Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Dem Rising Star Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Calls for 70 Percent Top Tax Rate

Dem Rising Star Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Calls for 70 Percent Top Tax Rate

“Compares Herself to Lincoln, FDR”

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has been a member of Congress for exactly two days, but for some reason, we’re already seeing her on TV talking about tax and energy policies. Also consider that what she’s proposing would make Bernie Sanders blush.

Paul Crookston writes at the Washington Free Beacon:

Ocasio-Cortez Compares Herself to Lincoln, FDR as She Calls for 70 Percent Top Tax Rate

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D., N.Y.) said in an interview Friday that her “radical” environmental plans could be accomplished if tax rates at the “tippy tops” were set at 70 percent.

The “60 Minutes” clip, which aired on CBS Friday morning, shows Cortez being questioned about her “Green New Deal” by Anderson Cooper. When Cooper got her to admit the goal of zero emissions within 12 years is “ambitious,” he inquired further about the taxation necessary.

“What is the problem with trying to push our technological capacities to the furthest extent possible?” Ocasio-Cortez asked. “People are going to have to start paying their fair share in taxes.”

Cooper asked for a specific on the tax rate, and Ocasio-Cortez said she was looking to the 1960’s for inspiration.

You look at our tax rates back in the ’60’s, and when you have a progressive tax rate system, your tax rate, let’s say from $0-$75,000 may be 10 percent or 15 percent, et cetera, but once you get to like the tippy tops, on your 10 millionth dollar, sometimes you see tax rates as high as 60 or 70 percent. That doesn’t mean all $10 million are taxed at an extremely high rate, but it means that as you climb up this ladder you should be contributing more.

She also compared herself to Lincoln and FDR:

“I think that it only has ever been radicals that have changed this country,” she said. “Abraham Lincoln made the radical decision to sign the Emancipation Proclamation. Franklin Delano Roosevelt made the radical decision to embark on establishing programs like Social Security. That is radical.”

Here’s the video:

If you look for an in-depth analysis of what Cortez is talking about here, you won’t find it. The media is too busy pushing a narrative about conservatives being obsessed with a video of her dancing, despite a lack of evidence.

Ace of Spades writes:

Dear Enemy-of-the-People Media, Which Conservatives, Exactly, “Shamed” Alexandria Ocasio Cortez Over Her Dance Video? Can You Name Them? Or Will You Just Continue to Assert There Were Such Conservatives Without Providing Actual Evidence of Them?

It should also be noted that many people say this video was actually publicized during her congressional campaign, and caused no ripples then.

So why is this being “broken” now?

In any event, no named “conservatives” apart from “QAnon1776,” who I hear is close personal friends with “GunTotingCommieHunter69” as well as “MakeBitchesMakeSammitches4Ever” as well as “MAGAInsertRacialSlurHereKiller,” commented on the video, apart from the usual Twitter Cucks spending all night and morning Virtue Signalling that they did not see why anyone would think this was embarrassing.

They like saying obvious things that liberals agree with. Or rather, they like being seen by their liberal friends saying obvious things that liberals agree with.

This proves that they are not Deplorable like those other, you know, Deplorables.

In other words: You.

It’s no wonder why the media wants to talk about dance videos, even if the supposed controversy is false. As long as they’re talking about that, they don’t have to ask questions about her insane views on policy.

Last word goes to Ben Shapiro:

Featured image via YouTube.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


I bet the disarray of her checkbook makes reconciling very difficult.
It’s hard to figure why she’s getting so much press time. Is it to prove how radical the left can be?

She is establishing an anchor. Any other leftist will appear to be “reasonable” by comparison. With the left, look at the process not the content. They have been working this slow revolution since I was young — 1960’s (or earlier). She is a useful idiot. The press is just doing their part.

The content of her words is a distraction. Substance is a shiny object to a conservative because conservatives think. Process is worshiped by leftists because it works albeit slowly. Think Alinsky.

She is just part of a bigger plan.

If you think of modern journalism as an extension of entertainment, you’ll realize she will never be asked a serious question. For example, maybe she could explain how Venezuela is getting Socialism wrong. Don’t dismiss her as just dumb. She knows how to use social media and modern entertainment journalists will be more than happy to help out.

    PODKen in reply to technerd. | January 5, 2019 at 7:04 pm

    Despite the objectives of socialism … and as proven by all that have tried it … the results of it are always the same. Seems to me that Venezuela has hit the nail on the head.

