Author Topic: AOC thread  (Read 4845 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline KevShmev

  • EZBoard Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 29996
  • Gender: Male
AOC thread
« on: March 31, 2019, 08:46:21 AM »
I figured we need a thread on her since she is the most talked about US politician right now not named Trump.

This made me chuckle:

https://twitter.com/tomselliott/status/1112146790860668928

Sounds like someone on her staff needs to give her a history lesson.  :lol :lol

Offline Phoenix87x

  • From the ashes
  • Posts: 6371
  • The Phoenix shall rise
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #1 on: March 31, 2019, 09:34:24 AM »
This thread is gonna be epic  :corn 

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 16475
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #2 on: March 31, 2019, 09:44:38 AM »
Ironically, I might not have to say too much here.  Just let her do the talking... ;)


Offline Adami

  • Moderator of awesomeness
  • *
  • Posts: 28517
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #3 on: March 31, 2019, 10:03:07 AM »
Not much to contribute here, but I do have two requests, which can obviously be ignored.

1) For people who attack this person (which I feel will be most of you) try to imagine how you'd react to those same attacks on Trump or other conservatives.

2) For the people defending and advocating for her (which I feel will NOT be most of you) try to imagine if you'd advocate or defend the same things if they were being done by Trump or a conservative.

fanticide.bandcamp.com

Offline Cool Chris

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 7443
  • Gender: Male
  • Rest in Peace
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #4 on: March 31, 2019, 11:39:51 AM »
The two do have a lot in common, the both:

* Reached high levels of government without any political history
* have very loud, ardent supporters
* Love the spotlight
* Think they are smarter than everyone else
* Think they know what's best for everyone else

If aliens landed tomorrow and began their research in to the American political system, after a cursory glance at the internet coverage their initial conclusions might be those two are the only federal government officials in the country.
"Nostalgia is just the ability to forget the things that sucked" - Nelson DeMille, 'Up Country'

Online gmillerdrake

  • Proud Father.....Blessed Husband
  • DTF.org Member
  • *
  • Posts: 13036
  • Gender: Male
  • 1 Timothy 2:5
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #5 on: March 31, 2019, 12:08:41 PM »
My only contribution to this thread will be a prediction....and that is she’ll be a (1) term Rep. Many reasons as to why I believe that, the top one being the exposure she’s getting. It has not been good for her on a couple levels and will continue to work against her.

I’ll leave it at that as thats about the nicest thing I can say concerning her.
Without Faith.....Without Hope.....There can be No Peace of Mind

Offline El Barto

  • Rascal Atheistic Pig
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 22062
  • Bad Craziness
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #6 on: March 31, 2019, 12:37:34 PM »
My only contribution to this thread will be a prediction....and that is she’ll be a (1) term Rep. Many reasons as to why I believe that, the top one being the exposure she’s getting. It has not been good for her on a couple levels and will continue to work against her.

I’ll leave it at that as thats about the nicest thing I can say concerning her.
That exposure works both ways. So much of it has been false or misleading that she'll get some persecution points. The more dipshit republicans rag on her for the way she dresses or make up stuff about the NGD the more her supporters will galvanize.

Also, she only has to answer to the people in Queens that elected her, and I suspect they all think she did them a solid by standing against Amazon. Nimrod or not, she'd get a whole lot of leeway from me if I were in her district based simply on that. We had a former mayor here many years ago that generally sucked, but I still support her because the one thing she did was tell Jerry Jones to go fuck himself. That's why Jerry World is in Arlington and not Dallas. 
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 Adami

  • Moderator of awesomeness
  • *
  • Posts: 28517
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #7 on: March 31, 2019, 01:34:28 PM »
I don't know much about AOC other than what I read here and there, but just based on that, this is actually going to be a great opportunity....that will of course be completely missed.

Liberals can finally see what some conservatives loved about Trump back in the day.

Conservatives can finally see why liberals hated Trump.

Doubt much of that will actually be happening, but it's a hope.
fanticide.bandcamp.com

Offline KevShmev

  • EZBoard Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 29996
  • Gender: Male
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #8 on: March 31, 2019, 01:46:05 PM »
I was thinking more like, liberals can see what some conservatives liked in Sarah Palin.  AOC reminds me a lot of Palin: attractive (by politician standards), says a lot of stupid stuff that makes you wonder if she thought before she spoke, became a star out of nowhere, villain-ized by the other side in quick fashion, etc.

Offline XeRocks81

  • Posts: 561
  • Gender: Male
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #9 on: March 31, 2019, 02:03:53 PM »
I was thinking more like, liberals can see what some conservatives liked in Sarah Palin.  AOC reminds me a lot of Palin: attractive (by politician standards), says a lot of stupid stuff that makes you wonder if she thought before she spoke, became a star out of nowhere, villain-ized by the other side in quick fashion, etc.

She seems much more informed on the issues than Palin was, at least from my perspective. 

edit: I mean you can disagree with her politics but no one can say she doesn’t come prepared to those hearings

Offline Chino

  • Be excellent to each other.
  • DT.net Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 21168
  • Gender: Male
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #10 on: April 01, 2019, 06:13:57 AM »
Palin and AOC aren't even playing the same sport. I think the suggestion that Palin and AOC are on the same intellectual level is hilariously inaccurate.

You don't need to like AOC. I find myself rolling my eyes at probably 40% of the words that come out of her mouth, but she'd run circles around Palin in both a political debate and a general aptitude test.

Online gmillerdrake

  • Proud Father.....Blessed Husband
  • DTF.org Member
  • *
  • Posts: 13036
  • Gender: Male
  • 1 Timothy 2:5
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #11 on: April 01, 2019, 06:46:45 AM »
Palin and AOC aren't even playing the same sport. I think the suggestion that Palin and AOC are on the same intellectual level is hilariously inaccurate.

You don't need to like AOC. I find myself rolling my eyes at probably 40% of the words that come out of her mouth, but she'd run circles around Palin in both a political debate and a general aptitude test.

Not that I even like Sarah Palin.....but I completely disagree with this. If anything they’re similar.....but you can’t listen to AOC give an interview without cringing. Aptitude is not a word I’d ever use to describe anything she’s ever said and the idea that she can run circles around anyone in a debate....including a person who ran a state for a while is laughable to me.

I don’t know....I think she’s nothing more than a poster girl with near zero content.....and the content that is there isn’t based in reality.
Without Faith.....Without Hope.....There can be No Peace of Mind

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 16475
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #12 on: April 01, 2019, 07:49:49 AM »
I was thinking more like, liberals can see what some conservatives liked in Sarah Palin.  AOC reminds me a lot of Palin: attractive (by politician standards), says a lot of stupid stuff that makes you wonder if she thought before she spoke, became a star out of nowhere, villain-ized by the other side in quick fashion, etc.

