AOC makes Zuckerberg look like the total dipshit you think he is...

[tenderfoot]

Link to tweet

[C_U_L8R]

1. Zuckerberg feels no obligation to society.

He could help lift us all higher but his misguided philosophy only drags everyone down into the mud. He’s even doing his own brand a tremendous disservice. Wise up, Mark.

[emmaverybo]

32. SF General became Zuckerberger hospital. He also bought a bunch of houses in the hilly part

of Noe Valley.Paid the owners who get to live in their houses for life.Lots of other philanthropy he
and wife, a pediatrician, do.

[C_U_L8R]

38. And yet his Kauai neighbors despise him.

[emmaverybo]

43. Ok. I have to get up to speed. He is probably a more complicated person than I realize and so

are the issues that drive the ill-will against him.

[C_U_L8R]

44. Simply, good acts don't necessarily erase the bad ones.

That's wonderful that Zuck is donating to good causes. Meanwhile he still needs to take responsibility for the character of the community he's built.

[cab67]

67. there's lots of complication.

Richard Nixon gave us the Endangered Species Act. He and his wife were major supporters of the American Heart Association.

Ken Cuccinelli once acted very quickly to free a wrongly-convicted man at a time when most prosecutors were still reluctant to admit errors. And he hired the exoneree to work in his office.

Donald Rumsfeld actually has a decent sense of humor.

That doesn't mean I'd want to have them as dinner guests.

[sharedvalues]

66. Yes Zuckerberg makes small donations while advocating for lower taxes.

THE DONATIONS ARE PR.
They cover up his campaign for lower taxes.

Our government should be getting billions from him. Which we’d spend on healthcare.
Instead he donates a fraction of that. And much of his donations go to vanity projects.

[ChubbyStar]

2. He sucks

AOC just exposed then buried his bullshit.

[blm]

3. She and Porter did their jobs. Proud of these Dems.

[bdamomma]

28. Both

Congresswomen take their jobs seriously, and take no shit.

[blm]

31. And it shows.

They embody the democratic process.

[Blaukraut]

4. He is proof positive that companies like Facebook need to be broken up n/t

[bdamomma]

30. True,

those of who use Facebook could move somewhere else to keep in touch with our families. Since the Russians are going to use the same tactics they used in 2016.

[UpInArms]

5. I love her clarity

And ability to show this pos what an a-hole he is to the world

[spooky3]

29. Her staff deserve credit too, for researching these questions nt

[klook]

6. "But all my friends are on Facebook!"

"Without Facebook, I'd have no idea what my kids and grandchildren are doing!"

"How am I going to reach potential customers without Facebook?"

These are just a few of the reasons people maintain an active Facebook presence. So glad I never got sucked in.

[VarryOn]

27. Ive made it over a year without FB with no problem...

Anyone still on it isnt paying attention. I cant believe I was a fool for so long.

[Garrett78]

54. I've gone my whole life without Facebook. I've survived.

[VarryOn]

55. You're a wiser man than me! I shudder...

To think of the data they have from me.

[Garrett78]

57. No, I just wasn't interested in using FB. I'm sure there's plenty of my data out there just the same

[VarryOn]

63. Laws need to be passed...

Where it's illegal for companies to keep a person's data beyond a short amount of time without their permission. I read stories all the time where tweets from 3, 5, or 8 year-old tweets resurface or where telecoms still have call data from years ago. I should be able to tell AT&T, Amazon, or Gmail to delete my data after X months or years.

I'm totally willing to forego evidence in criminal cases by forcing the destruction of data. My employer has a four-month data retention policy. Unless I take an affirmative action to save an email, it disappears at four months (yes, I understand it probably lingers somewhere). But, I wish all my calls, web activity, Amazon purchases and etc would do the same permanently if I so chose.

[DURHAM D]

7. What is wrong with Sheryl Sandberg?

She is still COO of Facebook.

She was featured on Finding Your Roots a few months back. Her DNA indicated she is 100% Ashkenazi Jew from Russia.

I know she makes like $12 Million or more a year but how does she live with herself?

[ChubbyStar]

8. $12 million

Easy for her I'm sure.

