Democrat doing their best to deliver White House to GOP in 2020, as Dems sign on to get rid of airplanes and cows.

Is anyone paying attention to the bag of crazy that Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is proposing as the “Green New Deal?” Because Democrats are supporting it left and right at the same time that the plan’s author is contradicting herself as she gives voice to one of the wildest socialist wish lists ever proposed in America:

Democratic New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who announced a sweeping “Green New Deal” on Thursday that promises to render air travel obsolete, get rid of flatulent cows and ensure economic security for everyone in less than a decade, seemingly contradicted herself in a span of twelve hours on the nature of the government’s role in the massive undertaking.

..” Inskeep asked. “Are you prepared to put on that table that, ‘Yes actually they’re right, what this requires is massive government intervention?'”

Ocasio-Cortez responded: “It does, it does, yeah, I have no problem saying that. Why? Because we have tried their approach for 40 years. For 40 years we have tried to let the private sector take care of this. They said, ‘We got this, we can do this, the forces of the market are going to force us to innovate.’ Except for the fact that there’s a little thing in economics called externalities. And what that means is that a corporation can dump pollution in the river and they don’t have to pay, but taxpayers have to pay.”


But later in the day, in an interview with MSNBC’s Chuck Todd, Ocasio-Cortez blamed conservatives for suggesting that she wanted a massive government program.

“I think one way that the right does try to mischaracterize, uh, what we’re doing as though it’s, like, some kind of massive government takeover,” Ocasio-Cortez told Todd. “Obviously, it’s not that, because what we’re trying to do is release the investments from the federal government to mobilize those resources across the country.”


Along the way, her office says the plan would aim to make air travel obsolete, upgrade or replace every building in America to ensure energy efficiency and give economic security even to those “unwilling” to work.


The plan, which calls for a massive package of big-government proposals including health care for all, quickly picked up the backing of major 2020 Democratic presidential hopefuls including Sens. Kamala Harris, D-Calif., Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., and Cory Booker, D-N.J. — who all co-sponsored the resolution.

Read it all here.

Wow.  If you want to read the outline of @AOC’s crazy plan, including carbon taxes, cap & (tax) trade, getting rid of fossil fuels, putting Labor Unions in charge, and actually getting rid of cattle and airplanes. Although they don’t think they can do the cows and airplane thing in 10 years…

NPR has a summary of the crazy measure here.

Democrats trying to become the party of Bernie Sanders was bad enough. Now they’re trying to become the party of Ocasio-Cortez, who makes Bernie look tame in comparison.

It’s so nutty, even Nancy Pelosi herself is slamming it…

“It will be one of several or maybe many suggestions that we receive. The green dream, or whatever they call it, nobody knows what it is, but they’re for it, right?”

Read that here.

But these guys signing on can’t help themselves. They’re all in to reshape our society in their twisted view.

I suppose Republicans should thank Democrats for unthinkably shifting their party harder and farther to the left than most people thought possible.  Because they’re going to help deliver the White House to the GOP once again in 2020.

26 Replies to “Democrat doing their best to deliver White House to GOP in 2020, as Dems sign on to get rid of airplanes and cows.”

  1. Anonymous

    Is she wrong though? We’ve let corporations trash our environment and we’re starting to feel the effects. Leaving it to the private sector won’t solve anything, money rules all for them. So we can either work to put some regulations in place or have a massive FEMA budget to deal with all of our climate issues in the future.

    1. enquirer

      everything balances on the fulcrum or high-yield energy sources. we haven’t solved clean fusion, we haven’t solved nuclear waste, we haven’t advanced solar and wind sufficiently. we are on fossil fuels until we 1. find the next new high yield power source or 2. brutally minimize or eliminate private use of power. i personally hope we invent that thing that distills and generates power flow from thin air from ‘atlas shrugged,’ the upshot: advancing a total green agenda is a win win for democrats – it keeps the crazy part of their base engaged, and the constant failure of congress to go green can give political power to a lefty outsider movement.

  2. Springer

    First climate cooling and a coming ice age, then when that wasn’t working it switched to global warming and rising sea levels, when that didn’t come to fruition, it switched to climate change, which has been present since the world began. This is basically a scheme of wealth distribution as all the Dems proposals would have negligible effects on lowering CO2 levels, but would have us return to a much lower standard of living (and without beef if Cortez has her way), also without cars. Electric cars wouldn’t work because where does she think electricity comes from? She proves her stupidity every time she opens her mouth, so hope the media continues to report it! The school she “graduated”from should be embarrassed.

    1. Anonymous

      Speaking of stupidity, you should know that electricity can come from wind, water, sunlight. Scientists generally don’t care about politics, they care about science and science is showing rising sea levels, melting polar ice, global changes in our climate due to emissions. So you can continue to bury your head in the sand and blame it all on a political party or pay attention to the science and wish to make the world sustainable for future generations.

      1. Anne Beal

        Yes and science also tells us that during the Cretaceous Era, atmospheric CO2 levels were 10X what they are today. There was more 02 as well, which is why dinosaurs were able to get so big. What was missing was all the nitrogen current species have adapted to. The climate changed before humans appeared on the earth and it will again. In fact, the Holocene Optimum of 5000 years ago happened without any effort on the part of humans, but the planet warmed up, warmer than it is today, and caused the spread of humans all over the planet. Humans don’t cause global warming, global warming causes humans.

