7 Stories on Liberal hypocrisy


AirDrake

  1. Superstar rapper Drake, who rails against climate change, buys massive private jet

The hypocrisy of rapper Drake comes out in a Climate Depot post of 10 May 2019.

The rapper Drake, who has surpassed The Beatles in song popularity, is now the proud owner of a 767 cargo jet despite his vocal climate change campaigning.

Drake acquires a gigantic plane. – Via Daily Caller – “The superstar rapper showed off his plane, called “Air Drake,” on Instagram Friday, and it’s downright absurd. The interior is absolutely massive, and he points out that it’s not a ‘timeshare’ or ‘rental.’ It’s just all his.”

While I support his right to use a jet and as many gas-guzzling SUV’s as he wants in the commission of his work, he needs to stop preaching unproven theories to the rest of us.

AOCripsUber

  1. Socialist ‘It’ Candidate Ocasio-Cortez Rips ‘Unregulated’ Uber, Then Spends $4,000 On … Uber

In a 28 August 2018 Investor’s Business Daily article, the way AOC uses ride shares (rather than public transportation) comes to light.

Socialism: Self-described social democratic congressional candidate Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is the gift that keeps on giving. The youthful socialist can hardly go a day without saying something that undescores the hypocrisy of her beliefs.

Last week, we noted the irony of the socialist movement’s most visible star (besides Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, of course) lamenting the closure of the restaurant she once worked at. Turns out, the restaurant closed largely due to enormous hikes in the minimum wage — a policy Ocasio-Cortez would enthusiastically impose on the whole country.

For her latest display of socialist hypocrisy, you have to go back to March.

Then, tragically, a New York cab driver named Nicanor Ochisor took his own life. He did so apparently in response to financial struggles. As Zuri Davis of the Reason.com blog points out, New York Times reporter Noam Scheiber immediately blamed ride-sharing companies Uber and Lyft for the death and faulted local government for letting the ride-sharing companies operate.

Seeing a chance to score political points, Ocasio-Cortez tweeted: “NYC’s fourth driver suicide. Yellow cab drivers are in financial ruin due to the unregulated expansion of Uber. What was a living wage now pays under minimum.”

And she had a whole socialist agenda for fixing the problem, as she saw it.

“We need:

-to call Uber drivers what they are: EMPLOYEES, not contractors

-Fed jobs guarantee

-Prep for automation”

But, surprise! Fox News reports that Federal Election Commission records show that Ocasio-Cortez’s campaign used Uber repeatedly, despite her sharp criticisms of the business model.

Indeed, her campaign spent around $4,000 on 160 Uber rides in California alone from April to late June. For the record, Ocasio-Cortez isn’t running for office in California, but in New York. Apparently, California is where the really BIG socialist billionaires live.

(Read more at Investor’s Business Daily)

For someone who claims to be so so concerned about the environment (to the point of forcing the rest of us to embrace socialism and abandon our cars), she sure does not want to sacrifice anything.

Hypocritical Democrat. AKA, common Democrat.

AOCrecants

  1. #AOC recants: ‘…world ending in 12 years due to climate change’ – it was “a joke”

In the electronic folds of the Watts Up with That blog, we are informed that AOC’s demands that we should give up all for the Green New Deal were just a joke that sea sponges should have understood.

Ocasio-Cortez recants with insult: I Was Joking About World Ending In 12 Years, and you’re an idiot if you believed me

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) said that she was joking around when she claimed the world was going to end in 12 years if we do not take serious action against Climate Change, a declaration she’s been widely criticized over. The 29-year-old socialist mocked the Republican Party for taking her claim about the end of the world seriously, which she suggested was a combination of “dry humor + sarcasm.”

AOC in a tweet published on Mother’s Day:

Read the Full Article

She looked dead serious to me when she first said it:

(Read the whole article at Watts Up with That)

I am with Mr. Watts. I saw her proposal of the Green New Deal as a real platform for her. However, I can also see the other side.

That is, by AOC making her own “deplorable” statement like this, she shows that she is the joke and those that vote for her are the punch line.

alexandria-ocasio-cortez-green-new-deal-speech-tout

  1. Green New Deal Vote Exposes Democratic Hypocrisy on AOC-Led Insanity

Even left-leaning CNN cannot help but poke at AOC’s Green New Deal as a stupid idea.

One thing Democrats are notorious for is sticking together. However, the ludicrous Green New Deal is going to expose which of them will break ranks from the ascendent Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez wing of the party and air on the side of sanity.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has set a vote over the Green New Deal for Tuesday afternoon. Most Democrats have boasted about the greatness of the radical proposal since it was introduced last month. However, since McConnell said, “okay, let’s vote,” they’ve been screaming bloody murder.

