Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez To Green New Deal Haters: ‘I’m The Boss. How ‘Bout That?’

From The Daily Caller

Speaking at a “Girls Who Code” event in New York City, self-identified democratic socialist Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez hit back against critics of her Green New Deal resolution.

WATCH:

“I just introduced the Green New Deal two weeks ago, and it’s creating all of this conversation,” the New York Democratic congresswoman said Friday to moderator Reshma Saujani, the CEO of Girls Who Code. “Why? Because no one else has even tried. Because no one else has even tried.”

Ocasio-Cortez claimed that — regardless of success — the “power” goes to the individual who tries.

“So people are like, ‘Oh it’s unrealistic. Oh it’s vague. Oh it doesn’t address this little minute thing.’ And I’m like, ‘You try. You do it. ‘Cuz you’re not. ‘Cuz you’re not. So, until you do it, I’m the boss.’ How ’bout that?’”

Ocasio-Cortez introduced her Green New Deal resolution earlier in February alongside Democratic Massachusetts Sen. Ed Markey. The bill not only calls for the U.S. to dramatically transition to 100 percent renewable energy in just a few years, but also demands upgrading all buildings in the country, addressing the emissions released from cow farts in a now-deleted FAQ page, and touches on a number of other progressive issues. (RELATED: ‘Dis Me. I’ve Been Around Awhile’: Joe Lieberman Is Not Impressed By Ocasio-Cortez)

The resolution has been met with criticism and ridicule from both parties. Senate Democratic Whip Dick Durbin, the second-highest ranking senator in his party, said after reading and re-reading the Green New Deal, he still had to ask a co-sponsor, “What in the heck is this?”

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell might bring the Green New Deal up for a vote in the upper chamber of Congress in the coming days. The move would force numerous Democratic presidential candidates to take a public stance on the bill.

Follow Jason on Twitter.

0 0 vote
Article Rating
304 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
icisil
February 24, 2019 4:39 pm

“Cash me outside. How ’bout dat?”

https://twitter.com/RealSaavedra/status/1099498312405635074

Santa
Reply to  icisil
February 25, 2019 1:03 pm

Its just Agenda 21/2030 all over.

Bryan A
Reply to  Santa
February 25, 2019 1:46 pm

Famous quote:
Ross Perot…”You’re the Boss, I’m just Ross”…ruled by the people…public servant.
Infamous quote:
AOC…”I’m the Boss…How ’bout that?”…rules the public…megalomaniac extraordinaire

JoeSchmoe
Reply to  Bryan A
February 26, 2019 5:02 am

Her handlers MUST have already told her they’d make her president

Ron Sinclair
February 24, 2019 4:43 pm

This is great – takes some of the heat off Trump and lets him concentrate on his job!

Ve2
Reply to  Ron Sinclair
February 25, 2019 3:51 am

So people are like, ‘Oh it’s unrealistic. Oh it’s vague. Oh it doesn’t address this little minute thing.’
Or even where the extra $38 trillion is coming from.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Ve2
February 25, 2019 5:25 am

“Or even where the extra $38 trillion is coming from”

Apparently AOC thinks people are *nitpiking* when they raise the issue of costs.

MarkW
Reply to  Tom Abbott
February 25, 2019 2:48 pm

When you are saving the world from destruction in the next 12 years, costs aren’t relevant.
Anyone complaining about cost doesn’t want to save the world.
At least that’s how the illogic usually goes.

Barbara
Reply to  MarkW
February 26, 2019 8:00 pm

Is AOC just another United Nations facilitator?

The “Global Green New Deal” has its roots at the UN late in 2008-2009.

Ve2
Reply to  Ron Sinclair
February 25, 2019 3:53 am

No, it’s bad for Trump, he won’t get to run against her and her lunatic ideas because the Democrats will bury her first.

Reply to  Ve2
February 25, 2019 9:54 am

Ve2
Alexandria Occasionally Coherent
is a problem for Dumbocrats,
but seems to have the support
of many young Dumbocrats
running for president,
and the press loves her too.

She may be the dumbest politician
in my lifetime (I’m 65), but if her real goal
is to destroy US capitalism, she may have
found a way to do it — The Green
Bad Dream.

While I have no idea what the
climate will be like in 12 years,
nor does anyone else, I would
guess it would be 0.1 degree C.
warmer, or 0.1 degree C. cooler.

That’s no “existential threat”,
unless you are a dingbat,
or a leftist (I repeat myself).

Bill Powers
Reply to  Richard Greene
February 25, 2019 12:25 pm

Since ALGORE turned to his climate crusade full time after losing to Bush we have been subjected to a full court press on the part of our Government to take over near complete control of our lives.
The debate is over. 97% of economists agree. What is most likely to kill you in the next 12 years is centralized totalitarian regulations and mandates not climate change. So buckle up all you free marketeers it is going to be a bumpy ride through their stormy seas of socialism and this Cortez foul wind machine. Those winds will destroy you faster than any man made hurricane.

whiten
Reply to  Richard Greene
February 25, 2019 1:27 pm

Richard

If I may add up, and trying to explain my understanding, or my opinion;
dumbocrats are already beyond the mud-fight condition.
The dumbos are already into a “dog-eats dog” fight condition.

Soon this will spread out to the dumbocrat MSM.
More resistance or delay, more savage the outcome… 🙂
And with some serious consequences for some of these.

Oh well, I may have watched too many fictional movies… 🙂

cheers

JoeSchmoe
Reply to  whiten
February 26, 2019 5:03 am

Occasionally Coherent doesnt really even work though, because I still have yet to see her be coherent even once!

beng135
Reply to  Ve2
February 25, 2019 10:54 am

he won’t get to run against her and her lunatic ideas because the Democrats will bury her first.

She not even old enough to run against Trump….

Big T
Reply to  beng135
February 25, 2019 11:14 am

Sorry miss kotex, WE are the boss.

whiten
Reply to  Ron Sinclair
February 25, 2019 1:06 pm

Ron,
no matter what the politics, or tactics, or strategy, of the better outcome considered;

The AOC is trying for a very quick fast resolution of the matter…in an assumed better outcome in regard of selfishness.

Meaning, a complete lack of responsibility in her part…regardless.
Intentionally pouring fuel into a fire is a very much irresponsible gambling.

She does not seem to much care about it all!
And the consequences….
A selfish free-fly zombie…
Exactly what will be get, in the context of what payed for, in accordance of the wishful thinking,
in the first place.

A very effective “catalyzer” for a fast quick reactive reaction.
But never the less, very reactive and aggressive in content and behavior…quite expensive;
to all concerned…
but hey, some live and fight and still do consider acceptance of the end by falling in their own sword.

And this one “sword” is or seems to be very sharp one,,, indeed so!

cheers

joe
February 24, 2019 4:44 pm

Dear Ocasio, I trust you will commute from NYC to Washington in an electric car and never take airplanes. The technology exists now so there is NO EXCUSE for you not to practice what you preach.

HotScot
Reply to  joe
February 24, 2019 4:56 pm

joe

Electric cars are powered by coal or gas.

Kamikazedave
Reply to  HotScot
February 24, 2019 5:19 pm

HotScot, Shhhhhhhhh

joe
Reply to  HotScot
February 24, 2019 6:17 pm

Hotscot, I am well aware of that. But I still want Ocasio to fork over for an electric car. Then the next step is to get her to charge it using solar panels.

Bryan A
Reply to  HotScot
February 24, 2019 9:20 pm

Electric cars still run on rubber tires which require fossil fuels to produce. No rubber tires without oil

Carbon Bigfoot
Reply to  Bryan A
February 25, 2019 2:33 am

I don’t think she ever drove a car or even owns one—a city rat.

Ve2
Reply to  Carbon Bigfoot
February 25, 2019 4:13 am

Doesn’t need a car, takes taxi’s

Bryan A
Reply to  Carbon Bigfoot
February 25, 2019 1:58 pm

Last time I looked, taxis were really just cars painted yellow.
comment image
comment image

Farmer Ch E retired
Reply to  Bryan A
February 25, 2019 5:29 am

I believe the mines, smelters, petro plants, and factories used to produce the metals, batteries, and light-weight synthetic components of electric cars are powered predominantly by fossil fuels. More than likely, the the plant and factory workers use ICE-powered transportation to and from work. So these beautiful electric cars have a significant non-renewable footprint before reaching the showroom floor. This is information you will not find in the marketing brochures.

Astrocyte
Reply to  Farmer Ch E retired
February 25, 2019 3:56 pm

We used a Humvee (military version) as a service vehicule in a mines I worked. If its good at taking bullets, its good also at taking falling rocks…

John Tillman
Reply to  joe
February 24, 2019 4:58 pm

Good point. Would like to know how she travels between her district and DC. ¿Tal vez en el tren de Acela?

https://espanol.amtrak.com/acela-express-train

fxk
Reply to  John Tillman
February 24, 2019 5:14 pm

Yeah.Yeah.Yeah. Electricity is… just there… isn’t it? Just plug it in, and voila!

In reality, power companies do such a good job, electricity seems inexhaustible. Until it isn’t. And generation is so diverse, distant, and out of mind.

We were reconfiguring a commercial kitchen, and needed 50 amps here, 100 amps there, another panel here – until the engineer stated that we already had three 100amp panels, and there were two other restaurants on the same building feeder – which was only 400 amps. What do you mean we’ve run out of electricity? We can’t move forward?

The other mirror half of the plaza needed to “heavy up” their feeder – they brought in 2,000 amp service – with a price tag of $100,000 plus.

Folks are in a faerie land when it comes to electricity and what it takes to get it home.

Just like 5hit, electricity happens.

George Daddis
Reply to  fxk
February 24, 2019 5:39 pm

AOC made it clear in her FAQ published by PBS; transition “rapidly” to EVs and then, like, “put charging stations everywhere!”

Unless you’ve tried this idea, you’d better not criticize it.

Rainer Bensch
Reply to  George Daddis
February 25, 2019 4:27 am

What about some calculations before you try?

Gerry, England
Reply to  George Daddis
February 25, 2019 5:58 am

The simplest calculation would be how much space do you need on a motorway/freeway or very busy highway service station if you replace filling with petrol/diesel with charging a battery?

Reply to  fxk
February 24, 2019 9:05 pm

You should have been in California when we had the Gray-Outs. The state legislature refused to listen to the CA-ISO (which regulates all electric power in the state) and didn’t permit new power plants. We had rolling (planned) blackouts. I was working for Intel at a campus of about 8,000 people. We had a huge test floor with several multi-million dollar Agilent, Avantest, and Schlumberger testers, not to mention two very large compute farms. The power went out every day at 11AM for more than a week. Imagine idling 8,000 people for an hour every day. Not to mention crashing two data centers, and a test floor. I was in an IT group, and it would take us about 4 hours to get everything recovered again. Not to mention the things which didn’t recover. Needless to say, then Governor Gray Davis suffered a recall event whilst he was dialing money in a bid to run for President of the US. Arnold Schwarzenegger won the special election after Davis’ recall. Then Intel CEO Craig Barrett said Intel will never build another building in California. Intel scrapped the steel–some was already delivered, and let the permits expire on an 8th building at the Folsom Campus. The long range plan was for 11 buildings.

A lot of the work has since been relocated to lower cost geographies i.e. (Jan Jose, Costa Rica; Guadalajara, Mexico; Penang, Malaysia; & India).

Michael S. Kelly, LS BSA, Ret.
Reply to  Michael
February 24, 2019 10:58 pm

You worked at Intel, yet write “whilst”? I’m, uh, skeptical. Or is it sceptical?

griff
Reply to  Michael
February 25, 2019 12:31 am

Intel set up solar to power 51% of its US electricity use in 2010

HotScot
Reply to  Michael
February 25, 2019 12:42 am

griff

What does Intel do at night?

Switch the Internet off?

