|
Post by nighttimer on Apr 9, 2019 23:05:56 GMT -5
Hating AOC does not diminish AOC. Do not fool yourself that it does. She drinks the tears of your bitter hate like granny's sun made tea and it is sweet. AOC does not simply thrive off of your actual conservative and faux "liberal" hate. You do not weaken her. To the contrary the more you hate her the more you only make her even stronger. There's a possibility AOC will disappoint. That she will be exposed as dishonest, completely unprincipled, bought and paid for or simply today's celebrity and tomorrow's reality show has-been. Just another Lefty with no staying power
OR...there's a chance AOC won't sell-out for a book deal. Doesn't make nice with the other side because she sees compromising with the Enemy no different from siding with the Enemy. Maybe she's authentic. Maybe she can be the transcendent figure that motivates other young free-thinkers to deviate from the norm, subvert the dominant paradigm and just generally raises hell and fucks shit up. God help us, maybe Ocasio-Cortez is that bad-ass Latina Change Agent she's advertised as being.
But not with you. Never with you. That's okay. You were never the target demographic to be receptive of an AOC message. You are a lost cause. Settled in your ways like concrete and full of dread and fear of a foreboding future whether you are no longer the biggest and baddest of bad asses and probably doesn't include you because you're teetering and tottering, if not on the edge of extinction, to at least irrelevance in how the world works. There is nothing White patriarchal,supremacist,racist elites fear more than the loss of their stranglehold on access, influence,control and power. The fact that they are in total freak-out mode over a first-term Congresswoman speaks volume on how tenuous their hold is. The Left can have AOC. The Right can have Southern Strategy Disbeliever/Hitler Was A Nationalist Like Me Candace Owens and they are welcome to this thoroughly wretched woman. It's a win-win. Except one person talks it while the other talks it and walks it as well. I'd take Ocasio-Cortez over Owens in the 2019 Racial Draft any day of the week and twice on Sunday.
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on Apr 9, 2019 11:27:03 GMT -5
Look, her appearance has, or should have, nothing to do with our assessment, but sometimes this is a chicken and egg sort of thing, isn't it? Nobody on this board except CE is a fan of Trump, and if we searched all our posts here or elsewhere, I'd bet many of us have taken a few shots of his looks. Should we? No, but we do and it's really hard to feel bad about it.
Our supposed "leaders" have always been called out for their looks. Every last one. If Trump thought he was the right man for the job when he ran for president, he should be man enough to take all the slings and arrows directed at him. He isn't.
Trump, like some posters in this thread, have dismissed AOC as nothing more than " a young bartender" suffering from delusions of grandeur. She's shallow. She's unfocused. She's batshit crazy. She doesn't understand economics. She's dreaming. Then they say it has nothing to do with her race or gender, only her out-of-touch politics. That's plausible. So is this.
Pretty much this. Women in general are victimized by men. Women of color get it even worse. That's not even a question and to even attempt to say, " Well, men are too" is false equivalency at its worst.
How dare Ocasio-Cortez and other women like her enter into what has always been a bastion of White patriarchy, power and privilege and refuse to play along and be nice girls. Why, it's almost as if they think they're equal or something!
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on Apr 9, 2019 9:29:33 GMT -5
This reads like the script for the Japanese horror film, Audition. If I were a malicious bastard, I'd wish for this guy to meet the same fate as the protagonist in the movie...oh wait...I AM a malicious bastard, so yeah, fuck this guy.
...and when it doesn't work, goes onto an incel forum to gripe about how women are all gold-digging militant man-hating whores no one wants anyway and who should all be forced to give sex to every man who asks without exception on an equal basis and by the way he has a hot new 18-year-old girlfriend in Russia where women know their proper role and she wants $5K so she can afford the paperwork and airfare so she can come over here to marry him and check out her picture she's waaaaay hotter than the ugly nasty lesbian gold-diggers here who won't even make a guy a sammich because Of all the sorry little sad sacks in the world, incels are easily the sorriest. They take their pathetic little pee-pees in their greasy mitts, fap away until they're shooting blanks, and piss and moan to their loser buddies online how no woman will give them the time of day and Captain Marvel is a man-hating dyke which should be boycotted because Brie Larson likes Samuel L. Jackson more than Jude Law and that proves it and why, oh why, can't I get laid???
There is a new invention for these dudes. It's called a mirror. Strip naked and enjoy. Then there's the wonders worked by a liberal application of hot water, soap, shampoo and a shower combined with a conservative application of cologne to cover up the musk that comes from dwelling in mom's basement and not bathing regularly. Some toothpaste and mouthwash wouldn't hurt either.
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on Apr 8, 2019 10:15:16 GMT -5
Let's get back to the topic of this thread because it's not Melania Trump. What does where Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez lived as a kid have to do with anything? Why does a silly video she made in college have to do with anything? Why does where she live, how much she pays her staff, what she eats and drink or whether or not she smiles while Trump is boring the shit out the nation during a State of the Union address have to do with anything? In my view, none of those issues are particularly significant in any way. In contrast, stuff Occasio-Cortez says on current events, positions she takes, policy she supports, those all do matter. So...if someone criticizes Occasio-Cortez for, say, pushing the Green New Deal, or for not understanding how the unemployment rate is figured, how does dwelling on her appearance/sex/race counter such criticisms? If you want to argue that there'd be less negative attention on her comments/positions if she was an old unattractive white male, you might have a point (though Bernie catches plenty of heat), but I'd argue that the reverse could also be argued: she'd be getting less positive attention, as well. Which brings us back full circle. She's a public figure who gets lots of attention for a number of reasons, hence the thread...
Yeah, I kinda figured that's why this thread. How does dwelling referencing on Ocasio-Cortez's appearance/sex/race counter such criticisms? Quite easily, actually.
AOC is a star. King is a slug. Who wants to talk about slugs?
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on Apr 5, 2019 20:04:23 GMT -5
It is absolutely ridiculous that Melania Trump has been mentioned, let alone become the subject, of this thread. Come on, guys. Be Best. I loathe that fucking slogan. What a twit. I know, right? The only one from a First Lady that is worse is, "When they go low, we go high." Yeah, and you see how that worked out, Mrs. Obama.
As far as it being absolutely ridiculous that Melania Trump has been mentioned, you should have been here a few days ago, Christine when someone made the absolutely ridiculous snipe that I am defending Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, therefore I must be madly in love and lust with her and fiendin' to jump her bones, ipso facto: anything you say is based upon a misguided racial bond and can be safely discounted as absolutely ridiculous.
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on Apr 5, 2019 15:47:17 GMT -5
WHY are you noting that fact? That's what you're not really answering. WHY? Why NOT? Because it is a fact. Because it happened.
Perhaps because it is one of the more interesting things about a rather dull and uninteresting woman. Ever stop to consider that while you look for deeper meanings, hidden agendas, and ulterior motives?
Let's get back to the topic of this thread because it's not Melania Trump. What does where Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez lived as a kid have to do with anything? Why does a silly video she made in college have to do with anything? Why does where she live, how much she pays her staff, what she eats and drink or whether or not she smiles while Trump is boring the shit out the nation during a State of the Union address have to do with anything?
Not a goddamn thing as far as I'm concerned, but it hasn't slowed AOC's critics not one bit.
I own everything I say. I own everything I write. Always have. Always will. Now I'm pretty sure I've said it before, but if not, I'll say it again: Melania is an awful human being. You happy?
I could criticize Melania Trump for being as much if a racist as her hubby when she co-signed his Birther bullshit or I could criticize for ripping off Michelle Obama time and again, and maybe I will, but those are things you don't care about. But bring up her softcore porno past? Now THAT you do care a lot about. So here's your question backatcha. WHY? Is it that even mentioning this slightly tacky fact somehow stains and tarnishes Melania's carefully cultivated veneer of class and respectability?
Are you lusting after Mrs. Trump? Do you feel some need to be her shining knight riding to her rescue?
How did you put it? How gallant.
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on Apr 4, 2019 11:54:17 GMT -5
It's not "slut-shaming" Melania to point out the fact she's the first First Lady who is only a click away from appearing in her birthday suit. This is a fact. Don't get in your feelings because over it. Facts don't care about your feelings. You point this out as a means of criticizing her. Again, the same thing can be said about Booker's current girlfriend: she's "a click away from appearing in her birthday suit." Do you think that should disqualify Booker as a Presidential candidate? Seriously. Because the sense I get--from your fixation on Melania's nude pics--is that you think it's unseemly that Melania is First Lady, simply because she has posed in the nude. To me, that's a very antiquated notion, as well as being quite paternalistic. You're missing the point. Allow me to simplify it.
