Ocasio-Cortez supports providing alternate facts.

[Tahuyaman]

Ocasi-Cortez says it's more important to be morally correct vs factually correct. Isn't she one of these people who is so concerned about the president being fast and loose with the truth and introducing "alternate facts"?

https://dailycaller.com/2019/01/07/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-60-minutes-interview-radical-morals-better-facts/


Democratic New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez says its preferable to be “morally right” than “factually … correct.”
In an interview on CBS’s “60 Minutes (https://www.cbsnews.com/news/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-the-rookie-congresswoman-challenging-the-democratic-establishment-60-minutes-interview-full-transcript-2019-01-06/?ftag=CNM-00-10aab4i)” that aired Sunday night, Ocasio-Cortez said, “I think that there a lot of people more concerned with being precisely, factually and semantically correct than about being morally right.”

[Tahuyaman]

Does this nit-wit believe moral correctness and factual accuracy are mutually exclusive? Just what does this dolt stand for?


I sincerely hope that the Democrats put this woman out front and center with Maxine Waters by her side.

[Mister D]

It's an interesting remark in so far as it captures a very common approach to politics in the West. I admire her candor.

[Tahuyaman]

It's an interesting remark in so far as it captures a very common approach to politics in the West. I admire her candor.


I believe she is completely sincere and honest in representing her views when she says these stupid things.

[Mister D]

I believe she is completely sincere and honest in representing her views when she says these stupid things.

If only some of our progressive members possessed her candor.

[Common]

I think shes being honest too. I have to admit when I read her statements and ideas and wants, I think the millenials cant wait for the baby boomers to die off when we do, they will have to deal with each other, because some are clearly and truly indoctrinated to the point they cant reason

[Chris]

Liberals have long followed that sort of thinking, er, feeling. How many here post opinions and call them facts? How many here post long narratives of imaginative possibilities?

It's also very postmodern. Stanley Fish on critical theory but applicable here: "It relieves me of the obligation to be right (a standard that simply drops out) and demands only that I be interesting (a standard that can be met without any reference at all to an illusory objectivity)."

[Green Arrow]

She didn’t say you shouldn’t be factually correct, she just prioritized being morally correct over being factually correct. And she’s right. Morality should be the foundation of every decision we make.

[Chris]

She didn’t say you shouldn’t be factually correct, she just prioritized being morally correct over being factually correct. And she’s right. Morality should be the foundation of every decision we make.

Who's morality?

[Kalkin]

Ocasi-Cortez says it's more important to be morally correct vs factually correct. Isn't she one of these people who is so concerned about the president being fast and loose with the truth and introducing "alternate facts"?

https://dailycaller.com/2019/01/07/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-60-minutes-interview-radical-morals-better-facts/


Democratic New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez says its preferable to be “morally right” than “factually … correct.”
In an interview on CBS’s “60 Minutes (https://www.cbsnews.com/news/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-the-rookie-congresswoman-challenging-the-democratic-establishment-60-minutes-interview-full-transcript-2019-01-06/?ftag=CNM-00-10aab4i)” that aired Sunday night, Ocasio-Cortez said, “I think that there a lot of people more concerned with being precisely, factually and semantically correct than about being morally right.”She's an idiot. Without facts, morality is a feather in the wind.

[Tahuyaman]

She didn’t say you shouldn’t be factually correct, she just prioritized being morally correct over being factually correct. And she’s right. Morality should be the foundation of every decision we make.


Like the good loyal socialist, you'll attempt to spin her comment.

[Chris]

Take this statement by AOC: "Unemployment is low because everyone has two jobs."

That is not precise, factual or semantically correct.

It is also not moral.

[Mister D]

Who's morality?

We do have several members who are quite adamant about the subjective nature of morality.

[Green Arrow]

Like the good loyal socialist, you'll attempt to spin her comment.

It’s a pretty accurate paraphrase, actually, but it’s too late for games.

[Tahuyaman]

It’s a pretty accurate paraphrase, actually, but it’s too late for games.
Actually your paraphrase was politically motivated spin. You support her ideas, so you spin her dumb comments.

[Green Arrow]

Actually your paraphrase was politically motivated spin. You support her ideas, so you spin her dumb comments.

