TakeYouToTasker Posted November 29, 2018 Posted November 29, 2018 (edited) 4 minutes ago, Paulus said: Hmm... The white males don't seem organized. I thought I remembered you being a libertarian leaning moderate. When did you become a race-baiting leftist moron? Edited November 29, 2018 by TakeYouToTasker
Paulus Posted November 29, 2018 Posted November 29, 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, TakeYouToTasker said: I thought I remembered you being a libertarian leaning moderate. When did you become a race-baiting leftist moron? You're right. Look at my avatar. I have been on a kick lately... Accusing my friends of being evil white males has elicited some of the best reactions. They know me well enough to know I am VERY much against the whole race-baiting thing, and have been my whole life. But, their initial knee-jerk reactions are pretty priceless. It is like they completely get offended for about 5 seconds before they catch on to the joke. Like they forgot who I was, and I had triggered them for a few seconds. I take pleasure in the small things in life. Ultimately, I am happy to see people becoming more like me, and standing up against the asinine "evil white male" shtick. Bottom line, I am doing a bit o' minor trolling, but in my dream world white males would be accusing eachother of white male privilage in a sarcastic sort of way. Make this crap even more absurd until it finally pops. Edited November 29, 2018 by Paulus
IDBillzFan Posted November 29, 2018 Posted November 29, 2018 23 minutes ago, Paulus said: It is like they completely get offended for about 5 seconds before they catch on to the joke. Like they forgot who I was, and I had triggered them for a few seconds. I take pleasure in the small things in life. The reason it works is because there are so many white leftists who are relentless in their desire to suggest successful white men only got that way because they were white and male. They are literally stupid enough to believe and suggest that there is literally no way a white male could be successful if you were to eliminate the white and the male. Their stupidity jumps to new heights when states like CA create laws that mandate a woman must be on the board of public companies. And when you challenge these dolts by suggesting it should then be okay if one of the men on the board already identifies as a woman...their brains melt, because they will forever be too stupid to think for themselves to the extent they can see their own hypocrisies.
Paulus Posted November 29, 2018 Posted November 29, 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, LABillzFan said: The reason it works is because there are so many white leftists who are relentless in their desire to suggest successful white men only got that way because they were white and male. They are literally stupid enough to believe and suggest that there is literally no way a white male could be successful if you were to eliminate the white and the male. Their stupidity jumps to new heights when states like CA create laws that mandate a woman must be on the board of public companies. And when you challenge these dolts by suggesting it should then be okay if one of the men on the board already identifies as a woman...their brains melt, because they will forever be too stupid to think for themselves to the extent they can see their own hypocrisies. I agree. I felt bad mI agree. I felt bad messing with you about being a white male. I had a similar upbringing, and share your hate of the crazy left in CA. I have started to claim it with my liberal friends, and make absurd demands of them so they can prove my privilege. Edited November 29, 2018 by Paulus
KD in CA Posted December 2, 2018 Posted December 2, 2018 On 11/26/2018 at 12:01 AM, Doc Brown said: It depends what job you get. I've found for the most part the teachers that get tenured continue to work just as hard after. It's just the way you're wired. My father worked his way up from a plant utility engineer at a prison to plant superintendent over 35 years working a lot of overtime to increase his pension. I knew at 16 to get into the NYS pension system and I always intended to get a state job and got my Masters and CAS with the intent of working for the public school system as a school psychologist. I worked a full time job as a night shift custodian at a school for seven years to pay my way through college in order to obtain it. My question to those who complain about the benefits and security that come with state jobs is why didn't you get one then? Boy, that "I got mine" attitude really highlights your concern for the working class! "Gee, why doesn't everyone just get an early retirement and a pension?? Look how well it works in Greece!"
Foxx Posted December 2, 2018 Posted December 2, 2018 (edited) i don't agree with her on much and i don't know about Medicare for all but there is some truth here... https://twitter.com/Ocasio2018/status/1069007012044918785 Edited December 2, 2018 by Foxx
Buffalo_Gal Posted December 2, 2018 Posted December 2, 2018 8 minutes ago, Foxx said: i don't agree with her on much and i don't know about Medicare for all but there is some truth here... https://twitter.com/Ocasio2018/status/1069007012044918785 Congress has always been a "good for me, but not for thee" operation. Insurance, law exemptions, etc. It really is the "it's good to be king" mentality. 1
DC Tom Posted December 2, 2018 Posted December 2, 2018 14 minutes ago, Foxx said: i don't agree with her on much and i don't know about Medicare for all but there is some truth here... https://twitter.com/Ocasio2018/status/1069007012044918785 The fundamental problem with her position is that the taxpayer-funded subsidy that makes Congressional health insurance inexpensive do not scale up well when they have to cover ALL the taxpayers. On 11/29/2018 at 3:05 PM, Paulus said: Ultimately, I am happy to see people becoming more like me, and standing up against the asinine "evil white male" shtick. I've gone the opposite way and decided to be an evil white male. Since I'm going to get accused of it anyway, I may as well derive some benefit from it. 2
Foxx Posted December 2, 2018 Posted December 2, 2018 1 minute ago, DC Tom said: The fundamental problem with her position is that the taxpayer-funded subsidy that makes Congressional health insurance inexpensive do not scale up well when they have to cover ALL the taxpayers. while I understand that. my fundamental problem is that before Obamanation Care came along, I was paying 200% less (if not more for the same level of care (i can't be sure because I now have a lessor metal plan)) than what they want me to pay today.
