I got a chuckle from that one. And Michelle Obama doesn't work.
The string pullers for AOC want war in the Left - getcher popcorn ready
- Thread starter Superman
- Start date
I got a chuckle from that one. And Michelle Obama doesn't work.
- Joined
- Apr 20, 2014
- Messages
- 9,583
- Reaction score
- 5,866
- Points
- 113
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2014
- Messages
- 18,548
- Reaction score
- 29,820
- Points
- 113
- Location
- The nearest Steelers bar.
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2014
- Messages
- 1,337
- Reaction score
- 1,680
- Points
- 113
From the 'She's trying to think again' Department
"We need to invent things that have never been invented yet." Somewhere in here gene pool lurks some Berras.
https://pjmedia.com/video/what-coul...-government-bank-operated-by-the-post-office/
What Could Possibly Go Wrong? AOC Wants a Government Bank Operated by the Post Office
By Tyler O'Neil | May 9, 2019
Imagine a big government boondoggle with the disorganization of a poorly-run non-profit organization and "customer service" that treats customers like driver's license applicants at the DMV. That's how Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) wants banking to work.
America's most infamous former bartender proposed this idea with Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), the runner-up for the 2016 Democratic presidential nomination.
"We should have a not-for-profit public option for basic banking services, and we should be piloting these projects through the U.S. Postal Service," Ocasio-Cortez said, apparently with no irony.
.@RepAOC "We should have a not-for-profit public option for basic banking services, and we should be piloting these projects through the @USPS" #postalbanking pic.twitter.com/dobyU4hdT2
— Take On Wall St (@TakeOnWallSt) May 9, 2019
In the video, a tired Sanders ends his yawn to make a gesture of agreement.
It seems AOC has heard that 34 million American households are "unbanked" and she thinks the best solution is government — of course! But she also wants to phrase it like the government-takeover of health care: Let's provide a "public option," which will eventually become the only option. Oh, and let's make it sound nice and caring, like the Salvation Army — it's a non-profit!
It is true that millions of Americans lack access to the basic services that traditional banks provide, from checking and savings accounts to credit and debit cards to online payment options. Banks know there's a problem, and so they have been creating innovative ways to meet the need.
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), the least constitutional part of Dodd-Frank, has tried to regulate the banks, stopping them from meeting the market needs of the unbanked.
In fact, the Dodd-Frank financial reform law wreaked havoc on the U.S. banking system. Intended to prevent big banks from growing bigger and crowding out smaller ones, it arguably reinforced the large banks and led to the decline in smaller financial institutions.
Before 2010, the FDIC approved an average of 170 new banks a year; from then until 2016, it had only approved one new bank.
Meanwhile, government figures indicated the U.S. was losing one community bank or credit union a day. Larger banks, by contrast, have seen an increase in their market share. As HotAir’s Ed Morrissey points out, Dodd-Frank shows that “regulatory expansion disproportionately impacts smaller players in any market,” leading to fewer options for consumers and less competition for entrenched big businesses.
The Durbin Amendment to Dodd-Frank wiped out low-cost checking accounts for roughly one million people after it took effect in 2011.
More regulation makes problems worse, not better, for those in need of banking services. AOC's program seems reminiscent of Obamacare, which promised new options but wreaked havoc on the market, leaving fewer options in its wake.
Many of the unbanked do not have bank accounts because they do not understand how easy it is to set one up. Some Americans are intimidated by the prospect, but it is rather simple. My wife opened an account with $25.
Yet AOC seems to think that the only solution is to create a new government boondoggle. This would be run by the post office, with its short hours, lost packages, and costs that go up as demand for the product goes down (ahem, stamps).
For good measure, she'll make it corrupt and inefficient like most non-profits. That's because government is always the answer, and the self-avowed socialist beside her nodded along.
"We need to invent things that have never been invented yet." Somewhere in here gene pool lurks some Berras.
https://pjmedia.com/video/what-coul...-government-bank-operated-by-the-post-office/
What Could Possibly Go Wrong? AOC Wants a Government Bank Operated by the Post Office
By Tyler O'Neil | May 9, 2019
Imagine a big government boondoggle with the disorganization of a poorly-run non-profit organization and "customer service" that treats customers like driver's license applicants at the DMV. That's how Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) wants banking to work.
America's most infamous former bartender proposed this idea with Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), the runner-up for the 2016 Democratic presidential nomination.
"We should have a not-for-profit public option for basic banking services, and we should be piloting these projects through the U.S. Postal Service," Ocasio-Cortez said, apparently with no irony.
