FL GOP rep gets in AOC's face on the hill, calls her "disgusting" and a "f** b**"

[GMDino]

Gotta love Republican courage from Rep @RogerWilliamsTX: when he undeniably sees another man engaged in virulent harassment of a young woman, just pretend you never saw it in the most cartoonish manner possible and keep pushing.

(He’s lying, by the way. He joined in w/ Yoho) https://t.co/TAjvXBdd9u

— Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) July 21, 2020

 

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(07-21-2020, 01:39 PM)GMDino Wrote: What is important though is focus on the young woman...who just happens to be black...rather than any of the other looters that day.

After all YOU Chose a white guy from the right that broke the law and got away with it!

This thinly veiled attempt to accuse bfine of being racist is a personal attack and clearly not in the spirit of the new P&R.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(07-21-2020, 04:32 PM)GMDino Wrote:

Gotta love Republican courage from Rep @RogerWilliamsTX: when he undeniably sees another man engaged in virulent harassment of a young woman, just pretend you never saw it in the most cartoonish manner possible and keep pushing.

(He’s lying, by the way. He joined in w/ Yoho) https://t.co/TAjvXBdd9u

— Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) July 21, 2020

 

Having a heated discussion is "virulent harassment"?  Obvious hyperbole aside, doesn't she pride herself on being "tough"? 

[*bfine32*]

(07-21-2020, 04:46 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: This thinly veiled attempt to accuse bfine of being racist is a personal attack and clearly not in the spirit of the new P&R.

Dino's just displaying the Liberal "go to".

Disagree with someone, call them a racist. 

The accusations are not near as infuriating as the refusal to address the point. 

[hollodero]

(07-21-2020, 04:49 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Having a heated discussion is "virulent harassment"?  Obvious hyperbole aside, doesn't she pride herself on being "tough"? 

Saying "effing b****" or "disgusting" imho is harassment. And claiming to have not heard that because of being so occupied with problems in the district is a bit laughable.

I also find it unfair to scold her for saying unemployment and poverty contribute to crime, for that's obviously true and is not countered by looters getting Gucci bags.

That being said, I don't think this you only harass once person deserves to be thrown out of all committees.

(07-21-2020, 04:46 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: This thinly veiled attempt to accuse bfine of being racist is a personal attack and clearly not in the spirit of the new P&R.

I kinda agree with that. It was a bit unneccessary.

[GMDino]

(07-21-2020, 04:55 PM)hollodero Wrote: I kinda agree with that. It was a bit unneccessary.

 He chose the image out of hundreds of photos of looters.

Google "Chicago looting" that image isn't even on the first few pages.

Here is the first one:


I merely commented that he happened to choose one of a woman of color.

Just like Yoho just happened to decide to yell at OAC vs any male member of congress during his time there.

[BmorePat87]

(07-21-2020, 03:23 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: They didn't censure Omar for trafficking in anti-Semitic tropes or take her off any committees.  This altercation, while certainly unprofessional, doesn't, to me at least, rise to anything close to that.

And yet that was McCarthy’s response to Omar, censure and remove from the foreign affairs committee.

[GMDino]

Just putting this here rather start a thread about it.

Not sure if the Press Secretary claimed this or someone else in the administration but they were wrong either way.

If you’re still accusing ⁦@KimberlyHalkett⁩ of using an obscenity during today’s briefing with @PressSec, even the White House official stenographers say you’re wrong. pic.twitter.com/9T3EPDdBnR

— Andrew Feinberg (@AndrewFeinberg) July 21, 2020

 

[BmorePat87]

(07-21-2020, 04:49 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Having a heated discussion is "virulent harassment"?  Obvious hyperbole aside, doesn't she pride herself on being "tough"? 

I don’t think anyone would characterize that as a “discussion”. Discussions tend to be mutual rather than unprovoked verbal vitriol.

Getting in someone’s face as they walk by, yelling that they’re “disgusting”, and then calling them expletives when they call you rude for it is more accurately “harassment” than a “discussion”.

Also, I don’t think anyone being “tough” means they shouldn’t push for people to be held accountable

[hollodero]

(07-21-2020, 05:26 PM)GMDino Wrote:  He chose the image out of hundreds of photos of looters.

Google "Chicago looting" that image isn't even on the first few pages.  

Here is the first one:  


I merely commented that he happened to choose one of a woman of color.

Just like Yoho just happened to decide to yell at OAC vs any male member of congress during his time there.

The link you yourself posted showed the photo amongst the first results. There were others, but there were few without black people in it, which is not bfine's fault. You can find other search terms where this particular picture won't be amongst the first results, and congrats you did, but that does not prove anything really.

I would be more than willing to assume he meant nothing nefarious or racist by posting a photo of a looter that sure fulfilled the demand that the looting is on good display, but you feel inclined to look at it differently and to double down on it. At this point - have it your way. I don't deem it overly constructive to be always ready for accusations, but sure who am I  except one guy that is a bit annoyed about the wide-spread willingness to paint someoone as being motivated by racist reasons on every turn possible.
Just one thing, please do not deny that you indeed did just that. Your last sentence makes that abundantly clear and makes the word "merely" in "I 'merely' commented" irrelevant.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(07-21-2020, 04:55 PM)hollodero Wrote: Saying "effing b****" or "disgusting" imho is harassment. And claiming to have not heard that because of being so occupied with problems in the district is a bit laughable.

I believe he called her the expletives under his breath on as he was walking away.  Not excusing it but it's not the same thing as yelling it to her face.  I would have to have seen the actual confrontation to know if that was the proper way to describe it.

Quote:I also find it unfair to scold her for saying unemployment and poverty contribute to crime, for that's obviously true and is not countered by looters getting Gucci bags.

That being said, I don't think this you only harass once person deserves to be thrown out of all committees.



I kinda agree with that. It was a bit unneccessary.

Agreed.

(07-21-2020, 05:34 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: And yet that was McCarthy’s response to Omar, censure and remove from the foreign affairs committee.

Indeed.  In my position, prior to being in management position and before, I always strove for fairness and equity.  If McCarthy claimed Omar should be censured and thrown of committees he should back the same action in this case.  If Pelosi didn't think Omar's antisemitism was worthy of censure and being thrown off committees than she should feel the same about homeboy in this incident.

(07-21-2020, 05:41 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: I don’t think anyone would characterize that as a “discussion”. Discussions tend to be mutual rather than unprovoked verbal vitriol.

Getting in someone’s face as they walk by, yelling that they’re “disgusting”, and then calling them expletives when they call you rude for it is more accurately “harassment” than a “discussion”.

Also, I don’t think anyone being “tough” means they shouldn’t push for people to be held accountable

I'd have to have seen the altercation to accurately judge it.  I absolutely don't agree with the profanity, under his breath walking away or otherwise.  I also think her characterization of the event is intentionally inflammatory.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(07-21-2020, 05:43 PM)hollodero Wrote: The link you yourself posted showed the photo amongst the first results. There were others, but there were few without black people in it, which is not bfine's fault. You can find other search terms where this particular picture won't be amongst the first results, and congrats you did, but that does not prove anything really.

I would be more than willing to assume he meant nothing nefarious or racist by posting a photo of a looter that sure fulfilled the demand that the looting is on good display, but you feel inclined to look at it differently and to double down on it. At this point - have it your way. I don't deem it overly constructive to be always ready for accusations, but sure who am I  except one guy that is a bit annoyed about the wide-spread willingness to paint someoone as being motivated by racist reasons on every turn possible.
Just one thing, please do not deny that you indeed did just that. Your last sentence makes that abundantly clear and makes the word "merely" in "I 'merely' commented" irrelevant.

This post is outstanding and I cannot overstate this.  Seriously, kudos to you, well said.

[BmorePat87]

(07-21-2020, 06:13 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Indeed.  In my position, prior to being in management position and before, I always strove for fairness and equity.  If McCarthy claimed Omar should be censured and thrown of committees he should back the same action in this case.  If Pelosi didn't think Omar's antisemitism was worthy of censure and being thrown off committees than she should feel the same about homeboy in this incident.

Agreed, everyone will always protect their own

Quote:I'd have to have seen the altercation to accurately judge it.  I absolutely don't agree with the profanity, under his breath walking away or otherwise.  I also think her characterization of the event is intentionally inflammatory.

Going off the Hill reporter alone, though, it sounds far more like harassment than the alternative. That's the only person whose word I am listening to in this case.

[GMDino]

(07-21-2020, 05:43 PM)hollodero Wrote: The link you yourself posted showed the photo amongst the first results. There were others, but there were few without black people in it, which is not bfine's fault. You can find other search terms where this particular picture won't be amongst the first results, and congrats you did, but that does not prove anything really.

I would be more than willing to assume he meant nothing nefarious or racist by posting a photo of a looter that sure fulfilled the demand that the looting is on good display, but you feel inclined to look at it differently and to double down on it. At this point - have it your way. I don't deem it overly constructive to be always ready for accusations, but sure who am I  except one guy that is a bit annoyed about the wide-spread willingness to paint someoone as being motivated by racist reasons on every turn possible.
Just one thing, please do not deny that you indeed did just that. Your last sentence makes that abundantly clear and makes the word "merely" in "I 'merely' commented" irrelevant.

You are one of the most even handed posters on this board and I respect that.  We are way off from the original topic so I will say this and then no more:  

Too often in this country and on these boards "poor" and "looters" is a code word for "black". That bfine used a smiling black woman to defend his position that poor people looting aren't "feeding their families" as an attempt at explaining why Yoho screamed at AOC and called her a  ******* ***** may have been a coincidence.  I also said Nately used a white guy as an example of Republican who got away with a crime.  No one cared about that.   I try to be very careful when I post an image or gif that is says what I mean it to say. 

Back on topic there is no excuse for Yoho's behavior despite people trying to explain "why" he might had said something or claiming they know how it was said without hearing it.  And no republican (that I've seen yet) has called him out for it either.  So this will fall along partisan lines unfortunately along with an attempt to distract from it.  

[CarolinaBengalFanGuy]

This increase in crime are we talking recently in the last few months? Because I would attribute that to riots, the rise of wanting to defund the police and abandoning them when they do their jobs, and cops quitting left and right.

[GMDino]

(07-21-2020, 08:52 PM)CarolinaBengalFanGuy Wrote: This increase in crime are we talking recently in the last few months? Because I would attribute that to riots, the rise of wanting to defund the police and abandoning them when they do their jobs, and cops quitting left and right.

I'd think crime in general among the poor.  And a lot of officers are quitting thanks to the overtime driving up their pensions too.  Good old unions.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(07-21-2020, 08:58 PM)GMDino Wrote: I'd think crime in general among the poor.  And a lot of officers are quitting thanks to the overtime driving up their pensions too.  Good old unions.

Overtime does not contribute to your final retirement rate.  It's your highest years base salary.  That loophole was closed decades ago and I live in possibly the most union friendly state in the nation.

[GMDino]

(07-21-2020, 09:03 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Overtime does not contribute to your final retirement rate.  It's your highest years base salary.  That loophole was closed decades ago and I live in possibly the most union friendly state in the nation.

https://nypost.com/2020/07/08/nypd-limits-retirement-applications-amid-411-surge-this-week/

Quote:Sources also said the flood of overtime tied to last month’s protests — which will boost pension payouts for eligible retirees — and the expected loss of overtime due to the recent $1 billion cut to the NYPD’s budget were also factors.


“This is the best time to leave,” one cop said.


“You’ve padded the numbers as high as you can pad them.”


Another cop noted, “When they cut the OT, a lot of people were done.”


“Also, there’s another class hitting their 20th year in September, so that will be another group leaving,” the source added, noting that cops often retire once they hit the minimum requirement for pension vestment.



A Brooklyn cop said the NYPD was facing a “perfect storm,” noting that “cops made the most overtime they will for a long time — at least until next year” and citing rumors that “grade promotions” for detectives and “special assignment money” for sergeants and lieutenants will be canceled.

Of course there is also this:

Quote:Sources blamed the situation — which comes amid an alarming spike in shootings — on growing anti-cop sentiment, coupled with a pending city law that would make it a crime for cops to use chokeholds while trying to subdue violent suspects.

Edit to add that THIS ALSO has nothing to do with the OT so I'll be done with it too.

[*bfine32*]

(07-21-2020, 08:05 PM)GMDino Wrote: You are one of the most even handed posters on this board and I respect that.  We are way off from the original topic so I will say this and then no more:  

Too often in this country and on these boards "poor" and "looters" is a code word for "black". That bfine used a smiling black woman to defend his position that poor people looting aren't "feeding their families" as an attempt at explaining why Yoho screamed at AOC and called her a  ******* ***** may have been a coincidence.  I also said Nately used a white guy as an example of Republican who got away with a crime.  No one cared about that.   I try to be very careful when I post an image or gif that is says what I mean it to say. 

Back on topic there is no excuse for Yoho's behavior despite people trying to explain "why" he might had said something or claiming they know how it was said without hearing it.  And no republican (that I've seen yet) has called him out for it either.  So this will fall along partisan lines unfortunately along with an attempt to distract from it.  

It's you. You're the reason we're "off topic". I posted a photo of a person gleefully looting and you made it about color. Not only about the photo I posted but you made sure to point the the Congressman from Florida is white.

I had hopes that things would change in this reboot, but it's simply: The more things change the more they remain the same. 

If this reboot is going to continue you to do what you've always done,; then I most likely want no part of it. 

Thanks to Hollo and SSF. 

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(07-21-2020, 09:16 PM)GMDino Wrote: https://nypost.com/2020/07/08/nypd-limits-retirement-applications-amid-411-surge-this-week/



Of course there is also this:



Edit to add that THIS ALSO has nothing to do with the OT so I'll be done with it too.

I'd have to see the exact retirement plan, but it's a thing of the past for overtime to contribute in any significant way to your monthly retirement rate.  They may have bonuses for OT worked or some other factor.  Without knowing the details of their contract it's impossible to say.  Even so, your post is about NYPD only, the rise in crime is not even remotely confined to that city.

As for retiring due to banning chokeholds?  No, this is more LEO bashing on your part.  Predictable, but still unfortunate.  Mass retirements are happening because it's become clear that politicians will happily throw you to the wolves to appease a mob.  The current climate is so hostile to law enforcement that I don't blame anyone for retiring that has the means.  I'm still a ways away or I'd likely be gone too, and it's not nearly as bad in the Los Angeles area as it is in others.