AOC wants 70% tax on wealthy
- Thread starter Horn6721
- Start date
Seattle Husker
10,000+ Posts
As stupid as inaction which is what "thoughts and prayers" represent? Debatable.
Yes, much stupider. If you insult someone's religious beliefs (and ridiculing thoughts and prayers does insult people's religious beliefs), you do nothing but antagonize and make people dig in. If you want people to listen to you and consider your position, insulting them isn't a smart way to start that conversation. Frankly, it's a very Trump-like thing to do.
In addition, thoughts and prayers don't represent inaction. That's a false binary that people set up for no reason. You can pray for victims and support "action." In fact, most people who pray for the victims of shootings are fine with taking some kind of action. The problem is that when the prayer-ridiculers talk about "action," it is usually a proxy for gun control. Well, you can favor all kinds of action to deal with shootings other than gun control.
However, even if you accept that proxy, it's still a false binary. You can pray for victims and still favor gun control. Just look at black neighborhoods following a shooting of a local citizen. You'll see churches full of people who support gun control on their knees in prayer for the families of the victims.
Last edited:
Monahorns
10,000+ Posts
It is stupid to conflate praying with inaction, as Deez explains.
It is also wrong because for those who pray, the expectation is that God will act, in a bigger and more helpful way than any law could. You don't believe in God, that's your right, but don't insult others.
It is also wrong because for those who pray, the expectation is that God will act, in a bigger and more helpful way than any law could. You don't believe in God, that's your right, but don't insult others.
Her Twitter manager is horrible. A few suggestions for next time:
- I like to have a little fun when i’m back in the hood.
- Just keeping it real!
- Getting lit tonight, y’all
She lived Westchester( meidan income 450k) from age 5,hardly a hotbed of linguistic culture.
But whoever is pulling her strings is brilliant. Pay attention to the difference among her unscripted speech, her scripted speech and her tweets, some scripted and others off the cuff.
I think she is even better at being manipulated from the Soros associates etc in charge that obama was.And likely more dangerous.
But whoever is pulling her strings is brilliant. Pay attention to the difference among her unscripted speech, her scripted speech and her tweets, some scripted and others off the cuff.
I think she is even better at being manipulated from the Soros associates etc in charge that obama was.And likely more dangerous.
Joe Fan
10,000+ Posts
Fake Brooklyn address, fake accent for certain folks, fake campaign accounting -- what next?
She was soundly blasted at that Sharpton thing for being financially illiterate ( the cum laude grad in econ from Boston U)
And the Pres. Of CNYU bashed her for costing black and latino students valuable jobs .
Who was responsible for her criticizing Amazon to the point they pulled out?
Was she unscripted or did her handlers make a serious mistake?
And the Pres. Of CNYU bashed her for costing black and latino students valuable jobs .
Who was responsible for her criticizing Amazon to the point they pulled out?
Was she unscripted or did her handlers make a serious mistake?
Last edited:
Maybe fake intelligence - clearly there's no evidence of the real thing.
Joe Fan
10,000+ Posts
Do we know if her glasses are real or fake?
So it's ok to accuse someone of cultural appropriation except when it's not...
As for "working people," how is it that blue-collar workers hang their hat on being workers and white collar people are not? It really perplexes me.
The real problem is that these cities and states force the idiots that put them in office to flee to other cities and states without these taxes and regulations. Then they vote the same type of idiots into office there.
Joe Fan
10,000+ Posts
Agree but not sure yet what we can do about it yet
Virtue signaling and political correctness are now locked-in as the new American zeitgeist. This is why Socialism (however you define it) is gaining traction. It sounds kinder and gentler. Republicans have a hard enough time trying to win elections when you have "artists" and "hipsters" who will never become Conservatives. But when you add Trump's crass personality then it becomes a recipe for emotional decision making. Somehow, the Republicans need a strong, tough leader (Trump's main skill-set) who is INTELLECTUAL and classy about upholding the Constitution, the economy and foreign policy while simultaneously acknowledging social issues. I don't understand Trump's need to tweet and some of his caustic remarks. All he has to do is calmly articulate his reasoning and pursue his policies within the parameters of his office. He can be as on point in enforcing the laws as passed by Congress as he is today. Just change the tone. He must also forcefully use the bully pulpit to denounce all forms of racism and especially Nazi's. That is easy to do. The irony is that the American military helped destroy the Nazi's. Our military pride includes this vital historical act against the monsters that they were. Why would any Conservative politician equivocate when it comes to Nazi's? Get out in front of it and make yourself clear.
Last edited:
His brash side doesn't bother me personally because I think outrage and being pissed off is the rational response to the swamp. Everyone is so eaten up with Obama's smooth delivery (but not Omar who called him a murderer; how about that?) that we are now stuck with phony sweetness. But we all know the extreme Left can never be reached so sweet talk is howling at the moon. It's the moderates who matter and they want to feel good about their virtues (I think @Mr. Deez has spoken about this) and are willing to give up their Constitutional beliefs and instead substitute political quackery because feelings have become all that matter anymore. It's a damn fad. It used to be that way only with college kids; now adults think that way.
