|
Affiliation | Republican |
|
<- |
2022-07-01 |
|
|
Name | Marjorie Taylor Greene |
Address | 16083 Old Henderson Road Milton, Georgia 30004, United States |
Email | None |
Website | None |
X (Twitter) | repmtg |
Born |
May 27, 1974
(50 years)
|
Contributor | RP |
Last Modifed | NCdem Sep 16, 2024 08:02am |
Tags |
Caucasian - Divorced - Censured - Christian - Straight -
|
Info |
Marjorie Greene has a lifetime of business experience, having grown up working in her family’s company. In 2002 Marjorie purchased Taylor Commercial, a commercial construction and renovation company. The company has since managed a quarter of a billion dollars of construction projects.
Marjorie successfully started, grew, and sold a thriving CrossFit gym here in Georgia which has become one of the top CrossFit gyms in the country. Marjorie has a unique perspective on how to succeed from the ground up, through true hard work and financial responsibility.
Marjorie graduated from the University of Georgia and received her Bachelor’s degree in Business Administration. Marjorie has been actively involved in her community, in her children’s schools, and been active on a national level as National Director of Family America Project.
Marjorie has a strong Christian faith and believes we must continue to protect our great freedoms and work to keep America a great country for our generations to come.
Marjorie has three children, Lauren, Taylor and Derek. Marjorie believes the best part of her life is being a mother and spending time with her family.
|
| BOOKS |
|
|
Title |
Purchase |
Contributor |
|
Start Date |
End Date |
Type |
Title |
Contributor |
DISCUSSION |
[View All 68 Previous Messages] |
|
Huh. The voice of reason
https://x.com/mtgreenee/status/1834006729966723558
THIS is where she draws the line??? I guess I'm more surprised there's a line at all.
BrentinCO: Huh. The voice of reason
THIS is where she draws the line??? I guess I'm more surprised there's a line at all.
|
|
|
Looking forward to when Greene gets a primary challenge to her right after this woke shift.
Looking forward to when Greene gets a primary challenge to her right after this woke shift.
|
|
|
Remember when MTG wasn't even remotely considered the voice of reason?
Pepperidge Farm Remembers.
Remember when MTG wasn't even remotely considered the voice of reason?
Pepperidge Farm Remembers.
|
|
|
Joker:9757 | BrentinCO ( 7748.4790 points)
|
Thu, September 12, 2024 05:59:02 PM UTC0:00
|
Apparently Loomer is launching into MTG on Twitter now. Here's just one, but her timeline has been fixated with MTG over the last day or so.
https://x.com/LauraLoomer/status/1834268985379926406
Apparently Loomer is launching into MTG on Twitter now. Here's just one, but her timeline has been fixated with MTG over the last day or so.
|
|
|
D:1 | RP ( 5508.0200 points)
|
Sun, September 15, 2024 04:37:05 PM UTC0:00
|
https://x.com/mtgreenee/status/1835289676959064119
|
|
|
I:6738 | IndyGeorgia ( 4113.6006 points)
x3
|
Sun, September 15, 2024 06:17:09 PM UTC0:00
|
What question at the debate was out of left field such that you needed advance notice? It's not like David Muir asked about the price of turnips or the conflict in Sudan.
Conspiracies are getting dumber and dumber.
What question at the debate was out of left field such that you needed advance notice? It's not like David Muir asked about the price of turnips or the conflict in Sudan.
Conspiracies are getting dumber and dumber.
|
|
|
A-R:9399 | Juan Croniqueur ( -34.0791 points)
|
Sun, September 15, 2024 11:38:15 PM UTC0:00
|
They should have asked about the conflict in Molvania just to see how Trump responded.
They should have asked about the conflict in Molvania just to see how Trump responded.
|
|
|
I:9951 | E Pluribus Unum ( -405.4800 points)
|
Sat, October 5, 2024 04:57:24 AM UTC0:00
|
Just as a reminder for those who don't know, "They" refers to Jews.....
https://twitter.com/mtgreenee/status/1842039774359462324
This is not only the first time she has blamed national disasters on Jews https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/marjorie-taylor-greene-qanon-wildfires-space-laser-rothschild-execute.html
But this is also not the first time people have called out "Jewish Weather Machines"
https://www.vox.com/identities/2018/3/19/17139516/dc-lawmaker-anti-semitism-conspiracy-theory-trayon-white
Just as a reminder for those who don't know, "They" refers to Jews.....