Ve2
Reply to  Michael
February 25, 2019 4:24 am

Michael S. Kelly

While or whilst?
So should you be using while or whilst? First, some history: the word while was first recorded in Old English and it can be used as a noun, a verb, a relative adverb, a conjunction, or a preposition. Whilst is a later form and was first evidenced in the late 14th century.
Whilst is more limited in scope than while, and can only be used as a conjunction and relative adverb, so if you know the word you want is a noun, verb, or preposition, then while is the only possible option. As conjunctions and relative adverbs, while and whilst mean exactly the same:
during the time when something is happening; at the same time as something else is happening:
I recommend not watching this movie while eating.
Anna kept us all entertained whilst we were waiting.
whereas (used to show a contrast):
He was presented with a watch, while his wife was given a bunch of flowers.
Mark looks after the business side, whilst Diana is the expert in public relations.
in spite of the fact that; although:
The thought of flying, while appealing, was not at the top of my list of things to do.
I detest violence but for once, whilst I still didn’t agree with it, I could understand it.
In the same way as happens with among and amongst, the chief distinction between while and whilst as conjunctions and relative adverbs is in respect of their usage. While is far more common than whilst and is significantly more prevalent in US English than it is in British English. Here’s a table of the statistics, using evidence from the Oxford English Corpus:
This chart illustrates the difference in usage between while or whilst
With only 6.9% of the occurrences of whilst appearing in US English, this form seems to be rapidly falling out of favour across the Atlantic. Bryan Garner states categorically that whilst ‘reeks of pretension in the work of a modern American writer’ and this stance is echoed by other authorities. So if you’re a US speaker or writer, you’d only be likely to use whilst if you were consciously aiming for an old-fashioned effect (for instance, if you were writing historical fiction). In all other contexts, while is the word to choose and thus avoid that dreaded reeking.
In British English, whilst incurs less opprobrium, but guides and dictionaries usually advise that while is preferable, given that it’s the most common form and may sound more up to date. If you’re writing for a particular organization or publication and you need to make the choice between while or whilst, you should always follow the relevant style manual on such matters.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Michael
February 25, 2019 5:35 am

Thanks for that English history lesson, Ve2.

ATheoK
Reply to  Michael
February 25, 2019 5:55 am

More spin from the g.
False claims from the past.

Here is their latest energy chart.
A) Notice the $185 million spent on “efficiency”.
B) Also notice that they do not identify “renewable or solar”. Electricity is simply labeled electricity.
i.e. Renewable power they generate is mostly fed into electrical grids, so Intel can pull electricity from the grid and feel that it is equivalent. Which allows Intel to ignore electricity quality issues and low or the frequent zero renewable electricity generation periods.

comment image?dl=0

wsbriggs
Reply to  fxk
February 25, 2019 3:10 am

I’ve long felt we are living in a world populated by “civilized savages”. When they want things they simply make the correct incantation, like turning a switch on, and voila the gods provide light! Progress is not having to deal with goat or chicken entrails any longer…

icisil
Reply to  John Tillman
February 24, 2019 5:15 pm

Apparently, no one knows where she lives in NYC. The address she used to register in her district is her dead father’s flat, but no one in that building who a reporter talked to knew who she is. They said mail would pile up for a month before someone would come by and get it. I’m wondering if bloodhounds aren’t on her trail for election fraud, i.e., not actually living in the district that elected her.

John Tillman
Reply to  icisil
February 24, 2019 5:24 pm

That just shows how Green she is!

She saves the planet by not having a domicile in her district, so needs travel only for campaign photo ops.

She originally filed to run in another district.

mike the morlock
Reply to  icisil
February 24, 2019 5:31 pm

icisil February 24, 2019 at 5:15 pm

Some are asking that question lets see where it goes.

michael

https://nypost.com/2019/02/23/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-is-nowhere-to-be-seen-near-bronx-home/

Krudd Gillard of
Reply to  mike the morlock
February 25, 2019 1:47 am

Leave her in place. High value asset.

Tom in Florida
Reply to  icisil
February 24, 2019 5:52 pm

Perhaps she lives in a van down by the river. The question then is… which river?

John Tillman
Reply to  Tom in Florida
February 24, 2019 6:08 pm

The East River isn’t really a rivier, nor of course is Long Island Sound.

R Shearer
Reply to  icisil
February 24, 2019 7:04 pm

I bet her father still votes Democrat.

Reply to  R Shearer
February 24, 2019 7:12 pm

Almost all dead people vote for democrats. Cheers –

griff
Reply to  icisil
February 25, 2019 12:32 am

In a country where people armed with automatic weapons can show up at the door of political opponents, I’d say that was a wise precaution?

HotScot
Reply to  griff
February 25, 2019 12:46 am

griff

Are you suggesting people armed with automatic weapons can’t show up in the UK?

Stop trying to be holier than thou. We had a politician murdered in her surgery and the guy didn’t need an automatic weapon.

Remember Jo Cox you thoughtless bastard?

HotScot
Reply to  griff
February 25, 2019 12:58 am

Are you suggesting people armed with automatic weapons can’t show up in the UK?

Stop being holier than thou.

Remember Jo Cox? Murdered in her surgery by a guy who didn’t have an automatic weapon. [snip]

F.LEGHORN
Reply to  griff
February 25, 2019 3:21 am

Yell upstairs and tell your mom you won.

hunter
Reply to  griff
February 25, 2019 3:37 am

Griff, your trolling style today is sub par.
You feeling ok?

Ve2
Reply to  griff
February 25, 2019 4:33 am

Great reply Griff, but neither did the one who murdered Rigby or committed the Lockerbie and Manchester “misunderstandings”

John Endicott
Reply to  griff
February 25, 2019 5:21 am

hunter, how can you tell? From what I’ve seen his trolling style never reaches par let alone better than par.

Brooks Hurd
Reply to  griff
February 25, 2019 6:09 am

Griff,

Were you referring to the men armed with automatic weapons who showed up at Roger Stone’s home?

John Tillman
Reply to  griff
February 25, 2019 6:32 am

It’s extremely rare in the US to be killed by an automatic weapon, unlike in France, for instance.

More people were killed in one night at the Bataclan theatre and surrounding area in Paris by automatic fire than in all the US since the 1934 National Firearms Act combined. By about a factor of ten.

Honest liberty
Reply to  griff
February 25, 2019 6:55 am

Interesting. Automatic weapons eh?
Griff, maybe you mean “fully semi-automatic”?🤔

The difference between semi automatic firearms with standard 30 round capacity detachable magazines and automatic weapons is significant, both in cost and availability.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Assault_Weapons_Ban

Do some basic research. I know, it’s tough when reality burdens your narrative with factual evidence.

I’ve looked into converting my new short barreled suppressed rifle, HK416 in 22lr, (for plinking cheap range days) to three round bursts option. Impossible. From what I’ve discovered talking with multiple local gun shops, and reading up on the batfe website, you have to own a firearm that was built fully automatic before the ban. So, you can’t make one legally without serious penalty should you be caught.

2. To obtain fully automatic rifles, you need to find one made before that date, which means they can’t make more than what was already made, which means…
An AK, M16, Tec-9 pistol, etc… Are running in the range of 15k to 25k regularly, and all they really do is waste ammo. They were designed for enemy suppression to advance troops into more advantageous firing positions but eventually abandoned due to wasted ammunition in scared as shoot young infantry hands.

Almost no civilians in America own automatic firearms, pistols or rifles, because of access and cost.

Additionally, I’m still waiting for my suppressors to get out of nfa jail, and still waiting for form1 to open up online to submit that pistol to become an sbr. I can’t even put the buttstock on it in my own home for practice or it’s a felony if caught.

So, this is barrier to entry most folks don’t want to go through:

Suppressors, $799 and $399,
Sbr rifle in 300 blk… $1499 but on sale for $799 Merry Christmas to me!
Spring field threaded 9mm
$475
HK pistol $399
Then buttstock for HK(that i can’t even put on to get a feel of whether I like it) $99
Plus glass for each SBR at about $275 each
Plus quick disconnect adapters for each of my threaded rifles and pistols $79 each x 5
Plus specific can caps for each caliber x 4 at $69
Are you starting to understand just how expensive this hobby and practice is? That’s not even factoring in bullets, of which center-fire rifle bulk ammo is minimum .25¢ per round, unless it’s .22lr which I’m getting again for about .03¢

Then… Each suppressor and SBR requires a $200 tax stamp, about 8-12 months waiting period, and full rolling fingerprints of every finger and thumb, the whole thumb, Palm prints, federal background check, all of this extremely invasive horse hockey
Invasion of privacy for something that is actually polite to those around.
BTW even sub Sonic 22lr isn’t as quiet as Hollywood. You see gruff, sub Sonic bullets are rather expensive, and supersonic break the sound barrier at the muzzle, do they are still definably firearm explosions to bystanders… Unmistakeable.

So, having real world evidence from someone who just dropped over $3500 on the process, and had my 4th amendment pissed all over… You want to come take to me about automatic weapons…

What gang banger is going to go through all that? What gang banger had that kind of money? Maybe the top dog but they don’t do the actual violence, that’s what recruits are for.

Politically motivated? It’s typically Democrats because those on the left are more emotional rather than logically exploring information that may challenge their feels. Thems the facts Jack.
Evidence for that claim? Go look in the mirror. Great place to start.

I’m posting under my pseudo name because this is much to personal information. My apologies but I’m sure most of you can gather who i am. I don’t want my real name searchable on the interwebs with that info.

Big T
Reply to  griff
February 25, 2019 5:59 pm

Sorry griff, automatics are a federal crime, semi-automatic are legal; such as used for hunting deer.?

Menicholas
Reply to  icisil
February 25, 2019 2:48 am

I read several newspaper articles that asserted a house member has to live in their district.
But this is not the case, according to the Constitution. The only requirement as to domicile is that one resides in the state they are elected in. In fact a bunch of house members to not live within their districts.

John Endicott
Reply to  Menicholas
February 25, 2019 5:31 am

Indeed, there currently are 20-something members of the House who do not live in the districts they represent. So unless there’s a specific rule in NY that would require her to live in her district, this is a non-issue.

Menicholas
Reply to  Menicholas
February 25, 2019 8:57 am

There were some state laws requiring things not specified by the Constitution or federal law, and they were overturned because state law cannot supersede federal law.

John Endicott
Reply to  Menicholas
February 25, 2019 9:34 am

Constitutionally that should only happen when the state laws conflicts with constitutionally enacted federal law. Complementary laws shouldn’t be a problem. and wouldn’t be if it weren’t for activist judges.

MarkW
Reply to  Menicholas
February 25, 2019 9:43 am

State environmental laws are allowed to be tougher than federal ones.
Though I believe there is a law that specifically allows that.

Menicholas
Reply to  Menicholas
February 25, 2019 10:57 pm

I am not an expert in this area.
I just read a few things last night after doing a search, read about a few court cases.
In the case of environmental laws, the SCOTUS or any court will only strike a law if someone with standing brings a case in some specific harm or damage.
Lots of laws remain for years before being tossed as being unconstitutional.

Sara
Reply to  joe
February 24, 2019 5:06 pm

I would MUCH, MUCH rather she’d commute by walking from NYC to WDC and back. Shouldn’t be too hard for her. Yes, it’s still cold, but the statement she’d be making, slogging her way south once a week and back, and also, walking from her Congressional seat to her dwelling in WDC – well, you can’t beat just DOING IT, as a means of showing your real sincerity about the whole thing!

David Chappell
Reply to  Sara
February 24, 2019 8:47 pm

Might she be allowed a horse (a non-farting one)?

Andrew Jenkinson
Reply to  David Chappell
February 25, 2019 2:00 am

Instead of quoting isolated sentences out of context why not explain what you feel is WRONG in general terms with what she said? Or is reading and understanding more than one sentence at a time is as difficult for Trump followers as it is for Trump himself?