She seems much more informed on the issues than Palin was, at least from my perspective. 

edit: I mean you can disagree with her politics but no one can say she doesn’t come prepared to those hearings

I guess I can concede that last point, but to what end?   

I don't really share the "hate" that many Republicans seem to be having for her, at least not in the same way.  I dislike the rampant hypocrisy that she embodies; it is, in my humble view, a crystalization of everything I see wrong in American politics today.   Trump is a LIAR! The LYINGEST LIAR TO EVER HAVE LIED!    But when AOC says that "Republicans had to change the Constitution to prevent a DEMOCRAT from being elected to a fifth term!" (referring to FDR, who had died about two years before the Amendment was debated and passed) I wonder where the apoplexy about "false information" went?  Trump screams about "Fake News" and it's the death of democracy as he undermines the very integrity of the foundation of our nation, and when she does it, doubling down on a mis-statement, it's "haters gonna hate!", and I wonder where the apoplexy about "fake news" and "democracy" went?   

And I know where it went: right up the ass, because "it's my guy" or "it's for a good cause" or "at least she's not banging porn stars" or whatever other rationalization you need to "hate" a guy simply because his politics are (ironically, probably not that) different than yours.   She's the embodiment of "us versus them" politics, and so no matter how smart she is, no matter how well-prepared she is, no matter how POPULAR she is, it's the equivalent of Adam Levine selling 7 million copies of the latest Maroon 5 record.  Is it really the best thing for moving our civilization, our society, our country forward?   

In that galvanizing way, in that completely lacking in self-awareness way, in that "perpetuating the problem instead of hard cuts to solve the problem" way, I see little difference between her and Trump.

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 16475
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #13 on: April 01, 2019, 07:56:42 AM »
Palin and AOC aren't even playing the same sport. I think the suggestion that Palin and AOC are on the same intellectual level is hilariously inaccurate.

You don't need to like AOC. I find myself rolling my eyes at probably 40% of the words that come out of her mouth, but she'd run circles around Palin in both a political debate and a general aptitude test.

Maybe the former, but not sure how we can say the latter.   

They are both alike in that they both risk being branded largely by the criticisms against them than the substance of their accomplishments.   They've both sort of raised themselves up by their bootstraps in that way.  If I was Sarah Palin, I'd've challenged Tina Fey to a good old fashioned Texas cage, no-disqualification, taipei deathmatch a long long time ago.  Fey did more to disparage Palin's reputation than Palin herself ever did.   That "Russia" quote was so out of context it's ridiculous.   I'm not suggesting that Palin is any kind of genius, but I find it hard to believe she's the idiot that her opponents want (nay, NEED) her to be. 

Online gmillerdrake

  • Proud Father.....Blessed Husband
  • DTF.org Member
  • *
  • Posts: 13036
  • Gender: Male
  • 1 Timothy 2:5
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #14 on: April 01, 2019, 08:15:43 AM »
but no one can say she doesn’t come prepared to those hearings

I don't believe she's the one preparing her content for those hearings. The stark difference in her when speaking 'off the cuff' on her own volition and intellect and her speaking in those hearings with that provided material are two different people.
Without Faith.....Without Hope.....There can be No Peace of Mind

Online Kattelox

  • Heart of an Eagle
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 7668
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #15 on: April 01, 2019, 08:30:55 AM »
You know... at first I didn't understand why she was getting slammed so much from every direction but the more I hear from her the more I understand why people don't praise her. She, to me, relies on emotion too much when she talks instead of cold hard facts and logic (as do some other congressmen and -women). She seems to be oblivious to some facts that congressmen should be aware of (the FDR/amendment thing is a prime example). Experience really isn't an issue for me, I voted Obama, and I think it's good for Congress to get fresh faces in that sea of career politicians, but... something just feels off about her.
RYM || Last.FM
"No Christ, God, nor religion gave me the answers I was looking for" - Timo Tolkki

Offline KevShmev

  • EZBoard Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 29996
  • Gender: Male
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #16 on: April 01, 2019, 08:43:43 AM »
Palin and AOC aren't even playing the same sport. I think the suggestion that Palin and AOC are on the same intellectual level is hilariously inaccurate.


Who suggested that?

I don't believe she's the one preparing her content for those hearings. The stark difference in her when speaking 'off the cuff' on her own volition and intellect and her speaking in those hearings with that provided material are two different people.

Agreed.  The one clip I saw at a hearing, she was literally reading every question from papers her staff clearly prepared for her, and while I get that most come prepped with notes, if you are truly prepared, you should be able to pose the questions mostly from memory while using the paperwork as a guide, like if the wording of a question slips your mind for a moment or something like that, but with her, it was like she was seeing the questions for the first time.

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 16475
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #17 on: April 01, 2019, 10:13:29 AM »
She, to me, relies on emotion too much when she talks instead of cold hard facts and logic (as do some other congressmen and -women).

Which is both a deal-breaker for me (we have a representational government for the precise reason of taking emotion out of the equation.  That's also - in part - why we have the legal system we do, with "right to counsel" a Constitutional right.) as well as another example of the perpetuation of the problem.    Trump's "gut" is to be mocked, but her "emotion" is to be praised?   Well, of course AS LONG AS YOU AGREE WITH THEM.   But - repeating myself - since there's zero self-awareness that this is exactly no different than the other side, we'll continue to get "deplorable" and "libtards".

It's like going to McDonald's every Wednesday and expecting there to be chicken cordon bleu on the menu.

Offline XeRocks81

  • Posts: 561
  • Gender: Male
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #18 on: April 01, 2019, 08:32:30 PM »
AOC is no different than any other representative, senator, what have you.  They all have(usually overworked and underpaid) teams of staffers who prepare briefing materials.

Offline Dave_Manchester

  • Posts: 1093
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #19 on: April 02, 2019, 07:09:50 AM »
AOC is no different than any other representative, senator, what have you.  They all have(usually overworked and underpaid) teams of staffers who prepare briefing materials.

This isn't strictly true. The ability and willingness to listen to a team of experts, read their briefing materials, and then publicly articulate the information in a coherent manner sets her apart from at least one political figure I can think of.

Honestly it's the reaction to AOC rather than Alexandria herself that I find interesting. For a while now I've been calling attention to FOX's hysterical campaign against her, and today we get yet another tired screed from Tucker "Iraqis are primitive monkeys and were not worth killing" Carlson. This is on the site's front page at the time of writing:

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/tucker-carlson-heres-why-awful-ocasio-cortez-has-a-following-and-its-not-because-shes-impressive

As you can see the headline indicates the responsible journalism ahead. She's "awful". Ok? You needn't read on. Most won't anyway. You got the idea before you even started to read the article - the girl is awful and that's all you need to know. But for those of us prepared to wade through another day's worth of FOX's dumbed-down clickbait demagoguery, here are some snippets from the article:
 
"Chris Hayes is what every man would be if feminists ever achieve absolute power in this country -- apologetic, bespectacled and deeply, deeply concerned about global warming and the patriarchal systems that cause it"

This is from the opening, and the scene is set: beware the feminists. They are deeply concerned about global warming. And they wear spectacles.

