I like the one that says..."Good News...my IQ test came back...it's negative!"

The snowflakes should be embracing her. She is a gift.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

She's a gift to the right fox and jim and all the other impressionable Conservatives who claim they are free thinkers ... AOC gives them someone to attack rather then having to defend Trump daily

they talk about the green deal as if it's going to Trump's desk to be signed .. yet they are ambivalent when it comes to Trump's end around of congress his new Budget proposal or the deBt increase ..

yet focus on The 1st year Congresswomen.. Fox runs a min of a new AOC stories daily

https://www.foxnews.com/category/per...-ocasio-cortez

18 stories in 2 days

should have to drink every time a leftist says fox....:cheers:

and Kill the glass when they say "Trump"

https://youtu.be/RGsQES_OdrQ


Pretty certain SNL is hard left leaning.
She’s talked about because she’s so stupid, it’s funny.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

"She's a gift to the right "

You finally got one right.

"AOC gives them someone to attack rather then having to defend Trump daily"

Who defends Trump here daily?

"they talk about the green deal as if it's going to Trump's desk to be signed "

All the democrats running, have endorsed it. So it's true and worth mentioning that if the democrats pick up the Senate and the White House, there's reason to believe we will be taken down that path, which would mean we'd be eating zoo animals in a month.

"yet they are ambivalent when it comes to Trump's end around of congress his new Budget proposal or the debt increase "

I have complained about the debt many, many times. It's a disaster, and some of it is Obama's doing as well. Di you care then? I am saying the same thing about the debt now, that I did when Obama was POTUS. I'll bet you didn't say chit about the debt from 09-16.

"yet focus on The 1st year Congresswomen"

She's the leader of that party at the moment. Make that wrong?

" Fox runs a min of a new AOC stories daily "

I'm not the one who blindly posts every negative story about politicians I don't like. I do it when I think it matters. If she is saying that banks are responsible for the operators of projects they finance, banks will stop lending money. Maybe you see nothing wrong with that, with your limited experience in, and knowledge of, the private sector.

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/ocas...-economics.amp

Oh look another AOC Story by the Trump news network

This... it’s like poetry... I couldn’t have said it better myself (so I won’t, because I’m not an original thinker)
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

The WaPo just issued her a three Pinocchio rating for her comments in Trump opioid funding. This is actually an improvement over her previous rating.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

dangles, give her a break, how could she be expected to know that:

6,000,000,000 > 0?

what is this, a witch hunt?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Exactly. Scott handed that hose over to you.

I happen to like Kool aid
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Explains a lot. But still waiting for you to reveal the source that feeds me narratives. I don't watch Fox. Re this, you responded to post #74 in this thread. Who fed me that narrative?

And as if on cue ... now They believe the WaPo Pinocchio rating when its used against AOC

But when Trump gets a bad Pinocchio rating its Fake

Just funny to see conservatives and Trump supporters screaming anyone who criticizes Trump Suffer from Trump derangement syndrome

yet are unable to self diagnose

Please point out where I said the Trump ratings are fake. This is when you typically move the goalposts or claim You were taken out of context. When you have nothing to add that helps the narrative it helps to make up stories like this. Kind of like Hillary dodging sniper fire. More lies and exaggerating to convince yourself that you are making a difference.Looks like the shoe doesn’t fit as well when the WaPo picks on your new darling.These are fun times indeed.!!!
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Whos making anything up if you ever paid attention to previous responses to Pinocchio rating... you would clearly understand my point ...

what lies and exaggerating have i used to convince myself that I am are making a difference???

I love being schooled by capt Drive by on the merits on what is a useful post and what is not ...

I am not defending AOC just pointing out how the right is obsessed with a nobody.. but yet they have appointed her the new power broker of the left .. to distract themselves from the #^&#^&#^&#^& show called the white house

For the third time, I say she's the leader of the party because of the way all the dems running for president, jumped on board her Green New Deal, instead of suggesting she get electric shock treatment.

How is that wrong? Who is more influential, and on what basis?

It's very easy to say I'm an idiot for saying she's the most influential. Try something harder, try explaining why I'm wrong?

