Whoopi Goldberg Advises AOC To 'Sit Still,' 'Learn The Job' Before 'Pooping On People'

[kstewart33]

On “The View” Monday, Goldberg acknowledged that Ocasio-Cortez is an “opinionated woman, which we like.”

“But it is very, very difficult when people make accusations where you say, you know, the Democrats have done nothing, the establishment of the Democrats have done nothing,” Goldberg said. “And I just want to throw this out to you. (Rep.) John Lewis (D-GA) wasn’t sitting still. [Sen.] Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) wasn’t sitting still.”

“So,” she continued. “You just got in there and I know you got lots of good ideas, but I would encourage you to sit still for a minute and learn the job. … You don’t have to be born into it. You don’t have to know it when you step out, but before you start pooping on people and what they’ve done, you got to do something too.”

[link:https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/whoopi-goldberg-advises-aoc-sit-still-learn-job-pooping-on-people|

Wishing AO-C the best, but my thoughts exactly.

[Mr. Quackers]

1. Whoopi should stick to being an irrelevant has been

[A HERETIC I AM]

3. ...

[fleabiscuit]

16. +1

[musicblind]

251. +2

[Kahuna7]

320. +3 nt

[ehrnst]

371. +4.

[ADX]

373. +5

...For fuck's sake...

[geardaddy]

376. +1

[Eliot Rosewater]

403. Yeah, what do they call that when one person has ALL the major awards?

EGOT

[sheshe2]

533. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++

[George II]

568. let me get to the point, +1,000,000! HAHA!

[Hassin Bin Sober]

7. Whoopi has gone a long way from her "Fontaine" days to filling out a chair on the view,

... telling a young elected person of color to shut up, while raking in millions.

[Mr. Quackers]

9. She couldn't net $5 in box office to save her life

who really gives a flying fuck what Whoopi Goldberg says.

1984 called and wants it's shitty movies back.

[cwydro]

24. She won an Academy award, a Grammy, a Tony, and an Emmy - among other accomplishments.

No doubt your talents rival hers, therefore allowing you to call her an “irrelevant has been.”

[cwydro]

38. Care to explain?

I doubt it.

[mcar]

185. Who's they?

[cwydro]

218. That's what I wondered.

Never got an answer though.

[mcar]

230. We won't

[Eliot Rosewater]

404. If you or I said that ....can you IMAGINE

[still_one]

259. hmmmmmmmmmmm, I imagine things are slow over at JPR

[musicblind]

262. Was thinking similar. n/t

[Eliot Rosewater]

405. They are bound and determined to give 2020 to the GOP, those folks you mention

But, we cant really discuss it.

[RandiFan1290]

310. 100%

[ehrnst]

355. Not going to answer that?

I can imagine why.

[tonedevil]

31. Whoopie has all the political savvy...

of a Susan Sarandon.

[fleabiscuit]

175. Well Susan had BS, so there is that. nt

[sheshe2]

235. Ha!

Hey, flea.

[ehrnst]

411. Yep. (nt)

[ehrnst]

381. Whoopi's way, way more progressive, and has an actual decades long record of progressive advocacy.

She's no rookie.

[tonedevil]

393. She has a voice based on...

celebrity and has no unique knowledge fueling her opinion just a prominence that gets her more attention. That is exactly how Susan Sarandon is qualified I give their political opinions equal importance, which is to say none.

[ehrnst]

394. Perhaps you don't know Whoopi grew up in actual poverty, unlike others who have claimed to.

Last edited Tue Jan 8, 2019, 02:22 PM - Edit history (2)

She grew up the object of racism and violence. Lived homeless as an addict. Coat hanger self-abortion at 14. Made it out, and made art out of it. That is what her voice is based on.

I'd say that's some unique knowledge. It also informed by her long, long history of actual progressive activism.

https://www.nirhealth.org/champions2018/ Champions of Choice Award

https://www.looktothestars.org/celebrity/whoopi-goldberg

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comic_Relief_USA

http://www.thecannifornian.com/cannabis-health/resources-for-patients/whoopi-goldberg-women-deserve-legal-access-cannabis-products/

https://variety.com/video/whoopi-goldberg-power-of-women-new-york/

Invited to state dinner at the White House in 2000
https://www.gettyimages.ae/detail/news-photo/actress-whoopi-goldberg-arrives-at-the-white-house-for-a-news-photo/909192

I guess she won those awards and honors for her "celebrity" because she really has no other voice than a poser like Sarandon? I guess she was invited to host the Oscars three times, and the Tonys once because she is just a "celebrity" has no 'voice' as a satirical contemporary comic writer and artist? When Susan Sarandon gets that honor, then you might have one thing to compare them on. Or an EGOT. Or a one woman broadway show with brilliant observations on class, addictions, being black and a child, and disability.

She broke new ground in politically based, honest, soul baring comedy:

https://www.pri.org/stories/2018-09-06/aha-moment-whoopi-goldberg

I'd compare political neophytes, not Whoopi, to privileged Sarandon, for being mostly talk, and little action. Whoopi, on the other hand is a sharp satirist in the mold of Richard Pryor.

You're welcome for the education on Whoopi Goldberg.

The feeding frenzy and the dismissing and demeaning the intellect, talent and acheivements of a truly progressive, outspoken, middle aged woman of color because she dares to criticize the actions of a Sanders-endorsed politician isn't surprising to me anymore. Even on DU.

[Mosby]

420. thanks to her wisdom, I now know the difference beween rape-rape

And just "kinda rapey".

You know nuance is important.

[ehrnst]

487. Yeah, because when she says something that makes you unhappy

She's dirt.



There's that nuance for ya.

[tonedevil]

505. Whoopi's nuance...

was to inform us that Roman Polanski hadn't committed rape-rape. Apparently if it only rates one rape it isn't very serious.

[ehrnst]

502. Kind of "rapey?" You mean like...

essays literally about how women "fantasize about being raped by three men?"

But.... but.... this is so much WORSE...because...... REASONS!!!

Yeah, nuance and all.

[tonedevil]

423. If you weren't so busy breaking your arm...

patting yourself on the back you might notice I'm not thanking you. Whoopi is a fine person and has a gigantic career in entertainment, but she has no experience in politics except as a celebrity. I don't hold her political opinion any higher than any other random person I might have occasion to hear express an opinion regarding politics. In this case I sharply disagree with her and found her invocation of older Congresspeople as though Rep. Ocasio-Cortez had spoken against them disingenuous at best.

[ehrnst]

427. I guess if you ignore her career and awards, and her comedy, and her writing and her activism

that would make some sense. I understand an emotional need to demean/diminish her intellect, experience, career, and activism her to make her seem less accomplished or savvy than someone she's criticizing, which is what your posts appear to be.

I guess you'll dismiss this just as easily?



https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=11641710

The political acumen of just any random person on the street...

https://www.nirhealth.org/champions2018/ Champions of Choice Award

https://www.looktothestars.org/celebrity/whoopi-goldberg

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comic_Relief_USA

http://www.thecannifornian.com/cannabis-health/resources-for-patients/whoopi-goldberg-women-deserve-legal-access-cannabis-products/

https://variety.com/video/whoopi-goldberg-power-of-women-new-york/

Invited to state dinner at the White House in 2000
https://www.gettyimages.ae/detail/news-photo/actress-whoopi-goldberg-arrives-at-the-white-house-for-a-news-photo/909192


https://www.pri.org/stories/2018-09-06/aha-moment-whoopi-goldberg

[melman]

484. "unlike others who have claimed to''

Who has done this? It would be great to hear some detail on this so nobody misunderstands the meaning.

I mean, someone might look at that and see it as an attempt to resurrect an ugly right-wing smear against Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

But since you obviously wouldn't do a thing like that it would be a great help if you explained exactly what that is supposed to mean.


Thanks!

[ehrnst]

508. Many others.

What are the 'ugly right wing smears' you are referring to?

It would be a great help if you explained exactly what that is supposed to mean.

[melman]

510. Why should I explain

When you know exactly what I'm referring to?

[ehrnst]

511. Got nothing, huh?

Not surprised.

If a woman did that, she'd be called a tease.

[melman]

514. What is there to have?

You know exactly what I'm talking about.

[ehrnst]

516. So why do you have a problem with posting it?

All talk, I see.

[melman]

517. No problem

I'm just not going to play the game where we pretend you don't know.

[ehrnst]

519. Tag, you're it.

And you pretend like I'm the one making the crass insinuations.

But you keep on posting, yet say nothing.

[betsuni]

489. What a wonderful post, thank you.

The attacks against her are pathetic.

[George II]

506. She grew up in public housing on the lower west side of Manhattan (Chelsea)

[ehrnst]

521. Self-induced abortion at 14, homeless and addicted. She overcame it all

and she pays it forward in trying to make the world a better place for kids like her.

Her numerous awards and honors for activism are some serious cred.

[ehrnst]

416. You mean like this politcial opinion?

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1251733008

[tonedevil]

429. Should I be moved one way or the other...

by that meme? Is Senator Sanders germane to this discussion?

[ehrnst]

430. Whoopi is, and this is one of her political opinions - which you think has no real value.

Is that clearer?

Nice try at evasion, tho. I'll give you that. Others just would have simply stopped responding in an attempt at damage control.

[tonedevil]

431. So we should like Senator Sanders...

because Whoopi will have him on The View?

[ehrnst]

436. How many straw men is that now?

You're just going to keep on swinging away, trying to hit something that resembles a ball. It's adorable.




No one said any such thing, and you know it. You're defensive because it just blows a hole in the black/white argument that if Whoopi doesn't agree with you or AOC on something, then she's incapable of political judgement as astute as yours, that there is something very flawed with her not your POV - no other explanation! Clearly you wouldn't have made any of those insults or judgements concerning Whoopi had you seen that other statement instead.

You are the one with the "all or nothing" mentality going on, and the inability to admit that one's response to Whoopi's statements could possibly an emotional one, and not one that you are able defend with data.

Is that clearer?

Swing away. I'm not counting strikes.

[tonedevil]

444. When did I make this argument?

It just blows a hole in the argument that if Whoopi doesn't agree with you or AOC on something, then she's incapable of political judgement as astute as yours

I have never claimed I have better political judgement than Whoopi so it doesn't make any sense accusing me of doing so. In what way have I demonstrated an "all or nothing" mentality? That is a very vague sentence with no examples of why you would say that. My emotional response to Whoopi's statements is a rousing whatever.
I still don't understand why you decided to SPAM the thread with a picture of Whoopi saying she would invite Senator Sanders on The View.

[ehrnst]

445. "rousing whatever" Swing!

It took all those posts for you to get that across?



This is an all or nothing/strawman argument:

tonedevil (1,313 posts)

431. So we should like Senator Sanders...

because Whoopi will have him on The View?

I presented you with something that didn't support your claims about Whoopi, and so you tried to make it an extreme statement that it wasn't, so your argument seemed less extreme.

Is that clearer?

But please do go on insisting and reposting that Whoopi's words mean nothing to you, because it totally makes that case.

Batter up!

[tonedevil]

464. This game where you are...

pitcher and umpire is amusing, but in the end just as meaningless as the Whoopi talks to Sanders meme you SPAMed this thread with. Whoopi's tirade on The View does give me a small sad because I don't like to see people around my age turning into the shake-fist-at-clouds-get-off-my-lawn types that I disliked when I was youthful. So her words mean something to me, but they haven't altered my thoughts or feelings.

[ehrnst]

469. "tirade"

Yes, men often say that women are unhinged or otherwise irrational when they don't apologize for saying something that angers one.

Keep on saying that "sad" you have is "small."

Repeatedly insisting that you are non-plussed is totally convincing.

[tonedevil]

476. OK.

[ehrnst]

491. That's much more convincing,

[tonedevil]

493. OK

[George II]

442. But she isn't criticizing her elders in Congress, essentially claiming they haven't done anything.

So you are basically saying that Whoopi Goldberg (and Susan Sarandon) should do what some think Whoopi Goldberg told Cortez, "shut up".

Who of those three has the more learned experience in "politics"?

[ehrnst]

448. Indeed. (nt)

[tonedevil]

460. Which of them has spent the most time...

in an elected office? I wouldn't tell someone else to shut up, but I do try to ignore both Whoopi Goldberg and Susan Sarandon as much as possible when they pontificate on politics.

[George II]

470. This isn't so much about politics, it's advice on life - both of those women...

....(one of whom I admire, the other not so much) have decades more experience in life and how to get along overall.

When I got out of college and got my first job as an engineer, I would never have thought of going in on my first day and tell my bosses that they didn't accomplish anything or didn't know what they were doing.

It was utterly disrespectful to talk about so-called "establishment Democrats" that they haven't done anything. Plus, it was entirely wrong.

I really liked two of Whoopi Goldberg's comments:

"Before you start pooping on people and what they've done, you gotta do something too."

"You can't poop on what was when you came in on the shoulders of quite a few giants."

Those don't refer necessarily to politics, they refer to how to get along in life.

[tonedevil]

478. Those are fine...

comments I just don't think that Rep. Ocasio-Cortez has been pooping on people and Whoopi was very shy about providing those details.

[sheshe2]

538. Not sure what your point is here.

Which of them has spent the most time...
in an elected office?

Cortez has held office for- five days. No previous experience.

Goldberg and Sarandon-zero days. No previous experience.

[Eliot Rosewater]

407. Of course and for people to dismiss her like this is SICKENING

I have my issues with her, but these attacks arent about the issues I would have.

They are about something else.

[George II]

361. Bazinga. I believe she's the only person to every have won all four of those awards....

"Irrelevant has been"? I think not.

Thanks!

[ADX]

375. Nah, several people have won all four...

Richard Rodgers
Helen Hayes
Rita Moreno
John Gielgud
Audrey Hepburn
Marvin Hamlisch
Jonathan Tunick
Mel Brooks
Mike Nichols
Whoopi Goldberg
Scott Rudin
John Legend
Andrew Lloyd Webber
Tim Rice

[George II]

378. I thought there was a qualifier with respect to her - the first black woman to win all four.

[Eliot Rosewater]

408. I can see the future. It is very bleak.

I cant talk about it though.

[ADX]

667. Well, if you had included that qualifier in your post...

...I wouldn't have taken the time to edify you...

[at140]

676. yap, credit is due where it is due. nt

[Baitball Blogger]

52. Yes, but how do you feel about Lady Gaga losing a Golden Globe to Glenn Close?

[littlemissmartypants]

236. I got nothin' eom

[Captain Stern]

108. I doubt you or I could net $5 in box office either.

Yet, here we both are saying stuff as if someone will give a flying fuck.

Whoopi Goldberg wasn't throwing around insults. She was giving advice.

Ms Ocasio-Cortez can take that advice and use it, or not.

[cwydro]

118. Bingo.

[MustLoveBeagles]

238. Spot on

I'm not really getting the hostility towards Whoopi.

[demosincebirth]

276. Bingo bingo

[ehrnst]

379. +1000

[NurseJackie]

117. ...

[LovingA2andMI]

187. Ummm...

Researching before letting the fingers do the typing is a REALLY, REALLY good thing....

Whoopi Goldberg's Box Office Stats

Movies Over $100M: 6
Total Number of Movies: 46
Total Gross of Movies (starring): $959,546,728
Total Number of Movies (starring): 30
Avg Gross of each movie (starring): $34,269,526
Total Gross of All Movies: $2,331,669,462
Avg. Gross of each Movie: $52,992,488
Avg Gross of Movies in the 90s: $55,559,907
Avg Gross of Movies in the 00s: $28,524,542
Avg Gross of Movies in the 10s: $128,991,865
Avg. Gross of the Last 10 movies: $84,374,236

[cwydro]

220. Good job!

Thanks for that!

[cwydro]

217. You think The Color Purple is a shitty movie?

Wow. That speaks volumes.

[kstewart33]

260. When you don't like the message, attack the messenger?

Let's not adopt Fox News' MO.

[betsuni]

265. A lot of that in this thread.

According to the attack the messenger people, Whoopi's:

An overfed talking head
Irrelevant
All she does is gain weight and run her mouth for big paychecks
Racist, sexist, right-wing
Just jealous
Has money and people with money have no clue as to how the majority feels
Slipping into the White Moderate role
"Ms. Greedy" who's pissed off because her taxes might go up
Makes shitty movies
Isn't doing her job (when her job is hosting a show about politics and current events)

Quite the spectacle.

[NurseJackie]

271. I thank GOD for strong women like Whoopi Goldberg! THANK GOD!!

She's right to be upset and insulted when our stalwart Democrats are "pooped" on. These Democrats deserve her PRAISE not her scorn and contempt and insults.

“But it is very, very difficult when people make accusations where you say, you know, the Democrats have done nothing, the establishment of the Democrats have done nothing,” Goldberg said. “And I just want to throw this out to you. (Rep.) John Lewis (D-GA) wasn’t sitting still. [Sen.] Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) wasn’t sitting still.”

