that higher tax rates for the wealthy is radical.

but he is still by birth one of the very upper crust.

Yes! That Vanderbilt

Yes, the dress designer but more importantly, the sole heiress to the legendary Vanderbilt fortune. Yes, those Vanderbilts.

Unlike most Democrats she doesn't accept Republican and corporate media framing of every issue.

of those elders who practice the art of the great compromise?

Cooper is not the only one who needs to be reminded about the New Deal and Great Society roots of our party, our government, and our country.

years of work and accomplishments before she could read. Criticizing what they've done. That's what Whoopi was referring to.

No one is all good or all bad. She's done well in certain respects, and like any person new to the company, bad in other respects.

She hasn't actually done anything yet. Like co-sponsor a bill, debate on the floor of the House, etc.

Like the other side gets to make the laws.

I'm not going to argue the legislative record of every Democrat in the House of Representatives. But I think we can agree that much has been accomplished over the last 30 or 40 years. I remember 40 years ago. Much has been accomplished since then.

being told to sit down. be quiet and listen. Yeah right there are consequences winning , depending on how uncomfortable a Democrat winning makes people. I'm sure the last 30 or 40 years much has been accomplished getting the wealthy to pay their fair share of the tax burden.

but maybe you don't remember what things were like a few decades ago. Maybe you don't remember when the big bills that were difficult to pass, got passed.

That may be the problem. For some voters, they simply don't know what they don't know. And they don't know history.

There are things still to be done. Some big things.

The way government works, though, is that this is not a dictatorship. We are seeing someone try to make it one. But one party pushes for things, and the opposition pushes back. Oftentimes, a compromise is reached. Otherwise, nothing at all is done. Instead of a leap forward, a step forward is taken.

In government, we have to deal with all the people. From the far right to the far left, and all those in between

We can get much done in the House, since we are in control. But unless the Republicans in the Senate approve it, nothing will become law. Even then, unless the President signs it, it won't become law.

This is what we have to work through to change laws or make new ones. Neither party can do that alone, if it's not in control of the two houses of Congress and the executive branch...and even then, has a super majority in the Senate. Even then, it can be challenged in the US Sct...where the opposition has placed a majority of conservative justices.

I think it's great that Cortez was elected for her district. Even if I didn't, it's none of my business, since that's not my state or district. I happen to think an influx of new, young people into the party is a good thing. But there's an oversensitivity to any comment that is anything but absolute adoration...even a "people aren't all good or bad" was objected to, as relates to Cortez.

But what does Cortez want to accomplish? An increase in taxes for the wealthy? Okay...where's her introduced bill for that? That's all I'm saying. She hasn't actually done anything yet. Does she want to do away w/the electoral college? Where's her bill for that? I'll tell you where that bill is...it was introduced on the first day of this House of Rep session by someone else who was working to get things done. By not a big name...Steve Cohen, TN Democrat. He's introduced that Resolution for three years in a row.

Or does she want to reduce the influence of big money in politics? Where's her bill for that? Too late...that was introduced by the little known John Sarbanes (Maryland Democratic rep) on the first day of this House of Rep session. He apparently had done actual work on legislation before the session began, and was ready to introduce his bill on the first day.

This is what it takes to effect change. Talk is good. It really is. It's important to speak truth. If you're silent when lies are told, then the public has only the lies to go by. But the only thing that changes anything in the legislature is legislation itself.

One example, tax deductions that working blue collar people used were done away with. But none of your post touches on the fact that a popular outspoken WOC is bringing things that we have needed for 40 or 50 years. Discussions about taxing the wealthy making them pay their fair share, healthcare for all, affordable college AOC is bringing into the mainstream. Young and old people from both sides are learning about what can be done to achieve those things and getting excited about them and she is being told to sit down and learn before she does anything. Even by some of our wealthy allies.
Both parties have been able to work together to bring about favorable laws and legislation and tax breaks that benefits the wealthy and big business but it seems when it's for the poor and working class the story is "Sorry both parties have to work together to pass stuff so you only get part of what you need and we need to extend these tax breaks for the wealthy and make them permanent so you can get food stamps and unemployment."

I think young people have caught on and it's time for the old ways to slide into history while they change business as usual to this is what we can and will do. Lead follow or get out of their way.

So...I think some people are remembering what they want to remember. That's when Reagan decreased the tax rate from 90% down to 70% or something.

