ADVERTISEMENT

AOC Throwing Twitter Tantrum over her Pinnochios

She is the Trump counterweight. Equally as misinformed on issues and good policy as Trump and spins a populist message to gain political power. The biggest difference, Trump is an old fat white guy racist and ACO is a young, non-racist, hot Puerto Rican who I would like to see nudes of.
Trump has probably already had her.
 
  • Like
Reactions: unIowa
You get the bad actors out by a nationwide commitment to expose them and get them out. This means, among other things, supporting the Fourth Estate. It means not glorifying and worshipping (or even forgiving) greed. It means understanding the innate dangers of capitalism so as to check those dangers (be it with a balance of socialism or whatever it could be called). Before someone thinks I'm arguing against capitalism… stop. Bad actors are too often excused because we have a perverted sense of self-worth—associated with wealth—and so we give the wealthy a pass (not all wealthy bad actors, stop that nonsense). Sometimes we excuse bad-acting wealth because of some notion of "job creation". We do it micro and macro. Oil industry—bad actors. But job creators. And the sponsor the NFL and NBA and MLB so they must be okay and look now they're trying to do green shit so okay. Fvck that. Bad actors hold them accountable. Certainly don't fvcking allow them to pull levers of government—be it externally or internally.

Government size is a nonissue. We make the government whatever size it needs to be to suit our society's needs. It's such a waste of time to argue big versus small. Now efficiency versus inefficiency? Fine. Good discussion. Just note that complaints of inefficiency should always bear with them consideration for how the lines-blurring between private and public might be involved.

Bottom line, I don't care if my tax rate is 40% or 32% or 12%. What I care is am I getting my money's worth. I want to know what I'm paying for and I want it to be for something benefitting my society. I think cons, forgive me if I'm wrong, but I think cons think of this in terms of, well, substitute "me" for "society" in the previous sentence. Anyways, fundamentally, I'm a we versus a me person. Our government actually, at its roots, affords us an opportunity at this type of society. But it has been bought. Strike that. We still own it. It's being rented. Crazy shit is, folks like AOC actually might give us a chance to kick these asshole tenants out.

You are forgetting about sound risk management, if you get too top heavy at some point you can expect awful results. When you don't account for risk and you are a too big to fail (our federal govt) you end up with bad consequences.

static.jpg
 
Not sure a freshman rep has ever received so much attention. Very dumb. They are barely more powerful than a typical state senator.
It's the media, for one thing. You of all people should recognize that. Look at the attention she got for winning the nomination (which was tantamount to winning the seat). Cons don't schedule "60 Minutes" interviews.

Plus, she illustrates all the bad qualities cons have been ascribing to lefties forever and a day. Dumb as a post and farther left than the Marx who wasn't a brother. Why does Steve King get so much attention from you guys here -- and a fair amount nationally? It isn't because he's powerful or has ever accomplished anything. It's because he fits the stereotype liberals advance for conservatives.
 
I'll accept actions as well.

Like in the 1970's when he was sued for racial discrimination, because the FBI found that when blacks were sent to rent one of his apartments they were told none were available, while whites sent to check on the same apartments were offered leases.

The records, posted on the FBI's Freedom of Information Act website, include a 1974 interview with a former doorman at a Trump building in Brooklyn.

A supervisor "told me that if a black person came to 2650 Ocean Parkway and inquired about an apartment for rent, and he, that is [redacted] was not there at the time, that I should tell him that the rent was twice as much as it really was, in order that he could not afford the apartment," the ex-doorman said.
 
Cute.

Trump actually grabs pussies, you say nothing. A young girl tries to protect hers and you're all up in arms.

Let's say 90% is accurate. Does that make it okay, as in, let's just accept that in society?

I agree, young people do shitty things, make mistakes, sometimes show poor impulse control and judgment. So let's work on this, yeah?