This is not only the first time she has blamed national disasters on Jews [Link]
But this is also not the first time people have called out "Jewish Weather Machines"
[Link]
|
|
|
Just as a reminder for those who don't know, "They" refers to Jews.....
https://twitter.com/mtgreenee/status/1842039774359462324
This is not only the first time she has blamed national disasters on Jews https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/marjorie-taylor-greene-qanon-wildfires-space-laser-rothschild-execute.html
But this is also not the first time people have called out "Jewish Weather Machines"
https://www.vox.com/identities/2018/3/19/17139516/dc-lawmaker-anti-semitism-conspiracy-theory-trayon-white
It's insane that Jews controlling the weather to cause disasters is more plausible than climate change to these nutjobs.
E Pluribus Unum: Just as a reminder for those who don't know, "They" refers to Jews.....
This is not only the first time she has blamed national disasters on Jews [Link]
But this is also not the first time people have called out "Jewish Weather Machines"
[Link]
It's insane that Jews controlling the weather to cause disasters is more plausible than climate change to these nutjobs.
|
|
|
She's as bad as the Squad in Congress.
She's as bad as the Squad in Congress.
|
|
|
A-R:9399 | Juan Croniqueur ( -34.0791 points)
|
Sun, October 6, 2024 01:47:48 AM UTC0:00
|
We really need a "bait" react, don't we?
We really need a "bait" react, don't we?
|
|
|
D:6454 | Mr. Matt ( 1766.5430 points)
|
Sun, October 6, 2024 03:50:02 AM UTC0:00
|
image://i.imgur.com/bxLa3.gif - master
- master
|
|
|
D:1 | RP ( 5508.0200 points)
|
Sun, October 6, 2024 06:02:42 PM UTC0:00
|
JD Vance praises Marjorie Taylor Greene hours after she suggested Hurricane Helene was man-made - https://www.the-independent.com/news/world/americas/us-politics/jd-vance-marjorie-taylor-greene-hurricane-helene-b2624210.html
JD Vance praises Marjorie Taylor Greene hours after she suggested Hurricane Helene was man-made - [Link]
|
|
|
I:11727 | LSjustbloggin ( 0.0000 points)
x3
|
Sun, October 6, 2024 07:41:27 PM UTC0:00
|
There are few politicians who openly crusade against the globalists, she's one of them.
There are few politicians who openly crusade against the globalists, she's one of them.
|
|
|
I:9951 | E Pluribus Unum ( -405.4800 points)
|
Sun, October 6, 2024 08:03:24 PM UTC0:00
|
She's as bad as the Squad in Congress.
Literally you yesterday.
That statement is also either 100% Wrong or completely Antisemetic.
If you cared about Economic Globalization and wanting to stop it, you would be an Anti-Capitalist
LSjustbloggin: She's as bad as the Squad in Congress.
Literally you yesterday.
That statement is also either 100% Wrong or completely Antisemetic.
If you cared about Economic Globalization and wanting to stop it, you would be an Anti-Capitalist
|
|
|
D:1 | RP ( 5508.0200 points)
|
Mon, October 7, 2024 02:22:50 PM UTC0:00
|
Globalization and Capitalism don't necessarily have to go together. You can also have globalist socialists or communists.
Globalization and Capitalism don't necessarily have to go together. You can also have globalist socialists or communists.
|
|
|
I:9951 | E Pluribus Unum ( -405.4800 points)
|
Mon, October 7, 2024 06:28:54 PM UTC0:00
|
The Globalism they decry is in its nature capitalist, because the worldwide economy is capitalist. They decry NAFTA, the WTO, TPP, the WEF as "GlObAlIsM" for simply doing what Capitalism does, it is the natural evolution of the economic system they espouse
My point is if they are truly opposed to "gLoBaLiSm" for reasons that are truthful and not vaguely trying to be Antisemetic, then they'd be opposed to the economy that is leading to the current form of Globalization
The Globalism they decry is in its nature capitalist, because the worldwide economy is capitalist. They decry NAFTA, the WTO, TPP, the WEF as "GlObAlIsM" for simply doing what Capitalism does, it is the natural evolution of the economic system they espouse
My point is if they are truly opposed to "gLoBaLiSm" for reasons that are truthful and not vaguely trying to be Antisemetic, then they'd be opposed to the economy that is leading to the current form of Globalization
|
|
|
D:1 | RP ( 5508.0200 points)
|
Tue, October 8, 2024 07:09:21 PM UTC0:00
|
Geopolitically, we're entering an era of de-globalization anyway for many reasons, including authoritarian rulers using globalization as a weapon.