[betsuni]

280. Whoopi would never fall for the false equivalency nonsense.

I still don't know who these establishment corporate Democrats are who have done nothing. Why are we never told their names and proof of their corruption and do-nothingness? They should really have proof of their accusations so we can all know the facts. Better than running around attacking the messenger, moving goalposts, straw men, deflection, insults, gaslighting, etc.

[NurseJackie]

282. The arguments are getting weaker and more absurd. But my favorite is still "psy-ops".

Second favorite: the one where we're supposed to allow others to trash the Democratic party and our stalwart Democrats because it "generates excitement" and "brings in new voters".

I'm like: seriously?? Why would ANY "new voter" be attracted to a party that's being (falsely) billed as being "corrupt" or "feeble" or filled with do-nothings who don't care about anything.

I'm sick of it. Whoopi is right!

[betsuni]

288. Yes, the "psy-ops" was a nice touch.

The Huffington Post is spam, anyone who doesn't believe Democrats are corrupt monsters are bots and Republicans, Whoopi is a jealous sexist racist millionaire who hates taxes. There is no bottom of the barrel!

[NurseJackie]

291. Don't mess with Whoopi!

[R B Garr]

331. Yes! Whoopi nailed it with that quote alone, and she was

being polite. AOC could learn from Whoopi.

[Trumpocalypse]

559. When AOC say

anything against John Lewis or Diane Feinstein? Because if she didn’t Goldberg was lying and loses all credibility.

[NurseJackie]

560. LOL ... It's all a conspiracy, eh?

[Trumpocalypse]

561. Never said anything about a conspiracy

Let’s be honest and not play childish diversion games.

When did AOC specifically criticize Lewis and Feinstein? Goldberg infers that she did.

[NurseJackie]

563. Please do.

[Trumpocalypse]

583. So you're admitting

AOC never criticized Lewis and Feinstein and that Goldberg was dishonest to infer that she did.

[NurseJackie]

587. I'm smarter than you give me credit for.

Oh good grief! I'm smarter than you give me credit for. And I also know that you're smarter than you're pretending to be. These hair-splitting word games you're trying to play are not going to work with me.

583. So you're admitting
AOC never criticized Lewis and Feinstein and that Goldberg was dishonest to infer that she did.

Nope. Nothing of the sort. I've been very clear all along and so has Whoopi.

[Trumpocalypse]

593. Then why did Goldberg

bring up Lewis and Feinstein when AOC never criticized them?

[NurseJackie]

595. I disagree with the premise of the question. Aside from that....

I disagree with the premise of the question. Aside from that, you're on your own. You'll have to figure it out for yourself.

[Trumpocalypse]

597. Are you denying that Goldberg

mentioned them? What was the purpose of mentioning them?

[NurseJackie]

598. You don't need me to explain it to you.

[Trumpocalypse]

648. No you don't

Goldberg was being dishonest.

[NurseJackie]

649. No she wasn't.

[Trumpocalypse]

652. Yes she was

She was inferring AOC had criticized them when she never has.

[NurseJackie]

654. You know perfectly well that she did.

[Trumpocalypse]

656. Yes I do

She dishonestly inferred AOC had criticized Lewis and Feinstein.

[NurseJackie]

657. Whoopi told the truth. There's no two ways about it. Whoopi did not lie.

89. I'm here for serious discussion
Not childish games.

[Trumpocalypse]

658. What truth?

Telling anyone whether a new member of Congress or person on street to sit down and shut up sounds more like FAUX News.

[NurseJackie]

659. Cope.

[George II]

608. She claimed "congress hasn't done anything" (not an exact quote, won't look that one up)....

....which means the many experienced Democratic members of the House (and the Senate) didn't do anything.

The line I appreciated most about what Whoopi Goldberg said was:

"you come in on the shoulders of quite a few giants."

[Trumpocalypse]

650. But she specifically mentioned

Lewis and Feinstein, dishonestly inferring that AOC had criticized them.

[George II]

651. No, she probably just mentioned the two Democrats....

....who first came to mind that have been in Congress for a long time.

[Trumpocalypse]

653. Then she should have pointed

that out. But she didn’t.

[dogman]

343. That is exactly what Whoopi is doing.

Taxes frighten the rich.

[ehrnst]

415. Oh right...

Your claim that she is after AOC because "OMGtaxes" makes no sense.




https://www.democraticunderground.com/1251733008

[dogman]

419. Her criticism of AOC makes no sense.

She has an issue and I'm not buying "stand still". AOC has less than 2 years to prove herself. In the first week she has done more to move the Overton window back to the left and I love that.

[ehrnst]

422. Your claim that she's going after AOC because she's a greedy rich

person and AOC wants to tax the rich is what makes no sense.

Which is why you're trying to avoid even acknowledging this after your insults and smears that she's "lazy" and motivated by 'greed' that this DU post blows away.





Here it is again, in case you forgot, just before you tried to derail the subject....

dogman (5,703 posts)

358. Spending money is hard work, ikr?

She doesn't have me enraged, just disgusted. Why does she feel enraged by AOC's behavior? I think it's taxes, but I could be wrong. You mention rape, what about her opinion on Polanski?

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=11641097

[dogman]

424. ok

[ehrnst]

425. OK what?

[dogman]

463. whatever

I don't dislike Whoopi. I am annoyed by her IMO ignorant statements. For this I have been accused of racism and sexism. The discussion isn't really worth the effort. Sorry to have wasted our time. T-Rump is the problem. I will try to stick with that issue. I wish she had stuck to that issue also.

[ehrnst]

507. So she's ignorant to give her advice on how to last longer in office. Got it.

And who has accused you of being 'racist and sexist' for your slamming of her?

And if the discussion wasn't worth the effort, why did you keep on blasting away with those posts?

[dogman]

524. So she can criticize an elected Democrat, but I can't criticize her. Got it.

Nice to see who makes the rules here. It would not keep her in Congress longer to fail her campaign promises. She got where she is taking on the establishment. She knows there is a huge target on her back and she's using it to push her agenda. Read your posts for the racist, sexist crap. Your post #367 and #432 on the difficulty of being a man. The effort is a waste because T-Rump is still President.

[George II]

433. Uh oh, wonder how many heads exploded over that?

[ehrnst]

435. The Whoopi must be flawed because she doesn't agree with me or AOC

argument won't take a dent, esp among males, but it's good to remind people how opinions are not the same as facts, and are not neccessarily supported by facts.

[George II]

437. I wonder if we should rename her Oopsi Goldberg?

[ehrnst]

438. ....

[ehrnst]

529. So do you think her admiration for Bernie is fake?

I hear that women are duplicitous. When they're not fantasizing about being gang raped.

[Eliot Rosewater]

536. Taxes frighten most people, including those who will never pay a high rate.

Thus talking about it NOW when we have NAZI TRAITORS in the WH doesnt make sense to me.

[ehrnst]

370. Apparently you give a great big "flying fuck" about what Whoopi says

or you wouldn't be furiously posting trying to discredit and demean her....and by extension, anyone who agrees with her assessment...

[ehrnst]

417. I guess you missed this on DU

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1251733008

[qazplm135]

64. I missed where she said

"shut up."

And she's a POC as well so the idea that this is a POC issue is ridiculous.

[fleabiscuit]

257. "shut up" are your words, not Whoopi's. nt

[betsuni]

327. LOL

[R B Garr]

350. Yes, all Hollywood actresses should maintain their popularity from their youth

That's the way it works in Hollywood, after all.

[ehrnst]

385. She's rich. That's what gets in your craw?

And she's not young. And she's of color, so there are some behavioral expectations you have of her.

Sounds like a MAGA critique of Maxine Waters.

You know, Whoopi is a woman of color who has actually experienced real poverty and homelessness.

Might want to keep that in mind when smearing her as 'rich' and clueless.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

534. I don't mind wealthy people. I mind wealthy people who don't want to pay their fair share and...

... use their soapbox to parrot right wing bullshit.

I can see why she has a beef with AOC.

Whoopi sounds like a republican.

[Power 2 the People]

552. I've never seen this before. Holy shit. She has no idea what she's talking about.

I agree she's got a good heart but she sometimes talks about policy without having researched her position. Like most people I meet, she spouts a strong opinion but only seems to have a "bumper sticker" understanding of the issue.

Between this clip,the AOC scolding and her Kylie Jenner is a "self-made Billionaire" comment I can't take her seriously anymore.

It's probably best that she take her own advice and "sit back and learn" when commenting on things she only has a surface understanding of.

[Power 2 the People]

399. +1

[ehrnst]

586. So, she's overweight, a millionaire, and so her views on politicians/politics are highly unreliable?

She does speak highly of millionaire politicians that she invites on to her show where she "fills out that chair," I'll give you that.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1251733008

[tonedevil]

15. In what way did she deviate from that? /nt

[Cha]

40. Whoopi is Not "irrelevant" but I can see

why you'd like to paint her as such.

[cwydro]

121. What amuses me is that the question is asked who gives a flying eff what Whoopi says...

Apparently, someone does...

[littlemissmartypants]

136. And apparently was bothered enough to retort. nt

[cwydro]

141. Numerous times!

Don’t mess with Whoopi!

[ehrnst]

384. Trying to convince everyone that she's 'just a has-been' irrelevant...

by frantically trying to argue with everyone who doesn't think so.

Really doesn't make the case.

[Cha]

457. Indeed. What Whoopi said

resonates with a lot of people.

[TSheehan]

606. Congresswoman Ocasio-Cortez is 1000 times more relevant than the co-host of the View.

[Cha]

614. Well, Whoopi is certainly Wrong about this...

[tymorial]

213. No. Eom.

[matt819]

221. Spot on (nt)

[musicblind]

250. Welcome to DU, Mr. Quackers. n/t

[leftynyc]

324. Did she crap in your cornflakes or something?

Why the fuck should we care what anyone posts about, including you? She gave an opinion, like all of us here do every single day. Your hostility is entirely misplaced.

[ehrnst]

354. Because she gets more time to talk about issues than other people?

If she's such an "irrelevant has been," why are you furiously posting to discredit her on this thread?

[George II]

360. "Irrelevant has been"? She heads up one of the most watched daytime talk shows on television.

That's not the record of someone who is "irrelevant" or a "has been".

[NurseJackie]

363. People who believe Whoopi Goldberg is a "has-been" are out of touch with reality.

[George II]

366. Plus she had a steamy affair w/Ted Danson. My wife would have killed to be in her shoes back then!!

[cwydro]

421. I don't think we'll be getting an answer lol.

[ehrnst]

413. Tell that to the rest of DU...

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1251733008


https://upload.democraticunderground.com/100210897161

https://www.democraticunderground.com/10021612460

https://upload.democraticunderground.com/1017509328

https://upload.democraticunderground.com/1017206309

https://www.democraticunderground.com/10024849098

https://www.democraticunderground.com/12512454480

I won't blame you if you feel a need to hide out from DU for a week or so.

[Eliot Rosewater]

537. Great list of stuff there. Sometimes she pisses me off to be honest, but in this instance

she is simply making the same observation most anyone paying attention would make.

I wonder what a poll of the country would show as to support of this type of tax structure, I myself have supported it longer than AOC and some others have been alive but I do wonder how it polls.

[ehrnst]

541. Imagine that, a woman, not young, being complex and human, and still having the nerve to speak out.

Especially when she has been hired to be a talk show host and talk about current events, and then decides to give some characteristically plain-spoken advice to a rookie in the public eye?

WHITE STRAIGHT MEN ARE NOT HAPPY WITH THIS! THE ROOKIE GIRL POLITICIAN'S HONOR MUST BE DEFENDED FROM THIS WITCH!!

Doesn't show a lot of confidence in her on the part of those who feel a need to drag a long time progressive in order to protect this new politician.

White male ego on the right and the far left looks similar. Maxine Waters gets some of the same treatment from the MAGA humpers.

[Eliot Rosewater]

542. LOL...yeah, men and some others.

I dont know whether to scream or cry.

Putin runs our government. The world hates us. Our institutions are seconds away from complete destruction.

And guess what is going to happen, again.

[ehrnst]

544. Yep.(nt)

[metroins]

551. Agreed

[TSheehan]

605. Whoopi who?

[manor321]

2. Wrong. This was fine advice 30 years ago. Not today.

I can't comprehend why Democrats must labor under the "be nice" rules. It's fucking ridiculous. Republicans have won a TON of elections over the last 30 years by being vile and nasty. Voters don't care about it.

[EffieBlack]

4. "Take some time to learn your job" is not the same as "be nice."

This is excellent advice.

[cwydro]

28. Thank you.

Whoopi is certainly not someone to tell others to “be nice.” She doesn’t mince words.

I’m a longtime fan.

[More_Cowbell]

37. Yes. Learn, for instance, that the Senate can't draw up its own funding bill for the wall

when appropriations must come from the House.

It's sad, but true, that women can afford to make fewer mistakes than men. The dotard can lie and misspeak all the time, and the media is only starting to call him out.

If AOC asked me, which of course she hasn't, I'd advise her to spend a few more weeks learning about how her branch of the government works.

As it is, she's tweeting out complaints about being fact checked. We have someone doing that already: Trump.

She's a refreshing, exciting newcomer, and I wish her well.

[George II]

426. Lies, mistakes, gaffes, etc.....I don't care who says them, a man or a woman, they STILL....

....aren't true.

Time for some (HER) to stop complaining about being criticized by using the "woman" defense. She's being corrected and criticized for what she says, NOT because she's a woman.

I've said this several times before, the next time she feels like lashing out about being criticized or corrected or whatever, before she does it she should sit down for an hour or so with Hillary Clinton to learn how to let stuff like that roll off her back.

[Kurt V.]

112. no.bad advice.

"get going before you're ready" cecile richards

[EffieBlack]

115. "Get going before you're ready" isn't the same as "Don't bother to learn your job"

[George II]

374. Here is exactly what Cecile Richards said, in context:

That you don’t actually have to know how it all works out or exactly what you’re doing. It’s more important to just get started. I think the mantra for our time should just be, “Get going before you’re ready.” And certainly, there’s a number of things I’ve jumped into in my life that I had no idea what I was doing, and somehow it all just kind of worked out.

My mother raised four kids before she ever got to do anything on her own, really. And those were the days when women had few opportunities, and so it wasn’t until we were practically grown that she finally had the chance to run her own campaign, for a woman who was running for the state legislature, Sarah Weddington. And then eventually, [my mom] ran for governor. I think what it taught her, and what she relayed to me and my siblings, was, “Boy, you should just get busy and get going now.” And for goodness sake, never turn down a new opportunity. I still see women worry that they’re not ready for this next job, or that they don’t have the right degree, or they didn’t take the right classes. Men never say that.

Nowhere does she say "lecture your elders and claim they did nothing in their lives", which is essentially what Whoopi Goldberg was responding to. She says GET STARTED, not act like an expert on the first day.

[Fullduplexxx]

10. I think the advice given was advice on how to behave when dealing with those inside the party

Not how to behave when dealing with cons

[dogman]

345. So who is Whoopi dealing with?

AOC is not a con. Whoopi should follow her own advice and let the doers do.

[Fullduplexxx]

359. Whoopi isnt a pol and is allowed her opinion

[dogman]

364. Neither am I.

And so am I.

[Fullduplexxx]

380. Ok.... nt

[Cha]

42. No, it's not about being nice.. it's about learning your

damn job before "pooping" on Dems.

[we can do it]

111. Exactly.

[PatSeg]

174. There certainly is improvement for Democrats

But are you advocating that we become "vile and nasty" to win elections? There already is a republican party, we don't need to become the same as them.Perhaps you are confusing being honest and reasonable with being "nice".

Meanwhile, some of us think new people to congress might want to dial things down a notch and look and listen to those who have gone before them. Bringing new energy and ideas is wonderful, but you don't throw out many years of hard fought progress or underestimate those who did the fighting. Super bright flames can burn out much too quickly if they aren't careful.

[NurseJackie]

369. Not to their own party members.

Republicans have won a TON of elections over the last 30 years by being vile and nasty.

Not to their own party members.

[NurseJackie]

5. I love Whoopi! She nails it!

Did she say anything about anyone's close association with Cenk Uygur's "Justice Democrats" and his GOP-financed contempt for the Democratic Party... or his philosophy that the Democratic party must be "destroyed to be rebuilt" (a view which is, by the way, also shared by Susan Sarandon).

Cenk Uygur is a complete asshole (just ask American Airlines) and his contempt for well-respected and loyal Democrats and the Democratic party are well known. I really don't understand the motivation of anyone who associates with him or has anything to do with anything associated with Cenk.

[NurseJackie]

17. ...

[Ccarmona]

19. Nice Educated Response

You’ve just eliminated yourself as a legitimate critic of the Justice Democrats

[EffieBlack]

41. Sometimes, the most logical response from intelligent people to comments such as yours

[Ccarmona]

49. Not Logical If Rebuttal Facts Aren't Provided.

I’m willing to discuss with facts and admit if I’m wrong, but a laughing emoji only proves my point

[EffieBlack]

59. Some posts are so ridiculous, they don't merit "rebuttal facts"

A is actually quite charitable ...

[Tarheel_Dem]

69. Let me just add my own "rebuttal".

[Ccarmona]

80. I Found Where Discouse Comes to Die

[Tarheel_Dem]

87. Actually, it's "discourse", and sometimes the only appropriate response to nonsense is....

[Ccarmona]

92. I truly Resent that remark.

This is bad a trying to discuss issues with a Trumpster
It’s your opinion, but I’m not entitled to mine? So be it

[Tarheel_Dem]

103. Oh, you're certainly entitled to your opinion, and so is Whoopi. You' re free to take issue with...

Whoopi's opinion, and I'm free to take issue with yours. See how that works?

[littlemissmartypants]

138. The dis- is in discourse for a reason. nt

[brush]

283. How much do you know about the Justice Democrats?

[Cha]

482. You're the one who resorted to ".... trumpster"

that's a losing strategy.

[Cha]

481. But, those weren't "facts".

[JCanete]

299. yes, sometimes abdicating making an argument or challenging a current claim is the best course of

action....usually when you don't have any ammo...just ask FOX and its hosts. Congrats on using the best tools at your disposal.

[betsuni]

303. Who are these corporate Democrats who don't want to get money out of politics?

Why can't we know their names so we don't vote for them?

[JCanete]

307. There is a vast difference between wanting money out of politics and fighting for it daily. They

can have the right policies in general and still have other priorities. I think Barney Frank summed it up pretty well when he asked if the person grilling him in an interview....think it was Naomi Konst….was suggesting democrats shouldn't take the twenty percent of big corporate money(compared to Republicans) that we do now....again, according to Frank. His argument, entirely reasonable to debate, was that we can't win without it. The counterargument is, I hope obvious to you, that we can't win with it. Not really. The only way to receive it is to be to the right of people who corporations REALLY REALLY don't want making decisions, and that's still them just hedging their bets, since, as Frank correctly pointed out, the BIG money is going to the GOP. So how much does the money hold us back is the question? This isn't a matter of buying democratic politicians. It isn't a matter of corruption...its a matter of being moderate enough in ideology, or if you will, "pragmatic" enough, to basically take the boldest ideas off the table....to say, agree with blue dogs that we'll implement a PayGo which will preemptively hinder us going forwards.

[ehrnst]

446. So you can't name the "corporate Democrats"

No surprise.

[JCanete]

449. That's a really sad attempt by you. I did just give you the name of a democrat who I respect highly

in that last post. I just happen to strongly disagree with him on this issue.

[ehrnst]

455. A "corporate Democrat" you respect highly?

Because I asked for the names of the "Corporate democrats" you were complaining about. You wanted to appear to answer without actually doing so. I think you may have inadvertently stumbled, and you know it. Breaking into a tap dance doesn't really hide it...

Sadly obvious effort to avoid putting your money where your mouth is.

And like I said, no surprise.



Your turn - will it be a red herring yet again?

[JCanete]

456. First I can absoultely respect more moderate democrats who think that the way forward is to find

common ground with Wall Street etc...to come to the table with a compromise position....who would argue that big money in politics is just the way of the world and either you play the game or your piece gets removed from the board. I'll even go so far as to say there was a day not long ago where that was absolutely true. I just don't agree that that's the best approach going forward.


If you want me to name moderate democrats who obviously take funding from big lobbies and industries, well that's most of the field. There are only a few who have taken the position that they wont take pac money, and among those, only a few who don't have other avenues of revenue that aren't so different. Again, this isn't a matter of any of these politicians being corrupt. Frankly, I'd say in most cases, they just happen to hold positions that are close enough to what these industries and lobbies are okay with that they get a leg up because of it. They would argue that it doesn't affect their position. I'd argue that the problem is it gives them that leg up on the potential primary competition that isn't well funded, and thus is toxic for clean politics.

Also, since we've finally put the "strawman" to rest. Let me ask you this. do you know what a red herring is?

[ehrnst]

458. You're still trying to act like you answered our question about who the "corporate Democrats" are.

But you you aren't.

And we know why. Most would simply give up trying to pretend like one has actually answered the question that was put to you.

You just keep on digging that hole deeper and deeper, thinking no one notices.

Got you, didn't I?

[JCanete]

461. what about "most" do you not understand? but Corporate democrat is not the term I use, so

what do you want exactly?

[ehrnst]

462. You are nothing if not predictable.

You're going to need a new shovel soon.

[JCanete]

467. cool, so we're going to stay in the naha aha naha territory of discourse. What exactly are you

getting out of this? Do you think you've zinged me here? Do you think I'm going to come away from this going....ouch that one stung...

What you have instead is me starting to get the impression that you just want to put your stamp on this and feel like you've won, and that you care nothing for the topic of discussion, or of challenging your, or my, perspective.

[ehrnst]

468. You never disappoint.

Unfortunately for you, I just don't ever submit like you'd like me too.

I never see a reason to, argumentatively speaking.

Sorry.

[JCanete]

472. ....uh...okay...keep cleaning my clock in this battle you imagine us having right now then, and

I'll just take your word for it, that on whatever plane its happening, I'm getting pwned.

[ehrnst]

474. Don't feel bad.

You'll suffer that way every time you try to convince me that your feelings have the weight of facts, or I call out the logical problems in your arguments in the attempt to rationalize your emotional responses.

The ignore feature comes in very handy in those circumstances.

[JCanete]

477. I must ask you to desist at once ehrnst...the truth you're bringing is just too much for me to bear.

Have a heart. Have compassion. I can't take all of your winning.

[tonedevil]

479. I can see why you beg...

for mercy when you are being attacked with so much "truth".

[ehrnst]

490. You'll be OK, hon.

It just takes getting used to the fact that argument by domination will leave you rather lonely.

But I'll be here for you.

[ehrnst]

349. Lost the argument again, I see.

Start throwing Strawmen in bulk in a effort to get someone off your tail...

[JCanete]

441. I don't even know what you're talking about. Feel free to give me an example of where I just laugh

somebody off without actually presenting a counter argument. I'll wait. I'm not afraid of having a discussion. Nor will I hide behind that kind of crap rather than to concede ground or be proven wrong.


Also, what strawman is being applied here exactly?

[ehrnst]

447. Right here:

abdicating making an argument or challenging a current claim is the best course of action....usually when you don't have any ammo...just ask FOX and its hosts.

You're welcome.

[JCanete]

450. That's not me just chortling and not making an argument. That's me stating clearly what I think is

being resorted to. That's me taking a position on the former type of post.


Nor is it a strawman. Do you know what a strawman is?

[ehrnst]

451. Yes, that's why I copied and pasted that text.

Is that clearer?

You don't agree with me, clearly.

[JCanete]

453. A strawman would be me making up a persons words or statements or actions in order to then

blow them down. In this case, I'm wading in and characterizing the action. Do you see how that's different? And if you're going to keep having a discussion, maybe add a little detail to your argument so that you don't try to turn this into an exchange of aha...naha...aha....

[ehrnst]

454. Or an accusation. To be fair it really was more of a red herring.

I'll give you that.

Here you go, in case you don't know the definition:

https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/150/Red-Herring

[George II]

365. Cenk eliminated himself from the Justice Democrats because of his racist and sexist comments....

...when, as he put it, "I was a conservative".

I wonder how much of a "conservative" he still is, since his "The Young Turks" has accepted $millions from right wing lobbyist Buddy Roehmer and he airs his show on Moscow based RT vis RT America.

Nope, Cenk Uygur isn't a very credible spokesperson or advocate for progressive issues.

[JCanete]

483. not much of one at all. Do you believe people can't change their perspective? cuz if that

were true we'd be well and truly fucked. Slavery would still exist. Hell, the world would still be flat.

[George II]

488. He SAID he changed his viewpoint since those days, but has since accepted millions....

....from Buddy Roehmer and is being paid even today by Moscow based RT to run his show on RT America.

It's one thing to actually change, it's another to say one has changed yet still go on his merry way.

[JCanete]

495. and if you are a media host on MSNBC or CNN you are being funded by tons of Republican money.

Does that occur to you? MSNBC is owned by who? And who are the advertisers? Big ass corporations with what agendas?

[George II]

498. Advertisers are different than underwriters.

"Big ass corporations" are selling products. What are Buddy Roehmer or Vladimir Putin selling?

[JCanete]

499. Roemer stated what his interest was. And even if I take advertisers out of it...right....

what of the parent corporations that have huge political agendas? Those don't have an impact? What of MSNBC"S near entire lineup aside from a couple exceptions? What of CNN's?

[JCanete]

497. The change, for your information, is the perspective and what he's talking about. YOu point out

something he says that is actually a republican talking point and not a liberal one and we can try to move this conversation along. Otherwise your attack on Cenk as being a former replublican(thus always one) is nothing more than a slander of convenience.

[Cha]

480. No, she hasn't.

[WeekiWater]

33. "Cenk, like many other Progressive Organizations"

Not big on just the laughing emoji as a response but you were left with few options.

[Ccarmona]

56. With your response, I can only Assume You Were Happy with the Citizens United decision

Well I’m not

[WeekiWater]

63. You should not be in the assumption making business. NT

[emulatorloo]

101. You are surrounded by left-liberals/progressives here. We all hate Citizens United

Not all left-liberals/progressives are fan-boys of TYT, nor do they have to be. Stop smearing your fellow DU’ers please.

[cwydro]

154. Capitalizing of random words...hmm...

Who does that remind me of? Can’t quite bring it to mind...darn.

[NurseJackie]

190. Good eye!

[cwydro]

200. Misspellings, random capitalization- just can't put my finger on it...

Maybe it’ll come to me.

[mcar]

192. What does that have to do with the poster's response

If one doesn't appreciate Cenk, one agrees with Citizens United?

Bit of a stretch, yes?

[sheshe2]

239. Bend and stretch. Reach for the sky.

Stand on tippie toes my oh my.

Yep. Old enough to remember Romper Room.

[ehrnst]

351. Did you find a sale on

strawman?

And picked up a few false dillemas while you were at the checkout?

Seriously...

[fleabiscuit]

180. +1

[emulatorloo]

94. Cenk hired Jimmy Dore, who hasn't met a RW conspiracy theory he doesn't fall in love with

He also hired Michael Tracy, who is the nut who tried to claim Maxine Waters beat him up.

TYT was funded by a Republican sugar daddy.

Buddy Roemer Buys The Young Turks.
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2014/4/16/1292572/-Buddy-Roemer-Buys-The-Young-Turks

Don’t accuse your fellow DU’ers of being “satisfied with the Koch Brothers and Mercer’s dictating policy” because that is not true.

You are surrounded by left liberals/progressives here.

[Ccarmona]

102. I Hope So

But they’re sure acting like smug elitists that are dismissing my opinion.
Yours is a researched response and I respect that.

[brush]

285. You didn't know that about Cenk and the Justice Democrats?

[JCanete]

309. oh lord. Yeah, TYT got funded by Roemer, who at least outwardly said he was dissatisified

with money's effects on politics, with his own particular anecdotal evidence coming from the Republican party. now, I'm under no illusions that big money infused into any media institution is still money in politics. I'm under no illusions that this isn't big players swaying what conversations get play, but the conversation TYT has been attempting to have, along with other, far more marginalized progressive voices, is getting money the fuck out of politics. So, in the grand scheme of things, I'm okay with that message being amplified. If you think there's some ulterior agenda that somehow helps republicans, I'd say you'd have to put up some evidence that TYT's listeners didn't by and large come in for Clinton. Yes, you're right, Dore is non-pragmatic and seems to have an irrational denial of Russia's interference, and I've seen Tracy make a couple of silly claims that has done him no favors(and I'm not at all familiar with any positive things I might point out about him at this time.) But would you like to go tit for tat with any major media institution regarding who gets hired and what messages get amplified? That should be hilarious.

[emulatorloo]

575. Cenk hired Jimmy Dore. Nuff said.

TYT isn’t credible.

Honestly, you should distance yourself from that shit if you want to be credible in your advocacy.

Is The Media Failing To Report Hillary’s Parkinson’s?

Hillary Collapses! Speculation she has Parkinson’s

Oh Lord, indeed.

Of course, if you want to align yourself with that idiotic craziness, it is totally up to you.

[JCanete]

577. seriously? No. in the context of my post it isnt anywhere close to enough said. Cenk hired Dore

because he didn't want a cookie cutter version of liberal opinions on his show. He wanted some range there. And if you ever listen to Anna's exasperation about Dore, they are hardly trying to sell those positions they most disagree with him on. They are promoting a range of voices who have one common thread...they want money out of politics.

But again, if you want to point out that there are problematic people on TYT...there are far worse people on MSNBC...there are far worse people on CNN, and certainly on FOX, and there are shitty contributors to NYT and Wapo, etc. etc. etc. How do you defend any media outlet if you are going to use only the worst of their hiring choices as the rationale?

[emulatorloo]

578. Extra points: Cenk hired Putin apologist Michael Tracy

Zero interest in gaslighting or revisionist history. As I say totally up to you if you want to align yourself with this craziness. Does nothing for your credibility as an advocate though.

The Basic Formula For Every Shocking Russia/Trump Revelation

Michael Tracey

https://medium.com/theyoungturks/the-basic-formula-for-every-shocking-russia-trump-revelation-e9ae390d9f05

The basic formula for every breaking Trump/Russia story is essentially as follows:

The New York Times or Washington Post releases an article that at first blush appears extremely damning.

Anti-Trump pundits and Democrats react reflexively to the news, express shrieking outrage, and proclaim that this finally proves untoward collusion between Trump and Russia — a smoking gun, at last.

Aggrieved former Clinton apparatchiks *connect the dots* in a manner eerily reminiscent of right-wing Glenn Beck-esque prognostication circa 2009.

<much more at link>

[JCanete]

579. No response to my rebuttal to your nonsense? nt

[emulatorloo]

580. Dore and Tracy links are rebuttal enough.

You want to align with and serve as an apologist for those despicable fuckheads, that’s your prerogative.

Have zero interest in your gaslighting and your and your tacit defense/support of Jimmy Dore spewing RW-conspiracy theories and the Putin apoloigism from Michael Tracy.

Don’t piss on my shoes and tell me it’s raining.

Cenk picked them and that tells me all I need to know about TYT. Poor judgement is the best thing I can say about it.

[JCanete]

581. And Dave Rubin. Why don't you point out the credible news source that you trust so that

we can go down the list of its contributors? Go ahead...be brave.

[emulatorloo]

582. No point in continuing this discussion.

—-


You are a big fan of TYT, I find them to be conspiracy theorists, anti-Democratic, and in the case of Tracey a liar and a Putin apologist. I’ve posted links to back that up.

As I said earlier, If you enjoy them and want to align with them that is totally up to you.

Link to tweet

Have a good week.

[NurseJackie]

114. "you're"

[mcar]

189. Hit a bunch of points there

[BannonsLiver]

246. The only thing Cenk is fighting for is a fatter wallet

You want to talk about jokes, he is one.

[JCanete]

311. entirely unfounded. He was sitting nice and pretty and MSNBC but didn't play ball the way

he was asked to. Lost his job even though his ratings were good. I eagerly await your evidence to the contrary. Should I hold my breath?

[MrGrieves]

338. I'm sorry but were you being serious?

Surely you can't be serious with this.

[ehrnst]

347. Who are the "corporate Democrats?"

And who here is "satisfied with the Koch Bros and the Mercers dictating policy and wielding undo influence?"

Anyone who disagrees with you?

[cwydro]

50. Love your sig line!

[NurseJackie]

58. ...

[ehrnst]

329. Indeed. (nt)

[NurseJackie]

330. I *literally* laugh-out-loud every time someone suggests she's just making it up!!

Or the old "I never heard it therefore it didn't happen" rationale is popular too.

[George II]

357. Cenk has accepted millions from right wing lobbyist Buddy Roehmer and also appears....

....on Moscow based RT. That's enough for me to disqualify him as a "progressive".

Plus, he was forced to resign from Justice Democrats because of racist and sexist comments which he claims he said "when I was a conservative"!

"When I was a conservative"??

[nini]

386. AOC campaigned against Sharice Davids

That told me all I need to know about her.

I do not anyone associated with Cenk..or the Justice Democrats.

[NurseJackie]

388. Agreed! Cenk Uygur is a complete asshole anyway. They obsess about...

Agreed! Cenk Uygur is a complete asshole anyway. They obsess about "money in politics" but with an obsessive focus toward Democrats. It's clear to me that Cenk and his posse want to exclusively and intentionally and willingly cripple Democrats (thus giving a huge advantage to the GOP).

His TYT cabal is funded by a Republican and RT (Putin's "Russia Today" network) loves him too. That's just a bit too cozy for my liking.

Even the name "Justice Democrats" is insulting... it's clearly implying that "regular" Democrats don't care about justice, or that they're filling some sort of moral void in the Democratic party.

Cenk and Sarandon share the same philosophy of "we must destroy it to rebuild it" when it comes to the Democratic party. Typically anyone who's associated with "Justice Democrats" ascribes to the same philosophy. So, in that regard, it's little wonder that we're continuing to hear smears and divisive lies about how Democrats are "corrupt"; or that Democrats are "do-nothings"; or that Democrats "don't care about climate change."

All I'm saying is that it serves no good purpose to smear Democrats. This type of talk drives away new voters and new support and volunteers. It creates division and distrust. A divided party is a weaker party. A weaker party only benefits the GOP (and Russians).

So I all I want to know is why anyone would purposely do and say things that benefit the GOP and the Russians? And why would anyone rush to the defense of those to do such things? Those are fair questions that deserve to be answered.

[nini]

439. I can think of only one reason they would do that in the situation this country is in today

This is NOT a time to play around with bashing the party that is our only hope to save democracy.

I do not trust any of them.

[NurseJackie]

465. I do not ascribe to the philosophy of "the ends justifies the means"....

I do not ascribe to the philosophy of "the ends justifies the means" and I'll never remain silent while those who do continue on their quest to "destroy and rebuild" the Democratic party.

I'll continue to speak up every time that groups like "Justice Democrats" and "Our Revolution" (and their assorted spokespersons, staff, or "board" members) say or write things that smear and denigrate Democrats and the Democratic party.

I'll continue to question the motives of anyone who supports those groups, or who has anything to do with those groups, or who is endorsed-by or promoted-by those groups.

All I'm saying is that there is only ONE party (just one, only ONE) that can oppose the GOP. That would be the Democratic Party. Not the Greens. Not the Libertarians. Not any "independents"... ONLY the Democrats.

It serves NO GOOD PURPOSE for anyone to do or say or write anything that denigrates or divides the Democratic party. The "destroy to rebuild" philosophy of ultimate purity is complete bullshit. The notion that Democrats should "set an example" by INTENTIONALLY CRIPPLING our campaigns by rejecting legal funding (while surrendering financial advantage to the GOP) is absolutely insane.

Anyone who calls the Democrats "corrupt" or "feeble" or "ideologically bankrupt" or "do-nothings" or "the party of the one percent" or "climate-change deniers" or "too old" or "corporatists" or "banksters" etc... well that's someone who doesn't know what the fuck they're talking about. I'll always question their motives and their agenda and their associations. Look closely, behind curtains, in closets, under the rug, behind the sofa... you'll be surprised at what can be discovered.

I mean, I knew I didn't like Cenk Uygur (just because he's a complete pompous and arrogant asshole) but when we look closer at his RT and Republican ties... a clearer picture emerges. Anything he touches or is associated with is also suspect. His resignation from the "board" of "Justice Democrats" doesn't change anything about its origins or agenda.

I do not trust him. I do not trust anyone who associates with him or who defends him or who makes excuses for him.

[Eliot Rosewater]

396. Cenk loves Cenk. I know another person who fits that category.

They WILL destroy the party if they can.

They WILL destroy America in the process.

[NurseJackie]

400. Yes. All for personal fame and money. Cenk is like a cult leader in my opinion...

... but he's a total douche. A real tool. But, he can afford to be with all the Republican money lining his pockets.

[Eliot Rosewater]

401. What I will not understand is people who give certain people allegiance and they

dont check them out first.

Whether it is Cenk or someone running for office.

I consider how short a time they have been in power then I look at some who say they want the office who have been around MUCH longer who should have MUCH bigger resumes.

I ask questions.

Cenk is not your friend. He is Cenk's friend.

[NurseJackie]

406. And Cenk really has no accomplishments other than being a loudmouth and ...

And Cenk really has no accomplishments other than being a loudmouth and a sexist, arrogant know-it-all. I wouldn't trust him any further than I could throw a lemon pie.

[dogman]

6. Like the people from her mother's home, Puerto Rico, just sit still?

People had better act and act quickly. She's on fire, Whoopi's just smoldering.

[demmiblue]

8. Whoopi "I don't believe it was rape-rape" Goldberg... I pass on her opinion

[lilactime]

93. +1

[ZeroSomeBrains]

110. Yeah that was a real low point for her

And if AOC has to hold her fire so should Chris Coons. You can't have a double standard.

[disillusioned73]

340. Holly shit...

I think woopie is the one that needs to STFU ... that is so bad - inexcusable excuse making.. funny that

[ehrnst]

504. Wow. Way worse than

writing an essay on a woman who fantasizes about being "raped by three men simultaneously."

Because REASONS!

[tonedevil]

515. Roman Polanski...

actually raped a 13 year old girl, which according to Whoopi is not bad enough to be considered rape-rape. To me that is worse than written sexual fantasy, YMMV.

[ehrnst]

520. An essay that says women fantasize about being raped.

Whoopi didn't rape anyone, and she certainly didn't say women fantasize about being gang raped.

Did I miss something there?

And you're really going to go down that road?

Careful.

She did express admiration for....

[tonedevil]

522. She defended a rapist...

for a rape that really happened that is worse than fantasy to me, again YMMV.

[ehrnst]

525. And she admires this man:

What does that imply?



And of course she's so much worse than anyone who created an essay that mused on women fantasizing about being gang-raped because REASONS.

Which are clear...

Really, you might want to re-consider an equivalency here.

[tonedevil]

535. You sure can convolute...

I have not read the essay(s) that Senator Sanders wrote so I can't speak to the content. Rape fantasy isn't my cup-of-tea, but I think that fiction should be allowed to go to dark places and be offensive if that is where the author is going. If that is a horror to you let me protect your delicate sensibilities by saying don't be tempted to look at Penthouse Letters.
The Roman Polanski situation is different because it really happened. To me things that happen in the real world are more important than things that are described in fiction. You are pointing out that Whoopi admires the man who wrote the sex fantasy that has you grabbing for the smelling salts and as it turns out she also defended Roman Polanski who is a convicted rapist.

[ehrnst]

539. I just connected the implications about your statement of Whoopi's defense of a rapist.

You opened that topic, and now you are scrambling to get those worms back in the can.

Whoopi is damned for making comments about rapist, and someone else is held blameless for conjuring up gang rape fiction, becausea man "should be allowed to go to dark places and be offensive" in their writings.

I think there's a double standard there, because she's not Bernie, and she critiqued someone that many Sanders supporters feel should be above critique.

I pointed out that Whoopi admires Bernie. She expressed no such admiration for Polanski. Then the pearl clutching started on your part.

I'm not grabbing smelling salts, it's those who are gnashing their teeth that this woman would DARE to critique AOC and give her some advice.

You brought rape comments into the discusion, and now you realize that there are nuances that can come back to bite you when you get out the smellin salts over Whoopi being Whoopi, when Whoopi being Whoopi also includes praise for Bernie. You don't get to have it both ways.

If you think that AOC needs to be defended from critiques and plain spoken advice from those on talk shows with pistols at dawn, that doesn't indicate much faith in her, does it?

If you think that any politician is exempt from vetting or critiquing , you're going to break that strand of pearls...

[tonedevil]

545. Whoopi absolutely did defend...

Roman Polanski, what he did was not rape-rape is a definite defense of the director. She expressed I seem to be sensing that you are calling for a censorship of fiction if it touches on certain subjects? That's what it sounds like since you are adamant in your decrying Sanders smutty writing, but you don't seem to think the real world rape of a 13 year old is of any interest at all.

[ehrnst]

609. And she also praised Senator Sanders. Cherry pick all you like, but

the thing is, she's a human being, complex and expressive, and sometimes contradictory.

But, if you want to insist on defining her judgement solely to the Polanski statement, then you are also applying that smear of bad judgement to her admiration of Bernie.



That's the catch of a dualistic worldview - one gets hung up on all the shades of grey in reality... sort of when people call WAPO, Politifact and CNN "corporate shills" for finding errors in the statements of your heroes, then turn around and call their fact checking of DT's errors as courageous journalism.

[tonedevil]

610. OK

[ehrnst]

611. Alrighty then.... LOL

[ehrnst]

613. But let's break this down.. it's just too priceless...

I seem to be sensing that you are calling for a censorship of fiction if it touches on certain subjects?

No more than you're "calling for censorship" of Whoopi if she talks about certain politicians. Desperate, but you gave it a shot

That's what it sounds like since you are adamant in your decrying Sanders smutty writing, but you don't seem to think the real world rape of a 13 year old is of any interest at all.

Yep, your gonna equate anything anyone says about Whoopi, other than "Whoopi is dead to me for saying AOC has some things to learn" with "not thinking the rape of a 13 year old girl is of any interest at all." You sure did get humiliated when I turned the whole "OMG RAPE COMMENTS YEARS AGO=UNHINGED" thing back around and applied your logic to someone else. Didn't see that coming.

OK

You need to be the one writing fiction, hon.... such drama, such rage. But don't go writing that "dark literature" as you refer to it - especially on DU. And don't go fishing, because you certainly don't know how to bait a hook.



OK

[tonedevil]

615. OK

[ehrnst]

619. ....

That "whatevs" right?

[tonedevil]

628. OK

[ehrnst]

629. TG U R IT

[AlexSFCA]

11. good advice

because AOC hasn’t actually done much yet in terms of legislature; it’s ok to voice her ideas as long as she doesnt immidiately criticize her dem colleagues from the start. But I haven’t heard much from her doong that except Crowley who just turned lobbyst so his loss was well deseved. AOC is far more vocal against gop which we all should like.

[GulfCoast66]

186. Well, she worked hard to primary good liberal congress members

Who happened to not be on the correct team.

I think that goes beyond immediately criticizing Democratic colleagues.

Especially before she had even been elected.

[AlexSFCA]

194. I think that was after she won the primary

which in her district pretty much guaranteed victory in the general. And turns our Crowley got corrupted so it was time for him to go, he is now a corporate lobbyst using his congress connections acquired through taxpayers money.

[GulfCoast66]

203. It was. But that makes no difference.

It was an incredibly dumb thing to do. Her new colleagues, including the ones she tried to Primary, will not forget.

Trust is very important in Congress. It explains Speaker Pelosi’s success. AOC now has high ranking members who do not have any trust in her. Would you trust someone who if you cut a deal she does not agree with will start twittering about it?

I predict she will be very visible. But have very little influence in actual lawmaking.

Which is a shame. We need young energized team players. Fortunately, we have a bunch of them.

And will get more in 2020.

[Voltaire2]

205. Yeah it's been 3 damn days and she hasn't

passed a single piece of legislation!

[littlemissmartypants]

232. Just because redundancy can be effective I have to go with

Go Voltaire2!

[Mr. Quackers]

12. People keep saying AOC should "learn her job"

like she's training to be a fast food worker. Like she's bringing nothing to the table. She's a goddamn US Congresswoman.

Totally racist, totally right wing, totally sexist.

[NurseJackie]

20. No it's not.

Totally racist, totally right wing, totally sexist.

No it's not. Whoopi nails it!

[Mr. Quackers]

21. bullshit

psy ops bullshit

[NurseJackie]

23. No it's not.

psy ops bullshit

No it's not. Whoopi knows!

[tonedevil]

25. That is a very well thought out response. /nt

[NurseJackie]

75. Thank you! You're the best!

[tonedevil]

79. Oh no...

you're the best!

[NurseJackie]

81. I know.

[Eliot Rosewater]

397. The whole country will go down in flames if ...

oh fuck it...what is the point anymore.

[Ccarmona]

32. 0-2 in Legitimate Responses Just Within this Thread

Time for you to re-group

[John Fante]

85. It's pretty embarrassing at this point.

Posting emojis is not a good rebuttal.

[NurseJackie]

204. What makes you think it's a "rebuttal"? Some things are so absurd...

What makes you think it's a "rebuttal"? Some things are so absurd, that no "rebuttal" is needed, and the only thing left to do is acknowledge and react to the absurdity.

Any thing else you'd like to add?

[Mr. Quackers]

34. When you minimize a woman of color

and discount her that's racist, that's sexist. And it stinks to high heaven of right wing warped ideology.

[NurseJackie]

55. So, Whoopi is racist and sexist?

HA!

[Mr. Quackers]

57. not whoopi

read again, you'll get it.

[NurseJackie]

60. Uh huh! I get it all right.

[Mr. Quackers]

67. swarm

[NurseJackie]

77. Bzzzz.

[betsuni]

140. This is hilarious. I knew when I saw the OP it would good, but not THIS good.

[cwydro]

145. Ik,r?

Truly amusing!

[NurseJackie]

150. All this and Psy-ops too!

[cwydro]

168. The psy ops still has me giggling.

I mean - what?

[NurseJackie]

169. Waddle waddle!

[betsuni]

173. A kitchen sink of logical fallacies!

[cwydro]

177. Or a farm pond!

I needed the laughs!

[NurseJackie]

148. I know, right? What a hoot!

[Tipperary]

183. This thread is quacking me up!

[littlemissmartypants]

234. Ouch.

I'd like to welcome everyone to DU. Just in case you haven't been here before, these are the moments when our collective intelligence really shines. Just for the record in case you haven't already seen a thread like this. It's safe to say we're all pretty fed up with the status quo and we haven't lost our sense of humor. Most of us will live to fight (and laugh) another day. So, grateful for the laughter and especially the collective intelligence.

Bless us, every one.

[still_one]

319. Don't be shy, tell us exactly who you are calling a racist, sexist, and a right winger?

[cwydro]

157. If it walks like a duck...

[NurseJackie]

163. Quack quack!

It's duck season! Rabbit season! Duck season!

[cwydro]

171. Snort!

🦆

[Persondem]

65. You do realize that you are doing exactly that to Whoopi, right?

"When you minimize a woman of color and discount her that's racist, that's sexist."

[Mr. Quackers]

74. Whoopi Goldberg has ZERO RELEVANCE to the issue at hand:

the dismantling of our governmental institutions, by a dictatorial madman who never ONCE gave any consideration to learning ANYTHING, let alone taking the time "to learn his job."

Were you ever concerned about Trump learning HIS job?

[Persondem]

86. So you are "minimizing a woman of color". Check. Just so long as you own it ...

... and the hypocrisy that goes along with it.

The rest of your response is a weak attempt at deflection.

[Autumn]

170. As a woman of color I think Whoopie might want to concentrate on her job.

AOC is doing just fine.

[NurseJackie]

176. She is doing her job.

[musicblind]

258. With less than 200 posts, maybe you don't know what DU is.

DU is Democratic Underground.

To ask "Were you ever concerned about Trump learning HIS job?" on DU is ridiculous. Everyone on DU was concerned about Trump learning his job.

We still are, because he still hasn't.

[betsuni]

268. ....

[Captain Stern]

344. Are you being serious?

You're telling us when someone minimizes a woman of color, and discounts her, that it's racist and sexist.

You're telling us that in the very same thread where you said:

"Whoopi should stick to being an irrelevant has been"

and

"She couldn't net $5 in box office to save her life who really gives a flying fuck what Whoopi Goldberg says."

Have you no sense of self-awareness at all?

[cwydro]

43. "Psy ops?"

Lol, you’re on a roll today.

[NurseJackie]

83. ... and it's only Monday!!!

[cwydro]

36. You're accusing Whoopi of being racist, sexist, and right wing?

Oh lord I’ve, Ive heard it all now!

[Mr. Quackers]

39. not whoopi

look closer.

[More_Cowbell]

48. She *does* need to learn the job.

As I said above, it's not helpful for her to say that the Senate can write its own wall-funding bill, when appropriations bills can come only from the House.

It's not fair, but a mistake like that is pounced on by the GOP and by media on both sides of the aisle.

You are quite right that women and people of color are unfairly criticized. And it's even more obvious now, because AOC is the only person speaking out about bold ideas.

But appropriations is an extremely basic part of her job; it's not asking too much, I don't think, for her to know one of the House's primary functions.

[Mr. Quackers]

54. What makes you think she doesn't know?

the assumption that she's bringing nothing to the table is what sets off the bot detector.

[EffieBlack]

72. "Bringing something to the table" doesn't mean she knows her job

And given how enthusiastically she participated with her colleagues in 2 months of orientation, she likely knows she doesn't yet know her job and - thank God - probably is not as high on herself and certain of her unprecedented awesomeness as her fans seem to be.

[Mr. Quackers]

78. What is her job?

since you're an expert, what exactly does she need to learn?

Did you have this same "concern" for Trump and whether he learned HIS job?

[EffieBlack]

105. No - I never had any concern about whether Trump knew how to be president

I always thought he was brilliant and awesome and ready for duty from Day 1, and he's proven me right.

I feel the same way about every elected official in their first week who has never held office before.

On the other hand, Ocasio-Cortez is the only brand new politician I ever thought might need to learn the ropes of their job because ... Something or other ...

For the clueless, I'd better add:

[brush]

289. Appropriation bills originate in the House, not the Senate.

Seems she hasn't learned that yet.

[LisaM]

88. She's the only person speaking out about bold ideas?

She's learned quickly how to get airtime, I'll give her that, but she is not the only person with bold ideas.

Gay marriage was once considered a bold idea, now it's the law of the land. Legalized pot was once a bold idea - pretty soon, it will likely be legal in at least half of the US. Making healthcare affordable was a bold idea and of course, there's a long way to go there, but at least something was finally passed against really prolonged and determined resistance, heck, it was a bold idea when Teddy Kennedy proposed it back in the 1970s.

She's got charisma, clearly she's very intelligent, she knows how to get on TV, these are all great traits, and I think that it's important that she doesn't criticize people who put in a lot of work before she got on the scene. The struggle is real and it's been going on for a long time.

[littlemissmartypants]

144. Well stated LisaM.

My only concern is that she's a shiny new "target" & the possibility exists that she'll be pushed aside for the next shiny new thing on the scene. I want her to pace herself but definitely not stop talking. We have a lot to learn about the evolution of our party (and she may not even realize) that part of her job is to teach us. I'm definitely listening and ready to learn.

[qazplm135]

68. I have several decades of experience in leadership and the law

and I too would need to "learn" how to work in Congress.

You don't walk into that job knowing everything.

Nothing racist, right wing or sexist about that.

[UniteFightBack]

71. She got elected...yes and that is a good START. Start as in NEW. Unbelievable. nt

[LovingA2andMI]

193. So, you are calling a POC...

"Totally racist, totally right wing, totally sexist."

Totally Welcome to DU. Enjoy your stay, We Think....

[mcar]

197. So, training to be a fast food worker is harder than being a new US congressperson?

Really? You think there's no learning curve there?

[cwydro]

223. Perfect. nt

[mcar]

231. Thanks

so tired of this.

[Voltaire2]

209. Now you will be lectured why it isn't.

By people who insist they have never attacked Ocasio-Cortez.

[cwydro]

233. I never have.

I think I even posted that I liked her. That she really wasn’t on my radar since I don’t live in NY, but I really loved the video and how she handled all that nonsense.

[tymorial]

224. No. Just no

Choosing to label the argument as racist and sexist does not make it so. When one takes a new job, one must learn the job. Being a popular Democrat serving in the house does not change this fact.

[BeyondGeography]

13. Seniority no longer rules

That’s what happens when things move sideways-to-down for most people for 30 or 40 years. Get used to AOC, plenty more where that came from, Whoopi.

[GulfCoast66]

196. Keep telling yourself that.

Cause Senority has always ruled in Congress. Getting publicity for criticism of your own party does not translate to being in positions of real power. In fact, it does the opposite.

I actually like young aggressive Congress members.

But have a hard time ginning up support for one from NYC who travels to the Midwest in an attempt to Primary a good liberal member of Congress.

Which she did. And will now own those actions.

[BeyondGeography]

240. Congress, Schmongress, as we would say in New York

Who's President again? An impostor who was sent to Washington to fuck things up because that's what voters in states accounting for 306 EV's wanted. Now Congress wakes up every day wondering when the nightmare will end.

It's a Republican nightmare to be sure, because they win even when they lose while Democrats, per the opinion of many in the AOC generation, have played nicey nice. So you can be pretty sure that their reaction will be Whoopi Goldberg and every other defender of the status quo can go stuff it. They're going to call Trump a racist, 70 percent tax rates on people like him who run up the score and call for the motherfucker to be impeached, and most Democrats, who are tired of playing defense, will agree with them. And our Speaker, who said repeatedly that impeachment was off the table during the campaign, will defend them, because she's an extremely smart politician. That's power for you.

[disillusioned73]

341. Well.. well..

[WeekiWater]

18. Is she going to make legislation happen...

Or is she going to be a Bernie Sanders. Many of us are hoping for the former. I feel she is off to a rocky start. Her seat is safe and she has a lot of time to learn.

[murielm99]

26. Her seat is not necessarily safe.

She won by a small margin. She could be primaried. After all, she advocates Democrats primarying Democrats.

I think I have heard enough of her and about her for a while. There are plenty of other good freshmen legislators who could use some attention.

[WeekiWater]

45. I meant safe for us in general terms.

I should have defined my statement better. I can tell you now she will face a progressive primary challenge, just as she unseated an excellent progressive. The problem is that people like AOC are in it for the national attention which means she will pull big money from outside of her district.

[sheshe2]

89. Thank you.

I think I have heard enough of her and about her for a while. There are plenty of other good freshmen legislators who could use some attention.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

[NurseJackie]

46. Apparently it's disrespectful "psy ops" (or something) to say she needs to learn.

And you're right... anyone can stand up and give a laundry list of all things we "shoulda-woulda-coulda-oughta" do. That's the easy part. Making promises is the easy part. The old "all or nothing" showboating and "no compromises" pie in the sky is easy. That's not leadership, it's just wishlisting.

Leadership is making alliances, making compromises, settling for less as long as it's more that what you had before, calling-in favors (but you can't call-em-in if you haven't been around long enough to even work with someone before).

The type of politicians I like are the mature ones who knows what it takes to get things done. The ones who are willing to give a little to gain a little. Bellicose rants and tweets, and insulting well-respected and beloved members of the Democratic party... well, that just don't impress me much.

All I'm saying is that my standards are higher and I think we need to do better.

[Mr. Quackers]

61. no it's just racist, sexist, and right wing propaganda

[NurseJackie]

178. Elaborate please.

[fleabiscuit]

195. Don't think that's going to happen. nt

[NurseJackie]

198. I think you're correct!

[brush]

292. I hear echoes from under that bridge though.

[betsuni]

295. I think it's time for a musical interlude. Edvard Grieg:

[brush]

296. Heeheehee!

[mcar]

202. How, exactly, is it sexist, racist, RW propaganda?

Do tell.

[Eliot Rosewater]

409. I tried to illustrate what you are referring to here and nobody paid attention.

[TheBlackAdder]

22. This is the only one pooping on people.

.



.

[melman]

29. "Wishing AO-C the best"

Of course you are.

[kstewart33]

263. Yes, I do.

She has real potential. But she's got to build relationships in the House which takes a long time. It's the only way to get things done. And learn the specifics of how Congress works. And how to manage her staff, and determine her priorities. The list is long.

But she seems much more interested in the publicity.
The media loves her now but in a few months she will be yesterday's news.
I don't see this ending well.

[littlemissmartypants]

267. I know what you mean. I hope she doesn't get her feelings hurt.

My rule one would be to build your support system. Everything we accomplish is done with the aid of others. Few succeed in a vacuum.

I am really hoping the best for her.

[tonedevil]

272. Aw bless your little heart. /nt

[littlemissmartypants]

274. Thanks, Anthony.

My tough exterior is just a shield for my tender heart. I appreciate your support but apparently you are not a fan of AOC. Got it. Rock on.

[tonedevil]

287. I may have made a huge blunder...

Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez reminds me of my daughters, who are just a shade older, in the best way. There is no way to know what she will do with her term, but I am already excited with her rhetoric.

[NurseJackie]

290. Not sure why anyone would be "excited" about rhetoric suggesting that Democrats are do-nothings...

Not sure why anyone would be "excited" about divisive smears and other divisive "rhetoric" suggesting that Democrats are do-nothings, or corrupt, or that we don't care about climate change.

in the best way.

Yep, she's the best. Ooooo... how exciting!

[tonedevil]

294. I don't see things your way...

I know AOC has stamped all over your lawn, but she is so far so good with me. Not that I matter my district is 3000 miles away.

[melman]

270. Sorry

Not buying that. This is an attack thread.


And if you wish her well then why a post so full of insults?

according to your post here ...

- she is much more interested in publicity

- soon going to be yesterday's news

- and "this'' is not going to end well.


That's some well wishing.

[crazycatlady]

30. problem is that this bullshit has gone on for years

And we're just now hearing about it first hand from a 20 something congresswoman. One thing I'll say about younger generations (I say this as an 80s baby) is that we're not afraid to call out bullshit when we see it, rather than polishing the turds like our elders do.

An example is that Harvard orientation that featured conservative thinktanks and lobbyists. If it has been a long-standing tradition, why did the public not know about it until 2018?

[HopeAgain]

35. Yes let's make sure the excitement AOC brings is quelled

Lord knows we don't need to bring in new voters

[NurseJackie]

281. How does it "bring in new voters" when someone denigrates the Democrats...

How does it "bring in new voters" when someone denigrates the Democrats and the Democratic party? What exactly is "exciting" about making the Democratic party appear lazy or incompetent, or in suggesting that Democrats do-nothing, or that Democrats don't care about climate change?

These types of divisive lies only serve to divide and weaken the party... it creates distrust and resentment. All I'm trying to say is that a weakened Democratic party only serves to benefit the GOP (and the Russians.) So I wonder why anyone would want to do or say anything like that? What's the motivation? What good purpose does it serve?

Republican-funded Cenk Uygur's founded the group "Justice Democrats" which really makes no secret of their contempt and hostility toward the Democratic Party with the continual accusations that the party is "corrupt" and that the only way to save the party is to "destroy it" and rebuild-it.

I have to tell you that I think it's reasonable for anyone to question the motives of anyone who may be associated with that particular group. These are fair questions and deserve to be explored and answered. I think reasonable people can agree that it should be okay to ask questions and have them answered honestly.

[Palisade]

301. Who exactly has AOC been denigrating?

When exactly did she say the democratic party are do-nothings and don't care about climate change?

[NurseJackie]

323. Pay attention.

[Palisade]

434. So not any dems then?

That's what I thought.

[NurseJackie]

443. Wrong.

[Palisade]

503. Care to point out which dems she has "denigrated" and "pooped" on?

Or are you just going to reply with emoticons, per usual?

[George II]

592. "per usual"? Here for four days and you already know what's "usual" about someone?

Or, perhaps................

[HopeAgain]

471. AOC won't cost a single vote to a single Democrat

in a single general election. All this pearl clutching over her is silly.

[NurseJackie]

475. Ooph! Hysterical!

AOC won't cost a single vote to a single Democrat

All this pearl clutching over her is silly.

But without her the party is doomed?

[HopeAgain]

486. Democrats aren't dependent of AOC

I never said that, and your belittling smilies are just what one might expect. The politician's and Congress' dismal approval ratings are not going to get better with with more of the same, and then where does that lead? It lead to Trump on the other side...

Time to shake things up before it is too late.

[Eliot Rosewater]

590. Oh yeah, there is NO history of person A bad mouthing a candidate

and others overhearing it and thinking"well if my friend Zora cant trust X, how can I?"

Happens all day everyday.

Lots of history about this! LOTS LOTS LOTS

[HopeAgain]

669. Please give me a quote where she "badmouthed" a specfic candidate.

Disagreeing is not badmouthing, it's democracy.

[Eliot Rosewater]

670. She? Who are you talking about?

Let me save you some time, I am talking about next year when the non liberal but pretends to be left says over and over:

"we just cant trust that Kamala, something about her"

"I might vote for Beto in the end but I will HOLD MY NOSE"

I could go on for HOURS.

[HopeAgain]

671. ?

I don't know if you are being coy or lost track of the thread.

[Eliot Rosewater]

672. READ my response, do you see me referencing anyone?

NO

I am talking about who i am talking about and it is OBVIOUS

AOC is not person A, person A is anyone who does what I described there.

[HopeAgain]

673. So good to know

You have no issue with AOC, since you suddenly changed the subject.

[Hoyt]

44. I'm OK with Goldberg's advice. OK with AOC too, so far. Could see her get a bit out there. n/t

[cwydro]

66. Same here. Surprised at the defensive responses here.

Saying “learn your job” is not bad advice.

[whathehell]

133. Except Whoopi doesn't know enough about AOC's job..

to presume to lecture her about it.

AOC worked her butt off for her job. .What has Whoopi done in the past 10 years except gain weight and run her mouth for big paychecks?

[Hassin Bin Sober]

199. Bingo!

[fleabiscuit]

47. "...but before you start pooping on people and what they've done, you got to do something too."

Sounds like very good advise for past and present presidential wannabe runners as well.

[JCanete]

76. You have to talk about the things. That is doing something. That is part of the battle. If AOC were

just to shut up and not bring these issues to our attention, they certainly wouldn't get fixed. Now whether she can fix them unilaterally or get enough public support behind her to get other politicians to either step up or fall in line remains to be seen, but fuck that bullshit about staying quiet and learning. What is that teaching exactly?

[fleabiscuit]

106. Maturity and resolve. nt

[JCanete]

132. Ha...so its maturity to hold your tongue when injustice continues? What does that gain you?

a seat on a committee assuming you don't irritate the wrong people?

[fleabiscuit]

166. Or the maturity to offer a brokered doable solution for a perceived problem. nt

[JCanete]

245. But some things have just festered and been ignored, not talked about, not drawn attention

to for years. Should she wait years before she brings them up? Should she not address how bad Democrats tying their OWN hands behinds their backs with Paygo is? Should she be mum because she doesn't yet have the experience that would teach her how to be mum?

[fleabiscuit]

279. I have no idea what you are trying to say. nt

[JCanete]

297. That our adult congress has allowed some issues to entirely slip through the cracks and never be

publicly addressed for years and decades...presumably because that's the effective, statesmanly way to fix those issues? That our adults have brokered deals lately to tie our own hands behind our backs, presumably again, to usher in grand progressive legislation? Are these the lessons Cortez should be learning, in your estimation?

And what of the generally tepid way we've addressed money in politics for decades now? Yes, occasionally we bemoan the situation. Rarely do we campaign on it as an issue.

[betsuni]

298. What issues have slipped through the cracks and never be publicly addressed for years and decades?

[JCanete]

300. How about the ridiculous fact that internships have remained unpaid? That is

a system that simply favors the privileged.

[fleabiscuit]

392. Meh. There are many different internships in the US.

If one goes into an unpaid internship I'd assume she has a larger picture and plan that is beyond her internship. That would be her choice. Technically a paid intern is an employee, which brings other considerations into play, such as tax withholding etc. One would probably want to find out what all those considerations and obligations are before jumping the shark.

[JCanete]

440. oh my....but who chooses not to go into an unpaid internship because they simply can't afford to?

Internships in Congress should absolutely be paid. This should be an opportunity for people from all walks of life to get an education in our legislative system that gives them the foundation of one day being a part of it. You follow?

[fleabiscuit]

556. If that's what floats you boat it's OK with me.

I'd rather everyone was offered free college education. nt

[JCanete]

558. Totally with you on that goal. nt

[fleabiscuit]

269. Generally best not to crap where you eat. nt

[JCanete]

273. If the only important thing is you getting to eat. nt

[fleabiscuit]

278. Everyone does it.

[Cha]

96. +1!

[whathehell]

137. Maybe Whoopi should take her own advice..

before criticizing or "pooping" on others like AOC.

What has she done lately?

[fleabiscuit]

212. A lot of people don't see relevance of the entertainment industry.

Interestingly, the industry that has sparked this thread. Or perhaps ironic is a better word.

Whoppie irrelevant? hahahahaha...

[whathehell]

229. 'The industey that sparked this thread"...huh?

I have no idea what you're talking about. Buh bye.

[fleabiscuit]

244. On "The View" Monday...

[Power 2 the People]

398. Whoopi insisted that Kylie Jenner was a "self-made" billionaire too.

I like her but I don't put much stock in her opinion of people after that.

[Cha]

51. Kick for Whoopi!

[cwydro]

124. +1

[JCanete]

53. Whoopie continues to say, in my opinion, really stupid, research-free things, abut justice democrats

etc. She is a brilliant person, but continues to not put in the effort before spouting her opinions regarding political organizations, positions and personalities that are outside of her comfort zone.

[dogman]

120. She has a conservative attitude.

That's why I don't think AOC is likely to give her much thought.

[ProfessorGAC]

326. Unbrillant!

Like too many other posts on this thread.

[dogman]

332. Ok stable genius.

[Power 2 the People]

553. +1

[UniteFightBack]

62. I think it's sound advice although the wording may be harsh. nt

[trueblue2007]

70. i DEFINATELY agree with Whoopi Goldberg .... oftentimes i think the Congresswoman looks silly

she lacks experience I believe. Her heart is in the right place, but she needs more knowledge.

[left-of-center2012]

146. yes

[defacto7]

208. This

[Honeycombe8]

335. +1. nt

[coeur_de_lion]

73. Oh let her poop all she wants.

She's a young smart hot shot. I was like that once. Just get out of her way.

[Dr Vegas]

84. Learn the job before Pooping on People?

you mean like How her fellow "View" members, took the Time to Learn about the person who spoke about her job as a Nurse during The Miss America contest a few years back?

[Trumpocalypse]

90. I've never heard AOC say a word against

John Lewis or Dianne Feinstein. I get the point Goldberg is trying to make but she makes it dishonestly.

[Palisade]

304. Agreed

What she is saying is totally in bad faith. Would respect her much more if she would just say she disagrees with AOC's policy proposals.

[ehrnst]

596. "Bad faith"

Can you clarify? Do you mean she's lying?

Do you mean she's not sincere about wanting AOC to succeed?

After all HRC kept a low profile when she started in the Senate, as did Obama.

They actually turned down interviews, not wanting to appear like they were seeking the celebrity spotlight as newbies. They learned procedures, met with colleagues on ways to get work done.

They also ended up getting the enthusiastic endorsement of their vast majority of their legislative colleagues for higher office, as well as being very effective legislators.

I think that Whoopi was being her down to earth, geniune self in her effusive advice to AOC.

If I was in that position, I would have smiled and said, "Thanks for the advice - I'm a fan! I don't think I'm pooping on anyone, but I'll take it under consideration." That would have shown a sense of humor and a self-confidence that tempers defensiveness.

I do hope that AOC is seeking counsel from other experienced women on the Hill. I hear it's quite a learning curve, and it's easy to stumble when in the spotlight. People want Pelosi to mentor a replacement, and AOC would do very well to take the opportunity to soak up Pelosi's tutelage while she can, now that she's stated she's going to stay on as speaker only through 2020.

There's room for many styles of governing in our party - and it's important for get all of the new ones to get up to speed and working effectively as legislators, especially at this point in history.

[Tech]

91. Numbers

13% of registered dems voted, she received about 16000 voted. A high % win in a low count vote. I am excited to see what she does, and how she does. Whoopie is who she is, much to be admired. I do not always agree with her, but I do refuse to watch The View anymore. They have both rubbed me the wrong way at times. So has my mom, my kid, and my husband. And they are the most important people in my life. Nobody starts a new job without needing to learn.

[LongtimeAZDem]

98. "Nobody starts a new job without needing to learn."

Well said.

[LongtimeAZDem]

95. Didn't Whoopi get the memo that we're not allowed to criticize AOC? /nt

[Gothmog]

97. K&R

[John Fante]

99. I don't recall AOC criticizing Diane Feinstein, John Lewis, etc.

Seems llke a strawman to me.

[dogman]

252. You develop those techniques when you sit still and learn the job.

Then you can poop on the young ones passing you by. Taxing the rich scares the rich.

[Honeycombe8]

100. I think she's right.

Whoopi's been around for a while. I'm older, too. No doubt she has seen what I've seen over the years. I've seen this before at work, when new young people come in. They don't know anything, but think they know everything. They're going to tell people how to do things better (like the existing people don't know what they're doing and haven't tried other ways). They often didn't last long.

She can be a real asset. I hope she doesn't ruin it for herself before then, though. It's like what the Bee Gees called "First Fame." When someone suddenly becomes famous at a young age...they go overboard, they're famous and loved, they start believing the hype about themselves, they get arrogant and difficult. It's hard to handle, and not many young people are good at handling that, if it happens suddenly.

It seems to me that the #1 rule for a newcomer should be: Don't make enemies; respect the ones who have been doing the work before you got there. She hasn't sponsored any bills, passed any bills, or done anything yet. When it comes time for that, she will need friends in the House.

[left-of-center2012]

149. yes

[Hortensis]

342. As you say. She is talented, she is in congress,

and she shows signs that she could turn out to be an asset for progressivism in government.

I was encouraged by her voting for Pelosi, but young or otherwise, for me she comes in with a trust deficit to make up. I was never so young that I would have supported a primary candidate who promised (and then genuinely tried) to try to overset the choice made by the majority of Democrats.

We'll see. She's in a much better position now to realize the truth about progressivism in the Democratic Party.

Nancy Pelosi when she accepted the speakership: Let us declare that we will call upon the bold thinking needed to address the disparity of income in America – which is at the root of the crisis of confidence felt by so many Americans.

As Justice Brandeis said, “We may have democracy, or we may have wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can’t have both.”

We must end that injustice and restore the public’s faith in a better future for themselves and their children.

[fascisthunter]

104. Yes, Everyone... Calm Down and be reasonable

It's worked so well with the blue collar folks I work with. Keep listening to this nonsense, and we will have a republican majority in the House again. Sorry but, people with money have no clue as to how the majority feels, lives or thinks.

[David__77]

228. Drawing sharp lines in a struggle is a skill.

Those who utter talking points of “across the aisle,” “realistic solutions,” and “pragmatic,” may or may not find themselves on the other side of that line.

[Wash. state Desk Jet]

107. What? There is an issue about Whoopi having said what people are thinking !

Really ? Learn the job, imagine that, experience really makes the difference. The other thing of it is, Goldberg really knows how the media works. It's all about the job .

[doc03]

109. She is absolutely right of all the new people elected to Congress she is the one

popping off and the news media is eating it up. Trump will use her as the example to define Democrats
as being extreme leftists.

[dogman]

122. I hope so.

So far every right wing attack has been handled quite well. she is getting out our message better than Democrats who have been there for years.

[doc03]

135. IMHO her message is not going to help us in places like Ohio

where I live or the other states Trump turned in 2016.

[dogman]

139. Not sure what can save Ohio.

From what I've seen in the midterms it will help in Wisconsin and Michigan. Obviously the young are the future and she gives me hope.

[John Fante]

158. Would you prefer she kiss Trump's ass? Apologize to the deplorables?

Would that help win Ohio?

[doc03]

181. I prefer she let the paint dry on her office door before she

thinks she runs the House. Reminds me of another person that said I alone can fix it.

[John Fante]

155. I don't give a shit what Trump says or does. You shouldn't either.

[customerserviceguy]

113. Here's what I'm worried about

AOC will suck the oxygen out of the room for anyone trying to get their ideas, faces, names, etc. out there for the 2020 nomination. Faux Snooze will amplify and distort whatever she says to help smother our eventual nominee, and anyone running for the nomination will be asked if they agree or disagree with something AOC has said.

Keeping her head down, learning the job, and trying to get along with at least people who have a "D" behind their names is not bad advice.

[defacto7]

219. +1

[msongs]

116. just whoopi's opinion. both she and aoc are allowed to have such things nt

[MustLoveBeagles]

242. Yep

[bullwinkle428]

119. WTF ever happened to "well-behaved women rarely make history"?

[Quixote1818]

172. Thank you! nt

[lunatica]

123. I recall the young Whoopi breaking all kinds of rules when she started

her career.

[NurseJackie]

125. But whatabout? 😜

[ehrnst]

616. You think that may be why she recognizes when someone else might be heading there?

And wants to give them some advice on how to avoid it?

[lunatica]

627. Probably. I do think

Whoopi was trying to help Ocasio-Cortez avoid some future pitfall, But her “poopy” remark is unfortunate. A lot of the early criticism was about that, but Ocasio-Cortez has persisted nevertheless and many people now admire her for it, because she’s coming across as committed and passionate and not as foolish. Whoopi is probably beginning to admire her too.

I like Whoopi and I don’t have any purity expectations of people so I think she’ll be more open minded now. I don’t see that Ocasio-Cortez has stumbled or slipped up so far. She will never wilt under criticism and so far I agree with her. I’ve always admired outspoken people. I did my best to instill it in my son even as a child, and to support it in my co-workers. I myself have overcome many insecurities to make myself speak out. A profound belief in your cause helps.

[ehrnst]

630. I think that Whoopi does admire her, which is why seeing her make

what Whoopi thought were some errors was so frustrating.

[lunatica]

633. That is also highly probable

Whoopi May be seeing a lot of herself in Ocasio-Cortez. I see it in Whoopi. In myself too.

[ehrnst]

646. ....

Many do.

And if I could go back in time, I would probably sound a bit like Whoopi when talking to my younger self.

Damn, I want her to do well, and the only way it's going to happen is because she knocks it out of the park with her own acheivements as a legislator.

[Gore1FL]

126. I'm going with AOC on this one. nt

[HopeAgain]

127. Angry because the rookie is getting more playing time?

[NurseJackie]

131. Sure, go with that.

[NurseJackie]

160. Thanks for the concern.

[Tarc]

128. Whoopi needs a reminder of the middle portion of "Letter from a Birmingham Jail"

I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action"; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a "more convenient season." Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection.

Letter from a Birmingham Jail

Whoopi's got hers, and screw the next generation that wants theirs. She is slipping into the White Moderate role.

[tonedevil]

134. Agreed. /nt

[mountain grammy]

162. Yep. The divide between rich and poor is growing

And we better damn well address it. The Congresswoman understands that..

[questionseverything]

284. whoopi is against taxes...so its no surprise she is hating on a new progressive member

[NurseJackie]

286. No she's not.

so its no surprise she is hating on a new progressive member

No she's not. Nobody is doing that. Legitimate criticism isn't hate.

Thank GOD for Whoopi Goldberg!

[questionseverything]

547. i dont watch the view much but i do sometimes...whooppee rails against raxes

I think she identifies as independent but her views are more repub

1%ers have a hard time with compassion for those who don't have the basics

<shrugs>

[NurseJackie]

554. ...

[questionseverything]

622. ...

[NurseJackie]

624. "Rails"?? GMAFB! :rofl:

"Rails"?? GMAFB!

[ecstatic]

129. I agree. That has been my issue all along.

I support AOC--she checks every box that I like... except for the drama. Not sure how else to put it. Ever since she won the primary, there has been a lot of division surrounding her, but she contributes to it with her social media posts and unprovoked attacks on democrats. There are so many other new congress members who are drama free. She really needs to take Whoopi's advice before the negative impression of her is set in stone, and "sit still" becomes sit down and STFU.

[democratisphere]

130. Whoopi Goldberg is referring to AO-C's "showboating" behavior!

Whoopi Goldberg is absolutely correct, imo.

[whathehell]

142. Maybe Whoopi's just a tad jealous since the 'show'

on her boat closed years ago.

[democratisphere]

151. Whoopi Goldberg is on one of the most popular shows on television.

There is certainly nothing for her to be jealous about!

[whathehell]

167. I'd be more impressed if she did more than,

fill out a chair on the View and run her mouth.

"Nothing to be jealous of"? Please -- There are lots of things about AOC that Whoopi could be jealous of.

[cwydro]

215. I doubt she's in the least bit jealous.

She is one of the few entertainers who has won an Academy award, a Grammy, an Emmy, and a Tony. Those are just a few of her accomplishments.

She came out of the projects, and to paraphrase Drake “started from the bottom but she’s here now.”

[whathehell]

227. You can doubt it.

I don't.

[EffieBlack]

389. Yes everybody is jealous of Alexandria

[mchill]

143. If there is one thing Whoopi does not like

it is for the rich (like her) to have their taxes raised. I've seen it over and over during the years I watched The View. I don't know when Whoopi had this reaction to AOC - but was it after AOC's comments on a 70% marginal tax? That would have have pissed Ms Greedy Whoopi off to no end.

[shanny]

147. Whoopi Goldberg can sit herself right down, thank you very much.

She hasn't been elected to anything, ever, and doesn't speak for anyone but herself.

[NurseJackie]

153. She speaks for me.

[Tarheel_Dem]

275. She speaks for me too. We all know someone who has a huge fan club for the things he says, but...

for all his fandom, has a very thin legislative success record. AOC would do well to take Whoopi's advice and get her bearings, and build relationships, or she'll wind up just being an ineffective celebrity.

[NurseJackie]

277. "she'll wind up just being an ineffective celebrity."

she'll wind up just being an ineffective celebrity.

Nailed it.

[EffieBlack]

390. This says it all.

[left-of-center2012]

152. Love Whoopi !

[littlemissmartypants]

159. Kicking. eom

[Autumn]

161. Whoopie should concentrate on her job and AOC will concentrate on her job, which she is

doing quite well.

[mountain grammy]

165. Agree

[angrychair]

164. Know what? Fuck Whoopi.

Tired of this “little girl doesn’t know what she is talking about” misogynistic bullshit.

She is a duly elected congress person from New York with a Bachelors in Foreign Relations with a minor in Economics form Boston College.

Tired of this framing of her as a child or “silly” or this ridiculous talking point that she just needs to sit back and do what she is told.

Sorry the “way we used to do it” should be just that. That way helped us loss our ass 2010 and 2016.

The new way helped us win 40 seats in the House and huge gains in state governments across the country.

The new way has people talking about 70% tax rates on millionaires and Medicare for all as serious policy positions.

If anybody should be tempering their approach it should not be the new batch of incoming Democrats but those still trying to do things “the way we have always done it”.

I am NOT saying we need to rewrite the book BUT We need realize that people want fresh ideas and new approaches and we should recognize that as the clear message from the 2018 election.

[Autumn]

179. You know what pisses me off? Whoopie was dishonest as fuck with her so called "advice"

or whatever her problem is with AOC. John Lewis , Dianne Feinstein didn't sit still but AOC should sit still for a minute and learn the job. Fuck that, she knows the job and she's actually doing it.

[Palisade]

305. +1!!!

The first news cycle of 2019 is people talking seriously about a 70% tax rate on the rich.

I'd say AOC is doing her job extremely well!

[colsohlibgal]

182. Love Whoopi But....

Keep on stirring the pot and changing the debate AOC. She and others correctly point out how from he 1940s till Reagan the top marginal tax rate was 60/70 percent.....and our country flourished. It was the realization of FDRs New Deal.

I think people hear of a top tax rate of say 73% and think that is applied to all their income....when it is only on any money after 10 million or so.

Everyone loves our Interstate Freeway System....which was buil using cash from thos high rates....started under Eisenhower, a republican. That party has deteriorated from Ike To Orange Disaster.

[SHRED]

184. Whoopi who?

[Quixote1818]

188. Well a Nobel prize winning economist disagrees with Whoopi so maybe Whoopi should stop pooping

on someone with great ideas and great leadership skills?

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/05/opinion/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-tax-policy-dance.html

[NastyRiffraff]

191. What would happen if you went into a brand new job

and told the owner, manager, and all the employees that they were doing everything wrong and YOU were going to show them how to do it? What do you think the reaction would be? That's exactly what AOC is doing. She's been there 2 minutes and she thinks she can overturn things that people that are, as hard as it is to believe, just as intelligent, perhaps even more knowledgeable, that she is.

I'll give her one thing; she does know how to grab attention for herself. We all know the girl in high school who was exactly like that.

[David__77]

206. You might just save a company that way.

It depends.

[NastyRiffraff]

211. You're kidding, right?

You must be.

[David__77]

216. Not at all.

One of the biggest challenges I have is in getting colleagues to express a definite viewpoint and articulating a plan of action.

Look, listen, and contribute and share. One doesn’t preclude any other.

[Quixote1818]

226. Hey, if Paul Krugman said the new employee was spot on in economics

I would fucking listen to that person.

“A leader is the one, who knows the way, goes the way and show the way”

— JOHN C.MAXWELL

[Hassin Bin Sober]

207. Her owner/manager is the voters in her district and The Constitution.

Not the party leadership or some has been over-fed talking head whose claim to fame is being evenly matched in a battle of wits with like likes of Meghan McCain and Elizabeth Hasselbeck.

[Quixote1818]

210. Well, since Congress and Gov in general has rock bottom approval ratings

I would hope the new employee would have some good ideas how to get my business out of the gutter.

[NastyRiffraff]

214. Okay, you guys win

I give up. I can't engage in this, for reasons I can't say or I'll be alerted on. Byeeeee!

[Honeycombe8]

337. I saw that happen a few times at work.

A new person coming in, who is going to show them all how to do things right. When in actuality, she or he didn't know anything. A failure to recognize that you don't know what you don't know, and a failure to understand that the others there have arrived where they are by trial and error, trying different things....and were successful, which is why they are there!

Those new people who were arrogant and disrespected those who were doing the hard work for years before the newbie got there...they didn't last long.

I had a young male relative who got a job at KMart years ago. He was fired within two weeks. Apparently, he went in and started "advising" the supervisor that the inventory wasn't set up the right way, the procedures weren't efficient, and the like. He had never worked in retail before. When they fired him, they told him he should try another line of work, that he should never work in retail.

Then that same young male worked for my father's bingo parlor. The young man was his SIL. In a short time, my dad told him he wasn't needed anymore. He came in and started telling my dad how to do this, how to do that, etc. The young man was wrong about everything, and it was irritating...the arrogance and presumption and lack of insight into knowing that the young man didn't know anything about how to run a bingo parlor.

I worked for years at a prestigious large law firm. We had a female tech supervisor start once. She had never worked at a law firm before. She came in and immediately started changing procedures, without speaking with the hundreds of attorneys or their staff. She didn't even know that some of the procedures she instituted had been tried before, and had failed. The new procedures interfered with the flow of work. She was fired within six months.

Rule for when you're new: Recognize you don't know the company yet, or the people, or the history there. You are new. Lie low in the beginning and work on understanding the procedures, the people, the atmosphere. Make friends. Don't become a hated new person. THEN you can start tipping your toe into changing things that have not been tried before and which you think would be better. To do anything else is foolish, IF the goal is to accomplish better things at work. If, OTOH, the goal is to have your name on everyone's lips, do the former.

[ehrnst]

589. I think that Whoopi's advice comes from lessons learned about saying things one later regrets.

And certainly AOC is free to take it, ignore it, complain that someone cares enough to say it, etc.

Say what you will about Whoopi, she's a survivor - literally of addiction and homelessness - and that's because she acknowledges/ learns from her mistakes and from new information.

Unfortunately, there is a pervasive culture among some in politics to view any dissent, disagreement or fact checking of them as = to an attack on the very morality of progressive ideas themselves. It's the opposite of good management, which governance is.

The Democratic party is a party of coalitions. Respecting the diversity of veiwpoints and experiences of those groups and the ability to learn from them and from changing scientific discoveries, demographics, political climates, technology, media formats and leadership, and adapt our tactics and messaging accordingly, rather than requiring everyone to unquestioningly comply with an unchanging manifesto, has been ourstrength. Rigidity may appear to be strength, especially if it's about something that appeals to one's specific experiences, and makes for a dynamic lockstep in a protest, but it's not how our society, or our culture functions. Dissent and learning from one's mistakes is neccessary for a healthy political ecosystem. The Tea Party tried it, and while it seemed to work for awhile, it's killing them now.

When Darwin said "survival of the fittest," by "fittest" he meant most adaptable. Adaptable doesn't = "corruptable" or "duplicitous," as many people seem to think. One can be true to oneself and change one's mind with new information....

We have seen all too well what domineering, lockstep, top down politics - masquerading as grassroots populism - has done to the GOP, and we've been very wise to avoid it as long as we could.

Having a diverse toolkit of tactics, and being flexible enough admit to and learn from mistakes is the way we outlive the GOP. It's a hallmark of good management.

[EffieBlack]

591. Brilliant post!

This should be an OP.

[NastyRiffraff]

603. EXCELLENT post!

We ALL need to learn from our mistakes, and every one of us can benefit from learning from other people. When asked if there was intelligent life elsewhere in the universe, the brilliant Carl Sagan said:

It seems to me an important issue whether there is life elsewhere. On important issues, you shouldn’t make a decision until you have the evidence.

If Carl Sagan was open, even eager, to learn new things, certainly we all can.

[David__77]

201. Spoken to the delight of cynics and mummies across the land.

I hope Ocasio Cortez is true to herself. I like her!

[loyalsister]

325. It should have been addressed long ago

Climate change has been an afterthought for far too long. Many Democrats have been necessarily fighting the old battles for so long that they seem to not have grasped the urgency of climate change.
The influence of the fossil fuel industry is institutional and someone is finally saying it loudly.
I get that it is hard to turn down the money but until they band together to reject the money and influence we are not going to have the political force willing to seriously consider what it might mean to have children and grandchildren living into the 2nd century of this millennium.
As for rookie mistakes about process bills originate in the House but ideas that inform them come from other branches. A lot of times the Senate tells the House what they will pass. It seems possible that she referenced that process and in the eagerness to pounce in her critics have used the most cynical interpretation.

[betsuni]

222. "... too much of what we've tried in the past hasn't worked, either."

Same old "establishment Democrats have no message, don't fight for anything, are beholden to corporations and wealthy donors, don't care about the working/middle class" ideology.

The things that haven't worked in the past are Republican things. When did history disappear?

Grover Norquist: "We are trying to change the tone in state capitals and turn them toward nastiness and partisanship. ... Bipartisanship is another name for date rape."

[David__77]

225. I don't advise a Ocasio Cortex "sit still" in face of white supremacy.

I don’t advise she “sit still” in the face of heterosexism.”

I don’t advise she “sit still” in the face of the current economic order!

[emulatorloo]

247. Agreed, but Goldberg didn't say anything remotely like that, did she?

Here’s the quote, please highlight the parts where Goldberg said AOC should sit still in the face of white supremacy, heterosexism, or income inequality.

————————

"There are a whole bunch of people in the Democratic party who have been busting their asses to make sure that women get what they need, people get what they need, children get what they need," Goldberg said.

"So you just got in there. And I know you got lots of good ideas, but I would encourage you to sit still for a minute and learn the job... because there are people in that party who have been working their tails off for this country, and they know a lot.

And you could learn some stuff from them" Goldberg advised Ocasio-Cortez.

—————————-

I don’t know what I think of Goldberg’s statement, but she didn’t say anything like what you claim she said.

[David__77]

248. I dont think she should sit still in the face of Trump.

...

[emulatorloo]

249. Agreed. Except Goldberg didn't say that either.

Gist of the statement is that AOC has good Democratic colleagues in Congress who can help her learn the ropes.

Nowhere in that statement does Goldberg say anything remotely like ‘sit still in the face of Trump.’

As I said before I don’t know what I think about Goldberg’s statement, but let’s criticize it for what was actually said, not some thing we have made up or words we have put in her mouth that she didn’t say.
————-

“"There are a whole bunch of people in the Democratic Party who have been busting their asses to make sure that women get what they need, people get what they need, children get what they need," Goldberg said.

"So you just got in there. And I know you got lots of good ideas, but I would encourage you to sit still for a minute and learn the job... because there are people in that party who have been working their tails off for this country, and they know a lot.

And you could learn some stuff from them" Goldberg advised Ocasio-Cortez.

————————

[David__77]

253. I don't think she should sit still, in any sense.

I’m sure people may come to very different conclusions regarding Goldberg’s “encouragement.”

[emulatorloo]

255. Me neither, I think AOC is great.

[David__77]

256. Yay!

Also, I’ve appreciated Whoopi Goldberg. I liked her sitcom that didn’t last too long! I’m glad she’s pro-Democratic.

[brush]

293. Would you agree she should learn that appropriation bills originate in the House...

not the Senate as she mistakenly suggested on 60 Minutes?

That's kind of an elementary thing about learning the job of a Congressperson.

[littlemissmartypants]

237. AOC compared herself to FDR yesterday.

I say we give her some space.

Many of us are able to hold two concepts in our minds at the same time, like loving two children, or boyfriends.
( Full disclosure: I am sometimes easily distracted.)

I will always love Woopi.

Kicking again. Just cause I love DU, too.

[Beacool]

241. I agree with Whoopi.

Alexandria has the arrogance of youth. A lot of us thought that we knew it all in our 20s. We soon found out that we didn't. She's a fresh face with new ideas, and that is a good thing, but like any rookie she does need to learn the job before she starts sh*tting on those who came before her.

[dogman]

254. Who has she shit on?

Or are you pushing Whoopi's straw man?

[Gothmog]

243. From Talking Points Memorandum

Link to tweet

[musicblind]

261. I agree with Goldberg's advice.

When reading just the headline, I was skeptical, but it makes sense in context.

I hope AOC takes it but that is her prerogative. I don't plan to judge her either way because it's her term. She can use it how she wants, then her constituents can decide if they want another. So on and so on.

[bubbazero]

264. A thought from a man, an old white man

dem whip from Illinois Sen Hamilton Lewis told a freshman sen from Missouri, one Harry Truman: For the first 6 months you'll wonder how you got here, After that you'll wonder how the rest of us got here. Being the dumb old redneck I is, I shant offer miss Ocasio-Cortez any direct advice. Rather I would suggest that when reality of the cesspool sets in, research THOURGHLY another old white man----The late Sam Rayburn from Texas. Look at how he learned, functioned, and led thru some of the toughest years of the 20th century. YOU CAN DO THIS and those who are seeking a better country are pulling for you as we pull for all our democrats!

[VOX]

266. Right now, in this moment in history, it's imperative for Democrats be the "adults in the room."

That is, the exact opposite of Trump and his nihilistic band of thieves. Direct frontal assaults are brave and exciting and yes, well-deserved, but it all has to play well in the battleground states come November 2020.

I’m not criticizing anyone in particular, because this should apply to ALL Democrats and progressives at this dark moment in our history. I am NOT thinking something like, oh, let’s keep a low profile so we’re more likeable. Hell no! Rather, I’m thinking that acting *strategically* and in disciplined, coordinated fashion will be of greater value in salvaging democracy. Be the adults in the room, adults who are sick of the fascist government with which we’re all saddled.

Tear the hell out of 45, but do it in an adult fashion. It is feasible. Remember Obama leading Mitt Romney into a box canyon with the pitch-perfect “Please proceed, governor”? That’s how to win.

[Palisade]

302. I'm sorry...but who does Whoopi think AOC is "pooping" on?

The only people I've seen her "poop" on is Trump, Scalise, Hannity and other media hacks like Chris Cillizza.

Does Whoopi think fighting for a climate change committee is "pooping" on democrats? Does she think disagreeing with PAYGO is "pooping" on democrats too? Or perhaps she is just worried about falling into an undesirable tax bracket in the future? Hmmm...

[whistler162]

306. Jeffrey Archer "The Prodigal Daughter:

[RandiFan1290]

308. Another in the 1% scared to death of having to pay her fair share. nt

[betsuni]

312. Why do you think that?

Link?

[RandiFan1290]

313. lol

[betsuni]

315. Oh right, only some people can ask for links.

[RandiFan1290]

316. lol

[betsuni]

317. Thing is, that only works when there's something funny.

Whoopi as a one-percenter not wanting to pay taxes is funny. Do you know who she is? By all means, keep kicking this thread, I am!

[pwb]

314. Fuck whoopi.

Last edited Tue Jan 8, 2019, 02:25 PM - Edit history (1)

[betsuni]

321. Who's whoppi and why should we fuck her?

[pwb]

412. Happy?

[whistler162]

318. Interesting how many "pro" Rep. Ocasio-Cortez

want her to be a one term House member by having her not learn the job. Good advise from Ms. Goldberg.

[dogman]

333. She has 2 years.

Not a lot of time. If she sits still she will be gone. Lauren Underwood was sworn in from IL-14. The very next day a GOPer filed for 2020. She is under attack already. Unless she brings something home, she will be gone in 2 years. In a matter of days AOC has moved the Overton window back to the left. This is what we need from Democrats, not advice from lazy rich people.

[ehrnst]

334. "Lazy rich people?" Whoopi Goldberg lazy?

[dogman]

336. Yep, sits and pontificates.

What has she done? She is the one who is attacking Democrats.

[ehrnst]

346. So she's "lazy" because.....

I don't think you want to go there, do you?

[dogman]

348. She's telling a person who has organized and run a campaign how to act.

She sits and talks and T-Rump is still President. AOC is actually putting her whole person into her cause. Talkers talk, doers do. And I go where I want, I'm not afraid of you.

[ehrnst]

352. Talkers talk, and doers do...

Apparently her "talk" is enough action to get you enraged.

So, she's lazy because she "sits" while doing her job.

I understand that a certain Senator is a hero because he has "talked for years" about certain issues without having achieved as much legislatively on those issues as Democratic leaders have.

Is it that Whoopi gets more airtime to talk than AOC that gets under your skin? How is that others are "putting their whole person in" when they talk on TV, but Whoopi is "lazy" and doesn't "do."

I think Whoopi's long record of "doing" shows someone who has put "their whole person in" for decades longer than others you seem to think do. I think the one who's out of line here is the one saying that a very accomplished activist and artist, and incidentally, a black woman, is "lazy."

https://www.gaytimes.co.uk/community/55709/whoopi-goldberg-receives-aids-activism-award-elizabeth-taylors-grandson/

http://www.achievement.org/achiever/whoopi-goldberg/

https://www.unicef.org/people/people_whoopi_goldberg.html

https://www.looktothestars.org/celebrity/whoopi-goldberg

Charities supported:

21st Century Leaders
AIDS LIFE
American Foundation for AIDS Research
American Humane Association
American Wild Horse Preservation Campaign
Bob Woodruff Foundation
Broadway Cares/Equity Fights AIDS
Cancer Research Institute
Comic Relief
Communities in Schools
Declare Yourself
DonorsChoose.org
Elevate Hope Foundation
Elizabeth Glaser Pediatric AIDS Foundation
Elton John AIDS Foundation
Exploring The Arts
FilmAid International
Garden of Dreams
Hope North
Human Rights Campaign
Legacy of Hope Foundation
Nelson Mandela Children's Fund
New York Cares
Peace Over Violence
Red Cross
Save the Children
Society for Animal Protective Legislation
St. Jude Children's Research Hospital
True Colors Fund
UNICEF
V-Day
Whatever It Takes
World Vision

Causes supported:
Abuse, Adoption, Fostering, Orphans, AIDS & HIV, Animals, At-Risk/Disadvantaged Youths, Cancer, Children, Civil Rights, Creative Arts, Disaster Relief, Education, Family/Parent Support, Gender Equality, Health, Homelessness, Human Rights, LGBT Support, Miscellaneous, Peace, Physical Challenges, Poverty, Rape/Sexual Abuse, Refugees, Slavery & Human Trafficking, Veteran/Service Member Support, Voter Education, Women

[dogman]

358. Spending money is hard work, ikr?

She doesn't have me enraged, just disgusted. Why does she feel enraged by AOC's behavior? I think it's taxes, but I could be wrong. You mention rape, what about her opinion on Polanski?

[ehrnst]

367. So a black woman who is a long time progressive activist makes money, so she "disgusts" you.

And you think that she's critiquing AOC's actions and words concerning other Democratic party reps and actions, because AOC wants to tax rich people - because AOC is the first/only person to say that?

I didn't hear her saying that Nancy Pelosi is pooping on people for this:

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/democrats-propose-funding-teacher-pay-raises-by-canceling-tax-cuts-for-the-wealthy

Can you provide a link to something I may have missed that this "disgusting" black woman, who has ACTUALLY experienced poverty said in criticism of Nancy because of that. Because this is what I found:

https://abcnews.go.com/US/view-weighs-incoming-speaker-house-nancy-pelosis-role/story?id=60138641

So saying that Whoopi is trying to trash Democrats that want to raise taxes make no sense. She also said that she thought AOC had some things to learn about being in office, which makes sense when they're a beginner.

I have no idea what you are talking about with rape and Polanski. You must be confusing me with another person who you are arguing with.

[dogman]

372. Why do you find it necessary to bring up race?

To me her comments are disgusting. Just like these, "I know it wasn't rape-rape. I think it was something else, but I don't believe it was rape-rape." In defense of Roman Polanski, as quoted in "Roman Polanski: backlash as Whoopi Goldberg says director didn't commit 'rape-rape'. https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Whoopi_Goldberg
Not all of her comments are brilliant.

[ehrnst]

377. Why do you find it neccessary to try to discredit what she said about AOC with

something she said about Roman Polanski?

That's called Whataboutism. Whataboutism (also known as whataboutery) is a variant of the tu quoque logical fallacy that attempts to discredit an opponent's position by charging them with hypocrisy without directly refuting or disproving their argument.

Or try to discredit anyone who agrees with her by implying that they agree with everything she says? Whoopi doesn't have a manifesto that demands no dissent, unlike others.

And yes, she's a black woman, and your language to describe her sounds a bit like a MAGA hat would use about a black woman ("disgusting" ), especially one who is saying things that indicate she doesn't care if straight white men approve. (google Maxine Waters and Brenda Snipes for an eyeopener). Why do you use that language?

You think that because I posted a list of charities and progressive causes that she has actually DONE work for and with for DECADES and, you decide that I "brought up rape." That's a real stretch. You are bending over backwards to discredit someone who said something you don't like, and apparently hit a deep nerve in you. Dost thou protest too much?

No one said "all her comments are brilliant" - that's a strawman.

A twofer in one post!

[dogman]

382. No, it is an example of her opinions.

Your race argument is just another straw man. Do you agree that AOC should sit still? Seems racist to me since AOC is a POC. See how stupid that sounds? Talk about a twofer, racism and whataboutism. You brought up her charity work on rape abuse, not me. Whoopi's doing well as a talker, AOC is doing better IMO.

[ehrnst]

391. I didn't make a race argument...

I never told AOC to "sit still" and I'm even more "irrelevant" than Whoopi is all things considered. You hit a sale on strawmen, didn't you?

I actually brought up Whoopi's long history with social justice and charity work as a response to your statement that she "disgusted" you, and called her "lazy." You then tried to twist that list of accomplishments into me (or anyone who agreed with Whoopi" into defending "Roman Polanski" and "rape" and "thinking everything she says is brilliant" in a desperate attempt to my post that very effectively called out your "lazy" smear out as not only hateful but very inaccurate. As the record shows.

Whoopi has done very well as a progressive activist with a long, long history of effective action and accomplishments, not to mention an award winning comedian with sharp social commentary. And I think that reveals her to be far, far more effective IMHO. Whereas you feel a need to demean her to make someone else look more effective, and less of a 'talker.'

I think much of that efficacy and activism comes from Whoopi's early background of deep poverty, and addiction and sexual abuse. She has accomplished more in overcoming that, and it gives her an insight into economic justice issues as well as social justice issues few others have.

John Lewis is one example. He truly suffered in service of the social justice movement, growing up with racism, and staying the course when others bailed.

[dogman]

414. Whoopi told her sit still.

IMO Whoopi has lost empathy. I could be wrong. AOC seems an unlikely target for Whoopi. Something is up with that. I haven't tied you to Whoopi, you have done that. I merely pointed out that despite all the love for her comment here, she's capable of mistakes. I enjoyed her work around thirty years ago, but don't have interest in her opinions. I think that she has the right to criticize and so do I.

[ehrnst]

432. That's it - In your opinion. Don't try to make it about Whoopi being less intelligent, savvy

or experienced, because you can't really make that case.

She said something you disagree with. Best to just own that, and not to try to demean or dismiss her to make someone she's critiquing - that you like - look better.

No one said she wasn't capable of mistakes - that's a strawman, and doesn't give your argument much credibility.

I find that's most difficult for men, who are more used to having their opinion given the weight of fact, even if it's rooted in anger admit that they 'think' or 'feel" differently than a woman about something, rather than trying to attempt to present it as a flaw or shortcoming with the woman. The idea that someone, (especially woman) one disagrees with could be just as or more savvy or experienced or intelligent as oneself is something many men never learn.

Good to see that you've opened the door to at least considering that possibility.

[ehrnst]

513. You mention rape.

You mean like writing an essay about a woman who fantasizes about being raped by three men at once?

That's a pretty dicey place to go in a discussion here on DU, don't you think?

[dogman]

526. That's insane.

One is Rape, the other's fiction. Wow

[ehrnst]

527. Whoopi raped someone? Gotta link?

She also expressed admiration for this man- what does that imply in light of your characterizaion that she "defends rapists?"



Do you think her female staffers are paid less than her male staffers? Do you think there is a pervasiveculture of harassment at the View, judging from of her statements on Polanski?

[dogman]

530. Sorry but it's time to break.

We seem to have disconnected. "Whoopi raped someone?' No, never said that. So Good Bye, it's been a slice.

[ehrnst]

531. "One is Rape, the other's fiction."

Your equivalence, Yes? Your words, yes?

Whoopi vs essays....

If there's anything "insane' it's denying the content of your own posts when everyone can read it....

I completely understand why you'd want to exit quickly.

[NastyRiffraff]

428. +1

I wish I could rec your post.

[whistler162]

549. No, she has 1 year then she

must begin campaigning again. Don't worry the Congresswoman just needs to make a bunch of speeches and TV appearances not create and work to get legislation through the process.

[Yosemito]

466. Did you poll her constituents ?

Please do share the results of your survey.

[Vinca]

322. Let AOC be AOC. She will either succeed or fail.

Better to have failed being genuine than succeed being the big, fucking, phony, reality star we've got in the White House.

[still_one]

328. Absolutely, but human nature is human nature, and when public figures make public comments, people

for better or worse will respond with their opinions

[disillusioned73]

339. If you take advice from woopie..

Last edited Tue Jan 8, 2019, 11:41 AM - Edit history (1)

well, lol

[Devil Child]

353. Rep. Ocasio-Cortez is worth listening too, corporate talk-show infotainment pundits... not so much

[MrGrieves]

356. Gee it's a good thing we are arguing about this

Gee it's a good thing we are arguing about a freshmen congress member and a tv personality. That seems like a great thing to do while our country burns.

[NurseJackie]

362. I can multi-task.

[MrGrieves]

459. Oh I know you can

I don’t blame you for your responses. This is being fed to us to create problems though. this is why I said the other day that she needs to be careful about being used to create problems. It isn’t that I think it is resulting by anything intentional on her or whoopie’s part but this type of fighting will be pushed and to an extent already has been. She needs to recognize when her tactixs are opening the doors for damage.

[NurseJackie]

473. Such knowledge comes with age, or by LISTENING to good advice...

Such knowledge comes with age, or by LISTENING to good advice being offered to her by mentors. Now is not the time for her to make "enemies" within her own party, or to create distrust or resentment that would interfere with her having a productive interactions with her colleagues. Such things are not accomplished by repeating lies that the Democrats are "corrupt" and "do-nothings" and "don't care about climate change" and "too old". It's a mistake to antagonize one's own senior party members. I know that I wouldn't expect any assignments or appointments if I started off that way.

Back in my day we used to call that being too big for one's britches or bloomers.

It isn’t that I think it is resulting by anything intentional on her

I believe she's getting bad advice and doesn't realize it's bad advice, and doesn't believe others when she's told that she's receiving bad advice and that she's behaving in a way that is divisive.

I guess people learn by making mistakes, but at this critical juncture in time we really don't have the luxury to do it that way. It's time for her to get with the program and to learn to accept wise advice that's being offered to her.

[MrGrieves]

532. Agreed.

I think you put it all in a better way than I ever could.

[justhanginon]

548. Well said and yes, I too agree. Thanks.

[George II]

368. Speaking of Whoopi and the View, Kamala Harris will be on in a minute or two!!!

[Bleacher Creature]

383. If true, AOC should be ashamed at herself!!

That's disgusting and totally unsanitary. She's not a seagull!!

[ZX86]

387. Garbage advice from a C-list celebrity.

We already have a President who takes advice from bubble headed talk show hosts. We don't need our best and brightest following that lead. Especially from a person who's professional name is "Whoopi". We shouldn't take political advice from a person named "Whoopi" anymore than we should take advice from people with names like Yahoo Serious, Larry the Cable Guy, or Bozo the Clown.

[NNadir]

395. I don't watch television, but as an old man, Ms. Ocasio-Cortez is someone...

...who refreshes me enormously.

I love her dance...

...with the media, unafraid, aggressive, and courageous.

We old folks have screwed up enough. It's time to hear loudly from those for whom the screw ups will have consequence.

"Learning the job" in Congress should not be learning how to tell people what they want to hear.

Our country is facing a clear and present danger, an incompetent, mindless, racist, fool is running it.

It's time to hear from real human beings, and Ms. Ocasio-Cortez is just that, a real human being.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

402. Who is she saying AOC is "pooping on"?

[Eliot Rosewater]

410. Yep, I just read this thread. 2020 is gonna be a repeat of something that I cant

mention, we will NOT learn our lesson.

And our grandchildren will wanna know who is responsible. I will tell them.

[BluesRunTheGame]

418. Whoopi works for ABC/Disney

She gets a big fat paycheck from ‘The Man’.

There’s an acceptable range of political thought allowed on the corporate media and AOC is finding success with a message that goes beyond what’s allowed. It’s unsurprising that they are giving her advice to “sit still and learn her job”.

[ehrnst]

509. Oh, so that totally explains this.

[RandySF]

452. I don't think AOC needs to "sit back"

But I don’t she quite yet quite yet appreciates how difficult the legislative process can be.

[ehrnst]

528. I think that the term "sit back" isn't as nefarious or malicious as many think.(nt)

[scarytomcat]

485. another rich person that does NOT want to pay taxes

who would have figured
sad very sad

[ehrnst]

492. How do you explain this if she goes after anyone who wants to raise taxes on the rich?

I'd be interested to hear.

[scarytomcat]

494. Bernie never advocated bring back a 70% bracket

that I know of
it's my opinion

[ehrnst]

496. That's your rationalization?

Lemme get this straight - Whoopi has no actual interest in her doing a good job, she's just saying anything because she's angry at someone who proposes a particular tax increase that isn't likely, and hasn't been proposed in legislation, but she's all over Bernie... until he says 70%.

Why would she even like Bernie, after what he's said about the 1%?

Your theory about Whoopi's motives don't seem to make sense.

[Doremus]

500. Not a big fan of Whoopi's. She occasionally goes on a spiel, like the one today about AOC, and

she tends to be very smug, as if she has the only valid opinion on whatever topic and must rein in the silly children from talking nonsense. Sometimes she has it right imo but most times she doesn't and will spew a bunch of crud about health insurance should refund unused premiums and similar illogic.

I think she tends to be more libertarian in some of her stances. When it comes to the Clintons they can do no wrong in her eyes, hence today's scolding from on high.

[ehrnst]

501. ....

[Cha]

512. lol.. that I disagree

with.

[ehrnst]

518. Clearly she's "not relevant..."

[Cha]

523. Little do they know..

Good find

[MadDAsHell]

540. Translation: "Learn your place, woman." It's Nov 2016 all over again. nt

[ehrnst]

543. Like all over RW twitter when Maxine Waters says something Maxine.

[tonedevil]

546. Now it becomes clear...

you want to treat Rep Ocasio-Cortez the way the RW treats Rep Waters. That is an interesting thing for you to reveal.

[Doremus]

555. ...

[ZX86]

550. She earned the job and all it's privileges when she won the election.

It's an insult to AOC and all her voters that she doesn't know what her job is or how to perform it. You don't agree with her policy positions? Fine. But don't insult this woman color by telling her she needs to "sit still" and "learn her job". It reeks of sexism and racism.

[fleabiscuit]

557. Hmm... I've always looked at it quite the opposite.

For me, once someone has been voted into congress they inherit obligations to their voters, not gain privileges from the voters.

[ZX86]

569. I haven't the slightest idea what you are saying.

[fleabiscuit]

584. I believe you. nt

[ZX86]

660. Because what you are saying doesn't make any sense.

Nobody votes for a candidate to "sit still" and "learn your job". To say that to an elected member of congress and a woman of color is condescending at best and racist/sexist at worse. It insults the candidate and everyone who voted for her.

Your semantic arguments over "obligations" and "privileges" has no relevance.

[fleabiscuit]

661. The irony is amusing. nt

[Palisade]

562. Whoopi net worth: 45 million dollars

Her show should be called "The View From Up Here"

[George II]

564. Beyond bashing her, do you have a point?

Do you know anything about her background or what she's accomplished in her life?

[Palisade]

566. I do know she has a history of being against taxes

And that her wanting AOC to sit down and shut up is wildly transparent.

[George II]

567. She doesn't have a "history of being against taxes", not at all.

[Palisade]

570. K

[George II]

571. That's a "history"?

[melman]

576. Yes

That is a history.

[ehrnst]

594. Clearly she just wants to attack politicians who wants to tax the rich...

Because people say things they later regret - or at least should, if they have an ounce of self-awareness - sometimes advise newbies that they think may be headed for the same. I don't see Whoopi giving advice to new Republican freshman, or even DOTUS. I think she wants AOC to succeed and is frustrated seeing her do things that Whoopi, among others, see as growing pains.

Trashing a successful, progressive, outspoken, admired, accomplished, intelligent woman of color for uttering some critique and advice to someone new to the public eye is wildly transparent.

Pro-tip: Digging up old statements (let alone something like an essay one wrote where a woman fantasizes about being gang raped by three men) as some sort of evidence that nothing they say can be trusted if one disagrees with them even a little on something they say this week can open cans of worms that one doesn't intend to.

[SMC22307]

565. LOL God forbid she pay a higher marginal tax rate! (n/t)

[George II]

572. I don't think she has a problem with that. Amazing some have to go back 12 years......

...to dredge up some obscure comment about someone.

As Jesus said, "He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her."

[SMC22307]

573. Too bad Whoopie didn't heed Jesus's advice...

and instead decided to regurgitate the anti-AOC narrative. "Sit still" and know your place, woman!

[George II]

574. You know that's not what she said. Have a great night!

[George II]

601. She never said "know your place, woman!" In case you didn't notice, Whoopi is a woman, too!

[ehrnst]

600. And oddly enough ignore her more recent praise of Senator Sanders.

But hey, a feeding frenzy is a feeding frenzy.

[George II]

602. What I find very interesting is the indignation directed toward a woman of color. Ironic, eh?

[ehrnst]

607. But it's indignation on behalf of a woman of color

and I hear that makes trashing another woman of color totally not racially relevant at all.

For instance, I heard from my conservative uncle that DT said that the border wall would protect African Americans and Hispanics, so that means he can't possibly be racist, and the wall can't possibly be racist. It means anyone who doesn't agree with the President on this is really the racist one, because that makes almost too much sense. By defending the blacks and hispanics in the first part of sentence he cancels out any racism in calling the brown immigrants 'terrorists' and "criminals."

[ehrnst]

599. Definitely has it out for those tax the rich progressives...

[Power 2 the People]

612. LOL. Keep posting this. Proves even a broken clock is right twice a day.

[ehrnst]

620. As long as people claim she is just trying to bring down a politician that wants to raise taxes..

It will be a relevant.

She's being trashed as a person for her statements on AOC, which makes no sense in light of her admiration for Sanders.

But I understand, I'm harshing the feeding frenzy by introducing facts.

Broken clock, but likes Sanders.

[Power 2 the People]

621. LOL

[ehrnst]

626. Whatevs

[Power 2 the People]

631. Exactly

[ehrnst]

632. TG UR IT

This is fun.

[Power 2 the People]

634. Not so much.

[tonedevil]

635. My Father had a saying...

that I am reminded of watching you have the same conversation I just had. You shouldn't get down in the mud to wrestle a pig you will both get muddy and the pig enjoys it. There are times when a little pig wrestling can be fun, but it hardly seems sporting if the pig has obvious brain damage.

[Power 2 the People]

636. Well said tonedevil. I'll heed your father's wise words.

[tonedevil]

637. I understand how it happens...

I had almost the exact same conversation in this same thread.

[ehrnst]

640. And yet, here you are. Still wading "in the mud."

To use your metaphor...

[George II]

668. I believe you were called a pig with brain damage. Did I read that correctly?

[ehrnst]

639. And yet, here you are, "in the mud" as you say.

What are the implications of that?

[tonedevil]

641. OK

[ehrnst]

645. You seem to enjoy getting all "muddy" do you?

[ehrnst]

638. I think so.

[tonedevil]

642. OK

[ehrnst]

644. Aren't you getting "muddy?"

[KG]

585. can AOC poop on people after she learns her job?

[disillusioned73]

588. She really exposes the rightwing of this country..

for ALL to see...

[NurseJackie]

617. She-who?

[ehrnst]

625. Indeed she does....

https://www.thewrap.com/the-views-whoopi-goldberg-blasts-planned-parenthood-foes-get-out-of-my-vagina/

https://www.aol.com/article/news/2016/09/29/whoopi-goldberg-grills-donald-trump-campaign-manager-kellyanne-conway/21483437/

https://www.mediaite.com/online/whoopi-grills-white-reporter-what-do-you-know-about-black-history/

https://www.sfgate.com/entertainment/article/The-View-Whoopi-Goldberg-Blasts-Trump-for-6654518.php

[kstewart33]

664. Thank you so much, ehrnst.

It's been quite a while since I laughed so hard.

[TSheehan]

604. I advise Whoopi Gooldberg to stop condescending and catch up to what young people want and need.

[NurseJackie]

618. Now THAT'S funny!

I advise Whoopi Gooldberg to stop condescending and catch up to what young people want and need.

Now THAT'S funny!

[EffieBlack]

665. They don't even get it, do they?

[NurseJackie]

666. Clearly not.

But sometimes I wonder if it's comedy performance art or improve-farce.

It's either sad, or hysterical. This time it was hysterical.

[ehrnst]

623. ....

[Cold War Spook]

647. After reading maybe 20% of thge posts I fast forward to the end.

I believe in the 1st Amendment, but when we get this many posts about Whoopi, I worry about 2020.

[Doreen]

655. I hope she said that to and about the entire

trump administration first. If not she needs to be quiet.

[Demovictory9]

662. is this the longest thread ever??

[winstars]

663. It might be. I have seen the number growing each day so I wanna be part of DU history.

BTW, I think AOC should keep rocking the house, literally!

LONGEST EVER!!!

EDIT:

I am so glad I wasn't post 666 of this thread...

[at140]

677. in before the thread ends!

[Gothmog]

674. From My twitter feed

Link to tweet

?s=20

[Autumn]

675. Wow. The responses to Politico's tweet are brutal.

Thanks for the tweet.

[lapucelle]

678. Do we know what her committee assignments are yet? N/T

[Gothmog]

680. She is not on the Ways and Means committee

[lapucelle]

681. One of our LI Democratic reps got that assignment.

WASHINGTON — Rep. Tom Suozzi, the second-term Democrat from Glen Cove, won a coveted seat on the influential House Ways and Means Committee, Democratic leadership said late Wednesday as it passed over Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of the Bronx.

snip==================================

Suozzi expressed gratitude to the leadership for selecting him and in a statement vowed “to fight for the national issues voters and American families are concerned about — increasing wages, improving retirement security and reducing healthcare and prescription drug costs.”

snip===================================

Over the past several weeks, Suozzi faced a strong challenge for Crowley’s long-standing New York City seat on Ways and Means by Ocasio-Cortez, whose supporters across the country submitted a petition with more than 100,000 signatures for her.

https://www.newsday.com/news/nation/suozzi-ways-and-means-1.25786157

[hueymahl]

679. What a patronizing, borderline misogynistic headline

I'm pretty sure she is capable of both legislating and being a "twitter star." And I strongly suspect one helps the other.

Ridiculous the fake outrage some people have about her.

[lapucelle]

682. We know that Cortez is Twitter-capable. As with any brand new representative,

the record she builds in Congress over the next two years will help her constituents to assess her legislative skills.