[Grins]

21. That's not how you spell "Billion", almost 2 of them NM

[Blue_true]

17. Even beyond her salary, she was already very rich.

Her late husband was some whiz-kid finance guy who had made lots of money. Before she came to Facebook, she herself was already rich, without her husband's money. To make things even worse, she was once prominent in having many Democratic Party friends.

[DURHAM D]

9. How many times did he say "Congresswoman"? nt

[ChubbyStar]

12. Every time he opened his FB hole

[brush]

20. Apparenly he was coached to address the reps that way to show respect.

The problem is he still comes off like an who wants no part in editing the content he publishes on his site.

He's a publisher. Publishers employ editors to edit/police content that appears on their site/newspaper/magazine/book/TV channel. It's not rocket science.

He just doesn't want to reduce his profit margin, which is humongous, by paying professional editors. For all he cares 2016 can happen all over again, just don't mess with the cash flow.

[kcr]

10. Well done

[NCLefty]

11. Mark Zuckerberg cares more about saving his fucking company than saving our elections.

[DURHAM D]

15. He is completely void of empathy.

Therefore, the only measurement he knows is money.

[emmaverybo]

22. What? He saved General Hospital in SF so it can serve the poor. He and his wife are both

philanthropists. Sure, he is very misguided on the ad propaganda issue. He is plain wrong. But
he is not a Trump.

[DURHAM D]

23. His wife, not him, is making those decisions.

Where did I say he is "a Trump"?

[emmaverybo]

34. And she would marry a man lacking in empathy? They are both making the decisions and he made

the money which he has used to better people’s lives.

[Red Mountain]

52. They hired a consultant

Gave them a budget and Voila! Good vibes at a minimal cost.

Spending money like this is an investment for them. There's no heart involved.

They seriously don't give a damn about anything other than the positive PR.

If they did they'd be doing a whole hell of a lot more.

[irisblue]

53. Zuck +FB +Genocide in Myanmar+Bloody Hands

Source-https://www.lawfareblog.com/facebooks-role-genocide-myanmar-new-reporting-complicates-narrative

More at article

Snip-"Members of the Myanmar military have systematically used Facebook as a tool in the government’s campaign of ethnic cleansing against Myanmar’s Rohingya Muslim minority, according to an incredible piece of reporting by the New York Times on Oct. 15. The Times writes that the military harnessed Facebook over a period of years to disseminate hate propaganda, false news and inflammatory posts. The story adds to the horrors known about the ongoing violence in Myanmar, but it also should complicate the ongoing debate about Facebook’s role and responsibility for spreading hate and exacerbating conflict in Myanmar and other developing countries."


So he is careful to donate $$$$$ in the US. He is still a bad human.


There are many articles online about FB + murders

[tenderfoot]

37. Philanthrop as a cover for abhorrent behavior...

Fuck that shit. BTW, didn't the hospital ask to remove his name?

[emmaverybo]

42. Peskin, an SF supervisor, tried and nurses taped over his name. So far, still bears his name. But

you are right. Question of possible anti-Semitic behavior in FB vs, Soros.

[Kurt V.]

56. this person is an absolute monster and a real threat to the planet. Philanthropy and charity

does not solve root problems but only provide pr and a band aid.

[bdamomma]

33. oh yes,

someone leaned on him.

[Hekate]

13. Zuck will only respond to laws. New, rigorous, laws.

[TidalWave46]

14. I just don't think it should be their job...

To be arbiters of the truth. I get that’s not popular here. I do think they have responsibility to not let their platform be used by nefarious agents from outside of the country or illegal activity, domestic or foreign.

[DURHAM D]

16. Truth is not the issue. Facts are the issue. nt

[TidalWave46]

18. I don't think they should be determining fact.

There you go.

[DURHAM D]

19. Fact are facts.

No "determining" is involved.


Done

[TidalWave46]

24. A bit of irony there.

What you just stated is not a factual statement.

[lostnfound]

69. yet FB algorithms are equipping people with extraordinary ability to destroy others

The ability to amplify voices across the world or to silence them is not a subset of free speech, it’s a subset of publishing or freedom of the press.
In some ways, there’s a parallel to 2nd amendment arguments. Founding fathers never anticipated AR15s.