Joe Fan
10,000+ Posts
There was a large Republican field in 2016 full of successful people. In hindsight, I do not believe that anyone else in that field would have beaten Hillary Clinton. Not a single one of them. I concede I was initially on Team Cruz, but, looking back, I dont think he would have won either. Trump was the only one. This is, of course impossible for me to prove. But it is likewise impossible for anyone to disprove. I am close to 100% convinced that it was Trump or lose in 2016. And I am more than happy to exchange some crassness for not letting Hillary have the 2 last SCOTUS picks, possibly even more in the near future. I am fully aware that not everyone on this site fully understands or agrees with this perspective, but it is the reality nonetheless. If this Republic is to be saved, it will be the SCOTUS who does it.
I fully understand that SCOTUS appointments are where the real game is being played. Yes, Trump's victory was vital if you are a Conservative even if he is an a-hole or however you would describe him. He is not the face of Christianity. He is the face of Constitutional Conservatism in the sense that he picked judges who lean towards strict constructionism.
You may be correct about Trump or bust in 2016. It's hard to say. I just think everyone else was so bland that they probably would have lost. Jeb Bush was MEH. If only Trump could use his natural force and refine his message. I still believe he could have won the nomination by merely pounding his message of upholding the Constitution and our laws.
As I've said many times; all he had to do was say stuff like this:
"I support a just resolution for the Dreamer's. Talk to Congress. In the meantime, I will continue to enforce our immigration laws just as my predecessor did. I need not remind you that he deported over three million people. I hope I can do my job as well as he did."
I voted for Trump because I'm sick and tired of politics as usual. I wanted a non-politician and non-PC president. Now, people complain about how he communicates. That's why he won is because he is different.
The majority of the media doesn't report his accomplishments. He has to tweet what he is doing. Who cares about his personality? I don't. He continues to prove the media wrong when they jump on things he says and tweets things they don't like, which is everything.
The majority of the media doesn't report his accomplishments. He has to tweet what he is doing. Who cares about his personality? I don't. He continues to prove the media wrong when they jump on things he says and tweets things they don't like, which is everything.
Joe Fan
10,000+ Posts
I dont think its that difficult to see if you dive into the electoral breakdown state-by-state. Show me how Ted Cruz (or any other R) would have motivated recalcitrant voters in the same key states, enough to carry the day. Neither Cruz, nor Jeb, nor Rubio, nor Kasich, nor Christie would have carried all of Wisc, Ohio, Penn, Mich, Fla, NoCar, Iowa and Mo. Maybe Cruz or Rubio could have snagged Fla, but what about the rest?
Last edited:
Joe Fan
10,000+ Posts
It's almost all they have to complain about.
And I think your view still carries the day with the vast majority of R-voters, even the most rigorous religious practitioners. Why? I say its because the stakes are so high and they know it. They sense it. This is something that has been building for a couple of decades. It's much easier for them to forgive low level transgressions when the alternative is the trivialization of the US Constitution, which is what protects them. It's what protects all of us. And they know it even without ever having studied it closely.
In addition, from my perspective, Never-Trumpers are a tiny minority of whiny, sycophants who have never admitted they were wrong or, more importantly, come to grips with why they were so, so, so wrong. They are only able to cling to what they have left because the media loves anyone who hates Trump. Without that perverse love from our perverse media, they would have disappeared already.
Looking ahead, the one big speed bump for Trump 2020 from my perspective is the border and immigration. My sense is that he has about a year to get something going or he will lose voters. Enough to lose the election? Maybe. On this issue, I lean Ann Coulter. Trump is botching it.
Looking at the Dem field, I dont see anyone who is particularly scary in a fight with Trump. They each have their own vulnerabilities. I do think Michelle Obama could maybe beat him. Maybe. But I dont think she will run. She already knows first hand how hard it is to be President. Other than her, I dont know who else. But there is still time. Maybe someone will rise up. We will see.
Joe Fan
10,000+ Posts
Probably right about most. But most is not all. What % of people who voted for him last time would not do it a second time if he doesnt get something done on the southern border? I dont know the answer to that but, if I were him, I would not want to find out (the hard way). Why risk that chance when you dont have to? Better to get something done while he still has the time.
Do that and then adding in the Senate and regaining the House look pretty good. Then, who knows what he might accomplish?
Mocking the idea of prayer comes very close to mocking the idea of God.
In the spirit of St James, they should instead say something like: 'Thoughts and prayers are a good start. Let's also do something practical to help.'
Weekly Prediction Contest
* Predict HORNS-AGGIES *
Sat, Nov 30 • 6:30 PM on ABC
Recent Threads
-
The Media Industry
- Started by texas_ex2000
- Replies: 8K
- West Mall
-
President Biden Accountability Thread
- Started by 2003TexasGrad
- Replies: 4K
- West Mall
Prediction Results Threads