      2. Anonymous

        How about putting your leftwing agenda aside for a moment and go to “Climate Depot” and get another side of things. The science isn’t settled, and the left won’t admit it.

    1. Cliff Hadley

      Anonymous at 11:19 and 12:53….

      The trouble with the climate extremists and NASA is their predictions have never panned out. In fact, their models haven’t even explained past climate epochs. The only reliable thing about doomsday science is, that’s where the bucks are. So…. chill.

  3. Troy Jones

    Everybody talks about science and scientific consensus but nobody ever talks about what is the consensus: Human activity is primarily responsible for the increases in carbon dioxide emissions.

    Where consensus falls apart is:

    1) How much of the recent experienced warming is related to these carbon dioxide emissions and how much by other naturally occurring events?

    2) What are the negatives and positives (yes there are positives) and what is the net-net?

    3) How much (if any) of a reduction in carbon dioxide is appropriate?

    4) How best to reduce carbon dioxide considering economic effects, ala crazy proposals like the New Green Deal will cause massive unemployment and starvation, especially in the Third World.

    While there are rational conversation in many science quarters, the political discussion is beyond counter-productive. One one side you have those who put their head in the sand and on the other you have those who predict armageddon without crazy stuff like the New Green Deal. The reality is

    1) the US is reducing carbon emissions even in the face of economic growth without massive government mandate.
    2) We can show the way via private sector innovation, which solves more problems and creates more improvement in our living condition than any government initiative ever has or will.

    Sidebar: The covert racism of those Green New Deal extremists is not to be ignored. They have no concern on who gets hurt the worst, especially the poor black folks in Africa, the poor yellow folks in Asia.

    1. Anonymous

      Another thing: “consensus” is sometimes reached by the heads of a scientific organization believing a theory and signing onto it on behalf of the whole group when all the individual scientists in the group don’t buy into the theory. It skews the “consensus” greatly.

    2. Anne Beal

      No, the CO2 is not coming from humans. Where did it come from during the Carboniferous Period? How did all that carbon get into the atmosphere? During that time, huge quantities of carbon were extracted from the air by plants which then died and turned into coal deposits. When we burn fossil fuels we release that carbon back into the air, where it probably belongs. That depends on your point of view: do you believe the climate which has been most beneficial to us is “normal?”

      If the Democrats managed to get rid of all the cows, all the beef, milk, cheese yogurt etc, humans would get their protein from soybeans and we would produce our own methane.

  4. Kelly Lieberg

    And our guy Dusty is willing to reach across the aisle and negotiate with this Anarchist ! Kinda like out other guy, Thune, who finds himself “horrified”. All these two are doing is demonstrating that they don’t know the enemy. The actionable word is, defeat. Enough with the “Never” cuteness. Thers is no middle to negotiate. Unite and defeat these wannabe Communists.

    1. enquirer

      good lord why is this about dusty all of a sudden? he singlehandedly shut down the boxer bill a decade ago. I saw it.

  5. Anonymous

    Enemy? We’re all Americans. The enemy is a large country on the other side of the world. Hey speaking of Thune…he is about due for a trip back there.

  6. Troy Jones

    Anonymous 2:42: I agree to large degree with your point when “consensus” is stretched to include the answers to my questions. However, it is pretty hard to deny that human activity the last few hundred years has not increased the amount of carbon released in the air. What I’m not convinced that the increase in agriculture activity hasn’t greatly mitigated this increase, which would mitigate the impact.

    Anne: Carbon in the atmosphere is primarily the result of burning matter which contains carbon. Forest fires, gas cars, and coal fired electric plants all burn matter that contains carbon. By virtue of the increased population in the world and various purposes for which we burn carbon, it is not rationale to argue humans aren’t discharging more carbon into the air. Which goes to one question these crazy liberals never answer: Which people in the world do we allow to starve when we adopt your ideas: Old people, black people, Christians, Arabs, yellow people. We at least deserve to know if we are on your extermination list.

    1. Anne Beal

      Where did the carbon come from in the Carboniferous period? Why was the Cretaceous’ atmospheric carbon dioxide 10X higher than it is now? There were no humans around. Nobody was driving cars or building fires.
      Has it never occurred to you that the amount of carbon on the planet is static? Sometimes carbon is trapped in coal deposits and at other times it is released into the atmosphere or dissolved in the ocean. But except for what arrived on meteorites, the total amount of carbon never changes.
      Humans can, in fact, sequester carbon artificially by having it compressed into diamonds.
      If you want to save the planet, buy lab-created diamonds

  7. Charlie Hoffman

    Absolutely and along with The New Democrat Green Death Deal remember what Earl Butz said back in the 70s; “Sure let’s all go back to organic farming and get rid of every chemical and modified plant being seeded and along with that figure out what 40 million people next year you’re going to starve to death. “

  8. Anonymous

    We must not forget that the cows issue was started by Obama. I wish that the republicans would have pushed this issue in the last election. It is part of what the left really believes. Obviously this would be devesting to our state.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.