What many of the de-globalization proponents aren't realizing is that it is absolutely going to mean both an increase in inflation and an increase in wars, not the opposite. For all its faults (and there are many) globalization did bring us an era of low inflation and relative peace.
Geopolitically, we're entering an era of de-globalization anyway for many reasons, including authoritarian rulers using globalization as a weapon.
What many of the de-globalization proponents aren't realizing is that it is absolutely going to mean both an increase in inflation and an increase in wars, not the opposite. For all its faults (and there are many) globalization did bring us an era of low inflation and relative peace.
|
|
|
I:9951 | E Pluribus Unum ( -405.4800 points)
|
Tue, October 8, 2024 09:48:37 PM UTC0:00
|
It also brought us an era of offshoring at home and modern day imperialism abroad. Exploiting the labor of the international worker to line the pockets of the rich.
Sure maybe people like Clinton and Gortari benefitted from NAFTA; but people in Chiapas didn't benefit, People in Michigan didn't benefit. And through various means, they let us know they disn't benefit...But like I said its not the act of "Glabalization" in and of itself thats the problem, merely a symptom of the existing problem of Capitalism.
It also brought us an era of offshoring at home and modern day imperialism abroad. Exploiting the labor of the international worker to line the pockets of the rich.
Sure maybe people like Clinton and Gortari benefitted from NAFTA; but people in Chiapas didn't benefit, People in Michigan didn't benefit. And through various means, they let us know they disn't benefit...But like I said its not the act of "Glabalization" in and of itself thats the problem, merely a symptom of the existing problem of Capitalism.
|
|
|
D:6086 | Jason (11913.3682 points)
|
Wed, October 9, 2024 03:15:46 AM UTC0:00
|
You could organize international trade agreements in such a way as to benefit or to hurt almost any class or industry if you so chose to select them.
Trade deals could just as easily be written to drive down the profits of the pharmaceutical industry, or the medical and legal professions, or anyone else. Just imagine what such globalization would look like if we imported cheap prescription drugs from India, making medication affordable for regular people, and forcing our country's most privileged and aloof suburbanites to engage in good old-fashioned rigorous competition with the third world.
Instead, the consistent pattern since NAFTA has always been to de-industrialize the United States and brutalize laborers in the name of austerity, all while gaslighting them as being too uneducated to comprehend the technical techniques and complex complexities of the global economy.
You could organize international trade agreements in such a way as to benefit or to hurt almost any class or industry if you so chose to select them.
Trade deals could just as easily be written to drive down the profits of the pharmaceutical industry, or the medical and legal professions, or anyone else. Just imagine what such globalization would look like if we imported cheap prescription drugs from India, making medication affordable for regular people, and forcing our country's most privileged and aloof suburbanites to engage in good old-fashioned rigorous competition with the third world.
Instead, the consistent pattern since NAFTA has always been to de-industrialize the United States and brutalize laborers in the name of austerity, all while gaslighting them as being too uneducated to comprehend the technical techniques and complex complexities of the global economy.
|
|
|
D:1 | RP ( 5508.0200 points)
|
Wed, October 9, 2024 03:21:55 AM UTC0:00
|
modern day imperialism abroad.
I wouldn't call it imperialism. Most countries maintained their local control and participated more than willingly. It actually did a lot to dismantle some of the actual imperialism that immediately preceded it.
people in Chiapas didn't benefit
Well, as a primarily agricultural province Chiapas didn't change much because of globalism, which was more of a manufacturing phenomenon. The imperialist practices already in place didn't change much.
There's no doubt that globalization benefited people in Japan and South Korea and China, making them rich countries. Even Mexico as a whole and much of Eastern Europe and many other 3rd world countries become wealthier because of it.
People in Michigan didn't benefit.
Sure they did. All the people employed in non-manufacturing service, intellectual or white collar jobs got greatly cheaper products and low inflation for decades. Sure, it came at the expense of manufacturing jobs and wage stagnation, but people loved those parts. Look at the proliferation of Walmarts,
And through various means, they let us know they disn't benefit...
Sure, they griped about it, but because of some weird quirk of human psychology what really pisses them off is inflation and immigration. Globalization fixed both of those - after all, you don't need cheap labor to immigrate in as much when you can just ship the jobs off to the foreign countries. And people seem to gladly pick low inflation and low wage growth over medium inflation and higher wage growth for some reason.
There's no question that HOW globalization was done significantly benefited the rich more than lower class workers. The rich were in control of the process. We could have put more guard rails in place for worker's rights and environmental protections in our trade agreements. Or the judicial use of protectionist measures like targeted tariffs to keep the playing field more leveled and give time for workers to transition and more time for pay equalization. But we didn't.
