Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez-Cortez

[Pepperman]

So tax cuts for the rich and stock buy backs good... housing, healthcare and education bad. That pretty much sums up the difference between left and right. There is much more than that but that's a great example.

Those positions certainly aren't mine. I'm not sure where you get the idea that I agree with them? Others can support that I've consistently posted that Trump's tax cuts were not a good move and that I'm not in support of larger government spending of any kind. I am for cutting spending AND raising taxes.

 

[artradley]

That's fair and I'd expect NOTHING LESS OF YOU, honestly... Which brings us right back to where we were at the beginning of this exchange. I can understand why you feel that way - after all, nobody from the left wants to admit it. I'm done giving the mainstream media the benefit of the doubt because my eyes are open to the bias.

How you feel about the non-mainstream media? Do you consider them to be reliable sources of accurate information?

 

[Hawk8595]

Those positions certainly aren't mine. I'm not sure where you get the idea that I agree with them? Others can support that I've consistently posted that Trump's tax cuts were not a good move and that I'm not in support of larger government spending of any kind. I am for cutting spending AND raising taxes.

You were critical of AOCs comment. I defended it. The tax cut money could have been used for housing, health care and education as an example. It's a basic difference in conservative liberal thinking. IMO

 

[lawsonhawk]

she is an absolute gift to republicans

No, not really. People vote identity (what they can identify with) not policy. R's could relate to anger w/ DT, he got elected in spite of bafoonery, dirty business, racist history, painful narcissism, unchristian behavior.

Everyone can relate to a young, hot female. R's overlooked stupid w/ Palin.

 

[Hawk8595]

No, not really. People vote identity (what they can identify with) not policy. R's could relate to anger w/ DT, he got elected in spite of bafoonery, dirty business, racist history, painful narcissism, unchristian behavior.

Everyone can relate to a young, hot female. R's overlooked stupid w/ Palin.

THIS BIGLY.

 

[Pepperman]

How you feel about the non-mainstream media? Do you consider them to be reliable sources of accurate information?

Most of it is a total joke if not outright lies.

So, no, to answer your question directly they are not accurate either. Fox News occasionally gets things correct, but they lie too.

 

[JRHawk2003]

If the Dems want to win next year, they need to keep her in a corner.

 

[Dr. Spaceman]

That's fair and I'd expect NOTHING LESS OF YOU, honestly... Which brings us right back to where we were at the beginning of this exchange. I can understand why you feel that way - after all, nobody from the left wants to admit it. I'm done giving the mainstream media the benefit of the doubt because my eyes are open to the bias.

Just own your BS conspiracy post and quit playing the victim.

 

[WhiteSoxClone]

Anderson Cooper: "How are you going to pay for all of this?"

AOC: "No one asks how we're going to pay for the Space Force. No one asked how we paid for a $2 trillion tax cut. We only ask how we pay for it on issues of housing, healthcare and education."

First, I heard, and still hear, a lot of talk about how the tax cuts are substantially increasing the national debt and borrowing from our grandchildren to fund our government. And that criticism is true. But even if no one was talking about the increase to the national debt, its still a BS answer. She is basically saying, "since they don't explain how they are going to pay for things, we don't have to explain how we are."

When is one of the parties going to step up and hold themselves to a higher standard? I get sick of the argument from both sides that they can't be expected to be more accountable than the standard the other side holds for itself. Its an f-ing race to the bottom between these two.

You want to be different than the Republicans? Tell us how you're going to pay for all of this sh*t. Give us a real plan with real details. Otherwise, you're just another politician in a different package.

 

[artradley]

First, I heard, and still hear, a lot of talk about how the tax cuts are substantially increasing the national debt and borrowing from our grandchildren to fund our government. And that criticism is true. But even if that wasn't true, its still a BS answer. She is basically saying, "since they don't explain how they are going to pay for things, we don't have to explain how we are."

When is one of the parties going to step up and hold themselves to a higher standard? I get sick of the argument from both sides that they can't be expected to be more accountable than the standard the other sides hold for themselves. Its an f-ing race to the bottom between these two.

You want to be different than the Republicans? Tell us how you're going to pay for all of this sh*t. Give us a real plan with real details. Otherwise, you're just another politician in a different package.

Do we know this is her full quote, and not an aside before explaining how she would pay for it?

 

[WhiteSoxClone]

Do we know this is her full quote, and not an aside before explaining how she would pay for it?

I didn't see the interview, but that was the answer quoted in this thread. If she's provided details, let's hear them.

