Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez

mace1229

Halifax2TheMax said:

mace1229 said:

OnWis97 said:

Part of it is probably related to the idea that as each generation gets further removed from it, it sort of goes away from our minds through attrition.  For example, my grandfather fought in WWII.  My father learned about that era directly from him and probably read more WWII-era history books than 99.9% of the population.  Me?  I come out of the "right" side of these questions (e.g., I know what Auschwitz is) but I am not nearly the student of the era my parents were.  Growing up with them (my dad in particular) gave me that base...it was second-nature to him.  But if I were to have kids (I'm not gonna), I'd probably have to make a specific effort to make sure they get that base...and I should...but human nature probably shows that the understanding of this period is going to dissipate in most households. 

Regarding school, I don't remember learning about the Holocaust at school.  I probably did, but I picked up most of my knowledge at home.

Two other thoughts: 1) Parents do need to expose their kids to important history like this but how many adults even now have a lot of interested?  2) There probably is no more important part of history to learn from and to make sure to avoid repeating.

That definitely will play a part. But not enough to explain why 22% haven't even heard of it. 
I mean, how long ago was the civil war, and yet we know a lot about it. Again, I learned a little from school, then even more talking about it. Probably spend a few days in school talking about it, then I go home and I even remember asking my parents about it during dinner 30 years ago. I asked did brothers really fight against brothers, and did kids really fight in this war? And we talked about it, how I was about 12 at the time and there were plenty of boys age 12 fighting, and plenty of families split and fought each other. I remember talking about that at dinner with my family, but I don't even remember what teacher I had that year.

I blame Texas as the largest purchaser of school text books, they get a disproportionate edit right and thus influence content across the country. I was exposed to the holocaust in junior high and studied it extensively in high school. More importantly, after reading the Diary of Anne Frank I went to my junior high library and followed up with every book I could get my hands on regarding 1939-1945. We also watched black and white film of the liberation of the camps and I remember kids leaving the room in tears. It certainly made me aware that the world is a cruel place due to humankind.
 

No wonder why we spent so much time on the Alamo. 

mrussel1

The TX issue is real, but not the cause here.  Students take a year of world history in high school and unless they have a specific interest, that's pretty much it.  They take a poli sci/gov't, and an American History too.  Everything else is optional and therefore most will bypass history.  So if you think about take a world history survey course, you will spend a decent amount of time on WWII, and you will study the Holocaust for a segment, but how much will you spend on Auschwitz itself?  Not much.  And then they ask Millenials in a survey something that is probably 10 to 15 years about one death camp that they may have learned in one or two classes during a WH survey course likely in 9th or 10th grade.  It's no wonder.  

gimmesometruth27

Spiritual_Chaos said:

mrussel1 said:

my2hands said:

15 pages? She has been on the job a few days

I agree here.  Yes she has made a splash and yes, she uses social media effectively, but she has been outflanked by Pelosi twice.  She needs to be more strategic if she wants to make a difference.  But that takes time and experience, ironically.  

I don't think she should be blamed for getting airtime and attention.

exactly. but the trolls on the right sharing the video and fake nudes trying to shame her are only making her more legitimate. plus, her twitter game is on point. she gives it right back to the people attacking her.

oftenreading

mrussel1 said:

The TX issue is real, but not the cause here.  Students take a year of world history in high school and unless they have a specific interest, that's pretty much it.  They take a poli sci/gov't, and an American History too.  Everything else is optional and therefore most will bypass history.  So if you think about take a world history survey course, you will spend a decent amount of time on WWII, and you will study the Holocaust for a segment, but how much will you spend on Auschwitz itself?  Not much.  And then they ask Millenials in a survey something that is probably 10 to 15 years about one death camp that they may have learned in one or two classes during a WH survey course likely in 9th or 10th grade.  It's no wonder.  

What about before high school, though? That’s a time when everyone takes “social studies” (at least in Canada), wirh a big focus on European history. 

mrussel1

oftenreading said:

mrussel1 said:

The TX issue is real, but not the cause here.  Students take a year of world history in high school and unless they have a specific interest, that's pretty much it.  They take a poli sci/gov't, and an American History too.  Everything else is optional and therefore most will bypass history.  So if you think about take a world history survey course, you will spend a decent amount of time on WWII, and you will study the Holocaust for a segment, but how much will you spend on Auschwitz itself?  Not much.  And then they ask Millenials in a survey something that is probably 10 to 15 years about one death camp that they may have learned in one or two classes during a WH survey course likely in 9th or 10th grade.  It's no wonder.  