"On Friday, Hayes hosted a town hall event on MSNBC with Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. It was designed to promote her Green New Deal. This apparently seemed like a wise idea to executives over at NBC. The very same news outlet that spent two years lying to you about Russia brings you a 29-year-old former bartender to teach you about science"

3 notable things here:

1) NBC were wrong in their predictions about Trump collusion with Russia. Therefore, this discredits anyone they ever have on their network to talk about climate change. Wrong about one thing means wrong about everything else. It would be like if someone spent years pushing a false story about a president being a Kenyan citizen and [continued on page 2].

2) It is not clear why Tucker Carlson believes a "former bartender" cannot be informed about science. It may be because he's a rich trust fund baby whose father was president of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and his step-mother was an heiress, and so he now spends his days spewing out coked-up rants against feckless unemployed layabouts and primitive brown folk who aren't worth the price of an American bullet. Either way, take note please - if you have ever worked in the service industry then you sir or madam are a moron and should stick to serving people. Leave questions of policy to the proper people, the rich ones whose mummies and daddies put them through expensive colleges.

3) Tucker Carlson wants it noted that (elected) Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is "29-years-old" and is recklessly inexperienced for the level of power she has.

Tucker Carlson has never uttered one single derogatory word against (unelected) Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump.

We go on...

"Hayes framed the terms at the outset of the show. Unless you do exactly what Dr. Ocasio-Cortez says, the entire human race has only 12 years to live"

Tucker Carlson (and FOX as a whole) is very fond of wheeling out this mishcaracterised version of the "12 year" comment that AOC made back in January. They are less keen on stating what she actually said, nor that she was referring to (I quote) "a United Nations-backed climate report, published late last year, that determined the effects of climate change to be irreversible and unavoidable if carbon emissions are not reined in over the next 12 years".

The silly bitch had read a report on climate change put together by the world's leading climate scientists. What kind of responsible statesperson does such a thing? If only she had a more trust-worthy gut she could have saved herself the time and known it was all horseshit.

Next we come to a key and relatively new tactic in the Republican strategy:

"Well, the good news is that Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has the cure for human extinction. All we have to do is obey her and be very, very good people.

"In my framework, it is my belief that we do not just have a wealthy society, but that we have a moral society," she said.

Wait a second, you may be wondering. How does a member of Congress who hasn't yet turned 30, someone who has never even raised children, get the right to lecture me about morality? Well, that's the difference between you and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. She is a highly decent person"

You see what's happened here? The merest mention of the m-word and suddenly she's hyperbolically accused of "lecturing" people. She is being mocked. "How on earth can this young childless person possibly have an opinion about what is right and wrong in this world? Only we rich folk who laugh at the "primitive monkeys" we kill can do such a thing".

It is also worth noting that Tucker Carlson believes that the only people who are in a position to talk about morality are people who have children. Which suggests that he believes morality is something that is passed on. It is directed downwards from the adults towards an obedient youth. Moralising in other words. 

To conclude:

"So, it's official. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is a moron and nasty and more self-righteous than any televangelist who ever preached a sermon on cable access. She is not impressive. She's awful"

The American left resort to name-calling when they have run out of arguments doncha know?


Day after day after day of this shit, a barrage of hysterical anti-AOC articles attacking everything from her age to her looks to the social media posts she made in college to - once in a while - her policies. It is the Republican strategy to cast Alexandria as the face of the Democratic Party. By October 2020 they want everyone in America to associate a vote for the Dems as a vote for an inexperienced (the irony), not-always articulate (more irony), populist (you get it by now...) rabble-rouser who wants to overthrow the American way of life. It helps that she's young, female and Puerto Rican. If she were a lesbian they could stick horns on her head and claim the grand slam.

My own opinion of her - I hope she sticks around. She's inexperienced as a politician but I think she has the intelligence to learn. Despite her young age and arguable lack of skills for the job, she was elected fairly by her constituents to serve in that position (*cough* Ivanka *cough*) and her ideas, when stripped of the bullshit that her opponents garnish them with, are worth listening to and discussing, even if that means rejecting them (as many of them probably should be). Trump mobilised a certain section of America that felt disenfranchised and it was inevitable that a similar thing would then happen on the other end of the spectrum.

One other interesting thing about her - I could be wrong about this but I'm fairly sure that Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is the one human being in the entire Democratic Party who Donald Trump does not attack. His bastard of a son does, and often, but Trump himself never does (or at least, very rarely, and never with the vicious tone he uses for the likes of Waters, Warren, Schiff, Hillary, etc). I have a sneaking suspicion that he actually likes and even admires her. He will recognise in her certain aspects of himself (shamelessly offering hope to a demographic that felt disenfranchised), presented with his brand of I-don't-give-a-fuck-what-you-think-of-me 'naturalness'.


edit - One other point while I'm talking about frat boy's obsession with AOC's young age and how it disqualifies her from having a point of view on any topic, much less "morality" - Tucker Carlson was 33 years of age when he used his rich media mogul daddy's contacts to publish his inspirational memoir Politicians, Partisans and Parasites, a collection of musings that drip with raw life experience.
« Last Edit: April 02, 2019, 08:17:15 AM by Dave_Manchester »
"As democracy is perfected, the office of President represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their hearts' desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron" - H.L.Mencken, 26th July 1920.

"China has total respect for Donald Trump and for Donald Trump's very very large brain" - American President Donald Trump, September 26th 2018.

Offline KevShmev

  • EZBoard Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 29996
  • Gender: Male
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #20 on: April 02, 2019, 10:19:58 AM »
I don't give a crap what Tucker Carlson (see: major d-bag) thinks about anything, and if we can be real for a minute, the way Fox and some on the right are crushing AOC right now is not that dissimilar from what CNN, MCNBS and many on the left did to Sarah Palin back then.  Bill Maher called Palin the c-word and it was apparently funny (so we were told).

But you might be on to something regarding the similarity between AOC and Trump. 

Offline Dave_Manchester

  • Posts: 1093
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #21 on: April 02, 2019, 11:54:47 AM »
I don't give a crap what Tucker Carlson (see: major d-bag) thinks about anything, and if we can be real for a minute, the way Fox and some on the right are crushing AOC right now is not that dissimilar from what CNN, MCNBS and many on the left did to Sarah Palin back then.  Bill Maher called Palin the c-word and it was apparently funny (so we were told).

But you might be on to something regarding the similarity between AOC and Trump.

