• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

She's constantly bringing up reparations. NO ONE ALIVE TODAY HAD ANYTHING TO DO WITH SLAVERY!

This funny clip below illustrates the stupidity of reparations:

[YOUTUBE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FEN8MV8kANM[/YOUTUBE]

The funny thing is that Arthur is acting as satire, yet the Dems are acting like Arthur FOR REAL! C'mon guys!
 
The rumor doesn't even make sense. Her alleged brother husband had a different last name.

Rumours don't need to make sense. They just need a pool of useful idiots to keep repeating them. Fear; Uncertainty; Denial. They won't fool most people, but they will fool enough to tip the political balance - particularly in democracies with a largely apathetic electorate, where it's the extremists who have the only real voice.

Rumours and stupid "scandals", that appear to be childish silliness, in fact serve the very useful purpose of keeping the less enthusiastic centre of the electorate away from the ballot box. It helps to reinforce the idea that the whole business of politics is a joke, a childish farce, a game played by idiots. It reinforces the 'both sides are just as bad' propaganda narrative that stops many from wanting to pick a side - despite one side being clearly worse than the other.

None of this stuff is 'silly'. Even the farcical nonsense has a deliberate and highly sinister purpose. Though most of thise supporting that sinister objective have no idea that they are being manipulated; and many wouldn't care even if they realised it.
 
She's constantly bringing up reparations. NO ONE ALIVE TODAY HAD ANYTHING TO DO WITH SLAVERY!

This funny clip below illustrates the stupidity of reparations:

[YOUTUBE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FEN8MV8kANM[/YOUTUBE]

The funny thing is that Arthur is acting as satire, yet the Dems are acting like Arthur FOR REAL! C'mon guys!

C'mon guys! Half-Life has repeatedly asked you to join him in taking an incredibly simplistic approach to everything. Why won't you accept his offer? Just imagine how much easier life is, if you assume everything is simple and easy! You too could completely avoid all that difficult thinking, and all that boring learning stuff.

I mean, c'mon guys - who doesn't want to be a simpleton? Ignorance is bliss!
 
She's constantly bringing up reparations. NO ONE ALIVE TODAY HAD ANYTHING TO DO WITH SLAVERY!

This funny clip below illustrates the stupidity of reparations:

[YOUTUBE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FEN8MV8kANM[/YOUTUBE]

The funny thing is that Arthur is acting as satire, yet the Dems are acting like Arthur FOR REAL! C'mon guys!

C'mon guys! Half-Life has repeatedly asked you to join him in taking an incredibly simplistic approach to everything. Why won't you accept his offer? Just imagine how much easier life is, if you assume everything is simple and easy! You too could completely avoid all that difficult thinking, and all that boring learning stuff.

I mean, c'mon guys - who doesn't want to be a simpleton? Ignorance is bliss!

Nothing changes the fact that the Dems are acting like Arthur in real life. No one owes anyone anything.

Let's take the New England Patriots owner Robert Kraft. I assume people know who he is. Now imagine the year is 1965. The Patriots owner at that time said racist and horrible things. Supposed he refused to allow black players on the team. Fast forward to today and reporters and fans are DEMANDING that Robert Kraft pay reparations to those players and apologize just because he is the current owner of the team. Is that fair to Kraft? Absolutely not. He had nothing to do with the owner in 1965. Why should he do anything?
 
She's constantly bringing up reparations. NO ONE ALIVE TODAY HAD ANYTHING TO DO WITH SLAVERY!

This funny clip below illustrates the stupidity of reparations:

[YOUTUBE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FEN8MV8kANM[/YOUTUBE]

The funny thing is that Arthur is acting as satire, yet the Dems are acting like Arthur FOR REAL! C'mon guys!

C'mon guys! Half-Life has repeatedly asked you to join him in taking an incredibly simplistic approach to everything. Why won't you accept his offer? Just imagine how much easier life is, if you assume everything is simple and easy! You too could completely avoid all that difficult thinking, and all that boring learning stuff.

