Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Brilliantly Exposes Culture of Corruption.

[_subgenius]

A politician that blames corporations for the actions of politicians is only a believable premise to a moron.

Exactly.

Despite having watched the video, which is about how a corrupt politician (she makes it simple for you by talking about a 'bad guy', did you notice?) could profit from the current law to fund their campaign, pay to suppress inconvenient news stories, get elected and then enrich themselves by exploiting their elected office, all of it quite legally, you have concluded that the object of her attack was not corrupt politicians and the law that allows them to act corruptly, but corporations.

Yup. A conclusion like that would only appeal to a moron.

Read the OP and listen to video, i didn't conclude that at all, they did...so thanks.

But yeah choose to believe the hypothetical hollywood-esque storytelling of an incompetent freshman congresswoman, because.... a.k.a. moronic.

[_Chap]

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez isn't bringing anything to the table here except that the media obsession with her as created a cult of personality that earns titles like, "brilliantly exposes."

I don't really care whether or not the media choose to glamorise a particular politician or not. That's part of the price of a free press. What matters is what the politician then does with their time in the spotlight.

That video showed her putting her no doubt temporary share of the public attention to quite good use. The issue she raised and summed up fairly effectively is one that needs to be raised again and again until the public insists that something is done about it.

It's not at all clear to me what you are complaining about ...

[_EAllusion]

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez isn't bringing anything to the table here except that the media obsession with her as created a cult of personality that earns titles like, "brilliantly exposes."

I don't really care whether or not the media choose to glamorise a particular politician or not. That's part of the price of a free press. What matters is what the politician then does with their time in the spotlight.

That video showed her putting her no doubt temporary share of the public attention to quite good use. The issue she raised and summed up fairly effectively is one that needs to be raised again and again until the public insists that something is done about it.

It's not at all clear to me what you are complaining about ...

What she was doing was the banal stuff of routine politics going back decades. The public has been insisting something be done about it since forever and politicians have been benefiting from grandstanding and promising to do something about it for just as long. I don't think this is remarkable nor was her presentation of issues particularly insightful, therefore I don't think it should be referred to as a brilliant revealing.

[_Gunnar]

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez isn't bringing anything to the table here except that the media obsession with her as created a cult of personality that earns titles like, "brilliantly exposes."

I don't really care whether or not the media choose to glamorise a particular politician or not. That's part of the price of a free press. What matters is what the politician then does with their time in the spotlight.

That video showed her putting her no doubt temporary share of the public attention to quite good use. The issue she raised and summed up fairly effectively is one that needs to be raised again and again until the public insists that something is done about it.

It's not at all clear to me what you are complaining about ...

I obviously agree with you entirely with you on this, and like you, I don't understand why EA is complaining about it.

What she was doing was the banal stuff of routine politics going back decades. The public has been insisting something be done about it since forever and politicians have been benefiting from grandstanding and promising to do something about it for just as long. I don't think this is remarkable nor was her presentation of issues particularly insightful, therefore I don't think it should be referred to as a brilliant revealing.

I disagree. I think her presentation was particularly powerful, and deserves widest possible dissemination. Like Chap said, this issue needs to be raised again and again and more effectively than in the past, by not only her but others, until the public is no longer willing to permit politicians to get away with not doing anything about it.

[_Jersey Girl]

I did view the lightning round that ACO presented as soon as it came up on video on youtube. I think that the premise was simple and that some of the most effective demonstrations can be considered elegant in their simplicity and that is exactly why they are effective.

Most anyone can understand the dynamic behind the analogy. Most anyone can draw conclusions from it. I think that's why we can safely describe it as brilliant.

In other words, it works and it works for most anyone listening to it because it is uncomplicated and therefore effective.

[_subgenius]

So how does this "simple" analogy play out if you're the good guy and you use the same money and influence to pass good guy legislation?
Or is this an exclusive premise of fantasy?

[_Gunnar]

So how does this "simple" analogy play out if you're the good guy and you use the same money and influence to pass good guy legislation?
Or is this an exclusive premise of fantasy?

[_EAllusion]

So how does this "simple" analogy play out if you're the good guy and you use the same money and influence to pass good guy legislation?
Or is this an exclusive premise of fantasy?

What if people use corruption for good is what you are asking? How ever will be respond to this devastating rhetorical question?

[_subgenius]

So how does this "simple" analogy play out if you're the good guy and you use the same money and influence to pass good guy legislation?
Or is this an exclusive premise of fantasy?

What if people use corruption for good is what you are asking? How ever will be respond to this devastating rhetorical question?

Point being, that as usual Libs/Democrats blme others instea of recognizing personal accountability. The system does not create "the bad guy" it simply allows for it - which is the condition of every free society, of liberty. In order for good to flourish there must be vulnerability. In other words, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's "bad guy" would still find a way regardless. She is using emotional rhetoric which is great for politics but lousy for policy. So, to condemn the system because of her "bad guy" movie pitch is to also condemn the freedom and ability of the good guys out there...and fortunately there are still more of them than not.
But please, continue your campaign of fear mongering that has been tediously promoted for a little over 24 months now....

[_Gunnar]

So we should make no attempt to fight against, expose or punish corruption and fraud because sufficiently evil and determined bad guys will try to get away with it anyway no matter what we do? Is that what subby is saying or implying? One could foolishly use that type of argument to oppose making anything illegal or criminal--including Murder.