I'm consuming New Yorker prose...
"Substitutionary" is an odd word for me. But it is a word. The OED finds its earliest use in 1772, in "Clerical Subscription No Grievance": "The Son of Man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his Life,..a substitutionary Ransom for many."
My Google search suggests that the word comes up most in the phrase "Substitutionary Atonement," and there's an article for that in Wikipedia:
Substitutionary atonement is the name given to a number of Christian models of the atonement that regard Jesus as dying as a substitute for others, 'instead of' them.... There is also a less technical use of the term "substitution" in discussion about atonement when it is used in "the sense that [Jesus, through his death,] did for us that which we can never do for ourselves"....Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez suffers for us?
Atonement is a theological term for the act of paying for and thereby redeeming sin... A distinction is often made between substitutionary atonement (Christ suffers for us), and penal substitution (Christ punished instead of us)....
As the tag says: too much drama.
AND: What is the "politics whose particulars are increasingly popular across the country"? Socialism? I think that's what the New Yorker writer is festooning his prose around. So let's quote Trump's speech, because he talked about socialism:
Here, in the United States, we are alarmed by new calls to adopt socialism in our country. America was founded on liberty and independence - not government coercion, domination, and control. We are born free, and we will stay free. Tonight, we renew our resolve that America will never be a socialist country.ALSO: After Trump says, "We are born free, and we will stay free," the camera closes in on Bernie Sanders, visibly suffering:
He can't speak, but I imagine he's thinking something like: My socialism brings more freedom.
पोस्ट्स
१६९ टिप्पण्या:
Damage control. At least they can work with the people who didn’t see the speech.
Ocasio-Cortez's appeal is that she is young and pretty, and young pretty American women have the most privilege in this country, if you are one who believes in things like group privilege.
Young pretty women can say things and the audience will act interested. The audience will be kinder. And the YPW doesn't even know she is getting special treatment, because it is how she has always been treated.
Love that phrase: "The horror of the State of the Union." The nation is doing pretty well. To the opposition party, that's a Horror. Sour, bitter, nasty people who basically don't like America or Americans very much. Happy citizens represent a horror for them.
It’s true that much of Ocasio-Cortez’s appeal has to do with her frank and fluid way of expressing a politics whose particulars are increasingly popular across the country
Which country is the New Yorker talking about here? Puerto Rico? Cuba? Russia?
Ah, they seem to be relying on a 'poll' that seems to discover when you offer 'people' a million dollars if they push a button in a box but someone they don't know will die, 62 percent of women and 55 percent of men would push it.
Ocasio-Cortez's appeal is that she is young and pretty
Relatively pretty.
Socialism depends on people being ignorant of the costs of the things they receive for "free". Let's forgive all student debt, for example. The banks can afford to write that off. Of course, those write-offs will affect future lending levels and the availability of future student loan programs, but that's tomorrow. Someone else can find a way to pay for that later.
“The horror of the state of the union”???
This is why the press is not to be trusted. With anything.
caught between complicit spectatorship and horror at the seriousness at hand.
The hyperbole is hilarious.
We're living in the greatest, most prosperous and free era in human history in the fantastic United States.
Whatever is this bullshit supposed to be about?
I'm waiting Althouse...
Is Fauxcahontas DOA?
If she has come to suffer for us, let's hand her over to ISIS and they can crucify her for our sake.
caught between complicit spectatorship and horror at the seriousness at hand
I don't understand any of this phrase.
I find that pundits use the term "It's true that..." to run off an otherwise unsupported sentence.
@S/T: Warren's candidacy: Dead.
Correction: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's Resting Bitch Face at the State of the Union.
The way to not have the too much drama tag would be to leave Jesus out of the article.
Like the author did.
Duh.
Well Mike, the “horror” and “seriousness” come from the Democrats not being in total power. You see, they lost an election and Hillary should be giving that speech while holding a martini in one hand.
So of course the It Girl is upset at being dragged to participate in this farce where the voters get a say.
They must not like the poll numbers. All the trolls are in damage control mode today.
That photo makes OC look like the unhappy wife of The Caudillo Joe Manchin.
Fox News reported that a CBS poll reported 76% liked Trump's speech.
The Horror of SOTU? How about the horror of Trump nailing it and winning re-election in 2020?
The Dems are against America and American citizens. How else do you explain Open Borders?
Jesus said that he is the Way to the Father.That way goes through his death , burial and ressurrection. Suffering and death is not all that He was a substitute for us. The key that He accomplished was our being declared righteous by the Father's ressurrection of Jesus as our substitute.
Cortez's skill is her giving that hateful and malevolent revenge, that is all Socialism actually is, a smiley fresh face. The other Socialists, who are murderers at heart, will deal with her soon.
AOC is going to use her politics to get wealthy.
caught between complicit spectatorship and horror at the seriousness at hand
-----
A person is caught between two sides, which are:
* spectatorship
* horror
Spectatorship is the state of being a spectator.
Horror is a feeling.
The parallel structure is faulty. Both ends should be states, or else both states should be feelings.
-----
The idea that spectatorship is complicit is puzzling. What makes a spectator complicit to a situation?
I suppose the idea is that a spectator must intervene in the situation in order to not be complicit.
-----
The phrase horror at the seriousness at hand is puzzling.
* The spectator feels horror at the seriousness.
* The spectator feels horror at the seriousness at hand.
Does seriousness evoke a feeling of horror?
Does the expression at hand distinguish this particular seriousness from some other seriousness?
-----
The spectator is caught between spectatorship and horror.
I don't get it.
"From each according to his ability; to each according to his needs."
So, somebody has to be in charge of determining what your abilities are and see to it that you deliver accordingly, and also to determine what what your needs are and see to it that they are satisfied. And it is not going to be you.
You consume staples; not verbiage.
Suffer the little socialists to come unto me.... But don't kid yourself, It YOU who will be made to suffer.
The problem has always been getting from each according to his ability without providing incentives. So failing that, they have to define your “needs’ down.
More freedom to the dictators that would be in charge!!!
Mike Sylwester said...
"...caught between complicit spectatorship and horror at the seriousness at hand."
I don't understand any of this phrase.
With all of Cunningham's overwrought prose, I dunno, either.
I'm thinking maybe he means like when Michael Corleone goes to see the Havana "Superman" sex show in Godfather II?
AOC has a cult following in the media, but I have to wonder what your average American hating liberal thinks.
Are they ready to scrap their Che' t-shirts for her yet?
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez suffers for us?
So what is she suffering, besides congenital brain damage?
> Substitutionary
Writers for The New Yorker are paid by the syllable.
The New Yorker got a tiny taste of penal substitution when I canceled my subscription in protest to Ronan Farrow’s nonstory about Brett Kavanaugh. If only I could come up with a plan for compensatory retaliation! Such as, you push a red button and you get one million dollars and The New Yorker disappears.
"The horror of the State of the Union.”
Like she’s Kurtz up the river. Fucking hilarious. I’m torn between distress at watching fellow Americans fall into hysterical self-destruction and delight at watching fellow Americans fall into hysterical self-destruction.
"I'm consuming New Yorker prose..."
That prose should come with a warning label.
The Cracker Emcee Refulgent said...
I’m torn between distress at watching fellow Americans fall into hysterical self-destruction and delight at watching fellow Americans fall into hysterical self-destruction.
Ah, there you go: "...caught between complicit spectatorship and horror at the seriousness at hand."
Bernie looked like he was trying to pass a grapefruit sized kidney stone.
I LOVED it.
Hillary will never be president, oh corruption excusing leftists. Get over it.
Nothing scares the left more than shutting down their ability to control everyone with an iron fist.
Here, in the United States, we are alarmed by new calls to adopt socialism in our country. America was founded on liberty and independence - not government coercion, domination, and control. We are born free, and we will stay free. Tonight, we renew our resolve that America will never be a socialist country.
_ Trump - worth a nice hearth bold.
The dems need to crush Arroz con Pollo ¡Arriba, Arriba! ¡Ándale, Ándale!
AOC would look nice even in a tight Che t-shirt.
"I'm consuming New Yorker prose..."
“Rich, ornate prose is hard to digest, generally unwholesome, and sometimes nauseating.”
― William Strunk/E.B. White
She's popular because she's attractive. She's attractive mostly because she's young, but her physical attractiveness and her youth are the bulk of her appeal.
A homely woman with the same message and social media strategy would get no coverage. Does anyone actually dispute this?
She's most popular with young people and her policy preferences, such as they are, target young people (naive socialism, gross appeals to "fairness," etc). She presents a simple message: I'm young, attractive, and cool and since you want to be those things yourself you should agree with my simplistic positions/basic bitch leftism. She gets clicks and eyeballs for the Media 'cause she's pretty. We can think deeply about that if we need to but it's really not difficult to understand.
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez... what a senseless waste of human life.
Speaking of looks -- I think Kyrsten Sinema's hot pinkness warmed the heart of men's cockles last night.
Hagar said...
"From each according to his ability; to each according to his needs."
So, somebody has to be in charge of determining what your abilities are and see to it that you deliver accordingly, and also to determine what what your needs are and see to it that they are satisfied. And it is not going to be you.
Basically, everything becomes one of those bad alimony/child support deals where the ex-husband is on the hook pay his ex-wife some large sum of money every year because he had one very good year while they were married. No matter how many times he tries to tell the family court judge how exceptional that one year was, the judge keeps saying, "well, just earn that much again and I'll stop putting you in jail."
Bernie Sanders can't speak, but I imagine he's thinking something like: My socialism is a success. I have power, I'm worshipped and I have three houses.
Ha - Cortez is sitting behind Manchin (I think?) and Manchin looks like Northam.
Perfect.
[Bernie Sanders] can't speak, but I imagine he's thinking something like: My socialism brings more freedom.
@Althouse, Sanders has to be one of the stupidest people ever to graduate from Chicago, but surely even he knows better than that!
I'm consuming New Yorker prose...
You're consuming affirmative action prose, blithe lethal childish cowardly intractable conflicting tacky exploitative emancipated murdered fraudulent racist creepy stupid silly odd forlorn substitutionary complicit horrible prose.
I wonder how calculated was AOC's choice of an Evita hair style.
Blogger CWJ said...