I mean, c'mon guys - who doesn't want to be a simpleton? Ignorance is bliss!

Nothing changes the fact that the Dems are acting like Arthur in real life. No one owes anyone anything.

Let's take the New England Patriots owner Robert Kraft. I assume people know who he is. Now imagine the year is 1965. The Patriots owner at that time said racist and horrible things. Supposed he refused to allow black players on the team. Fast forward to today and reporters and fans are DEMANDING that Robert Kraft pay reparations to those players and apologize just because he is the current owner of the team. Is that fair to Kraft? Absolutely not. He had nothing to do with the owner in 1965. Why should he do anything?

OK, so from this response I learned two things:

Firstly, that we can add corporate identity to the long list of concepts that you don't understand; and

Secondly, that you assume that your nation's pastimes are of universal importance. I presume from context that the New England Patriots are a sports team of some kind, but had never heard of their coach until this moment, and can see no reason why knowing his name would ever be of use to me other than in some future pub trivia quiz.
 
Nothing changes the fact that the Dems are acting like Arthur in real life. No one owes anyone anything.

Let's take the New England Patriots owner Robert Kraft. I assume people know who he is. Now imagine the year is 1965. The Patriots owner at that time said racist and horrible things. Supposed he refused to allow black players on the team. Fast forward to today and reporters and fans are DEMANDING that Robert Kraft pay reparations to those players and apologize just because he is the current owner of the team. Is that fair to Kraft? Absolutely not. He had nothing to do with the owner in 1965. Why should he do anything?

OK, so from this response I learned two things:

Firstly, that we can add corporate identity to the long list of concepts that you don't understand; and

Secondly, that you assume that your nation's pastimes are of universal importance. I presume from context that the New England Patriots are a sports team of some kind, but had never heard of their coach until this moment, and can see no reason why knowing his name would ever be of use to me other than in some future pub trivia quiz.

Instead of answering the question based on what I provided you, you say "I don't know who that is" and ignore the question. It doesn't matter if you know who he is or not. The point still stands. He's the owner, not the coach.
 
Nothing changes the fact that the Dems are acting like Arthur in real life. No one owes anyone anything.

Let's take the New England Patriots owner Robert Kraft. I assume people know who he is. Now imagine the year is 1965. The Patriots owner at that time said racist and horrible things. Supposed he refused to allow black players on the team. Fast forward to today and reporters and fans are DEMANDING that Robert Kraft pay reparations to those players and apologize just because he is the current owner of the team. Is that fair to Kraft? Absolutely not. He had nothing to do with the owner in 1965. Why should he do anything?

OK, so from this response I learned two things:

Firstly, that we can add corporate identity to the long list of concepts that you don't understand; and

Secondly, that you assume that your nation's pastimes are of universal importance. I presume from context that the New England Patriots are a sports team of some kind, but had never heard of their coach until this moment, and can see no reason why knowing his name would ever be of use to me other than in some future pub trivia quiz.

Instead of answering the question based on what I provided you, you say "I don't know who that is" and ignore the question. It doesn't matter if you know who he is or not. The point still stands. He's the owner, not the coach.

I did answer the question based on what you provided me. :rolleyes:
 
Picture a nascar race between Bob and Mohammed. Bob is driving a Bugatti Veyron and Mohammed is driving a model T Ford. Then, when Bob is a hundred metres from the finish line, it's decided that Mohammed didn't really have a chance of winning, so he can finish the rest of the race also in a Veyron. Bob won fairly because they both finished the race in the same car, despite the fact Mohammed spent most of the race in a shit box.

That's how asinine and moronic the argument against reparation is.
 
Picture a nascar race between Bob and Mohammed. Bob is driving a Bugatti Veyron and Mohammed is driving a model T Ford. Then, when Bob is a hundred metres from the finish line, it's decided that Mohammed didn't really have a chance of winning, so he can finish the rest of the race also in a Veyron. Bob won fairly because they both finished the race in the same car, despite the fact Mohammed spent most of the race in a shit box.