But many do, and my point in taking apart his silly article was that a lot of the attacks on AOC are based on misinformation or mischaracterisation of what she actually says, as well as a relentless obsession with her age, appearance, former jobs, etc (FOX even had a period where they were trying to track down where she lives, as well as stalking her boyfriend). Your own OP describes her as the "most talked about" politician in America now, after Trump, which is correct. But why is she? Because she's the dumbest one? I'd refer anyone who believes that to Betsy DeVos' bar-raising idiocy during her House Appropriations grilling last Tuesday. This is the Education Secretary speaking with disturbing stupidity about questions she has a duty to understand, and it got barely a mention in the media. Why isn't she the most talked about politician in America? Where's the scrutiny of her former career and living situation and dress sense and dance videos from college? Why isn't Orrin "Mr Zuckerberg, walk us through your perplexing business model please" Hatch the most talked about politician, if cluelessness is a concern?

I just think that a lot (not all) of the criticism levelled at her is disproportionate. I see a kind of reverse Trump phenomenon going on in the sense that the bar for Trump to raise an eyebrow with his stupidity is now so high that his ritual "How can global warming be real if it's snowing in February" tweets don't get a mention anymore, whereas the mouthy young Latino gets torn apart for nigh-on everything she says even when what she says has sometimes not even been properly read or heard by those criticising her (case in point being the "12 year climate change" comments that her detractors continue to misrepresent).
"As democracy is perfected, the office of President represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their hearts' desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron" - H.L.Mencken, 26th July 1920.

"China has total respect for Donald Trump and for Donald Trump's very very large brain" - American President Donald Trump, September 26th 2018.

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 16475
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #22 on: April 02, 2019, 12:27:50 PM »
AOC is no different than any other representative, senator, what have you.  They all have(usually overworked and underpaid) teams of staffers who prepare briefing materials.

This isn't strictly true. The ability and willingness to listen to a team of experts, read their briefing materials, and then publicly articulate the information in a coherent manner sets her apart from at least one political figure I can think of.

Honestly it's the reaction to AOC rather than Alexandria herself that I find interesting. For a while now I've been calling attention to FOX's hysterical campaign against her, and today we get yet another tired screed from Tucker "Iraqis are primitive monkeys and were not worth killing" Carlson. This is on the site's front page at the time of writing:

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/tucker-carlson-heres-why-awful-ocasio-cortez-has-a-following-and-its-not-because-shes-impressive

As you can see the headline indicates the responsible journalism ahead. She's "awful". Ok? You needn't read on.

You know better.  That's not journalism, PERIOD, let along "responsible" journalism.  It says it right in the title: "OPINION".    If we're going to talk about media, talk about journalism, we need to immediately jettison Tucker Carlson and Sean Hannity from the conversation.  THEY ARE NOT JOURNALISTS.    Now, I get the response:  "But they are on a news network, and people listen to them".   Okay, fair enough, but so did people to the "most trusted man in journalism", the COMEDIAN Jon Stewart, and I've been told many times by smart capable people here that I'm unreasonable in my estimation of their impact and reach.    Funny, though, when I cite the numbers for Tucker Carlson and Sean Hannity - about 2.5 million viewers per day - I'm told that's impactful, but somehow Stewart's 1.7 to 2 million viewers is not.


Quote
Most won't anyway. You got the idea before you even started to read the article - the girl is awful and that's all you need to know. But for those of us prepared to wade through another day's worth of FOX's dumbed-down clickbait demagoguery, here are some snippets from the article:
 
"Chris Hayes is what every man would be if feminists ever achieve absolute power in this country -- apologetic, bespectacled and deeply, deeply concerned about global warming and the patriarchal systems that cause it"

This is from the opening, and the scene is set: beware the feminists. They are deeply concerned about global warming. And they wear spectacles.

"On Friday, Hayes hosted a town hall event on MSNBC with Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. It was designed to promote her Green New Deal. This apparently seemed like a wise idea to executives over at NBC. The very same news outlet that spent two years lying to you about Russia brings you a 29-year-old former bartender to teach you about science"

3 notable things here:

1) NBC were wrong in their predictions about Trump collusion with Russia. Therefore, this discredits anyone they ever have on their network to talk about climate change. Wrong about one thing means wrong about everything else. It would be like if someone spent years pushing a false story about a president being a Kenyan citizen and [continued on page 2].

2) It is not clear why Tucker Carlson believes a "former bartender" cannot be informed about science. It may be because he's a rich trust fund baby whose father was president of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and his step-mother was an heiress, and so he now spends his days spewing out coked-up rants against feckless unemployed layabouts and primitive brown folk who aren't worth the price of an American bullet. Either way, take note please - if you have ever worked in the service industry then you sir or madam are a moron and should stick to serving people. Leave questions of policy to the proper people, the rich ones whose mummies and daddies put them through expensive colleges.

3) Tucker Carlson wants it noted that (elected) Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is "29-years-old" and is recklessly inexperienced for the level of power she has.

Tucker Carlson has never uttered one single derogatory word against (unelected) Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump.

We go on...

"Hayes framed the terms at the outset of the show. Unless you do exactly what Dr. Ocasio-Cortez says, the entire human race has only 12 years to live"

Tucker Carlson (and FOX as a whole) is very fond of wheeling out this mishcaracterised version of the "12 year" comment that AOC made back in January. They are less keen on stating what she actually said, nor that she was referring to (I quote) "a United Nations-backed climate report, published late last year, that determined the effects of climate change to be irreversible and unavoidable if carbon emissions are not reined in over the next 12 years".

The silly bitch had read a report on climate change put together by the world's leading climate scientists. What kind of responsible statesperson does such a thing? If only she had a more trust-worthy gut she could have saved herself the time and known it was all horseshit.

Next we come to a key and relatively new tactic in the Republican strategy:

"Well, the good news is that Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has the cure for human extinction. All we have to do is obey her and be very, very good people.

"In my framework, it is my belief that we do not just have a wealthy society, but that we have a moral society," she said.

Wait a second, you may be wondering. How does a member of Congress who hasn't yet turned 30, someone who has never even raised children, get the right to lecture me about morality? Well, that's the difference between you and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. She is a highly decent person"

You see what's happened here? The merest mention of the m-word and suddenly she's hyperbolically accused of "lecturing" people. She is being mocked. "How on earth can this young childless person possibly have an opinion about what is right and wrong in this world? Only we rich folk who laugh at the "primitive monkeys" we kill can do such a thing".

It is also worth noting that Tucker Carlson believes that the only people who are in a position to talk about morality are people who have children. Which suggests that he believes morality is something that is passed on. It is directed downwards from the adults towards an obedient youth. Moralising in other words. 

To conclude:

"So, it's official. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is a moron and nasty and more self-righteous than any televangelist who ever preached a sermon on cable access. She is not impressive. She's awful"

The American left resort to name-calling when they have run out of arguments doncha know?