E Pluribus Unum: modern day imperialism abroad.
I wouldn't call it imperialism. Most countries maintained their local control and participated more than willingly. It actually did a lot to dismantle some of the actual imperialism that immediately preceded it.
E Pluribus Unum: people in Chiapas didn't benefit
Well, as a primarily agricultural province Chiapas didn't change much because of globalism, which was more of a manufacturing phenomenon. The imperialist practices already in place didn't change much.
There's no doubt that globalization benefited people in Japan and South Korea and China, making them rich countries. Even Mexico as a whole and much of Eastern Europe and many other 3rd world countries become wealthier because of it.
E Pluribus Unum: People in Michigan didn't benefit.
Sure they did. All the people employed in non-manufacturing service, intellectual or white collar jobs got greatly cheaper products and low inflation for decades. Sure, it came at the expense of manufacturing jobs and wage stagnation, but people loved those parts. Look at the proliferation of Walmarts,
E Pluribus Unum: And through various means, they let us know they disn't benefit...
Sure, they griped about it, but because of some weird quirk of human psychology what really pisses them off is inflation and immigration. Globalization fixed both of those - after all, you don't need cheap labor to immigrate in as much when you can just ship the jobs off to the foreign countries. And people seem to gladly pick low inflation and low wage growth over medium inflation and higher wage growth for some reason.
There's no question that HOW globalization was done significantly benefited the rich more than lower class workers. The rich were in control of the process. We could have put more guard rails in place for worker's rights and environmental protections in our trade agreements. Or the judicial use of protectionist measures like targeted tariffs to keep the playing field more leveled and give time for workers to transition and more time for pay equalization. But we didn't.
|
|
|
I:9951 | E Pluribus Unum ( -405.4800 points)
|
Wed, October 9, 2024 06:53:08 PM UTC0:00
|
I wouldn't call it imperialism. Most countries maintained their local control and participated more than willingly. It actually did a lot to dismantle some of the actual imperialism that immediately preceded it.
Ofc YOU wouldn't, your countries goals and economic interests are being spread to other nations and punish them if they make choices that benefit them as opposed to the US. If a Latin American country starts to make decisions that hurt the US's bottom dollar but benefits them, magically their leader is couped outta office.
Well, as a primarily agricultural province Chiapas didn't change much because of globalism, which was more of a manufacturing phenomenon. The imperialist practices already in place didn't change much.
There's no doubt that globalization benefited people in Japan and South Korea and China, making them rich countries. Even Mexico as a whole and much of Eastern Europe and many other 3rd world countries become wealthier because of it.
Exactly WHO in those nations benefitted? 79.1% of the wealth in Mexico is concentrated in the top 10% of the population and we still have people feel the need to come to the US for a better life? Its the myth that the if the well off benefit, then the wealth will trickle down. You will notice the wealth
Sure they did. All the people employed in non-manufacturing service, intellectual or white collar jobs got greatly cheaper products and low inflation for decades. Sure, it came at the expense of manufacturing jobs and wage stagnation, but people loved those parts. Look at the proliferation of Walmarts,
Sure the things that barely benefit consumers did good, but at the cost of things that GREATLY HURT consumers...not the argument you think it is. The direction of the graph means little to me when I know that people still suffer.
Sure, they griped about it, but because of some weird quirk of human psychology what really pisses them off is inflation and immigration. Globalization fixed both of those - after all, you don't need cheap labor to immigrate in as much when you can just ship the jobs off to the foreign countries. And people seem to gladly pick low inflation and low wage growth over medium inflation and higher wage growth for some reason.
Which is why Immigration rates have gone down since globalization, OH WAIT. Because that will happen regardless of jobs offshored or not. Capitalists wanna exploit the brown workers somehow...
There's no question that HOW globalization was done significantly benefited the rich more than lower class workers. The rich were in control of the process. We could have put more guard rails in place for worker's rights and environmental protections in our trade agreements. Or the judicial use of protectionist measures like targeted tariffs to keep the playing field more leveled and give time for workers to transition and more time for pay equalization. But we didn't.
Yeah, and we should fix that so that we can get the alleged benefits of Economic Globalization without the faults
RP: I wouldn't call it imperialism. Most countries maintained their local control and participated more than willingly. It actually did a lot to dismantle some of the actual imperialism that immediately preceded it.
Ofc YOU wouldn't, your countries goals and economic interests are being spread to other nations and punish them if they make choices that benefit them as opposed to the US. If a Latin American country starts to make decisions that hurt the US's bottom dollar but benefits them, magically their leader is couped outta office.
