I can't really tell from the short exchange which one of these two people should
receive this week's 'Tripping With the Twits' award.
My interest was piqued in the exchange when AOC moved the subject matter
basically into the [truth in advertising
]criteria... and in the same paragraph
comparing an exampled explanation of the Green New Deal with some other ad
that may or not have contained 'dishonesty'. Wait......rewind and WHAT??
The clip is from Fox-- but variously elsewhere including complete for context.
Of COURSE I can't imbed the link because I do it twice a YEAR.
I heard Zuck explain the rules for taking an ad down being the advocating of
physical harm, and little else. AOC brought up 'lies' in the same exchange with
the GND, which seems to be one of the latest Copernican Gospels according to
the Californian Bartender's Union. The logical disconnect these two seem to
be explaining around for the Congressional Record is more than enough to make
the smoke begin pouring out my ears from overloaded logic circuit: MUST REBOOT/
Ever since the Smith-Mundt got repealed -- and it became LEGAL for the government
to lie to you in the media: show me why anybody running an ad on a privately owned
website for political office would need holding to any HIGHER standard of honesty?
I must admit right here that I'm confused as hell-- and I'm not going to attempt to
decipher all this wordcrafting anymore.
The only thing I'm starting to believe true in the noise/smoke/mirrors/BS, my recent
four main food groups around here: is that we've largely become calloused to any-
thing like truth when it slips by. Takes too long to rinse off and weigh UP.
Back to lurking and my months-old crumbs. What say you, and don't be gentle ATS.
edit on 24-10-2019 by derfreebie because: To each his hone..
and where's my hammer and sicko to FIX THE BROKEN LINK?
edit on 24-10-2019 by derfreebie because: (no reason given)