Author Topic: AOC thread  (Read 1596 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online El Barto

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 21782
  • Bad Craziness
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #70 on: April 06, 2019, 12:34:01 PM »
The thing with the democrats flipflopping on the wall reminds me a lot of the Michael Cohen firing. We all know exactly why Trump fired him, to hinder the Mueller investigation, but he had legit cover for it so we don't argue too much. Similarly there's the "Moslem" ban. Every one of us, including Stadler, knows what the intention was, but there's enough there to throw some plausible deniability int the mix. "It's not a Moslem ban, it's a ban on people from certain Moslem countries." Alright, sure. De facto is dandy where the law is concerned. No argument. In this case he democrats have numerous reasons why they can support a wall 3 years ago and be opposed to it today. Very good reasons.

  • They wanted specific, necessary bits of wall in places. They're built now. More would be a waste of resources.
  • Illegal immigration has been at a steady decline for years now. It seems that once you wreck the economy people stop wanting to come here. Border apprehensions have been trending steadily downward since [I think] '06, but suddenly now it's a national emergency.
  • The needs have changed. Modern, technological infrastructure is in greater need of updating and repair than physical barriers now. Trump wants to fix the stereo in the car before he repairs the brakes.
  • The demographics have changed (and this is a big one). In the past we worried about Pedro sneaking over to take all of those tomato-picking jobs Americans are fighting over. Pedro has been replaced by families fleeing carnage and generally shitty circumstances. There's a humanitarian aspect at play that wasn't before.
  • In the past we were inclined to respect international and US laws pertaining to immigration. Now we tend to ignore them both.

Times change, and along with them needs, goals, priorities, and resources. I could probably come up with 10 more, but it doesn't matter. Thwarting the boy king is the most likely rationale and we're willing to accept that as fact while ignoring all of the other points that provide them cover.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 15898
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #71 on: April 08, 2019, 08:20:24 AM »
The thing with the democrats flipflopping on the wall reminds me a lot of the Michael Cohen firing. We all know exactly why Trump fired him, to hinder the Mueller investigation, but he had legit cover for it so we don't argue too much. Similarly there's the "Moslem" ban. Every one of us, including Stadler, knows what the intention was, but there's enough there to throw some plausible deniability int the mix. "It's not a Moslem ban, it's a ban on people from certain Moslem countries." Alright, sure. De facto is dandy where the law is concerned. No argument. In this case he democrats have numerous reasons why they can support a wall 3 years ago and be opposed to it today. Very good reasons.

  • They wanted specific, necessary bits of wall in places. They're built now. More would be a waste of resources.
  • Illegal immigration has been at a steady decline for years now. It seems that once you wreck the economy people stop wanting to come here. Border apprehensions have been trending steadily downward since [I think] '06, but suddenly now it's a national emergency.
  • The needs have changed. Modern, technological infrastructure is in greater need of updating and repair than physical barriers now. Trump wants to fix the stereo in the car before he repairs the brakes.
  • The demographics have changed (and this is a big one). In the past we worried about Pedro sneaking over to take all of those tomato-picking jobs Americans are fighting over. Pedro has been replaced by families fleeing carnage and generally shitty circumstances. There's a humanitarian aspect at play that wasn't before.
  • In the past we were inclined to respect international and US laws pertaining to immigration. Now we tend to ignore them both.

Times change, and along with them needs, goals, priorities, and resources. I could probably come up with 10 more, but it doesn't matter. Thwarting the boy king is the most likely rationale and we're willing to accept that as fact while ignoring all of the other points that provide them cover.

So why have exactly ZERO major Democrats come out and said that?  Why are they playing the moral card?  Why are they playing the funding card?  Why are the playing the "my cock is bigger than your cock" card?   

You know, we've been hearing how STUPID Trump is for years now, and yet... who actually is stupider?  The stupid guy, or the guy that can't fool the stuipid guy?   Do you (collective, but I'm very curious what you, el Barto, think) honestly believe that the House couldn't have passed a bill that basically made Trump feel like he won (which is how he's going to feel anyway) and yet didn't give him anything close to what he wanted (assuming that, beyond "$5B" there was anything concrete there anyway)?   

