AOC melts down because she was fact checked

[iluvatar5150]

He used to use the hand motions quite often, none of the generals he referenced, Ted Cruz nor anyone else was disabled, he was mocking the disability. Repeating the misinformation doesn't suddenly make it true

He used the "retard" hand gesture, which is still inappropriate and offensive.

 

[USincognito]

Just as a continued reminder:

He used to use the hand motions quite often, none of the generals he referenced, Ted Cruz nor anyone else was disabled, he was mocking the disability. Repeating the misinformation doesn't suddenly make it true

And yet, for some reason, he hasn't done that since this example. It's almost as if that gesture was for a specific individual.

 

[SimplyMe]

Who cares? Even beyond groceries, there are things an ID is needed for. Buying cigarettes requires an ID since you have to be at least 18 to buy them. Low income people are the ones who smoke and drink the most, and they're the ones the democrats like to say are being denied voting rights by needing an ID. Why aren't they complaining about their smoking and drinking rights being denied?

And, beyond that, this isn't even really true. I can buy cigarettes or alcohol (if I want to, I rarely do) without ID. The issue isn't ID, the issue is age verification and, while state laws vary, some states may require checking ID if a person appears to be younger than a certain age.

The fact is, there is no requirement to have ID to buy alcohol or cigarettes (or basically any groceries) -- just that you may need an ID, in some cases, to verify you are old enough to buy it.

 

[Aldebaran]

And, beyond that, this isn't even really true. I can buy cigarettes or alcohol (if I want to, I rarely do) without ID. The issue isn't ID, the issue is age verification and, while state laws vary, some states may require checking ID if a person appears to be younger than a certain age.

The fact is, there is no requirement to have ID to buy alcohol or cigarettes (or basically any groceries) -- just that you may need an ID, in some cases, to verify you are old enough to buy it.

Of course, "appears to be younger than a certain age" is subjective, and if an ID is requested at the time of purchase and is not shown, the sale can be denied.

 

[Aldebaran]

Guy. Use WHATEVER descriptor you want, but also tell me which PHRASES in particular you found so aggregious and explain to me how they are aggregious.
Added bonus: You could even take them WAAAAAAAAY out of context.

My response is this: "Trump threw a hissy fit when he disagreed with the reporter. The fact that he threw a hissy fit is supported by his gesticulations and impression of a disabled person when it was neither necessary or beneficial for his point". Trump's "hissy fit indicators" (HFI) are obvious not exactly hidden.

And again, Trump supporters LOVE that he does stuff like that. They want him to get angry and say stupid hurtful stuff. They voted for him, at least in part, because they wnat to see that; they want to see mean and dirty.
So why get upset when he's calledon it?

Dude, calm down! I'm just pointing out the hypocrisy of hurt feelings on the Left when they do more of what they criticize their political opponents of.

 

[Aldebaran]

Sure, in some states the same ID can be used in a grocery store and for voting, but in others, well, they're a bit more restrictive in what they'll accept for voting.

Those states have also given clear instructions on how to get one of those IDs suitable for voting for either a very low cost, or even free. Yet the antis like to claim that their voting rights are being "suppressed", which is like saying that a landlord raising a person's rent by $5 is forcing someone to be homeless.

 

[iluvatar5150]

Those states have also given clear instructions on how to get one of those IDs suitable for voting for either a very low cost, or even free. Yet the antis like to claim that their voting rights are being "suppressed", which is like saying that a landlord raising a person's rent by $5 is forcing someone to be homeless.

If that person doesn't have and/or can't get another $5, then the landlord effectively is forcing that person into homelessness.

 

[Aldebaran]

Sometimes cash, sometimes a credit card - either way I'm never asked for ID. When I got the credit card, they didn't ask for ID either, just information.

That leads to something you should be able to relate to then. How would you like it if someone who knew your information was able to get a credit card in your name without having to prove who they were? Not a very secure system, is it? It also happens pretty often. It's called ID theft, and is a very serious problem. Now, if it's that easy to get a credit card in someone else's name by only knowing the right information, just imagine how easy it would be for someone to vote in your name without knowing anything at all about you accept for your name and address (which is publicly available).

 

[SimplyMe]

Of course, "appears to be younger than a certain age" is subjective, and if an ID is requested at the time of purchase and is not shown, the sale can be denied.

Sure it is but the fact is that, at worst, you buy the rest of your groceries and leave the alcohol (which is not "groceries" by definition, it is a non-grocery item sold in many grocery stores). There is no requirement anywhere in the US to show ID to buy groceries -- there are times when if you want to use a particularly payment type or buy certain items they will request ID (alcohol, cigarettes or some types of drugs), but even that does not stop basically anyone from buying groceries. At worst, you cannot buy some non-grocery items or need to use cash as your payment method.

 

[iluvatar5150]

@Aldebaran - I'm pretty sure a "funny" rating in this context qualifies as goading.

 

[Ada Lovelace]

Correct , no meltdown just a lot of childish whining.

