It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

@AOC Claims Crazy Green New Deal Document FROM HER OWN WEBSITE Is a Fake

page: 4
26
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 9 2019 @ 11:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: strongfp
a reply to: xuenchen

So your OP is literally just a nothing source based on literally nothing?

What's wrong with that list of things they want for people?

You don't want people to have a decent job? Clean air and water? housing?


Yep. That's right. You were smart enough to figure it out. Congratulations. Now go run tell everybody the news. Us Trump supporters are bunch of mean SOBs who don't want people to have good jobs, clean water and air, or housing.

Please, go share your brilliance with the world and be sure to point them back here. Surely they will come to the same conclusion as you have?


Surely they won't notice that you attacked the OP for being "based on nothing" and then went on to attempt to defend that very same nothing...

So which is it?

Is it "Nothing"?

Or... is it: "Not only is it something, it is something worth supporting and defending."



Do people not understand those bulging eyeballs and excitability are signs of mental instability? This poor woman is being used... they shuffle her out when they want to say something they know is crazy. Only they took it too far this time and now they have to pretend it was the Republicans who put this out...

I do feel legitimately sorry for her in a way, but I would love for all her supporters to confront her about this "What the $&#% do you mean that was a hoax/mistake? So you're telling me I still have to work??? Even if I am unwilling?! That freakin NAZI sh#$, man...you're a FREAKIN NAZI, MAN!!!! AOC needs to learn, "Antifa don't play!" (...and in smaller print you'll see that we also do not work.)




posted on Feb, 9 2019 @ 11:30 PM
link   
So sorry, jadedANDcynical; when I replied to your post above I misread it. That comment should actually be aimed at strongfp but it's too late for me to edit



posted on Feb, 9 2019 @ 11:48 PM
link   
a reply to: riiver

That's quite alright. I figured that there was perhaps a miscommunication there.

No worries m'dear.



posted on Feb, 10 2019 @ 12:55 AM
link   
She's so full of poop. Ughhh



posted on Feb, 10 2019 @ 01:41 AM
link   
I found this entire thread to be VERY Educational, it clearly demonstrated how AOC was elected. It clearly shows that Ms cisgender's supporters have no ideas about reality, even when it is repeatedly shown they are mistaken.

Heaven help the future of the USA,because it sure don't look like the young will.



posted on Feb, 10 2019 @ 09:11 AM
link   
a reply to: 3n19m470

It's the same old story here in these Democrat hate threads. Someone points out the truth, and it's an attack on the OP! Someone attempts to have an opinion on the matter; You're wrong get out commie!

Now things have settled a bit and I'm not getting flooded with the same stuff over and over pointing me to the same FAQ document, with no one actually bothering to find the actual BILL The FAQ was never even found to be published by anyone in particular, the original source is fake news in that regard. Someone in AOCs staff clearly goofed and published some poorly written draft document that doesn't even match the actual proposal that was made up BEFORE the FAQs even was published. The FAQs talks about taking cars off the road and getting rid of nuclear power, who ever wrote that particular FAQs didn't even seem to read the bill.

So yea, the OP is literally nothing, it's a source based off partisan hatred. Someone made a mistake and it's now gotten blown out of proportion. I wonder why...



posted on Feb, 10 2019 @ 09:18 AM
link   
The point is she is already lying and denying her own stuff. She should make a good politician.

She could have said it was removed because it was unintended or she reconsidered, but she chose to say 'it wasn't there'.

Welcome to the internet, ma'am.
edit on 2/10/2019 by roadgravel because: typo



posted on Feb, 10 2019 @ 09:21 AM
link   
a reply to: strongfp

From your link:


(O) providing all people of the United States with—
(i) high-quality health care;
(ii) affordable, safe, and adequate housing;
(i) economic security; and
(iv) clean water, clean air, healthy and affordable food, and access to nature.


emphases mine

What do you think it means when it say, "providing all people of the United States with economic security?"



posted on Feb, 10 2019 @ 09:47 AM
link   
a reply to: jadedANDcynical

Can't answer that for her. But in my opinion, it can mean a lot of things. If you're a citizen of the US you should have security from the economy your contribute to. If you lose your job, should you become homeless, starve, or be barred from welfare and food stamps? But, people are focusing on the 'unwilling' aspect of the FAQs document.



posted on Feb, 10 2019 @ 09:55 AM
link   
a reply to: roadgravel

Where did she lie? She didn't write the FAQs or even had anything to do with it's publication. She trusted someone else to take care of that for her. And they screwed it up. Show me where she ever backed these FAQs, came out and told people they were canon to her proposed bill.

Other than retweeting a tweet, and getting messed up in a storm of internet loud mouths and trolls that dug up a document that wasn't supposed to be there in the first place. The proposed bill is what matters, not a half assed FAQs Blog post.

Last time I checked tweets don't pass laws. But hey, yea this is the internet, believe everything you want to hear.



posted on Feb, 10 2019 @ 09:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: jadedANDcynical
a reply to: strongfp

From your link:


(O) providing all people of the United States with—
(i) high-quality health care;
(ii) affordable, safe, and adequate housing;
(i) economic security; and
(iv) clean water, clean air, healthy and affordable food, and access to nature.


emphases mine

What do you think it means when it say, "providing all people of the United States with economic security?"


in the mind of an hillbilly alt right senior citizen "providing all people of the USA with economic security" means that USA is going to become Venezuela or China.



posted on Feb, 10 2019 @ 10:08 AM
link   
a reply to: ErrorErrorError

It is up to the individual to provide for themselves, economic security.


It is not the job of government to provide economic security for the individual.



posted on Feb, 10 2019 @ 10:11 AM
link   
a reply to: strongfp
and
a reply to: ErrorErrorError


Economic security or financial security is the condition of having stable income or other resources to support a standard of living now and in the foreseeable future.


Wikipedia

We already have assistance for those who find themselves unemployed through no fault of their own in the form of welfare and SNAP.

The bill proposed has no details at all about how they plan on going about providing all people of the United States with economic security or what that even entails; AOC, along with her spokespeople, have no answers for either of those questions.

That is the problem I have with the bill.



posted on Feb, 10 2019 @ 10:15 AM
link   
a reply to: jadedANDcynical

Have you even given them a chance to explain it all?

The bill is less than a week old, and people are already losing their minds.



posted on Feb, 10 2019 @ 10:17 AM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

If you have a job, you are being secured by the economy you work in with a pay check.



posted on Feb, 10 2019 @ 10:25 AM
link   
a reply to: jadedANDcynical

This Green New Deal along with the current "Identity Politics" movement is just rebranded Marxism.


It's about a power grab for government and creating a justification for the removal of freedoms and liberties.



posted on Feb, 10 2019 @ 10:26 AM
link   
a reply to: strongfp

The very fact that her people are trying to crawfish away from the post by saying that it came from some other site or was somehow altered does not fill me with an overabundance of confidence.


First, one of her surrogates said the document was "doctored" and circulated by Republicans, then her chief of staff said the line was from a draft that was never intended for publication.


Business Insider

Instead of owning up to it as a mistake, they first tried blaming it on a doctored version being circulated by republicans.

Can you maybe understand why some people are a bit skeptical?



posted on Feb, 10 2019 @ 10:43 AM
link   
a reply to: jadedANDcynical

First thing is to blame others. So much for being responsible. We have plenty of this already in government and now we have more. Same s---, different Congress person.
edit on 2/10/2019 by roadgravel because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 10 2019 @ 11:30 AM
link   
a reply to: jadedANDcynical

It could have. You're making the assumption already they're wrong. Heaven forbid they might be telling the truth. But they're Democrats so all they do is lie right?



posted on Feb, 10 2019 @ 11:37 AM
link   
a reply to: strongfp

It could have what?

Been doctored or come from some other site?

The fact is that it didn't it cam from AOC's very own site but the first thing her spokesperson tried to do was blame it on the republicans rather than own it.

That's not the action of someone who deserves to be given the benefit of the doubt.

Both sides (and those from the middle) lie.

As House said:


The other thing I have an issue with regarding this whole thing, is that it's merely a resolution and not meant to be legally binding. In other words, it's a waste of time and money. There are issues that need to be addressed, but both sides of the aisle do nothing but argue in circles thus ensuring that none of the issues are ever addressed; job security.

Ye gods and little fishes but I hate politicians.



new topics

top topics



 
26
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join