Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by flea

I've probably met 2 or 3 women in my entire life that I would consider suitable for even low level public office. Conversely I've only met one man in my entire life that I would consider suitable for carrying a child to term (valade). Is this sexist of me?

---

Yeah. I mean, it’s highly indicative of that or just you not meeting women. Although I have a feeling the former has lead to the latter for you lol

Kinda like how you arguing that the concept of racial supremacy not being racist is...racist.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by flea

I've probably met 2 or 3 women in my entire life that I would consider suitable for even low level public office. Conversely I've only met one man in my entire life that I would consider suitable for carrying a child to term (valade). Is this sexist of me?

---

You obsess about me so much that based on these comments, I think you want to **** me. Kind of weird bro.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by flea

I've probably met 2 or 3 women in my entire life that I would consider suitable for even low level public office. Conversely I've only met one man in my entire life that I would consider suitable for carrying a child to term (valade). Is this sexist of me?

---

Pick up a damn history book on women accomplishment. You would be right at home with Muslim extremists who only allow their woman folk to attend school up to eighth grade because they aren't suited for higher learning. Then you ask "Is this sexist of me", lol.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by flea

Okay I take it back, I bet your b*#@h hips could carry a child too.

---

I think you may want to go read up on biology. Hips don’t have that much to do with carrying the child. Birthing. Now that’s a different story.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by valade16

You obsess about me so much that based on these comments, I think you want to **** me. Kind of weird bro.

---

Proves my point, only the overly feminized would think mentioning someone's name means you want to penetrate their holes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WES445

Pick up a damn history book on women accomplishment. You would be right at home with Muslim extremists who only allow their woman folk to attend school up to eighth grade because they aren't suited for higher learning. Then you ask "Is this sexist of me", lol.

---

I'm going to choose to believe this is Wes's wife posting in which case it was all jokes. :D

But welcome back Wes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by flea

I'm going to choose to believe this is Wes's wife posting in which case it was all jokes. :D

But welcome back Wes.

---

Thanks Flea, but do you really believe this? My wife is very smart, tolerant no disrespect and knows how to use a knife. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by flea

Proves my point, only the overly feminized would think mentioning someone's name means you want to penetrate their holes.

---

Nah, you were definitely talking about my hips. Which is weird. Sad to see the high and mighty Flea stoop to such low bars for your posts. All that time away and you came back with that dud?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by VCaintdead17

Wait. This is racist and sexist as ****. What the hell

---

quoted this..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hawkeye15

I don't disagree with your premise, I simply think if an extremist gets in the oval office, it causes divide, versus positive direction.

We all saw the office can humble a man with Obama, whose inexperience was blasted by the right. And he was just fine overall. Maybe she would be the same.

This will sound terrible, and it likely is. I can't possibly vote for a latina woman to make decisions that matter. I have never met one that isn't fire engine red when they get upset and act impulsively instead of rationally.

If she can get the backing/funding, I would love to see where she can go. But she won't make it to the top imo. Too extreme and already lacking the facts.

---

I didn't see this before when it was posted 08-10-2018, but did nobody comment on this before? how is this okay to say? does it not get much attention because it was latina. imagine substituting that with black and the outrage it would cause.

---

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bramaca

Post all that and there’s no comment about a California Republican running an ad about a New York Democrat comparing her to the Khmer Rouge lol. If this was an add by the Democrats comparing Trump to Hitler you would be irate and would completely ignore the dumb **** that would inevitably come out of his mouth as a result.

---

I can only comment on what I know about. I know nothing about the Khmer Rouge.
I could say you posted all you did, and didn't bother to comment on what you quoted, the actual story that I posted.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bramaca

Strange how my reply is in the quote. Doesn’t show it that way when I tried editing it.

---

that is what happens when there are too many tweets in a post. when someone quotes the entire post then their reply is including in the quote like it did here. when I click quote only the reply to my post is there.

---

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by valade16

So someone comparing Trump to Hitler/Mao is wrong and violent rhetoric but someone comparing AOC to genocide in Khmer is OK? That is also violent rhetoric.

You stated you denounce violent rhetoric from both sides. So why are you not denouncing this?

---

I don't agree with the original video used against AOC. I didn't like or agree with her face ending up in fire. I didn't even watch the entire video, just saw the part with AOC's face ending up on fire.
I know nothing about Khmer Rouge so I don't know the comparison.

the point in why I posted this story is to show the stupidity of AOC and how easily words like white supremacist and racist get thrown around. this had nothing to do with that yet AOC was stupid enough to say that.

you want to criticize me for not commenting about the violent comparison, but yet you didn't say anything about what AOC said. you took to the time to reply to me but couldn't even take the time to comment on AOC.

multiple days and not 1 person could comment about what AOC said.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SpecialFNK

I don't agree with the original video used against AOC. I didn't like or agree with her face ending up in fire. I didn't even watch the entire video, just saw the part with AOC's face ending up on fire.
I know nothing about Khmer Rouge so I don't know the comparison.

the point in why I posted this story is to show the stupidity of AOC and how easily words like white supremacist and racist get thrown around. this had nothing to do with that yet AOC was stupid enough to say that.

you want to criticize me for not commenting about the violent comparison, but yet you didn't say anything about what AOC said. you took to the time to reply to me but couldn't even take the time to comment on AOC.

multiple days and not 1 person could comment about what AOC said.

---

You posted a story where someone uses violent rhetoric against AOC and never once mention it. In the other thread you stated that you are against all violent rhetoric, regardless of what side. That was a lie. If you cared about violent rhetoric, you would have called it out here. You did not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by valade16

You posted a story where someone uses violent rhetoric against AOC and never once mention it. In the other thread you stated that you are against all violent rhetoric, regardless of what side. That was a lie. If you cared about violent rhetoric, you would have called it out here. You did not.

---

question. what is the title of this thread? I don't need to wait for you to answer, the answer is.. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. I posted something about, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. what she said was the intent of what I posted.

here is another post by you and still not commenting on the actual story in what AOC said. you are more interested in arguing with me than what is the actual story. that is often your problem. why is it so hard for you to comment on the story, about what AOC said. this has become a pattern for you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SpecialFNK

question. what is the title of this thread? I don't need to wait for you to answer, the answer is.. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. I posted something about, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. what she said was the intent of what I posted.

here is another post by you and still not commenting on the actual story in what AOC said. you are more interested in arguing with me than what is the actual story. that is often your problem. why is it so hard for you to comment on the story, about what AOC said. this has become a pattern for you.

---

Yeah you posted a story about someone using Violent Rhetoric against AOC and literally said nothing about it. Here is the title of the article you posted:

Republican PAC runs debate ad comparing Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez to genocidal Khmer Rouge

I am the only one between us commenting on the actual story. The story is how someone used violent rhetoric about AOC and you have not commented on it.

By the fact you have no commented on the story I guess you don't care about violent rhetoric from both sides. Seriously, you completely ignored the title of your own article. How bad can you get?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by valade16

Yeah you posted a story about someone using Violent Rhetoric against AOC and literally said nothing about it. Here is the title of the article you posted:

Republican PAC runs debate ad comparing Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez to genocidal Khmer Rouge

---

the reason why I posted the story was about what AOC said. that is literally why I said this..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SpecialFNK

this is what Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said..

apparently Asian Elizabeth Heng is a racist white supremacist. :shrug:



this is why the use of racist and white supremacist has become idiotic. it's used to manipulate people for a political agenda. it's straight up ignorant.

AOC is just stupid.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by valade16

I am the only one between us commenting on the actual story. The story is how someone used violent rhetoric about AOC and you have not commented on it.

By the fact you have no commented on the story I guess you don't care about violent rhetoric from both sides. Seriously, you completely ignored the title of your own article. How bad can you get?

---

I did comment on that part yesterday replying to you..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SpecialFNK

I don't agree with the original video used against AOC. I didn't like or agree with her face ending up in fire. I didn't even watch the entire video, just saw the part with AOC's face ending up on fire.
I know nothing about Khmer Rouge so I don't know the comparison.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SpecialFNK

the reason why I posted the story was about what AOC said. that is literally why I said this..

I did comment on that part yesterday replying to you..

---

I know the reason you posted the story, but by making the reason about what AOC in response to violent rhetoric you completely ignored violent rhetoric towards AOC, despite you talking about how you don't like it from any side. You made absolutely zero mention of it until I specifically called you out for not doing so. Your response yesterday was in reply to me, had I not called you out, you NEVER would have mentioned how the violent rhetoric towards AOC was bad.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by valade16

I know the reason you posted the story, but by making the reason about what AOC in response to violent rhetoric you completely ignored violent rhetoric towards AOC, despite you talking about how you don't like it from any side. You made absolutely zero mention of it until I specifically called you out for not doing so. Your response yesterday was in reply to me, had I not called you out, you NEVER would have mentioned how the violent rhetoric towards AOC was bad.

---

what I said yesterday is how I felt when I first saw the video. I'm sorry if I didn't post that at the same time. the bipartisan reaction should be not to have a woman's face ending up in fire. but I was more interested in what AOC said, which is why I posted it in the AOC thread.

where is your comment on what AOC said, you have had numerous replies now without addressing that.