Melania Trump has appeared nude in pictures. She is the First Lady.
Rosario Dawson has appeared nude in film. She is not the First Lady.
I do not care if Melania has appeared nude. She's a grown woman and she's made grown woman decisions. I am no more "fixated" on her nude pics than I am lusting after AOC, as you snidely insinuated earlier and to say I am is incorrect.
I am stating a FACT. Now whether or not you find that fact to be antiquated or paternalistic does not alter that fact and if by repeating that fact you find yourself discomforted and aggrieved, that is a problem, but that problem is not mine. There was an Instagram post that got some traction a few weeks ago. Fashion designer Tom Ford reportedly said in response to a question about dressing Melania, "I have no interest in dressing a glorified escort who steals speeches and has bad taste in men." That's a pretty sick burn and it galloped across the web like a runaway horse.
Only thing was it wasn't true. Ford never said that about Melania. That was not a FACT. It was UNTRUE. But it comes with the job. First Ladies get lied on all the time. What makes Melania Trump unique is the fact she is the first First Lady who has a past that includes posing nude.
Buy the ticket. Take the ride. I can't make it any plainer than that.
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on Apr 3, 2019 22:46:24 GMT -5
Now that there is some straight-up smelly bullshit. Men in politics get judged on how they look, too? WTF are you smoking? NOBODY but the sickest of sick-ass fucks is trolling the Internet for a shirtless pic of a 72-year-old Donald Trump. Who wants to see that flabby gut? Who wants to see those saggy man-boobs? Your comparison is absolute hot garbage burning in a dumpster, robeiae. I can't help but wonder sometimes if you actually read what you write, because you're all over the place, wound up and spouting fire in an attempt to disagree with me, even as you make my points for me. Remember the Trump statues? Regardless, you tell me Trump isn't judged on how he looks, then you immediately proceed to judge him on how he looks. Fuck the Trump statues. What's that got to do with anything? Trump is an ugly, fat fuck. He was once fairly good-looking, but since then the roof has fallen in and age and gravity hath taken its toll. Nobody is objectifying an old bigot based upon his looks. It's the 29-year-old Latina we're talking about. As hard as it may be for you, TRY to stick to the subject instead of these insipid diversions into statues nobody but you remembers or cares about. Trust that I don't have to "attempt" to disagree with you. You make it ridiculously easy to disagree with you. I couldn't make your points for you because the "point" that there is even the slightest equivalency between how women and men in politics are judged based upon their looks is too ludicrous to be taken seriously. Tsk. There's that poor reading comprehension of yours kicking in again. Here. I'll type it slow for you: There is nothing patently misogynistic about defending a Latin woman from the attacks of White men who call her dumb, ignorant, stupid, uninformed and worse. Go back a few pages. By my own admission I've said and I will repeat it since it didn't sink in the first time: I will ALWAYS defend a woman of color who is being besieged by White men in such a blatantly, unfair, unjust and unequal manner. Or to put it another way, if there were a conscious and proud Latin woman or man who was a member of The Colline Gate, maybe she or he would fill that role. However, since after nearly three years, I'm STILL the only person of color on this board, that role kinda falls to me by default. Fortunately, I'm good at that sort of thing. I see Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez as a Latin woman because that's how she sees Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. I assume nothing. There IS an affinity between Latinos, Hispanics, Asians, Muslims, Native Americans, Black Americans and any other group who has been dicked around and fucked over and oppressed by White supremacists and systematic racism and state-sanctioned genocide. This is simply a historical fact. Don't get mad me at me because I know history and you prefer to delude yourself it doesn't matter. Being Black does afford me special insights because I have to navigate and survive and find a way to thrive in a White world with White laws and a White system of systemic racism, oppression and supremacy. Now you wouldn't know anything about that because you don't think race matters. In reality, race doesn't matter to you. Which is why you always get defensive and angry when the conversation turns to race. This is not a subject where you're well-positioned to teach and you're incapable of learning. Which I'm good with. I'm not really interested in teaching you. I can understand your discomfort. It's not a subject you have any agency or authority in. "Special privileges?" What are those? And what "privilege" do you possess that you can grant or withhold from me? You don't have to. Your prior history does. No, it's not because of AOC's youth or her looks. That's a very superficial analysis on your part and it belies how impressive her accomplishments are and how significant it is It goes much deeper than that. She is quite literally inspiring an entirely different sort of political activists than Washington has seen in many a moon. This is why you and other conservatives expend so much energy attempting to belittle and trivialize her as nothing more than a shallow know-nothing who is reasonably attractive. In reality, what AOC has done and has the potential to do is actually fascinating in how much she can shake this rotten system to its rancid core. It's not "slut-shaming" Melania to point out the fact she's the first First Lady who is only a click away from appearing in her birthday suit. This is a fact. Don't get in your feelings because over it. Facts don't care about your feelings. Oh, if I only had a dollar every time you have done exactly what you just said I do. I'd surely have a lot of dollars. Alas... Maybe on a free weekend when I'm really bored, I'll go through and count up all the "empty-headed insults" or the times you bounced me off the board for no reason besides you could. I don't have to imagine anything, robeiae. I bring balance to the party because if I don't who will? Amadan has gone on an extended hiatus and every so often he'd call you out. Cassandra and Christine drop in every so often to do the same and maybe Mark aaaaaannnnd that's pretty much it. The only thing I see I undermine is your insistence you are the definitive authority on all things.
