Florida Democrat


raqball

macrumors 68000
Sep 11, 2016
1,955
8,895
Does this mean I can't post AOC memes anymore without getting tossed in the slammer?

Guess she is unaware of the peeps in her own party flipping their wigs on a minute by minute basis over (R) eh? Won't be anyone left to vote (D) if she gets her wish.... LOL

Is she not the whacky hat wearing idiot from a year ago or so?
 

Raid

macrumors 68020
Feb 18, 2003
2,144
3,933
Toronto
While this is really extreme, it's also interesting the first comment made by @jkcerda calls her a "clown"... the second mentions "dictators", the third calls her an "idiot".... the fourth tries to make it about him :rolleyes: ... the 5th is better as it is, on the surface an idiotic thing to say.

How about we drop the name calling and actually get down to why this is a bad idea? Also perhaps discuss why name calling is not part of working towards anything productive (unless one needs an ego boost by belittling strangers based on a thread title and not reading the content of the article). YMMV

While the onset of her statements are very broad, but the article does explain she's talking of the intimidation of members of congress. This with the context of the reported Border Patrol FB page... now vulgar or not they have the right to 'get off' ... politically(?) on photoshoped images of AOC and say whatever about whomever. It doesn't make it true, or validate an opinion... it is evidence of like minded people (might want to check yourself if that's the case) or perhaps have a laugh at the expense of people that they can't comprehend, or articulate a reasonable argument against.

You want a better country? Debate better.
 

BoxerGT2.5

macrumors 68000
Jun 4, 2008
1,929
11,160
While this is really extreme, it's also interesting the first comment made by @jkcerda calls her a "clown"... the second mentions "dictators", the third calls her an "idiot".... the fourth tries to make it about him :rolleyes: ... the 5th is better as it is, on the surface an idiotic thing to say.

How about we drop the name calling and actually get down to why this is a bad idea? Also perhaps discuss why name calling is not part of working towards anything productive (unless one needs an ego boost by belittling strangers based on a thread title and not reading the content of the article). YMMV

While the onset of her statements are very broad, but the article does explain she's talking of the intimidation of members of congress. This with the context of the reported Border Patrol FB page... now vulgar or not they have the right to 'get off' ... politically(?) on photoshoped images of AOC and say whatever about whomever. It doesn't make it true, or validate an opinion... it is evidence of like minded people (might want to check yourself if that's the case) or perhaps have a laugh at the expense of people that they can't comprehend, or articulate a reasonable argument against.

You want a better country? Debate better.
Have you read any of the numerous comments about our President in the past 3yrs? But yes, when addressing a nutjob in the other party the rules and decorum of debate should be adhered to. For the record, I think they're both idiots.
 

Raid

macrumors 68020
Feb 18, 2003
2,144
3,933
Toronto
Have you read any of the numerous comments about our President in the past 3yrs? But yes, when addressing a nutjob in the other party the rules and decorum of debate should be adhered to. For the record, I think they're both idiots.
The only way to elevate the level of debate is not to participate in what brings it down. Nobody is perfect in this regard, but damn if I don't see anything but short name calling posts as the first three.
 

BoxerGT2.5

macrumors 68000
Jun 4, 2008
1,929
11,160
The only way to elevate the level of debate is not to participate in what brings it down. Nobody is perfect in this regard, but damn if I don't see anything but short name calling posts as the first three.
Well the level of debate has been in the toilet since 43. Prosecuting people who are mean to members of our government is something China would do, you can call it whatever you'd like.

Your preaching to the wrong people, the left are the ones who demonize, and dehumanize any and everyone they disagree with. Case in point, they just chewed up Biden pretty quick when he said he had to work with segregationists (as an example of working with those you 100% disagree with), now he's a racist for even working with those people. I'm shocked no one told Obama he had a racist in the VP's office.
 
Last edited:

Raid

macrumors 68020
Feb 18, 2003
2,144
3,933
Toronto
Well the level of debate has been in the toilet since 43.
Still no excuse to continue it, I have said some unkind words about Trump but if they have not started and stopped at name calling.

Prosecuting people who are mean to members of our government is something China would do, you can call it whatever you'd like.
If you look at the article she does speak of intimidation; I'm not saying that's where she draws the line, but that's where the line should start.

Your preaching to the wrong people, the left are the ones who demonize, and dehumanize any and everyone they disagree with. Case in point, they just chewed up Biden pretty quick when he said he had to work with segregationists (as an example of working with those you 100% disagree with), now he's a racist for even working with those people.
Your Binden case is quite one sided, the right has dubbed him 'creepy uncle joe' and can you really say the left are the ones demonizing and dehumanizing when this crap about AOC exists? o_O
 

Night Spring

macrumors G5
Jul 17, 2008
13,064
5,084
As far as I can tell, Wilson seems to be saying those people should be prosecuted for intimidating members of Congress.

“We're gonna shut them down and work with whoever it is to shut them down, and they should be prosecuted,” she added. “You cannot intimidate members of Congress, frighten members of Congress. It is against the law, and it's a shame in this United States of America.”
I haven't checked to see what specific law she could be thinking of, but I'm pretty sure there are laws against intimidating people.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JayMysterio

BoxerGT2.5

macrumors 68000
Jun 4, 2008
1,929
11,160
Still no excuse to continue it, I have said some unkind words about Trump but if they have not started and stopped at name calling.

If you look at the article she does speak of intimidation; I'm not saying that's where she draws the line, but that's where the line should start.

Your Binden case is quite one sided, the right has dubbed him 'creepy uncle joe' and can you really say the left are the ones demonizing and dehumanizing when this crap about AOC exists? o_O
Who defines intimidation at a time where everyone is hellbent on being outraged and offended? Good luck with that.
As far as "Creepy Uncle Joe", he's the one going around touching people and sniffing them, the people coming out saying they were uncomfortable are in his own party.
 

jkcerda

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Jun 10, 2013
682
39,025
Criminal Mexi Midget
While this is really extreme, it's also interesting the first comment made by @jkcerda calls her a "clown"... the second mentions "dictators", the third calls her an "idiot".... the fourth tries to make it about him :rolleyes: ... the 5th is better as it is, on the surface an idiotic thing to say.

How about we drop the name calling and actually get down to why this is a bad idea? Also perhaps discuss why name calling is not part of working towards anything productive (unless one needs an ego boost by belittling strangers based on a thread title and not reading the content of the article). YMMV

While the onset of her statements are very broad, but the article does explain she's talking of the intimidation of members of congress. This with the context of the reported Border Patrol FB page... now vulgar or not they have the right to 'get off' ... politically(?) on photoshoped images of AOC and say whatever about whomever. It doesn't make it true, or validate an opinion... it is evidence of like minded people (might want to check yourself if that's the case) or perhaps have a laugh at the expense of people that they can't comprehend, or articulate a reasonable argument against.

You want a better country? Debate better.
you need to learn about her, she is a clown.
 

Raid

macrumors 68020
Feb 18, 2003
2,144
3,933
Toronto
you need to learn about her, she is a clown.
I already know way too much about American politics, I think this woman has been in the news before rabble rousing. Honestly I think Americans thrive on this BS. I'm just starting to see this crap up here and it worries me.

Again. The person behind the words does imply things, but it's the idea that should be addressed.
[doublepost=1562172324][/doublepost]
Who defines intimidation at a time where everyone is hellbent on being outraged and offended? Good luck with that.
As far as "Creepy Uncle Joe", he's the one going around touching people and sniffing them, the people coming out saying they were uncomfortable are in his own party.
Well like painting a target on someone's face... that's intimidation... perhaps a comedian acting out a scene cutting off the head of the sitting president is intimidation. There's a legal system to decide such things. As far as "Creepy Uncle Joe" goes Trump, trumps him on that too. But again let's talk about this woman's words rather than the cults of personality around politics. There are plenty of good policy discussions not happening because people like to cast aspersions of the 'other' more than they'd like to make things better.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PrincePoppycock

pl1984

Suspended
Oct 31, 2017
2,230
2,603
How about we drop the name calling and actually get down to why this is a bad idea? Also perhaps discuss why name calling is not part of working towards anything productive (unless one needs an ego boost by belittling strangers based on a thread title and not reading the content of the article). YMMV
I agree. How many times have you said this to your fellow Democrats?
 

ronntaylor

macrumors regular
Jan 16, 2004
185
1,448
Flushing, New York
While the onset of her statements are very broad, but the article does explain she's talking of the intimidation of members of congress. This with the context of the reported Border Patrol FB page
It appears she is talking about threats against members or congress. The agency has said its Inspector General has started an investigation.