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Andrew Jenkinson
February 25, 2019 5:46 am

“Or is reading and understanding more than one sentence at a time is as difficult for Trump followers as it is for Trump himself?”

That’s right, start right out insulting everyone. This is the what the Left considers an argument.

Andrew, why don’t you point out some of the problems you are having with our analysis of AOC and we can discuss them. You will probably be very surprised at the level of understanding. So much so, that you will probably go away and never post here again.

Let’s have a discussion.

Phoenix44
Reply to  Andrew Jenkinson
February 25, 2019 9:03 am

What is wrong with what she said? That pointing out that cratering the US economy and making everybody much, much poorer for no gain whatsoever is not a “small thing”? Or maybe pointing tout that trying central control to solve problems has failed every time and everywhere and that’s why people don’t suggest it any more?

Edwin
Reply to  Andrew Jenkinson
February 25, 2019 9:41 am

Andrew, have you heard AOC’s radio broadcasts? Did you read the New Green Deal while it was up. In a couple interviews she flatly said we need to totally eliminate raising cattle and all “industrial farming.” To quote AOC, “we don’t need to be eating hamburgers three meals a day.” She was defending her anti-cattle, anti-industrial farming proposed policies.

Including AOC, there are very few on the CAGW side of the aisle that walk the walk. Few have actually reduced their “carbon footprint.” Bernie Sanders bought offsets for his millions of dollars of flying around the world. At the same time in bought another house actually increasing his footprint.

MarkW
Reply to  Andrew Jenkinson
February 25, 2019 9:45 am

Don’t expect Andrew to explain himself. Like most liberals he just does hate. He doesn’t actually think for himself.

Andrew Jenkinson
Reply to  David Chappell
February 25, 2019 2:02 am

Trump supporters are BY DEFINITION Fart supporters.

hunter
Reply to  Andrew Jenkinson
February 25, 2019 3:39 am

Oh my, we have an authentic bona fide AOC believer.

F.LEGHORN
Reply to  Andrew Jenkinson
February 25, 2019 3:58 am

Which bridge do you live under.?

Bryan A
Reply to  Andrew Jenkinson
February 25, 2019 2:51 pm

And AOC will be a One Trick Pony…lose the GND…And fade into obscurity

MarkW
Reply to  Andrew Jenkinson
February 25, 2019 5:36 pm

As will Andrew apparently

ozspeaksup
Reply to  David Chappell
February 25, 2019 4:12 am

shes a show pony herself. no equine other required

John Tillman
Reply to  David Chappell
February 26, 2019 6:26 pm

Horses are lower CH4 emission transport than cows or other ruminants, but even humans are major CO2 sources.

John the Econ
Reply to  joe
February 24, 2019 7:26 pm

No, an electric car would be no less carbon-intensive than a conventional auto. She should be made to walk. If she wants to send us back to the 18th century, let her lead the way.

Geoff
Reply to  joe
February 24, 2019 7:48 pm

All you need is ice skates to get to DC. Its all downhill baby. Swap to blades in summer.

AOC would look more congressional with a “pointy end” hat.

Just needs the latest “Nimbus” 2030 to match the hat. Its all magic. Take from the rich to buy votes from the poor. Works for a few years till you have $22 Trillion in debt. Then some Chinese people turn up to “negotiate”.

griff
Reply to  joe
February 25, 2019 12:29 am

In a rational country you’d get a high speed train, powered by renewables.

e.g Berlin to Hamburg.

HotScot
Reply to  griff
February 25, 2019 12:48 am

griff

We can’t even get a high speed train powered conventionally, neither can California it seems.

Peddle you unicorn crap elsewhere.

Bryan A
Reply to  HotScot
February 25, 2019 7:48 pm

griff February 25, 2019 at 12:29 am
In a rational country you’d get a high speed train, powered by renewables.

e.g Berlin to Hamburg.

One of the best one liners I have read from Griff today.

Trevor
Reply to  griff
February 25, 2019 1:33 am

No. A country’s economy depends on things and people getting to their destinations in time. Making that service extremely weather-dependent and expensive is not a sign of a rational country, it is a serious economic disadvantage, which in today’s competitive world equals self-destruction.

pbweather
Reply to  griff
February 25, 2019 1:35 am

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-germany-renewables-railways/analysis-german-rail-to-run-on-sun-wind-to-keep-clients-happy-idUSTRE77L2B920110822

Wow! You actually believe the train will run 100% on renewable energy. When will journalists and scientists start calling this BS out. When the wind does not blow or the sun is not shining, unless you have massive battery storage (Very expensive), no train, city, factory or car runs on 100% renewable energy. Full stop. So stop claiming it.

I ask this question. Why is it that every intermittent power supply that has been installed was not accompanied by battery or some other form of power storage for when that power supply is not available? A true renewable energy grid that is reliable and replaces fossil or nuclear power has to have huge amounts of power storage to become equivalent. Yet very little storage has been installed. Power supply engineers, experts, scientists and politicians must have known this yet still spent billions on installing intermittent power.

We have countries like Germany who have been rapidly installing renewable energy seeing their emissions not falling (which is obvious because of back up required). The only answer I can come up with is cost. They know the true package cost of renewables and storage is so high that they would never get it past voters and tax payers. So I am guessing they thought, hey let’s install the renewable power supply and hope that technology will somehow find a cheap storage solution that we can tack on later. Still waiting for that and there is no known solution in the pipeline for the time being.

Edwin
Reply to  pbweather
February 25, 2019 9:33 am

pbweather, Many forget why Hitler fought WWII. He want more land and more natural resources for Germany. So Germans having the mind set that they can get all their energy supposedly for “free” from the sun, wind and hydro should be of little surprise. Their reaction to Fukushima is a bit bizarre.

So it comes down to, besides the hyperbole and flat out lies, to storage when the wind blows too hard or not at all or when the sun doesn’t shine. How much storage will it take to move to 100% renewables by 2050? Costs are probably higher and will remain higher than actual renewable production. Then we come to land use. Germany will have to be really innovative to find enough space for storage. Not only do they have to have enough storage to make up for the night or no or too much wind days but they need enough storage for longer outages in production weeks. My guess is that the German technocrats are already planning on buying carbon based energy production from neighboring countries. All this rather ironic since Germans are general better at math than the average American.

Keith
Reply to  Edwin
February 25, 2019 7:46 pm

They’re becoming more and more dependent on Russian gas to power the backup to wind/solar. Not smart.

Brooks Hurd
Reply to  griff
February 25, 2019 6:18 am

What you describe would be a “high speed train” which only runs when the renewables can produce power. That is not very practical for people who need to arrive at their destination at a specific time

Joel Snider
Reply to  griff
February 25, 2019 7:53 am

Grift – you shouldn’t use big words like ‘rational’.

And the country you’re imagining is a non-rational one.

Phoenix44
Reply to  griff
February 25, 2019 9:04 am

Right, Germany is “rational” – higher prices, more renewables, higher emissions.

Oh so very rational.

Talk us through getting rid of the nukes as a “rational” decision?

pigs_in_space
Reply to  griff
February 25, 2019 11:00 am

More likely using Nuclear powered electricity bought from next door France you nut!

Since when has Germany been self sufficient in solar and wind power in order to drive their ICE across the flat lands of even north Germany at night when there’s no wind?

Being as they are idiotically getting rid of all nuclear power, that only leaves COAL.

Bryan A
Reply to  griff
February 26, 2019 9:45 am

and in an irrational one, High Speed Rail would be your only option AKA AOC-GND

Paul of Alexandria
Reply to  griff
February 26, 2019 4:36 pm

Griff. Where do you live? It’s about 185 miles from Berlin to Hamburg. 185 miles doesn’t get you out of most U.S. states, if you start in the middle. Europe and Japan have high-speed rail because they’re small, relatively speaking.

It’s 750 miles from DC to Chicago, which is about a third of the way across the country and is plains most of the way. However, it’s all high-productivity farmland. Where would you begin to put a high-speed rail in there? You can’t put high-speed rail on freight-rail tracks, you can barely put AMTRAK on it! You’d need a whole new right-of-way (and the minimum width for a rail ROW is 50 ft). Then, you’d need whole new generating facilities at multiple locations (I’m presuming that diesel locomotives are verboten here), plus the overhead wires and their supports. Then you’d need Heaven only knows how many new bridges and overpasses for all of the local roads and highways.

Now we can presume that the train will stop in, say, Pittsburgh, Wheeling, Toledo, Dayton, and Indianapolis before it gets to Illinois (you aren’t going to get any track closer to Chicago than Joliet, there’s nowhere to put it, it will have to loop around Gary and South Chicago, so figure closer to 800 miles total) so you’ll also have to build new stations, with associated parking facilities,

Now, let’s say that you pulled a financial miracle out of your hat and built all that (and that’s one line out of several thousand required to connect the entire U.S., which has some 400 regional airports, plus locals). If your train could reliably do 200 mph the entire trip, that’s still 6 hours, allowing a half-hour or so for stops. Oh, and don’t forget the snow on those plains around the Great Lakes! (As of this writing there’s a passenger train that’s been stuck in snow, with a fallen tree involved, out West for three days). I can fly it in three, drive it in 14.

Bryan A
Reply to  Paul of Alexandria
February 27, 2019 2:09 pm

More than likely the tracks would need to be entirely elevated to allow for faster travel with a far greater reduced chance of incidence with animals. Since there will be no more cars, they could run the traks right down the middle of the freeway systems

Andrew Jenkinson
Reply to  joe
February 25, 2019 1:54 am

Instead of quoting isolated sentences out of context why not explain what you feel is WRONG in general terms with what she said? Or is reading and understanding more than one sentence at a time is as difficult for Trump followers as it is for Trump himself?

Greg Woods
Reply to  Andrew Jenkinson
February 25, 2019 3:33 am

Suggst you find another blog to read and comment…this one is taken….

hunter
Reply to  Andrew Jenkinson
February 25, 2019 3:44 am

Andrew,
Firstly she took the plan down.
Her claim is that it was preliminary.
Is there a finished version available?
Secondly, she ain’t the boss of anything.
She is a freshman Congressional member.
We can continue to as much detail as you wish.
If you are serious…

MarkW
Reply to  Andrew Jenkinson
February 25, 2019 9:48 am

That’s been done, many times. Do you honestly expect us to detail what’s wrong with every single item in the list each time we choose to ridicule a particular item in the list?

Joel Snider
Reply to  joe
February 25, 2019 7:55 am

C’mon, Joe – that’s ‘a little minute thing’.

Walter Sobchak
Reply to  joe
February 25, 2019 10:18 am

Joe: I am not sure that is much of a call out. AOC can take the train from her district to DC easily, and probably without spending a lot more time that air travel out of LaGuardia. And, that route has been electrified since Hector was a pup.

Kenji
February 24, 2019 4:44 pm

Is it not yet obvious that the … self-esteem … movement in public education has been an utter FAILure?

Nancy
Reply to  Kenji
February 24, 2019 6:41 pm

I’d say it has been a success. This know-nothing woman has a very high opinion of herself in spite of the empty head.

Kenji
Reply to  Nancy
February 24, 2019 8:51 pm

Of course you are correct. Shame on me for assuming that teaching self esteem would include ACTUAL knowledge and accomplishment to fuel such esteem. Silly me.

drednicolson
Reply to  Kenji
February 25, 2019 6:45 am

The diploma should read:

Can’t Read.
Can’t Write.
Can’t Add.
High Self-Esteem!

MarkW
Reply to  Kenji
February 25, 2019 9:50 am

Every year they compare the knowledge of high school seniors around the world, in a variety of subjects.
50 years ago, US students led the world in pretty much every subject.

Today the only subject we lead in is self esteem.
Thank you public school unions.