I wonder how calculated was AOC's choice of an Evita hair style.
How fey do you have to be to catch that?
“... the horror of the State of the Union.”
Which part? The thriving economy? The need for border security? The sanctity of life? Curtailing endless wars? Honoring veterans?
Secprog Dems, particularly the mediaswine, are not merely evil, they are also insane!
Personally, I disagree profoundly with AOC's pursuit of a socialist agenda. But I can put that aside.
I can also put aside a discussion of her looks (reasonably attractive) and her youth (late 20s).
What I can't put aside is her lack of any meanngful acheivement and her public statements evincing the wisdom of a 14-year old. She isn't bright, has no wisdom and has done nothing of note.
If she were applying for a file clerk or secretary, you just wouldn't hire her. She's that unqualified.
Credit where it’s due: I noticed Sen. Sinema departing from the Democrat herd to applaud on at least on occasion. That was the end of her coverage for the evening.
Howard: "The dems need to crush Arroz con Pollo ¡Arriba, Arriba! ¡Ándale, Ándale!"
You had to bring up my second favorte dish! Now I'm hungry you bas****!!
As God is my witness, if you mention paella I will beat you with a stick!
Cortez was looking "sincerely forlorn." Good to know that 4 years of Grievance Studies wasn't entirely wasted.
One person's "frank and fluid" is another's "codswallop."
Popular with whom? The Socialist dirtbags who illegally enter the country, and whom AOC had a special, much publicized 'meeting' with before her election? Well, they know all about the difference between a baseball bat and an AK-47 when it comes to the spreading of Socialist Dogma, but we don't particularly like it up here.
If you are talking about the indoctrinated Journalism majors, well, they are also innumerate enough to like Socialism.
And AOC, famous for stealing tips from her co-workers, and who never had enough money to actually afford beef for her meals from her bartending gigs, probably also is a big fan of confiscatory policies...as long as she has the paws which does the confiscation.
As MayBee noted, most of AOC's attraction lies in the fact that she's attractive. I'd rather look at her being disgruntled than Bernie. She looks so cute when she's disgruntled......Is it in some way contradictory to have such an attractive young woman be a spokeswoman for feminism?..........Bella Abzug was an eyesore, and, even beyond that, she had an obnoxious personality. The media loved her, but she didn't have much of a following beyond the media......In some ways Bella was the true, honest face of socialism, but AOC has the face to collectivize a thousand ships.
"Ocasio-Cortez looks like she’s wondering just what kind of club she worked so hard to join." Groucho Marx had a pretty good answer for that one.
he's thinking something like: My socialism brings more freedom.
Socialism is growing in popularity across the country mostly because people don't know what socialism is, what it means, how it plays out in the real world. They just think it means free stuff. It means lots of vacation like the French get or paid paternity leave like the Swedes get.
Trump opened the door here to an education session on what socialism really means--it means a loss of freedom, an overbearing government, a system where only the politicians prosper and everyone else suffers.
"Tonight, we renew our resolve that America will never be a socialist country."
Reaganesque!
Rep. Ocasio-Cortez is a first term backbencher with no significant previous governmental or private sector experience. Why she gets so much attention ought to be a mystery, except that it isn’t much of a mystery. The millennial/Twitter demographic is fascinated with her for their own non-substantive reasons. And the far right and alt-right demographic is fascinated with her as a hate object.
It is a policy-free festival of emotionalism all around. And effectively a win-win for the Congresswoman’s name recognition. Good for page-hits on blog’s and internet news sites, to say nothing of electronic social media.
AOC is getting the benefit of the Latina spitfire stereotype. Muy caliente. Right, fellas?
There is a great meme that's floating around that perfectly encapsulates AOC's popularity - AOC is just the Bernie Sanders you want to have sex with.
Based on that dancing vid, she does look to have a top 1% rack.
"He can't speak, but I imagine he's thinking something like: My socialism brings more freedom."
He can speak, his words and his pops' words are easy to find. Not a fan of rich folks and wealth hoarding.
Althouse was still referring to Jesus here, right?
You people fall in line with the rich autocrats everytime they say socialism
https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/tucker-carlson-mitt-romney-supports-the-status-quo-but-for-everyone-else-its-infuriating
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/06/opinion/tucker-carlson-republicans-democrats.html?em_pos=small&emc=edit_ty_20190206&nl=opinion-today&nl_art=0&nlid=60788959emc%3Dedit_ty_20190206&ref=headline&te=1
https://www.salon.com/2019/01/26/salon-interview-tucker-carlson-bashes-capitalism-says-he-might-vote-for-elizabeth-warren/
https://www.vox.com/2019/1/10/18171912/tucker-carlson-fox-news-populism-conservatism-trump-gop
Blogger Amadeus 48 said...
AOC is getting the benefit of the Latina spitfire stereotype. Muy caliente. Right, fellas?
Look, but don't touch. Dragon Ladies got nothing on Wise Latinas
AOC is like the cotton candy vendor at the political carnival. She's selling pennies worth of sugar, puffed up with hot air, spun into a frothy web of nothing, wrapped around a hollow paper cone. You know your overpaying by a thousand percent for something that will melt the minute you touch it. But it's so darn cute, you don't mind indulging your sweet tooth just a bit. Too bad you can't live off cotton candy and cuteness.
