Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

[angelo]

Blind Freddy can see the blatant hypocrisy of AOC, or anyone else who mentions the green new deal while having a well above average carbon footprint as she and her cronies have.

So after being refuted, you just repeat the claim. That's political, not logical.

I think the word you're looking for is "STUPID".

Of course anyone who opposes the socialists must be STUPID right?

 

[PyramidHead]

I think the word you're looking for is "STUPID".

Of course anyone who opposes the socialists must be STUPID right?

 

[ZiprHead]

That improvement is not feesable or affordable until the science catches up with the crazy idea of carbon emission free world for perhaps centuries. Just about every single item in an average home is made or uses fossil fuel.

You are changing the subject from alleged hypocrisy of AOC to alleged infeasibility of Green New Deal. In discussion about alleged hypocrisy, the claim is that condition A contradicts condition B. But AOC has introduced legislation to move from condition A to condition B by adding enablement of condition B which currently is very lacking. So, condition A does not contradict condition B. If you want to now discuss infeasibility of Green New Deal, at least concede you were wrong about the hypocrisy as I have laid out, first, before changing the subject.

Blind Freddy can see the blatant hypocrisy of AOC, or anyone else who mentions the green new deal while having a well above average carbon footprint as she and her cronies have.

 

[lpetrich]

Ziprhead, where is that text from? I don't like unsourced assertions. But I agree that one has to bootstrap one's way into new technologies by using existing ones.

I think that it might be nice to dig up an account of some early car factory, including how that factory got its supplies. I wouldn't be surprised if it was all horse-drawn wagons.


Businessweek on Twitter: "To get into the top 1%, Americans now need at least $500,000 a year https://t.co/EOXhS74xYU" / Twitter
then
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on Twitter: "A lot of people think that folks like your typical lawyer or doctor are in “the 1%.”
That may be bc it’s hard to conceive how bad runaway inequality has gotten.
Even this number - $500k - reflects top income, & even THAT doesn’t hold a candle to recognizing concentrated wealth. https://t.co/1L4ITfryEk" / Twitter

I like this response:
Margo Jones on Twitter: "@AOC I don't think it's the top 1% we have to worry about, it's the top 1% of the top 1%. If people are making most of their exorbitant income through passive investments, tax the hell out of them. I'm not a fan of heavily taxing someone who actually works their ass off for that 500k." / Twitter

 

[ZiprHead]

I have no idea who said it first. The truth of it is what matters.

 

[lpetrich]

AOC has Instagrammed yet again, taking questions as she rides an Amtrak train from NYC to DC. She seems to like window seats, or at least she only Instagrams from a train when she has a window seat. I also like window seats.

As to big money in politics, that's from what's necessary to campaign: raising lots of money. That's from lack of public financing for campaigns. Also, politicians in DC can become detached from their constituents and the general public, and AOC, like many others, likes to return to her home district on a regular basis.

How to express one's anger at a senator in a red state? "Protest, run for office, or support someone running for office!"

As to negative emotions, she prefers to recognize that she has them. But she says that she's sometimes very hard on herself, but she has very supportive family and friends who are willing to correct her or offer different perspectives. Having a hobby is also helpful - plants, crocheting, meditation, video games, whatever works for you.

She does inside-outside politics, working on both the inside (Congress) and the outside (the broader world), and going outside helps her for some of the downsides of going inside, like mutual back-scratching politics.

As to people who don't think that voting will accomplish much, that's understandable in many cases. But take such people to some activism event, and they might get some different perspective.

As to having high emotional intelligence, it is from making oneself aware of one's own emotions and those of others.


In that interview in Copenhagen, she was asked if she'd do anything different. Not even the mistakes, because she has learned from them.

How Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Plans to Wield Her Power - The Atlantic - back from Nov 2018

“Members who come in with big names tend to go in one of two directions,” observed a longtime senior House Democratic aide who spoke anonymously to discuss Ocasio-Cortez. “They can try to trade on that name and make issues all about themselves. Or they can put their head down and work.”