Jamie
February 24, 2019 4:46 pm

Every time this woman opens her mouth she gets into more trouble….the GOP MUST BE LUVIN her

dodgy geezer
February 24, 2019 4:48 pm

PLEASE!!

Will the USA keep supporting this woman? She sounds like the best thing going for the Republicans since Hillary…

Chris Hanley
February 24, 2019 4:49 pm

Tantrums are just a matter of time.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Chris Hanley
February 24, 2019 7:08 pm

She seems to be barely containing her anger at the criticism. I don’t think she takes it well.

Paula Cohen
Reply to  Tom Abbott
February 24, 2019 9:38 pm

And why does she keep repeating the same words? Repeating the same words? (What a dork…)

drednicolson
Reply to  Paula Cohen
February 25, 2019 6:52 am

She’s talking faster than she’s thinking and needs the filler to let her brain catch up. Apparently, plebeian Um’s and Uh’s aren’t sophisticated enough for her.

Hunter
Reply to  drednicolson
February 25, 2019 7:25 am

She could talk a lot slower and still speak faster than she can rationally think.

MarkW
Reply to  Tom Abbott
February 25, 2019 9:50 am

That seems to be a trait with liberals in general.

Ron Long
February 24, 2019 4:52 pm

Looks like both the House and the Senate will get a chance to vote on the original Green New Deal, you know, the version that not only is nuts about Climate Change, but also guarantees an income to those “unwilling to work”. Go OCM, go. I need a drink.

John Tillman
Reply to  Ron Long
February 24, 2019 5:02 pm

And which outlaws fossil fuel-powered cars and planes, plus cows, because methane. How the high-speed trains are supposed to operate on “renewable” energy is a little unclear. Even less well explained is how to get to Hawaii.

John Tillman
Reply to  John Tillman
February 24, 2019 5:06 pm

http://archive.hokulea.com/ike/kalai_waa/kane_search_voyaging_canoe.html

SS Alexandria, replacing the beloved SS Lurline.

Steve Heins
Reply to  John Tillman
February 24, 2019 5:09 pm

AOC can ride the Acella between NYC and DC. It is electric powered. Kinda simple Mr. Tillman.

John Tillman
Reply to  Steve Heins
February 25, 2019 7:47 am

Steve,

Acela’s electric power mainly comes from fossil fuels.

John Tillman
Reply to  Steve Heins
February 25, 2019 8:07 am

PS: I already commented on the Acela Express.

John Tillman February 24, 2019 at 4:58 pm

Should you be interested in electrical power generation in the Acela Corridor:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/national/power-plants/?utm_term=.56ecdcd02e3d

Heavily reliant on natural gas, but also one of the few areas also still using a lot of oil, plus of course yet some coal, but with nuclear and hydro in the mix. Wind, biomass and solar, not so much.

John Tillman
Reply to  Steve Heins
March 3, 2019 3:51 pm

As it turns out, Queen Alex, like Prince Albert, prefers to fly or take chauferred cars rather than the train or even walk one block to it:

https://nypost.com/2019/03/03/ocasio-cortez-responds-to-carbon-footprint-expose-im-just-living-in-the-world/

Airlines, yeah, all the time. Amtrak’s Acela, not so much.

No surprise. Hard to pretend to be Green without also being a hypocrite.

Gregory M
Reply to  John Tillman
February 24, 2019 6:22 pm

comment image

Moderately Cross of East Anglia
Reply to  John Tillman
February 25, 2019 1:02 am

Swim

rotor
Reply to  Ron Long
February 24, 2019 6:29 pm

The House wont be voting on the GND although the Republicans would love to see it. That would require Nancy Pelosi to be on board with it and that will certainly not happen.

Kristen
Reply to  rotor
February 24, 2019 9:36 pm

some supposition McConnel will introduce it in the senate. Then the dem presidential candidates will have to actually pick a position… (I’m sure all will end up hating Pelosi for not getting her a handler.)

Admin
February 24, 2019 4:53 pm

AOC is our greatest asset, the gift which keeps on giving…

Earthling2
Reply to  Eric Worrall
February 25, 2019 7:24 am

She da Boss…good thing she is peaking at 29 years old. At least the Democrats are going to be entertaining while they self destruct from within with these upstart millennial demigods that know nothing bout nothin.

icisil
February 24, 2019 4:54 pm

Considering AOC’s abilities, I don’t think she’s going to last very long in Congress… unless she puts her best c̶a̶m̶e̶l̶ kamela toe forward (like HorizontalHarris reportedly did to get ahead). When I look at Skeletor Malarkey of Mass (the guy who co-sponsored the GND with her) I can’t help but think he wants to bring her under his s̶h̶e̶e̶t̶s̶ mentoring to show her how power really works in DC.

Joel O'Bryan
Reply to  icisil
February 24, 2019 4:59 pm

Mods, comment above this deserves the big snip.

Louis Hooffstetter
Reply to  Joel O'Bryan
February 24, 2019 5:11 pm

I’ll second that.

Ed MacAulay
Reply to  Louis Hooffstetter
February 24, 2019 6:08 pm

+42 It adds nothing to the discussion, and can be quoted to our detriment.

icisil
Reply to  Ed MacAulay
February 24, 2019 7:28 pm

What are you afraid of?

Reply to  Ed MacAulay
February 24, 2019 8:53 pm

“What are you afraid of?”

False flag operators, icisil. People who are trying to make CAGW critics look bad by posting trashy comments on this site.

icisil
Reply to  Ed MacAulay
February 25, 2019 5:30 am

Sounds like you’re out of touch. A skeptic who occasionally writes articles here used on several occasions one of the terms I did. I didn’t read any complaints or sanctimonious fear mongering then. I doubt that any who have responded to my post in the way that they did would have the courage to address him the same way. In fact I know they wouldn’t.

Don Perry
Reply to  icisil
February 24, 2019 5:44 pm

I don’t know about that. People seem to keep re-electing Hank Johnson, who’s of the same intellect as AOC.

Latitude
Reply to  Don Perry
February 24, 2019 6:11 pm

I don’t think AOC even knows what a Guam is….

rotor
Reply to  Latitude
February 24, 2019 6:36 pm

Is it still upright?

Felix
Reply to  icisil
February 24, 2019 6:34 pm

You’re being too cutesy by half when you half to explain your clever insults.

icisil
Reply to  Felix
February 24, 2019 7:20 pm

True for the first instance, but I figured leaving out the strikethrough might be a little too obscure. Oh well, live and learn. Can’t really know a crowd until you step on some toes. Oof…

Matthew Drobnick
Reply to  icisil
February 25, 2019 9:21 am

I enjoyed it, although I respect the sentiment of remaining above similar tactics of the true believers.

Kamala toe made me shoot coffee through my nose. Thanks
🤣

Craig from Oz
Reply to  icisil
February 24, 2019 6:51 pm

thank you for your in depth analysis, icisil.

The world is clearly a better place because of it. So much better in fact that I want you to take 100% ownership of every single word because deep down the rest of us know we are unworthy to even share them.

All you, icisil. You run with what you believe. Take your words. Run with them. Half marathon should do it.

icisil
Reply to  Craig from Oz
February 24, 2019 7:54 pm

Indepth analysis on this thread… Now THAT’s funny! You ought to go look up that term on Wikipedia and note the visual. Wikipedia. It’s funnier than anything I wrote by far.

Rich Davis
Reply to  icisil
February 25, 2019 11:50 am

Regardless of anything else, icisil…
Skeletor Malarkey …
That there is funny!

But if I may… it should be Skeletuh Malahhhhhhkey.
(There is no lettah AH in the Boston alphabet)

Rich Davis
February 24, 2019 4:54 pm

An I’m like, oh no she di’int! Cuz this is not the way a real congress critter talks, I know right?

Sara
Reply to  Rich Davis
February 24, 2019 7:23 pm

That’s right, and we are ALL jealous of her and her popularity and all the rest of that stuff!!

Joel O'Bryan
February 24, 2019 4:56 pm

“…public stance on the bill.”

It is not a bill, that is, the GND in its present form is not a piece of legislation.
The GND introduced by The Dunce of the Senate Markey is a resolution. An embarrassment to anyone with a brain, which Markey and AO-C don’t have and why the stupidity of the GND completely eluded them at the time.

Still it will be used against all Democrats who vote for it. And there may be some who do not vote at all, they’ll be trying to claim they had business elsewhere – out of town. McConnell will probably thwart that tactic by scheduling the resolution vote with some other legislation vote that the Democrats want to be present for.

rotor
Reply to  Joel O'Bryan
February 24, 2019 7:06 pm

It’s really amazing to hear Markey attack the Majority Leader for bringing his idea up for a vote.

Maybe he remembers the last time he had one of his looney ideas put up for a vote.
The Cap and Trade bill could not even pass a Democrat Super Majority controlled Senate and they were crushed in the next election and lost control of both chambers.

Good Job Ed.

Menicholas
Reply to  rotor
February 25, 2019 9:06 am

Incredible to even consider that a Senator would introduce something, and then complain when a vote was called on it.
Markey outsmarted himself, figuring that it would be rejected and not have to face a vote.
Or something.
Hard to imagine how he could throw it out and then lambaste McConnell for bringing it to the floor for a vote.
Perhaps he is not able to muster the humility to withdrawal it, but having seen the reaction to it, is now embarrassed by it to the point that being forced into voting on it is an attack by the opposition.

Paul of Alexandria
Reply to  Joel O'Bryan
February 26, 2019 4:45 pm

It’s a platform on which to base legislation.

HotScot
February 24, 2019 4:58 pm

An innocent lamb to the slaughter.

She will be sacrificed by the Democrats soon.

icisil
Reply to  HotScot
February 24, 2019 5:17 pm

I think they are going to make every effort to primary her in two years.

John Tillman
Reply to  icisil
February 24, 2019 7:27 pm

J-Lo is from the Bronx, but probably isn’t interested in the job.

John Tillman
Reply to  John Tillman
February 24, 2019 7:34 pm

Rosie Perez might be more inclined, but she’s from Brooklyn, so would have to move to Queens. Although residential whereabouts unknown doesn’t seem to have been an obstacle for Rep. Ocasio.

Analitik
Reply to  HotScot
February 24, 2019 5:48 pm

Then we get to watch all the SJWs go ape$hit (or implode)

Reply to  HotScot
February 25, 2019 12:54 am

All the high IQ democrats are pushing eighty. They will be replaced by a wave of low IQ browns, openly hostile to whites and none too keen on Jews, of whom Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is one of the least stupid.

This is partly a race replacement drop in intelligence, but partly it is that Democratic politicians are no longer IQ selected. The younger they are, the dumber they are.

It used to be said that Democrats were the evil party and Republicans the stupid party. This is no longer the case, and it is rapidly becoming less and less the case.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  jim of jim's blog
February 25, 2019 6:13 am

“This is partly a race replacement drop in intelligence”

jim, this statement might be interpreted by some as you believing that some races are less intelligent than others.

Perhaps I am reading too much into it.

Let me just say that I think all races are equal in intelligence when given the same circumstances. And all races include very smart people and very dumb people.

MarkW
Reply to  jim of jim's blog
February 25, 2019 9:55 am

“All the high IQ democrats are pushing eighty.”

On what standard? Comparison to the rest of the Democrats?

Minor nit, lower case democrat is someone who believes in democracy.
Upper case Democrat is a member of the party.

BernardP
February 24, 2019 5:01 pm

What is happening now is that the whole man-made global warming hype has been blown up so high for so long that it has taken a life of its own: Borderline crackpots such as AOC… *children* suing the government… student blocking streets in London… states and cities going ahead with their own climate regulations… people who know nothing about climate change contributing to the hysteria, such as the wine critic in my newspaper (Montreal Gazette).

https://montrealgazette.com/life/zacharkiw-the-hot-and-cold-of-climate-change-and-wine-cultivation

There is not a day without a ludicrous story in the MSM. I could go on… Then you mix this with the habitual dose of Trump Derangement Syndrome, and the result is that we are faced with an accelerating movement that is starting to look like a menace to public order and institutions.