That's how asinine and moronic the argument against reparation is.

But, we've been over this. Democrats that run inner city hoods gut funding to public schooling and encourage violence. Is it any coincidence there were riots under Obama but not Trump? Since Democrats don't give a crap about people, just their vote, these places stay poor. Now they are virtue signalling reparations because they feel guilty. If the Democrats want to pay reparations because they feel bad for supporting slavery for so many years and still keeping them on the plantation today, then they can if they want. But, don't you dare take my tax dollars to pay reparations. I didn't have a damn thing to do with the Democratic party.
 
And we have been over this. If you are going to state slanderous crap, expect it to be dismissed as bullshit until you can back up your assertions. Clearly your polemics are lies because you have never, not once proven any of them.
 
And we have been over this. If you are going to state slanderous crap, expect it to be dismissed as bullshit until you can back up your assertions. Clearly your polemics are lies because you have never, not once proven any of them.

Would you voluntarily move to an inner city hood? If you wouldn't, then my point is proven true.
 
And we have been over this. If you are going to state slanderous crap, expect it to be dismissed as bullshit until you can back up your assertions. Clearly your polemics are lies because you have never, not once proven any of them.

Would you voluntarily move to an inner city hood? If you wouldn't, then my point is proven true.
That is simply untrue. If a person prefers country life to city life, then the declination proves nothing of the sort.

Moreover, you have not provided a whit of evidence to support your claim that Democrats who run "inner city hoods" gut school funding and encourage violence.
 
And we have been over this. If you are going to state slanderous crap, expect it to be dismissed as bullshit until you can back up your assertions. Clearly your polemics are lies because you have never, not once proven any of them.

Would you voluntarily move to an inner city hood? If you wouldn't, then my point is proven true.

I live in a box underneath a pool table in a pub. What's that got to do with your inability to provide evidence for any of your assertios? If you can't answer me then my point is proven true.
 
And we have been over this. If you are going to state slanderous crap, expect it to be dismissed as bullshit until you can back up your assertions. Clearly your polemics are lies because you have never, not once proven any of them.

Would you voluntarily move to an inner city hood? If you wouldn't, then my point is proven true.

I live in a box underneath a pool table in a pub. What's that got to do with your inability to provide evidence for any of your assertios? If you can't answer me then my point is proven true.

My response would be basic history. It is still going on today. In the 50's and 60's you could keep your doors and windows unlocked in the projects. Not anymore. Why?
 
four_horsewomen.jpg



Btw, AOC's little group is not even big enough to be a squad. They are more of a fireteam. And I guess AOC fancies herself its corporal.
 
I live in a box underneath a pool table in a pub. What's that got to do with your inability to provide evidence for any of your assertios? If you can't answer me then my point is proven true.

My response would be basic history. It is still going on today. In the 50's and 60's you could keep your doors and windows unlocked in the projects. Not anymore. Why?

Took the time to answer my point, but not Laughing Dog's. Thank you for admitting I am correct.
 
Scherie Murray on Twitter: "There’s a crisis in Queens and it’s called AOC. She isn’t worried about us - she’s worried about being famous. That’s why I’m running for Congress. Join our movement to #unitethefight ➡️ https://t.co/rtqGz0XeAw" / Twitter
AOC does pay attention to her constituents -- consider her town-hall meetings like that recent one.

Someone responded by interpreting AOC as An Outstanding Congresswoman.

Another defender noted 🥀 on Twitter: "@ScherieMurray Strange you were all about her when she was elected 🤔 https://t.co/2U4yqggfbb" / Twitter

Antoine Tucker on Twitter: ".@ScherieMurray backed @Aoc she’s never endorsed #MAGA or @realDonaldTrump she couldn’t flip a quarter let alone a district red! @NickLangworthy @GOPChairwoman we are being played for fools by a Democrat plant. My campaign is the real deal. [url]https://t.co/9CcAwbqENA https://t.co/iEzo8hu3rq" / Twitter[/url] -- another Republican? He noted SM's celebration of AOC's victory over Joe Crowley.