Sure, works for me.

[Tahuyaman]

Sure, works for me.


I knew that.

[RadioGod]

Ocasi-Cortez says it's more important to be morally correct vs factually correct. Isn't she one of these people who is so concerned about the president being fast and loose with the truth and introducing "alternate facts"?

https://dailycaller.com/2019/01/07/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-60-minutes-interview-radical-morals-better-facts/


Democratic New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez says its preferable to be “morally right” than “factually … correct.”
In an interview on CBS’s “60 Minutes (https://www.cbsnews.com/news/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-the-rookie-congresswoman-challenging-the-democratic-establishment-60-minutes-interview-full-transcript-2019-01-06/?ftag=CNM-00-10aab4i)” that aired Sunday night, Ocasio-Cortez said, “I think that there a lot of people more concerned with being precisely, factually and semantically correct than about being morally right.”
Thank you for the link. Even though it's a kook site, it did have a link to the actual interview on 60 minutes.
It looks like she was taken out of context in that daily caller article. She was replying to a question about what she thought about another article calling her out for not being accurate with budget numbers. There have been plenty of times where I myself have looked at numbers from government and industry, and they don't add up. Look at Yemen. One paper said 18.4 million would starve, another said 10 million, another said 8 million. Just like the point Ocasio was making, when it comes to numbers like that, which ones are 100% correct is not important. It's millions that will starve, and it's not good.
Just so you all know what she was talking about specifically, it was about subsidizing in green energy and getting us totally off fossil fuels and 100% renewable in 12 years. When asked how she would pay for that idea, she said it would be the same way we pay for energy and military increases. And she made an excellent point, in that whenever politicians talk about budget cuts, it's always social security, medicare, and education that are brought up, but never military cuts, or billionaire subsidy cuts.
Just so you know, the daily caller is just as fake as CNN, just on the opposite side of the fence.

[RadioGod]

Take this statement by AOC: "Unemployment is low because everyone has two jobs."

That is not precise, factual or semantically correct.

It is also not moral.

What? Are you drinking or something?

[Tahuyaman]

Thank you for the link. Even though it's a kook site, it did have a link to the actual interview on 60 minutes.
It looks like she was taken out of context in that daily caller article. She was replying to a question about what she thought about another article calling her out for not being accurate with budget numbers. There have been plenty of times where I myself have looked at numbers from government and industry, and they don't add up. Look at Yemen. One paper said 18.4 million would starve, another said 10 million, another said 8 million. Just like the point Ocasio was making, when it comes to numbers like that, which ones are 100% correct is not important. It's millions that will starve, and it's not good.
Just so you all know what she was talking about specifically, it was about subsidizing in green energy and getting us totally off fossil fuels and 100% renewable in 12 years. When asked how she would pay for that idea, she said it would be the same way we pay for energy and military increases. And she made an excellent point, in that whenever politicians talk about budget cuts, it's always social security, medicare, and education that are brought up, but never military cuts, or billionaire subsidy cuts.
Just so you know, the daily caller is just as fake as CNN, just on the opposite side of the fence.
Sorry. Her quote wasn’t taken out of context. Would you have preferred that I posted her interview from another web site? I actually used that site to see if someone would attack the messenger vs the message. You did it.

[Tahuyaman]

Take this statement by AOC: "Unemployment is low because everyone has two jobs."

That is not precise, factual or semantically correct.

It is also not moral.

That was a humorous comment. More humorous when you consider that she was serious and supposedly has a degree in economics.

[RadioGod]

It's an interesting remark in so far as it captures a very common approach to politics in the West. I admire her candor.

It wasn't her candor. It was they daily caller being candid on her behalf. They like to make stuff up out of context because they know it appeals to your kind. It gets you all riled up and keeps you clicking. Then, before you know it, you're in an insulated news bubble and have no idea what reality is anymore, it's painted in for you by the alt-right media. Granted, the same can be said about msnbc, cnn, and fox. She was being questioned about budget numbers. She quoted some she had read. Other people claimed her numbers were off. Then the washington post drops an article saying since her numbers were not 100% accurate, she's a liar. Just like in this forum when a discrediting campaign is in full swing.