We are facing a hockey stick, but it is not a temperature hockey stick. It’s a civil unrest hockey stick.

Too many brains have been washed.

TheLastDemocrat
Reply to  BernardP
February 24, 2019 5:18 pm

The wine angle is about a decade old.

Chemists have been figuring out fairly precisely how weather and weather changes during grape-growing time affect the character of some specific varieties.

I don’t recall the details, but there are three dimensions along which wines predominantly vary, when experts do taste-testing. Growers want cold at just the right time, rain at just the right time, etc., and those grapes will be in the best shape for wine. Veer off this path a little, and that vintage goes off the path a bit.

So, they now know what causes a year to be “a good year.”

It is quite obvious that weather does not always comply. Nowadays, there is this big claim to say “global warming” is messing with the ability of vintners to plan their work. Of course, they have to add the concept of “micro-environment:” while the micro-environment on one side of a valley is terrible, it may be just fine on the other side.

Yes, I sat through an entire guest lecture on this just to hear how the global warming was going to kill fine wine.

I have to admit: much of this was well-done research.

rah
February 24, 2019 5:03 pm

Yep! Can’t think of a better candidate to throw in the volcano to appease the weather gods though I’m sure she isn’t a virgin.

HotScot
February 24, 2019 5:04 pm

No idea if this’ll work. The UK equivalent of AOC

[youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SyI1gxQU17I&w=537&h=403%5D

If not, try this.

R Shearer
Reply to  HotScot
February 24, 2019 5:40 pm

That can’t be real. LOL

John in Oz
Reply to  R Shearer
February 24, 2019 7:57 pm

No, it’s not real. Look up “Little Britain” to see these comedians.

HotScot
Reply to  R Shearer
February 25, 2019 12:55 am

That is real, well sort of. Vicky is played by a guy.

icisil
Reply to  HotScot
February 24, 2019 5:45 pm

LOL I had to google that. Victoria Titania Pollard. Something going on with the name Titania in Britain I can’t fathom. Have you heard of Titania McGrath?

Rich Davis
Reply to  HotScot
February 24, 2019 5:46 pm

https://www.instagram.com/p/BqlaO0Xgn-j/?utm_source=ig_embed

The video’s funny, but her dad died of cancer so, not so funny.

HotScot
Reply to  Rich Davis
February 25, 2019 12:53 am

Rich Davis

My Mum died of cancer. What’s that got to do with anything?

Rich Davis
Reply to  HotScot
February 25, 2019 6:48 am

As did mine, HotScot. If the video is the “UK equivalent of AOC” as you said, that implies that AOC’s father didn’t get her mother’s name but he knew that the kid was called Alexandria. Now he’s decided that he would like to catch up with her again. It says her mother was a slut and her father didn’t have any part of her family life. Now I don’t know squat about her family life, but it just strikes me as unnecessarily cruel humor, since she may have loved her father. Maybe you were just referring to her dancing skills and didn’t notice the rest of the skit?

There is already enough ammunition for satire just replaying the actual video clips of AOC talking about, well just about anything at all.

Duncan Smith
February 24, 2019 5:08 pm

The NYPost is trying to figure where AOC lives? Where would the champion of ‘green’, integration and the poor live? In time the truth with come out me thinks.

https://nypost.com/2019/02/23/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-is-nowhere-to-be-seen-near-bronx-home/

mike the morlock
Reply to  Duncan Smith
February 24, 2019 6:00 pm

Duncan Smith February 24, 2019 at 5:08 pm
This could be her undoing. She may in fact really live outside her district. She had to in fact live some where. Her boy friend lists the same address, her deceased dad’s apartment.
since she owns it, looking at her tax returns would be interesting. Think property taxes. On a bar-keeper’s wages? Something is amiss.

michael

mike the morlock
Reply to  mike the morlock
February 24, 2019 6:48 pm

Correction AOC’s mom owns the apartment she listed.

michael

CD in Wisconsin
Reply to  Duncan Smith
February 24, 2019 7:01 pm

I’m wondering if this might morph into a significant scandal for AOC. Don’t know whether it will.

Does the law require that you actually RESIDE in the district you represent, or do you only have to own property there? This may end up amounting to nothing at all. We will have to wait and see…

John Tillman
Reply to  CD in Wisconsin
February 24, 2019 7:44 pm

Article 1, Section 2 of the US Constitution says a representative has to be an inhabitant of the state from which elected, not the district. But other laws apply.

John Tillman
Reply to  John Tillman
February 24, 2019 7:47 pm

But Oregon Senator Wyden is an inhabitant of New York, so the law is not strictly enforced.

mark from the midwest
February 24, 2019 5:08 pm

She only got elected because the incumbent was asleep at the wheel during the primary. I suspect she’s not even on the ballot in 2020, the Dem leadership will do everything in their power to make her go away, but by that time the damage will be done and The Donald will be back at 1600

Edwin
Reply to  mark from the midwest
February 24, 2019 6:33 pm

AOC may not be on the ballot in 2020 but it is too soon to tell whether the Democrat leadership is going to do anything to keep her off. Remember she beat Crowley, who was at the time number four in Democrat House leadership. At one point he was believed to be the chosen one to replace Pelosi.

Having watched politics up close and personal since the 1960 election (I wasn’t old enough to vote but worked in a campaign.) I am pretty well convinced that AOC, Omar and a couple of others are deliberate distraction. If the Democrat Leadership believed they were a threat at least right now, they would compartmentalize them immediately. The Leadership isn’t doing that. I believe the leadership likes AOC, Omar, etc keeping the base motivated.

To close, a couple of quotes from Nikita Khrushchev: “The press [western press] is our chief ideological weapon.” And, “We cannot expect Americans to jump from capitalism to communism but we can assist their elected leaders in given Americans small doses of socialism until suddenly they awake to find they have communism.”

Reply to  Edwin
February 24, 2019 7:34 pm

Edwin

To close, a couple of quotes from Nikita Khrushchev: “The press [western press] is our chief ideological weapon.” And, “We cannot expect Americans to jump from capitalism to communism but we can assist their elected leaders in given Americans small doses of socialism until suddenly they awake to find they have communism.

The Russian connection !

Robert B
Reply to  Edwin
February 24, 2019 9:57 pm

The media are well and truly socialist. This article in Australia was the first up on a new google page yesterday. ” The Green New Deal gets America talking, finally, about climate change

https://amp.smh.com.au/world/north-america/the-green-new-deal-gets-america-talking-finally-about-climate-change-20190222-p50zh0.html

An Australian paper doing it’s best to hose down concern about the stupidity of “an early draft published by mistake and didn’t represent the contents of the resolution.”

“Many of the criticisms were overblown and misleading. The resolution doesn’t propose banning cars, cows or air travel, for example.”

Not completely but such massive restrictions that you might get to eat a steak, over the course of a week, once in your life or get to fly to Europe once if you win a lottery.

Menicholas
Reply to  Edwin
February 25, 2019 9:17 am

As Trump proved, the media is no longer the gatekeeper of information being disseminated to the public, as they feel is their right.
Twitter and other social media means that savvy politicians. and children, can bypass them and go straight to the people.
Recall that at one point in the 2016 election primary process, the NYT said they would not cover Trump as if he were a serious candidate.
As if it was up to them. In decades past, that might have worked, but not anymore.
Much the same way that the internet kept the climate mafia from being able to control what information people could get and then do whatever they wanted with no effective opposition.
In the political sphere, once someone like Trump or AOC issues a Tweet or Instagram video that garners widespread attention, they more or less have to cover it, or be throw ever further and more quickly into irrelevance.
Similarly, the DNC establishment would have a hard time preventing AOC from doing what she does. She has made it clear she does not respect them as being her authority…she is responsible only to her voters.
She is now a hero, having steered tens of billions of dollars and 25,000-40,000 jobs away, preventing the calamity of a huge economic boost to her district. Sending jobs and money packing is the new Bringing Home The Bacon.

Edwin
Reply to  Menicholas
February 25, 2019 9:57 am

Menicholas, Ah, if only you were totally correct. First everyone is not on social media or if they are they are not necessarily reading Trump’s or AOC’s “Tweets.” Second, as you say using social media Trump and AOC can go right to the people but we have already seen the social media operators censoring social media post, especially those they label conservatives. And, what happens if the news media no longer reported any posting from either.

AOC’s power today comes from the fact she is an elected Congressperson now in D.C. home of the mainstream media. Pelosi could ensure she is a back bencher and at the same time is so busy that talking to the media as much as she has ends. Do not underestimate the true power of Congressional leaders. The most ruthless politicians in US history were not Presidents but Congressional leaders.

As for Democrat Leadership stopping AOC, why would they at this point. They want her to keep the base activated. They are only interested in defeating Trump so keeping the millennials and the left of their base in the game is better than letting them wonder off and lose interest. What they want is that no matter who they nominate, even if they are not socialists, that enough base will show up in 2020 to beat Trump.

Menicholas
Reply to  Edwin
February 25, 2019 11:08 pm

Everyone is not on social media, that is for certain.
But everyone does not watch news, or read the papers, either.
I believe this site counts as social media.
Twitter has 100 million daily active users. 24% of all male internet users. 21% of female.
FB:
62% of online Seniors aged 65+ are on Facebook and 72% are between age 50-64.
88% of online users of age 18-29 are on Facebook, 84% of those 30-49.
82% of college graduates are on Facebook.
72% of online users of income more than $75K are on Facebook.
210 million use FB in the US. An astounding number, which I am not at all sure I believe, but even half that many is almost all the voters in 2016/

Menicholas
Reply to  Edwin
February 25, 2019 11:15 pm

Regardless of the numbers, it is a lot of people, even if a lot of them are kids or people trading cat pictures or talking about the Oscars.
How many people watch cable news? (I just looked it up…3 million, maybe, less for the other cable news networks)
Twitter is big numbers, and ditto FB.

Rich Davis
Reply to  mark from the midwest
February 24, 2019 7:15 pm

Like two years from now she has to be a Senator, am I right? Majority leader? Then 2024 Casa Blanca?

Michael Jankowski
February 24, 2019 5:11 pm

‘…Ocasio-Cortez claimed that — regardless of success — the “power” goes to the individual who tries…’

Her platform is all about individuals not trying and being kept powerless (no pun intended).

commieBob
Reply to  Michael Jankowski
February 24, 2019 6:13 pm

Who Dares Wins

There was also the rude version about faint hearts and fair maidens. The point is that crazy stuff works more often than it should.

Garland Lowe
February 24, 2019 5:14 pm

Typical millennial, less than 2 months on the job and she claims to be in charge.

Chris Hanley
February 24, 2019 5:17 pm

“… Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell might bring the Green New Deal up for a vote in the upper chamber of Congress in the coming days. The move would force numerous Democratic presidential candidates to take a public stance on the bill …”.
================================================
Quite so:
“Don’t wish too hard for what you want
Or then you might get it
And then when you get it
Then you might wish you never got it all”
(Peter Allen).

markl
February 24, 2019 5:19 pm

Nothing more than another useful idiot spewing the AGW narrative without an understanding of what she’s saying. Big on “save the world” hype and short on common sense. Hopefully all the like minded people will gravitate to her support and leave the rest of us alone.

Keith Sketchley
Reply to  markl
February 24, 2019 5:24 pm

Markl, AOC could grab your genitals, and get away with it because she is a “star.”

MarkW
Reply to  Keith Sketchley
February 24, 2019 6:35 pm

It really is sad how trolls think that they are funny. Or even relevant.

R Shearer
Reply to  Keith Sketchley
February 24, 2019 7:12 pm

Her hands aren’t big enough for me.

