As above, so below.
From Newsweek. (https://www.newsweek.com/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-desus-mero-notorious-aoc-showtime-1340445):
Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez told Showtime’s new late-night talk show Desus & Mero that the nonstop criticism and personal attacks lobbed her way is “validation” that she is doing something right.
During the first episode of the show on Showtime (it previously appeared on Viceland), Ocasio-Cortez, who hosts Desus Nice and The Kid Mero introduced as the “Notorious AOC,” admitted that the trolling and abuse was “heavy.”
“But in a weird way, that stuff is validation that you’re doing something real,” she said, reported The Daily Beast.
—snip—
Yup.
So…thank you once again, alla you neocentrist insult comedians.
Pile on. Enjoy your short stint in the sun, out from the rocks underneath which you have apparently been living.
You’re doing nothing but proving my point.
Plus…
The New York Democrat said she didn’t mind the online insults because many of them are “so weak.”
Yup twice!!!
Later…
AG
P.S. Looking at the neocentrist, McCarthyite trolling going on below, I guess it’s time to post my usual (non-zeroable) answer.
Sigh…
Oh well…
I wonder on what side of their mouths they will be lying once their beloved DNC is publicly proven to be as corrupt as the rest of the criminal government now in power up and down Washington DC, from the presidency straight on through to the crooked lobbyists who buy congresspeople. Diogenes would have contemplated suicide had he lived today.
Here is my usual answer to all of this claptrap.
========================================================================
A group…or perhaps better, a cadre…of people on this site have tried everything in their power to discourage criticism of the Democratic Party as it stands today. They automatically downrate such posts and have endlessly attacked several posters as liars, fools, pro-Trump trolls and/or spreaders of Russian propaganda. When effectively rebutted, they simply ignore the rebuttal and repeat the same attacks. These McCarthyite tactics are intended to exhaust the patience of the attacked posters and discourage others from reading or posting similar material. It has worked on a few posters, who have simply given up. It has not worked with me. I initially answered their attacks with attempts at reason. After realizing that this was a total waste of time, I have pretty much stopped replying to them. My comments and articles on this site are my replies. Read what I have to say; consider what they have to say and how it is said, and then make up your own minds. Thank you-AG
===========================================================================
Methinks that Arthur doth protest too much here in his SEVENTEENTH DIARY THIS MONTH.
How in the world do you put up with this vicious censorship, Arthur?
Also, there’s a typographical error in your diary title, Arthur. You meant to write “Ron Paul”, not “AOC”.
I know it pains you no end to see my posts here, JDW. Tell you what…you get together with your little neocentrist cadre and work out a way where none of them will “censor” my comments and replies by zeroing them out, and then I won’t need to resort to posting essentially uncensorable…by you folk, anyway…standalones.
But…wouldn’t that ruin your fun!!!???
Now you have something else about which to complain.
Yippee!!!
AG
Just provide substantive responses to people and I’ll be happy.
Arthur, if you don’t want your comments to be “zeroed out,” don’t write particularly trolling, offensive posts.
About 1% of your comments have received multiple “Mega-Troll” ratings. We’ve shown ourselves capable of absorbing the vast majority of your bad faith posts.
Me, I want the vast majority of your horrible stuff to remain on this site for posterity. For example, it’s important for community members to know you want to split New York State and empower the northern part of the former State to force juvenile incest victims to carry the pregnancies caused by their rapists to term. It’s important for community members to know that you oppose unemployment insurance because you believe it saps initiative. It’s important for community members to know that you’re willing to go to absurd lengths to defend your political idol Ron Paul from the enormous pile of evidence that he empowered racists and sexists his entire political career.
Arthur, please defend Ron Paul’s opposition to the Civil Rights Act and Roe v. Wade.
. . . When I weigh whether to rate an obviously trolling ag comment/”standalone article”[LOL!] “0” or “1”, that is one factor I take into consideration, although I actually give more weight to not disappearing any good, thoughtful, substantive replies to it. I figure the Everest of shit ag has already piled up here should be fully sufficient to prove beyond any reasonable doubt what he is. Whether or not one more ag excretion makes it onto that mountain seems pretty inconsequential to me.
As I’ve noted here repeatedly, for a long time I mostly just scrolled past much of ag’s shit, or barely skimmed it to see if any particularly egregious shit meriting confrontation leaped out. But I would have opposed banning him, even as annoying a bad-faith spammer as he is. It was the recognition of the profound dishonesty underlying all his interactions here that finally tipped me to the opposing view. In particular, the final straw pushing past that tipping point was
Another shift in my approach to confronting ag’s shit is driven by his complete unresponsiveness to substantive, good-faith confrontation of it (diversionary lies and attempts to bury criticism in tsunamis of irrelevant blather are emphatically NOT substantively responsive; though they emphatically ARE deeply dishonest). This painfully teaches anyone who has attempted good-faith interaction with him even a few times that it is utterly pointless, a fool’s game. It’s completely understandable that people he has so thoroughly taught that unpleasant lesson eventually wise-up (including recognizing that that diversionary unresponsiveness is itself a trolling method) and start skipping straight past replying to administering the earned trollratings. Which I have gradually shifted to doing more of recently, including “0” ratings when merited.
In particular, I’ve concluded that persisting in serial-lying about the reasons/motivations/politics of critics (“centrist”, “neocentrist”, “DNC-loving”, “cadre”, etc.) and the substance of our criticisms long after these lies have been thoroughly, definitively, and repeatedly refuted by the only individuals in possession of the requisite knowledge to either confirm or refute claims about what our reasons/motivations/politics in fact are — i.e., the critics ourownselves! — is itself an extreme, particularly egregious form of trolling that thoroughly merits a “0” rating whenever ag engages in it. (It’s also a very transparent ad hominem attempt to deflect from the substance of the criticism by lying about the critic.) So I’ve been handing out “0”s with ever less hesitation recently as ag persists in such mega-trolling, and will continue to do so.
There comes a time when anyone who hosts or moderates a blog has to make difficult choices. Banning should not be done lightly, but at some point if it becomes obvious that a member has repeatedly crossed a blog’s red lines (whether published in a FAQ or elsewhere on the site’s web presence), those most directly responsible for the blog must act. Continuing to allow a repeat offender to, well, continue offending is beyond the pale. Expecting other members to simply “put up with it” is weak. None of us has any inside info on the stats to this blog – visits, time spent engaging content, interactions between members, etc. – but I can hazard a guess that the conditions here have devolved to a point where those numbers are not what they used to be. And those numbers point to something else – a human toll. I am hardly a fan of safe spaces, and consider the whole notion ridiculous (a personal opinion, and one that could be discussed at length at another time). That said, for a political blog dedicated to a very big tent party to be viable, members deserve some reasonable assurance that they will be engaged in good faith if they post comments, diaries, etc. As things stand now, those conditions no longer exist, and have not in quite a while. User ratings by themselves as a flag of bad faith behavior just ain’t cutting it. Regrettably that is all we seem to be given. Something we should all think about as we see the shrinking roster of regular usernames whenever we visit, and on those moments when we wonder what happened to those who no longer seem to comment.
Well, he plays us all for fools. Or at least we unprincipled neicentrists.🤣
. . . to engage with him seriously and in good faith long after he’s proven how pointless that is. As opposed to just pointing out his dishonesty and ridiculousness. And laughing as appropriate.
I’m generally fine with people making whatever ratings decisions they like. I’d guess that I’ve given troll ratings to about a dozen of AG’s comments over the years I’ve been here. About a dozen out of what, thousands?
The one time I was truly happy to participate in making an AG comment disappear was the one where he posted a sickeningly garish photo of the lynching of an African-American, a photo I had never seen before. I remember explicitly that the photo appeared to be meant to do nothing other than to disgust and threaten. It’s the very worst thing I can remember anyone doing here.
I couldn’t believe that didn’t get him immediately banned.
. . . trolling/lie.
. . . and AOC: she actually gets trolled by dishonest rightwing assholes.
You just lie and pretend that substantive, Reality-Based criticism, downrates, and/or thorough, definitive, factually documented refutation of your lies and other falsehoods are the same thing!
I.e., when she says
. . . she’s correct! The dishonest, non-credible sources and nature of the criticism she gets (which exist in a separate universe from the valid criticism you get) demonstrate that she’s right.
Clue for the clueless: what she says only works (i.e., is true) when your critics are wrong and non-credible, and their criticisms invalid. Your case is precisely the reverse!
Your mantra that “someone criticized me, so that means I’m right!” is as idiotic (and dishonest!) as it gets. Idiotically and falsely labeling critics “neocentrist” to pretend that suffices to render valid critiques invalid squares both the idiocy and the dishonesty.
So, no, as a simple matter of fact, AOC DOES NOT speak for you!
“REALLY!!!
“
AOC ran as a legit progressive and is doing all the right things to legislate as a legit progressive. She is already worthy of attention, and she’s just now getting warmed up. After she learns the ropes in Congress, she’ll be formidable. I don’t know if she’ll be more of a backbench rabble rouser or a major power player. Either way, she won’t be ignored.
AG on the other hand? Well….
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has called for a much more vigorous set of Federal laws and regulations in order to defend the 99%.
Arthur Gilroy has called for the Federal government to dissolve, leaving most of the 99% incredibly vulnerable to even greater levels of oppression and abuse.
These fanboy diaries of his are ludicrous and fraudulent.
Hey, Arthur, tell us about your views on the rights of women to have access to all family planning services.
Wait, does this mean Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is not a faux libertarian like Ron Paul? The horror, the horror!
Also, I must confess to my error: I miscounted and this is actually Arthur’s 18th diary this month.
. . . is hanging appropriately low with the shame of THAT error!
Seriously, though, who can keep up with the spam?
Arthur’s evidently going for a world record.
. . . shat out his favorite pack-of-lies-start-to-finish here:
“Here is my usual answer to all of this claptrap..”