“Obviously,” the aide continued, “it’s far too soon to say which one she’ll be.” But the aide noted that, in private, Ocasio-Cortez had been respectful to members and constructive in internal party debates. Out of the three full meetings of the Democratic caucus that have taken place this week, Ocasio-Cortez has spoken up in just one of them, to advocate for the new climate committee. “She’s not out there saying, ‘Hey, look at me, look at me, look at me,’” the aide told me.

So far, AOC has gone the latter of those two routes, being a workhorse member rather than the show horse member that she might have seemed like from her celebrity. But she's been willing to advertise her proposals more broadly, proposals like the Green New Deal, anti-usury, and the Just Society.

 

[Derec]

AOC has Instagrammed yet again,

More on this later.

She does inside-outside politics, working on both the inside (Congress) and the outside (the broader world), and going outside helps her for some of the downsides of going inside, like mutual back-scratching politics.

You could almost say she is the outsider's insider ...

So far, AOC has gone the latter of those two routes, being a workhorse member rather than the show horse member that she might have seemed like from her celebrity. But she's been willing to advertise her proposals more broadly, proposals like the Green New Deal, anti-usury, and the Just Society.

Are you kidding me? She has been all about flash. Her incessant instagramming does not exactly scream "workhorse". More like an Insta-ready show horse! A Budweiser Clydesdale instead of a draught Clydesdale.

 

[Derec]

AOC has three blue dresses: a light-blue one, a medium-blue one, and a dark-blue one. She also has a red one.

Hey folks, look at all the dresses AOC has.

Earlier this year, she had supported public defender Tiffany Cabán for Queens District Attorney. She lost by about 60 votes to Melinda Katz, someone supported by AOC's old opponent Joe Crowley.

Tiffany Caban is quite extremist. She wants to
- end "broken windows" prosecutions, i.e. she doesn't want to prosecute quality of life crimes. Her claim is that such crimes amount to "criminalization of poverty", which is BS.
- not prosecute any crimes she deems "racist", whatever that means
- seek shorter penalties for felonies
- aid and abet illegal immigration

I agree with her on some things like ending civil forefeiture and not prosecuting sex work (as long as that applies to both provider and client, and is not a backdoor Swedish Model) and a few others. But she also wants to release murderers, armed robbers etc. into the community sooner, which is stupid.

You don’t need the political machine.

Brand New Congress/Democratic Socialists of America/Justice Democrats etc. are all political machines. Let's not kid ourselves.

You don’t need the Democratic establishment.

As long as other types of establishment support you.

 

[Derec]

Bullshit. It is already feasible. angelo, have you ever heard of the Fischer-Tropsch reaction? One can use as feedstocks H2 from electrolysis of water and CO2 from the air.

I can't speak of angelo, but I have heard of it. First of all, it involves carbon monoxide, not dioxide. So if you want to use carbon dioxide, you have to reduce CO₂ first.
Most FT uses coal as both a source of carbon and an energy source.
Using electrolytic hydrogen and CO₂ from the air is not a very practical proposition, because CO₂ is only 0.4% of ambient air and splitting hydrogen from oxygen is very energy intensive. FT itself is also not terribly efficient either.
For ground transportation battery electric or something like Al-air "batteries" (really fuel cells using solid fuel) is the way to go. For airplanes some form of synthetic fuel may be used, but probably a short chain alcohol would be better than just hydrocarbons.

I think the best use of FT today would be to liquefy associated gas in oil fields instead of flaring it off or simply venting it.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on Twitter: "Today I am endorsing Senator @BernieSanders for president.

He is not going to be the nominee. His odds were slim to none before, but with the heart attack slim has left town.
So, it's really a waste of an endorsement.

She was wearing the same medium blue dress that she wore when she accepted that big birthday card, and she was indoors. So she recorded it earlier.

Why are you so obsessed with AOC's dresses? Focusing on a blue one is even more weird because the only well known political blue dress is the Lewinsky one.