HoodlumDoodlum said...
She's popular because she's attractive. She's attractive mostly because she's young, but her physical attractiveness and her youth are the bulk of her appeal.
A homely woman with the same message and social media strategy would get no coverage. Does anyone actually dispute this?
...
You are 100% correct. And I only stopped quoting you where I did, to emphasize the rightness of what you wrote.
If Ocasio-Cortez weren’t pretty in a slightly exotic brown-skinned Latina way, she would not be getting this level of attention. And I want to join you in emphasizing that. Emphasizing the profound, obvious shallowness of it all. And the fundamentally sexist “pretty girl” aspect of the attention being paid to her. All the women’s rights crap; all of the Democratic Party civil rights crap; this woman is getting ahead because she has a kind of a show biz appeal in white mainstream media.
AOC is getting the benefit of the Latina spitfire stereotype.
I thought it was more of the genocidal Latina commie look popular in the 30's.
AOC is the Kardashian of politics.
"My socialism brings more freedom"
Which is true, since all good socialists know that slavery is freedom.
And if you disagree, they have ways of making you unfree.
That citation from the Trump speech is preview of Trump's campaign if he runs for reelection, which at the moment it appears he is certain to do.
Blogger West Texas Intermediate Crude said...
AOC is the Kardashian of politics.
Of course. But so too is Trump. Right? I mean, literally. The reality tv show history. The relentless self promotion. The supposed business acumen. The chaotic extended family/family business. The tabloid existence; and indeed the co-dependent relationship with the tabloids.
Trump is arguably more “tabloid,” for decades, before anyone ever heard of Ocasio-Cortez.
William wrote:
"but AOC has the face to collectivize a thousand ships."
You, sir, win the internet today! I am stealing that shamelessly!
I watched some after the speech stuff on MSNBC. The cisgender-privileged Ocasio-Cortez said that it was unfair of Trump to use Venezuela as an example of failed socialism because it was an authoritarian state, not a "democratic socialist" state. The problem with Venezuela was a lack of democracy, not too much socialism.
So Ocasio-Cortez is either stupid or she was being disingenuous. Maduro, and Chavez before him, had about half the country behind them. Let's say for argument's sake that 50% plus one of Venezuelans endorsed Chavez-Maduro socialism, so it was in fact democratic socialism.
The authoritarian nature of the Chavez-Maduro government rises from its democratic populism. The number of "haves" are smaller than the number of "have nots," but the "haves" by definition, have more resources than the have nots. To them, Chavez-Maduro democratic socialism looks like looting by a mob. So they use their resources to fight back against Chavez-Maduro. Chavez-Maduro respond by curtailing civil liberties, arresting opposition figures, actively censoring the media, seizing property, all the apparatus of an authoritarian government.
Her appeal is no different than Wendy Davis'
That is, it is a balloon that is about 85% filled with media manufactured appeal and 15% genuine appeal
Lord Help Me! I have sinned in Southern California, and my atonement is the arrival in Congress of AOC!
Well everybody has to believe in something, and I believe I'll have another beer.
"He can't speak, but I imagine he's thinking something like: My socialism brings more freedom." Bernie would be wrong, Wrong, WRONG. See Venezuela. Also, Italy and Germany in the '30s and '40s, and the USSR from '18-'89.
The people of Venezuela voted for that.
@Chuck -
PDT has hotels, country clubs, office buildings, etc., with his name on them. Also, a successful TV show. And a nation that he leads that is doing very well under his leadership.
AOC, and some of the Kardashians, have a pretty face.
AOC = fresh vibrant red lipstick. But remember, you can put lipstick on a pig.
Chuck said...
Blogger West Texas Intermediate Crude said...
AOC is the Kardashian of politics.
Of course. But so too is Trump. Right? I mean, literally.
Trump is the most conservative and effective president we have had since Lincoln.
He is doing what Republican voters have wanted our elected officials to do. He is not betraying us like the cuck wing traitors do. Romney and The Bushes and Kristols and McCains and Ryans have had their masks removed and everyone sees them for the traitors they always were.
One economist's commentary on POTUS' SOTU.
"We're living in the greatest, most prosperous and free era in human history in the fantastic United States."
I think you gotcherself a bad batch of White Lightnin', ST!
Blogger tim maguire said...
"Trump opened the door here to an education session on what socialism really means--it means a loss of freedom, an overbearing government, a system where only the politicians prosper and everyone else suffers."
Suffer? How about 100 million dead under Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot and the rest. It's ironic that the Stalinist left loves to call Trump "literally Hitler. Their heroes killed many more than Hitler, and often in more brutal ways.
Dave Chappell once said that there are some things that will only be believed if a white woman sings them.
I suppose they are only persuasive if an off-white looking woman dances about them.
Robert Cook, political commentary is not economics.
And please tell us when the US has been more prosperous than it is now.
We certainly have been freer in the past. Alas, socialists have little regard for the Bill of Rights.
Where exactly has sociualism created more freedom?
Look up insular in the dictionary; there's a picture of David Remnick.
This old hetero male Republican admires women who are stylishly dressed.
