Oh, oh, we are entering the land of fake news as his base would say.Quote:
Originally Posted by dbroncos78087
Printable View
Oh, oh, we are entering the land of fake news as his base would say.Quote:
Originally Posted by dbroncos78087
Yep. It’s fact news.Quote:
Originally Posted by WES445
Or maybe there is no merit in giving publicity to a pandering clickbait artist who literally reversed his political takes without an explanation once a radio station told him to slurp Trump more. Shapiro is a racist loser who lies about his height because he's so insecure and irrelevant. He's like an angry video game nerd fast talking YouTuber to make dumb people think they're listening to something at least pseudo-intellectual for once.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brewersfan255
LmaoQuote:
Originally Posted by browski234
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
America's tired of know-it-all elitists like Shapiro regurgitating repeatedly debunked rightist talking points. Shapiro just trying to get publicity by challenging someone famous. AOC was right to turn that down.
I guess you can understand why Shapiro tucked his tail between his legs, abandoned all of his previous stances and exposed himself as a total fraud once higher ups asked him to change his feelings towards Trump for better ratings given that the drum he beat before was the ever enticing "Obama hates Jews" stance.
Nobody wants socialism!
Even the DEMS know she won’t work...If they wanted to go this avenue then Hillary would have not blocked Bernie and his ridiculous stuff that came out of his pie hole....
Again, WHO IS GOING TO PAY FOR ALL OF THE FREE STUFF that these two keep saying?
NOTHING IS FREE!
Why do they keep saying it is free?
Manram loves these posts.Quote:
Originally Posted by rrzubnyy
He clearly has a mental illness. I just ignore him.Quote:
Originally Posted by jojo30
The best part is that YOU ARE. Ha Ha.Quote:
Originally Posted by rrzubnyy
Your screen name is apropos.Quote:
Originally Posted by FlakeyFool
Who's gonna pay for all these tax cuts to billionaires?Quote:
Originally Posted by Crovash
Who's gonna pay for these billions upon billions of dollars we're pissing away on money to the "military" that the military itself says it doesn't need?
I don't know what this gibberish is supposed to mean. :shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by dbroncos78087
if she did not want to debate him then she could have politely declined, without feeling a need to be negative. I would imagine many people on both political sides have declined requests to debate someone.
this thread is not just about the debate issue.Quote:
Originally Posted by ManRam
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brewersfan255
even this from accused Liberal politifact..
https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...l-counts-abou/
Quote:
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez wrong on several counts about unemployment
Quote:
"Unemployment is low because everyone has two jobs. Unemployment is low because people are working 60, 70, 80 hours a week and can barely feed their family."
— Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on Friday, July 13th, 2018 in an interview on PBS' "Firing Line"
Pants on Fire!
https://www.dailywire.com/news/34386...eck-ashe-schow
Quote:
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Gets Epic FACT CHECK From The Washington Post
Quote:
Self-described “Democratic socialist” Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has been making the rounds on liberal media ever since her surprising win over top Democratic incumbent Joseph Crowley in New York's 14th congressional district.
Her statements have been repeatedly fact checked by right-leaning news outlets, but now the left-leaning Washington Post (link added- https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.eb2278ec4191) is following Politifact to debunk many of her common claims. The Post doesn’t use its standard “Pinocchios” rating scale when doing a round up like this, but it still takes Ocasio-Cortez to task for her claims.
For example, the 28-year-old former bartender claimed on PBS’s “Firing Line” that “Unemployment is low because everyone has two jobs,” and “Unemployment is low because people are working 60, 70, 80 hours a week and can barely feed their family."
The Post’s Glenn Kessler called her first claim “poppycock.”
“First of all, Bureau of Labor Statistics data shows that the percentage of people working two jobs has actually declined since the Great Recession – and been relatively steady at around 5 percent since 2010,” Kessler wrote. “The percentage bounced around a bit but it was as low as 4.7 percent in October 2017 and was 5.2 percent in the July jobs report, the most recent available. That hardly adds up to ‘everyone.’”
As to the second part of her claim, Kessler pointed out that 58% of the people working two jobs have a full-time and part-time job and only 6% have two full-time jobs. He wrote this “calls into question her claim that people are working ’60, 70, 80 hours a week.’” The average private employee works 35 hours per week.