Given your stance on this, your perception of things, is it not fair to ask that men (and society), at the very least, learn to treat accusations with a little more conscientiousness? (This is where I begin to truly judge the character of people—in how they react and respond to accusations. Deny and attack as publicly as possible? Yeah, you're probably a piece of shit.)

And again, your "examples" of people "calling me out for attacking women" are terrible (and not linked for context). I mean...using these, you must be in total agreement with Northern about Rashida Tlaib using a anti-semetic slur. That's how flimsy those things are. Even worse.

I couldn't since I added them after I started typing, but here they are above your quote. Maybe one of them can tell you that your have a pattern of signalling out women specifically.
 
I couldn't since I added them after I started typing, but here they are above your quote. Maybe one of them can tell you that your have a pattern of signalling out women specifically.

Yeah...me and the Washington Post. Since saying anything about any DEM woman ever is tantamount to "a pattern of attacking women".

We know that this is just your deflection of choice.

Dumb comment is made by Dem.
Dumb comment is pointed out.
You ignore dumb comment.
You claim dumb comment is being pointed out because of commenters race, gender or affiliation.
Rinse. Repeat.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Panic1769
Side question: Are you saying King is a racist or that he just fits an stereotype from dems?
It doesn't really matter. What I was saying was that he fits the stereotype. Whether he's actually a racist, I do not know. Just like I don't know of AOC is really dumber than a post. In both cases, the person in question does and says things that can be interpreted to support that claim.
 
A quick google search says otherwise.
I think you misunderstood my statement. I didn't mean that "60 Minutes" doesn't interview conservatives. I meant that conservatives don't decide who "60 Minutes" will interview.
 
Not sure a freshman rep has ever received so much attention. Very dumb. They are barely more powerful than a typical state senator.

Agreed. Similar things happened with Obama, too, during his first and only Senate term. It ultimately elevated him.
 
Not sure a freshman rep has ever received so much attention. Very dumb. They are barely more powerful than a typical state senator.

And yet Rush is being screamed about on MSNBC every other night. He has no power either. Why? Because, like her, and Bernie, he's a thought leader with a shit ton of followers.

She's a star in her own party because of many of her crazy ideas. If she only had 200 Twitter followers, no one would care about her. But there's a huge contingency of Yahoo!'s who think she's the 2nd coming and her ideas are great.

That's why.
 
Like in the 1970's when he was sued for racial discrimination, because the FBI found that when blacks were sent to rent one of his apartments they were told none were available, while whites sent to check on the same apartments were offered leases.

The records, posted on the FBI's Freedom of Information Act website, include a 1974 interview with a former doorman at a Trump building in Brooklyn.

A supervisor "told me that if a black person came to 2650 Ocean Parkway and inquired about an apartment for rent, and he, that is [redacted] was not there at the time, that I should tell him that the rent was twice as much as it really was, in order that he could not afford the apartment," the ex-doorman said.

Look, that’s just, like, your opinion, man.
 
It doesn't really matter. What I was saying was that he fits the stereotype. Whether he's actually a racist, I do not know. Just like I don't know of AOC is really dumber than a post. In both cases, the person in question does and says things that can be interpreted to support that claim.

Pray tell, how does one determine if someone is "actually" racist. Aren't public comments and actions proof enough for most of us? How much rope will you give Mr. King before he hangs himself on the racist gallows?
 
Pray tell, how does one determine if someone is "actually" racist. Aren't public comments and actions proof enough for most of us? How much rope will you give Mr. King before he hangs himself on the racist gallows?
I reserve the term for people who clearly earn it. I don't think opposing illegal immigration is enough. If he starts throwing the n word around, or refers to the illegals by some similar slur, I'd grant him racisthood.
 
I reserve the term for people who clearly earn it. I don't think opposing illegal immigration is enough. If he starts throwing the n word around, or refers to the illegals by some similar slur, I'd grant him racisthood.

Has Steve King earned it?
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT