745
'Do I Look Like I Care?': AOC Shreds Trump's Border Czar In Blunt Free Speech Reminder
(www.huffpost.com)
this post was submitted on 03 May 2025
745 points (99.1% liked)
politics
23305 readers
2760 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Please stay safe, AOC
These absolute fucking ghouls. Homan needs to be put against the fucking wall.
Mod here: We’ve received several reports from this comment thread. If I had the power to lock just this thread, I would because I can see how this conversation has some seeds for productive discourse, but that doesn’t seem to be the direction that things are headed toward right now.
I would encourage people to reread what each other has said, and rather than immediately thinking of a rebuttal, read it a second or third time until you can interpret what the other person said a different way than you initially read it.
Mod here: We’ve received several reports from this comment thread. If I had the power to lock just this thread, I would because I can see how this conversation has some seeds for productive discourse, but that doesn’t seem to be the direction that things are headed toward right now.
I would encourage people to reread what each other has said, and rather than immediately thinking of a rebuttal, read it a second or third time until you can interpret what the other person said a different way than you initially read it.
Why is some unproductive discourse a problem? Why is it so severe that a (hypothetical) thread lock is needed?
If a conversation isn’t productive and people are just becoming mean and ugly toward each other, then all we’re left with is people being mean and ugly toward each other. That doesn’t promote community, it creates rage bait. And not that it necessarily means a conversation can’t be productive, I would assume — although maybe incorrectly — that the reason people are on Lemmy is because they’ve seen what happens when rage is monetized on social media platforms, and they came here to get away from that.
Disagree. There would be some people being mean and ugly toward each other, but those subthreads can easily be hidden by the user.
Yes, we certainly don't want to encourage rage for attention and clicks. But locking a thread always seemed over-authoritarian to me.
Obviously I'm only talking hypothetically here. I'm trying to understand the logic behind locking threads in general. Nothing against you or regarding this topic in particular.
What's more, Pam Bondi is probably the one orchestrating and advising on political prosecutions that are almost certainly implied by "what's coming."
But I really hope my other intuition is correct and they have not yet fully staffed the DOJ with fascist sycophants. I am hoping there are enough decent people that they have been and will derail the worst of it, at least in the short term.
I feel like the recession and threat of joblessness will sway a lot of those decent people to "just doing my job" their way into being okay with it.
No, don't. The opposition playing it safe is how the fascists are winning.
bro doesn't know the difference between "stay safe" and "play safe"
You know what I meant.
Yes, I know what you meant. But the reality is, defeating fascism is not a safe thing to do. If we all stick with the mentality of being safe, we will lose our rights forever.
Edit: I guess the downvotes I'm getting just go to show how many of us are fascists and/or cowards.
Edit 2: keep downvoting without replying to refute my point, fascist cowards. You're only proving me right with every click. You have no fucking rebuttal and you know it.
You're getting downvoted for being a dick. Stop being a dick and maybe people will listen to you. You can be correct and have a counterproductive attitude. Especially knowing that Lemmy is largely filled with people who align with you.
Nope, I was getting downvoted before that. Try again.
The real reason is that people don't want to hear what a dire situation we're actually in. They want to delude themselves into thinking that "safe" politics as usual is capable of solving the problems we're faced with to day, but it isn't. So they shoot the messenger.
Ok chicken little
See, this shit right here is exactly why statements like the one I made are necessary. Trump is attacking the press, sending people to gulags without due process, and all sorts of other blatantly tyrannical shit, and he just refuses to see it.
Yeah, because you were being a dick on your first comment.
Just say "my bad" and be more thoughtful going forward, that's all it takes.
TIL not wanting to discourage standing up to fascism makes me a "dick."
🙄
While grue may have said it rude and crude, they aren't wrong.
The longer people mill about waiting for someone else to lead them - vs organizing, preparing, etc themselves - allows Trump and his syncophants more time to settle into power.
Wait too long and Americans miss their chance to shut this shit down.
Indeed, exactly this. They are, just like the nazis did, using the small window of opportunity (where most folks still don’t realise what’s going on) to disable the basic checks and balances our modern system of governance provides.
However, as most of us in the West have such little understanding of how it would be to live under autocratic or even fascist rule, it’s just hard to grasp that we’re mere months away from precisely that happening.
I get where Grue is coming from.
You can tell yourself what you want, but I agree with your view, and still had to downvote just to reduce the toxicity hogging space from up top. I use the votes as signal boosters / signal dampeners. Lower voted, for most people, end up in the bottom, where most don’t reach them.
Some people don’t want to hear it, because they know it by heart already. Some because it’s not productive and only serves to lower morale. Some, because that’s just defeatist and/or escalatory. Whatever the reason, I’m certain most people do not need to hear that shit. What purpose would it even serve? Things are not as dire as that and you know it too, you are just being sensational for whatever reason you’ve conjured yourself. I even agree that things have to hurt before meaningful action starts to happen at a meaningful level, but hoping specifically someone to get hurt and/or not stay safe is just you being a prick. Nobody needs to be exposed to that.
What the fuck is wrong with you?! That is not even slightly what I said and you fucking know it. Telling hateful lies like that is 10000% more "prick" behavior than anything I did!
There's a big fucking difference between hoping that somebody will not listen to cowardly advice, and hoping they get hurt. I shouldn't have to explain that to the entire fucking thread, but I'm apparently surrounded by idiots.
That is a direct quote from you.
What would you yourself deem “not being safe” to mean in context of people in general? Now what would you take it to mean when the commenter you quoted there said that the opposition is dangerous and deranged, hoping AOC stay safe, and you responding hoping AOC not to stay safe. In the same context where the clear danger and derangement is stated? In fact, quoting the very comment doing just that?
You can keep acting shocked and mistreated as though everyone around you is stupid or malicious or both… or, you know, you could maybe consider that maybe whatever way other people interpret your words might just be reasonable and you could perhaps stand to benefit from admitting that, then elaborating what you meant, instead of lashing out on everyone and playing a victim with overly dramatized tone that is pretty much guaranteed to get people confused and vocal about your behavior.
Just saying.
What it means is that I hope AOC stays bold in her opposition instead of letting the threats dissuade her from defending democracy against fascism. C'mon, was it really that unclear?!
There seems to be a real lack of basic comprehension in people's responses. I agree with you. Staying safe, under fascism, means playing it safe, and the USA needs leaders like AOC who won't do this but will speak out even if it puts them in danger.
If everyone around you is an asshole...
Yeah, no. That's not a choice you get to make for AOC.
It's not even a choice you get to make for anyone but yourself.
I'll put it another way, perhaps more clearly:
If you volunteer your own safety and even your life in the cause of defending others from evil, you're a hero. I mean that sincerely.
But when you freely volunteer someone else's safety and even their own life for a cause that you have determined they should suffer and die for, no matter how noble or ethical, you are just another arrogant prick who has strayed SO far from your own lane that you've become blind to your own anti-fascist cause, even the moral lines you 100% believe you're defending.
Add to this the fact that AOC is female, and how many men believe women are disposable and even interchangeable, and that just adds a whole 'nother level of self-engaged fuckery to your outburst.
In case all this isn't clear enough for you, FASCISTS are the ones who gleefully sacrifice others to their cause and blithely determine them all to be sacrifices they're willing to make on the behalf of the majority. Maybe go back and think about what you're really advocating before you adopt the exact same tactics you decry in others to make it happen.
In the meantime you richly deserve every downvote you get.
EDITED TO ADD ORIGINAL QUOTE:
And I'm not!
But @prole over there thinks it's somehow a good thing to encourage her to stop. Since when is he entitled to tell her to second-guess the decision she already made?
It's ironic that he's the one who committed the offense you think was so heinous -- trying to tell AOC what to do -- but you're piling on me instead for pushing back on it.
Fuck off and quit lying about what I said.
Now you reveal your own dishonesty and bad faith, pulling implications of sexism out of thin fucking air. You should be ashamed of yourself. Apologize. Now.
Yeah, that's why I quoted you in full.
I don't have a problem with remembering what you wrote. You do.
Read it again carefully . . . but thank you for confirming the accuracy. Not everyone who genuinely supports the rights of women is a woman, lol.
BWAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
First of all, no you fucking didn't. You quoted my second comment, but not the first (let alone the context I was replying to). Quit lying.
Second, exactly where the fuck in...
...did I demand or "volunteer" anything from AOC? Point it out!
Oh that's right, you can't because I said no such thing and you fucking know it.
You should read it again, because you didn't confirm a goddamn thing.
No shit, Sherlock -- literally nobody here but you ever implied otherwise. Maybe you're the sexist who just made that major discovery for yourself, LOL!
Bottom line is, you have some real "lack of reading comprehension" and "making bad-faith baseless accusation" problems.
Your comment https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/43455840/18472152
Cool, you managed to complete the quoting you had previously claimed to have done. Half credit for belated honesty, I guess?
Now point out the part where any of that is me "freely volunteer[ing]" any fucking thing at all from AOC, or where I claimed it's "a choice [I] get to make for AOC." Put up or shut up.
The bottom line is that I was just making a rhetorical point about how it's unrealistic to expect resisting fascism to be safe, and for that, you read into it a whole pile of shit that was not there in order to attack me.
And for what? What's your purpose here?
It's already in their quote
To keep poking you to make stupid comments showing your lack of reading comprehension
If I tell you "go jump in a lake," did I "freely volunteer" you to jump in the lake? Was that "a choice [I] get to make for" you? Did I somehow compel you to jump in the lake? Do you need a towel now because of the inexorable magic voodoo power of my Internet comment?
Please, O Wise and Powerful Reading Comprehension Expert, explain to me how exhorting somebody to do something and "volunteering them" or "making the choice for them" to do it are equivalent!
Holy shit you're fucking stupid dude
You’re getting downvoted because you’re uneducated.
Okay then, educate me. Tell me exactly which part of what I wrote wasn't correct. Be specific, please -- after all, "I'm uneducated."