.@RepAOC "We should have a not-for-profit public option for basic banking services, and we should be piloting these projects through the @USPS" #postalbanking pic.twitter.com/dobyU4hdT2
— Take On Wall St (@TakeOnWallSt) May 9, 2019
In the video, a tired Sanders ends his yawn to make a gesture of agreement.
It seems AOC has heard that 34 million American households are "unbanked" and she thinks the best solution is government — of course! But she also wants to phrase it like the government-takeover of health care: Let's provide a "public option," which will eventually become the only option. Oh, and let's make it sound nice and caring, like the Salvation Army — it's a non-profit!
It is true that millions of Americans lack access to the basic services that traditional banks provide, from checking and savings accounts to credit and debit cards to online payment options. Banks know there's a problem, and so they have been creating innovative ways to meet the need.
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), the least constitutional part of Dodd-Frank, has tried to regulate the banks, stopping them from meeting the market needs of the unbanked.
In fact, the Dodd-Frank financial reform law wreaked havoc on the U.S. banking system. Intended to prevent big banks from growing bigger and crowding out smaller ones, it arguably reinforced the large banks and led to the decline in smaller financial institutions.
Before 2010, the FDIC approved an average of 170 new banks a year; from then until 2016, it had only approved one new bank.
Meanwhile, government figures indicated the U.S. was losing one community bank or credit union a day. Larger banks, by contrast, have seen an increase in their market share. As HotAir’s Ed Morrissey points out, Dodd-Frank shows that “regulatory expansion disproportionately impacts smaller players in any market,” leading to fewer options for consumers and less competition for entrenched big businesses.
The Durbin Amendment to Dodd-Frank wiped out low-cost checking accounts for roughly one million people after it took effect in 2011.
More regulation makes problems worse, not better, for those in need of banking services. AOC's program seems reminiscent of Obamacare, which promised new options but wreaked havoc on the market, leaving fewer options in its wake.
Many of the unbanked do not have bank accounts because they do not understand how easy it is to set one up. Some Americans are intimidated by the prospect, but it is rather simple. My wife opened an account with $25.
Yet AOC seems to think that the only solution is to create a new government boondoggle. This would be run by the post office, with its short hours, lost packages, and costs that go up as demand for the product goes down (ahem, stamps).
For good measure, she'll make it corrupt and inefficient like most non-profits. That's because government is always the answer, and the self-avowed socialist beside her nodded along.
Riiiiight "our panties in a bunch" lol. Nice try but you're projecting again. As you can see by the barrage of memes we're having too much fun laughing at the dimwit.
So the only one who could possibly be having their panties in a bunch is the one not laughing.^^^^^
https://gasstation-nearme.com/
Last edited:
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2014
- Messages
- 1,337
- Reaction score
- 1,680
- Points
- 113
The folks that are out billions in tax revenue and high paying jobs are the ones with their panties in a bunch. With the exception of the progs, the rest of the world just points and laughs. Some comment on her ****.
In all fairness, where she has devastated good jobs in one sector, the meme industry is humming, thanks to her genius.
This is an example of ...
Setting the bar pretty damn low.
I love animals thinking outside the box videos.
Riiiiight "our panties in a bunch" lol. Nice try but you're projecting again. As you can see by the barrage of memes we're having too much fun laughing at the dimwit.
So the only one who could possibly be having their panties in a bunch is the one not laughing.^^^^^
Standing behid a cow will give you freckels.
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2014
- Messages
- 1,337
- Reaction score
- 1,680
- Points
- 113
Traces of brain waves detected in 14th New York.
Its early. But this is a 'door to door' poll. NOT the usual polling 'methodology.
https://www.theepochtimes.com/majority-wont-vote-to-re-elect-ocasio-cortez-poll_2968170.html
Majority Won’t Vote to Re-elect Ocasio-Cortez: Poll
By Bowen Xiao | June 18, 2019 Updated: June 18, 2019
A sizable majority of Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’ (D-N.Y.) own constituents in the Bronx 14th congressional district have a low opinion of her, with a majority saying they would not vote for her re-election according to a new door-to-door survey of 2,261 homes.
The freshman congresswoman had a favorability rating of 21 percent, with less than 11 percent who believed she had their best interests in her mind when she quashed the Amazon deal. The survey was conducted by a political action committee called “Stop the AOC PAC,” who want to “evaluate the actual perceptions of constituents.”
The survey, dated on June 10, found only 13 percent would vote for her re-election. At the same time, 33 percent of constituents said they are “are ready to vote against her.”
Another key finding was that 42 percent of her constituents were unfamiliar with her name, “despite her enormous media coverage and Twitter presence,” the pollsters said.
