Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez moves into a luxury apartment complex

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Luxury" is marketing speak. I'm sure the place is no Trump Tower.

This is a really pointless thread and I am baffled how it has gone on for dozens of pages.

In the context of her age, 20-something, it is a luxury apartment. Anyone denying that is being a partisan bootlicker. I fully agree she's clever, she's a natural politician ... but she is a vain phony and a pathological liar with a thirst for power (just like literally all of her politico peers).

+1.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Luxury" is marketing speak. I'm sure the place is no Trump Tower.

This is a really pointless thread and I am baffled how it has gone on for dozens of pages.

In the context of her age, 20-something, it is a luxury apartment. Anyone denying that is being a partisan bootlicker. I fully agree she's clever, she's a natural politician ... but she is a vain phony and a pathological liar with a thirst for power (just like literally all of her politico peers).

+1.

How many 20 somethings earn $174,000 per year? Of those that do, how many live in run-down walk-up flats?

[Anonymous]

AOC has already had untold number of death threats against her. Very few buildings could handle her security needs.

If this psychotic thread is any indication, I think we can figure out who is making the threats.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Luxury" is marketing speak. I'm sure the place is no Trump Tower.

This is a really pointless thread and I am baffled how it has gone on for dozens of pages.

In the context of her age, 20-something, it is a luxury apartment. Anyone denying that is being a partisan bootlicker. I fully agree she's clever, she's a natural politician ... but she is a vain phony and a pathological liar with a thirst for power (just like literally all of her politico peers).

+1.

How many 20 somethings earn $174,000 per year? Of those that do, how many live in run-down walk-up flats?

In other words, she's using politics for personal financial gain.

Fine by me, but I notice a little tiny disconnect with her political platform.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:AOC has already had untold number of death threats against her. Very few buildings could handle her security needs.

If this psychotic thread is any indication, I think we can figure out who is making the threats.

#smollett

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Luxury" is marketing speak. I'm sure the place is no Trump Tower.

This is a really pointless thread and I am baffled how it has gone on for dozens of pages.

In the context of her age, 20-something, it is a luxury apartment. Anyone denying that is being a partisan bootlicker. I fully agree she's clever, she's a natural politician ... but she is a vain phony and a pathological liar with a thirst for power (just like literally all of her politico peers).

+1.

How many 20 somethings earn $174,000 per year? Of those that do, how many live in run-down walk-up flats?

In other words, she's using politics for personal financial gain.

Fine by me, but I notice a little tiny disconnect with her political platform.

She ran for Congress for the paycheck. Sure!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:AOC has already had untold number of death threats against her. Very few buildings could handle her security needs.

If this psychotic thread is any indication, I think we can figure out who is making the threats.

#smollett

The Secret Service would like a word with you...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Luxury" is marketing speak. I'm sure the place is no Trump Tower.

This is a really pointless thread and I am baffled how it has gone on for dozens of pages.

In the context of her age, 20-something, it is a luxury apartment. Anyone denying that is being a partisan bootlicker. I fully agree she's clever, she's a natural politician ... but she is a vain phony and a pathological liar with a thirst for power (just like literally all of her politico peers).

+1.

Pathological liar? Laughable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Luxury" is marketing speak. I'm sure the place is no Trump Tower.

This is a really pointless thread and I am baffled how it has gone on for dozens of pages.

In the context of her age, 20-something, it is a luxury apartment. Anyone denying that is being a partisan bootlicker. I fully agree she's clever, she's a natural politician ... but she is a vain phony and a pathological liar with a thirst for power (just like literally all of her politico peers).

+1.

How many 20 somethings earn $174,000 per year? Of those that do, how many live in run-down walk-up flats?

In other words, she's using politics for personal financial gain.

Fine by me, but I notice a little tiny disconnect with her political platform.

Funny I don't notice any disconnect. The money is hers to spend as she wishes. If you think it isn't, I demand you give your entire salary away to your entire salary away to your favorite cause and move into a van foen by the river.

[Anonymous]

AOC constantly cites the simultaneous existence of extreme luxury and poverty as a moral failing and as justification for her proposed redistributive policies.

Once you realize, however, that, within a moral context, there is no meaningful distinction between “extreme luxury” and “excess” in relation to eliminating poverty it’s clear she is undermining her own position.

