Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
How AOC and her supporters dealt with the laughable provisions in the Green New Deal plan.
Comments
-
Would flat out lying about its veracity and attacking opponents for using her own words muddy the waters of how bad the revised version is?allpurpleallgold said:Regardless of what in or not in the faq, it’s not part of the resolution. I guess when you can’t win on ideas you try and muddy the waters.
Defend the ideas and don't join morons like hondo in lying about it
-
I don't know about the releasing of it or if the cow farting was photoshopped. But the way that's written is awfully fucking stupid.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Think that was the npr reporting on it and it made sense to me.2001400ex said:
Do you honestly believe that or you just trying to goad APAG?GrundleStiltzkin said:
Sounds like that’s what AOC was doing. She couldn’t get the full deal through with the senator, so she threw that bone out to the proggies.allpurpleallgold said:Regardless of what in or not in the faq, it’s not part of the resolution. I guess when you can’t win on ideas you try and muddy the waters.
What do you believe? AOC released it by mistake?
The interpretation that getting rid of air travel in 10 years is FS, even when reading the FAQ I can't get there.
If we are to believe the FAQ, I'm not on board to get rid of nuclear and invest in trains on a large scale, even high speed trains like in Japan. Our country is too spread out for trains to be effective.
But if you stick solely to the resolution in Congress. It's a blueprint. An aggressive one. And a path to reducing our dependence on fossil fuels. And that I do support. -
Quading down on the photoshop.2001400ex said:
I don't know about the releasing of it or if the cow farting was photoshopped. But the way that's written is awfully fucking stupid.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Think that was the npr reporting on it and it made sense to me.2001400ex said:
Do you honestly believe that or you just trying to goad APAG?GrundleStiltzkin said:
Sounds like that’s what AOC was doing. She couldn’t get the full deal through with the senator, so she threw that bone out to the proggies.allpurpleallgold said:Regardless of what in or not in the faq, it’s not part of the resolution. I guess when you can’t win on ideas you try and muddy the waters.
What do you believe? AOC released it by mistake?
The interpretation that getting rid of air travel in 10 years is FS, even when reading the FAQ I can't get there.
If we are to believe the FAQ, I'm not on board to get rid of nuclear and invest in trains on a large scale, even high speed trains like in Japan. Our country is too spread out for trains to be effective.
But if you stick solely to the resolution in Congress. It's a blueprint. An aggressive one. And a path to reducing our dependence on fossil fuels. And that I do support. -
So you don't want to address what I said and just want to talk about Photoshop. You are better than that.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Quading down on the photoshop.2001400ex said:
I don't know about the releasing of it or if the cow farting was photoshopped. But the way that's written is awfully fucking stupid.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Think that was the npr reporting on it and it made sense to me.2001400ex said:
Do you honestly believe that or you just trying to goad APAG?GrundleStiltzkin said:
Sounds like that’s what AOC was doing. She couldn’t get the full deal through with the senator, so she threw that bone out to the proggies.allpurpleallgold said:Regardless of what in or not in the faq, it’s not part of the resolution. I guess when you can’t win on ideas you try and muddy the waters.
What do you believe? AOC released it by mistake?
The interpretation that getting rid of air travel in 10 years is FS, even when reading the FAQ I can't get there.
If we are to believe the FAQ, I'm not on board to get rid of nuclear and invest in trains on a large scale, even high speed trains like in Japan. Our country is too spread out for trains to be effective.
But if you stick solely to the resolution in Congress. It's a blueprint. An aggressive one. And a path to reducing our dependence on fossil fuels. And that I do support. -
I agree with you on some points, but you’re still questioning the veracity of the document. What’s the point of typing more?2001400ex said:
So you don't want to address what I said and just want to talk about Photoshop. You are better than that.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Quading down on the photoshop.2001400ex said:
I don't know about the releasing of it or if the cow farting was photoshopped. But the way that's written is awfully fucking stupid.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Think that was the npr reporting on it and it made sense to me.2001400ex said:
Do you honestly believe that or you just trying to goad APAG?GrundleStiltzkin said:
Sounds like that’s what AOC was doing. She couldn’t get the full deal through with the senator, so she threw that bone out to the proggies.allpurpleallgold said:Regardless of what in or not in the faq, it’s not part of the resolution. I guess when you can’t win on ideas you try and muddy the waters.
What do you believe? AOC released it by mistake?
The interpretation that getting rid of air travel in 10 years is FS, even when reading the FAQ I can't get there.
If we are to believe the FAQ, I'm not on board to get rid of nuclear and invest in trains on a large scale, even high speed trains like in Japan. Our country is too spread out for trains to be effective.
But if you stick solely to the resolution in Congress. It's a blueprint. An aggressive one. And a path to reducing our dependence on fossil fuels. And that I do support. -
I said I don't know about how it was released and I called that document fucking stupid. Discussed a few points in it that are bullshit.GrundleStiltzkin said:
I agree with you on some points, but you’re still questioning the veracity of the document. What’s the point of typing more?2001400ex said:
So you don't want to address what I said and just want to talk about Photoshop. You are better than that.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Quading down on the photoshop.2001400ex said:
I don't know about the releasing of it or if the cow farting was photoshopped. But the way that's written is awfully fucking stupid.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Think that was the npr reporting on it and it made sense to me.2001400ex said:
Do you honestly believe that or you just trying to goad APAG?GrundleStiltzkin said:
Sounds like that’s what AOC was doing. She couldn’t get the full deal through with the senator, so she threw that bone out to the proggies.allpurpleallgold said:Regardless of what in or not in the faq, it’s not part of the resolution. I guess when you can’t win on ideas you try and muddy the waters.
What do you believe? AOC released it by mistake?
The interpretation that getting rid of air travel in 10 years is FS, even when reading the FAQ I can't get there.
If we are to believe the FAQ, I'm not on board to get rid of nuclear and invest in trains on a large scale, even high speed trains like in Japan. Our country is too spread out for trains to be effective.
But if you stick solely to the resolution in Congress. It's a blueprint. An aggressive one. And a path to reducing our dependence on fossil fuels. And that I do support.
Then I went on to discuss the actual resolution.