There's certainly been an abundance of churlish, childish whining in reaction to Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

 

[Aldebaran]

@Aldebaran - I'm pretty sure a "funny" rating in this context qualifies as goading.

You mean you weren't trying to be humorous? You made me laugh, so I rated your post as funny. It's called giving honest feedback.

 

[iluvatar5150]

You mean you weren't trying to be humorous? You made me laugh, so I rated your post as funny. It's called giving honest feedback.

disingenuous - Google Search

 

[Aldebaran]

disingenuous - Google Search

Not seeing the relevance here. If you'd like to start a discussion about it, you might want to start a new thread.

 

[iluvatar5150]

Not seeing the relevance here. If you'd like to start a discussion about it, you might want to start a new thread.

I'll make it clearer - I don't believe your explanation of the rating.

 

[Aldebaran]

I'll make it clearer - I don't believe your explanation of the rating.

Oh, I see. Well, it is a Fact that I found it humorous. As we know from past back-and-forths, a fact cannot be reliably argued against.

 

[rambot]

Dude, calm down! I'm just pointing out the hypocrisy of hurt feelings on the Left when they do more of what they criticize their political opponents of.

But you haven't proven she has done that.
That's what I'm trying to get you to understand.

Just saying "she had a melt down" without providing evidence she did.

 

[Aldebaran]

But you haven't proven she has done that.
That's what I'm trying to get you to understand.

Just saying "she had a melt down" without providing evidence she did.

The proof is in what she wrote. Just as people can define what Trump says as meltdowns, temper tantrums or whatever words they like (and call it a "fact"), it's no different for AOC or anybody else.

 

[rambot]

The proof is in what she wrote.

I teach.
I've told the kids that when writing you can't just present evidence and leave it at that, you have to link your evidence to your reasoning because the evidence you gave could mean many different things to many different people.
If a kid answers me with "the proof is in what she wrote" they get a 0/10.
You can't even provide an EXACT quote from her that supports your position.
I'm sure it appears I'm trying to hound you or be obtuse or a jerk but I really am not. I see maybe one sentence in there that could be seen as being ornery at most. The rest of it seems fairly reasonable.

I gave an example a few posts back about what it would look like to tie evidence to your claim; Post 147.

"Trump threw a hissy fit when he disagreed with the reporter. The fact that he threw a hissy fit is supported by his gesticulations and impression of a disabled person when it was neither necessary or beneficial for his point".

Just as people can define what Trump says as meltdowns, temper tantrums or whatever words they like (and call it a "fact"), it's no different for AOC or anybody else.

You're right. It would be. If there were evidence she did such a thing. As of yet, I've seen no strong or convincing argument that any such things happenned.

 

[USincognito]

Ah, there's that liberal

I'd be careful about trying to be too clever.

use of the "F" word again (redefined to suit the desires of the user rather than according to the dictionary)

This is hilarious. Everyone can see you dishonesty cut out the Tweets I cited showing that she was

Fact: a thing that is known or proved to be true.
Synonyms: reality, actuality, certainty, factuality, certitude;
truth, naked truth, verity, gospel

Cool.
---------------------------------------
Me- Let's go ahead and see if there's any reality to this supposed meltdown.

Ocasio-Cortez attacks fact-checkers for 'false equivalency,' 'bias'

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on Twitter
>> Facts are facts, America. We should care about getting things right. Yet standards of who gets fact-checked, how often + why are unclear. This is where false equivalency+bias creeps in, allowing climate deniers to be put on par w/scientists, for example. <<

HOLY MOLY! The woman is clearly unhinged!

She continues:
>> For example, it looks like @PolitiFact has fact-checked Sarah Huckabee Sanders and myself the *same* amount of times: 6. She’s been serving for almost 2 years. I’ve served 4 days. Why is she fact-checked so little? Is she adhering to some standard we don’t know about? <<

>> Or why did @washingtonpost give my confusing tweet on military accounting offsets the same “Pinocchios” as Trump’s flat denial of how many Americans died in Puerto Rico? These are legitimate questions not intended to attack. Who makes these decisions? How? Is there a rubric? <<

>> Another question for @politifact: some officials’ statements (ex. Andrew Cuomo) get rated “true” frequently. I say true things all the time - I’d hope most do. When does Politifact choose to rate true statements? Is there a guide? I’d be happy to repost if there is. <<

She's crazed with madness! But then she does something that not even Trump would ever do:

accepts the criticism of her...
Sal Rizzo on Twitter
>> Sal Rizzo‏Verified account @rizzoTK

No one likes to be fact-checked. There's a simple way to avoid it. And there's a big difference between the colossal amount of time we spend fact-checking Trump (7,645 false/misleading claims and counting) and TWO fact-checks of @AOC <<
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on Twitter
> Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez‏Verified account @AOC

Fact-checking is critically important. It’s not always fun. But that’s okay! It pushes me to be better. It’s important that if fact-checkers are referees, everyone know the rules - and those rules be as clear + fair as possible for all to play. Thank you for the work you do. <<

I wonder if the Daily Caller included this last exchange in it's hit piece the way Fox News did.
-------------------------------------