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on Apr 3, 2019 21:22:33 GMT -5
By any measurable standard, Captain Marvel is a 2nd-tier Marvel movie. It's fun and it moves briskly, but nobody's writing longform thought pieces on the deeper meaning of the movie (except for one part). But any movie that crashes a BILLION DAMN DOLLARS cannot be sold short. It does what it does and it does it very well. Here's the thing: there is a glut of super-hero flicks. In 2018 I passed on Ant-Man and the Wasp, Venom and Aquaman. Just the way I'll pass on the Shazam! and Hellboy films that will come out before Avengers: Endgame sucks up all the oxygen even as it breaks the billion-dollar bank. Maybe these movies are good. Maybe they're bad. Maybe I don't care. I can only deal with so many talented actors slumming in material that is clearly beneath them. How many CGI fights am I supposed to sit through in a calendar year ( which is why while I enjoyed Black Panther, the final fight looked cheap and sloppy, I had no choice but to dock it from an low "A" to a high "B.") Still. a check is a check and if you're Michael Douglass, Michelle Williams, Tom Hardy, Michelle Pfeiffer, Willem Dafoe, or Nicole Kidman, you've got to take the jobs that meet your salary demands. I don't know when the wave of super-hero films will crest. Maybe the next Spider-Man, Wonder Woman, Joker or Dark Phoenix will crash and burn. More than likely though, its superheroes and nothing else keeping Hollywood afloat.
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on Apr 3, 2019 19:23:10 GMT -5
Feet don't have a race. Just sayin'... Regardless, I'd note that the most outspoken Donald Trump critics--who also happen to be male--seem to be quite adept at googling up nekid pictures of the First Lady (I don't want to know what they're doing with those pictures in their moms' basements), while others openly gawk at her. The below, from Nighttimer, is incorrect: Fact of the matter is that this is true in general, for an awful lot of people (not all of them men, either). But men in politics get judged on how they look, too. Certainly not to the extent that women do, however. But I remember a fair amount of swooning over Obama's looks, especially when the shirtless pic of him was getting tossed around on social media. Now that there is some straight-up smelly bullshit. Men in politics get judged on how they look, too? WTF are you smoking? NOBODY but the sickest of sick-ass fucks is trolling the Internet for a shirtless pic of a 72-year-old Donald Trump. Who wants to see that flabby gut? Who wants to see those saggy man-boobs? Your comparison is absolute hot garbage burning in a dumpster, robeiae. Of course you wouldn't find it a difficult distinction. But it's still a stupid distinction. There is nothing patently misogynistic about defending a Latin woman from the attacks of White men who call her dumb, ignorant, stupid, uninformed and worse. The misogyny is all yours, but it's really not your fault. You can't help how you were socialized. You have no clue how people of color have to navigate their way through places which have been enclaves of White males. You're simply ignorant of how treacherous it is to move through a system that was never designed for you. When you're the only White guy in an All-Black place, maybe then you can holla at me. Until then? You don't know squat about it. It's not that as though you're going to stop pushing in this naive, dishonest idea that every politician is subject to the same degree of scrutiny since they're all politicians. That's never been a standard you've ever held conservatives to. You rag on her in a way you have never ragged on certifiable G.O.P. fucktards like Matt Gaetz, Louie Gohmert, Marsha Blackburn, James Imhofe, Cindy Hyde Smith, Ted Cruz, and White Supremacist Shithead Steve King. I recalll how you refused to even entertain an honest debate over the verified bigotry of Ron DeSantis. But when it comes to peeling the skin off of AOC as if she were an apple? Oh, you're all in for that. There's so much wrong with that statement. Yet to even attempt to explain how its wrong would be a colossial waste of my time, so I'll pass on commenting any further. The difference of course is Melania Trump knowingly and willingly posed for soft-core pornography that Trump ally Rupert Murdoch published in his wank rag, the New York Piss Post, whereas Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has not (except for the vivid imaginations of right-wing perverts) and there's nothing "unfair" about pointing how Trump's trophy wife willingly exploited herself. Your false equivalency is bullshit. Your comparison is bullshit. You are trying to hold Ocasio-Cortez to a standard that will not and can not apply to her. And this is why you flair and fail, robeiae. You're The Colline Gate's version of Tucker Carlson. A poseur, a fake, a phony and just as transparently inauthentic.
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on Apr 3, 2019 11:31:15 GMT -5
I'd be good with Mayor Pete as the last one standing. But my fear is that all the wrangling and mudslinging ends in Bernie Sanders getting the nomination. Of all the candidates with a reasonable shot of getting the Dem nomination, he's my last choice. Last choice? Inslee makes your heart all a'flutter? Hickenlooper doesn't have too many syllables in his name? Gabbard isn't a DINO? The best reason I have for not wanting Bernie Sanders to see get the Democratic nomination is he's not even a Democrat! Not that not being a Republican slowed Trump down all that much.
Pete Buttigieg is cool. He's fine. Seems thoughtful and there's reports he's been a pretty good mayor. I don't know if being a mayor of a small American city like South Bend, Indiana should be considered sufficient experience to be president. The risk for Buttigieg is peaking too soon. For all the worry in some quarters that you won't stand a chance of winning the Democratic presidential nomination if you're White and male, two of the top three contenders are White males.
What this may all come down to is what does the electorate want? More of the same same old or something different?
The first female president? (Gillibrand, Harris, Kloubuchar, Gabbard, Warren)
The first openly gay president? (Buttigieg)
The first Latino president (Castro)
The first "I'm-not-Latino-But-People-Think-I-Am-Because-I-Speak-Spanish" president (O'Rourke)
The first Hindu president? (Gabbard)
The first Asian president (Yang)
The next Black president? (Booker, Harris, Messam)
The first Socialist president? (Sanders)
Or just a straight White guy? (Inslee, Hickenlooper, Biden, O'Rourke, Sanders)
It's nice that Mayor Pete is having a moment and his fundraising reflects it. Problem is, moments pass and then you have to sustain the momentum you've built up. Rudy Giuliani, John Edwards, Herman Cain, Fred Thompson and Jesse Jackson can tell you how far that gets you. I had to go out of town yesterday on a mission of mercy and as I tooled down the highway, I listened to Julian Castro on a Sirius XM station. Very thoughtful, very cerebral and very interesting man. Castro checked off a lot of my boxes in what I'm looking for from the next Democratic standard-bearer.
But he's probably gonna be cold toast before the debates start in June. That's a real shame. I thought Castro would have been a much more exciting choice for veep had Hillary selected him over the boring, straight White guy she rode with instead. That's the way it goes.
Still, any of the Dems running would get my vote over the Cretin-In-Chief currently dry-humping our collective legs like a horny poodle. Hell, if Thanos was a Democrat, I'd vote for him over Trump. So long as when he snaps his fingers Trump and all his Deplorables vanish like a bad dream.
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on Apr 3, 2019 9:47:59 GMT -5
derail from argument simply because I must share this, and this is the go-to AOC thread/ Same. /end derail Carry on. Sigh. Sometimes...I...just..can't. This board needs a facepalm emoji in the worst way. Since I've already been accused of lusting for AOC because...reasons....anything I might say is probably subject to being reduced down to nothing but my racial obsession, but fuck it.
Gonna go out on a limb here and guess there are heterosexual men out there who find 29-year-old Latinas who look like AOC not to hard on the eyes. Joe Biden would probably smell her hair. Donald Trump would start flexing his stubby fingers to cop a quick feel. Most other dudes would probably keep their hands to themselves and just enjoy the view.