 

[lpetrich]

I can't speak of angelo, but I have heard of it. First of all, it involves carbon monoxide, not dioxide. So if you want to use carbon dioxide, you have to reduce CO₂ first.

That's splitting hairs. One does CO2 + H2 -> CO + H2O.

Most FT uses coal as both a source of carbon and an energy source.

So what?

Using electrolytic hydrogen and CO₂ from the air is not a very practical proposition, because CO₂ is only 0.4% of ambient air and splitting hydrogen from oxygen is very energy intensive. FT itself is also not terribly efficient either.

Yes, one needs to put energy into it. But that's because one gets energy back from it when one burns the results.

 

[lpetrich]

From that Atlantic article,

When I met Ocasio-Cortez last month, we were sitting on metal folding chairs inside her small Queens campaign office, which occupied a second-floor storefront near a subway stop in the Elmhurst neighborhood. The only signage outside was a campaign banner taped over the more permanent sign for a law office that advertised free tax services in Spanish. Ocasio-Cortez wears glasses when she’s not on TV, and it was easier to see the young Star Trek fan that her friend Jean Bertrand Uwilingiyimana described as introverted and “pretty nerdy” when he met her in a Boston University dorm as college freshmen in 2007.

Star Trek? A future much like what AOC aims for.

BTW, at that modest-proposal town hall, someone noticed that elevated-rail line in the Green New Deal posters for the Bronx and Queens, and proposed a monorail line for those NYC boroughs. AOC responded that that's the sort of conversation that we ought to have - what sort of public-transport lines should we build. My own opinion of monorails is that they are not very practical. Track switches for them are horrible - one has to move sections of track. It's much easier to do track switches with traditional bi-rail tracks.

In a pre-election interview with AOC, the people in the interview went from the Bronx to Queens by bus, because there is no rail line that connects the two boroughs. I've seen some speculation about building a light-rail line that would connect the two boroughs, but nothing definite. But it could be some great pork for her - she could point to how she brought home the bacon for her district.

The Freshman Democrat Who’s Making Conservatives Squirm | The New Republic - Katie Porter, a Democrat who was elected to a district in Orange County, CA, long known for right-wing politics. Referring to her and "The Squad" - AOC, RT, AP, IO

These women share many of the same priorities—Medicare for All, reproductive and LGBTQ rights, a desire to get corporate money out of politics (in 2018, while running in conservative Orange County, Porter refused to take PAC money)—but, today, she conveys cautious, considered pragmatism more often than idealism or militant fire.

Her background as a law professor, a textbook author, a consumer protection attorney who studied under Warren at Harvard, and a single mother of three has helped to equip her with an even-keel approach, an incisive analytical mind, and a boundless well of patience—qualities that have served her well during her customarily rigorous preparation for congressional hearings, which often begins around midnight, when she gets home from Capitol Hill.

 

[angelo]

Star Trek. A future AOC aims for? Pure unadulterated fantasy land stuff. And this is an elected member of congress?

 

[Derec]

That's splitting hairs. One does CO2 + H2 -> CO + H2O.

Which requires more H₂, and that is energy intensive to make, especially through electrolysis.

So what?

So the large-scale FT applications have been using relatively cheap coal for both a source of reduced carbon and for energy. Other applications use natural gas (methane). Using oxidized (+4) carbon from air (where it is 0.4%) is a whole other kettle of fish.

Yes, one needs to put energy into it. But that's because one gets energy back from it when one burns the results.

The issue is efficiency. FT is not very efficient, esp. if you have to enrich CO₂ from air first and get H₂ through electrolysis. Then you burn the resulting hydrocarbons in a heat engine, which is again not efficient. The overall efficiency would probably be <10%. I.e. you have to put more than ten times the energy compared to energy you get out.

 

[Derec]

Star Trek? A future much like what AOC aims for.

Is it though? You can't get to warp speed with solar panels and windmills. Her GND explicitly denounces any form of nuclear power.