[RadioGod]

Sorry. Her quote wasn’t taken out of context. Would you have preferred that I posted her interview from another web site? I actually used that site to see if someone would attack the messenger vs the message. You did it.

I'm not surprised there is a concerted effort to slow her down. That's expected from an entrenched corrupt establishment. They will fail, and more like her will run for office and win. Our country will be returned to us through political engagement by regular people.

[Tahuyaman]

I'm not surprised there is a concerted effort to slow her down. That's expected from an entrenched corrupt establishment. They will fail, and more like her will run for office and win. Our country will be returned to us through political engagement by regular people.
There’s no concerted effort to slow her down. If anything there’s an effort to just get out of the way and let everyone hear what she has to say. She’s as goofy as they come. It’s fiscally impossible to impose her wild ideas.

How can you say she represents returning the country to us, whoever that is? She wants “us” to be dependent upon the benevolence of government. She wants to take the country from us and give it to a handful of self appointed elites in Washington DC. She might even call for changing the name of the congress to the politburo.

[Peter1469]

I'm not surprised there is a concerted effort to slow her down. That's expected from an entrenched corrupt establishment. They will fail, and more like her will run for office and win. Our country will be returned to us through political engagement by regular people.
It certainly shows that the leadership in both parties exert a lot of informal control over its members.

[Hoosier8]

She didn’t say you shouldn’t be factually correct, she just prioritized being morally correct over being factually correct. And she’s right. Morality should be the foundation of every decision we make.
Which is funny because the left has done everything it could to eliminate the idea of morality.

[countryboy]

That was a humorous comment. More humorous when you consider that she was serious and supposedly has a degree in economics.

A degree in economics? Surely you jest. Affirmative action? Oy vey

[Lummy]

I'm not surprised there is a concerted effort to slow her down.
Slow her down? Like a whirling dervish, she isn't going anywhere. When the novelty wears off, she will probably become an establishment Democrat operative. She already expresses an inclination to steal like one. She would be a pain in the neck for another 40 years that will never amount to much. Good luck to those who will have to suffer her, as she no doubt finds delight in such disparaging remarks.

[Chris]

A degree in economics? Surely you jest. Affirmative action? Oy vey

Undergrad degree, she majored in economics....and, apparently, dance.

[Lummy]

It's an interesting remark in so far as it captures a very common approach to politics in the West. I admire her candor.
She has no sense whatsoever of propriety, almost like a Tourette Syndrome case of mental illness. What's admirable about that?

I think she deserves our pity and to be put away somewhere safe for good.

[Chris]

Ocasio-Cortez attacks fact-checkers for 'false equivalency,' 'bias' (https://www.foxnews.com/politics/ocasio-cortez-attacks-fact-checkers-for-false-equivalency-bias-toward-her)


Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez lashed out at fact-checkers just days after taking office, accusing them of “false equivalency” and “bias” toward her in their columns examining her statements.

Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., has been called out by fact-checkers at a steady clip since her upset primary win last year over then-Rep. Joe Crowley. She's apparently had enough. On Monday, she took aim at PolitiFact and The Washington Post fact-check unit for supposedly singling her out.

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

...

[Chris]

https://i.snag.gy/zpgra0.jpg

[donttread]

Ocasi-Cortez says it's more important to be morally correct vs factually correct. Isn't she one of these people who is so concerned about the president being fast and loose with the truth and introducing "alternate facts"?

https://dailycaller.com/2019/01/07/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-60-minutes-interview-radical-morals-better-facts/


Democratic New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez says its preferable to be “morally right” than “factually … correct.”
In an interview on CBS’s “60 Minutes (https://www.cbsnews.com/news/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-the-rookie-congresswoman-challenging-the-democratic-establishment-60-minutes-interview-full-transcript-2019-01-06/?ftag=CNM-00-10aab4i)” that aired Sunday night, Ocasio-Cortez said, “I think that there a lot of people more concerned with being precisely, factually and semantically correct than about being morally right.”