Trump's a fucking idiot.  He doesn't give shit one about the people who couldn't feed their families (if you believe the rhetoric) and yet the "morally superior" Democrats opted to play poker with the American people.    In the other thread, Jaffa made a nice post about our standards failing, and I would posit that it's not JUST the Presidency that is at stake here.   Instead, I've had CNN on since about 8:30 in the background; the story getting the most airtime (by about 2:1 over EVERYTHING ELSE combined, even the resignation of Kjerstin Nielsen):  TRUMP'S TAX RETURNS.   Why?  Well, in part because trusted tax professional Mike Cohen said, under oath (so it MUST be true) that there was "there" there.

Online El Barto

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 21782
  • Bad Craziness
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #72 on: April 08, 2019, 08:32:05 AM »
The thing with the democrats flipflopping on the wall reminds me a lot of the Michael Cohen firing. We all know exactly why Trump fired him, to hinder the Mueller investigation, but he had legit cover for it so we don't argue too much. Similarly there's the "Moslem" ban. Every one of us, including Stadler, knows what the intention was, but there's enough there to throw some plausible deniability int the mix. "It's not a Moslem ban, it's a ban on people from certain Moslem countries." Alright, sure. De facto is dandy where the law is concerned. No argument. In this case he democrats have numerous reasons why they can support a wall 3 years ago and be opposed to it today. Very good reasons.

  • They wanted specific, necessary bits of wall in places. They're built now. More would be a waste of resources.
  • Illegal immigration has been at a steady decline for years now. It seems that once you wreck the economy people stop wanting to come here. Border apprehensions have been trending steadily downward since [I think] '06, but suddenly now it's a national emergency.
  • The needs have changed. Modern, technological infrastructure is in greater need of updating and repair than physical barriers now. Trump wants to fix the stereo in the car before he repairs the brakes.
  • The demographics have changed (and this is a big one). In the past we worried about Pedro sneaking over to take all of those tomato-picking jobs Americans are fighting over. Pedro has been replaced by families fleeing carnage and generally shitty circumstances. There's a humanitarian aspect at play that wasn't before.
  • In the past we were inclined to respect international and US laws pertaining to immigration. Now we tend to ignore them both.

Times change, and along with them needs, goals, priorities, and resources. I could probably come up with 10 more, but it doesn't matter. Thwarting the boy king is the most likely rationale and we're willing to accept that as fact while ignoring all of the other points that provide them cover.

So why have exactly ZERO major Democrats come out and said that?  Why are they playing the moral card?  Why are they playing the funding card?  Why are the playing the "my cock is bigger than your cock" card?   

You know, we've been hearing how STUPID Trump is for years now, and yet... who actually is stupider?  The stupid guy, or the guy that can't fool the stuipid guy?   Do you (collective, but I'm very curious what you, el Barto, think) honestly believe that the House couldn't have passed a bill that basically made Trump feel like he won (which is how he's going to feel anyway) and yet didn't give him anything close to what he wanted (assuming that, beyond "$5B" there was anything concrete there anyway)?   

Trump's a fucking idiot.  He doesn't give shit one about the people who couldn't feed their families (if you believe the rhetoric) and yet the "morally superior" Democrats opted to play poker with the American people.    In the other thread, Jaffa made a nice post about our standards failing, and I would posit that it's not JUST the Presidency that is at stake here.   Instead, I've had CNN on since about 8:30 in the background; the story getting the most airtime (by about 2:1 over EVERYTHING ELSE combined, even the resignation of Kjerstin Nielsen):  TRUMP'S TAX RETURNS.   Why?  Well, in part because trusted tax professional Mike Cohen said, under oath (so it MUST be true) that there was "there" there.
That's exactly what they did. And mind you the reason it worked is because Mitch finally allowed it to happen after assuring Donny that he'd back his national emergency nonsense. Also, plenty of them have been making the points I've made. I didn't make them up on my own. In a world where tabloid sensationalism rules the day actual facts and plans don't matter much. The reporting is centered around "They're going to get rid of Trump" on one side and "They're going to get rid of Trump" on the other.  That doesn't mean there aren't other matters of consequence going on that don't get reported as much.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 15898
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #73 on: April 08, 2019, 11:23:39 AM »
Fair enough; I forgot about McConnell in all that.   He deserves a ton more criticism than I've seen him garner so far.   When's his expiration date?