In a pre-election interview with AOC, the people in the interview went from the Bronx to Queens by bus, because there is no rail line that connects the two boroughs.

That is a strange omission. I wonder if it's because not enough traffic is going between these two boroughs to justify the expense of boring under the East River.
If she gets some public transit pork to her district, that would indeed be a win for AOC. Let's wait and see what she does.

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

AOC questioning Mark Zuckerberg

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/23/aoc...-facebook-allowing-lies-in-political-ads.html

This is one sharp Congresswoman. He is going to be smoking all the way home. If you are an AOC fan you have to watch this. Can you lie in a political ad?

 

[ZiprHead]

AOC questioning Mark Zuckerberg

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/23/aoc...-facebook-allowing-lies-in-political-ads.html

This is one sharp Congresswoman. He is going to be smoking all the way home. If you are an AOC fan you have to watch this. Can you lie in a political ad?

I haven't watched the video yet and I do intend to, but I have a problem with people expecting media to fact-check and block campaign advertising by politicians.

 

[lpetrich]

Pete Schroeder on Twitter: "AOC kind of tying Zuckerberg in knots here on political ads.
Q: Can I run ads telling voters the wrong election date?
Z: No.
Q: So you are fact-checking politics ads?
Z: For specific things.
Q: Can I run ads in GOP primaries saying they backed my Green New Deal?
Z: I don't know." / Twitter

Elizabeth Warren on Twitter: "Facebook let me run an ad saying Mark Zuckerberg endorsed Donald Trump for reelection, so I’d say you probably could, @AOC. I imagine Republicans would be a lot more concerned about fact-checking Facebook ads after that." / Twitter
noting
Erick Fernandez on Twitter: "Here is @AOC's full questioning of Mark Zuckerberg.
"Could I run ads targeting Republicans in primaries saying that they voted for the Green New Deal?" https://t.co/VrGQw7UzIW" / Twitter

 

[lpetrich]

I like this:
Public Citizen on Twitter: ".@AOC: Could I run ads on Facebook targeting Republicans in primaries saying that they voted for the Green New Deal?
Mark Zuckerberg: I don’t know the answer to that off the top of my head. I think probably. https://t.co/wy46phoGp5" / Twitter

Twitter Users Break Out The Popcorn As Ocasio-Cortez Smokes Zuckerberg | HuffPost

'So they knew': Ocasio-Cortez questions Exxon scientist on climate crisis denial – video | Business | The Guardian

House Democrats on Wednesday laid out evidence that the oil behemoth ExxonMobil had known since the 1970s about the potential for a climate crisis and intentionally sowed doubt about it. One of those testifying was Martin Hoffert, a scientist consultant for Exxon Research and Engineering in the 1980s. Responding to the New York congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Hoffert testified that in 1982, Exxon scientists predicted how carbon dioxide levels would rise and heat the planet as humans burned more fossil fuels

Something she mentions in her GND-promotion video "A Message from the Future".
Exxon sowed doubt about climate crisis, House Democrats hear in testimony | Business | The Guardian
AOC noted that the Exxon scientist's predictions were

“startlingly accurate”.

“In 1982, seven years before I was even born, Exxon accurately predicted that by this year, 2019, the Earth would hit a carbon dioxide concentration of 415 parts per million and a temperature increase of 1C. Dr Hoffert, is that correct?”

“We were excellent scientists,” Hoffert said to laughter from the audience.

“Yes you were, yes you were,” Ocasio-Cortez responded. “So they knew.”

 

[Patooka]

Star Trek. A future AOC aims for? Pure unadulterated fantasy land stuff. And this is an elected member of congress?

It could be worse. It could be a Hollywood actor who became Governor from California being affiliated with Star Wars.

 

[angelo]

Star Trek. A future AOC aims for? Pure unadulterated fantasy land stuff. And this is an elected member of congress?

It could be worse. It could be a Hollywood actor who became Governor from California being affiliated with Star Wars.

Who turned out to be a fairly good scandal free President in fact.