Public Servant AOC Wears 'Tax the Rich' Dress to $30k Per Ticket Event

submitted by Chipit from youtu.be

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]jet199 5 insightful - 4 fun5 insightful - 3 fun6 insightful - 4 fun -  (12 children)

The funniest thing is that she claimed it was courage to wear it.

Then two or three other people turned up wearing much the same thing.

Fashionable luxury beliefs which cost the holder nothing to promote. If anything they help people like AOC climb the greasy pole.

Also

http://imgur.com/a/DKbxky3

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (11 children)

At least she's made a good argument on the dress. Yes, that did require courage.

[–]jet199 5 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 3 fun -  (3 children)

No argument was made in the dress.

It's a slogan.

An argument would be "the rich should be taxed because ..."

Really Socks you are fast losing what brains you had. Forcing yourself to believe lies to justify your existence or to fit in with your lefty friends is never going to work out well for you mentally.

[–]Airbus320 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

A++

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

Some of the worst kinds of people are those who think they're so smart when they aren't.

Your comments take everything out of context, as if you have no idea where she was, what the Gala was for, the rare tradition of making a political statement with a dress, and so much more about the context. If you wore the dress, would that be an argument? Not really, because you're an anonymous online person. It's a slogan if you wear it.

If a politician wears that dress in a room of rich people, that is an argument. Do you understand?

The person, the dress, the statement on the expensive dress, the rich people at the Gala, the publicity for it, the history of political statements at Galas, the fact that this is a fundraiser, the need for rich people to pay a fair share of taxes (which some rich people agree with), and so much more make this 'event' of her's and the dress at the Gala an argument.

And you are definitely in no position to determine who has "brains" and who doesn't. If you were a zombie, you'd starve.

[–]JasonCarswell 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Some of the worst kinds of people are those who think they're so smart when they aren't.

Just like a vampire who wouldn't recognize himself in a mirror if he had a soul or reflection.

The dress is a perfect example of the fake-progressives saying the correct words but never actually taking action.

[–]Chipit[S] 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (6 children)

Courage would have been wearing an openly pro-American dress. She would have been thrown out of the event. But this virtue signalling? Fit right in. Everyone knew it was theater. AOC is a fraud. What happened to force the vote? AOC showed courage by standing up to the little people and bravely going along with Pelosi. Stunning and brave!

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Courage would have been wearing an openly pro-American dress.

No - not at all

She would have been thrown out of the event.

No - not even.

But this virtue signalling?

No - It's POLITICS - the rich should pay taxes

Fit right in.

No - she didn't - around the rich people: that's the point!

Everyone knew it was theater.

Of course - for everyone and what they wore. Do you know anything about Galas?

AOC is a fraud.

Certainly not.

What happened to force the vote?

Not related to the Gala

AOC showed courage by standing up to the little people

No - they're not little people

and bravely going along with Pelosi.

No - it's politics

Stunning and brave!

No - it's her job

All of these points are really strange, as if they copied a Fox News broadcast. They're also all wrong.

[–]Chipit[S] 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun -  (4 children)

That's merely contradiction, not argument. The other guy that operates this social media influencer account was much better than you. I mean, seriously, the guilt by association fallacy?

[–]Jesus 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Socks is right. AOC did something that at least virtue signaled a statement positive for the middle and lower classes. The question is why her campaign managers are Zionists and she changed her stance on Israel completely; made a pledge to that crap terrorist state, and NEVER talks about capital tax, the only tax worth implementing on the rich.

[–]JasonCarswell 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

AOC did something that at least virtue signaled a statement positive for the middle and lower classes.

Bullshit. False advertising for false hope in fake leadership for empty promises and no action.

I'd take the ugliest truth over the sexiest lie any day. Fuck virtue signalling - give us real virtue and ACTION.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

So you're making this up as well? The contradiction is the "no", OK? The argument is what follows the contradiction.