Maisie B on Twitter: "@ScherieMurray @seanhannity SCHERIE WENT FROM CONGRATULATING AOC ..LOOKING FOR EMPLOYMENT? TO RUNNING AGAINST HER IN SUCH A SHORT SPACE? WAS SHE UNINFORMED ABOUT AOC?.. OR JUST WANTED A WOMAN TO WIN? NOT GREAT CREDENTIALS FOR OFFICE!! WHAT DOES SCHERIE HAVE TO OFFER? WHERE ARE HER WRITTEN POLICIES ?" / Twitter

That tweet: Scherie Murray on Twitter: "Congratulations Alexandria. #Queens is headed in a new direction and It’s time for new leadership. #Yes. https://t.co/Jsk73JuMGW" / Twitter

Chris G on Twitter: "@ScherieMurray I have a feeling, based on your Democratic past & your previous support of @RepAOC, that you may be a Democrat in Republican's clothing. America has enough #RINOs. Tell me that I'm wrong, & that you support @usminority & #WalkAway. How will you combat #DemocratVoterFRAUD?" / Twitter

Buyer Beware – AOC Challenger Candidate Launch Has Familiarity…. | The Last Refuge
The launch of a “republican” political challenger in NY-14 to challenge Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Sherie Murray, follows a very familiar political ploy…. A fake candidate intended to protect AOC in 2020. In June of 2018 Sherie Murray was an avid AOC supporter.

In the last 36 hours you may have seen “republican” candidate Sherie Murray promoted, seemingly out of nowhere, by a variety of media platforms (social media and traditional). However, when there is an obviously coordinated effort to push a rapid high visibility roll-out; and that effort is for a singular congressional district; it is always worth doing some background research.

SM's pitch: Sean Hannity on Twitter: "**COMING FOR OCASIO-CORTEZ: "AOC chooses self-promotion over service, conflict over constituents, resistance over assistance. We need to build bridges, not burn them down.** https://t.co/hi0OUdb6rs" / Twitter
 
Trump unleashes invective on 'Squad,' slams news report - AOL News
Many allies urged Trump to "reframe" his tweets "away from the racist notion at the core" of his posts — "that only European immigrants or their descendants are entitled to criticize the country," the Post reported.

Fox News fuels Trump's fixation with AOC and Ilhan Omar - CNN
... Ocasio-Cortez has been mentioned on Fox almost three times as often as she's been mentioned on CNN or MSNBC.

... And a new poll indicates that the right's criticism of the women has had palpable effects. CBS News, citing the results of a new survey conducted by YouGov, reported on Sunday that Ocasio-Cortez and Omar, along with fellow congresswomen Rashida Tlaib and Ayanna Pressley, "are better known to Republicans than they are to members of their own party, and as with many members of Congress, many Americans are unfamiliar with them."
Fox mentions AOC and her fellow squadmates much more than it mentions most other Democratic politicians, with the possible exception of Nancy Pelosi.

-

As to that Ben Garrison cartoon, it has:
  • AOC = Stupidity "Take Choo Choo to Hawaii!"
  • Rashida Tlaib = Profanity "Impeach the (expletive)!"
  • Ilhan Omar = Bigotry "(Burn Israel! Burn the US!)"
  • Ayanna Pressley = Insanity "Racist! Racist! Racist! Racist! Racist! Racist! ..."
where
  • AOC rides a stick horse.
  • RT's horse rears up and puts its front hooves in its ears.
  • IO's horse wears a turban and a star-and-crescent badge
  • AP's horse has two rear ends, with a hammer-and-sickle and a blue D in a circle.
 
Trump and GOP should really shut up and let these anti American Idiots destroy themselves and take the Dems with them by their shrill leftists chants which is sure to frighten the shite out middle America and assure Trump of a second term.
 
Back
Top Bottom