Offline bosk1

  • Bow down to Boskaryus
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 6427
  • Kabbalah
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #74 on: April 11, 2019, 09:11:39 AM »
Saw a story this morning where she came out pretty hard against a post from the Ohio College Republicans labeling her as a "domestic terrorist."  And rightly so.  That kind of rhetoric is just stupid, inflammatory, and unfairly puts her in actual physical danger from nutjobs who may actually believe the hype.  Glad they promptly issued an apology.

The unfortunate thing is that I don't think she will pause for even a fraction of the second to look in the mirror and assess her own stupidly inflammatory rhetoric about...well...pretty much everything she comments on.  I'm not saying she "deserved" the label or that she "had it coming" because of things she has said.  Not at all.  I'm just saying that although she was right to call out that group for going too far, she would do well to look in the mirror and realize that she does the same thing on a pretty regular basis.
"The Supreme Court of the United States has descended from the disciplined legal reasoning of John Marshall and Joseph Story to the mystical aphorisms of the fortune cookie."

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 15898
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #75 on: April 11, 2019, 01:08:45 PM »
I think I'm saying the same thing, here, but I am almost perpetually amazed at the level to which Americans at this point are so blissfully unaware (or just downright shameless, depending on your philosophical bent).   I get that it's relatively archaic at this point, but whatever happened to "do unto others"?  It's independent of party, and it's independent of age (Maxine Waters and Steve Mnuchin's exchange - a person on CNN called it a "passive-agressive-off" - is an example of this).  But for any short term gains, it's got deeply troubling long term ramifications. 

Online Chino

  • Be excellent to each other.
  • DT.net Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 20947
  • Gender: Male
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #76 on: April 11, 2019, 01:13:45 PM »
Are the two of you saying that the words coming out of AOC's are equivalent to her being referred to as a domestic terrorist?

Offline bosk1

  • Bow down to Boskaryus
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 6427
  • Kabbalah
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #77 on: April 11, 2019, 01:20:58 PM »
It's not about whether they are the "equivalent."  I think you missed the point.
"The Supreme Court of the United States has descended from the disciplined legal reasoning of John Marshall and Joseph Story to the mystical aphorisms of the fortune cookie."

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 15898
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #78 on: April 11, 2019, 01:21:43 PM »
Are the two of you saying that the words coming out of AOC's are equivalent to her being referred to as a domestic terrorist?

I'll let Bosk answer for himself, but I'm not calling her a domestic terrorist, no.  I don't like those kinds of hyperbolic pronouncements and try very hard not to use them.   They serve only to inflame, and not education or effect change.  But having said that, the mindset that allows someone to be so convinced they are right and the "OTHER SIDE" (very important; you have to view politics as a war between "sides") is so fundamentally wrong as to be inherently, de facto dangerous, is the very same mindset that she shows on the daily.  There's very little room for compromise in her point of view.   The Green New Deal isn't about subtlety, it isn't about compromise, it isn't about mutual beneficial change.   Economy? THE ECONOMY? FUCK the economy, we've got a planet to save!  We've got WEALTH to reallocate!    (I'm trying to be funny, not hypocritically inflammatory, to make my point). 

Offline KevShmev

  • EZBoard Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 29521
  • Gender: Male
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #79 on: April 16, 2019, 08:50:03 AM »
So now, AOC, in all her wisdom, is denouncing Biden and saying the Democrats need to move forward, not backward, and I think it is clear that she will not get on board with any Democrat presidential candidate who is moderate at all.  Considering how many followers she has on Twitter, her way of thinking is going to hurt the Democrats' chances of taking back the White House in 2020.  If/when Trump gets re-elected, Democrats will have her to thank.