No different than Bernie or Al Gore insiting on private jet travel while asserting climate change is an extinction level challenge.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:AOC constantly cites the simultaneous existence of extreme luxury and poverty as a moral failing and as justification for her proposed redistributive policies.

Once you realize, however, that, within a moral context, there is no meaningful distinction between “extreme luxury” and “excess” in relation to eliminating poverty it’s clear she is undermining her own position.

No different than Bernie or Al Gore insiting on private jet travel while asserting climate change is an extinction level challenge.

+1.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:AOC constantly cites the simultaneous existence of extreme luxury and poverty as a moral failing and as justification for her proposed redistributive policies.

Once you realize, however, that, within a moral context, there is no meaningful distinction between “extreme luxury” and “excess” in relation to eliminating poverty it’s clear she is undermining her own position.

No different than Bernie or Al Gore insiting on private jet travel while asserting climate change is an extinction level challenge.

+1.

You idiots couldn’t find the navy yard on google maps, eh?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:AOC constantly cites the simultaneous existence of extreme luxury and poverty as a moral failing and as justification for her proposed redistributive policies.

Once you realize, however, that, within a moral context, there is no meaningful distinction between “extreme luxury” and “excess” in relation to eliminating poverty it’s clear she is undermining her own position.

No different than Bernie or Al Gore insiting on private jet travel while asserting climate change is an extinction level challenge.

+1.

You idiots couldn’t find the navy yard on google maps, eh?

What’s funny is that can’t see where this is heading even though AOC is telegraphing it. To cite AOC, if private owniership of a helipad in New York while poverty exists in Alabama is immoral, why aren’t $1000 Hamilton tickets and upscale restaurants immoral? Why is it moral to spend $15 on a movie ticket when that $15 could be allocated to alleviate poverty? Travel to Europe while poverty exists?

When her staff tells you they want to end air travel and consumption of meat you should believe them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:AOC constantly cites the simultaneous existence of extreme luxury and poverty as a moral failing and as justification for her proposed redistributive policies.

Once you realize, however, that, within a moral context, there is no meaningful distinction between “extreme luxury” and “excess” in relation to eliminating poverty it’s clear she is undermining her own position.

No different than Bernie or Al Gore insiting on private jet travel while asserting climate change is an extinction level challenge.

Once you realize that collective action is the omly solution to collective problems, you'll stop focusing supposed hypocrisies and start focusing on policies. If you believe that polticians'living quarters has a detrimental effect on policy, then I suggest you propose legislation that all Congressmembers have to live in government barracks, and that the White House be torn down and replaced with affordable housing.

Funny, this issue only comes up with Democratic politicians though. Apparently, republican politicians get to do whatever they want because they don't give a crap about anybody else anyway.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Luxury" is marketing speak. I'm sure the place is no Trump Tower.

This is a really pointless thread and I am baffled how it has gone on for dozens of pages.

In the context of her age, 20-something, it is a luxury apartment. Anyone denying that is being a partisan bootlicker. I fully agree she's clever, she's a natural politician ... but she is a vain phony and a pathological liar with a thirst for power (just like literally all of her politico peers).

+1.

How many 20 somethings earn $174,000 per year? Of those that do, how many live in run-down walk-up flats?

In other words, she's using politics for personal financial gain.

Fine by me, but I notice a little tiny disconnect with her political platform.

According to Daily Mail, yes . . .
NOT fine by me

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6752313/AOCs-campaign-team-accused-illegally-funneling-6-000-boyfriend-allied-PAC.html

some highlights:

- Lawyers for the Coolidge Reagan Foundation, a conservative non-profit, filed an FEC complaint against Cortez's campaign team on Wednesday
- The group wants the feds to review recently-unveiled campaign expenditures Cortez's election staff made to Brand New Congress LLC
- The political consulting firm hired Cortez's boyfriend, Riley Roberts, as a marketing strategist back in 2017 in the early stages of her campaign
- Cortez's campaign paid $6,191.32 to BNC not long before the PAC made two separate payments to Roberts totaling $6,000
- BNC Communications Director Zeynab Day said his firm hired Roberts based on his experience managing successful advertising and social media campaigns