Day after day after day of this shit, a barrage of hysterical anti-AOC articles attacking everything from her age to her looks to the social media posts she made in college to - once in a while - her policies. It is the Republican strategy to cast Alexandria as the face of the Democratic Party. By October 2020 they want everyone in America to associate a vote for the Dems as a vote for an inexperienced (the irony), not-always articulate (more irony), populist (you get it by now...) rabble-rouser who wants to overthrow the American way of life. It helps that she's young, female and Puerto Rican. If she were a lesbian they could stick horns on her head and claim the grand slam.

All probably closer to right than not, and yet... what's the point?  That Republicans are attacking a totem?   Republicans don't read past the headline?   Republicans resort to name-calling when their substantive argument is failing?   DEPLORABLE.  MUSLIM BAN. GRAB 'EM BY THE PUSSY.  RACIST!  There's a whole lot failing literacy skills in this country to go around, believe me.

There's literally zero intended irony here, but I give you this article/interview with Tucker Carlson, not for the content - some of it is blatantly self-serving - but because in there he says something I've been saying for months, if not YEARS now.   https://www.forbes.com/sites/markjoyella/2018/10/04/tucker-carlson-huge-ratings-big-ideas-and-a-constant-debate-with-the-dumb-people/#26079e484d30

I highlight three paragraphs in there:
"Carlson says that in writing his book, he returned again and again to the same question: "What happened that the country got so mad they elected Trump? How did we get here?" Content countries, he writes, don't elect people like Donald Trump.

But the media veers away from the why in a rush to cover the larger-than-life character that is Trump. "I honestly feel that most days I'm the only person in America that doesn't think Trump is as interesting as Trump thinks he is."

Carlson says the media's non-stop focus on the man — and not on his policies and the forces that brought them to power — exposes the media's real agenda. "It's totally self-indulgent, and I think it tells you everything about who they really are. The media aren't there to inform you. They're there to protect their own prerogatives and those of their class.""

I'm not enough of a Carlson supporter - read:  not at all a supporter - to even pretend that he's not also, inadvertently, talking about himself.  He is.   But there's ZERO difference between Jake Tapper rolling his eyes and making smiley faces at the camera when talking about Trump as there is in what you point out.   No, it's not enough that "Trump is PRESIDENT", since it IS important why we got here.  Why Trump gets to even BE President, why a "29-year-old bartender" gets to be on NATIONAL news on the regular for her point of view.  She may be smart.  She may be educated.  She may have come from humble beginnings.  Well, that's not enough.  I'm literally all of those things (as are you).  Why not our voice? 

Quote
My own opinion of her - I hope she sticks around. She's inexperienced as a politician but I think she has the intelligence to learn. Despite her young age and arguable lack of skills for the job, she was elected fairly by her constituents to serve in that position (*cough* Ivanka *cough*) and her ideas, when stripped of the bullshit that her opponents garnish them with, are worth listening to and discussing, even if that means rejecting them (as many of them probably should be). Trump mobilised a certain section of America that felt disenfranchised and it was inevitable that a similar thing would then happen on the other end of the spectrum.

Someone here mentioned something about a "pendulum" a couple months back.  Maybe this is it (though if I remember correctly, one of the essential aspects of the pendulum was that it was oblivious to causation, and was almost exclusively reactionary in nature; that was a problem for him then and remains a problem here as well.)

Quote
One other interesting thing about her - I could be wrong about this but I'm fairly sure that Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is the one human being in the entire Democratic Party who Donald Trump does not attack. His bastard of a son does, and often, but Trump himself never does (or at least, very rarely, and never with the vicious tone he uses for the likes of Waters, Warren, Schiff, Hillary, etc). I have a sneaking suspicion that he actually likes and even admires her. He will recognise in her certain aspects of himself (shamelessly offering hope to a demographic that felt disenfranchised), presented with his brand of I-don't-give-a-fuck-what-you-think-of-me 'naturalness'.


edit - One other point while I'm talking about frat boy's obsession with AOC's young age and how it disqualifies her from having a point of view on any topic, much less "morality" - Tucker Carlson was 33 years of age when he used his rich media mogul daddy's contacts to publish his inspirational memoir Politicians, Partisans and Parasites, a collection of musings that drip with raw life experience.

This is not going to appeal to you at all, I understand that, but this is not apples to apples.  I have another, probably equally unpopular theory that I normally keep to myself, but will offer it up to you here:  not everyone is capable and/or qualified to be rich/wealthy.  "Having money" is not like "breathing", where everyone can do it, sometimes with a little help.  There's a reason that lottery winners declare bankruptcy at something like five times the rate of the average population.   It's popular - because it's populist - to say that "bartending" and "being a school teacher" and "growing up in the projects" is some sort of badge of honor that can be worn by politicians to effect good, but is it?   I've done two of the three, and I can tell you that other than now being absolutely POSITIVE that some men are scumbags (I bartended at a titty bar), and that our children are far more physically and culturally mature than their brains can emotionally handle (I substitute taught middle school, and worked as a volunteer at a private high school) neither of those made me at all capable of addressing the economic needs of a $20 TRILLION global economy, nor did it give me any insight whatsoever on important issues like immigration*, tariffs, global warming, or the like.  (Full disclosure, it did give me insight into those issues that rely heavily on human nature, which is why the asterisk, and my experience is almost totally at odds with the prevailing political wisdom of our current leadership, in both parties). 

I'm not at all suggesting that politicians need to be rich to be successful; absolutely not.  I am saying, though, that immediately dismissing the "rich kid" in favor of the "populist hero" isn't really indicative of anything other than a love of the underdog, and any bookie will tell you, "underdogs" are underdogs for a reason, and the house loves them. 

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 16475
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #23 on: April 02, 2019, 12:44:02 PM »
I don't give a crap what Tucker Carlson (see: major d-bag) thinks about anything, and if we can be real for a minute, the way Fox and some on the right are crushing AOC right now is not that dissimilar from what CNN, MCNBS and many on the left did to Sarah Palin back then.  Bill Maher called Palin the c-word and it was apparently funny (so we were told).

But you might be on to something regarding the similarity between AOC and Trump.

But many do, and my point in taking apart his silly article was that a lot of the attacks on AOC are based on misinformation or mischaracterisation of what she actually says, as well as a relentless obsession with her age, appearance, former jobs, etc (FOX even had a period where they were trying to track down where she lives, as well as stalking her boyfriend). Your own OP describes her as the "most talked about" politician in America now, after Trump, which is correct. But why is she? Because she's the dumbest one? I'd refer anyone who believes that to Betsy DeVos' bar-raising idiocy during her House Appropriations grilling last Tuesday. This is the Education Secretary speaking with disturbing stupidity about questions she has a duty to understand, and it got barely a mention in the media. Why isn't she the most talked about politician in America? Where's the scrutiny of her former career and living situation and dress sense and dance videos from college? Why isn't Orrin "Mr Zuckerberg, walk us through your perplexing business model please" Hatch the most talked about politician, if cluelessness is a concern?