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 15898
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #80 on: April 16, 2019, 08:57:41 AM »
So now, AOC, in all her wisdom, is denouncing Biden and saying the Democrats need to move forward, not backward, and I think it is clear that she will not get on board with any Democrat presidential candidate who is moderate at all.  Considering how many followers she has on Twitter, her way of thinking is going to hurt the Democrats' chances of taking back the White House in 2020.  If/when Trump gets re-elected, Democrats will have her to thank.

... and many (grateful) Republicans.   

Online El Barto

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 21782
  • Bad Craziness
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #81 on: April 16, 2019, 09:01:09 AM »
So now, AOC, in all her wisdom, is denouncing Biden and saying the Democrats need to move forward, not backward, and I think it is clear that she will not get on board with any Democrat presidential candidate who is moderate at all.  Considering how many followers she has on Twitter, her way of thinking is going to hurt the Democrats' chances of taking back the White House in 2020.  If/when Trump gets re-elected, Democrats will have her to thank.

... and many (grateful dipshit) Republicans.

In any case, this is what I've been saying all along. The reality is that I don't know what percentage of the democratic electorate are that short-sighted, though. Certainly the younger ones are, but I think by and large most democrats, and plenty of moderate republicans, will be just fine voting for Biden.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline KevShmev

  • EZBoard Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 29521
  • Gender: Male
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #82 on: April 16, 2019, 09:08:53 AM »
Biden has my vote in 2020 if he gets the nomination (assuming Trump runs for re-election).

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 15898
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #83 on: April 16, 2019, 09:29:44 AM »
So now, AOC, in all her wisdom, is denouncing Biden and saying the Democrats need to move forward, not backward, and I think it is clear that she will not get on board with any Democrat presidential candidate who is moderate at all.  Considering how many followers she has on Twitter, her way of thinking is going to hurt the Democrats' chances of taking back the White House in 2020.  If/when Trump gets re-elected, Democrats will have her to thank.

... and many (grateful dipshit) Republicans.

In any case, this is what I've been saying all along. The reality is that I don't know what percentage of the democratic electorate are that short-sighted, though. Certainly the younger ones are, but I think by and large most democrats, and plenty of moderate republicans, will be just fine voting for Biden.

I don't know that it's cut and dry, though.   I've said before I'd vote for Biden, and I'm not reversing that now, but I will say that my jury is out on a final decision - even assuming it's Trump/Biden - as I'm going to wait to see how the Parties position themselves.   If Biden says "I'm Joe F*****g Biden, bitches, take me or leave me" then he might get my vote.  If he whores himself out (as I believe Clinton did, at least to a degree) in order to secure his party's nomination - and I mean "more than the reasonable compromise that every candidate has to do to appeal broadly" - then maybe not so much.   

"Change" isn't "doing the same shit, just having someone different doing it".  "Change" is actually doing things in a markedly different way".  Obama wasn't able to make it stick.  He ultimately changed nothing.   History will have to tell us, but the possibility is that Trump, for better or worse, will have a far greater impact on our government than Obama ever did, even including the "ACA".   If Biden is going to come in and try to be "Hillary Sanders-Cortez" then I'll pass, even with the global "moderation/reason" aspect.   

Offline Cool Chris

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 7247
  • Gender: Male
  • Rest in Peace
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #84 on: April 16, 2019, 10:16:11 AM »
So now, AOC, in all her wisdom, is denouncing Biden and saying the Democrats need to move forward, not backward, and I think it is clear that she will not get on board with any Democrat presidential candidate who is moderate an old, white male at all. 

https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/14/politics/pelosi-aoc-60-minutes/index.html

Quote
During an interview that aired Sunday on "60 Minutes," CBS's Lesley Stahl began a question to Pelosi, saying, "You have these wings -- AOC, and her group on one side--"

"That's, like, five people," Pelosi replied.