When the resolution for the deal is introduced, the word is many Democrats plan to vote “present.” That way they avoid actually saying yea or nay.

Do they think that by dodging the question in this manner, the American voter won’t see their complicity? If it’s such a good thing, sounding off on it early would be great, right?

(Read more at CNN)

Further down in the CNN article, the author says “virtually all” Democrat presidential contenders support the Green New Deal. However, an incomplete post that I had to leave behind found that all of the then-18 (now 24) contenders were for the Green New Deal. They reaaly need to own their issues.

  1. AOC is a Hypocrite on Global Warming

A 5 March 2019 opinion piece by Michael Knowles outlines the hyprocrisy of AOC.

Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez likes to talk a good game on environmental issues, but recent findings show that while she talks the talk, she does not walk the walk. Michael Knowles calls her out on Monday’s episode of “The Michael Knowles Show.” Transcript and video below.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, our favorite socialist from Yorktown Heights, she said (paraphrasing), “We’re like, the world is going to end in 12 years if we don’t address climate change.” That’s what she said, so what she is saying is we need to have zero greenhouse gases, we need a full transition off of fossil fuels within ten years or else the world will end, or else it is not okay to have children, that’s what she said, (paraphrasing) “You have to ask yourself if it’s moral to have children in this world. And what did we learn from federal filings?” She’s a hypocrite, she doesn’t practice what she preaches. So Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez lives in the city with the greatest subway system in the world, and according to her federal filings, she listed over 1,000 Uber, Lyft and Juno transactions during her campaign. She spent $30,000 on rideshare apps. Guess where her campaign headquarters was located? One minute away from the Seven Train and the Seven Train can take you anywhere because the Seven Train connects to a bunch of other lines so you can get all around. She lived a one-minute walk away from the Seven Train and she spent 30 G’s on ride-share apps. To put that into perspective, Max Rose, who’s another freshman Democrat from New York, he only spent $6,000 on rideshare apps and he only spent them on 329 rides during his campaign, so she used multiples more than this.

(Read more at the Daily Wire)

Add to this, AOC flew to SXSW so that she could spout liberal tripe in front of an accepting Democrat audience.

AOC-apartment

  1. “More Equal” AOC lives in a luxury apartment

As noted by a 19 February 2019 Washington Examiner article

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., recently moved into a luxury apartment complex in Washington, D.C. that does not offer the affordable housing units that were a key plank in the New York congresswoman’s campaign platform.

Ocasio-Cortez, 29, who said in November that she was concerned about being able to afford rent in D.C., now earns a $174,000 annual salary and is living in a newly built high-rise in the city’s Navy Yard area, the Washington Free Beacon reported last week.

The freshman congresswoman, a self-described socialist, campaigned on a platform to expand affordable housing, and her controversial Green New Deal proposal promises “Safe, affordable, adequate housing” for all.

But Ocasio-Cortez’s new building — built by leading D.C. developer WC Smith — is part of a luxury complex whose owners specifically do not offer affordable units under Washington, D.C.’s Affordable Dwelling Units program. The Washington Examiner is not naming the building or complex.

In 2018, a civil rights attorney sued the Washington, D.C. government for allegedly discriminatory gentrification policies, claiming that development in Navy Yard area and other parts of southeast D.C. encouraged an influx of affluent “millennial creatives” who displaced minority residents.

“We need to kick luxury real estate lobbyists to the curb and defend working people’s way of life,” Ocasio-Cortez said last March. “Skyrocketing cost of living is a national crisis that CAN be addressed. It’s not just an NYC issue – it’s happening in every US metro area.”

Ocasio-Cortez also promised not to take campaign contributions from luxury developers during her campaign. “It’s time we stand up to the luxury developer lobby,” she said in a speech last April. “Every official is too scared to do it – except me.”

(Read more at the Washington Examiner)

Sure, she is a hypocrite, but look at her mentor Bernie.

SandersHowMany

  1. Lifestyles of the rich and socialist: Bernie Sanders has 3 houses, makes millions

Considering the fact that Bernie preaches the confiscation of wealth, you would think that he would live meagerly. You would think that one house (not three), public transportation (not $100K sports cars), and the health care system he forced us to use would be sufficient. However, if we go to a 21 February 2019 Fox News article, we get a description of his holdings that does not match up with his socialist preaching.

Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., entered the 2020 presidential race this week promising to transform America with a left-wing vision of economic and environmental justice. But the self-described democratic socialist’s high-end income, multiple houses and fondness for air travel have already opened him up to criticism that his lifestyle doesn’t always match the rhetoric.

Sanders has pitched himself as a grassroots economic populist, focusing on income inequality and higher taxes for the rich.

“Our campaign is about transforming our country and creating a government based on the principles of economic, social, racial and environmental justice,” he said.