I like her spunk but she should of gone to the state level and tried to develop some localism to back up her over the top goals and change them with some realism. . I am more concerned with the non-climate related effects that fossil fuels have on our lives. For example your dinner tonight may have traveled 1,500 miles to your table and been ordered there by a purely electronic system and then kept cool in your grid based refrigerator. all of which is dependent upon the fragile grid. And people lost their lives for that. A solar flare tomorrow could cause mass death and chaos when the one in the 1800's only disrupted some communications. Progress?
However, I also realize that she is being very unrealistic. I can't think of any program other than maybe total communism that could guarantee everyone a job at a fair wage . And even then that fair wage would drop like a sinker.
She's passionate and quick on her feet and I think we need people like her to have a seat at the table of what I hope will eventually become a coalition congress. As we need more Rand Pauls and other free thinkers and defenders of the Constitution as well. We really need less bought and paid for members. What she wishes to do is exercise power the federal government does not Constitutionally have. But she believes she can because our generation has allowed the feds to usurp so many state's rights already. That one is on us. The question is this. Will the dems remain intolerant of sub groups within the party ? Or will they learn from the repubs and accept them?

[Tahuyaman]

I like her spunk but she should of gone to the state level and tried to develop some localism to back up her over the top goals and change them with some realism. . I am more concerned with the non-climate related effects that fossil fuels have on our lives. For example your dinner tonight may have traveled 1,500 miles to your table and been ordered there by a purely electronic system and then kept cool in your grid based refrigerator. all of which is dependent upon the fragile grid. And people lost their lives for that. A solar flare tomorrow could cause mass death and chaos when the one in the 1800's only disrupted some communications. Progress?
However, I also realize that she is being very unrealistic. I can't think of any program other than maybe total communism that could guarantee everyone a job at a fair wage . And even then that fair wage would drop like a sinker.
She's passionate and quick on her feet and I think we need people like her to have a seat at the table of what I hope will eventually become a coalition congress. As we need more Rand Pauls and other free thinkers and defenders of the Constitution as well. We really need less bought and paid for members. What she wishes to do is exercise power the federal government does not Constitutionally have. But she believes she can because our generation has allowed the feds to usurp so many state's rights already. That one is on us. The question is this. Will the dems remain intolerant of sub groups within the party ? Or will they learn from the repubs and accept them?


I agree with some of that. I agree that our power grin needs to be upgraded and better protected. That's not solely a federal responsibility. However, I don't believe doom gloom and mass starvation is just a solar flare away.


I don't believe communism would provide a fair wage. It would provide a mandated wage based on some arbitrary ideal system.

She does seem to be passionate, but she's not quick on her feet. In fact she's just the opposite. She doesn't appear to have the experience combined with intelligence and wisdom to have yet developed that skill. She probably should have started at a local level, but she took advantage of the moment.


Both major parties have destroyed themselves because they have tried to be all things to all people. When you try to stand for everything, you end up with no defined principles.

[Mister D]

It wasn't her candor. It was they daily caller being candid on her behalf. They like to make stuff up out of context because they know it appeals to your kind. It gets you all riled up and keeps you clicking. Then, before you know it, you're in an insulated news bubble and have no idea what reality is anymore, it's painted in for you by the alt-right media. Granted, the same can be said about msnbc, cnn, and fox. She was being questioned about budget numbers. She quoted some she had read. Other people claimed her numbers were off. Then the washington post drops an article saying since her numbers were not 100% accurate, she's a liar. Just like in this forum when a discrediting campaign is in full swing.
Son, what are you talking about?

[Captdon]

She didn’t say you shouldn’t be factually correct, she just prioritized being morally correct over being factually correct. And she’s right. Morality should be the foundation of every decision we make.

Yet you stomp all over Trump. No, she's just stupid.

[Captdon]

Son, what are you talking about?

I guess if you vote for spending you don't have to know what the numbers are.

[Green Arrow]

Yet you stomp all over Trump. No, she's just stupid.

Well, yeah. Trump is nowhere close to the picture of moral soundness, lol. Where were you going with that, exactly?

[Trish]

Son, what are you talking about?


Hahahahahaha - that made me laugh. I could picture you (your avatar) looking puzzled.

[Trish]

She has no sense whatsoever of propriety, almost like a Tourette Syndrome case of mental illness. What's admirable about that?

I think she deserves our pity and to be put away somewhere safe for good.

She is an example of a typical millennial. No filter and not very good timing. Very full of themselves. I don't doubt her intelligence but she needs to learn how Congress runs before dictating new policies.