“I don’t think people who are taking money from pharmaceutical companies should be drafting health care legislation. I don’t think people who are taking money from oil and gas companies should be drafting climate legislation.”

submitted by EndlessSunflowers from (i.imgur.com)

all 35 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]screwballeclipsed 15 insightful - 4 fun15 insightful - 3 fun16 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

While i agree with the statement, i doubt she was smart enough to say this. Someone wrote this for her.

[–]chadwickofwv 7 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

While I fully agree with the sentiment, in no way do I believe that she does. Remember, communists lie even more than the other politicians.

[–]Druullus 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Doesn't that apply to anyone who can benefit from government intervention?

[–]EndlessSunflowers[S] 1 insightful - 4 fun1 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 4 fun -  (17 children)

It is awesome and amazing how this little firecracker triggers so many weak people!
She can speak the most basic, logical, truth and still send people over the edge! LOL

[–]jet199Instigatrix 8 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

She literally told people to donate money to Mermaids, a group which lobbies to sterilise "trans" kids, but OK.

[–]ReincarnatedByrney 3 insightful - 4 fun3 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

trans people should be sterilized

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

What the fuck is Mermaids

[–]Nemesis 6 insightful - 4 fun6 insightful - 3 fun7 insightful - 4 fun -  (11 children)

You can say the same thing about Trump. He can say something simple, like the sky is blue, and everyone will start shrieking that he's lying. It's as if when a group of people hate someone, they will overreact to every statement.
Honestly, what's great about this quote? It's just a surface level observation, no policy suggestion, no real insight. I wouldn't post a picture of my face with a quote saying "I think murder is bad, people shouldn't murder". A child could point out that money in politics is a problem, but if she was serious about the issue, maybe she could clarify her own connection to corporate money.

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (10 children)

She's a hypocrite. This woman will complain all day about how money shouldn't be in politics while taking money from Google, Amazon, and Microsoft. She's not even a Progressive, she's just another corrupt Democrat with no real ideology.

[–]FediNetizen 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

The only person that can afford to not take any money would be a rich person. AOC isn't rich, so she has to.

[–]Questionable 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (2 children)

Her yearly wages.

" Allowances

Members of Congress are also provided with an annual allowance intended to defray expenses related carrying out their congressional duties, including "official office expenses, including staff, mail, travel between a Member's district or state and Washington, DC, and other goods and services."

Sorry, not following you on this. How does money work again? For that matter, how do words work? Can we control the ones coming out of our own mouths? Or is that just something that people don't have to worry about, once you're in office, and in a different class of society?

Ĥ̅͛ǝ̮̺͕̲̰llo ʍoɹlp' I,m Qnǝsʇᴉouɐqlǝ.̬̘̟ͅ

[–]FediNetizen 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Christ you do understand what the money politicians take is being spent on, right?

[–]Questionable 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

That all depends on how dirty the politician is now doesn't it? And lets leave Christ out of this.

[–]Conductive-rabbi 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

😮

[–]screwballeclipsed 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

you seem to imply that when a person is rich, they stop taking money. it didn't stop the clintons from taking money for $500,000 dollar 'speeches'

[–]FediNetizen 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

you seem to imply that when a person is rich, they stop taking money.

No, what I said is that you need to be rich to be able to stop taking donations from corps and lobbying groups, and that since AOC isn't rich, she has to take donations from those group.

[–]screwballeclipsed 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

maybe that's not true either. if one had a moral compass, one would not need to take money from lobbyists. i guess if i had a choice between money and a suicide with two in the back of the head, i would take money.

[–]FediNetizen 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

if one had a moral compass, one would not need to take money from lobbyists

Do you think campaigning is free?

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

taxes could be used, to give each candidate an equal amount instead of lobbyists who corrupt the system. it would weed out all the 'micheal bloombergs.' it would likely work all else being equal.

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

I wouldn't call her a firecracker, more of a dud. How much did she lose her district in that Amazon deal again?

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

Climate change?

This is the #1 priority for Bill Gates, and the WHO. Literally.

So, what does that tell us?

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

And people who are taking money from big tech shouldn't be drafting tech legislation.