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on Apr 2, 2019 21:19:42 GMT -5
Would smelling/kissing hair get someone expelled from campus? Last word on this, as it's a distraction. I asked a lawyer that works on these issues, and she advised that she's been hired quite often to avoid suspensions for bumping into people in the halls that are written up as sexual assaults. Often, no lawsuit happens. Many of these crazy ones go away if you have a lawyer. They never get an article to reference if you don't sue and it's somewhere like $450-$750 per hour for the type of lawyers that handle this. So if you're poor, you're screwed. If it's a distraction, why do you feel the need to crowbar in a "last word?"
What rules might those be? Don't assume everyone knows as much about what those "rules" Biden wants college kids judged by as you seemingly do. City Journal sounds pretty mainstream and objective, but a quick scoping out of its contents indicates it is anything but.
The Diversity Delusion: How Race and Gender Pandering Corrupt the University and Undermine Our Culture
What Criminologists Don’t Say, and Why: Monopolized by the Left, academic research on crime gets almost everything wrong.
The Marijuana Delusion: States rush to legalize recreational pot, even as evidence of its harms grows.
No Need for Thanks: America rescued Ilhan Omar and her family, but to hear her tell it, we are the ones who should be grateful.
Vandalizing History: Progressives want to reframe even joyous moments from the past into a narrative of oppression.
The Frenzied Search for Racism: Elites bought Jussie Smollett’s story because it confirmed their cherished narrative about a hateful America.
Since Trump got elected despite what Trump has been accused of and admitted to doing, it's a perfectly fair standard.
You've been living under the rule of the biggest hypocrite ever to stink up the White House. As far as being galled goes, I suspect you'll find a way to get over it.
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on Apr 2, 2019 21:10:19 GMT -5
Like I said, gallant (albeit a gallantry limited by race). Your poor reading comprehension skills are your problem and if one-liners are all you got it's not the only one.
What's funny is how much you obsess over race when it suits you to do so. Then again, nothing seems to offend you more than finding out you're not the expert on everything.
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on Apr 2, 2019 12:22:03 GMT -5
Yet here you are. Making a big deal of something you claim not to be all that big of a deal. By posting about it where it might possibly be seen by six people? That's what you think qualifies as "making a big deal" out of something? Lol. As was the case in the Smollett thread, you assume a simple post/comment about something automatically means a great deal more--with regard to interest, caring, angst, or what have you--to someone than it might actually mean. It has been my experience, much can be revealed by what is concealed. Your persistent need to bang on Ocasio-Cortez for misspeaking or a gaffe speaks volumes. What you pass off as blase indifference is belied by your demonstrated antagonism toward AOC's politics, her positions, and her intelligence.
Not at all. Gallant has nothing to do with this. When I see a woman of color being attacked on all sides by a gaggle of White guys, it is natural for me to side with the party under siege instead of the side putting them under siege.
Ride with Trump, McConnell, Hannity, Carlson and all those sorry motherfuckers or with Ocasio-Cortez? This is a choice? Is this supposed to be a tough call?.
While your president and his idiot sonny boy lead chants of "AOC Sucks!" the target of their scorn is instructing her fans to show respect for a Republican speaker at a Green New Deal event. That's the difference between whipping up fear and scorn for the other side and pleading for civility and respect for the opposing viewpoint. Trump's success is based upon whomever he demonizes. Ocasio-Cortez's success is based upon a sincere desire to build a better world.
I'm not gallant. I'm over playing games. It's time to smack down the haters and the bullies and the bigots and all those weak-minded chickenshits who enable and empower them. The system h has not failed. It was never designed to work for people who look like me or AOC in the first damn place. Whatever it takes I'm here for it.
I am truly madly deeply in love with anyone who pisses off the status quo. In general, the world needs more "creative extremists" than it does cowed conformists. AOC is what MLK had in mind. Stir the pot. Give it to 'em raw and unfiltered. Make it plain. Shake shit up. So yeah, I'm dickridin' AOC. Which ain't the same thing as trying to fuck AOC. She's on the right side of history and you, and guys like you, are on the wrong side.
Uh-huh. Sure thing. You keep tellin' yourself that. This thread has 380 replies and over 5000 views. All this for a first -term Congresscritter with no special power or position?
Don't try to bullshit a bullshitter. That never ends well.
|
|