What about before high school, though? That’s a time when everyone takes “social studies” (at least in Canada), wirh a big focus on European history. 

Geography and american history. Maybe civilization.  But WWII is really only taught in the one course.  As someone with a history degree,  it's fairly appalling but true. 

oftenreading

mrussel1 said:

oftenreading said:

mrussel1 said:

The TX issue is real, but not the cause here.  Students take a year of world history in high school and unless they have a specific interest, that's pretty much it.  They take a poli sci/gov't, and an American History too.  Everything else is optional and therefore most will bypass history.  So if you think about take a world history survey course, you will spend a decent amount of time on WWII, and you will study the Holocaust for a segment, but how much will you spend on Auschwitz itself?  Not much.  And then they ask Millenials in a survey something that is probably 10 to 15 years about one death camp that they may have learned in one or two classes during a WH survey course likely in 9th or 10th grade.  It's no wonder.  

What about before high school, though? That’s a time when everyone takes “social studies” (at least in Canada), wirh a big focus on European history. 

Geography and american history. Maybe civilization.  But WWII is really only taught in the one course.  As someone with a history degree,  it's fairly appalling but true. 

Urgh. 

PJPOWER

Halifax2TheMax said:

mace1229 said:

OnWis97 said:

Part of it is probably related to the idea that as each generation gets further removed from it, it sort of goes away from our minds through attrition.  For example, my grandfather fought in WWII.  My father learned about that era directly from him and probably read more WWII-era history books than 99.9% of the population.  Me?  I come out of the "right" side of these questions (e.g., I know what Auschwitz is) but I am not nearly the student of the era my parents were.  Growing up with them (my dad in particular) gave me that base...it was second-nature to him.  But if I were to have kids (I'm not gonna), I'd probably have to make a specific effort to make sure they get that base...and I should...but human nature probably shows that the understanding of this period is going to dissipate in most households. 

Regarding school, I don't remember learning about the Holocaust at school.  I probably did, but I picked up most of my knowledge at home.

Two other thoughts: 1) Parents do need to expose their kids to important history like this but how many adults even now have a lot of interested?  2) There probably is no more important part of history to learn from and to make sure to avoid repeating.

That definitely will play a part. But not enough to explain why 22% haven't even heard of it. 
I mean, how long ago was the civil war, and yet we know a lot about it. Again, I learned a little from school, then even more talking about it. Probably spend a few days in school talking about it, then I go home and I even remember asking my parents about it during dinner 30 years ago. I asked did brothers really fight against brothers, and did kids really fight in this war? And we talked about it, how I was about 12 at the time and there were plenty of boys age 12 fighting, and plenty of families split and fought each other. I remember talking about that at dinner with my family, but I don't even remember what teacher I had that year.

I blame Texas as the largest purchaser of school text books, they get a disproportionate edit right and thus influence content across the country. I was exposed to the holocaust in junior high and studied it extensively in high school. More importantly, after reading the Diary of Anne Frank I went to my junior high library and followed up with every book I could get my hands on regarding 1939-1945. We also watched black and white film of the liberation of the camps and I remember kids leaving the room in tears. It certainly made me aware that the world is a cruel place due to humankind.
 

I grew up in TX and remember reading the Diary of Anne Frank in middle school  and doing a research paper on the Holocaust in high school...Do they honestly not teach that anymore?   My grandfather actually almost got blown to bits in WW2, so my generation has a pretty close relationship with that time period.  Newer Millennials, that becomes the case less and less(relationship with time period)...

cincybearcat

If kids don’t know about the holocaust...we should start by looking at the parents. No idea why the rush to judge the schools always happens, so they have to teach everything? Parents have given up responsibility to the school and then blame them when their kids don’t know shit 

oftenreading

cincybearcat said:

If kids don’t know about the holocaust...we should start by looking at the parents. No idea why the rush to judge the schools always happens, so they have to teach everything? Parents have given up responsibility to the school and then blame them when their kids don’t know shit 

It’s reasonable to expect the schools to teach important events in world history. There has been a lot added to the curriculum that could justifiably be said to more properly be within the realm of parenting, except that many parents drop the ball on it, but I don’t think it’s too much to ask for schools to teach the basic academic subjects. 