[–]zyxzevn🐈‍⬛ 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The climate?
As a scientist, I better correct that idea.

Many oil billionaires fully support the climate scare.
Yet they still don't care about the planet.
Let that sink in.

I have never seen such a bad science around that topic, probably because they have been deleting records from history to match their scare models. It has been colder and hotter these 100 of years. I grew up with old books about how Earth would freeze up.
http://www.realclimatescience.com has some good examples of the science from that time.

After studying the solar model, I noticed quickly that the climate is caused by the sun. But this has been neglected, because this did not match the models.
The NASA and astronomy have also many errors with their model, errors that break with basic tested science. And this mess leaks into the climate models.

With the climate models they only looked at one frequency, and not at the whole spectrum of the energy output of the sun. The latter varies far more than their models tell us, but we can see it directly.

And science is progressing, unlike the climate "science", and we are learning how the solar particles from the solar wind are giving us huge variations in temperature. A solar flare can raise the temperature a few degrees for several weeks.
We can also see how the variations of the sun has influence on the climate on other planets.
This video explains the fatal flaw in climate science
This video explains the latests science discoveries

The sun's activity goes up and down in a well known pattern, related to the sunspots. The climate follows exactly the same pattern!

The low magnetic field of Earth may cause some major disasters, though. It currently protects us from flares and such.

The focus of environmentalism on the climate-scare has completely destroyed the planet,
and left it open for pollution and deforestation.
I think it is time to dump the climate alarmism nonsense and get back to real-world problems.

Like did you know that insecticides have killed a majority of the insect population?
Want to stop that? Ban corrupt businesses like Monsanto/ Bayer
and get back to organic / balanced ways to grow food.

Still wonder why billionaires support climate scare?
Because it is related to "sustainable development", nice words that hide the real intention.
It actually means: "billionaires get monopolies on all resources",
and not just on oil, but on all energy,
and water, food, medicine,
and maybe also transport/ travel.
For resources on this check: www.corbettreport.com

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

Sounds nice on the surface but you really do need subject matter experts to avoid making huge mistakes that end up tanking an industry. Apply this same logic to excluding, say, subject matter experts on what "the internet" is and you get old school republicans whining about a series of tubes making some really, really bad internet legislation. To disconnect a subject matter expert from any income from that field is hard but also the reason politicians should (and do) get paid well.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Politicians get paid well because they passed the laws that allow them to get paid well. It's that simple, most of the civilians I know would take their jobs away because they are so inept at avoiding and dealing with corruption. They just bend the knee to it.

[–]LockeDemosthenes 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

I'm glad you agree with me i guess?

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Lol, no I don't. You said they should get paid the amount they are getting paid. I'm saying they shouldn't, because they don't deserve it.

[–]LockeDemosthenes 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Ah yes, there's that lack of more than 1 degree of separation you've shown again. You're literally advocating for even more private interest and funding in politics if you advocate for politicians to be paid less. Politicians are already paid far, far less than executive private industry roles. You cant honestly believe that you're going to get a subject matter expert in a political leadership role without paying them well do you? In your own dream world where politicians make nothing, the only people who could afford to be politicians would be people already rich as shit from success in private industry. I guess instead of agreeing with me you're arguing to hire more completely inept non-experts who have been bought and paid for by private industries - the logical outcome of your poorly considered idea.

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

My dream world doesn't have politicians making nothing.

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

Devil's advocate:

What if instead of being 'bought' the debate requires funding? What if the only people who know one side of the debate also are involved in the money of said side. What if that side's (presumed to be wrong) opponents are well funded. Should the right side hamstring themselves? What if this causes the right side to barely lose? Does this change the ethics of refusing the help?

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

I don't trust anyone to draft legislation. Everyone has an agenda.

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

Which would be ironic because I'm sure whatever large solar or wind company they put in place to man their green new deal would be making all the climate legislation. An energy company is an energy company. I love how these idiots think the GND is about climate change and not making politicians and companies extremely wealthy.

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

common sense.. is now radical idea

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

I think she should per her taxes before being allowed to say any "thoughts" on other taxpayers. Even when they are sound.

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

More carbon on atmosphere = good.

So only half-right.