I just think that a lot (not all) of the criticism levelled at her is disproportionate. I see a kind of reverse Trump phenomenon going on in the sense that the bar for Trump to raise an eyebrow with his stupidity is now so high that his ritual "How can global warming be real if it's snowing in February" tweets don't get a mention anymore, whereas the mouthy young Latino gets torn apart for nigh-on everything she says even when what she says has sometimes not even been properly read or heard by those criticising her (case in point being the "12 year climate change" comments that her detractors continue to misrepresent).

It might be disproportionate in terms of her stature or her achievements - you can't name a junior representative that's had this kind of press in a long time, at least in my lifetime - but it's very much par for the course in American politics these days.  This is what and how we do, now.   

The important thing about Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is not her; it's the role she's playing.  She's but the latest earnest politician that is in over her head, and wrapped up in forces that she likely doesn't even understand let alone can actually control.    When I say "likely doesn't even understand", I mean that same old obliviousness and lack of self-awareness that I've been writing about until I'm blue in the face.   

You would think that someone as "smart" (not meant to be sarcastic; she is), and "media savvy" as she is (she allegedly was teaching her older, less facile Democrat colleagues the art of "Twitter") would, in the age of "FAKE NEWS" and "Liar liar pants on fire!" take great pains to be as accurate as she can be.  But no; she's oblivous, because she believes with every fibre of her being that she's RIGHT.  You don't think that Trump does to?  Or the head of the Klan?   "Believing you're right" is the opiate of our country these days, along with "follow your passion".   Okay; your "passion" is repurposing seashells and you "believe" they have healing powers. We'll check in on your successes in 24 months, ok?   

It's not... I don't want to say "relevant", that's not the right word, but it's close - to compare her to Trump, since the SAME PEOPLE are doing the evaluating.   This isn't "liberal" or "conservative", "Democrat" or "Republican", it's American versus American.   We've been led down the path that OUR WAY is the RIGHT WAY, and as long as you believe it, nothing else matters.   And so, it's not about "being unfair to Alexandria", it's about "none of your damn facts are going to get in the way of my opinion".   There is NO difference between the MAGA hat wearing neanderthal criticizing her "12 years" and the man-bag wearing hippy referring to Trump's "Muslim Ban".  None, nada, nyet, zed. 

Offline Dave_Manchester

  • Posts: 1093
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #24 on: April 02, 2019, 01:10:03 PM »
To your previous post, I'm not "dismissing the rich kid in favour of the populist hero". I'm saying it's note-worthy that in seeking to denigrate AOC and belittle any scientific knowledge she might have, he specifically made mention of the fact that she used to work as a bartender. I once worked in my father's greengrocer shop. If one day I go into public politics can I expect a privileged twat like Carlson to diminish my ideas because of this? Yes I can, because it's what they do. And it's no big deal, but I still think it's worth mentioning. I highlight it because I think it's the kind of snarky condescension that would get missed by 90% of people who read that article, yet it speaks to a patronising, elitist mentality common to people like him, one that quite frankly I hope future generations of AOCs tackle. Forward, comrades.

And I don't especially want to get into a semantics game but Tucker Carlson is my definition of a journalist. He disseminates news and current information to the public on FOX News. Putting "opinion" over his screeds doesn't change that, and comparisons with Jon Stewart (and I agree with you about him by the way, and won't argue a point someone else made to you about him) don't alter my point about his part in the campaign against AOC.
"As democracy is perfected, the office of President represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their hearts' desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron" - H.L.Mencken, 26th July 1920.

"China has total respect for Donald Trump and for Donald Trump's very very large brain" - American President Donald Trump, September 26th 2018.

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 16475
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #25 on: April 02, 2019, 01:38:30 PM »
To your previous post, I'm not "dismissing the rich kid in favour of the populist hero". I'm saying it's note-worthy that in seeking to denigrate AOC and belittle any scientific knowledge she might have, he specifically made mention of the fact that she used to work as a bartender. I once worked in my father's greengrocer shop. If one day I go into public politics can I expect a privileged twat like Carlson to diminish my ideas because of this? Yes I can, because it's what they do. And it's no big deal, but I still think it's worth mentioning. I highlight it because I think it's the kind of snarky condescension that would get missed by 90% of people who read that article, yet it speaks to a patronising, elitist mentality common to people like him, one that quite frankly I hope future generations of AOCs tackle. Forward, comrades.

But while I agree with you in specifics, my point is that the problem isn't specifically the snarky condescension from the "elitist" to the "plebe", but rather the snarky condescension of one ideology to another.  Put another way, I agree with everything you're saying, except for the last part; why should there be Ocasio-Cortez's "tackling" Tuckers, and not the other way around?  Or better yet, some as-yet unnamed paladin that tackles BOTH Tucker's elitist condescension as well as Ocasio-Cortez's populist arrogance? 

I totally get it, I'm literally driving that dead horse to dust at this point, but it's that "one-sided mentality" that has hurt our country.  I cannot seem to get that across, because the individual causes seem so "just".   Who would argue against racial equality, right?  Except, when you stop arguing and just ASSUME that you're morally right and there's no room for discussion, you marginalize every bit as much as if you call someone "n******".   And while some people can live with that, what happens (as it did here in the States) when the next issues isn't quite as cut and dry?   And yet, there's still that moral indignation?   ANd then, the NEXT issue, murkier still, but with the same level of moral superiority... repeat that enough and you get people that aren't racists, aren't bigots, but fear - legitimately, because some have done it already - that THEY are about to be "put in a basket" and they vote for the guy that's ostensibly going to take that "political correctness" and shove it back up their ass.   

I can, by the way, do this in other areas too, not just identity politics.   It's just cleaner here.     

Quote
And I don't especially want to get into a semantics game but Tucker Carlson is my definition of a journalist. He disseminates news and current information to the public on FOX News. Putting "opinion" over his screeds doesn't change that, and comparisons with Jon Stewart (and I agree with you about him by the way, and won't argue a point someone else made to you about him) don't alter my point about his part in the campaign against AOC.

As long as you see the continuity, and you clearly do, I can't argue with you.  If you want to lump him in, that's fine.  At least you're being consistent.  I can't say that about everyone that wants to pound on Faux News. 

Offline sueño

  • Posts: 1517
  • How Dare I Be So Beautiful?
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #26 on: April 02, 2019, 05:41:37 PM »
Wasn't sure whether to put this in the Political Humor thread or this one.. https://www.theonion.com/tucker-carlson-challenges-alexandria-ocasio-cortez-to-a-1833754126
"We spend most of our lives convinced we’re the protagonist of the story, but we rarely realize that we’re just supporting characters in everybody else’s story. Nobody thinks about you as much as you do."

Offline Dave_Manchester

  • Posts: 1093
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #27 on: April 03, 2019, 06:31:21 AM »
It might be disproportionate in terms of her stature or her achievements - you can't name a junior representative that's had this kind of press in a long time, at least in my lifetime - but it's very much par for the course in American politics these days.  This is what and how we do, now.   