A major point of disagreement constituents had with the congresswoman was the scrapping of the Amazon HQ deal. The survey found only 9 percent were opposed to the deal which would have brought in thousands of new jobs in the New York area. Only 11 percent believed Ocasio-Cortez had their best interests in mind, in regards to the Amazon deal, with 33 percent saying she didn’t.
“Facing an electorate more concerned with results than retweets, Rep. Ocasio-Cortez has problems in her backyard,” the pollsters concluded. “Despite her online notoriety and fandom in the national new progressive movement, the citizens of New York District 14 want a representative aligned with their values.”
“It’s clear Rep. Ocasio-Cortez is not the model for hope and change she sold herself to be,” they continued. “The opportunity for a new voice is prevalent, and the electorate is ready to take action in 2020.”
President Donald Trump, on June 16 mentioned Ocasio-Cortez on Twitter and responded to a quote of hers where she had previously said: “I think we have a very real risk of losing the Presidency to Donald Trump.”
“I agree, and that is the only reason they play the impeach card, which cannot be legally used!” Trump said in response.
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. “I think we have a very real risk of losing the Presidency to Donald Trump.” I agree, and that is the only reason they play the impeach card, which cannot be legally used!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 16, 2019
FEC Complaint
Ocasio-Cortez accepted excessive campaign contributions and violated reporting rules by accepting undervalued services from a company run by her campaign manager, a complaint to the Federal Election Commission (FEC) alleged.
The campaign manager, Saikat Chakrabarti, set up the company, Brand New Congress LLC, which was paid $170,000 by Ocasio-Cortez and 12 other “far-left progressive Democratic candidates,” according to the April 1 complaint filed by the Coolidge-Reagan Foundation, a conservative nonprofit.
Yet the company provided services to the candidates worth “likely in excess of $1 million,” the complaint stated. “Brand New Congress provided cheap campaign services to Ocasio-Cortez and other candidates in part by failing to amortize its overhead and infrastructure costs among the amounts it charged them.”
Operating at a loss, the company was only able to sustain itself “through constant infusions of cash,” the complaint stated. The money mainly came from two political action committees—Brand New Congress PAC and Justice Democrats PAC—which together gave the company close to $900,000.
Brand New Congress PAC was run by Chakrabarti, the complaint claims, while Justice Democrats PAC was controlled by Chakrabarti and Ocasio-Cortez at least since late December 2017 and during the height of Ocasio-Cortez’s 2018 primary campaign, according to the complaint, referring to filings with the government, media reports, as well as information on the Justice Democrats website.
Through this scheme, Chakrabarti’s company “provided illegal excessive in-kind contributions to Ocasio-Cortez and the other candidates,” the complaint alleged. In addition, Brand New Congress PAC and Justice Democrats PAC likewise violated contribution limits and reporting requirements “by funneling hundreds of thousands of dollars to Brand New Congress LLC to subsidize the services it was providing candidates.” Finally, Ocasio-Cortez also violated both contribution limits and reporting requirements “by accepting these illegal in-kind contributions.”
Chakrabarti became Ocasio-Cortez’s chief of staff after she assumed office.
Its early. But this is a 'door to door' poll. NOT the usual polling 'methodology.
https://www.theepochtimes.com/majority-wont-vote-to-re-elect-ocasio-cortez-poll_2968170.html
Majority Won’t Vote to Re-elect Ocasio-Cortez: Poll
By Bowen Xiao | June 18, 2019 Updated: June 18, 2019
A sizable majority of Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’ (D-N.Y.) own constituents in the Bronx 14th congressional district have a low opinion of her, with a majority saying they would not vote for her re-election according to a new door-to-door survey of 2,261 homes.
The freshman congresswoman had a favorability rating of 21 percent, with less than 11 percent who believed she had their best interests in her mind when she quashed the Amazon deal. The survey was conducted by a political action committee called “Stop the AOC PAC,” who want to “evaluate the actual perceptions of constituents.”
The survey, dated on June 10, found only 13 percent would vote for her re-election. At the same time, 33 percent of constituents said they are “are ready to vote against her.”
Another key finding was that 42 percent of her constituents were unfamiliar with her name, “despite her enormous media coverage and Twitter presence,” the pollsters said.
A major point of disagreement constituents had with the congresswoman was the scrapping of the Amazon HQ deal. The survey found only 9 percent were opposed to the deal which would have brought in thousands of new jobs in the New York area. Only 11 percent believed Ocasio-Cortez had their best interests in mind, in regards to the Amazon deal, with 33 percent saying she didn’t.