Kessler then called Ocasio-Cortez’s claim that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has a quota “to fill 34,000 beds with detainees every single night” an “urban legend.” The 2016 appropriations bill requires ICE to have 34,000 beds available, but is not required to fill them, Kessler wrote.
Ocasio-Cortez recently said that the “upper-middle class does not exist anymore in America.” To this, Kessler wrote that not only does the upper-middle class exist, it has gained ground since 1979, from 12.9% of the population to 29.4% in 2014. He wrote that the middle-class has “shrunk a bit.” This is actually due to upward mobility.
Kessler also had to debunk Ocasio-Cortez’s claim that the Medicare-for-all-plan she and Sen. Bernie Sanders (Socialist-VT) support would reduce healthcare costs over 10 years. Luckily for Kessler, the Post had already given the claim three Pinocchios when another Democratic candidate said it earlier. Basically, Ocasio-Cortez and other Democrats are using an assumption from a study, but the study’s author called it unrealistic, and said the plan would increase government health expenditures by $32.6 trillion over two years.
Finally, Kessler knocked Ocasio-Cortez for claiming, “The reason that the Supreme Court upheld the Affordable Care Act is because they ruled that each of these monthly payments that everyday American make is a tax. And so, while it may not seem like we pay that tax on April 15th, we pay it every single month or we do pay at tax season if we don’t buy, you know, these plans off of the exchange.”
Kessler said Ocasio-Cortez did not appear to understand “policy nuances.”
“In the 5-4 opinion written by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., the Affordable Care Act was deemed to be an appropriate exercise of the government’s taxing power,” Kessler wrote. “But Roberts was not referring to the monthly premium payments, as Ocasio-Cortez claims. Instead, Roberts was referring to the individual mandate to buy insurance * — and the requirement to pay an annual penalty when filing a tax return if one did not buy health insurance.”
Kessler further noted that the Obama administration claimed the mandate was not a tax while passing the law.
So, for those of you keeping track at home, that’s five false ratings (the two unemployment claims are lumped into one) for Ocasio-Cortez’s most common talking points.
If that is the case, fair enough.Quote:
Originally Posted by dbroncos78087
Awwwwwwwww a Trump supporter complain that someone wasn't polite. Y'all are so cute.Quote:
Originally Posted by SpecialFNK
#BeBestQuote:
Originally Posted by flips333
To the contrary, if he doesn't know what he's talking about that is exactly why she shouldn't debate him. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by SpecialFNK
nope... because it could have made it better for him but would have also resulted in a lot of wasted money on individuals who have no business going to college and no hope of contributing to society at the rate of the investment because inevitably the government would dole money out based upon what is "fair" or "politically correct" to right previous injustices...Quote:
Originally Posted by valade16
College isn't for everyone... we don't need to act like it is...
Well this lies on the false supposition that everyone would go to college, which simply wouldn't be true. There would still be a lot of people who, even if the Government paid for college, wouldn't go. Furthermore, the program would be setup like it is for military benefits where if you fail a class you have to pay for that class. So the government wouldn't be paying for any wasted individuals because if they wasted their time at college flunking out, they would be paying for it themselves.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vinylman
College isn't for every Soldier either, but they have a free college program and it incurs very little waste. So I simply don't believe your fears are founded.
wrong... its being done to expose her for the fraud that she is and would be excellent ratings ….Quote:
Originally Posted by ManRam
No one expected it to happen... its a stunt by Shapiro... but to act like he wouldn't destroy here in a debate is laughable...
She uses her youth, personality, and her looks to her advantage as she should … to act like people would respect her for her deep understanding of the issues is laughable... she is a potted plant at this point
I have no fears … what you don't seem to understand is that I have no problem with rigid government programs to support tuition and room and board ... I just don't think we need to make it available to everyone and certainly not those who are marginal performers and major in studies that add nothing to the workforce.Quote:
Originally Posted by valade16
I am all for rewarding excellence and drive. I just want a payoff and my idea of excellence is different than most... it certainly wouldn't include the vast majority of people.
The current system is trash because it is being abused by multiple groups... Universities who see it as a windfall, lenders who see it as a windfall, students who see it as a way of delaying entry into the real world... a government funded program would be equally abused by universities without price controls and students without strict academic performance metrics...