 

[artradley]

I didn't see the interview, but that was the answer quoted in this thread. If she's provided details, let's hear them.

I didn’t see it either - but just because something isn’t included in a selected quote is no reason to assume it wasn’t said.

 

[WhiteSoxClone]

I didn’t see it either - but just because something isn’t included in a selected quote is no reason to assume it wasn’t said.

Fine, bust my balls over this if it makes you feel better, and then go find the details she's laid out to prove my reaction was unwarranted.

 

[Hawk8595]

First, I heard, and still hear, a lot of talk about how the tax cuts are substantially increasing the national debt and borrowing from our grandchildren to fund our government. And that criticism is true. But even if that wasn't true, its still a BS answer. She is basically saying, "since they don't explain how they are going to pay for things, we don't have to explain how we are."

When is one of the parties going to step up and hold themselves to a higher standard? I get sick of the argument from both sides that they can't be expected to be more accountable than the standard the other side holds for itself. Its an f-ing race to the bottom between these two.

You want to be different than the Republicans? Tell us how you're going to pay for all of this sh*t. Give us a real plan with real details. Otherwise, you're just another politician in a different package.

If you are saying you are fed up with R spending with deficit dollars as well as D spending with deficit dollars then good for you. I doubt that it is an equal proposition with you but I hope I'm wrong. You can start by damning the tax cut.

 

[BlackNGoldBleeder]

We are not far away from wealth confiscation.

In a way it’s the fault of the republicans. What did they expect when they have policies that help only the super elite.

I really enjoy a lot of your posts. They are pragmatic but profound and usually well-balanced. Fyi.

As far as AOC is concerned, she was a lot more articulate than I had expected. I watched most of the interview and thought she presented her views well.

I really don't understand a lot of the hoopla surrounding her. She sounds more intelligent than Trump ever has based on articulation alone and holds a lot of the same views as people in the far left.

So what makes her more cringe worthy to Sean Hannity and people of that ilk than other leftists in Congress? Because of her age? Her looks? She's Latina and from New York? All the above coupled with the fact she has a uterus? What?

She is no different than Bernie Sanders or any other socialist Democrat. No different.

 

[theVoicefromtheTomb]

Just own your BS conspiracy post and quit playing the victim.

When she appears to be well spoken it flies in the face of the talking points. If she actually appears to be well spoken than it is only because the biased media outlet gave her the questions upfront.

 

[Pepperman]

When she appears to be well spoken it flies in the face of the talking points. If she actually appears to be well spoken than it is only because the biased media outlet gave her the questions upfront.

No, not at all. She IS well-spoken. She makes some ok points too (so does Bernie).

It is possible to be fairly neutral and spot the bullshit coming from both sides. Try it sometime.

 

[BlackNGoldBleeder]

We conservatives have been told that she is insignificant so why is she on 60 minutes. I keep hearing she is young, so we should listen to her?

Her ideas, if implemented, will lead to a huge divide. Other people's money only lasts so long.

She's on 60 Minutes because Sean Hannity and other smug right-wing idiots like him doted so much attention and infatuation on her. They created hysteria over nothing. They are who started the AOC love fest.

And spare us the "other people's money" bullshit. We've had socialism in reverse and a shrinking middle class for forty years now. Parroting that inane drivel is eventually going to ring hollow to working-class white guys when more and more start waking up and realizing they can't blame their economic struggles anymore on Mexicans and blacks. It's all the handouts Repubs have given to the Top 3% while they have gotten shit back is the real reason they barely got a pot to piss in.

 

[theVoicefromtheTomb]

No, not at all. She IS well-spoken. She makes some ok points too (so does Bernie).

It is possible to be fairly neutral and spot the bullshit coming from both sides. Try it sometime.

I think that is the point. The idea that the media fed her the questions is just a bullshit assumption.

 

[Rudolph]

No, not at all. She IS well-spoken. She makes some ok points too (so does Bernie).

It is possible to be fairly neutral and spot the bullshit coming from both sides. Try it sometime.

Hey Pepp Fox News is part of this mainstream media complex. It's way past time for people to realize the entire 24-hour TV newstainment thing is one big corporate-sponsored turd for society.

 

[BlackNGoldBleeder]

Hey Pepp Fox News is part of this mainstream media complex. It's way past time for people to realize the entire 24-hour TV newstainment thing is one big corporate-sponsored turd for society.

Faux News is different, though. Because they're not part of the Fake News media.

 

[FAUlty Gator]

She's on 60 Minutes because Sean Hannity and other smug right-wing idiots like him doted so much attention and infatuation on her. They created hysteria over nothing. They are who started the AOC love fest.