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

Threatening government officials of the United States is a felony under federal law. Threatening the President of the United States is a felony under 18 U.S.C. § 871, punishable by up to 5 years of imprisonment, that is investigated by the United States Secret Service. Threatening other officials is a Class C or D felony, usually carrying maximum penalties of 5 or 10 years under 18 U.S.C. § 875, 18 U.S.C. § 876 and other statutes, that is investigated by the Federal Bureau of Investigation. When national boundaries are transcended by such a threat, it is considered a terrorist threat.
 

mudslag

macrumors regular
Oct 18, 2010
139
9,976
It appears she is talking about threats against members or congress. The agency has said its Inspector General has started an investigation.

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

Threatening government officials of the United States is a felony under federal law. Threatening the President of the United States is a felony under 18 U.S.C. § 871, punishable by up to 5 years of imprisonment, that is investigated by the United States Secret Service. Threatening other officials is a Class C or D felony, usually carrying maximum penalties of 5 or 10 years under 18 U.S.C. § 875, 18 U.S.C. § 876 and other statutes, that is investigated by the Federal Bureau of Investigation. When national boundaries are transcended by such a threat, it is considered a terrorist threat.



So you're saying Fox is coloring outside the lines again? Shocked I tell ya.
 

LIVEFRMNYC

macrumors 604
Oct 27, 2009
7,433
8,607

ronntaylor

macrumors regular
Jan 16, 2004
185
1,448
Flushing, New York
So you're saying Fox is coloring outside the lines again? Shocked I tell ya.
:D

Her actual quote: "You cannot intimidate members of Congress," Wilson, D-Florida, said. "It is against the law."

But it appears the frothing at the mouth Right wing extremist "news" media got its marching orders and talking points.

"those who mock Congress online" -- FOX News
"mock Frederica Wilson and go to jail" - PJMedia
"Rep. Frederica Wilson demands prosecution for those that mock Congress online" -- Washington Examiner
"Frederica Wilson: We must prosecute anyone who makes fun of Congress" -- Town Hall
"Dem Rep. Frederica Wilson vows to prosecute people for 'making fun of Congress'" -- The Blaze
 

vrDrew

macrumors 65816
Jan 31, 2010
1,317
11,838
Midlife, Midwest
Once again, Fox News manages to completely miss the context.

Rep. Wilson was referring to a ProPublica story that examined the sort of on-line behaviour by a group of Border Patrol Agents:

Members of a secret Facebook group for current and former Border Patrol agents joked about the deaths of migrants, discussed throwing burritos at Latino members of Congress visiting a detention facility in Texas on Monday and posted a vulgar illustration depicting Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez engaged in oral sex with a detained migrant, according to screenshots of their postings.
Who, exactly, is the "clown" here?

Frankly, any current Border Patrol officer or employee who used that forum to discuss their job, then they deserve to get fired. If I worked for a private company, and went online and posted sexually explicit and violent gif images depicting my employer or a customer, then I'd damn well deserve to get fired.

Who, exactly, are the "clowns" here?

Because I'd say the people getting suckered by Fox News nonsense are the real idiots.
 

jerwin

macrumors 68020
Jun 13, 2015
2,460
4,452
Frankly, any current Border Patrol officer or employee who used that forum to discuss their job, then they deserve to get fired. If I worked for a private company, and went online and posted sexually explicit and violent gif images depicting my employer or a customer, then I'd damn well deserve to get fired.
What if the leadership of the Border Patrol condones that group as an aid to esprit de corps?
 

Eraserhead

macrumors G4
Nov 3, 2005
10,300
10,386
UK
Your preaching to the wrong people, the left are the ones who demonize, and dehumanize any and everyone they disagree with.
The right certainly do this a lot. So do the left to be fair.

We all need to do better as @Raid says. Personally I think this is a good law. Should raise the tone of the debate.
[doublepost=1562343012][/doublepost]
What if the leadership of the Border Patrol condones that group as an aid to esprit de corps?
Hard to condemn half your staff.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JayMysterio