HughFreakingDillon

cincybearcat said:

If kids don’t know about the holocaust...we should start by looking at the parents. No idea why the rush to judge the schools always happens, so they have to teach everything? Parents have given up responsibility to the school and then blame them when their kids don’t know shit 

everything? haha, no. i'm not judging the schools. i'm actually judging society, parents and the school system as a whole, for forcing schools to become these havens for kids to never fail and to always be allowed to pass no matter what.  

generally academics gets taught in school, yes. my kid doesn't learn geometry from me first. they learn it at school and i help if they need it, and if i can fucking remember it, haha. 

obviously we are supposed to teach our kids outside of school, that's a no brainer, but that doesn't absolve the education system from their responsibility in this partnership. 

anyway, BACK TO THE DANCING CONGRESSPERSON!!! 

rgambs

It's not the parents, the teachers, the schools, the curriculum, or any of that.
It's because close to half the population is fucking dumb.
It's easy to think "kids these days", but a survey of boomers on other topics, evolution or geography, for instance, produces similarly horrifying results.

mace1229

gimmesometruth27 said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

mrussel1 said:

my2hands said:

15 pages? She has been on the job a few days

I agree here.  Yes she has made a splash and yes, she uses social media effectively, but she has been outflanked by Pelosi twice.  She needs to be more strategic if she wants to make a difference.  But that takes time and experience, ironically.  

I don't think she should be blamed for getting airtime and attention.

exactly. but the trolls on the right sharing the video and fake nudes trying to shame her are only making her more legitimate. plus, her twitter game is on point. she gives it right back to the people attacking her.

Thats what I still dont get, and I havent seen an answer yet.
What makes it the right that is doing it? Pretty much every female her age and is well known has fake nudes (unfortunately). What makes you think this one incident is somehow a conspiracy on the right to keep her down and not some creepy guy like thousands of other cases? I see no connection here, as this happens to just about everyone who is well known, even ones who aren't even attractive. This was bound to happen, and it will happen to the next republican young female too.

PJPOWER

mace1229 said:

gimmesometruth27 said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

mrussel1 said:

my2hands said:

15 pages? She has been on the job a few days

I agree here.  Yes she has made a splash and yes, she uses social media effectively, but she has been outflanked by Pelosi twice.  She needs to be more strategic if she wants to make a difference.  But that takes time and experience, ironically.  

I don't think she should be blamed for getting airtime and attention.

exactly. but the trolls on the right sharing the video and fake nudes trying to shame her are only making her more legitimate. plus, her twitter game is on point. she gives it right back to the people attacking her.

Thats what I still dont get, and I havent seen an answer yet.
What makes it the right that is doing it? Pretty much every female her age and is well known has fake nudes (unfortunately). What makes you think this one incident is somehow a conspiracy on the right to keep her down and not some creepy guy like thousands of other cases? I see no connection here, as this happens to just about everyone who is well known, even ones who aren't even attractive. This was bound to happen, and it will happen to the next republican young female too.

No doubt, I would guess that if you googled “Barbara Bush fake nude”, you would probably get results, frankly just because some weirdos get off on creating those.  The internet is vile and some people love pushing that vileness to new levels.

The Juggler

mace1229 said:

gimmesometruth27 said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

mrussel1 said:

my2hands said:

15 pages? She has been on the job a few days

I agree here.  Yes she has made a splash and yes, she uses social media effectively, but she has been outflanked by Pelosi twice.  She needs to be more strategic if she wants to make a difference.  But that takes time and experience, ironically.  

I don't think she should be blamed for getting airtime and attention.

exactly. but the trolls on the right sharing the video and fake nudes trying to shame her are only making her more legitimate. plus, her twitter game is on point. she gives it right back to the people attacking her.

Thats what I still dont get, and I havent seen an answer yet.
What makes it the right that is doing it? Pretty much every female her age and is well known has fake nudes (unfortunately). What makes you think this one incident is somehow a conspiracy on the right to keep her down and not some creepy guy like thousands of other cases? I see no connection here, as this happens to just about everyone who is well known, even ones who aren't even attractive. This was bound to happen, and it will happen to the next republican young female too.

Gee I don't know.....maybe because it was The Daily Caller, Tucker Carlson's website, that ran a story about it and promoted it on twitter? They obviously didn't make the fake picture but they had no problems running with the story. Hardly believe they'd have done the same with Sarah Palin pics....

mace1229

The Juggler said:

mace1229 said:

gimmesometruth27 said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

mrussel1 said:

my2hands said:

15 pages? She has been on the job a few days

I agree here.  Yes she has made a splash and yes, she uses social media effectively, but she has been outflanked by Pelosi twice.  She needs to be more strategic if she wants to make a difference.  But that takes time and experience, ironically.  

I don't think she should be blamed for getting airtime and attention.

exactly. but the trolls on the right sharing the video and fake nudes trying to shame her are only making her more legitimate. plus, her twitter game is on point. she gives it right back to the people attacking her.

Thats what I still dont get, and I havent seen an answer yet.
What makes it the right that is doing it? Pretty much every female her age and is well known has fake nudes (unfortunately). What makes you think this one incident is somehow a conspiracy on the right to keep her down and not some creepy guy like thousands of other cases? I see no connection here, as this happens to just about everyone who is well known, even ones who aren't even attractive. This was bound to happen, and it will happen to the next republican young female too.

Gee I don't know.....maybe because it was The Daily Caller, Tucker Carlson's website, that ran a story about it and promoted it on twitter? They obviously didn't make the fake picture but they had no problems running with the story. Hardly believe they'd have done the same with Sarah Palin pics....

The only story I saw in the The Daily Caller, and it was also falsely referenced earlier as promoting the pictures, actually never showed or promoted them. But in fact reported that they were fake and spoke out against it. So did many other news sources. Unless there was another story where they were actually promoting it then that that doesn't saying anything about it being some part right taking her down.  Even Alexandria herself spoke out against the fake pictures, so does that make her part of the conspiracy too?

mrussel1

mace1229 said:

The Juggler said:

mace1229 said:

gimmesometruth27 said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

mrussel1 said:

my2hands said:

15 pages? She has been on the job a few days

I agree here.  Yes she has made a splash and yes, she uses social media effectively, but she has been outflanked by Pelosi twice.  She needs to be more strategic if she wants to make a difference.  But that takes time and experience, ironically.  

I don't think she should be blamed for getting airtime and attention.

exactly. but the trolls on the right sharing the video and fake nudes trying to shame her are only making her more legitimate. plus, her twitter game is on point. she gives it right back to the people attacking her.

Thats what I still dont get, and I havent seen an answer yet.
What makes it the right that is doing it? Pretty much every female her age and is well known has fake nudes (unfortunately). What makes you think this one incident is somehow a conspiracy on the right to keep her down and not some creepy guy like thousands of other cases? I see no connection here, as this happens to just about everyone who is well known, even ones who aren't even attractive. This was bound to happen, and it will happen to the next republican young female too.

Gee I don't know.....maybe because it was The Daily Caller, Tucker Carlson's website, that ran a story about it and promoted it on twitter? They obviously didn't make the fake picture but they had no problems running with the story. Hardly believe they'd have done the same with Sarah Palin pics....

The only story I saw the The Daily Caller, and it was also falsely referenced earlier as promoting the pictures, actually never showed or promoted them. But in fact reported that they were fake and spoke out against it. So did many other news sources. Even Alexandria herself spoke out against the fake pictures, so does that make her part of the conspiracy too?

The Caller amended their site and changed it after they discovered they were fake.  They were promoting it when they thought they were real. 

mace1229

mrussel1 said:

mace1229 said:

The Juggler said:

mace1229 said:

gimmesometruth27 said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

mrussel1 said:

my2hands said:

15 pages? She has been on the job a few days

I agree here.  Yes she has made a splash and yes, she uses social media effectively, but she has been outflanked by Pelosi twice.  She needs to be more strategic if she wants to make a difference.  But that takes time and experience, ironically.  

I don't think she should be blamed for getting airtime and attention.

exactly. but the trolls on the right sharing the video and fake nudes trying to shame her are only making her more legitimate. plus, her twitter game is on point. she gives it right back to the people attacking her.

Thats what I still dont get, and I havent seen an answer yet.
What makes it the right that is doing it? Pretty much every female her age and is well known has fake nudes (unfortunately). What makes you think this one incident is somehow a conspiracy on the right to keep her down and not some creepy guy like thousands of other cases? I see no connection here, as this happens to just about everyone who is well known, even ones who aren't even attractive. This was bound to happen, and it will happen to the next republican young female too.

Gee I don't know.....maybe because it was The Daily Caller, Tucker Carlson's website, that ran a story about it and promoted it on twitter? They obviously didn't make the fake picture but they had no problems running with the story. Hardly believe they'd have done the same with Sarah Palin pics....

The only story I saw the The Daily Caller, and it was also falsely referenced earlier as promoting the pictures, actually never showed or promoted them. But in fact reported that they were fake and spoke out against it. So did many other news sources. Even Alexandria herself spoke out against the fake pictures, so does that make her part of the conspiracy too?

The Caller amended their site and changed it after they discovered they were fake.  They were promoting it when they thought they were real. 

Are there copies of the original floating around? I'd be interested in seeing how they wrote about it and what was said.

mrussel1

mace1229 said:

mrussel1 said:

mace1229 said:

The Juggler said:

mace1229 said:

gimmesometruth27 said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

mrussel1 said:

my2hands said:

15 pages? She has been on the job a few days

I agree here.  Yes she has made a splash and yes, she uses social media effectively, but she has been outflanked by Pelosi twice.  She needs to be more strategic if she wants to make a difference.  But that takes time and experience, ironically.  

I don't think she should be blamed for getting airtime and attention.

exactly. but the trolls on the right sharing the video and fake nudes trying to shame her are only making her more legitimate. plus, her twitter game is on point. she gives it right back to the people attacking her.

Thats what I still dont get, and I havent seen an answer yet.
What makes it the right that is doing it? Pretty much every female her age and is well known has fake nudes (unfortunately). What makes you think this one incident is somehow a conspiracy on the right to keep her down and not some creepy guy like thousands of other cases? I see no connection here, as this happens to just about everyone who is well known, even ones who aren't even attractive. This was bound to happen, and it will happen to the next republican young female too.

Gee I don't know.....maybe because it was The Daily Caller, Tucker Carlson's website, that ran a story about it and promoted it on twitter? They obviously didn't make the fake picture but they had no problems running with the story. Hardly believe they'd have done the same with Sarah Palin pics....

The only story I saw the The Daily Caller, and it was also falsely referenced earlier as promoting the pictures, actually never showed or promoted them. But in fact reported that they were fake and spoke out against it. So did many other news sources. Even Alexandria herself spoke out against the fake pictures, so does that make her part of the conspiracy too?

The Caller amended their site and changed it after they discovered they were fake.  They were promoting it when they thought they were real. 

Are there copies of the original floating around? I'd be interested in seeing how they wrote about it and what was said.

See the twitter feed.  Notice the way they worded it to protect themselves.  Curious if they posted the same about Scarlett Johansson or any of the other 'celebrities' who have been victimized by fake nudes.  

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/ocasio-cortez-drags-the-daily-caller-for-misleading-fake-nude-headline-2019-01-10

oftenreading

mace1229 said:

mrussel1 said:

mace1229 said:

The Juggler said:

mace1229 said:

gimmesometruth27 said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

mrussel1 said:

my2hands said:

15 pages? She has been on the job a few days

I agree here.  Yes she has made a splash and yes, she uses social media effectively, but she has been outflanked by Pelosi twice.  She needs to be more strategic if she wants to make a difference.  But that takes time and experience, ironically.  

I don't think she should be blamed for getting airtime and attention.

exactly. but the trolls on the right sharing the video and fake nudes trying to shame her are only making her more legitimate. plus, her twitter game is on point. she gives it right back to the people attacking her.

Thats what I still dont get, and I havent seen an answer yet.
What makes it the right that is doing it? Pretty much every female her age and is well known has fake nudes (unfortunately). What makes you think this one incident is somehow a conspiracy on the right to keep her down and not some creepy guy like thousands of other cases? I see no connection here, as this happens to just about everyone who is well known, even ones who aren't even attractive. This was bound to happen, and it will happen to the next republican young female too.

Gee I don't know.....maybe because it was The Daily Caller, Tucker Carlson's website, that ran a story about it and promoted it on twitter? They obviously didn't make the fake picture but they had no problems running with the story. Hardly believe they'd have done the same with Sarah Palin pics....

The only story I saw the The Daily Caller, and it was also falsely referenced earlier as promoting the pictures, actually never showed or promoted them. But in fact reported that they were fake and spoke out against it. So did many other news sources. Even Alexandria herself spoke out against the fake pictures, so does that make her part of the conspiracy too?

The Caller amended their site and changed it after they discovered they were fake.  They were promoting it when they thought they were real. 

Are there copies of the original floating around? I'd be interested in seeing how they wrote about it and what was said.

I’m not aware of how to find a “copy”. Someone more savvy with the internet might tell us how to find them, because there must be a way. 

My understanding is that the DC published the photos with a deliberately misleading headline. They knew the photos weren’t OC but the headline suggested they were. The text of the article confirmed that it had been debunked, but you know that not everyone reads the full text. 
 

mace1229

Sounds like the story didn't change, just the heading. The original heading was "Here’s The Photo Some Described As A Nude Selfie Of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez."  Which honestly isn't that misleading, the title doesn't say it is a fake but definitely implies it is.
I'm still not convinced this is some right attack on the left. 
In the end was this part of a planned attack against Alexandria, or just an attempt to get more publicity (money)? If their plan was the latter, then it was a great success.