The important thing about Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is not her; it's the role she's playing.  She's but the latest earnest politician that is in over her head, and wrapped up in forces that she likely doesn't even understand let alone can actually control.    When I say "likely doesn't even understand", I mean that same old obliviousness and lack of self-awareness that I've been writing about until I'm blue in the face.   

I agree with your point about "the role she's playing" but I want to add to it. For me she serves another kind of role - a useful distraction from senators far more experienced than her who are also guilty of being uninformed and recklessly unprepared. I ask again, if America is concerned about senators being lazily "unprepared" for debates and discussions, why wasn't Steve "tell me how iphones work, Mr CEO of Google" King not the national laughing stock that AOC sometimes is? What about Lamar Smith's or Ted Lieu's complete ignorance of how search engines work? You'd hope that House representatives would show up adequately prepared to speak with the leader of one of the world's largest companies, but I guess if the Zuckerberg hearing taught us anything it's that expectations for older, maler, more ethnically American senators are not all that high these days.

When they do it, it just gets treated as a joke. "They're really fuckin' old, whaddya expect?" I expect senators to be properly prepared for a set of hearings that directly affect America's cybersecurity. Instead we witnessed a bench full of decrepit old career politicians illustrating zero understanding of even the differences between Google, Wikipedia and Apple. That ought to have been disturbing. That ought to have brought about nationwide condemnation. A group of senators not doing even the briefest background research into a subject that their grandchildren could have walked them through. Meanwhile, wait for these same opportunist pricks to start bleating about Russia "infiltrating our cybersecurity!" in 2020. Yeah, if only you had a set of competent, informed people overseeing such things.

Yet it's AOC who is called "dumb", "ignorant" and "uninformed" every single day on FOX. It's she (along with Trump) whose every sentence is picked apart and scrutinised. If her views on healthcare are dumb, I refer us to Kansas senator Roger Marshall who invoked Jesus to explain why poor and ill people will always be with us. If her views on the economy are dumb, I refer us to every Republican who signed off on a spending bill that has a decent chance of crippling the next generation. If her views on 'socialism' are dumb, I ask why the Republicans (and FOX) were so quiet when Trump slipped through the 12 billion dollar farmers' bailout.

For me AOC, like Trump, is a symptom of a modern problem in politics all over the world, not just America - too much blame, not enough self-awareness.
"As democracy is perfected, the office of President represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their hearts' desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron" - H.L.Mencken, 26th July 1920.

"China has total respect for Donald Trump and for Donald Trump's very very large brain" - American President Donald Trump, September 26th 2018.

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 16475
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #28 on: April 03, 2019, 07:30:00 AM »
Well, let me say first that I don't fundamentally disagree with anything you wrote about the other Senators.   I have to be honest, though: man-to-man, I hope friend-to-friend, I'm not sure I get the emphasis on Fox News.   I really don't. 

But to the substance of your post:  there's another element of this that isn't really being discussed.   Steve King had his other troubles (racial comments) that have colored - no pun, seriously - his profile.   Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is courting the publicity and is BEING courted by those that can raise her profile. She relishes it, that's clear.   The tour of late night TV, the public statements... when other Senators have done this, they've come under the same fire (in a different way, Lyin' Ted Cruz, James "Snowball" Inhofe), though, it has to be said, that's a rarity.  When was the last time that a junior Republican Senator or Representative has been on the Stephen Colbert show just because of who they were?   I'll help you:  NEVER.   I believe that "Smilin' Mitch" McConnell was on a couple years ago, though I haven't been able to confirm that.   The only Republican that makes any kind of regular appearances on national television is - well, was - John McCain, and more often than not it was a apology appearance (Not the right word, but what i mean is, an opportunity to voice his reasoned, bipartisan opposition to his party). 

You keep focusing on Fox News, but I don't think it's even close (as Dr. Phil would say) at this point that the media is INCREDIBLY biased, almost inherently so* and like an out of tune instrument, the stories and ideas from Fox News seem SO antithetical that they attract attention.  But in the grand scheme of things, it's drops of piss in the ocean.  It's pollen on a stiff breeze.  It's... you get it. 



* I've always been pretty skeptical of the notion of "systemic racism", arguing regualrly that it was more an excuse and a crutch than any real tangible phenomenon, but in seeing how systemically "liberal" the media has become - blurring fact and opinion/conclusion as a matter of regular operating procedure - I'm softening my opinions on that.  It's THAT prevalent.   And with that, I have to ask:  if Fox is SO powerful, with it's 2.5 million viewers and something like 90 million eyeballs on the web, why is the entire REMAINDER of the media not?   Why does ONE OUTLET have so much alleged power, and the entire weight of the rest of the media machine does not?

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 16475
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #29 on: April 03, 2019, 07:35:46 AM »
Yet it's AOC who is called "dumb", "ignorant" and "uninformed" every single day on FOX. It's she (along with Trump) whose every sentence is picked apart and scrutinised. If her views on healthcare are dumb, I refer us to Kansas senator Roger Marshall who invoked Jesus to explain why poor and ill people will always be with us. If her views on the economy are dumb, I refer us to every Republican who signed off on a spending bill that has a decent chance of crippling the next generation. If her views on 'socialism' are dumb, I ask why the Republicans (and FOX) were so quiet when Trump slipped through the 12 billion dollar farmers' bailout.

I'm handling this differently, because it different.   I'm the first person to agree with you as far as "economic ignorance".  I've called Bernie Sanders an "economic third grader" and I stand by that.    BUT... I am very very much the minority.   I've come to realize that as much as bailouts are an economic mistep, they DO play a role in our way of looking at things.   Presidents of both stripes have used bailouts, sometimes extensively, as a means of showing compassion and garnering support.   In fact, when I posit the idea that Obama was in part responsible for the 2008 crash (an opinion that I stand behind as vociferously as ever at this point) it's often noted that Obama did much to mitigate the crash, first and foremost by offering bailouts to selected banks and insurers, even against the advice of many in his party.   As he was going out the door, Bush authorized millions in bailouts, also to the detriment of his standing with many in his party.  They, like tariffs, are an economic disaster, but they play a political role as well.  So while you are right, I'm not sure the answer is as cut and dry as you or I would like in this context.

Quote
For me AOC, like Trump, is a symptom of a modern problem in politics all over the world, not just America - too much blame, not enough self-awareness.

I think you know by now that you and I are in lock-step on this point, 100%, regardless of where on the political spectrum you fall.

Offline KevShmev

  • EZBoard Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 29996
  • Gender: Male
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #30 on: April 03, 2019, 07:45:55 AM »
I don't give a crap what Tucker Carlson (see: major d-bag) thinks about anything, and if we can be real for a minute, the way Fox and some on the right are crushing AOC right now is not that dissimilar from what CNN, MCNBS and many on the left did to Sarah Palin back then.  Bill Maher called Palin the c-word and it was apparently funny (so we were told).