    MajorWood in reply to technerd. | January 5, 2019 at 8:03 pm

    It was interesting that Trevor Noah on the Daily Show hit her with 5 hardball questions before the election. Of course, the election was already over at that point, but it did let her know that stuff could get really ugly if she doesn’t play ball. Because she is an entity of no internal substance, her existence is pretty much at the whim of those above her. The question remains, though, will that ever dawn on her. At least she took up someone’s suggestion to wear glasses to make her look smarter, though to my untrained eye they appear to be 0.0 diopter, just saying. Perhaps they are there to keep out the bugs attracted by her open mouth.

    murkyv in reply to technerd. | January 5, 2019 at 11:28 pm

    Kinda funny though, that the person interviewing her meets that $10 million a year threshold and still didn’t follow up

“[B]ut it means that as you climb up this ladder, you should be contributing more.”

Where did the “should be” come from? There’s no natural law demanding that. Marx came up with that mumbo-jumbo (his 1848 Communist manifesto) as a means/justification for theft. And taxation by another term is simply legalized theft. “Should bes are declarations of morality, not of choice.

So I’m gonna throw back in the faces of the lefties what they dish up to us, DON’T IMPOSE YOUR MORALITY ON ME.

    Exiliado in reply to fscarn. | January 5, 2019 at 11:38 am

    Math is so stubborn, and that’s why Leftards hate it.
    With a flat rate tax, those “at the tippy tops” would still contribute more, a lot more.
    But again, “Maths is so stubborn”.

      JusticeDelivered in reply to Exiliado. | January 5, 2019 at 12:18 pm

      I think that she picked 70 because that is her IQ, she is one really dumb broad, coupled with a big ego.

I wish she’d get polio …. like FDR.

Yeah, they have a “funny” way to understand the word “fair”.

If money is the mothers milk of politics, name recognition is the golden ticket.

The word is out. Bernie won’t live forever. Worse, he’s old and white.

Barack’s 15 minutes have played out. A new icon must be groomed for a new generation; more woke; more progressive; more attractive, and look – she cooks and dances!

In other words, same marxist horsecrap; different pretty face – because every generation falls into the same trap: they think history began when they were born.

This junior congresswoman from Queens has name recognition in spades. Media saturation complete. Da crazy eyes! Even her acronym is a media sensation, as is the ignorant blather burped out of her mouth.

And she embodies bias confirmation for every indoctrination lesson an entire generation under 30 learned in government school. Icon status unlocked.

I’ve said it all over the innerwebs – stop giving this woman free publicity.

The gaffes, da crazy eyes, the stupid, the memes…. it’s all a schtick. A character. A ploy.

And it’s working. Alxxxxxxia Oxxxio-Cxxxxz. Every one is talking about her and her marxist talking points.

She probably never had a real job before.
Wait until she finds out she is now in that high tax bracket but has to live in her DC office because she can’ afford rent in that town.
Another term or two and she’ll somehow be rich off of political payoffs, excuse me, “book deals”.

    Ghost Rider in reply to NGAREADER. | January 5, 2019 at 8:11 pm

    Sandy Ocasio got her real world experience as a bartender after growing up in privilege in one of the richer suburbs. That certainly qualifies her to tell the rest of us just how much of our income and assets we should give to government for whatever boondoggles they can dream up to enrich Dem party donors.

Ocasio-Cortez has the strength of purpose and opinion sufficient to destroy the lives of millions.

Lincoln freed the slaves. FDR introduced public smoothing functions, not a progressive extraction of retained earnings.

    starride in reply to n.n. | January 5, 2019 at 1:49 pm

    Lincoln didn’t care on bit about slavery, he only freed them to break the economic model of the south

Stop giving the crazy press
She’s only a star if you do that
She is nuts, mentally ill bartender

She’s like tiny Tim

I don’t understand the fascination

With so much time given to her by an eager press she’s destined to flame out early. Clearly she has a goal to charm but that only goes so far. With her major in foreign relations and a minor in econ, her bartending skills Boston should be proud. /s

So f’n stoopid. My dog knows more about how things work than she does. Yet her star continues to rise and we continue to have to put up with her.

Next up: she decides she can run for president in 2020. Because she’ll have as much national legislative and real-life experience as Obama did when he ran.

Her new name: Occasional Cortex

“Dear Enemy-of-the-People Media, Which Conservatives, Exactly, “Shamed” Alexandria Ocasio Cortez Over Her Dance Video? Can You Name Them? Or Will You Just Continue to Assert There Were Such Conservatives Without Providing Actual Evidence of Them?”