I agree the current system is trash, and that the biggest problem in a free tuition system would be capping how much colleges charge.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vinylman
AOC is one of these younger people who are a product of the ultra-left colleges and is too young to remember the Cold War and the fact that socialism is supposed to be our enemy -- and always fails. That, and the fact that she looks like a Kardashian family reject, and you got nothing but trouble.
no one can disagree on that lolQuote:
Originally Posted by valade16
It is mind boggling how much Universities have gotten away with because of all the student loan money that has flooded the system.
Anyway, the problems in the educational system start way early in the process with considerably greater waste at the lower levels by trying to be 100% inclusive.
At the end of the day even well intentioned programs like "Bright Futures" in florida" end up being a massive giveaway to those that really don't need assistance (ie wealthy whites).
We have this ne funding mechanism that hasn’t been published before buried deeply within the tax code called TAXES. That’s how we pay for things. It’s a ****ing game changer I tell you!Quote:
Originally Posted by rrzubnyy
Not if it was only state universities and only state universities were free.Quote:
Originally Posted by valade16
The amount of students would be capped by the number that can get in... the same way it works overseas.
Awwwwwww for a big tough guy like you it sounds like you are really intimidated by her.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vinylman
would people who send a kid to a private university receive a tax credit, since they aren't enjoying the luxury of "free school"?Quote:
Originally Posted by flips333
At the end of the day, a lengthy system is in place. Move to the burbs, where it is more expensive, so that you can be in a good school district (pay more taxes), so you can get your kid to the best school possible, etc. I get having "free" public school opens up education for everyone, but that also means the lower tier educated people, from poor neighborhoods, will be filling these schools up. Not that this is a bad thing, at all. But, simply put, many parents will want more for their kids. Should they receive credit for making a sacrifice?
Quote:
Originally Posted by flips333
you sound like one of the many on the left Prostituting her for their benefit... One can only conclude this by your inability to acknowledge her vapidness.
I guess English isn't your first language.Quote:
Originally Posted by SpecialFNK
You are scared schitless of AOC and it is absolutely hilarious.
If it was up to me, no they wouldn't. Public money for public schools. No public money for private schools. If people want to take advantage of the cheaper school benefit, they go to a public school. If you want to go to Harvard or Yale or Bob Jones University, that is between you and them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawkeye15
My understanding is that a fraud is one who intentionally deceives others for personal or financial gain. How exactly is Ms. Ocasio-Cortez a fraud?Quote:
Originally Posted by Vinylman
That is likely how it would work. All for the betterment of society. It's a non-issue if "free" schools are still kicking out high standard scholastic students. If public, or "free" schools start drawing lesser teachers, and pushing out graduates that are below average, it might be a problem. Education needs to be fixed at the lower level before we just unleash "free" college to me.Quote:
Originally Posted by IndyFan
The best incentive for that to happen is if you can't just take your ball and go home to the private schools. If you get a credit then you are essentially promoting leaving the free public college behind. It's very similar to why people fight those types of credits for current private schools. It further exacerbates a tiered system by removing the buy in.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawkeye15
oh what I am referring to is basically, "I know a sacrifice needs to be made at some point, but let's stave off the ones who need to make it another generation or two".Quote:
Originally Posted by DeW-Star
Here is the thing-in order to "fix" education, a generation(s) of people is going to have to eat **** and make a huge sacrifice. It means pumping massive tax dollars into a broken system, with fixes in place to assure a stronger future from an educational standpoint.
None of this addresses this simple truth though-4 year colleges are not for everyone.
Conservatives are really getting their panties in a twist over one singular socialist who hasn't even been elected yet. I'll be sure to but shares in Kleenex if the democrats can take back the house and/or senate
It's because this kid is everywhere. A day doesn't go by without seeing her somewhere. If "conservatives panties are in a twist" it's because this toothy know nothing is constantly being shoved at us. We're told daily that she's the new face of the Democrat party.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kenny Powders;32501070[B
She's like Tiger Woods at the PGA, he didn't win anything, but you would swear he did. Same Same with the bronx kid.
Only good thing about her is she has seemed to knock that pesky kid from Parkland HS out of the limelight for a while.
Technically Tiger won $1.2 million dollars for coming in 2nd.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sluggo1
I think the majority of people would agree with this statement.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawkeye15
Yeah, one year of college but I was lucky to get into a profession with upward mobility.