But you might be on to something regarding the similarity between AOC and Trump.

But many do, and my point in taking apart his silly article was that a lot of the attacks on AOC are based on misinformation or mischaracterisation of what she actually says, as well as a relentless obsession with her age, appearance, former jobs, etc (FOX even had a period where they were trying to track down where she lives, as well as stalking her boyfriend). Your own OP describes her as the "most talked about" politician in America now, after Trump, which is correct. But why is she? Because she's the dumbest one? I'd refer anyone who believes that to Betsy DeVos' bar-raising idiocy during her House Appropriations grilling last Tuesday. This is the Education Secretary speaking with disturbing stupidity about questions she has a duty to understand, and it got barely a mention in the media. Why isn't she the most talked about politician in America? Where's the scrutiny of her former career and living situation and dress sense and dance videos from college? Why isn't Orrin "Mr Zuckerberg, walk us through your perplexing business model please" Hatch the most talked about politician, if cluelessness is a concern?

I just think that a lot (not all) of the criticism levelled at her is disproportionate. I see a kind of reverse Trump phenomenon going on in the sense that the bar for Trump to raise an eyebrow with his stupidity is now so high that his ritual "How can global warming be real if it's snowing in February" tweets don't get a mention anymore, whereas the mouthy young Latino gets torn apart for nigh-on everything she says even when what she says has sometimes not even been properly read or heard by those criticising her (case in point being the "12 year climate change" comments that her detractors continue to misrepresent).

I think Stadler's post above covered this very well.  AOC has put forth incredible effort to get noticed and become a star, and she does have a charismatic personality. When you put yourself out there front and center, especially in the world of politics, criticism is gonna come.  It is always, or even sometimes, fair?  Probably not, but it's the way it is, and if she was too naive to not realize that before now, well, she is learning that lesson now.  Trust me, if there was a charismatic 29-year old Republican tweeting 12 times a day and going on talk shows and talking non-stop about ideas that the other side would describe as extreme or "very right-ish," CNN and MSNBC would be crushing him or her just as badly as AOC is getting crushed by Fox right now.

Offline XJDenton

  • What a shame
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 4713
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #31 on: April 04, 2019, 07:09:53 AM »
Quote
Trust me, if there was a charismatic 29-year old Republican tweeting 12 times a day and going on talk shows and talking non-stop about ideas that the other side would describe as extreme or "very right-ish,

.....if?

Offline Chino

  • Be excellent to each other.
  • DT.net Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 21168
  • Gender: Male
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #32 on: April 04, 2019, 07:24:14 AM »
I don't give a crap what Tucker Carlson (see: major d-bag) thinks about anything, and if we can be real for a minute, the way Fox and some on the right are crushing AOC right now is not that dissimilar from what CNN, MCNBS and many on the left did to Sarah Palin back then.  Bill Maher called Palin the c-word and it was apparently funny (so we were told).

But you might be on to something regarding the similarity between AOC and Trump.

But many do, and my point in taking apart his silly article was that a lot of the attacks on AOC are based on misinformation or mischaracterisation of what she actually says, as well as a relentless obsession with her age, appearance, former jobs, etc (FOX even had a period where they were trying to track down where she lives, as well as stalking her boyfriend). Your own OP describes her as the "most talked about" politician in America now, after Trump, which is correct. But why is she? Because she's the dumbest one? I'd refer anyone who believes that to Betsy DeVos' bar-raising idiocy during her House Appropriations grilling last Tuesday. This is the Education Secretary speaking with disturbing stupidity about questions she has a duty to understand, and it got barely a mention in the media. Why isn't she the most talked about politician in America? Where's the scrutiny of her former career and living situation and dress sense and dance videos from college? Why isn't Orrin "Mr Zuckerberg, walk us through your perplexing business model please" Hatch the most talked about politician, if cluelessness is a concern?

I just think that a lot (not all) of the criticism levelled at her is disproportionate. I see a kind of reverse Trump phenomenon going on in the sense that the bar for Trump to raise an eyebrow with his stupidity is now so high that his ritual "How can global warming be real if it's snowing in February" tweets don't get a mention anymore, whereas the mouthy young Latino gets torn apart for nigh-on everything she says even when what she says has sometimes not even been properly read or heard by those criticising her (case in point being the "12 year climate change" comments that her detractors continue to misrepresent).

I think Stadler's post above covered this very well.  AOC has put forth incredible effort to get noticed and become a star, and she does have a charismatic personality.

I actually don't see this as being the case. I could be entirely wrong in my thinking, but Fox News 100% responsible for her rise. She's a young, non-white, democratic, millennial woman that understands the hardships people are going through. She's getting young people excited and isn't afraid to call out bullshit within our system of government or the shenanigans pulled by our largest corporations. She's a direct threat to the organizations that prop up Sinclair, and Fox News wasted no time trying to shut that down. Hillary Clinton wasn't getting Fox New's base foaming at the mouth like she was two years ago, so AOC became the new dog whistle that would generate ad clicks. And then, in true "us vs them" fashion, all the other media outlets had to remind their viewers why Fox News is the enemy, and in turn started defending AOC for no reason other than to counter the bad people's opinion. I honestly don't think AOC acts much differently than anyone else in congress. Sure, she's got a different presence in the digital realm, but that's just due to her age.

Offline Dave_Manchester

  • Posts: 1093
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #33 on: April 04, 2019, 07:55:09 AM »
That's my take too. AOC is largely a myth that's been created by her opponents, in my opinion. From the moment she won her election, FOX and the interests represented by FOX (see the general P/R discussion thread, I just made a post there) decided to make an example of her. They've taken this young woman and turned her into a metonym for "the American left". Yes she's naive and yes she sometimes says misinformed or uninformed things (placing her in superb company in the US House of Representatives) but that's not why she's the 2nd most famous political personality in America now. The American right has created her in much the same way the American left created Trump, and for the same purpose. Whether it has the same unintended consequence (her eventual election someday) remains to be seen.
"As democracy is perfected, the office of President represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their hearts' desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron" - H.L.Mencken, 26th July 1920.

"China has total respect for Donald Trump and for Donald Trump's very very large brain" - American President Donald Trump, September 26th 2018.

Offline El Barto

  • Rascal Atheistic Pig
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 22062
  • Bad Craziness
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #34 on: April 04, 2019, 08:12:59 AM »
That's my take too. AOC is largely a myth that's been created by her opponents, in my opinion.
That's how I've seen it, too. However I think the motivation is twofold. Certainly it's grist for the conservatives. She's the best badguy they could hope for. At the same time they're giving her publicity which is making her a star in the democratic party. Notice that the Pelosis and Reeds don't want anything to do with her. I really doubt anybody on Earth wants FOX to shut up about her more than those two. It's a win-win for them. Undermine the democrats and rile up the conservatives.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson