AOC FTW: Shout out to all the legislators having dinner with Exxon lobbyists

[deminks]

Link to tweet

[OneBro]

1. They're spraying water . . . on a fire . . . that's under the ocean.

THAT, folks, is the stuff of environmental nightmares.

[TheBlackAdder]

18. They called the Bikini Bottom Fired Department with a second alarm to the Rock Bottom FD.

.



.

[sheshe2]

2. ...

[wellst0nev0ter]

3. And suddenly all the AOC antis are quiet

Hmmm...

[Hassin Bin Sober]

4. They are like sand people. Easily startled but will soon be back - and in greater numbers.

[sheshe2]

5. And suddenly pro AOC's are silent.

Just you and Hassin.

[wellst0nev0ter]

6. Cool

Now what do you think of that literal hell hole?

[George II]

33. Bazinga!

[sheshe2]

34. ...

[ChrisF1961]

11. Just wait until they figure out

how to spin this as negativity as possible against a woman of color.

[sheshe2]

35. Who are these woman of color that you refer to.

Next question, who are the "THEY"

[ChrisF1961]

44. You answered both for me.

Thanks.

[sheshe2]

51. ...

[betsuni]

63. Why do you think no Democrats are women of color? That's the Democratic base.

"They" are Democrats.

[ChrisF1961]

64. Yes they are

[betsuni]

65. Ah, so "they": myth of Democrats being wealthy old conservatives.

Because all anyone who isn't pure thinks about is money. Clintons, Obamas, Bidens, all middle/working class.

[ChrisF1961]

69. Never said that

So please don’t pretend that I did.

[CrackityJones75]

26. I am sure Wellstone would love your divisive antics.

/sarcasm

[Cha]

28. Touche'!

[tonedevil]

29. So you speak for the dead? /nt

[wellst0nev0ter]

30. Here, enjoy

?t=7380

[BGBD]

31. Has she do e anything

To make passage of GND more likely since it was introduced?

[George II]

36. A resolution, "Recognizing the duty of the Federal Government to create a Green New Deal"...

...was introduced February 7, 2019. It was referred to several Committees and Subcommittees. Last action was February 12, 2019.

The same resolution was reintroduced April 20, 2021 (> 2 years later). It was referred to several Committees and Subcommittees. Last action April 21, 2021.

The "Green New Deal for Public Housing Act" was introduced on April 19, 2021. It too was referred to Committee. Last action April 19, 2021.

[BGBD]

60. That's not an answer

If you can't make deals then you can't pass legislation.

If she wants to pass it then she needed Joe Manchin to help, and she's not going to get that by tweeting pictures staring at the back of his head. It's the same issue that people have with Sanders. Plenty of talk, but in decades he hasn't done much in terms of passing bills that he wrote.

[George II]

67. Precisely. Being a legislator and member of congress means working with other members....

....to pass legislation, not perpetually criticizing them.

[wellst0nev0ter]

70. So if the planet goes on fire, blame AOC

makes sense

[BGBD]

72. Talk's cheap

Put together a bill that you know can't pass and then criticize people for not voting for it.

If it was important to someone I'd imagine they would actually be trying to get a law passed.

[wellst0nev0ter]

74. Talk against AOC is cheap

If you think you can do better than her on the environment, then prove it.

[George II]

39. What are "AOC antis"?

[betsuni]

7. Who are all the legislators going out on dinner dates with Exxon lobbyists?

I missed that story. Does anyone know? Is that just one, Sinema? Isn't the Green New Deal a proposal, not legislation? Barack Obama ran for president in 2008 with a Green New Deal.

[aocommunalpunch]

8. No, Coons and Manchin were named.

The video is pretty gross to listen to.

[betsuni]

9. Does it say they went out on dinner dates?

The story I heard was phone calls.

[ChrisF1961]

12. Here is the story

https://www.npr.org/2021/07/01/1012138741/exxon-lobbyist-caught-on-video-talks-about-undermining-bidens-climate-push

[betsuni]

13. Thank you, but I still don't see anything about dinner dates.

[ChrisF1961]

14. Don't think that was meant

to be taken literally. Lol

[betsuni]

16. Oh. okay. It's just that Justice Democrats are always accusing Democrats of corruption,

being bribed by lobbyists, "donor class," corporations, billionaires, Wall Street, Big Pharma, etc., without any proof. It would be nice if they named names and provided proof. Otherwise it's "some people say." All politicians "take" donor money. Lobbyists lobby for environmentalism, green energy, many progressive issues.

[NurseJackie]

17. But unsupported accusations and innuendo are so much easier, eh?

It would be nice if they named names and provided proof.

But unsupported accusations and innuendo are so much easier, eh?

And it's that just pathetic? Pathetic that it happens at all, and pathetic that so many believe it without question and without demanding proof or any supporting evidence. Cenk Uygur's "Justice Democrats" are toxic and divisive and funded by Republicans. They are no friends of the Democratic party our Democratic leadership. In fact everything they do only serves to weaken and divide the party... they foment resentment and suspicion... and all of this (of course) has the ultimate result splitting or suppressing the vote, which benefits, who? THE GOP, of course!! Little wonder that Republicans are interested in helping them.

[betsuni]

19. Guess it can't be helped if one's ideology is based on the firm belief that everyone's corrupt

except for you, even though you use money just like everyone else to pay for things and the average donation is pretty much the same. Just put "grassroots" in front of everything and demonize everyone else as corrupt. Then you can concentrate on attacking their character as immoral and not on policy, which is also pretty much the same.

[StarfishSaver]

37. Well said.

[ChrisF1961]

20. She didn't accuse any democrats

just said legislators so no need to get so triggered.

I'm more upset about the lobbyist admitting that he is trying to undermine legislation on climate change. Seems like that should be more of priority for outrage.

[betsuni]

21. One of my favorite Justice Democrats scripts: "Some of the wealthiest members of the political

establishment are hiding behind closed doors with their canapés -- plotting to defeat our political revolution."

CANAPES.

"Wall Street is now opening up their checkbook for Biden because we are a threat to them. ... The political, financial and media elite of this country will stop at nothing to defeat our political revolution." As they nervously munch elite canapés secretly behind closed doors. TRIGGERED!

[ChrisF1961]

22. Again AOC

did not accuse any democrats in her tweet.

And I’m far more upset about about a lobbyist trying to undermine President Biden’s climate agenda.

[ChubbyStar]

23. It is difficult I guess to stay on topic n/t

[betsuni]

27. AOC/The Squad are Justice Democrats-supported (PAC) politicians.

[George II]

38. Justice Democrats last year converted to a "Carey" Committee, a hybrid PAC/Super PAC....

Hybrid PACs (Carey Committees) — A Carey committee is a hybrid political action committee that is not affiliated with a candidate and has the ability to operate both as a traditional PAC, contributing funds to a candidate's committee, and as a super PAC, which makes independent expenditures. To do so, Carey committees must have a separate bank account for each purpose. The committee can collect unlimited contributions from almost any source for its independent expenditure account, but may not use those funds for its traditional PAC contributions.

https://www.opensecrets.org/527s/types.php

In the 2020 cycle they made independent expenditures of more than $550,000 AGAINST Democrats.

[betsuni]

50. Thanks. "Unlimited contributions from almost any source ... ."

Doesn't sound very grassroots.

[George II]

40. From the article:

Exxon Mobil Chairman and CEO Darren Woods said in a statement that McCoy's comments don't represent his company's views. "We condemn the statements and are deeply apologetic for them, including comments regarding interactions with elected officials," he said.

Exxon Mobil says it supports the goals in the Paris climate agreement and is committed to addressing climate change.

[ChrisF1961]

43. So?

Of they are disavowing his statements. He exposed their dirty little secrets.

[George II]

45. Once again:

Exxon Mobil Chairman and CEO Darren Woods said in a statement that McCoy's comments don't represent his company's views. "We condemn the statements and are deeply apologetic for them, including comments regarding interactions with elected officials," he said.

Exxon Mobil says it supports the goals in the Paris climate agreement and is committed to addressing climate change.

[ChrisF1961]

47. So?

Like I’m going to believe the CEO of ExxonMobile.

[George II]

48. Do you have a realistic reason not to believe him?

[ChrisF1961]

49. Yes

He’s the CEO of ExxonMobile or should I just believe him because he’s a rich white guy.

[George II]

52. I have no reason not to believe him, and I'm curious why his race has anything to do with it.

[ChrisF1961]

53. No reason?

https://blog.ucsusa.org/elliott-negin/exxonmobil-claims-shift-on-climate-continues-to-fund-climate-deniers/https://blog.ucsusa.org/elliott-negin/exxonmobil-claims-shift-on-climate-continues-to-fund-climate-deniers/https://blog.ucsusa.org/elliott-negin/exxonmobil-claims-shift-on-climate-continues-to-fund-climate-deniers/

https://climate-xchange.org/2020/09/24/exxonmobil-sued-for-decades-of-lies/

https://www.latimes.com/environment/story/2019-10-21/oil-companies-exxon-climate-change-denial-report

https://www.wired.com/story/ai-shows-exxonmobil-downplayed-role-climate-change/

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/exxon-knew-about-climate-change-almost-40-years-ago/

https://www.earthisland.org/journal/index.php/articles/entry/exxon-climate-fraud-case-oil-sands-new-york?gclid=EAIaIQobChMI1uj9iPDK8QIVM21vBB1f9gW4EAAYASAAEgIKKPD_BwE

https://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/energy-environment/259132-the-harm-exxonmobil-has-done

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/jul/08/exxon-climate-change-1981-climate-denier-funding

https://www.greenpeace.org/usa/ending-the-climate-crisis/exxon-and-the-oil-industry-knew-about-climate-change/exxons-climate-denial-history-a-timeline/

[George II]

55. Not a single one of those articles mentions Darren Woods, and the first one is "Page Not Found"....

So, "I have no reason not to believe him, and I'm curious why his race has anything to do with it."

[ChrisF1961]

58. He's the CEO of the company

He also an donor to the Republican Party. Of the $53k of political contributions he gave last year, $45k was to the NRSC.

https://www.campaignmoney.com/political/contributions/darren-woods.asp?cycle=20

He also gave to the ExxonMobile pac. And guess where their money went?

https://www.opensecrets.org/party-totals-section

So please don’t tell me to trust him. I’m not that stupid.

[wellst0nev0ter]

71. Here you are

https://blog.ucsusa.org/elliott-negin/exxonmobil-claims-shift-on-climate-continues-to-fund-climate-deniers

It's very easy to see how to get the correct link, champ.

[George II]

73. Yawn... Things don't change overnight, but do you have something that isn't 8-1/2 months old?

This is a NEW year, a NEW administration, a NEW way of dealing with things, "champ".

From the article:

After decades of public denial, ExxonMobil now acknowledges that “the risk of climate change is real” and says it is “committed to being part of the solution,” at least according to the company’s website and statements. To that end, the largest investor-owned oil company in the world claims it supports a federal carbon tax and the Paris climate agreement.

Now, with that said, my post was

"not a single one of those articles mentions Darren Woods." and "I have no reason not to believe him, and I'm curious why his race has anything to do with it."

So, what were you saying about "how to get the correct link", champ?

[wellst0nev0ter]

75. How does someone like you miss the article's headline

ExxonMobil Claims Shift on Climate But Continues to Fund Climate Science Deniers

Are you seriously *defending* Exxon? Holy christ...

And Woods has been at Exxon for 24 years, and CEO for the last five. You can drop the red herring, sport.

[George II]

76. If you follow the sequence of posts between someone else and I, the topic of discussion was....

....Darren Woods specifically, and the fact that he's a "he’s a rich white guy".

Go back to post #40.

Yes, it may come as a surprise to you but I'm very intelligent and well educated, I saw the headline. But that's not what was under discussion.

I see you're doing it again. Where did I EVER "defend" Exxon? Why do you insist on lying about me? This isn't the first time and it's highly offensive.

[wellst0nev0ter]

77. This is your direct quote

After decades of public denial, ExxonMobil now acknowledges that “the risk of climate change is real” and says it is “committed to being part of the solution,” at least according to the company’s website and statements. To that end, the largest investor-owned oil company in the world claims it supports a federal carbon tax and the Paris climate agreement.

It's almost like you want to put that company in a good light, for some odd reason.

Also, you can drop the red herring. It's old.

[George II]

78. That's NOT my "direct quote", it's a direct quote from an article posted by someone else....

...who was criticizing ExxonMobile and Darren Woods, here:

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100215586544#post12

Why are you misrepresenting and actually LYING about what I said. You know I didn't say that, you know that's not my "direct quote", so please retract that insultingly ludicrous accusation. NOW!

Start from the top and try again.

[wellst0nev0ter]

79. That's what you quoted

Not me

[George II]

80. You openly lied and said it was MY "direct quote". Now you're trying to wriggle out of it. Why not..

....just admit you misrepresented a post of mine?

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=15594910

77. This is your direct quote

After decades of public denial, ExxonMobil now acknowledges that “the risk of climate change is real” and says it is “committed to being part of the solution,” at least according to the company’s website and statements. To that end, the largest investor-owned oil company in the world claims it supports a federal carbon tax and the Paris climate agreement.