Okay, here's something for Cortez to do. McConnell just blocked the Democrats in the Senate from opening the govt. Get Cortez to fix that. Because under your logic, the Democrats are to blame for everything bad that has happened in the country for decades. So here's yet another thing the Republicans are doing that is bad. Tell Cortez to fix that, will ya? Now that she's in government, she can show the others how it's done.

I don't know what you are arguing about at this point. So I won't be responding again.

Last edited Thu Jan 10, 2019, 06:14 PM - Edit history (1)

couple of small raises and a small cut or two and at least one huge permanent tax break since then. 39 -50 years is splitting hairs. They don't pay their fucking fair share. Now lets all just keep ignoring that those in our government are looking out for the wealthy in the "they have to work together bullshit" and ignore that at least a few people, AOC is the one under discussion, is out there taking it to the people and getting results.

Makes one wonder why it hasn't been done before but then you look at the past and you know why. As to your logic remark? Your logic is seriously lacking. No one, and certainly not I said that the Democrats are to blame for everything bad that has happened in the country for decades.Creative thought at it's finest. Almost as good as saying Democratic leadership won AOC's race for her.

Sorry to say that is straight up Republican framing. Do you not understand how marginal tax rates work?

is not equal to the tax rate

And I disagree completely that "the Democrats have been effective in working on a more fair tax system." More fair than what? Than the pukes? OK. More fair than their historical selves? No.

"I don't know how old you are..."

Really? I guess it fits with someone who uses the lack of introduced legislation by AOC to criticize her. I don't know if you were born yesterday, but you do realize she has not been a representative for even two weeks yet, don't you?

I feel that there's a generational shift that is starting to take place in politics, which AOC represents, that people are not yet ready for. This forum skews older so it could be a matter of the old guard not accepting the new.

AOC was not alive when Reagan was president. She was in kindergarten when Congress reached a turning point and turned dysfunctional (Newt's Contract On America). She's of a generation that has been screwed 7 ways to Sunday, yet people are complaining that they're not breeding like others are.

Should she get off your lawn?

I love that phrase. Every time I read a post complaining about her needing to “learn the job” that is what I hear.

That's what I hear all the time on this forum. Especially when it comes to things like cell phones.

Both Obama and Bill Clinton raised the tax rate for the wealthy.

This is not difficult information to find out.

by those with tremendous knowledge, both parties had to work together so taxes on corporations and the wealthy got smaller and tax breaks for them get bigger and permanent.
I don't blame young people for raising hell about it now. The wealthy have what they need and want while the young carry the burden of doing without basic needs and opportunities to get ahead and the looming threat of disastrous climate change. I think in this case the wealthy who have theirs should understand that elections have consequences, because the new generation of elected people seem to have no intention of sitting down and being quiet. And it's about damn time. To hear a newly elected Congresswoman say the truth and call Trump out for what he is is a watershed event. He really is a motherfucker.

to speak her mind.

What's one good thing Trump has done? So, what, according to you, has AOC done that's bad?

Last edited Thu Jan 10, 2019, 05:32 PM - Edit history (1)

That seems to be a big problem with some people.

co-sponsoring a bill, debating on the floor of the House, etc.

Like AOC I don't accept conservative framing of issues or policies. She's done more for Democrats in the last months than Pelosi has done in the last 6 years. The excitement surrounding this young lady is unprecedented. She is motivating young voters to vote Democratic. She is advocating for issues that establishment Democrats only give lip service or oppose altogether. She is the future of the Democratic Party.

That explains it. There's this overreaction I'm seeing to comments or observations about both Pelosi and Cortez. I didn't realize there's a contest going on between the two. Now I remember...it started when Cortez did something on her first day. I thought that was settled or a misunderstanding or something.

I'm not getting in the middle of that. I'm not in any camp, so to speak.

Ok. That's good to know.

Ok. That's good to know.

Read some history.

Or do you have only disgust for smart, brave, accomplished women over 40 who actually get progressive ideas (and actual progressive legislation) into practice?

by running against and beating a white man for a safe Congressional seat.

Oh, wait a minute. She couldn't do that because in 1955, there was no Voting Rights Act or Civil Rights Act, no people of color in Congress and, if she was allowed to vote, it was only after she took a literacy test and faced physical threats to cast a ballot.