To borrow a phrase you've liked to use, "the big picture"--you need to look at the big picture--the entire #^&#^&#^&#^& show of the federal bureaucracy, not just the White House. The reason it's so messed up, why the separation of powers, the key to making it all work, is no longer adhered to, lies at the feet of the creation of the administrative state in order to replace the constitutional one. We could discuss that . . . if you like. Doubt that you like.

The reason why the right is so excited is because she actually is the face of the Democratic Party. Not the most powerful by any stretch,but certainly the most prominent. I certainly don’t need the WaPo to make my point but I appreciate the assist. Some folks have no idea how much their lies and loyalties obscure their message,this is on display for anyone who is foolish enough to pay attention.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I don’t know where you get your information from, but it’s gotta be from somewhere
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

My post, to which you were responding, was not "information" nor was it based on information "fed" to me. It was commentary on your expressed opinion that Trump is a horrible person because of something he said in the past with the implication that Trump's personal past makes him more of a problem than AOC's present stupidity while she's in a position of public power.

I said and asked in response to your categorization of Trump's and AOC's words "What is the category of things people say that refers to past actions of someone as a representation of who he is now where there is no evidence that he does those things anymore? And for what he has apologized? And for characterizing something that is allowed as being an assault? Is there no redemption for past sins?

"If capitalism is irredeemable, are humans also not capable of redemption? If we did something "horrible" in the past are we then forever horrible?

"If there is a category for implying someone being what he once was but no longer is, it seems to me that category could charitably be referred to as misrepresentation.

"AOC is doing her stupidity NOW while in a position of political power that can influence the entire nation. Trump did what you phrase as 'horrible' (really, in its context?) in the private past. Which, of the two, is meaningful to the people of this country today?"

That commentary was not fed to me by any source. And you did not answer my question.

The reference was to you equivocating sexually predatory behavior and being a stupid politician in your statement. One is much more forgivable after an apology than the other.

Walking up to women and grabbing them in between the legs because they’ll “let you when you’re famous” is not a permitted action... that’s assault brotha. I’ll start redeeming him when he’s held accountable for the actions he has admitted to.

That being said, I passed the hose to you because you felt compelled to create an equivalency between the congresswoman’s stupidity and the president’s past transgressions to create some kind of “he did”/“she did” cancellation which I believe to be a far too frequent move by both sides of this political mess when one side or the other makes a mistake. He assaulted many women, or at least has claimed to have. Congresswoman Cortez is quickly making herself out to be a politician who doesn’t really know how the world works. They can both be wrong, but one is much worse than the other, plain and simple.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I did not create an equivalency. Quite the contrary, Cortez's actions as Congresswoman are potentially far more destructive to the nation than what you refer to as Trump's "assaults."

Trump didn't assume that he was "assaulting." From what he's said he presumed that the "grabbing" was welcomed and allowed. And if it was rebuffed, that was the end of it. As far as I know, there was no parade of casting couch "assaults" required for advancement in Trump's business.

The bar was set with Bill Clinton, and a host of Presidents before him. That cleansed me of caring anymore about what a President did sexually. Clinton was far worse than Trump, and he did it before and while being POTUS. We were told it was not our business. And that he was a really good President. And he was not to be removed from office, but to quit harassing him about it, and it was important to the country to let him do his job. Holding Trump to a higher standard holds no interest for me.

Apparently, for you, his past private personal sex is far more important than what Cortez can do in a powerful national political office. I asked you to clarify your position, and I guess you have.

Yes, I have.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Well, I don't remember that last time Time Magazine did an article on a junior rep after only being in office for 3 months. just saying

http://time.com/longform/alexandria-...ortez-profile/

did you see her tell the ceo of
Wels Fargo, that he’s responsible for everything done by anyone his bank gives money to? If wells fargo gives me a car loan, and i kill a pedestrian with the car, is wells fargo responsible? She thinks they are! That’s exactly how stupid she is. that’s not an exaggeration, and she’s on the finance and banking committee. Hooray!
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Time didn’t do one on Dan Crenshaw?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device