But if they are socialists, they are advocating economic drabness ... for everybody else.
Am I the only one to notice that AOC in all her photographs looks like a candidate for a national Best Dressed list?
Blogger West Texas Intermediate Crude said...
@Chuck -
PDT has hotels, country clubs, office buildings, etc., with his name on them. Also, a successful TV show. And a nation that he leads that is doing very well under his leadership.
AOC, and some of the Kardashians, have a pretty face.
The Kardashians have TV show. And they have a bunch of products of their own like the Trump magazine, Trump steaks, Trump vodka and the Chinese-made Trump shirts and ties.
The Kardashian did not run a multi million dollar “Kardashian University” fraud.
I’ll give you props for your care in saying that Trump’s name is on a lot of real estate. Saying no more about actual ownership of those properties.
"Am I the only one to notice that AOC in all her photographs looks like a candidate for a national Best Dressed list?"
I tend to agree. But be careful. That sort of comment risks activating the Howard-bot.
There is nothing more enjoyable than watching the video mashups of all of LLR Chuck's democrat and far left heroes in the House having to sit there and listen to Trump deliver a SOTU that was, like Trump's policies, more conservative than Reagan's!
It was an absolute far left/LLR Chuck nightmare on wheels.
I'll bet Chuck cried along with all the rest of the left when the snap polls came out after the speech!
LOL
Poor Chuck.
BTW, before popping onto Althouseblog I made sure to peruse the far left fever swamp sites to get an early headsup on what LLR Chuck would be offering up.
And, as always, pitch perfect alignment between our noted racist commenter and #StrongDemDefender Chuck and the far left crazies.
Thanks for not disappointing us Chuck. And congratulations for being sufficiently coherent to post today after what must have been an astonishing amount of alcohol consumed.
I only hope it wasn't combined with post-speech raging violence against any of your neighbors.
Tommy Duncan: "Suffer? How about 100 million dead under Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot and the rest."
Just the other night, LLR Chuck's biggest blog-fan Inga asserted flatly that the claim that 100 Million perished under communism was "propaganda" and a "lie".
Inga, taking time out from singing the praises of her pro-democrat pal Chuck, decided it was time to go Full LLR Chuck.
Chuck, disinvited racist smear merchant and fopdoodle extraordinaire, pretends that the prosperity of the last two years is irrelevant.
What a poor schmuck you have to be to deny the world is better now than it has been in decades.
Birkel: "What a poor schmuck you have to be to deny the world is better now than it has been in decades."
What you have to be is an anti-American democrat/lefty......
........HMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM
I was impressed by the way the trained democrats/socialists/LLR's responded to Nancy Pelosi's hand gestures to stand, sit, snarl, etc.
I can imagine that, inadvertantly, LLR Chuck sitting at home with his Maddow blow up doll, probably stood up as directed by Nancy and spilled his own scotch and pringles!!
The crumbs no doubt went all over place.
I'll be LLR Chuck regrets not replacing that belt in the vacuum cleaner now!!
Drago I get such a kick out of how much of your day(s) are devoted to me. My visibility on this blog’s comments pages is about 10,000% greater than it would be without you. It was never a goal of mine. I existed very happily and quietly as a commenter here for years before you began your psychopathic obsession with me.
The Passion of the Morons.
By the way, in Reason's online "Hit and Run" section there's a bit about Sanders' dour reaction to "No socialism ever," and one of the commenters came up with a great nickname for Bernie the Bolshie that I will steal and use shamelessly from now on:
"Grandpa Gulag."
My core argument against the idea of "democratic socialism" is that it can't be both fair and democratic. If the state could perfectly distribute goods using the idea "from each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs," more than half the people wouldn't like it. More than half the people will always believe that a fair system would reward them more for working less.
Chuck: "Drago I get such a kick out of how much of your day(s) are devoted to me. My visibility on this blog’s comments pages is about 10,000% greater than it would be without you. It was never a goal of mine. I existed very happily and quietly as a commenter here for years before you began your psychopathic obsession with me."
Just like every other leftist, now you attempt to rewrite history.....I'm sure it's purely coincidental.
Your comments here are replete with calls to remove me, how much you hate the comments which expose your Democrat cuckery, how many times you've written to Meade/Althouse to have me removed, particularly after you exposed yourself with your admitted smear merchant purpose here...and on and on and on.
So now, what is this? 2nd grade reverse psychology?
LOL
It's literally impossible to believe you are an attorney.
But your full operational alliance with the far left/dems is irrefutable.
"We're living in the greatest, most prosperous and free era in human history in the fantastic United States."
I think you gotcherself a bad batch of White Lightnin', ST!
OK..name a time and place where people had more freedom and a higher standard of living?
The truth that the Left cannot admit is that today there are more people alive than ever before, while at the same time there is less poverty and a higher standard of living worldwide than ever before. Free market capitalism for the win.
Wait. Heven't we seen her somewhere before?
Amadeus 48 said...
AOC is getting the benefit of the Latina spitfire stereotype. Muy caliente. Right, fellas?
AOC's appeal stems from the notion that any day now, someone will post naked selfies of her smoking some chap's bone.
Chuck said...
Blogger West Texas Intermediate Crude said...
AOC is the Kardashian of politics.
Of course. But so too is Trump.
Totally legit comment. What is incorrect is the inference that a reality-show background somehow disqualifies the man for office.
As a naive twenty-something, I was appalled when voters elected a B-picture actor to be president. Oh, the vacuousness of the easily led, I thought. He turned out to be the greatest president of the post war, if not of all time.
My original reaction to Trump was similar. Surely we had better taste! (I was more of a Scott Walker guy). We may, if we will, be educated by the passage of time. Trump promised many things, many truly conservative things, but to the point, he has actually delivered. He has repeatedly taken serious political risks in coming through on his promises. If you can't appreciate that as a Lifelong Republican, you're just being obtuse.
That’s somewhat true Drago.
After a few hundred of your obsessive personal attacks, I strongly and repeatedly suggested that you should be removed and blocked as a commenter.
Then, after about a thousand of your posts, and no action by Althouse, I mostly gave up.
LLR Chuck: "Then, after about a thousand of your posts, and no action by Althouse, I mostly gave up."
Oh no.
You haven't given up in the slightest.
You are still here, everyday, posting one pro-democrat/far left talking point after another and attacking any conservative in sight who even begins to appear effective in pushing back against your dem/far left teammates.
That is, when you aren't transparently conjuring up one smear after another all on your own. As you proudly proclaimed you would do.....
Lump it Chuck.
Your dem pals took it in the shorts last night and I'm pleased as punch you are still crying about it.
Trump's solipsistic existence is a wonder to behold but acceptance by his followers that he knows or even cares about anything beyond himself is sadly befuddling to my old mind. Just before this self-aggrandizing display last night, SDNY prosecutors come out about investigating inaugural funds that turned up missing from Trump' campaign finances and illegal donations received from foreigners. Unquestionably, Trump is succeeding in making his fans single-minded at best. - Trump-stupid on the downside.
The Poor Man's LLR Chuck, gadfly, believes that now would be a good time to advance another lefty smear.
LOL
In the immortal words of Virginia Lt. Governor Fairfax, "Fuck that bitch."
That's eloquent, man.
It never comes up, but Omar's is the truly beautiful face in this new crop of ugly thinkers.
Ms. "impeach that motherfucker" really stretching the curve.
FWIW
Gaffy found a new word that he doesn’t know what it means. Of course it must be good to bash Trump with though! My bet is it came from some op-ed somewhere.
Rabel: "In the immortal words of Virginia Lt. Governor Fairfax, "Fuck that bitch."'
He's a regular Stonewall Jackson!
And no, I don't care if my attacking a VA democrat causes LLR Chuck to pitch a fit.
If you want to know what is going on in LLR Chuck's and Chuck's mini-me Gadfly's mind right now is a clear desperation to throw up as much smoke as possible to keep the spotlight off of the now fully exposed Lizzie "Li'l Tomahawk" Warren's Texas State Bar card which provided documentary evidence of Li'l Tomahawk absolutely claiming Native American ancestry in an official way.
LOL
LLR Chuck and Inga hardest hit.
That's a sometimes misunderstood colloquialism, like "Death to America".
Actually, most of the appeal of Ocasio-Cortez is the sheer simple-mindedness of her policies. When asked how she intends to pay for “Medicaid for all” she claims not to understand. “How can it cost anything I’d it’s free?”
Because of course doctors don’t need to be paid. And Inga will surely agree that nurses don’t need to be paid. Hell, even the hospital janitors don’t need to be paid. Medical supplies don’t cost anything, and medical equipment never needs repair, and certainly never wears out and need replacing. Nope. Not in the world she lives in.
"Actually, most of the appeal of Ocasio-Cortez is the sheer simple-mindedness of her policies. When asked how she intends to pay for “Medicaid for all” she claims not to understand. 'How can it cost anything I’d it’s free?'”
We'd pay for it the same way other countries who have similar programs pay for it: taxes. I'm sure Ms. Ocasio-Cortez is aware of this.
What the plan to save money is is to put the non-union workers at health plans out of work and replace them with government workers with gold plated pensions, then everything will get cheaper.
We'd pay for it the same way other countries who have similar programs pay for it: taxes.
Regressive taxes, they all use regressive taxation because it’s the only way to come up with enough money.
More medical research gets done at single American hospitals than is done in all of Europe. Just saying. After the takeover, the only research that will be done will be into complaints that mostly affect women.
"We'd pay for it the same way other countries who have similar programs pay for it: taxes. I'm sure Ms. Ocasio-Cortez is aware of this."
But illegals don't pay taxes. They don't have social security numbers.
It would a serious crime to knowingly use a filched SSN to work illegally in the US, wouldn't it?
"But illegals don't pay taxes. They don't have social security numbers.
It would a serious crime to knowingly use a filched SSN to work illegally in the US, wouldn't it?"
Who's talking about providing Medicare-for-all to illegal immigrants?
Also, why does the topic of illegal immigrants seem to pressing to you? Given the scope of problems and policy matters to address, they are a minor issue.
Actually, it seems illegal immigrants DO pay taxes.
And here.
Given the scope of problems and policy matters to address, they are a minor issue.