So, why didn't they have a love piece on Michelle Bachmann, then? The left made her a rock star a thousand times bigger than AOC. Did she get the same treatment? Who else did FOX get put on 60 Minutes?

I suppose FOX is the reason she was giving speeches and raising money, 4000 miles from home, in San Francisco as well.

This makes no sense. I NEVER watch FOX. Just MSNBC. I don't even have it as a channel. How is it I heard of her?

 

[Pepperman]

Faux News is different, though. Because they're not part of the Fake News media.

Try reading next time:

Most of it is a total joke if not outright lies.

So, no, to answer your question directly they are not accurate either. Fox News occasionally gets things correct, but they lie too.

 

[BlackNGoldBleeder]

So, why didn't they have a love piece on Michelle Bachmann, then? The left made her a rock star a thousand times bigger than AOC. Did she get the same treatment? Who else did FOX get put on 60 Minutes?

I suppose FOX is the reason she was giving speeches and raising money, 4000 miles from home, in San Francisco as well.

This makes no sense. I NEVER watch FOX. Just MSNBC. I don't even have it as a channel. How is it I heard of her?

Are you serious?

Without Faux News and other right-wing media, most Americans, myself included, wouldn't have a clue who she is. Other news outlets no doubt ran with the controversy generated by them. And now she's a rock star. Why? I don't know. But that's how our culture is.

I don't remember the love fest for Michelle. I just don't remember it. She seemed boring and unremarkable to me. But I'm sure the left-wing media had a field day with her being a woman and a conservative. I don't remember a lot of it, though. At the time her presidential bid was being halfway entertained I was going through a divorce and drinking pretty heavily.

But I understand bias in media. Thank you.

 

[BlackNGoldBleeder]

Try reading next time:

I was just being flippant and wasn't directing it at you. Relax.

 

[TarponSpringsNole]

I might start paying attention once she develops a track record in the House. .

‘Present’

 

[srams21]

That's fair and I'd expect NOTHING LESS OF YOU, honestly... Which brings us right back to where we were at the beginning of this exchange. I can understand why you feel that way - after all, nobody from the left wants to admit it. I'm done giving the mainstream media the benefit of the doubt because my eyes are open to the bias.

LOL. I expected better from you.

There are lots of things about Trump no one on the right, including you, care to admit.

Is it fake news or news you don't want to hear?

 

[theiacowtipper]

First, I heard, and still hear, a lot of talk about how the tax cuts are substantially increasing the national debt and borrowing from our grandchildren to fund our government. And that criticism is true. But even if no one was talking about the increase to the national debt, its still a BS answer. She is basically saying, "since they don't explain how they are going to pay for things, we don't have to explain how we are."

When is one of the parties going to step up and hold themselves to a higher standard? I get sick of the argument from both sides that they can't be expected to be more accountable than the standard the other side holds for itself. Its an f-ing race to the bottom between these two.

You want to be different than the Republicans? Tell us how you're going to pay for all of this sh*t. Give us a real plan with real details. Otherwise, you're just another politician in a different package.

She did say how it was going to be paid for. Take healthcare for instance. We pay more in this country than other more "socialist" countries. I’ve said this over and over, my taxes could double and I’d save money on healthcare if it was provided as part of universal coverage. That was her basic point. That the money is already being spent.

 

[hawkifann]

If you just say she's unlikable and leave it at that, yes. If you actually explain what it is about her policies you don't like (and don't make any mention about her looks, whether she's likable, etc), then no.

I'll be honest....I'd have never voted for her because she's almost across the board too left for me, but as I've said before, I like that she's there. I like that she's outspoken. I like that she doesn't cower and get shouted down (so far, anyway). I like that she's challenged the power base in the Des party. As OP pointed out, her philosophies are different than mine, but she is smart and does a good job communicating her positions.

We need more AOCs from across the political spectrum. There are some big issues that desperately need public debate....and we're not going to get that debate by electing the same old boring politicians and letting them get by with trite soundbites before handing over more cash so that they can stay comfy in power. I don't want a Congress run by AOCs, but I do want one pushed by them.

 

[theiacowtipper]

And she is very upfront about higher taxes being necessary. Our effective tax rates are historically and relatively low.

 

[joelbc1]

communism is wrong , we have fought against it in wars

She is not a communist, OiT. And, Ibelieve what America has fought against for years, altho in the name of communist, is more the idea of authoritarianism. We seem to do a lot of business with the communists...if you consider Red effing China communist.

 

[Pepperman]

LOL. I expected better from you.

There are lots of things about Trump no one on the right, including you, care to admit.

Is it fake news or news you don't want to hear?

If you read half of my posts you'd see I'm REGULARLY criticizing the people I am likely to have either already voted for or will vote for. I don't see many others even close, including you.

 

[srams21]

If you read half of my posts you'd see I'm REGULARLY criticizing the people I am likely to have either already voted for or will vote for. I don't see many others even close, including you.

I do read your posts which is why your responses in this thread have surprised me.

They are very Trump-like responses. Making conjectures with no evidence.

 

[Pepperman]

I do read your posts which is why your responses in this thread have surprised me.

They are very Trump-like responses. Making conjectures with no evidence.

Ok, well then you also should know from all of my historical posts that I've consistently said the same thing about media bias:

Conservatives see it, feel it, know it.

Liberals never claim to see it.

There is no way for any of us to convince anybody else. As I always conclude, you either see it and understand it, or you don't. Simple as that. I know already where you stand on this. If that statement and my consistent explanation surprises you, then so be it.

 

[Hawkeye_311]

You were critical of AOCs comment. I defended it. The tax cut money could have been used for housing, health care and education as an example. It's a basic difference in conservative liberal thinking. IMO

You know you can write a check to the U.S. Treasury Department whenever you want.

 

[srams21]

Ok, well then you also should know from all of my historical posts that I've consistently said the same thing about media bias:

Conservatives see it, feel it, know it.

Liberals never claim to see it.

There is no way for any of us to convince anybody else. As I always conclude, you either see it and understand it, or you don't. Simple as that. I know already where you stand on this. If that statement and my consistent explanation surprises you, then so be it.

You are being intentionally obtuse here.

Whether there is a general bias in the media is not the point here. Btw, I'm sure the media has a liberal slant to it. No doubt. Again, not the issue.

The issue here is whether CBS fed the questions to AOC which you claimed they probably did. You made a conjecture based upon no actual evidence other than that the media has a liberal bias.

You were called out on it and rightfully so. Now you are trying to shift the argument. You are better than that Pepper. Or at least you were.

 

[Tom Paris]

So, why didn't they have a love piece on Michelle Bachmann, then? The left made her a rock star a thousand times bigger than AOC. Did she get the same treatment? Who else did FOX get put on 60 Minutes?

I suppose FOX is the reason she was giving speeches and raising money, 4000 miles from home, in San Francisco as well.

This makes no sense. I NEVER watch FOX. Just MSNBC. I don't even have it as a channel. How is it I heard of her?

Bachmann was like listening to Kellyanne Conway....everything coming out of her mouth was evasion or outright lies. That was Michelle's problem.

 

[Pepperman]

You are being intentionally obtuse here.

Whether there is a general bias in the media is not the point here. Btw, I'm sure the media has a liberal slant to it. No doubt. Again, not the issue.

The issue here is whether CBS fed the questions to AOC which you claimed they probably did. You made a conjecture based upon no actual evidence other than that the media has a liberal bias.

You were called out on it and rightfully so. Now you are trying to shift the argument. You are better than that Pepper. Or at least you were.

Oh, my mistake. Based on the post you quoted me on, I assumed you were wanting to debate media bias.

Well, I still think CBS gave the questions to her in advance. I don't think CBS would want to see her completely flop. Of course, much of what they do with shows like 60 Minutes is edit the tapes so that you see only one person at a time and it might not even be in sync with the real life conversation.

I also thought I said that ANY politician would want to know the questions in advance before an interview like this one. Maybe I didn't say that. At any rate, yes, call me crazy, but I think AOC and her people knew the questions in advance.

As to the "shifting of the argument" thing, you are free to read the exchange I had with the other poster who shifted it. Like I said, my mistake. I am not capable of reading your mind when you respond vaguely to one post but actually meant to drill me on another topic.

 

[alaskanseminole]

Interview on 60 Minutes tonight. Contrary to the knee jerk reaction from the right that wil inevitably occur, it wasn’t a puff piece and they hit her pretty hard on her stance in some issues.

All in all she came off as intelligent, well-versed in the issues, and believable. I understand why the right is scared to death of her.

Socialist Democrat - That's literally my only concern (and if she's actually smart. lol)

btw: I'm NOT a Republican.

 

[Hawk8595]

You know you can write a check to the U.S. Treasury Department whenever you want.

This is the dumbest suggestion imaginable. Go piss in the ocean and see how much it rises.