Thanks guys for calling the Leftist media out on this. It’s one of my pet peeves.

The Economist this week says that Trump has only been lucky these last 2 years and “House Democrats might unearth documents suggesting that the Trump Organisation was used to launder Russian money.”

Nobody has ever tried to implicate Trump with Russian money laundering but when a “respected” news source makes the insinuation, other news sources are going to quote them until it becomes accepted “fact” that Trump was laundering money for the Russians.

When the non-Leftist media questions the “facts” like here, they are shot down and labeled racists or some other -ists.

    JusticeDelivered in reply to DanJ1. | January 5, 2019 at 6:48 pm

    This is probably a result of RINO’s influence on the publication, the swamp trying once again to regain full control.

Clueless people pontificating on tax policy. In the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 crazy tax rates weren’t as ruinous because many more things were tax deductible including interest on personal loans and passive losses. The Internal Revenue Code of 1986, which forms the basis of our tax system today, did away with those deductions, greatly expanded AMT, and eliminated things like income averaging in return for much lower tax rates. That’s both before her time and a Reagan initiative, so apparently it doesn’t count.

Occasional Cortex is neither stupid or dumb…after all she got voted in to congress.

Whether we like it or not she is an asset to the Democrat party. A very photogenic asset with some lovely assets of her own.

So we should take her pronouncements seriously regardless of how out there they may sound. What people SHOULD be challenging her on is the details of her proposals OR challenging her to create the relevant legislation so she is forced to put her money where her mouth is.

So she wants 70% tax…cool…let’s get the legislation in front of congress so the people can actually see more than her empty words.

That really is the only way to force this woman back in to the privileged entitled wealthy liberal swamp she came from. Force her to expose how utterly clueless she really is for anything that remotely touches on reality. Once she has failed enough times she will whither and melt away as the empty suite we all know she is regardless of the free propaganda she will get from the democrat media (bit on repeat myself).

This woman is profoundly deranged, but neatly packed by the left.

We suffered the scam of one obama, we know better than to fall for another one.

Nonetheless, this girl (that’s all she is) is a warped believer, bent on turning this country into a leftist hell hole, while she free-loads protected, in the elite class, next door to pelosi’s wall-in castle.

She’s as ugly as Rashida Tlaib, but fortunate to have better physical genetics.

    JusticeDelivered in reply to | January 5, 2019 at 9:15 pm

    As a young man I might have taken her of a spin, but once I started thinking in terms of a mate, I always considered group’s average IQ, because I believe in doing well by my children. While any group of people can produce exceptional individuals, marrying one from a dull witted group is accepting their groups average IQ for one’s offspring.

    It is quite clear that Alexandria Ocasio Cortez coming from a group whose average IQ is 83, is a really bad deal for one’s children.

A complete puff piece on her from CNN appeared on my phone today. According to the idiot author, the meaner we are to her, the stronger she will become. I’m willing to take that risk.

She learned from our own dead communist. Don’t underestimate her appeal to the idiots.

lexandria Ocasio-Cortez
‏Verified account @AOC

About 10 years ago I worked in Ted Kennedy’s foreign affairs/immigration constituent office.

I REGULARLY fielded calls from panicked mothers who came home to missing family members.

ICE was created in 2003 along w/ the Patriot Act. It was a weapon waiting for a tyrant.

12:12 PM – 26 May 2018

You’ll have to add the https:// to the front of the above to see aoc’s response to the fake outrage (and probable false flag by her own team) about her “dance” video. She does another, shorter version of a dance and rips the repubs.
And I’ll bet her generation is loving it.

Still doesn’t show when I try to add the entire link for unknown to me reasons.

The inside of Alexandra Cortez is as ugly as the outside of Rashida Tlaib.

The inside of Rashiba Tlaib is…well here’s a good comparison:

Oh for the LOVE OF …..

PEOPLE! Stop calling Rep. Ocasio-Cortez a “radical.” She is absolutely nothing of the sort, and it’s making her some mythical creature that she is not.

The proper response to Rep. Occasio-Cortez is as follows (in as derisive and demeaning tone as possible):

There she goes again. Rep. Ocasio-Cortez isn’t a ‘radical.’ She’s a tired, plain-Jane Tax-and-Spend Liberal. We’ve seen her calls for 70% marginal tax rates on the rich before from Tax-and-Spend Liberals. Guess from who: Jimmy Carter. In the 70s. Now maybe YOU want to go back to gas lines, 20% inflation, and wearing a sweater to keep warm rather than turning on my furnace. I do not.