[brush]

25. He's a publisher. Publishers should hire editors to edit/police what appears in...

their publication. Newspapers, magazine publishers, TV channels and book publishers do it because they consider it their responsibility to fact check and publish the truth.

Perhaps since he didn't go to J-school he doesn't have that ingrained in him like J-school graduates do, or perhaps he doesn't to diminish his humongous profit margin by hiring editors to edit/police what goes on his platform.

[TidalWave46]

26. One of the ads in question was played across many "publishers."

I don’t see it as their job, to an extent.

[brush]

35. You've obviously never worked in a publishing field. It's a responsiblity taken...

seriously by those who do. Occasionally errors slip by editors but corrections/retractions are soon made. If your publication gets a reputation for publishing lies and non-truths, your reputation suffers (see D. trump, the liar in the WH. Also see how the NYT corrected their error for publishing that Hillary Clinton said Russia was grooming Gabbard for a third party run. Their retraction corrected that by publishing that she actually said that the GOP was grooming Gabbard).

It's publishing 101.

[X_Digger]

49. No more than DU should be in the same business.

It's not a government-run website, any more than DU is.

Therefore they can do pretty much whatever they please.

[tenderfoot]

68. I urge all Dems to post content stating Republican candidates support the New Green Deal and other..

progressive causes and watch that tidal wave 46 go flat.

[Aviation Pro]

36. Damn, Jesse Eisenberg's new hairstyle is weird.

Did he use a bowl?

[zentrum]

39. AOC 2028!

[Traildogbob]

40. Damn Fuckerbug

Worth billions and that's the best you can do with your hair style? Go see the stylist for the weasel Bengazi Chairman, Trey "Gawdy", at least she had some imagination.

[trof]

41. 1. She is BRILLIANT! 2. He is SUCH a weasel.

I had no idea what a fucking jerk this multibillionaire is.
He NEEDS a reality check and a comeuppance.

[dustyscamp]

45. The Magats on social media call her dumb and crazy

If they took the time to actually listen to her they'd find that she is a very smart and professional congresswoman

[X_Digger]

46. Facebook is under no obligation to do shit.

It's a website, just like DU.

[dalton99a]

47. Zuckerberg styles his hair like a Roman emperor's. Coincidence?

https://www.businessinsider.com/mark-zuckerberg-fascinated-by-augustus-future-of-facebook-2018-9
Mark Zuckerberg has been fascinated by Augustus Caesar for years, and it raises some questions about the future of Facebook
Áine Cain
Sep 14, 2018, 11:57 AM

[paleotn]

48. Can you say ..."not ready for prime time"?

Proof positive that money doesn't always go to the sharpest, most well rounded, informed knives in the drawer. Dear God, son. You can afford the most expensive and lavish prep humanly possible for this little trip to Congress and you get run over like a three legged opossum on a five day bender. And your company wants to float some jackass "currency"? Ummm, no.

[Kurt V.]

50. two things: she is really is good at thi and super rich ppl aren't nearly as smart as most ppl think

[DFW]

58. Not as stupid, either

He just had a direct grilling by a very smart member of the House, who used the classic prosecutor's tactic (ask questions to which you already know the answers), and the whole time managed to yak away while saying absolutely nothing. He is nowhere as stupid as we wished he were.

[Kurt V.]

59. so basic yak is smart. backed by an army of advisers in law and image he still has to present

himself. of which he did pretty bad. you and i are literally smarter than he is but have morals.

[DFW]

60. Being under that kind scrutiny, bring grilled and getting away with saying nothing requires skill

He is no idiot, just an immoral bright guy. That wasn't basic yak. Lenny Bruce called it "spritzing," only in Legalese. Zuckerberg knew exactly what he was doing. AOC knew he was doing it, too, and did her best to show him up.

[Kurt V.]

65. my points still stand. super rich ppl are given latitude for being exceptionally

smart and that's not true.

[wendyb-NC]

51. AOC is brilliant!

[Tom Yossarian Joad]

61. I saw that!

She nailed him.

[StarfishSaver]

62. Kudos to her for the great staff work

Nicely done!

[BlancheSplanchnik]

64. ❤️👏🏾😄