DC Tom Posted December 2, 2018 Posted December 2, 2018 6 minutes ago, Foxx said: while I understand that. my fundamental problem is that before Obamanation Care came along, I was paying 200% less (if not more for the same level of care (i can't be sure because I now have a lessor metal plan)) than what they want me to pay today. Yeah...and if Cortez were intelligent or honest, she'd insist that Congressional health insurance be 100% purchased by Congressmen/Senators, so they can see what the burden actually is. 1
Nanker Posted December 2, 2018 Posted December 2, 2018 She couldn’t afford it if it weren’t subsidized. Just like most families couldn’t afford Medicare coverage if they were allowed to participate in it.
Buffalo_Gal Posted December 3, 2018 Posted December 3, 2018 He explains in his second tweet a tad more...
Koko78 Posted December 3, 2018 Posted December 3, 2018 16 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said: He explains in his second tweet a tad more... "Accounting errors"/gimmicks are not the same thing as actual money. Good God, she is a ***** moron. 18 years ago I worked for a company that demanded that all corporate divisions show a profit. The corporate transportation department (whose sole duty was to occasionally buy new vehicles) did that by forcing each individual branch to "lease" 10-15 year old trucks (on paper). The branches showed a loss, the transportation department showed a profit, and the company made the same amount of actual money (probably a little less to pay for the internal accounting game).
Koko78 Posted December 8, 2018 Posted December 8, 2018 Uh oh, guys. We shouldn't mock or "troll" Rep. Crazy-Eyes anymore, she gonna have subpoena power: https://www.yahoo.com/news/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-warns-donald-200900245.html She really is clueless about how little actual power she's going to wield. I'm not sure what would be funnier: Pelosi sticking her on a semi-important committee so the moron can make a complete ass of herself, or Pelosi sticking her on an irrelevant committee, where the idiot will whine about not doing anything important.
B-Man Posted December 8, 2018 Posted December 8, 2018 32 minutes ago, Koko78 said: Uh oh, guys. We shouldn't mock or "troll" Rep. Crazy-Eyes anymore, she gonna have subpoena power: https://www.yahoo.com/news/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-warns-donald-200900245.html She really is clueless about how little actual power she's going to wield. I'm not sure what would be funnier: Pelosi sticking her on a semi-important committee so the moron can make a complete ass of herself, or Pelosi sticking her on an irrelevant committee, where the idiot will whine about not doing anything important. Socialists hate mockery, because it’s easy to mock lying idiots. But this kind of threat is specifically forbidden by House Ethics rules. So she’s managed to breach Congressional ethics before being sworn in. She really is precocious! And here’s the meme she was unhappy about. Spread it around!
3rdnlng Posted December 8, 2018 Posted December 8, 2018 33 minutes ago, Koko78 said: Uh oh, guys. We shouldn't mock or "troll" Rep. Crazy-Eyes anymore, she gonna have subpoena power: https://www.yahoo.com/news/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-warns-donald-200900245.html She really is clueless about how little actual power she's going to wield. I'm not sure what would be funnier: Pelosi sticking her on a semi-important committee so the moron can make a complete ass of herself, or Pelosi sticking her on an irrelevant committee, where the idiot will whine about not doing anything important. From the comment section of your link: LamoBros14 hours ago As usual, the bias "reporting" of the Independent (and Yahoo platform) only told half the story regarding "horse teeth". According to Jim Hoft at TheGatewayPundit.com, Ocasio-Cortez may have violated federal law by making the threat, specifically 42 U.S. Code § 1983 – Civil action for deprivation of rights. “It appears Ocasio-Cortez broke federal law by threatening a US citizen with retaliation for snarky tweets,” writes Hoft. “You can’t use the power of the law to get back at people for their Instagram memes, Alexandria!”
Buffalo_Gal Posted December 8, 2018 Posted December 8, 2018 35 minutes ago, B-Man said: Socialists hate mockery, because it’s easy to mock lying idiots. But this kind of threat is specifically forbidden by House Ethics rules. So she’s managed to breach Congressional ethics before being sworn in. She really is precocious! And here’s the meme she was unhappy about. Spread it around! If you read her follow-up tweet it was as if someone else wrote it. Full CYA mode telling people she didn't write what she wrote. If Congress could sanction her for this before she was even sworn in, that would be something!
Recommended Posts