Joel Snider
Reply to  Keith Sketchley
February 25, 2019 9:39 am

Wow, Keith – what’s her crotch taste like?

Edwin
Reply to  markl
February 25, 2019 8:11 am

markl, Problem is the number of “like minded people” are growing if one believes the polls and Sanders’ success in the last presidential primaries. Over 40% of Americans actually believe socialism is fairer and better than capitalism. It is even a larger percentage of Democrats. Even a bigger percentage of millennials think socialism is wonderful and they are the biggest voting bloc since “baby boomers.” America’s greatest generation is rapidly dying off.

For us there is a bigger problem, a very large percentage of Americans believe CAGW is a real and immediate problem. The question becomes if socialism and CAGW are properly explained will folks still support both.

J Mac
February 24, 2019 5:23 pm

AOC, the wannabe ‘boss’ of The Children of the Con.

Welcome to the Green New Deal/Same Old Socialist Steal, Y’all!

Tom Abbott
Reply to  J Mac
February 26, 2019 5:28 am

“The Children of the Con”

I like it! That made me laugh! 🙂

John
February 24, 2019 5:24 pm

“Gulag Girl” is here and is mistress of all she surveys. Where is the comic book?
There is a comic book…..right?

kenw
February 24, 2019 5:26 pm

Folks are missing the point. She’s so certifiably loony that anything else that the Democrats come up with will look positively marvelous by comparison.

Tom
Reply to  kenw
February 25, 2019 6:37 pm

Hillary & Crazy Uncle Joe are looking pretty good now.

Warren in New Zealand
February 24, 2019 5:33 pm

After 30 years of preaching doom, gloom, death to all living forms, the old adage, what you sow, so shall you reap comes to mind

As BernardP said above, the children that have grown up listening to this have now come of age, not very intelligent age, but able to vote age anyway.

yarpos
February 24, 2019 5:34 pm

Awww, she thinks her random thought bubbles are policy. That’s so cute.

Neo
February 24, 2019 5:36 pm

If I’m holding a gun.
The best course of action may be to do nothing.
Works for a plethora of situations.

Tom in Florida
February 24, 2019 5:45 pm

She is the poster child for the D-K Effect.

n.n
February 24, 2019 6:01 pm

The Naive New Deal… Full of prophecy and dictatorship. Sounds about right.

February 24, 2019 6:06 pm

What is worrisome here is that an organization called “Girls Who Code” invited this fruitcake.

I have known a few girls who code (and a lot of women that code) – and they would all be rolling around on the floor every time Occasional Cortex opens her mouth.

Pardon me; a correction. At least three of the excellent coders that I have known would probably not be amused in the least. They escaped the Soviet Empire, and know what “socialism” means.

Keith Sketchley
Reply to  Writing Observer
February 24, 2019 6:13 pm

When all the girls and women coders you know are rolling around on the floor, I suggest you mention to them what the salary is of a member of the House of Representatives is. That will stop them from rolling around on the floor. You can code for more than 10 years and won’t make that kind of money.

John Tillman
Reply to  Keith Sketchley
February 24, 2019 6:34 pm

Bill Gates, Larry Page, Sergey Brin and Jeff Bezos are coders of varying skill, among many other founders of startups large and small. So was Paul Allen.

The sky’s the limit for programmers.

MarkW
Reply to  Keith Sketchley
February 24, 2019 6:36 pm

Making a big salary means that she AOC can’t be an idiot?

Keith Sketchley
Reply to  MarkW
February 24, 2019 6:42 pm

She makes more than you.

HotScot
Reply to  Keith Sketchley
February 25, 2019 1:05 am

Keith Sketchley

How do you know?

Joel Snider
Reply to  Keith Sketchley
February 25, 2019 9:37 am

He doesn’t – he’s just really trolling hard.

MarkW
Reply to  Keith Sketchley
February 25, 2019 10:01 am

Even if true, so what?

PS: I notice that once again, you completely evaded the question.

John Tillman
Reply to  MarkW
February 24, 2019 6:49 pm

Even coders who make less than 174 grand per year at least are generally doing useful work, unlike Rep. Ocasio.

And they have done so for more than two years. Remains to be seen how long the Bronx Bomber from left field, who’s really from Westchester, can last. Although CNN might hire her.

Reply to  John Tillman
February 24, 2019 9:27 pm

When I was contract, I grossed $260K a year (admittedly, thirty years experience).

A former boss (a woman coder, by the way) pulled down ~$180K (I only know this because I handled the payroll software at that company. She switched jobs to a university – and I saw that position advertised for $210K at the time. (I didn’t apply, myself – bad experiences with academic parasites).

Now, to be honest, I’ve never had a job where the employees could unilaterally give themselves a raise whenever they fell like it, as the Congress critters can. Nor, to my knowledge (I didn’t try, so it could have been out there) did I have people lining up to pay me several million under the table to screw with my employer.

MarkW
Reply to  John Tillman
February 25, 2019 10:03 am

A new constitutional amendment went into affect a decade or so ago that congress’s ability to give itself pay raises.
A congress can no longer raise their own wage, the best they can do is to give a raise to the next congress. Of course with a 98% re-election rate, that’s not that big of a distinction.

John Tillman
Reply to  Keith Sketchley
February 24, 2019 6:37 pm

And Zuck, of course.

John Tillman
Reply to  John Tillman
February 24, 2019 6:42 pm

My prior post with a list of coding billionaires hasn’t appeared yet.

Members of Congress are overpaid.

Sheri
February 24, 2019 6:16 pm

It’s that just the cutest pink unicorn? Horrors!

WR2
February 24, 2019 6:18 pm

The post Trump era could very well be an Atlas Shrugged moment in history, where the appropriate response for productive, intelligent people is to go “on strike”, and accelerate the inevitable outcome of their idiotic policies. It will have to get much worse before these people can see the error of their ways.

February 24, 2019 6:18 pm

I thought I wrote an early, logical rebuttal to the Green New Deal. I even suggested that perhaps, the Nation should have an Energy Plan based on common sense. If you do a search on the Green New Deal you will find nothing but praise for AOC and socialism. If you search for “Why the Green New Deal is a Bad Deal for America”, you won’t find my book. You will find that the Green New Deal is marvelous and we just don’t understand it. I’m sorry, I just don’t have it in me to go through that daft, daffy legislation again. But I do hope we can buy our uranium back from Russia. Whoops, collusion?

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Martin Capages Jr.
February 26, 2019 5:43 am

I did a search for your book (using Startpage) and did not find your book listed on the first five pages, but this particular WUWT article showed up right at the top of the results.

D. Anderson
February 24, 2019 6:22 pm

President Trump is trying harder than you dear. Go ahead and salute him.

“the “power” goes to the individual who tries.”

MarkW
February 24, 2019 6:29 pm

” yelling “I’m the boss” or “I’m in charge” ”

Isn’t that always the way with socialists. When someone doesn’t agree with you, use power to force them to agree.

Rhys Jaggar
Reply to  MarkW
February 25, 2019 12:26 am

It is the same with capitalists. In a company you follow the party line or get sacked. No convincing people you are right.

Republicans going to war: they do it whether people are convinced or not (so do Democrats by the way).

There is imposition of power from both sides.

HotScot
Reply to  Rhys Jaggar
February 25, 2019 1:08 am

Rhys Jaggar

It is the same with capitalists.

Not in my experience.

Rhys
Reply to  Rhys Jaggar
February 25, 2019 5:06 am

You are an embarrassment to my name.
As a former employer in a labor market with full employment the employer works hard to make their good employees happy or the employee leaves. The customer is always right in a free market.

MarkW
Reply to  Rhys Jaggar
February 25, 2019 10:06 am

The only time I’ve ever been fired for not following the political line was when my bosses were socialists.

Most companies have policies that you can’t bad mouth the company, but beyond that you are allowed to say anything you want.

Perhaps if you actually learned something about capitalism.

John Tillman
Reply to  Rhys Jaggar
February 27, 2019 7:07 am

Rhys,

Wrong!

In the US, large corporations with union contracts are obliged to permit free speech for their employees, and smaller, non-union companies don’t care or their staff is protected by the US and state constitutions.

Capitalism, ie economic freedom, is the flip side of the liberty coin with political freedom.

Steve O
February 24, 2019 6:37 pm

“I’m the boss.”

Ultimately, that’s where socialism winds up. An ideology that believes as part of its DNA that the government should be expanded so it can solve more problems will always seek to expand government, and enhance government power at the expense of personal liberty.

Rhys Jaggar
Reply to  Steve O
February 25, 2019 12:48 am

And TNCs do not expand their coercive influence to grow shareholder profits?

Do me a favour: learn the first rule of politics and business: POWER is what it is all about.

Republican billionaires may be reclusive, but they are in charge as much as any socialist. They want control as much as any left winger.

Sheldon Adelson? David Rockefeller (before he died)? The Koch Brothers? Etc etc.

You cross a Republican administration, they put the surveillances teams on you and treat you like a prisoner. They do NOT believe in freedom, they believe in power.

You go out there and preach self-determination for Venezuela, free of John Bolton, Mike Pompeo et al. Do the same for Iran. Iraq. Syria. Afghanistan.

You will have your phone calls overtly monitored, your car tracked and followed, your financial transactions reported back to you, you mail tampered with and much, much more.

I DO believe in freedom. And I know there is no freedom joining any political party…..you follow the party line or else, especially when US wars are being touted. As true in the UK as in the US.

HotScot
Reply to  Rhys Jaggar
February 25, 2019 1:21 am

Rhys Jaggar

And TNCs do not expand their coercive influence to grow shareholder profits?

Not primarily. If there were no products or services to sell in the first place they wouldn’t have anything to be coercive about.

Business is about competition. It may be corrupted by the power of politics, which it frequently is (John Selwyn Gummer to mention just one such individual) but primarily, the power lies with the consumer.

Gerald Ratner is sufficient evidence of that.

You then go on to distort your argument by citing government agencies which are not businesses.

Everything you own is thanks to the free market principle. What did the Chinese and Russians own under their extreme socialist regimes? Absolutely nothing. Now they have converted to free market capitalism as a functioning principle, there are , allegedly, more Rolls Royces sold in China than anywhere else in the world.

Steve O
Reply to  Rhys Jaggar
February 25, 2019 5:46 am

One of the two major American political party’s ideology has expansion of government in their DNA. The other major American political party has individualism in their DNA. The grassroots supporters of the Democrats generally favors government expansion, while the grassroots supporters of the Republicans generally favors smaller government.

The fact that government itself generally favors more expansive government does not change that. Socialism is expansive. Do you somehow disagree with that?

MarkW
Reply to  Rhys Jaggar
February 25, 2019 10:09 am

The only mental ability the average socialist ever masters, is projection.

They just assume that the opposition must be as evil as they are.
They have no evidence to support such an assumption, other than the fact that it makes them feel better about their own shortcomings.

Do you have any evidence that right wingers and capitalists actually do the things left wingers are constantly being caught doing?

Oh yes, the obligatory, US wars. As if there were no wars before the US was founded.

Once again, the only thing Rhys demonstrates is the desperate need of those on the left to believe that those who oppose them must be evil.

SocietalNorm
February 24, 2019 6:53 pm

This is for “Girls Who Code,” right? Did she explain that, since they will make high salaries she want to punish them for their stealing from poor people?
They might not make the 70% income tax bracket, but with state, city, local, Social Security, etc. I’m sure that they will have only 30% or less of their money left.
Also, she and her cronies just took thousands of job opportunities away from any NYC girls who code, which, even if they didn’t work for Amazon, would have resulted in higher salaries for them due to increased demand.

Not sure why they would be cheering.

