Jump to content

GW Hayduke

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    1712
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by GW Hayduke

  1. I recommend you read the report. Or at least the open letter at the beginning. A few paragraphs from the open letter composed by the chair of the committee.
  2. I skimmed this thread and it appears folks believe that Lee and the confederacy played no role in origin of the Eyes. Have folks read the report? I recommend you get to at least page 11. There is more. Folks should read page 11 of the report. https://utexas.app.box.com/s/5o2a1klri1htyhq3mziyxdjgxvegprjj
  3. Misinformation is inappropriate when it comes from Fox News and Steve Miller, just like misinformation is inappropriate when it comes from AOC.
  4. We need more maturity from our elected Democratic representatives when their twitter team decides to "poke and speak up." AOC should never be parroting the same talking points as Fox News, fakebusiness, and Steve Miller. I get that folks want to find vague excuses for it but it shouldn't be acceptable.
  5. We need our Democratic representatives to be more responsible on twitter. Has AOC clarified or retracted her tweet?
  6. I wasn’t thinking about federal oversight. I was thinking about the deregulated marketplace that occurred 1999 or 2002 or whenever and how that led to the problems we are having
  7. Anyone have a link, source or brief analysis on how texas’ deregulation of our electric utility has led to this fiasco? Trying to keep a fire going so can’t do much research now
  8. I get it. You are the slow guy on the board. The GND and her tax policies are policies. Policies aren’t the same as method of politik. That’s been stated several times. I typed that slow for you. She has sound policies that mostly align with Dem platform, but that isn’t relevant to anything I was talking about.
  9. I lied - one last point is that there aren’t just two sides to the trumpist style attack based politics issue. And this is critical. The third side includes White House press briefings that address problems and policies rather than the “others.” That side includes a Biden team hitting the circuit making the case for policies and not against “others.” Hopefully that means a legislative branch passing meaningful laws. That is the side I am contrasting against AOC’s method and resulting tribalism. I get that the context contributed to some of the excessive emotions, strawmen, and labeling. I think it has more to do with tribal instincts - I called it worshiping but maybe people felt that is a loaded term
  10. Are you serious? What serious comment have I not responded to? My position from the beginning is that the worshiping of AOC seems to be a promotion of trumpist style politics that is based on tribalism and attacking the “others” and that that type of politics has costs. Different folks introduced their own qualifications. As I have stated, I don’t disagree with any of them. I was initially labeled as an other or trumpkin by multiple posters - evidence in my mind of the tribalism that surrounds AOC. Bernie had it too. I’ll leave it at that and stop responding since the mods seem to have an issue with something
  11. Don’t let brisket know that she attacks unprovoked. I agree Schiff was an attack dog during the first impeachment. Lieu is rather similar to AOC in my opinion as they both seem to operate heavily through twitter.
  12. So you agree they are both attack dogs for their side. That is the point. Your qualification is that they have different method of attacking the other side. I’m not arguing against that, just like I’m not arguing against brisket’s qualification that her attacks are only “defensive.”
  13. Yes. It is my fault you didn't understand the sentence. I'll do better next time. I never said any of that. Reading is hard.
  14. No need to strawman bro. We can have an adult discussion. Policies and method of politik are not the same. My sentence was "the worshiping of AOC seems to be a promotion of trumpist style of politics by the left...." The rest of the sentence was an accurate an accurate description of trumpism, IMO. My position is that they are both attack dogs for their side. That doesn't mean they are equivalent - but equivalent in that role and how they fit in the current game of trumpian attack-style politics. Are they each more than that? Sure. Of course. Some were upset with the use of attack dog and brisket prefers a shepherd with other qualifiers.
  15. I mean, you've got brisket on here promoting the use of attack-based politics - since that is what the other side does and (per him) that it is needed in order to win - as long we qualify that those attacks are actually defensive (per him). You should look closely at what he is saying and then look closely at what I am saying.
  16. And those two sentences are not in conflict.
  17. You've already made it clear that those qualifications are very very important to you. That doesn't mean they are relevant to my position. Are you arguing against the position that Cruz and AOC are the exact same? Are you arguing for the position that AOC is an attack dog but that she is justified in being one? Are you arguing against the position that AOC and Gym Jordan are both attack dogs for their side, except one of them is justified in that method of politik and is actually a shepherd?
  18. I understand the concept of counter attack. It just isn't relevant unless someone is overly sensitive about discussions about their tribe and wants to haggle. No one said she wasn't serious about policy. Again, policies and method of politik are not the same.
  19. First you haggle over "counter" and now "for." You can do better. You are for attack-based politics. You are for them because the other side uses them and because you say they are needed in order to win. Meet force with force. That is ok. You are for AOC being the attack dog - as long as that label expands to include "counter-attack dog that is only aggressive because it was provoked." None of your qualifications matter to my position. You are just playing a game with yourself.
  20. 2001 is when the stark separation occurs in the video.
  21. Look. You are on the side of attack-based politics. You have said so much. That is fine. Why the emotional reaction to describing AOC in those terms? Why the immediate reaction of labeling me, someone describing the situation (which you agree with), as a trump supporter or the other side or whatever? Your position is that we should use attack-based politics, but we shouldn't label attack dogs and then mix in a heavy helping of strawmen on top. The side that has used division based politics as their entire platform is currently sitting on the side lines, btw. It was effective for them - until it wasn't. I'm not denying that is has worked for them in the past. Is this a strawman or is categorization hard for you? https://www.pinterest.com/pin/553661347920903881/
  22. Sure man. That's exactly my position. But really, here it is, again.
  23. Sure mate. https://www.reddit.com/r/MurderedByAOC/ https://www.c-span.org/video/?508460-1/white-house-press-secretary-holds-briefing https://www.c-span.org/video/?508410-1/house-budget-resolution-week-speaker-pelosi
×
×
  • Create New...