“Together you and I and our 2016 campaign began the political revoution,” he said. “Now it is time to complete that revolution and implement the vision that we fought for.”

But Sanders has raised eyebrows over his spending and personal wealth. Notably, he owns three houses. In 2016, he bought a $575,000 four-bedroom lake-front home in his home state. This is in addition to a row house in Washington D.C., as well as a house in Burlington, Vermont.

“The Bern will keep his home in Burlington and use the new camp seasonally,” Vermont’s Seven Day’s reported in 2016.

Ah, but what do we expect? Socialists who live up to their preaching?

The Democrat blues


Ellen Page

Democrats can’t live and let live — they just force compliance

Ellen Page slams Chris Pratt for attending ‘infamously anti-LGBTQ’ church

We see in a 10 February 2019 Fox News article that Chris Pratt was slammed for attending an “anti-LGBTQ” church.

Ellen Page slammed Chris Pratt for attending a church she claimed is “infamously anti-LGBTQ” and doubled down on her comments on Saturday.

Page’s criticism came after Pratt appeared on “The Late Show With Stephen Colbert” and talked about being religious and completing a 21-day fast inspired by the Biblical Prophet Daniel. “The Lego Movie 2: The Second Part” actor frequently attends Zoe Church, which is modeled after Hillsong Church, a megachurch founded in Australia but which has locations in New York City and Los Angeles, the New York Times previously reported. Variety stated Pratt was also a Hillsong church attendee.

Following Pratt’s appearance on the late-night show, Page took to Twitter to criticize Pratt for attending the church, which she did not name.

“Oh. K. Um. But his church is infamously anti lgbtq so maybe address that too?” She tweeted along with a Hollywood Reporter article about Pratt’s interview.

(Read more at Fox News)

Do you remember when the Gay-Straight Alliance groups were starting in the late 1990’s? The claim then was that they just wanted acceptance by the society. Now, they want to push out anyone who associates with anyone else who judges them.

All the time, they accuse Christians of being brown shirts.

“If the world hates you, you know that it has hated Me before it hated you. If you were of the world, the world would love its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, because of this the world hates you. Remember the word that I said to you, ‘A slave is not greater than his master.’ If they persecuted Me, they will also persecute you; if they kept My word, they will keep yours also. But all these things they will do to you for My name’s sake, because they do not know the One who sent Me. If I had not come and spoken to them, they would not have sin, but now they have no excuse for their sin. He who hates Me hates My Father also. If I had not done among them the works which no one else did, they would not have sin; but now they have both seen and hated Me and My Father as well. But they have done this to fulfill the word that is written in their Law, ‘They hated Me without a cause.’ (John 15: 18-25 NASB)

Patrick Hope's tweet before he exposed his Democrat misgivings

Because being a Democrat means never having to say you’re sorry

Democrat delegate backs down on Justin Fairfax impeachment push

Patrick Hope will not impeach another Democrat

A 11 February 2019 Fox News article points out how Democrats have decided to treat one of their own with kid gloves (even though he has two recent accusations of sexual assault).

A Virginia delegate who threatened to introduce articles of impeachment against Lt. Gov. Justin Fairfax amid sexual assault allegations has hit pause, saying in a tweet that “additional conversation” is needed before anything is filed.

Patrick Hope, a fellow Democrat and member of the Virginia House of Delegates, announced Friday that he intended to introduce articles of impeachment against Fairfax unless he resigned by Monday. This prompted the two women who have accused Fairfax of assault to say they’d be willing to testify in any impeachment proceedings.

But Hope on Monday morning tweeted that he’s decided to wait after receiving “sincere and thoughtful feedback” on a draft he sent to his fellow delegates.

“Yesterday I sent draft language to my colleagues on the first step of an impeachment action regarding the Lt. Governor,” Hope tweeted. “There has been an enormous amount of sincere and thoughtful feedback which has led to additional conversations that need to take place before anything is filed.”

(Read more at Fox News)

Who in their right mind ever expected a Democrat to do the right thing when it meant handing power over to a Republican?

How many Minnesotans voted for Keith Ellison even after the pictures of both his victims were made public?

KarenMonahanByKeithEllison
Karen Monahan without bruises, Keith Ellison, and Karen Monahan with bruises

Another Judiciary Committee member joins the Democrat presidential money grab

Amy Klobuchar's snow storm as she rails against global warming

Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar joins 2020 Dem race

In a snowstorm and in 15-degree weather, another Democrat joined those making a presidential bid while decrying “global warming,” as we find in a 11 February 2019 Fox News article.

President Trump poked fun at Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., Sunday for vowing to tackle climate change as she kicked off her 2020 presidential campaign in a snowy, freezing Minneapolis park.