RP: Well, as a primarily agricultural province Chiapas didn't change much because of globalism, which was more of a manufacturing phenomenon. The imperialist practices already in place didn't change much.
There's no doubt that globalization benefited people in Japan and South Korea and China, making them rich countries. Even Mexico as a whole and much of Eastern Europe and many other 3rd world countries become wealthier because of it.
Exactly WHO in those nations benefitted? 79.1% of the wealth in Mexico is concentrated in the top 10% of the population and we still have people feel the need to come to the US for a better life? Its the myth that the if the well off benefit, then the wealth will trickle down. You will notice the wealth
RP: Sure they did. All the people employed in non-manufacturing service, intellectual or white collar jobs got greatly cheaper products and low inflation for decades. Sure, it came at the expense of manufacturing jobs and wage stagnation, but people loved those parts. Look at the proliferation of Walmarts,
Sure the things that barely benefit consumers did good, but at the cost of things that GREATLY HURT consumers...not the argument you think it is. The direction of the graph means little to me when I know that people still suffer.
RP: Sure, they griped about it, but because of some weird quirk of human psychology what really pisses them off is inflation and immigration. Globalization fixed both of those - after all, you don't need cheap labor to immigrate in as much when you can just ship the jobs off to the foreign countries. And people seem to gladly pick low inflation and low wage growth over medium inflation and higher wage growth for some reason.
Which is why Immigration rates have gone down since globalization, OH WAIT. Because that will happen regardless of jobs offshored or not. Capitalists wanna exploit the brown workers somehow...
RP: There's no question that HOW globalization was done significantly benefited the rich more than lower class workers. The rich were in control of the process. We could have put more guard rails in place for worker's rights and environmental protections in our trade agreements. Or the judicial use of protectionist measures like targeted tariffs to keep the playing field more leveled and give time for workers to transition and more time for pay equalization. But we didn't.
Yeah, and we should fix that so that we can get the alleged benefits of Economic Globalization without the faults
|
|
|
[View Next Page] |
|
| INFORMATION LINKS |
|
|
ENDORSEMENTS |
VA District 05 - R Primary - Jun 18, 2024 |
R |
John McGuire III |
GA District 03 - R Runoff - Jun 18, 2024 |
R |
Brian Jack |
SC District 04 - R Primary - Jun 11, 2024 |
R |
William Timmons |
MT US Senate - R Primary - Jun 04, 2024 |
R |
Tim P. Sheehy |
GA Court of Appeals Judge - May 21, 2024 |
N |
Jeff Davis |
GA US President - R Primary - Mar 12, 2024 |
R |
Donald J. Trump |
TX District 26 - R Primary - Mar 05, 2024 |
R |
Brandon Gill |
AL District 01 - R Primary - Mar 05, 2024 |
R |
Barry Moore |
US President - R Primaries - Jun 04, 2024 |
R |
Donald J. Trump |
US House Speaker - Oct 20, 2023 |
R |
James "Jim" Jordan |
US House Speaker - R Nomination - Oct 11, 2023 |
R |
Donald J. Trump |
US House Speaker - R Nomination - Nov 15, 2022 |
R |
Kevin McCarthy |
FL District 07 - R Primary - Aug 23, 2022 |
R |
Anthony Sabatini |
FL District 11 - R Primary - Aug 23, 2022 |
R |
Laura Loomer |
NY District 23 - R Primary - Aug 23, 2022 |
R |
Carl P. Paladino |
TN District 05 - R Primary - Aug 04, 2022 |
R |
Robby Starbuck Newsom |
AZ US Senate - R Primary - Aug 02, 2022 |
R |
Blake Masters |
AZ Governor - R Primary - Aug 02, 2022 |
R |
Kari Lake |
SC District 07 - R Primary - Jun 14, 2022 |
R |
Graham Allen |
AL US Senate - R Primary - May 24, 2022 |
R |
Morris J. "Mo" Brooks |
GA US Senate - R Primary - May 24, 2022 |
R |
Herschel Walker |
GA Governor - R Primary - May 24, 2022 |
R |
David Perdue |
NC District 13 - R Primary - May 17, 2022 |
R |
Bo Hines |
OH US Senate - R Primary - May 03, 2022 |
R |
JD Vance |
TX District 08 - R Primary - Mar 01, 2022 |
R |
Christian Collins |
GA Republican Party First Vice Chairman - Jun 05, 2021 |
R |
Pam Reardon |
GA US Senate - Special Election - Nov 03, 2020 |
R |
Kelly Loeffler |
|