Yes, Robert, who believes in government control of not just the rules, but the direction of the economy sees much work to be done to bring socialism to the US.
"As a naive twenty-something, I was appalled when voters elected a B-picture actor to be president. Oh, the vacuousness of the easily led, I thought. He turned out to be the greatest president of the post war, if not of all time."
Oy vey!
We'd pay for it the same way other countries who have similar programs pay for it: taxes.
You won't be able to raise enough revenue from tweaking tax rates to cover the cost.
Like Trump and Obama, Ocasio-Cortez is an empty vessel into which we pour our hopes and fears.
"You won't be able to raise enough revenue from tweaking tax rates to cover the cost."
How do you know until we try it?
We'd also, of course, want to cut our military expenditures and slash the Pentagon budget by at least 75%, (if not more). As well with the budgets--including the black budgets--of the various U.S. spy agencies who are invading our privacy and recording every least little datum about each of us that they can. That money could be transferred to actually productive expenditures, including health-care for U.S. citizens. Even if that, along with increased taxes on wealth, did not entirely cover it, it's worthwhile in and of itself to slash spending for war and instruments of war.
"Like Trump and Obama, Ocasio-Cortez is an empty vessel into which we pour our hopes and fears."
This is true of nearly all our modern presidents, certainly for all of them in the past 40+ years.
Cook: "Who's talking about providing Medicare-for-all to illegal immigrants?"
LOL
"How American Citizens Finance $18.5 Billion In Health Care For Unauthorized Immigrants"
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2018/02/26/how-american-citizens-finance-health-care-for-undocumented-immigrants/amp/
I'm sure Ms. Ocasio-Cortez is aware of this.
@Cookie, I was quoting her.
True. Trump is very anti-social and much more a crony corporatist (and mercantilist) in his economic outlook.
Republicans are so stupid. They don't know the difference between the economies and governments of the USSR and those of Western Europe. SO STUPID!
We'd also, of course, want to cut our military expenditures and slash the Pentagon budget by at least 75%, (if not more)
Well that would certainly solve all of our nations problems, but create a whole new set of problems for our new overlords. Seriously...you think the richest, freest nation in history with the highest standard of living in history shouldn't defend itself?
yet to a man and woman, cornyn and sanders Galloway and co, always defend fidel, Chavez, saddam Ortega, et al, as well as Arafat, the Iranian mullahs et al,why is that,
After Trump says, "We are born free, and we will stay free," the camera closes in on Bernie Sanders, visibly suffering.
Socialism is all about suffering. Ultimately. Once you get past the lofty promises - it always ends in misery.
Leftists are so moronic - they turn "socialism" into ice cream "social." Whatever you need to do to sell the crap sandwich of historical failure - that is socialism.
Again - Socialism is Communism's ugly step-sister.
Fact check. True.
Will Cortex promise for a full government take over of Starbucks? It's only fair.
Once you get past the lofty promises - it always ends in misery.
To which Western European or Scandinavian country are you referring?
Or do you prefer to just let the April Apple who never left flyover America to do all the talking?
It's funny how much you Republicans expect us to learn from all that you get out of life just by gazing at your navels.
Republican Dirt People.
Will Cortex promise for a full government take over of Starbucks? It's only fair.
I think she's promising family leave.
Since you could never convince a man that you were worth reproducing with I can see why you find that idea to be a waste of time.
as pointed out in the previous thread, the deliberate volume of dezinforma, re east bloc operations and practices is rather vast,
Sometimes I think the most exercise a Republican gets is the movement in their necks as they switch from staring at Fox Noise to gazing at their navels.
It's a tough decision, which to watch.
Ward, I think you are being too tough on the Beaver.
"It's a tough decision, which to watch."
Set up a naval cam and send the signal to a video matrix, then set the TV to pic-in-pic w/ both inputs.
Yur welcome, cons.
BTW, in my most tech place I have a 32x32.
Which seems pretty insane.
But, it does what we wants.
The trick thing is to have 28 screens, but make it possible to only see four.
Snatch!
Obviously, when yur in modes to hide the things, yur not using them.
Duh.
AOC is still a babe but those Latina hotties have an early sell by date.
Be careful who you subject to that Naval gaze, 'Sitter.
RK said “AOC is going to use her politics to get wealthy.“
Show me a Latino pol who didn’t. The only thing that keeps them from it is a felony arrest.
”Well that would certainly solve all of our nations problems, but create a whole new set of problems for our new overlords. Seriously...you think the richest, freest nation in history with the highest standard of living in history shouldn't defend itself?”
1. When was the last time we engaged in war to actually defend ourselves? How often have we had to actually defend ourselves in our history?
2. Even at 25% of our current war budget, we would have a substantial military apparatus in the unlikely event self-defense became a real necessity. And we could then shift funds as needed to meet exigent needs, as we did in WWII.
I've known people with that mindset in college also of affluent background but never that unfathomable dense.
1. When was the last time we engaged in war to actually defend ourselves? How often have we had to actually defend ourselves in our history?
That's kind of the point, numbskull. Si vis pacem, para bellum. As true today as it was in the 4th century AD.