“Well, it happened again,” Trump wrote on Twitter Sunday evening. “Amy Klobuchar announced that she is running for President, talking proudly of fighting global warming while standing in a virtual blizzard of snow, ice and freezing temperatures. Bad timing. By the end of her speech she looked like a Snowman(woman)!”

(Read more at Fox News)

When we consider that Ms. Klocuchar, Ms. Harris, and Mr. Booker sat on the Judiciary Committee and voted against Justice Kavanaugh even though none of the witnesses named by Ms. Ford corroborated her testimony and, now, they will likely raise millions on that notoriety — it turns the stomach.

To those who respond to this with “I stand with Christine,” do you also stand with the accusers of Keith Ellison and Justin Fairfax? Keith Ellison’s accusers had photos, doctors’ reports, and police reports. The only things that have been denied about the words of Justin Fairfax’s accusers has been whether the encounters have been consensual.

Reality stinks for Kamala Harris

Willie Brown -- Kamala Harris cannot beat Donald Trump

Willie Brown Throws Shade at Ex-Girlfriend Kamala Harris: Can’t Beat Trump

10 February 2019 Breitbart article points out some words that Kamala Harris likely will not want to hear.

Former San Francisco mayor and California State Assembly speaker Willie Brown threw shade at his ex-girlfriend, Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA), and the other contenders for the Democratic Party’s presidential nomination in 2020, writing Saturday that none of them can beat President Donald Trump.

In his weekly column in the San Francisco Chronicle, Brown wrote:

Make no mistake, President Trump’s State of the Union address was the kickoff for his 2020 re-election campaign, and so far I’ve yet to see a Democrat who can beat him.

[T]he overnight polling after the speech showed that once again, he connected with voters, at least enough voters to make him a 2020 favorite.

You can’t say the same for the Democratic contenders. They all have impressive credentials, winning personalities and positive messages, but none displays the “people personality” that our media-savvy president has mastered.

Let’s just hope Democrats can figure out that we need to go beyond the left and motivate voters across the board, just as midterm congressional campaigns did under Nancy Pelosi’s leadership.

(Read more at Breitbart)

Although there may be a segment of the population who want handouts from the government (probably the same population that was never educated on the failure of socialist programs like the Mayflower compact), both conservatives and independent voters will not vote for the radical leftist programs promoted by the likes of Kamala Harris. That leaves her with a voting base of about 30% of the population — not a winning majority.

Democrats don’t want to admit how socialist their programs tend

The ash heap of history

Ocasio-Cortez adviser admits he falsely claimed Green New Deal didn’t promise security for those ‘unwilling’ to work’

Tucker Carlson gets Ocasio-Cortez adviser Robert Hockett to admit to his lying

A 10 February 2019 Fox News article points out an embarrassing moment for an AOC apologist.

A top adviser to New York Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has admitted that an official “Green New Deal” document posted by Ocasio-Cortez’s office contained a guarantee of economic security even for those “unwilling to work” — but not before he went viral in progressive circles for claiming the exact opposite, repeatedly, in an interview with Fox News’ “Tucker Carlson Tonight.”

Cornell University Law School Professor Robert Hockett, who counsels Ocasio-Cortez on environmental initiatives, challenged host Tucker Carlson when he quoted from an outline and list of “frequently asked questions” (FAQ) that had been posted on Ocasio-Cortez’s official website. A similar version of the FAQ was also shared with NPR.

The FAQ and background materials from Ocasio-Cortez’s website stated that the Green New Deal will provide “Economic security for all who are unable or unwilling to work,” and the FAQ sent to NPR also noted, “We set a goal to get to net-zero, rather than zero emissions, in 10 years because we aren’t sure that we’ll be able to fully get rid of farting cows and airplanes that fast.”

Ocasio-Cortez’s office removed the documents from her website amid an online backlash. A version of the FAQ that referred to “farting cows” is still available on NPR’s website, and a similar version that was posted to Ocasio-Cortez’s website is currently viewable on an Internet archiving service. Both versions of the documents describe providing economic security for those “unwilling to work,” and state, “This is a massive transformation of our society with clear goals and a timeline” at a “scale not seen since World War 2.”

Carlson asked Hockett at the outset of the interview: “Why would we ever pay people who are ‘unwilling to work’?”

In a head-turning moment heard around the Internet, Hockett replied flatly, “Uh, we never would, right? And AOC has never said anything like that, right? I think you’re referring to some sort of document — I think some doctored document that somebody other than us has been circulating. … She’s actually tweeted it out to laugh at it, if you look at her latest tweets. It seems apparently, some Republicans have put it out there. I don’t know the details.”

(Read more at Fox News)

When the terms of a proposal are so extreme that the back-up team has to lie about it, you know that it is a bad proposal. If put into law, this Green New Deal would:

  • