The shoulder the brunt of the tax burden already but some people want them to pay more(their fair share). They. Already. Do.
According to which definition of "fair"?
The shoulder the brunt of the tax burden already but some people want them to pay more(their fair share). They. Already. Do.
Yeah I thought it was obvious, but the fact that you posted it (it was a dumb video, tbh) and then your comments made me wonder.Just want to make sure, but you realize she was roasted because she asked the same thing, right?
Like, no ****, Sherlock. Obviously.
I literally said this when I posted it..Yeah I thought it was obvious, but the fact that you posted it (it was a dumb video, tbh) and then your comments made me wonder.
What do you mean by "She thought this was real"? I mean, Ocasio-Cortez knows the video isn't "real" because she knows she wasn't in that interview. You mean she thinks the video is "real" right-wing propaganda? It is obviously an attempt to make fun of her, so in that sense it is "real" propaganda against her.I literally said this when I posted it..
"Lol. She thought this was real and not a joke and is getting roasted on Twitter"
I came across the video from an article making fun of her for thinking it was real right wing propaganda.
I'm kind of offended you think I'm that dumb. Feelings hurt.
What do you mean by "She thought this was real"? I mean, Ocasio-Cortez knows the video isn't "real" because she knows she wasn't in that interview. You mean she thinks the video is "real" right-wing propaganda? It is obviously an attempt to make fun of her, so in that sense it is "real" propaganda against her.
I'm just having a hard time getting where you're coming from.
When the video was originally posted on Facebook there was nothing mentioned in the post about it being 'satire.' More than a few of the reactions I saw to the video were from people who clearly thought the interview was real. Just because something is obvious to you doesn't mean that it's not intended to deceive, especially when you consider neither CRTV nor Stuckey are primarily satirists. Most of what they publish is intended to be taken seriously.Yeah, I probably didn't explain the best. Propaganda was not the best word to explain why she got roasted.
Basically, she responded to the video, which was obviously a parody, by saying this:
"Republicans are so scared of me that they’re faking videos and presenting them as real on Facebook because they can’t deal with reality anymore.
Here’s one bonafide truth:
Election Day is November 6th."
Who's trying to pass this off as real? Then again, I literally wrote why she was getting made fun of on Twitter and I was still asked if I thought it was real.
So she's either completely clueless to satire or is lying to get followers.
That was implied by the use of "acknowledged". Were you not aware of that, or did you feel the need to crow a little more?
I am not aware of how stating that neither of us has the calculation for a confounding factor, when we both acknowledge the existence of it, is anything other than straight-forward.
I see. You could not find a paper directly supporting your claim, you listed a paper not making that claim, and said it was an obvious manifestation.
I know a narrower one. The level where you think there is some sort of research on which disadvantaged groups suffer more from their specific group identity than other disadvantaged groups, and claim that this knowledge is so commonly understood in the academic community that asking for evidence is equivalent to denying climate change.
See you round the water cooler.
As well as what? Any Fortune 500 will have similar amounts of waste. It doesn't become news because only the stockholders are on the hook, and corporate executives go out of their way to hide from them.
The military’s budget has dramatically increased over the last 10-15 years. They are not “doing more with less”.
They are actually doing more with more.
A lot of that “more” is simply not needed.
Yes, they are, I've lived it first hand thanks, but I'm not here to argue the point.
Pretty sure recruitment is way down, so maybe that's what he is referring to.The military’s budget has dramatically increased over the last 10-15 years. They are not “doing more with less”.
They are actually doing more with more.
A lot of that “more” is simply not needed.