Sheri
Reply to  SocietalNorm
February 24, 2019 7:41 pm

Maybe because they too got participation trophies for their coding and are actually the same useless placeholders that write the code for marketing search engines (which is all of them). They are responsible for my not buying from many merchants who have search engines returning “socks” when I ask for potato chips. It’s revolting and convincing me coding is not a profession.

SocietalNorm
February 24, 2019 7:55 pm

This is a deadly serious post.
This is what Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez want to do to us.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jxNMDCMM3dI
Civilization is actually a very fragile thing.

Jim
February 24, 2019 8:10 pm

I thought idiocracy would take longer to get here.

Gordon Dressler
February 24, 2019 8:11 pm

Ms. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez,

So, you say you’re the boss over me because I haven’t fronted a climate change policy, eh?

OK, as the saying goes “it’s time to put up or shut up.” Your order me to do something, anything . . . and just see what will happen. How ’bout that!

phaedo
February 24, 2019 8:31 pm

It’s nice to see such a fine rhetorician articulating her thoughts so eloquently.

Kyle in Upstate NY
February 24, 2019 9:01 pm

Oh wow, LOL, this woman is a piece of work. She is one of those who would be living in a palace while everybody is starving due to the failure of her plans.

I forget who said it, but she really reminds me of the saying: “The urge to save the world is almost always a false flag for the urge to control it.”

Alan Robertson
February 24, 2019 9:31 pm

She’ll take a tumble on you
Roll you like you were dice
Until you come up blue
She’s got Charlie Manson eyes

She’ll expose you
When she snows you off your feet with the crumbs she throws you
She’s ferocious
And she knows just what it takes to make a pro blush
All the boys think she’s a spy
She’s got Marshall Applewhite eyes

She’ll turn the music on you
You won’t have to think twice
She’s pure as New York snow
She’s got Adam Lanza eyes

lyrics sort of from Kim Carnes

Edward Hanley
February 24, 2019 11:37 pm

Well, No. Bruce Springsteen is still the Boss. Whatever you are, history will decide.

griff
Reply to  Edward Hanley
February 25, 2019 12:33 am

I’m with you on that!

davidmhoffer
February 25, 2019 12:17 am

That’s so sad.
She’s deluded herself into believing that Star Wars is real, and she’s Yoda. Just do!

She also apparently misunderstood the dialogue. She heard “use the force” and only heard “use force”…
Just do! She told you to! She da boss!

John Endicott
Reply to  davidmhoffer
February 25, 2019 5:26 am

She’s deluded herself into believing that Star Wars is real, and she’s Yoda. Just do!

Just do! She told you to! She da boss!

Sounds more like she’s Jar Jar Binks than Yoda.

Rhys Jaggar
February 25, 2019 12:39 am

I think people are taking these words far too literally.

She is ‘in charge’ of trying to get the GND billl through legislative oversight. Just as another other Rep would be ‘in charge’ of trying to get their bill through.

She may or may not get it through. What does get through, if anything gets through, may be a vastly watered down bill.

No-one else is trying because maybe nobody else thinks it is the right approach.

What I think is arrogant is equating herself as a first term Congresswoman to FDR through hooking onto the slogan NEW DEAL. New Deal is a very emotive term for older Americans. It was about choosing the future rather than suicide where their parents were concerned in many cases. That is not what GND is about, despite its grandiose language.

There is now a Republican/climate skeptic community being triggered emotionally every time AOC says anything. What she has said here is just girl talk, nothing serious.

Here are things which would be serious:
1. Whilst spouting morals, she is a fully trained surveillance operative preying like a parasite on the work of 250,000 unconsenting adults.
2. She is flying around the world first class spouting GND slogans.
3. She is an avowed warmonger, willing to become an MIC shill to get to the White House.
4. She does not attend to district matters brought to her by her electors.
5. Etc etc.

HotScot
Reply to  Rhys Jaggar
February 25, 2019 1:27 am

Rhys Jaggar

Trumps “locker room banter” was taken pretty seriously. Why not this?

Gordon Dressler
Reply to  Rhys Jaggar
February 25, 2019 6:57 am

Rhys,
I’m in charge of taking out the trash . . . that doesn’t mean I’m the boss over all trash generated by my family.

The analogy is apt.

John Endicott
Reply to  Rhys Jaggar
February 25, 2019 11:08 am

Rhys, nice attempt at rationalizing her irrational statement, but the context she said it doesn’t support your rationalizations.

Ivor Ward
February 25, 2019 12:52 am

You just don’t understand!!!! All you have to do is BELIEVE and the Green New Deal will happen.

Stop bothering our fresh new leader with details.

michel
February 25, 2019 12:58 am

But actually skeptics should applaud AOC. The GND does not go far enough, it does not specify what the consequences of adopting its energy requirements would be. But it does at least spell out part of what you would have to do to comply with the demands of the global warming alarmists.

Climate skeptics most logial and effective response to this would be take it to the next step. Demand that the GND advocates also put together policies which will move the population into dense urban areas served by mass transit. Change diet, consumption and work patterns. Huge changes in agriculture.

The more concrete and specific thinking about this stuff, the better. The GND actually is proposing going back to 1870, but with wind turbines and computers and with a hugely expanded population. As people start to debate it, this will become clear.

She is doing the world a great service. Without realizing quite what that service is. It is a bit like proposing to avert teenage pregnancy by abstention. At a certain point, people start to realize what it will take to enforce abstention on teenagers.

That is when they wake up and smell the coffee, and they will also wake up when they realize that the GND is indeed a logical consequence of the alarmist world view, this is indeed what not just the US but the world should be doing, if they are right, and this is what it means in specific terms.

hunter
February 25, 2019 1:04 am

I think it is time to start placing bets on if AOC will finish her first term or be tossed out early.
A wise Latina would remember the Spanish proverb,
“A fish is caught by it’s mouth” before opening hers quite so much.
The public service that she was s providing of waking people up to just how ignorant and arrogant socialism truly is important and highly appreciated.

John Endicott
Reply to  hunter
February 25, 2019 11:11 am

Saying stupid s–t isn’t a grounds for being tossed out early. She’ll finish her term, but she’ll piss off a number of powerful members of her own party in the process. The real betting on is whether she’ll survive the next primary let alone get re-elected.

mikewaite
February 25, 2019 1:13 am

There is a much more positive view of the GND which Pat at Jonova has picked up :
http://joannenova.com.au/2019/02/milennials-havent-forgotten-mao-stalin-or-lenin-they-never-knew-them/#comments
(comment 34.1)
The economics Professor Jeffrey Sachs (Columbia) thinks the deal is achievable apparently :
just a snippet:

-“What is absolutely clear is that the Green New Deal is affordable. The claims about the unaffordability of these goals are pure hype. The detailed plans that will emerge in the coming months will expose the bluster…
Decarbonization will include the following measures. Electricity generation will shift from coal and natural gas to wind, solar, hydro, and other zero-carbon technologies. Cars and trucks will shift from gasoline to electricity, using batteries or fuel cells (with hydrogen manufactured by electrolysis). Planes will use electricity for short flights and advanced zero-carbon fuels for longer flights. Buildings will be heated by electricity (such as heat pumps) rather than boilers and furnaces.
The costs of renewable energy are plummeting, making decarbonization eminently feasible…”–

Now Sachs is a highly intelligent and eminent expert in sustainable development. Could he be wrong?
I do not think that the debate is as easy a win for the conservatives as most of the comments above suggest .
(But the bit about planes?)

HotScot
Reply to  mikewaite
February 25, 2019 2:14 am

mikewaite

The guy’s just another nut job.

The greens hate hydro and will do everything to block it, we all know wind can’t provide a solution, nor can solar.

In his head, those cars and trucks will be drawing enormous amounts of extra electricity from a grid with those two unreliable sources of electricity. 40%+ of UK households have no off road parking, so how will they convert millions of 240v 13amp lampposts to provide the electricity to power millions of cars simultaneously. And, certainly where I live, that would mean, probably three or four cars per lamppost.

And I just love this idea of heat pumps. Great where they can be installed in a new build where the ground is being dug up anyway, but try installing a ground source heat pump into an existing dwelling. It is horrendously expensive, you’re talking £20+ in the UK. Air source heat pumps aren’t much cheaper. I know, I have made my own inquiries.

In addition, to have GSHP or ASHP operate well, a house must be super insulated. Virtually none of the housing stock in the UK is insulated at all, never mind super insulated. Even modern houses aren’t insulated sufficiently to benefit from these technologies. You can forget about city centres as well, none of the high rise buildings in London or anywhere else for that matter are sufficiently insulated to benefit from heat pumps. Does he imagine we are just going to tear them down and replace them with brand new buildings? In his socialist dreams!

The costs of renewable energy are plummeting, making decarbonization eminently feasible…”

If you, or he believes that you will believe anything. Go along to Paul Homewood’s site https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com and have a gander at some of the numbers he posts regularly about the fake claim that renewables are getting cheaper.

The debate isn’t easy to win because of all the barefaced lies perpetuated by our left wing media about renewable energy.

Were renewable energy so cheap and reliable there wouldn’t be 120,000,000 people predicted to die prematurely in developing countries by 2050 from smoke inhalation because they are forced to burn wood and cow dung over open fires because they have no access to electricity. (World Health Organisation numbers). If windfarms were so cheap, there would be, right now, thousands of acres of wind farms being built to alleviate this disaster, but there’s not. Why? Because they are far too expensive and simply don’t work!

Perhaps if these green nutters were the humanitarians they claim to be they would allow these people reliable, cheap fossil fuel derived electricity and stop the largest deliberate genocide human history has ever seen before they preach to the wealthy west that we are evil.

Brian McCain
Reply to  HotScot
February 25, 2019 9:48 am

Put in my vote to do away with heat pumps. I grew up in the US Midwest where we had gas heat. Rooms were comfortable when my Dad would actually would let us turn the thermostat up a bit. Fast forward a number of decades and I live in North Carolina with “milder winters” and am freezing my rear off when I sleep with our high efficiency heat pump. All I get is slightly above ambient temperature air coming out that is way below skin temperature. Doesn’t help that the duct blows right on the bed where I sleep.

mikewaite
Reply to  HotScot
February 25, 2019 9:54 am

HotScot
I agree with what you are saying , but that is not the point of my post (which I should have expanded upon). Prof Sachs is an important academic , with high “impact factor” in Govt circles around the world .If he says that the GND is a good idea people will listen.
However he is not an engineer or scientist and clearly has not been able to hold conversations with the sort of practical people who can put him right about the technical difficulties/impossibilities of GND. But he is intelligent , if he can be appraised of the problems then his opinion of GND will trend towards that espoused by most of the commenters here – and again he will be listened to by the people who matter , because, lets face it , you and I (alone) have little influence on political and economic decisions .

John Endicott
Reply to  mikewaite
February 25, 2019 11:39 am

Prof Sachs is an important academic

Sorry, there’s no such thing. What there is are people who will listen because he’s espousing a viewpoint that they agree with, and people who will not listen because he is espousing nonsense. Hopefully there are more of the later than the former.

John Endicott
Reply to  HotScot
February 25, 2019 11:36 am

Does he imagine we are just going to tear them down and replace them with brand new buildings?

That’s precisely what the Green New Deal proposes for the US – Every single building is to be torn apart and rebuilt with the latest green technology – another reason the Green New Deal is not achievable despite what this “intelligent” idiot of a professor thinks. Just the labor required to tear apart and rebuild every building in the time frame specified by the GND would take more construction laborers than currently exist in all the world.

knr
Reply to  mikewaite
February 25, 2019 5:09 am

other zero-carbon technologies, fairy dust and unicorn farts perhaps ?
You see the problem with wind and solar is that there no control over the supplied side, you depend on processes over which you have no control , so you cannot get it when you need it only when its available which is not the same thing at all.
And all the fall back they have to deal with this issue is ‘storage ‘ although that also seems to made up of wishful think or batters which can offer nothing like the capacity required unless you build city block size facilities .
In reality the knowledge that renewable cannot supply in the manner required , is not a problem because they consider the ‘manner required ‘ to be a problem in the first place . They want nothing less than drastic reduction in energy usage not through efficiency but through the return to the ‘idealised rural past’ before evil industry when a lot less energy was needed . The cost of that is someone they ignore at best or happily accept at worst .

John Endicott
Reply to  mikewaite
February 25, 2019 11:31 am

mikewaite,

I don’t know the man, but judging from what you’ve wrote that he’s said, the man is not “intelligent” he’s an idiot.

Electricity generation will shift from coal and natural gas to wind, solar, hydro, and other zero-carbon technologies.

the first question anyone with an IQ greater than their shoe size would ask is “name these other zero-carbon technologies?” because other than Nuclear (which most Green New Dealers won’t even consider) they don’t exist, and certainly won’t in the short time frame that AOC suggests the GND needs to be implemented in. That alone makes it unrealistic. You can’t make your plans based on technologies that don’t exist magically coming into existence just when you need them to.

Cars and trucks will shift from gasoline to electricity, using batteries or fuel cells (with hydrogen manufactured by electrolysis)

There’s all kinds of reason why that shift won’t happen anytime soon (barring draconian government intervention). 1) range anxiety, 2) battery life in cold environments, 3) Lack of charging facilities & long length of charging time 4) Fear of the Hindenburg effect (for the hydrogen fuel cells) to name just a few. There’s a reason that such “alternate fuel” vehicles make up only a very, very small niche of cars and trucks sold despite the subsidies and tax incentives for purchasing them (and that niche would be many times smaller without the subsidies and tax incentives)

Planes will use electricity for short flights and advanced zero-carbon fuels for longer flights.

Again, banking on currently non-existent technology is not an intelligent means of planning society. Manned electric planes are still only in the experimental stage and “advanced zero-carbon fuels for longer flights” don’t currently exist and even if invented tomorrow would require many years before they’re ready for prime time (if ever).

The costs of renewable energy are plummeting, making decarbonization eminently feasible

Bwahahahaha. Oh, wait, he’s serious. No, they’re not. Not when you add in all the real costs that advocates gloss over. There’s a reason why energy prices skyrocket as wind & solar take on larger and larger shares of the grid in all the places that have been “transitioning” to renewables. Perhaps the “intelligent” and “expert” Professor would be wise to look into that.

drednicolson
Reply to  John Endicott
February 25, 2019 5:00 pm

Not to mention that producing hydrogen through electrolysis is a net energy loss. You expend more energy breaking the molecular bond than you will ever get back by combustion of the resulting hydrogen.

This academic’s background likely wasn’t in chemistry.

MarkW
Reply to  mikewaite
February 25, 2019 5:43 pm

There isn’t a single item in the GND that won’t bankrupt the country. All 10 combines is insanity to the 10th power.

How many trillions have we spent on wind and solar so far, and yet it only produces 1 to 2% of all the energy we need. (All energy, not just all electricity, because according to the GND, all other forms of power are to be banned.)

How many trillions are we going to have to spend on batteries so the country doesn’t have to shut down at night?

High speed trains? How many billions of dollars did CA spend, and they couldn’t even get a small section working.

Rebuild every single building in the entire country? It would take the entire federal budget to handle even a small state.

And so on.

Liberals lie, it’s what they do.

Ve2
February 25, 2019 1:34 am

So people are like, ‘Oh it’s unrealistic. Oh it’s vague. Oh it doesn’t address this little minute thing.’
Or even where the extra $38 trillion is coming from.

E J Zuiderwijk
February 25, 2019 3:39 am

You must give it to the New Yorkers for sending such a peach of a candidate to Congress.

Doug Huffman
February 25, 2019 4:23 am

Law and order conservative tyrants have always been preferred to the chaos and anarchy of progressive demagogues.. That is how Adolph Shikelgruber was democraticaly elected. TRUMP too!

Trump 2020 vision for the future. Make America Great Again. Make America Armed and Safe Again. Make America Wholesome Again.

E J Zuiderwijk
Reply to  Doug Huffman
February 25, 2019 4:53 am

Are you saying that mr T is the new mr H? When did T march into Poland? I must have missed something.

hunter
Reply to  Doug Huffman
February 25, 2019 7:29 am

Wow, the mindless trolls are really oozing in today.

MarkW
Reply to  Doug Huffman
February 25, 2019 10:15 am

Someone who sees the world in terms of black and white.
There’s tyranny and there’s chaos, nothing in between.
Sheesh.

MarkW
Reply to  Doug Huffman
February 25, 2019 10:15 am

PS: Modern progressives are completely tyrannical. No anarchists in there.

drednicolson
Reply to  MarkW
February 25, 2019 5:10 pm

Anarchism as a political philosophy is just about as far right as you can get.

The libertarian wants as little government as can be gotten away with.
The anarchist wants not even that.

Norman Blanton
February 25, 2019 4:46 am

I’m the Boss,

Sounds just like a democratic SOCIALIST

Tom in Florida
Reply to  Norman Blanton
February 25, 2019 6:43 am

“I’m the Bosss”, isn’t that what got “Ace” Rothstein in trouble.

MarkW
Reply to  Tom in Florida
February 25, 2019 10:17 am

On the other hand, “Who’s the Boss” gave Tony Danza’s career a big boost.
(and Alyssa Milano as well.)

John Endicott
Reply to  MarkW
February 25, 2019 11:43 am

Shame that Alysssa grew up to be such a far-left loony.

ResourceGuy
February 25, 2019 6:02 am

This is where a quantum computer would come in handy. That is to figure out the best mix of ways to take advantage of the situation with crazy stupid in play. Never let a good political party crisis go to waste—right Rahm?

Joel Snider
February 25, 2019 7:54 am

Well, she’s running true to the example of those before her.

Greg F
February 25, 2019 8:27 am

Maybe we could get her to introduce a bill to repeal the laws of thermodynamics.

Joel Snider
Reply to  Greg F
February 25, 2019 8:37 am

Don’t joke – they’ll try it.

William Handler
February 25, 2019 9:07 am

Way too much hate for someone who seems pretty forthright. I know she is wrong about a lot of her ideas and facts, but given her world view where she believes that the world will end unless she does something, her statements, positions and actions all follow and make sense. True she is mixing socialist ideology in with climate policy….But lets be critical of the real flaw here, her acceptance of the armageddon crowds imminent heat death of humanity. Not sure how we could change her mind on that, it ain’t easy.

MarkW
Reply to  William Handler
February 25, 2019 10:19 am

Hitler was pretty forthright about his plans as well.

There are two flaws. Her acceptance of thermageddon, and her desire to enslave everyone to her notion of a perfect world.

John Endicott
Reply to  MarkW
February 25, 2019 11:58 am

Not to mention the third flaw: It’s economically unfeasible. There isn’t enough money in the budget to pay for it at any tax rate.

MarkW
Reply to  John Endicott
February 25, 2019 5:49 pm

There isn’t enough money in the entire country to pay for it.

John Endicott
Reply to  MarkW
February 26, 2019 7:04 am

One estimate puts it at greater than the GDP of the entire world. There literally isn’t enough money in the world to pay for it.

Greg F
Reply to  William Handler
February 25, 2019 1:40 pm

True she is mixing socialist ideology in with climate policy….But lets be critical of the real flaw here, her acceptance of the armageddon crowds imminent heat death of humanity.

Her true flaw is her arrogance.

Joel Snider
Reply to  William Handler
February 25, 2019 4:15 pm

I actually don’t think it’s nearly enough hate, all things considered.

February 25, 2019 9:32 am

Blind idealism seems impenetrable by logic, and so perhaps a high volume of ridicule is a necessary measure to make any dent in her potential for rational thinking.

She’s likeable, no doubt. But likeability does not always trump shallowness, and, in her case, it makes her look even more like a moron.

Pamela Gray
February 25, 2019 9:36 am

I will use AOC’s logic: She must be relieved that historical American Bison herds have been eliminated. And is now after domesticated cows for the same reason. Note to AOC: Be sure and tell Pocahauntus that little piece of info so she can let her tribe know that everything’s good, methane producing bison are essentially gone and cows are next.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/248350887_Methane_emissions_from_bison-An_historic_herd_estimate_for_the_North_American_Great_Plains

Idiots.

John Tillman
Reply to  Pamela Gray
February 26, 2019 6:32 pm

Anything that happened before the onset of dangerous man-made global warming in that overheated Senate hearing room in 1988 just doesn’t matter. Especially ot Rep. Ocasio, who wasn;t even born yet.

She didn’t start the fire.

RockyRoad
February 25, 2019 9:38 am

AOC is WRONG!! She is NOT the first to try to destroy America! I’d say Hitler had a go at it, and he failed! Hopefully, AOC will also fail! (The only way she could ever fund her pet projects is to get taxpayers to foot the bill since venture capitalists would never touch them!!)

John Endicott
Reply to  RockyRoad
February 25, 2019 11:47 am

You don’t even need to go back to WWII to find someone trying to destroy America, you need only look back to the previous occupant of the White House. One thing for AOC, she’s certainly more ambitious in her America destroying ideas the Obummer was.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  John Endicott
February 26, 2019 6:09 am

“One thing for AOC, she’s certainly more ambitious in her America destroying ideas the Obummer was.”

Don’t underestimate Obama. He is still trying to destroy America as founded, with his weaponizing of the FBI, the DOJ and US intelligence agencies in his effort to prevent Trump from being elected and now that he is elected, Obama’s plan is to undermine Trump in every way.

Obama and Biden are the Elephants in the room. Someone ought to ask them about their role in these ongoing traitorous acts against the very foundations of our Republic.

William Astley
February 25, 2019 11:27 am

China vs the US

China has a made in China 2025 plan to dominate all industries.

The Democrats have a plan to bankrupt the US by 2030 and to destroy US industry.

One of many Democrats country bankrupt and industry destroying plans (all the Democrat plans require spending trillions of dollars) is to spend trillions of dollars on green scams that have been proven to not significantly reduce anthropogenic CO2 emissions (see Germany where CO2 emissions have remained the same for the last 9 years even though billions and billions has been spent on wind and sun gathering.)

What plan has the greatest chance of success? Help!!!

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-02-12/rubio-seeks-to-counter-made-in-china-2025-manufacturing-plan

Senator Marco Rubio is proposing legislation that would counteract China’s “Made in China 2025” economic-development initiative by restricting and taxing Chinese investment in the U.S. and by raising import duties on goods produced by industries supported by Beijing’s program.

“The American people know something has gone wrong,” Rubio, a Republican from Florida, wrote in the introduction to the report. “Will our country look more like the land of shared opportunity my parents found when they arrived, or will we become a stagnant nation fighting over how to divide up what is left?”

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/ocasio-cortez-says-there-is-a-legitimate-question-that-needs-to-be-asked-is-it-okay-to-still-have-children

“The whole premise of the Green New Deal, is that we’re screwed on climate. I’m sorry to break it to you,” she said. “When it comes to climate in particular, we’re actually screwed. There is a global threat to the planet.”
She added: “At this point, we don’t even have to prove it. Just walk outside in the winter in a lot of places, and its, either way worse than you’re used to, or way warmer than you’re used to.”
“Hurricanes, storms, wildfires,” she said. “We are dying now.”

John Endicott
Reply to  William Astley
February 25, 2019 11:52 am

She added: “At this point, we don’t even have to prove it. Just walk outside in the winter in a lot of places,…

It’s called weather. There’s nothing “unprecedented” about it. There’s always been cold winters and warm winters and hurricanes and storms and wildfires and any other “extreme” weather event she could care to name. And by all the records we have of such events, they are not getting worse or more frequent. Indeed some of them have been getting less not more in recent years.