In fact, THIS is my post clearly saying it's a quote out of the article:

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=15592595

40. From the article:

Exxon Mobil Chairman and CEO Darren Woods said in a statement that McCoy's comments don't represent his company's views. "We condemn the statements and are deeply apologetic for them, including comments regarding interactions with elected officials," he said.

Exxon Mobil says it supports the goals in the Paris climate agreement and is committed to addressing climate change.

You do this all the time. Why?

[wellst0nev0ter]

84. So you're angry

That I pointed out that you quoted what amounts to a cover-your-ass press release that you accepted at face value?

[George II]

85. Not angry at all. Just amazed how you can unabashedly and repeatedly do the same thing to me....

....and others, turning around what we say or even blatantly misrepresenting it just to make an ill-advised and incorrect point.

It's actually quite entertaining.

Carry on, carry on.

[wellst0nev0ter]

86. Just as long as we're clear

That you're taking Exxon's statement completely at face value, despite their horrible track record.

[George II]

87. Just as long as YOU are clear, or think you are. Not "we". BTW, I've never misrepresented anything..

...that was said, by the CEO or you. You've done so about both.

C'est la vie.

[wellst0nev0ter]

90. I noticed you didn't deny it

[George II]

91. What's to deny?

[George II]

46. It's right there in the tweet, "dinner dates"! But no names. Sort of like "it has been reported"....

....or "sources say".

[betsuni]

62. I thought I saw something about Sinema dating someone with a job, maybe a lobbyist.

I think that's what it's about. They might have eaten canapés together, which would be totally elitist. Not like lobster sliders.

[George II]

66. So now they're scrutinizing who people date. I guess I'm "beholden" to the healthcare industry....

I married a nurse. I should resign from DU and delete my account.

[sheshe2]

92. I guess I should resign as well.

My family is embedded with the healthcare industry. My grandfather was a doctor, grandmother a nurse, mother, sister and niece all nurses.

[George II]

93. Corporatist Establishment Democrat!!! Turn in your "commie card", dammit!

[sheshe2]

94. I know.

*sigh*

[George II]

95. Bazinga! By the way, I left out "DNC shill"!

[sheshe2]

97. Lol!

Thanks.

[JustAnotherGen]

88. Pictures

Or it didn't happen

[pwb]

10. A fire in water? Now I know

opposite world is here.

[NurseJackie]

15. The Gulf of Mexico is not "literally on fire". There's a fire. It's in the Gulf of Mexico.

This type of hyperbole serves no good purpose. It just opens things up for ridicule and it make it more difficult to get valuable information out to the public (without providing fertile grounds for others to plant seeds of doubt and false information.)

[George II]

41. And the fire was quickly extinguished. We had a house about 3 miles from us that caught fire.....

...and burned out last week. I guess that's ExxonMobil's fault too.

[RANDYWILDMAN]

25. She is right

and they will come back and say how bad she is
How liberal she is
How much she cares about people
How much she care about the earth

When did these thing become so bad ?

[George II]

42. "They"?

[Lancero]

32. Now even the ocean is catching fire, and still people think that's just fine and dandy.

When our world rightly burns, may something better rise from the ashes.

[Blue_true]

54. An oil film on the surface caught fire. Also, the internal of a pipe can catch fire

if the fuel to oxygen ratio is right.

A large body of water doesn’t catch fire. Using that type of over hyped language only damages our argument against continued blind use of fossil fuels.

[Lancero]

56. Like I said - All fine and dandy.

Maybe, just maybe, we shouldn't be spilling oil all over the ocean.

[Blue_true]

57. Whatever. nt

[George II]

68. Accidents happen. A 13-story building in Florida collapsed about a week ago, maybe, just maybe....

....we shouldn't be living in buildings all over place. There was a 3-car accident near here over the weekend, maybe, just maybe, we should be driving all over. I got an upset stomach from something I ate a few weeks ago, maybe, just maybe, I shouldn't be eating.

[betsuni]

59. +1

[W_HAMILTON]

61. Isn't that fire from a state-owned Mexican pipeline?

[FSogol]

82. +1 This. n/t

[betsuni]

83. +1

[BeckyDem]

89. +1

[sheshe2]

96. No win.

The Gulf of Mexico is literally on fire because a pipeline ruptured.

No it was not 'literally' on fire. There was a fire, it was put out.

Who is Brian Kahn?

[George II]

98. The Gulf of Mexico wasn't on fire, the limited amount of oil that leaked was on fire....

And that was good, better for the oil that leaked to burn off before it contaminated any plant life or animal life.

I wonder how many who are complaining will be driving to work tomorrow morning.