Or would you rather we were weak enough to be successfully attacked, and then have to fight? Note that in WWII we had almost a full year to get spun up -- we lost Guam, Wake, the Philippines, and most of Southeast Asia before we were ready to win one small island in the Pacific. In the Atlantic front, Operation Torch took place 11 full months after Pearl Harbor.
We'd also, of course, want to cut our military expenditures and slash the Pentagon budget by at least 75%
Cookie, you hate the Constitution. We understand that.Your hate, does not invalidate the document however. Stripping the funding from Defense, one of the very few true powers of the federal govt, to fund your wish list of activities that are no business of the federal govt.
Try to implement you plan toward Utopia, sure, just follow the constitution.
Imagine if the carriers had been struck at pearl, our capacity to defend much less retaliate would have been much diminished. Our land forces were only. Beginning to be built up.
Another scenario, what if the 20th hijacker had been able to join the compliment on United 93, and has struck capital hill or ant part of greater Washington, our command and control not to mention civilian authority would have been deeply impacted.
Family leave is Ivank's idea. Being a stay at home mom is something government leftists HATE.
dead babies are better.
Family leave is Ivank's idea.
Oh yes. No one ever thought of it before her. Right.
Sounds like just another one of those things she supports that won't go anywhere with her incestuous fat father.
Being a stay at home mom is something government leftists HATE.
dead babies are better.
Oh look. April jabbers like a weird moron whenever her previous point was shown to be empty. How predictable.
How do you know until we try it?
The same way you know you wouldn’t flap your arms fly like a bird if you jumped off the empire state building.
High tax rates have been tried in the US and abroad. The United States has historically collected between 15-20% of GDP regardless of what the rates are- even when we had that 90%+ rate. Government takeover of the healthcare and pharmaceutical industries represents a large number than that- and that’s before government inefficiency takes over.
No money left to run any other aspect of governemnt much less operate the green plan or some other leftie folly.
The math won’t work.
And where did you come up with that 25% figure for the miltary. Show your work or someone else’s.
"Or would you rather we were weak enough to be successfully attacked...."
Who will attack us and why?
Our nuclear armaments--remember, with 25% of what we spend on our military budget, we would still be able to maintain sufficient nukes to act as deterrents to an attack on our country.
James Madison warned about the dangers of maintaining a standing army:
"'In time of actual war, great discretionary powers are constantly given to the Executive Magistrate. Constant apprehension of War, has the same tendency to render the head too large for the body. A standing military force, with an overgrown Executive will not long be safe companions to liberty. The means of defence agst. foreign danger, have been always the instruments of tyranny at home. Among the Romans it was a standing maxim to excite a war, whenever a revolt was apprehended. Throughout all Europe, the armies kept up under the pretext of defending, have enslaved the people."
And:
"Of all the enemies to public liberty war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded, because it comprises and develops the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes; and armies, and debts, and taxes are the known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few. In war, too, the discretionary power of the Executive is extended; its influence in dealing out offices, honors, and emoluments is multiplied; and all the means of seducing the minds, are added to those of subduing the force, of the people. The same malignant aspect in republicanism may be traced in the inequality of fortunes, and the opportunities of fraud, growing out of a state of war, and in the degeneracy of manners and of morals engendered by both. No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare."
Alexander Hamilton offered his own warnings against maintaining standing armies:
"But in a country, where the perpetual menacings of danger oblige the government to be always prepared to repel it, her armies must be numerous enough for instant defence. The continual necessity for his services enhances the importance of the soldier, and proportionably degrades the condition of the citizen. The military state becomes elevated above the civil. The inhabitants of territories often the theatre of war, are unavoidably subjected to frequent infringements on their rights, which serve to weaken their sense of those rights; and by degrees, the people are brought to consider the soldiery not only as their protectors, but as their superiors."
"And where did you come up with that 25% figure for the miltary."
I just pulled it out of my ass. I think our military budget must be cut dramatically, and 25% of our current expenditures seems like a dramatic cut, yet still provides a substantial sum of money for that "defense" (sic) infrastructure that we might consider appropriate to maintain. (I'm being generous, as I would prefer it to be cut even more than that. And, of course, we need to drastically cut the budgets--public and secret--for our spy agencies, for whom we, the people, are a significant target, as Snowden's revelations demonstrate.)
"Cookie, you hate the Constitution. We understand that.Your hate, does not invalidate the document however. Stripping the funding from Defense, one of the very few true powers of the federal govt...."
You, apparently, misunderstand the Constitution. First, funding for defense is hardly one of "the few true powers" of Congress; second, where did I advocate "stripping" funding? I advocate drastically gutting our present grotesquely inflated spending levels, which do not serve any legitimate "defense" (sic) needs but primarily aggrandize the power of the military and enrich the arms merchants and affiliated entities.
Our metastasizing military mindset and spending has infected our police forces, who are now little armies of their own, acting with tyrannical authority.
We saw very public examples of this at Ruby Ridge and in Waco, Texas, but such unconstitutional violent invasions of our dwellings and assaults on private citizens are SOP today.
"Seriously...you think the richest, freest" (sic) "nation in history with the highest standard of living in history shouldn't defend itself?”
It seems to want to "defend" (sic) itself against us.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा