Occupy Democrats
Occupy Democrats

Occupy Democrats

Stop The
Stop The

Stop The

Guys Want
Guys Want

Guys Want

Honestity
Honestity

Honestity

Approvation
Approvation

Approvation

Rioting
Rioting

Rioting

i voted
 i voted

i voted

democrats
 democrats

democrats

democratic
democratic

democratic

ifs
ifs

ifs

🔥 | Latest

America, Arguing, and Ass: kayla renee Follow @kaybaeparker Long story short, I got my racist Professor fired mid semester after she tried to sabotage me. Then I wrote about it RETWEETS LIKES 682 1,368 Imani Gandy e @AngryBlackLady Follow Dear white people: Allyship is more than wearing a safety pin or tweeting Black Lives Matter. If you read one thing today, make it this. kayla renee @kaybaeparker Long story short, I got my racist Professor fired mid semester after she tried to sabotage me. Then I wrote about it medium.com/@kaybaeparker/ RETWEETS LIKES 719 1,303 princessnijireiki: corvussy: saturnineaqua: ghettablasta: Kayla Renee Parker shared her story of how she managed to expose her racist teacher who appeared to be a wolf in sheep’s clothing. “She wears a safety pin so everyone knows she’s an ally for minorities. Her cover photo has a Black power fist. She regularly discusses her love for the Obamas, the Black Lives Matter Movement, and her admonishment for this current administration.” However, it wasn’t enough to hide her racism.  It all started with a simple question from a test. The question stated,  “Historical research on African-American families during slavery shows that: A) Family ties weren’t important in African cultures where the slaves ancestors originated; consequently, family bonds were never strong among slaves. B) Two-parent families were extremely rare during the slave period. C) Black family bonds were destroyed by the abuses of slave owners, who regularly sold off family members to other slave owners. D) Most slave families were headed by two parents. So, obviously, Kayla chose C. And it was incorrect. According to the teacher, the right answer was D. The argument started when Kayla wrote her an email and respectfully provided the professor the evidence, even directly from their textbook. “However, my Professor continued to argue that family bonds were not destroyed and that 2/3 of slave families were headed by two parents.” The teacher cited Herbert Gutman, sociologist, who died in 1985 and surely took part in the whitewashing of Black history. When they met to discuss the subject in person the professor gave Kayla books to read adding such statements as, “This book would be good for you to read. I believe it’s $6 so I could buy it for you if you’d like.” The stated that she spent her whole life fighting for minorities and something like “I’ve got Black friends.”  When the girl was proving her opinion, she heard more comments as, “You’re talking to someone who has spent their entire life fighting for people of diversity and marched with my Black brothers and sisters.” As the result, the teacher asked Kayla to lecture the class on the topic and that was her fatal mistake. Kayla took all her courage and made a presentation on the topic she was passionate about. She defended Black people and Black history. Here’s her presentation. That was the point where the story should end, but NO. The professor obviously forgot about privacy settings on Facebook and posted offensive comments about Kayla. The professor’s last words to Kayla were: This time The University of Tennessee stood up for the student. In July the teacher officially retiring from the university. This is fucking insane. The last paragraph of kaya’s story is everything: To my Professor, I forgive you for robbing me of my focus last semester. I forgive you for calling my Father, a graduate of Yale Medical School, “educationally challenged.” I even forgive you for threatening me. However, I do not forgive you for being willfully ignorant to the subjects you teach students. I also do not forgive you for claiming to be an ally. An ally is so much more than wearing a safety pin. It also requires that you listen to the needs of Black people and respect the issues that we raise. When a Black student raises a concern over the way you are portraying her history, referring to all you’ve done for Black people doesn’t change the fact that you’re portraying slavery as some kind of slavery lite. As an educator and as an ally, you are not expected to know everything but this does not abdicate you from the responsibility of always continuing to learn- even from your students. Additionally, if you wanted to actually help Black men and women, you’d value our words. Unfortunately, your actions simply mirror how America values Black people in today’s society. This Black girl is a hero who overcame her fear and faced her teacher defending Black people and Black history.  #StayWoke #BlackPride #StopRacists this is why…white women…cant teach black people, or people of color as a whole. White supremacy has a long history of setting up white women to destroy people of color namely black and native people) via education.  I was going through my old likes and decided to see if there was any updates in this story. The professor was arrested for assaulting Kayla in a grocery store but the charges were dismissed by a judge on the condition Morelock has no further contact with Kayla I couldn’t find any more recent news on Kayla than what was said in the second link, but I sincerely hope she wasn’t in any way negatively impacted because of the situation with Morelock, especially since the second link says there were multiple other faculty members that defended Morelock… this is why I do not and never will like white educators. Morelock also continues to post about Kayla on her public Facebook, but (probably for ongoing legal reasons) still can’t or won’t name her directly. You can’t underestimate people’s hatefulness the depth of their vindictive and petty fixations out here— even especially people in a position of power over you with the potential to harm you, “ally” or no. And Kayla seems to be doing well! Her FB page says she became a Director at Amnesty International, and has just moved forward to become a Canvass Director for Care.org. Folks will try to block your blessings and drag you down to their hater-ass level in the mud, but you gotta fight keep on shining. ☀️
America, Arguing, and Ass: kayla renee
 Follow
 @kaybaeparker
 Long story short, I got my racist Professor
 fired mid semester after she tried to sabotage
 me. Then I wrote about it

 RETWEETS LIKES
 682
 1,368

 Imani Gandy e
 @AngryBlackLady
 Follow
 Dear white people: Allyship is more than
 wearing a safety pin or tweeting Black Lives
 Matter.
 If you read one thing today, make it this.
 kayla renee @kaybaeparker
 Long story short, I got my racist Professor fired mid semester after she tried to
 sabotage me. Then I wrote about it medium.com/@kaybaeparker/
 RETWEETS LIKES
 719
 1,303
princessnijireiki:
corvussy:

saturnineaqua:

ghettablasta:

Kayla Renee Parker shared her story of how she managed to expose her racist teacher who appeared to be a wolf in sheep’s clothing.


“She wears a safety pin so everyone knows she’s an ally for minorities. Her cover photo has a Black power fist. She regularly discusses her love for the Obamas, the Black Lives Matter Movement, and her admonishment for this current administration.”


However, it wasn’t enough to hide her racism. 
It all started with a simple question from a test. The question stated, 
“Historical research on African-American families during slavery shows that: A) Family ties weren’t important in African cultures where the slaves ancestors originated; consequently, family bonds were never strong among slaves. B) Two-parent families were extremely rare during the slave period. C) Black family bonds were destroyed by the abuses of slave owners, who regularly sold off family members to other slave owners. D) Most slave families were headed by two parents.


So, obviously, Kayla chose C. And it was incorrect. According to the teacher, the right answer was D.
The argument started when Kayla wrote her an email and respectfully provided the professor the evidence, even directly from their textbook. “However, my Professor continued to argue that family bonds were not destroyed and that 2/3 of slave families were headed by two parents.” The teacher cited Herbert Gutman, sociologist, who died in 1985 and surely took part in the whitewashing of Black history.
When they met to discuss the subject in person the professor gave Kayla books to read adding such statements as, “This book would be good for you to read. I believe it’s $6 so I could buy it for you if you’d like.” The stated that she spent her whole life fighting for minorities and something like “I’ve got Black friends.” 
When the girl was proving her opinion, she heard more comments as, “You’re talking to someone who has spent their entire life fighting for people of diversity and marched with my Black brothers and sisters.”


As the result, the teacher asked Kayla to lecture the class on the topic and that was her fatal mistake.
Kayla took all her courage and made a presentation on the topic she was passionate about. She defended Black people and Black history. Here’s her presentation.
That was the point where the story should end, but NO.
The professor obviously forgot about privacy settings on Facebook and posted offensive comments about Kayla.
The professor’s last words to Kayla were:
This time The University of Tennessee stood up for the student. In July the teacher officially retiring from the university.
This is fucking insane.
The last paragraph of kaya’s story is everything:


To my Professor, I forgive you for robbing me of my focus last semester. I forgive you for calling my Father, a graduate of Yale Medical School, “educationally challenged.” I even forgive you for threatening me. However, I do not forgive you for being willfully ignorant to the subjects you teach students. I also do not forgive you for claiming to be an ally. An ally is so much more than wearing a safety pin. It also requires that you listen to the needs of Black people and respect the issues that we raise. When a Black student raises a concern over the way you are portraying her history, referring to all you’ve done for Black people doesn’t change the fact that you’re portraying slavery as some kind of slavery lite. As an educator and as an ally, you are not expected to know everything but this does not abdicate you from the responsibility of always continuing to learn- even from your students. Additionally, if you wanted to actually help Black men and women, you’d value our words. Unfortunately, your actions simply mirror how America values Black people in today’s society.


This Black girl is a hero who overcame her fear and faced her teacher defending Black people and Black history. 
#StayWoke #BlackPride #StopRacists

this is why…white women…cant teach black people, or people of color as a whole. White supremacy has a long history of setting up white women to destroy people of color namely black and native people) via education. 

I was going through my old likes and decided to see if there was any updates in this story.

The professor was arrested for assaulting Kayla in a grocery store but the charges were dismissed by a judge on the condition Morelock has no further contact with Kayla

I couldn’t find any more recent news on Kayla than what was said in the second link, but I sincerely hope she wasn’t in any way negatively impacted because of the situation with Morelock, especially since the second link says there were multiple other faculty members that defended Morelock…
this is why I do not and never will like white educators.

Morelock also continues to post about Kayla on her public Facebook, but (probably for ongoing legal reasons) still can’t or won’t name her directly. You can’t underestimate people’s hatefulness  the depth of their vindictive and petty fixations out here— even  especially people in a position of power over you with the potential to harm you, “ally” or no.
And Kayla seems to be doing well! Her FB page says she became a Director at Amnesty International, and has just moved forward to become a Canvass Director for Care.org. Folks will try to block your blessings and drag you down to their hater-ass level in the mud, but you gotta fight  keep on shining. ☀️

princessnijireiki: corvussy: saturnineaqua: ghettablasta: Kayla Renee Parker shared her story of how she managed to expose her racist tea...

Being Alone, America, and Click: Jason Fuller, Contributor Working to bring about the best in America, both on-line and off. Impeachment Is No Longer Enough; Donald Trump Must Face Justice Impeachment and removal from office are only the first steps; for treason and-if convicted in a court of law-executed. 06/11/2017 10:39 pm ET for America to be redeemed, Donald Trump must be prosecuted Donald Trump has been President of the United States for just shy of six months now. I think that most of us among the electorate knew that his presidency would be a relative disaster, but I am not sure how many among us expected the catastrophe our nation now faces. friendly-neighborhood-patriarch: hominishostilis: abstractandedgyname: siryouarebeingmocked: mississpithy: bogleech: notyourmoderate: angrybell: thinksquad: http://archive.is/5VvI5 Huffpo, everybody. Can someone tell me what high crime or misdemeanor Trump has committed that merits this? Or is the HuffPo just publishing outright fantasies? God dammit, I’m now in the position of defending Huffington. I didn’t want to be here. Okay, @angrybell … actually, @ literally everyone who reblogged this uncritically as a tacit endorsement and agreement. Such as @the-critical-feminist that I reblog this from.My first question has to be: are you serious? Don’t read that with a tone, don’t read that as an attack. That’s my first question: Are you asking a serious question about what high crimes or misdemeanors Trump has perpetrated? Are you asking a sincere question or is this the sort of rhetoric that doesn’t translate well into text? And, if you are actually asking this question, are ou going to hear the answer or are you going to immediately start concocting your counter-argument because you just know in your heart that anyone who disagrees with you must be wrong, so you start formulating a plan to prove them wrong before you actually hear what they have to say?Next: did you read the article that was posted in the link you responded to? Because the author of that article does a reasonable job of explaining their thought process behind the headline. Or did you lash out before you read the article? Okay, presuming that you did read the article in good faith, evaluate its points, perform the follow-up research to understand context, and still disagree with the central tenets and simply believe that the author’s reasoning does not hold up for whatever reasons you have chosen not to state, and you believe their source information is falsified for whatever reason you have chosen not to state, I will move on. After I have given you and yours every conceivable benefit of the doubt and every charitable assumption. Because if the article itself doesn’t convince you, there’s the fact that Donald Trump has broken literally every federal law against corruption and conflict of interest. Not one or two, not most, not all but a few. Literally every single law we have against corruption, from the Constitution to the informal guidelines circulated as a memo from the White House ethics scholars. He’s broken literally every one of those rules. He’s openly traded favors for money and favors for months now. Hell, that Chinese influence-peddler that paid him off for sixteen million dollars should have been enough to get him convicted of treason. Sharing code-word level classified information with a government on the opposite side of an ongoing military conflict isn’t *necessarily* treason, unless the information was part of a share program with an allied nation and wasn’t his to distribute. That’s aiding a foreign aggressor at the expense of a military ally, and that’s treason. Giving aid and comfort to enemies of the nation. Obstruction of justice is pretty clear-cut, that’s an impeachment, except that the justice in question is also a matter of national security, so that’s treason. Again. Defaming the former president? Misdemeanor, impeachable. The way he drags his heels nominating posts in Justice and State could be prosecuted as dereliction of duty. If he has tapes of Comey, he’s on the hook for contempt, if he doesn’t then he’s on the hook for witness tampering. Hell, deleting the covfefe tweet is destroying federal records, which is a misdemeanor, and impeachable. The man doesn’t go a week without bringing on an impeachable offense. Strictly speaking, every time he goes to Mar-A-Lago he’s committing grand larceny by fraud, because he’s taking millions of dollars of American funds for his own benefit, after promising not to do that. There are dozens, hundreds maybe, of impeachable offenses already in this 140 days, “high crimes and misdemeanors”. Actual counts of treason, punishable by death by hanging, is probably only five or six counts. Only five or six counts of high treason by our sitting president. His job does not put him above reproach. His job is to *be* above reproach. And he’s failing that job. Trump’s supporters probably believe he’s done nothing impeachable or treasonous because they spent eight years claiming on no grounds whatsoever that Obama was impeachable and treasonous, just because they didn’t like him. They now probably convince themselves that these facts about Trump are as fake as their Obama theories and they’ve ruined the gravity of these terms for themselves. “ His job does not put him above reproach. His job is to *be* above reproach. And he’s failing that job. “ I like how Bogleech doesn’t know many Trump supporters are former Obama supporters. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/04/us/obama-trump-swing-voters.html https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/10/16/17980820/trump-obama-2016-race-racism-class-economy-2018-midterm https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obama-Trump_voters It’s not even a secret. But why am I not surprised bogleech - that intellectual titan - failed to do basic research? And last time I checked, no nation required their politicans to be perfect. Which is what NYM is asking for with that quote; perfection. That’s what ‘above reproach’ means. An impossible standard, considering people “reproach” Trump for feeding fish wrong, for his skin color, for any and every little thing, even if they have to twist reality into a pretzel to do it. In fact, I’ve seen people take pictures of kids in cages from 2014, and blame Trump for it. So this: Are you asking a serious question about what high crimes or misdemeanors Trump has perpetrated? Is a question of this: Can someone tell me what high crime or misdemeanor Trump has committed that merits this? Seems you missed the part that says “merits this”. Next: did you read the article that was posted in the link you responded to? Because the author of that article does a reasonable job of explaining their thought process behind the headline. Or did you lash out before you read the article? (The underlined is in the subtitle, not the headline.) Okay, presuming that you did read the article in good faith, evaluate its points, perform the follow-up research to understand context, and still disagree with the central tenets… Context? Central tenets? Do you not know how highlighting works? You don’t need to know the context, or any other point, when you’re indicating a specific, explicit, and isolated quality. The subtitle called for Trump’s execution, we’re 5 paragraphs in and you haven’t even acknowledged that part yet. Or at all, I’m guessing, because I’m not reading further. You keep talking around it. You accuse others, preemptively, of not hearing the answer and pre-”concocting” a response, and yet you’re waffling on about shit around the one, sole, isolated thing that was indicated in the first place. This isn’t about ignoring context, this is about criticising one thing. Which is a thing people are allowed to do, by the way, just because people criticise one thing, doesn’t mean they’re criticising everything about the everyone involved, and everything said before, adjacent to, and after that one thing, and therefore are required to include all of those things in their consideration and assessment of this one thing. The specific criticism of the indicated quality is the advocation of Trump’s execution. That’s it. No context is needed to understand that this is what was said, especially since that which was said, which is being criticised, is explicit. No amount of, “So, click-bait subtitle that you don’t see until you’ve already clicked on the article link out of the way, here’s what I actually meant when I said I wanted this person tried and executed,” could excuse the use of that language, let alone actually believing in it. It’s like… it’s like if someone makes a typo, someone else is like, “Oh, seems you made a typo,” you’d jump in like, “But what about they’re perfectly reasonable spelling everywhere else? Hm? Forced to ignore contextual perfect spelling I see. They’re lack of typos everywhere else explains this typo, and vindicates it”. You and what’s his face, James, fuckin ReasonAndEmpathy or whatever now, y’all keep saying “but what of the context?” when the criterion of criticism is isolated, atomic, specific, and/or explicit. No amount of context invalidates the very specific, singular words explicitly spoken. “Sure he called for Trump to be executed, but he explains himself.” Fucking and? When did the death sentence become ok? When did that happen? Moderates are ok with the death sentence now? Aight, weird. Man this fucking post aged like fine wine, take a SIP Delicious This was quite a ride
Being Alone, America, and Click: Jason Fuller, Contributor
 Working to bring about the best in America, both on-line and off.
 Impeachment Is No Longer Enough;
 Donald Trump Must Face Justice
 Impeachment and removal from office are only the first steps;
 for treason and-if convicted in a court of law-executed.
 06/11/2017 10:39 pm ET
 for America to be redeemed, Donald Trump must be prosecuted
 Donald Trump has been President of the United States for just shy of six months now. I
 think that most of us among the electorate knew that his presidency would be a relative
 disaster, but I am not sure how many among us expected the catastrophe our nation now
 faces.
friendly-neighborhood-patriarch:

hominishostilis:

abstractandedgyname:
siryouarebeingmocked:

mississpithy:

bogleech:

notyourmoderate:

angrybell:

thinksquad:


http://archive.is/5VvI5


Huffpo, everybody. 




Can someone tell me what high crime or misdemeanor Trump has committed that merits this? Or is the HuffPo just publishing outright fantasies?

God dammit, I’m now in the position of defending Huffington. I didn’t want to be here. Okay, @angrybell … actually, @ literally everyone who reblogged this uncritically as a tacit endorsement and agreement. Such as @the-critical-feminist that I reblog this from.My first question has to be: are you serious? Don’t read that with a tone, don’t read that as an attack. That’s my first question: Are you asking a serious question about what high crimes or misdemeanors Trump has perpetrated? Are you asking a sincere question or is this the sort of rhetoric that doesn’t translate well into text? And, if you are actually asking this question, are ou going to hear the answer or are you going to immediately start concocting your counter-argument because you just know in your heart that anyone who disagrees with you must be wrong, so you start formulating a plan to prove them wrong before you actually hear what they have to say?Next: did you read the article that was posted in the link you responded to? Because the author of that article does a reasonable job of explaining their thought process behind the headline. Or did you lash out before you read the article? Okay, presuming that you did read the article in good faith, evaluate its points, perform the follow-up research to understand context, and still disagree with the central tenets and simply believe that the author’s reasoning does not hold up for whatever reasons you have chosen not to state, and you believe their source information is falsified for whatever reason you have chosen not to state, I will move on. After I have given you and yours every conceivable benefit of the doubt and every charitable assumption. Because if the article itself doesn’t convince you, there’s the fact that Donald Trump has broken literally every federal law against corruption and conflict of interest. Not one or two, not most, not all but a few. Literally every single law we have against corruption, from the Constitution to the informal guidelines circulated as a memo from the White House ethics scholars. He’s broken literally every one of those rules. He’s openly traded favors for money and favors for months now. Hell, that Chinese influence-peddler that paid him off for sixteen million dollars should have been enough to get him convicted of treason. Sharing code-word level classified information with a government on the opposite side of an ongoing military conflict isn’t *necessarily* treason, unless the information was part of a share program with an allied nation and wasn’t his to distribute. That’s aiding a foreign aggressor at the expense of a military ally, and that’s treason. Giving aid and comfort to enemies of the nation. Obstruction of justice is pretty clear-cut, that’s an impeachment, except that the justice in question is also a matter of national security, so that’s treason. Again. Defaming the former president? Misdemeanor, impeachable. The way he drags his heels nominating posts in Justice and State could be prosecuted as dereliction of duty. If he has tapes of Comey, he’s on the hook for contempt, if he doesn’t then he’s on the hook for witness tampering. Hell, deleting the covfefe tweet is destroying federal records, which is a misdemeanor, and impeachable. The man doesn’t go a week without bringing on an impeachable offense. Strictly speaking, every time he goes to Mar-A-Lago he’s committing grand larceny by fraud, because he’s taking millions of dollars of American funds for his own benefit, after promising not to do that. There are dozens, hundreds maybe, of impeachable offenses already in this 140 days, “high crimes and misdemeanors”. Actual counts of treason, punishable by death by hanging, is probably only five or six counts. Only five or six counts of high treason by our sitting president. His job does not put him above reproach. His job is to *be* above reproach. And he’s failing that job. 

Trump’s supporters probably believe he’s done nothing impeachable or treasonous because they spent eight years claiming on no grounds whatsoever that Obama was impeachable and treasonous, just because they didn’t like him. They now probably convince themselves that these facts about Trump are as fake as their Obama theories and they’ve ruined the gravity of these terms for themselves.





“

His job does not put him above reproach. His job is to *be* above reproach. And he’s failing that job.


“






I like how Bogleech doesn’t know many Trump supporters are former Obama supporters.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/04/us/obama-trump-swing-voters.html
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/10/16/17980820/trump-obama-2016-race-racism-class-economy-2018-midterm
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obama-Trump_voters
It’s not even a secret. But why am I not surprised bogleech - that intellectual titan - failed to do basic research?
And last time I checked, no nation required their politicans to be perfect. Which is what NYM is asking for with that quote; perfection. That’s what ‘above reproach’ means. An impossible standard, considering people “reproach” Trump for feeding fish wrong, for his skin color, for any and every little thing, even if they have to twist reality into a pretzel to do it. In fact, I’ve seen people take pictures of kids in cages from 2014, and blame Trump for it.

So this:


Are you asking a serious question about what high crimes or misdemeanors Trump has perpetrated?


Is a question of this:


Can someone tell me what high crime or misdemeanor Trump has committed that merits this?


Seems you missed the part that says “merits this”.


Next: did you read the article that was posted in the link you responded to? Because the author of that article does a reasonable job of explaining their thought process behind the headline. Or did you lash out before you read the article? 


(The underlined is in the subtitle, not the headline.)


Okay, presuming that you did read the article in good faith, evaluate its points, perform the follow-up research to understand context, and still disagree with the central tenets…
Context? Central tenets? Do you not know how highlighting works? You don’t need to know the context, or any other point, when you’re indicating a specific, explicit, and isolated quality.
The subtitle called for Trump’s execution, we’re 5 paragraphs in and you haven’t even acknowledged that part yet. Or at all, I’m guessing, because I’m not reading further. You keep talking around it. You accuse others, preemptively, of not hearing the answer and pre-”concocting” a response, and yet you’re waffling on about shit around the one, sole, isolated thing that was indicated in the first place.
This isn’t about ignoring context, this is about criticising one thing. Which is a thing people are allowed to do, by the way, just because people criticise one thing, doesn’t mean they’re criticising everything about the everyone involved, and everything said before, adjacent to, and after that one thing, and therefore are required to include all of those things in their consideration and assessment of this one thing.
The specific criticism of the indicated quality is the advocation of Trump’s execution. That’s it. No context is needed to understand that this is what was said, especially since that which was said, which is being criticised, is explicit. No amount of, “So, click-bait subtitle that you don’t see until you’ve already clicked on the article link out of the way, here’s what I actually meant when I said I wanted this person tried and executed,” could excuse the use of that language, let alone actually believing in it.
It’s like… it’s like if someone makes a typo, someone else is like, “Oh, seems you made a typo,” you’d jump in like, “But what about they’re perfectly reasonable spelling everywhere else? Hm? Forced to ignore contextual perfect spelling I see. They’re lack of typos everywhere else explains this typo, and vindicates it”.
You and what’s his face, James, fuckin ReasonAndEmpathy or whatever now, y’all keep saying “but what of the context?” when the criterion of criticism is isolated, atomic, specific, and/or explicit. No amount of context invalidates the very specific, singular words explicitly spoken. “Sure he called for Trump to be executed, but he explains himself.” Fucking and? When did the death sentence become ok? When did that happen? Moderates are ok with the death sentence now? Aight, weird.


Man this fucking post aged like fine wine, take a SIP 

Delicious

This was quite a ride

friendly-neighborhood-patriarch: hominishostilis: abstractandedgyname: siryouarebeingmocked: mississpithy: bogleech: notyourmoderate: ...

Drinking, Iphone, and Money: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez @AOC He can stay, he can go. He can be impeached, or voted out in 2020 But removing Trump will not remove the infrastructure of an entire party that embraced him; the dark money that funded him; the online radicalization that drummed his army; nor the racism he amplitied +reanimated 11:00 AM 3/24/19 Twitter for iPhone sliceosunshine: drinking-tea-at-midnight: typhlonectes: AOC. sure, but not having him front and center will hurt a lot of this and at the very least stop him from making things worse and allow us to actively work towards improving things. This almost kinda feels like “getting rid of the cancer won’t solve the environment that allowed the cancer to happen in the first place.” I can get how that tweet feels like that! Especially since it’s on its own here, pulled out of its original context. Originally, it was part 2/3 in response to this tweet: So in response to the question “How did a guy like this get elected?” (and the implied “How do we prevent someone like this being elected again?”) The representative said this: (x) I can understand why OP pulled the one tweet that they did, since it is, by itself, a good insight that received more attention than even the start of the thread. But it’s getting a “diagnosis” without the proposed “solution” which can make it seem like a hollow insight 
Drinking, Iphone, and Money: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez
 @AOC
 He can stay, he can go. He can be
 impeached, or voted out in 2020
 But removing Trump will not remove the
 infrastructure of an entire party that
 embraced him; the dark money that
 funded him; the online radicalization
 that drummed his army; nor the racism
 he amplitied +reanimated
 11:00 AM 3/24/19 Twitter for iPhone
sliceosunshine:
drinking-tea-at-midnight:

typhlonectes:
AOC.
sure, but not having him front and center will hurt a lot of this and at the very least stop him from making things worse and allow us to actively work towards improving things.
This almost kinda feels like “getting rid of the cancer won’t solve the environment that allowed the cancer to happen in the first place.”

I can get how that tweet feels like that! Especially since it’s on its own here, pulled out of its original context. Originally, it was part 2/3 in response to this tweet:
So in response to the question “How did a guy like this get elected?” (and the implied “How do we prevent someone like this being elected again?”) The representative said this:
(x)
I can understand why OP pulled the one tweet that they did, since it is, by itself, a good insight that received more attention than even the start of the thread. But it’s getting a “diagnosis” without the proposed “solution” which can make it seem like a hollow insight 

sliceosunshine: drinking-tea-at-midnight: typhlonectes: AOC. sure, but not having him front and center will hurt a lot of this and at the v...