 :rollin
"Nostalgia is just the ability to forget the things that sucked" - Nelson DeMille, 'Up Country'

Online El Barto

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 21782
  • Bad Craziness
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #85 on: April 16, 2019, 10:20:42 AM »
So now, AOC, in all her wisdom, is denouncing Biden and saying the Democrats need to move forward, not backward, and I think it is clear that she will not get on board with any Democrat presidential candidate who is moderate an old, white male at all. 

https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/14/politics/pelosi-aoc-60-minutes/index.html

Quote
During an interview that aired Sunday on "60 Minutes," CBS's Lesley Stahl began a question to Pelosi, saying, "You have these wings -- AOC, and her group on one side--"

"That's, like, five people," Pelosi replied.

 :rollin
Congressionally that's probably true. While she's the face of much of the new dipshit left, splitting here airtime with Bernie, that's not a big contengent in the House, honestly. I just saw FOX making light of the fact that 95% of democrats vote along with her, rather than 5, but that's a pretty stupid analysis. Even for Fox.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline KevShmev

  • EZBoard Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 29521
  • Gender: Male
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #86 on: April 16, 2019, 10:58:44 AM »
Right, the vast majority of politicians vote down party lines, so I am sure there are plenty of Democrats who grimace and vote along with AOC, just like I am sure most Republicans throw up in their mouths at having to go along with President Doofus.

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 15898
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #87 on: April 17, 2019, 07:40:25 AM »
So now, AOC, in all her wisdom, is denouncing Biden and saying the Democrats need to move forward, not backward, and I think it is clear that she will not get on board with any Democrat presidential candidate who is moderate an old, white male at all. 

https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/14/politics/pelosi-aoc-60-minutes/index.html

Quote
During an interview that aired Sunday on "60 Minutes," CBS's Lesley Stahl began a question to Pelosi, saying, "You have these wings -- AOC, and her group on one side--"

"That's, like, five people," Pelosi replied.

 :rollin
Congressionally that's probably true. While she's the face of much of the new dipshit left, splitting here airtime with Bernie, that's not a big contengent in the House, honestly. I just saw FOX making light of the fact that 95% of democrats vote along with her, rather than 5, but that's a pretty stupid analysis. Even for Fox.

I have zero doubt that Pelosi is right on the money here, but isn't this indicative of a bigger thing?   Someone draws a swastika  on a synagogue in Detroit, and BAM! half of Trump voters are deplorable, he's a white nationalist scumbag and the GOP is a front organization for the Klan.   It's lazy; it's the analysis of convenience.   

BUT: It works both ways, and I have further kudos for Pelosi; if Trump was supposed to "disavow" all that the left disagreed with in the name of "compromise" and "bipartisanship", then in the same interest, if it IS five people, then there should be more on the left saying "Alexandria, please."  And to her credit, in the classy way that old school politicians did this stuff (and which I greatly miss) Pelosi has done just that. 

I feel like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is the young padawan facing off against the aged, seasoned, veteran of the Clone Wars Jedi that is Nancy Pelosi.  We'll see if she turns out like Luke (at the feet of Yoda) or Anakin (at the feet of Obi-wan).

Offline bosk1

  • Bow down to Boskaryus
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 6427
  • Kabbalah
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #88 on: April 17, 2019, 07:45:39 AM »
I really feel like we are living in a truly odd world when Nancy Pelosi is being held up as the voice of reason.
"The Supreme Court of the United States has descended from the disciplined legal reasoning of John Marshall and Joseph Story to the mystical aphorisms of the fortune cookie."

Offline eric42434224

  • Posts: 3439
  • Gender: Male
  • Wilson
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #89 on: April 17, 2019, 10:29:15 AM »
I really feel like we are living in a truly odd world when Nancy Pelosi is being held up as the voice of reason.

 :lol :lol :lol

We have Reality TV star and twitter addict, Donald Trump, as President Ot The United States, and THIS is what makes you feel like you are living in a truly odd world?

If someone, regardless of political affiliation, woke up today from a coma after 10 years, I'm pretty sure one of those examples would likely make that person think they were taking crazy pills.....and I don't think it would be the Pelosi one.

 
Oh shit, you're right!

rumborak

Rumborak to me 10/29

Offline Phoenix87x

  • From the ashes
  • Posts: 6192
  • The Phoenix shall rise
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #90 on: April 21, 2019, 11:15:54 AM »
A Message From the Future With Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d9uTH0iprVQ