Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Thread

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

5 hours ago, djmich said:

On 6/5/2021 at 2:20 PM, fatguyinalittlecoat said:

I want people in Congress that try to take care of everyone's families.

I want people in congress that ensure our laws allow citizens to live freely and drive their own success.  I also want them to ensure our laws provide protections and assistance for people that are vulnerable.  I don't want congress to create laws to take care of everyone, its not the responsibility of our government to ensure everyone is taken care of like children.

Right, that’s why we vote for different people.

[djmich]

15 minutes ago, fatguyinalittlecoat said:

Right, that’s why we vote for different people.

Right

[GordonGekko]

5 hours ago, timschochet said:

@IvanKaramazov as regards what you wrote about the FDA, it’s pretty much the same argument we’ve been having about the mainstream media. You point out flaws and use them to justify your rejection. I am making the point that, whatever the flaws, society needs an authoritative voice on food and drug safety, just as we need an authoritative voice on what happens in the news. Because in either case, the alternative is far far worse than whatever errors have been committed. 

 

VIDEO: Animal Farm -The Trial • Oct 26, 2017

Based on George Orwell's Novel

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=paH2TP3fKr0

 

******

Who gets to decide on whom ascends to this authoritative voice? Why do you get to choose this all powerful authoritative voice for everyone else here?  Why do the "proper" authoritative voices seem to coincidentally line up almost automatically to your personal opinions, which you then treat as facts?

You sound like you are screaming that four legs are good but that two legs are bad in one of the most ham-fisted lazy ad hoc purity tests I've ever seen.

What is the alternative far worse than asking Americans to voluntarily surrender their freedom?

Good people have died so America could have freedom. Good people have died so America could hold onto it's freedom. Good people are willing to die before they allow any one person, any group, any power, any nation, any threat to steal away their children's freedom.

I am willing to lay down my life to defend freedom. I want my godson to inherit a world where actual freedom can survive. Because it means he will live in a world where he has a chance to be safe. What people do, they do for their children. They live, fight, struggle and bleed to protect their children. I will do this, not because I am a Conservative, but simply because I love him more than I love my own life. This is the price of being a parent and that transcends any political party or any political ideology.

To get the kind of world you want, full of "authority" to lord over the subservient masses, you'll have to get your hands dirty to do it. Gaslighting won't be enough, you'll have to deal with waves of parents who love their children more than you love your identity politics. But if we are going to be blunt about it, those who push identity politics the hardest and most dogmatically are those who are too weak willed for real confrontation and real attrition. They are lazy, arrogant and cruel for the sake of sport.

When you come for a man's freedom, what you are really doing is threatening the future of his children. If you want my freedom you'll have to come take it. You'll have to make me bleed for it. You'll need to see blood on your hands that won't wash off and will haunt you the rest of your life. But son, rest assured, what you want will cost you. No one who steps to Old Man Gekko can pay the gold price, they have to pay the iron price.

Your casual dismissal of actual hard fought freedom, that represents the best of all American ideals, is the far worse alternative.

And that's the bitter irony of all of this. Good men died so you could have the freedom to tell everyone here they should voluntarily choose to allow their children to become slaves.

[quick-hands]

8 hours ago, timschochet said:

This is meaningless unless you unpack it. 
Do you want no Social Security? 
No Medicare? 
No police? 
No fire department? 
No roads or highways? 
No clean water supply? 
No FDA telling you what food and drugs are safe? 
 

Unless you’ve lived in a forest all this time, you’re already in a nanny state and you’ve spent your whole life in it. Who are you trying to kid? 

Obtuse

[BladeRunner]

1 hour ago, GordonGekko said:

 

VIDEO: Animal Farm -The Trial • Oct 26, 2017

Based on George Orwell's Novel

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=paH2TP3fKr0

 

******

Who gets to decide on whom ascends to this authoritative voice? Why do you get to choose this all powerful authoritative voice for everyone else here?  Why do the "proper" authoritative voices seem to coincidentally line up almost automatically to your personal opinions, which you then treat as facts?

You sound like you are screaming that four legs are good but that two legs are bad in one of the most ham-fisted lazy ad hoc purity tests I've ever seen.

What is the alternative far worse than asking Americans to voluntarily surrender their freedom?

Good people have died so America could have freedom. Good people have died so America could hold onto it's freedom. Good people are willing to die before they allow any one person, any group, any power, any nation, any threat to steal away their children's freedom.

I am willing to lay down my life to defend freedom. I want my godson to inherit a world where actual freedom can survive. Because it means he will live in a world where he has a chance to be safe. What people do, they do for their children. They live, fight, struggle and bleed to protect their children. I will do this, not because I am a Conservative, but simply because I love him more than I love my own life. This is the price of being a parent and that transcends any political party or any political ideology.

To get the kind of world you want, full of "authority" to lord over the subservient masses, you'll have to get your hands dirty to do it. Gaslighting won't be enough, you'll have to deal with waves of parents who love their children more than you love your identity politics. But if we are going to be blunt about it, those who push identity politics the hardest and most dogmatically are those who are too weak willed for real confrontation and real attrition. They are lazy, arrogant and cruel for the sake of sport.

When you come for a man's freedom, what you are really doing is threatening the future of his children. If you want my freedom you'll have to come take it. You'll have to make me bleed for it. You'll need to see blood on your hands that won't wash off and will haunt you the rest of your life. But son, rest assured, what you want will cost you. No one who steps to Old Man Gekko can pay the gold price, they have to pay the iron price.

Your casual dismissal of actual hard fought freedom, that represents the best of all American ideals, is the far worse alternative.

And that's the bitter irony of all of this. Good men died so you could have the freedom to tell everyone here they should voluntarily choose to allow their children to become slaves.

Gecko knocks it out of the park as usual!

[quick-hands]

7 hours ago, timschochet said:

My point is that it could mean any kind of government involvement. 

No tim he is right.   You may be a mind reader.....

[FairWarning]

On 6/5/2021 at 8:36 PM, Max Power said:

So about this missing PR aid... when PR wasn't giving aid it already received to people, why should we give them more aid? 

Rather give a US territory  aid than to give lazy people $300 more not to work.

[sho nuff]

On 6/4/2021 at 7:23 PM, BladeRunner said:

Man I simply CANNOT WAIT for the debate between her and MTG. 

Epic.  Epic I SAY!

 

On 6/4/2021 at 7:46 PM, PennStater77 said:

MTG will school her

 

On 6/4/2021 at 7:52 PM, PennStater77 said:

MTG is very smart and polished in politics. She sees both sides of the isle. She will destroy AOC. 

Is the debate going to be on June 31st?

[timschochet]

18 hours ago, BladeRunner said:

Gecko knocks it out of the park as usual!

So you agree with him that the FDA is only a slight step away from Comrade Napoleon? 
 

Interesting. Quite nonsensical, but interesting. 

[BladeRunner]

3 minutes ago, timschochet said:

So you agree with him that the FDA is only a slight step away from Comrade Napoleon? 
 

Interesting. Quite nonsensical, but interesting. 

uhm...okay?

[Mile High]

On 6/6/2021 at 5:56 AM, AAABatteries said:

I literally don’t think about her until this thread is bumped.  

Some face of the Democratic party she's turned out to be. People don't care what she has to say most of the time.

[FBG Moderator]

15 hours ago, PennStater77 said:

At least she can complete a sentence without stuttering..

Don't

[FairWarning]

20 hours ago, Mile High said:

Some face of the Democratic party she's turned out to be. People don't care what she has to say most of the time.

May be a touch ahead of her time.  Wait until she gets some seniority, unless NYers do the right thing.

[squistion]

1 hour ago, FairWarning said:

May be a touch ahead of her time.  Wait until she gets some seniority, unless NYers do the right thing.

She is in a solidly Democratic district and won reelection with 71.6% of the vote. She has that seat as long as she wants it. 

Edited June 8 by squistion

[IvanKaramazov]

1 hour ago, FairWarning said:

May be a touch ahead of her time.  Wait until she gets some seniority, unless NYers do the right thing.

Maxine Waters has been in Congress for 30 years, and she's still a nobody.  Normal political parties move heaven and earth to keep their weirdos somewhere near the back bench.

[fruity pebbles]

She’s pretty much the definition of talk a lot but do nothing. 

[FairWarning]

1 hour ago, squistion said:

She is in a solidly Democratic district and won reelection with 71.6% of the vote. She has that seat as long as she wants it. 

When she won the first term, how did the other lose it?

[GordonGekko]

On 6/7/2021 at 1:15 PM, timschochet said:

So you agree with him that the FDA is only a slight step away from Comrade Napoleon? 
 

Interesting. Quite nonsensical, but interesting. 

 

Why don't we do this, Tim.

Let's start a new thread called "PSF Debate 2021: GordonGekko Vs timschochet"

We can set up a poll where people can vote for topics they would like to see us debate. We can tackle each subject in the order of what got the most votes, then go down the list progressively. It would clearly be the most traffic intensive thread in the entire PSF and eventually in all of the forums.

The problem you'll have is while you use the Identity Politics Playbook dogmatically, you clearly don't understand the methodology on how to effectively use it. You can't differentiate the nuances of human behavior and just being a predictably outraged zealot.

Since you'll need to start simping at me right away, you'll probably challenge why any thread title has my board handle first. And that's OK, we can work on that.

So let's start a new thread called "PSF Debate 2021:  timschochet Vs Someone Too Naturally Dominant To Be Pedantic About Thread Titles"

You are always welcome to debate me, Tim.

Something I suspect you've completely missed the plot on regarding AOC ( this is , after all, a thread on AOC) is that her well paid and deep roster of media optics heavy hitters make sure she only stays in her wheelhouse. They aren't sending her out to do things she can't do. She has no experience in public policy nor law making nor the legal world nor lobbying, so she doesn't trudge near those areas. She's a glorified softball hitter that hits the right check boxes. Going after Big Pharma in her first year was a big fat juicy softball. But sometimes she can actually get some major wood onto the ball. And drive it. She's dangerous to herself and her campaign because she's unskilled, but she's also dangerous to others in the political establishment because she's unskilled and thus rote standard tactics no longer apply.

She's like someone who took the wrong medication is now behind the wheel of a very large motor vehicle. You don't know if she'll blow herself up first or someone else on the road, but no matter what happens, everyone is going to watch it happen. And when everyone watches, because they want to and don't want to at the same time, that's real power.

If it's any consolation, being pedantic about thread titles does not automatically make one unskilled. Usually a clue on what makes one unskilled is becoming a one trick pony where gaslighting is the only weapon in their arsenal. It's disappointing really. Most zealots have at least two weapons in their cache. I suppose half a zealot isn't the worst thing in the entire world.

I look forward to you pretending I didn't challenge you to open political debate Tim. Have a glorious day today.

Edited June 8 by GordonGekko

[FairWarning]

That would be outstanding. Who would moderate?

[the moops]

1 minute ago, FairWarning said:

That would be outstanding. Who would moderate?

There would be so many words

[squistion]

7 minutes ago, FairWarning said:

When she won the first term, how did the other lose it?

He was a 10 term incumbent and was viewed as not being responsive to the needs of his constituents. AOC beat him in the primary.

She was challenged in the 2020 Democratic primary by Michelle Caruso-Cabrera who was significantly to the right of her, but she still won by 74.6% to 18.2% for Caruso-Cabrera.

[FairWarning]

1 hour ago, the moops said:

There would be so many words

Long form 

[timschochet]

5 hours ago, GordonGekko said:

 

Why don't we do this, Tim.

Let's start a new thread called "PSF Debate 2021: GordonGekko Vs timschochet"

We can set up a poll where people can vote for topics they would like to see us debate. We can tackle each subject in the order of what got the most votes, then go down the list progressively. It would clearly be the most traffic intensive thread in the entire PSF and eventually in all of the forums.

The problem you'll have is while you use the Identity Politics Playbook dogmatically, you clearly don't understand the methodology on how to effectively use it. You can't differentiate the nuances of human behavior and just being a predictably outraged zealot.

Since you'll need to start simping at me right away, you'll probably challenge why any thread title has my board handle first. And that's OK, we can work on that.

So let's start a new thread called "PSF Debate 2021:  timschochet Vs Someone Too Naturally Dominant To Be Pedantic About Thread Titles"

You are always welcome to debate me, Tim.

Something I suspect you've completely missed the plot on regarding AOC ( this is , after all, a thread on AOC) is that her well paid and deep roster of media optics heavy hitters make sure she only stays in her wheelhouse. They aren't sending her out to do things she can't do. She has no experience in public policy nor law making nor the legal world nor lobbying, so she doesn't trudge near those areas. She's a glorified softball hitter that hits the right check boxes. Going after Big Pharma in her first year was a big fat juicy softball. But sometimes she can actually get some major wood onto the ball. And drive it. She's dangerous to herself and her campaign because she's unskilled, but she's also dangerous to others in the political establishment because she's unskilled and thus rote standard tactics no longer apply.

She's like someone who took the wrong medication is now behind the wheel of a very large motor vehicle. You don't know if she'll blow herself up first or someone else on the road, but no matter what happens, everyone is going to watch it happen. And when everyone watches, because they want to and don't want to at the same time, that's real power.

If it's any consolation, being pedantic about thread titles does not automatically make one unskilled. Usually a clue on what makes one unskilled is becoming a one trick pony where gaslighting is the only weapon in their arsenal. It's disappointing really. Most zealots have at least two weapons in their cache. I suppose half a zealot isn't the worst thing in the entire world.

I look forward to you pretending I didn't challenge you to open political debate Tim. Have a glorious day today.

I accept. 
You set up the thread, choose the topics set the rules. I am happy to debate you at anytime. I think it will be educational and good for the forum. 

[tonydead]

5 hours ago, GordonGekko said:

You can't differentiate the nuances of human behavior and just being a predictably outraged zealot.

You can say that again. 

[sho nuff]

Im going to say no…MTG wants no part of any debate with AOC.

[urbanhack]

Pretty sure we can all agree with her take here?

https://twitter.com/aoc/status/1410432121710252037?s=21

[Drunken Cowboy]

29 minutes ago, urbanhack said:

Pretty sure we can all agree with her take here?

https://twitter.com/aoc/status/1410432121710252037?s=21

Any Senator from West Virginia is going to talk to natural gas companies. 

[BladeRunner]

2 hours ago, urbanhack said:

Pretty sure we can all agree with her take here?

https://twitter.com/aoc/status/1410432121710252037?s=21

Does that include unions too?

[urbanhack]

40 minutes ago, BladeRunner said:

Does that include unions too?

Deflect! 

[Ramblin Wreck]

18 minutes ago, urbanhack said:

Deflect! 

Gonna guess that's a no for you

[sho nuff]

1 hour ago, BladeRunner said:

Does that include unions too?

like police and teacher? Sure.  Other…why would it include those not comparable to a public official.

Edited July 1 by sho nuff

[BladeRunner]

1 hour ago, urbanhack said:

Deflect! 

Which is exactly what you did. 

At least you're consistent.

[IvanKaramazov]

"Why does the guy from the coaliest coal state in coal country meet with folks from the fossil fuel industry?" asked the kid who just learned about representative government in social studies.

[IvanKaramazov]

I don't mean to alarm anyone, but I have it on good authority that some of our legislators from New York, Delaware, and Connecticut have been note to associate with lobbyists from the financial industry.  I know, I know, I'm just as shocked and upset as you are.  We'll get to the bottom of this.

[IvanKaramazov]

It's worse than I thought.  You guys wouldn't believe how many senators from the Midwest talk to lobbyists for agricultural commodity groups.  They even meet with people who lobby for ethanol producers.  Why?  It must be because they're evil -- why else would Midwesterners care about this sort of stuff?  

[IvanKaramazov]

Also, certain (((senators))) have been seen meeting with representatives from AIPAC.  

Edit: Oh wait, wrong squad member.  My bad.

Edited July 1 by IvanKaramazov

[IvanKaramazov]

Also, while we're all getting worked up over Exxon and climate change, let's pause a moment to remember the time when the US had the option of going all-in on nuclear and decided to double down on fossil fuels instead.  If somebody wants to bust on Manchin for putting his own state's interests above the country's, I could actually sort of get behind that except when the criticism is coming from somebody who actively opposes nuclear power and carbon taxation.  That type of person can kindly get bent -- this is as much your fault as anybody else's, you overgrown child.

[snore]

4 hours ago, Drunken Cowboy said:

Any Senator from West Virginia is going to talk to natural gas companies. 

Agreed. Isn’t part of being a politician’s job to be a relationship manager?  Especially with entities that can impact their constituents in a multitude of ways?  Seems like a solid approach if everything is on the up and up. 

[IvanKaramazov]

Well, that was cathartic.

[snore]

Just now, IvanKaramazov said:

Well, that was cathartic.

Seemed like you needed to vent. We’re here for you brother. 

[BladeRunner]

14 minutes ago, IvanKaramazov said:

Well, that was cathartic.

Not really.  I just found out that representatives from CA regularly meet with Hollywood and Big Tech.

I thought that CA, of all places, would at least adhere to not being influenced by big business.  Doesn't anyone have principles anymore?

Edited July 1 by BladeRunner

[timschochet]

Nobody meets with me. 

[NorvilleBarnes]

I don't agree with her politics but I don't have any issue with her dress, or the event, or (gasp) having fun.

At the Met Gala

[psychobillies]

40 minutes ago, NorvilleBarnes said:

I don't agree with her politics but I don't have any issue with her dress, or the event, or (gasp) having fun.

At the Met Gala

Someone will be along shortly to criticize the price of the dress and her haircut. 

[NorvilleBarnes]

25 minutes ago, psychobillies said:

Someone will be along shortly to criticize the price of the dress and her haircut. 

Yeah Twitterverse seems split between "ironic" and "hypocritical" but honestly it just makes me want to grab the rich and tax their brains out.

[IvanKaramazov]

11 hours ago, NorvilleBarnes said:

I don't agree with her politics but I don't have any issue with her dress, or the event, or (gasp) having fun.

At the Met Gala

Notice how only the servants are wearing masks.

[quick-hands]

Marie Antoinette. 

I don't care I'd she goes to party.   She is wealthy.  Have fun.

But can you stop preaching while you are at a party.    She is as bad as Francisco D'Anconia.

[BladeRunner]

13 hours ago, NorvilleBarnes said:

I don't agree with her politics but I don't have any issue with her dress, or the event, or (gasp) having fun.

At the Met Gala

 

See, the problem with Socialists/Marxists/Communists is once they start getting in the limelight they LOVE the perks, power, benefits and riches that come with it.  Oh, they're all for messaging when they haven't made it yet, but once they get there they become EXACTLY what they railed against before they became part of the upper echelon.

Throughout history, It's the same story in every country these fools, cretins and grifters have ever existed in.  From Cuba, Venezuela, Russia, China and on it's all the same:  Once they get to the top their message is now "Rules for thee, but not for me". 

Put it this way - AOC ain't giving up her perks, benefits, riches and limelight anymore now that she's "made it".  Just like Bernie Sanders isn't.  And Elizabeth Warren isn't.  And Rashida Talib isn't.  And Ilhan Omar isn't.  But you, MOST CERTAINLY, are going to give up yours.  They'll make sure of that.  And you don't even have to be "the rich".  They're going to get yours and as much of it as possible.  Again, same story through time immemorial.

Power corrupts.  Absolute power corrupts absolutely. 

S/M/C never practice what they preach.  Ever.

Edited September 14 by BladeRunner

[Summer Wheat]

1 hour ago, quick-hands said:

Marie Antoinette. 

I don't care I'd she goes to party.   She is wealthy.  Have fun.

But can you stop preaching while you are at a party.    She is as bad as Francisco D'Anconia.

 

To get a table at the Met Gala it costs anywhere from $200,00 to $275,000 and an individual ticket costs $30,000. If @AOC hates the rich so much, why is she attending an event that only the wealthiest, richest people in America can afford to attend?

AOC makes 175K a year.  Can she afford to spend 30K on a ticket to hobnob with the rich?

[BladeRunner]

Just now, Summer Wheat said:

 

To get a table at the Met Gala it costs anywhere from $200,00 to $275,000 and an individual ticket costs $30,000. If @AOC hates the rich so much, why is she attending an event that only the wealthiest, richest people in America can afford to attend?

AOC makes 175K a year.  Can she afford to spend 30K on a ticket to hobnob with the rich?

 

See my post above yours to answer your question. 

Edited September 14 by BladeRunner