“Facing an electorate more concerned with results than retweets, Rep. Ocasio-Cortez has problems in her backyard,” the pollsters concluded. “Despite her online notoriety and fandom in the national new progressive movement, the citizens of New York District 14 want a representative aligned with their values.”
“It’s clear Rep. Ocasio-Cortez is not the model for hope and change she sold herself to be,” they continued. “The opportunity for a new voice is prevalent, and the electorate is ready to take action in 2020.”
President Donald Trump, on June 16 mentioned Ocasio-Cortez on Twitter and responded to a quote of hers where she had previously said: “I think we have a very real risk of losing the Presidency to Donald Trump.”
“I agree, and that is the only reason they play the impeach card, which cannot be legally used!” Trump said in response.
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. “I think we have a very real risk of losing the Presidency to Donald Trump.” I agree, and that is the only reason they play the impeach card, which cannot be legally used!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 16, 2019
FEC Complaint
Ocasio-Cortez accepted excessive campaign contributions and violated reporting rules by accepting undervalued services from a company run by her campaign manager, a complaint to the Federal Election Commission (FEC) alleged.
The campaign manager, Saikat Chakrabarti, set up the company, Brand New Congress LLC, which was paid $170,000 by Ocasio-Cortez and 12 other “far-left progressive Democratic candidates,” according to the April 1 complaint filed by the Coolidge-Reagan Foundation, a conservative nonprofit.
Yet the company provided services to the candidates worth “likely in excess of $1 million,” the complaint stated. “Brand New Congress provided cheap campaign services to Ocasio-Cortez and other candidates in part by failing to amortize its overhead and infrastructure costs among the amounts it charged them.”
Operating at a loss, the company was only able to sustain itself “through constant infusions of cash,” the complaint stated. The money mainly came from two political action committees—Brand New Congress PAC and Justice Democrats PAC—which together gave the company close to $900,000.
Brand New Congress PAC was run by Chakrabarti, the complaint claims, while Justice Democrats PAC was controlled by Chakrabarti and Ocasio-Cortez at least since late December 2017 and during the height of Ocasio-Cortez’s 2018 primary campaign, according to the complaint, referring to filings with the government, media reports, as well as information on the Justice Democrats website.
Through this scheme, Chakrabarti’s company “provided illegal excessive in-kind contributions to Ocasio-Cortez and the other candidates,” the complaint alleged. In addition, Brand New Congress PAC and Justice Democrats PAC likewise violated contribution limits and reporting requirements “by funneling hundreds of thousands of dollars to Brand New Congress LLC to subsidize the services it was providing candidates.” Finally, Ocasio-Cortez also violated both contribution limits and reporting requirements “by accepting these illegal in-kind contributions.”
Chakrabarti became Ocasio-Cortez’s chief of staff after she assumed office.
I just can't imagine a 28 year-old gaffe machine with zero management or real-world policy experience who wants to implement climate change initiatives that would cost the U.S. taxpayer trillions of dollars not getting re-elected.
Just incomprehensible.
Just incomprehensible.
Why does anyone listen to that nitwit...unless it is for entertainment purposes only.
She equated the border with Holocaust concentration camps. Literally said there is no difference. How many Mexicans have we gassed and burned so far?
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 7,497
- Reaction score
- 5,031
- Points
- 113
I'm shocked anyone is shocked over this. AOC thoughts are about a deep as spreading a drop of water over a football field. She has no depth of knowledge at all. She's always been given everything. Including apparently, grades. She has no grasp of economics, science, or history. She is a painfully ignorant woman.
Ignorant, brainwashed & entitled -- a recipe for disaster. Does she have even the faintest idea that her comparison is not only devoid of fact, but is a slap in the face to any person living on this Earth that had to endure a concentration camp?
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2014
- Messages
- 1,337
- Reaction score
- 1,680
- Points
- 113
“Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.” Martin Luther King Jr.
To be 'fair', that describes the entirety of the left.
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 7,497
- Reaction score
- 5,031
- Points
- 113
I really don't think she knows what constitutes a concentration camp during WWII. She may even be a holocaust denier? If she even knows what it is.
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 9,394
- Reaction score
- 6,217
- Points
- 113
I suspect that this is the case.
- Joined
- Apr 21, 2014
- Messages
- 5,836
- Reaction score
- 4,780
- Points
- 113
Well considering she graduated with an Economics degree and is 100% ignorant in the field of Economics, I'm going to say there is a very good chance her History knowledge is even worse. She probably doesn't even know what it is.
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2014
- Messages
- 18,548
- Reaction score
- 29,820
- Points
- 113
- Location
- The nearest Steelers bar.
Since I have a degree in economics this makes me sad.