So, instead, she risked her life by refusing to give up her seat to a white man, getting arrested and dragged off of a city bus and thrown in jail when she had no way of knowing if she would come out alive, sparked a year-long civil disobedience movement that led to the invalidation of segregation on public transportation, spent the rest of her life fighting for civil rights and social justice and was so revered she became the first woman accorded the right to lie in honor in the U.S. Capitol, where the President of the United States and leaders of both Houses of Congress paid her tribute and tens of thousands of ordinary Americans stood in lines throughout two days and nights to honor her.

Yes, if only Mrs. Parks had stood for something and run for and won a safe seat in New York City, she too, could be praised as a true trailblazer willing to speak truth to power. But she didn't, so ...

and nurtured. It was nauseating.

with a healthy dose of man-splainin thrown in for good measure!

framing to boot! She has been a God send in my view. I believe she will attract disaffected millennials into the party provided we don’t somehow neutralize her.

Laura Marsh wrote a great piece in the New Republic debunking it, and I'm mystified it's still referenced.

As she said:

The more divided we become, the harder it is to locate the Overton Window, let alone move it. There is now a window of policies that are acceptable to the Republican base, and another for Democrats, but on the national level, there is no window. Instead of a consensus edging one way or another, we have a choice between two poles. The Overton Window is ultimately a name for what we have lost, not an indication of where we are headed. Its popularity today represents a powerful nostalgia for the center. It doesn’t help us overcome fragmentation or rebuild a consensus. Its attractiveness lies in its reassurance that a middle ground once existed..

it was made up by libertarians who thought they could drown out the market place of ideas with extremist ideas to make them more acceptable.The overton window theory does not capture the diverse polity and vast range of political viewpoints that exists.

THe ideas AOC have been expousing have found popularity among Americans ( democrats at least) for a while now. It was the ACA which really cemented for a lot of people that affordable healthcare should be a right. As for taxation that's a thorny one, Americans find taxation inherently repulsive , independence was birthed out of taxes but at least among Democrats there's been the belief that the rich should pay their due share in taxes.

As for the marginal tax rate, we no longer live during the time of Eisenhower. The super rich like Bezos generate wealth not through wage income but investments. What the super rich would NOT like is a tax on their wealth, and closing their ability to send their wealth outside, which they pay very little tax on. Consumption tax is also a joke. More progressive tax systems, less regressive taxes ( which hurt the poor) are what's needed.

Similar things were said about Ralph Nader, and didn't pan out.

There's a hotbed of progressivism!
More like brave defenders of the status quo. No wonder they are uncomfortable with the concept.

I'm amazed to see any left leaning people still defending an elitist libertarian concept (admittedly I used to reference it myself until I realised how limiting a theory it is)2016 was so wild pundits crawled out the woodwork with then relatively obscure theories to explain trump.

Thanks! A good laugh is always welcome.

Just a dig at the publication and a giggle. Now thanks for my laugh

AOC has given very good, passionate answers to questions she has been asked, but to put the shift (which is debatable) all at her feet is #1 insulting to all of the other movements and people who have been fighting for progressive values over the last few years and before that. #2 it puts immense pressure on AOC and gives in to the idea of a "savior" and that savior's eventual fall from grace.

I am glad that she is out there and she is for the most part doing a very good job speaking out. However, the media is doing what the media does, focusing on charismatic and photogenic politicians who create drama and conflict so that they can market that product. If they want to silence AOC, they will. She should stay strong to her values and get in there and legislate as well. That is how she will have a long and productive political life.

she speaks for me so far anyway
lowering taxes on the richest of us has led to many of our problems
a 70+ tax rate bracket and a tax on stock sales would go a long way to balancing the budget and paying for heath care , infrastructure and bring back a middle class

I'm afraid they're setting her up for a fall from grace - all the attention now, and then she'll get buried over some issue where she misstates some fact or misspeaks about some part of an issue. Even if she quickly corrects it on social media, the media (and RW media, especially) are waiting to pounce on her and tear her to shreds over it in the subsequent feeding frenzy.

He had an outburst of emotion at a campaign function and it was all down hill from there. The media basically buried him.

I am not saying that AOC should stop doing what she is doing. Other than a few bumps which may be overblown anyway, she has carried herself extremely well. What I am saying is the old adage of getting into problems with people who buy ink by the barrel.

My main point was for people not to anoint AOC as the next Messiah. I know that people like to think that one great personality will come along and make everything better. We saw it with President Obama, Bernie Sanders, and on the other side, right wingers saw it in Trump. The reality is that while able politicians or personalities can have impact on the situation, unless they work with others to sustain that impact, the load often becomes too heavy and they crumble, which is a story the media loves to tell.

or come in 2nd -- rather than winning he got 18% of the delegates to Kerry's 38%. He had actually reached his peak maybe a month or two before in Iowa and NH - where he already was polling lower. If there had been no "outburst of emotion" that night the coverage would have been Kerry's victory, Edwards' unexpected second AND why Howard Dean failed.

Not to mention AOC is genuinely a progressive on the edge of the party. Vermonters I speak to talk of how he was a nice guy, middle of the road Democrat. Other than Sharpton, the most liberal of the 2004 field was John Kerry. (Don't even try to suggest Edwards, who had one of the more centrist Senate records - even voting for a terrible bankruptcy bill.)

Millennials must have some short-assed memory spans, and that's all I'll say about that...

The difference now, I think, is that not only does social media makes it much easier perpetuate that lack of knowledge and perspective, it also appears to level out the playing field to the point that millennials think they have nothing to learn from anyone or anything that came before them.

But as my grandmother used to say to me whenever I thought I knew everything and she was clueless, "Just live long enough."

is so ingrained in most Americans' thinking now, the "old" ideas need a new fresh champion who doesn't mince words. I am glad AOC is speaking out and moving the political discourse leftward.

that people have been speaking out about these things for years but some folks think they're hearing it for the first time. She's bright and fresh, but she's not saying or doing anything that lots of other folk haven't been and giving her credit for
singlehandedly moving anything at this point is off-base and suggests that those who hold such a belief haven't been paying attention

I'm just glad we now have a speaker charismatic and savvy enough to get people's attention.

my point.

Speak for yourself. Not only have many of us been listening, we've also been doing. Perhaps you needed a young, exciting savior to come along to get your attention but many of us have already been doing the work long before Ocazio-Cortez came along. But if it took her to finally get you to start paying attention, I'm glad she appeared when she did since we need all hands on deck.. Whatever it takes.

Some people did listen. Just not nearly enough.

We needed a savior and here she is.

And you have a weird obsession with denegrating Aoc every chance you get.

Whatever floats your boat, I guess.

"AOC is THE most brilliant politician in generations who is doing what no one else has done or can do (including Rosa Parks) and is changing the world as we know it."

"Actually she's not."

"WHY do you insist on bashing, denigrating, attacking AOC?!?!"

Showing how much you are “concerned” about her. About how she just needs to be a little more respectful

Like I said, you are hilarious.

But it does seem that whenever I do respond to one, plenty of her fans are right there ready to instantly spring into action to swarm and accuse me - and anyone else who doesn't think she's the Second Coming - of attacking her, although I've done nothing of the kind.

It's rather amusing, but also a little creepy the way it echoes a familiar phenomenon . . .

And what the prior generations have royally screwed up.

That said, I do like your grandmother's advice!

I am here to tell you that they are right. The generation running things have failed miserably by almost any measure.

by people younger than themselves.

If you remember 60s, "The Greatest Generation" was not called that when they were the immediately preceding generation. They were on the old/wrong side of the "Generation Gap" and reviled by the next generation, who blamed them for Vietnam, racism, and generally screwing up the world, etc. They were the generation of Richard Nixon, Robert McNamara, George Wallace, Lt. Calley, etc. And the generation that blamed them and promised to do things differently and not repeat their errors and crimes is now known as the Baby Boomers and they are now the ones being reviled for screwing everything up.

The "Greatest Generation" is a fairly new frame, created and promoted in the late 1990s by Tom Brokaw in his book of the same name and adopted by people having the benefit of time and hindsight that enables them to view that group with more realistic perspective (including those people who couldn't stand them 50 years ago).

As I said, every generation thinks the previous one "royally screwed up." But once they've lived long enough and learn a few things, they usually revise that assessment.

rebellious against the generation that would be called the greatest some decades later.

these days you might have some things here and there but as a whole it's not as negative.

young people prefer Nancy pelosi to paul ryan. young people who actually care about issues like the environment are aware of what people like al gore Carter and many others have and continue to do to fight for it.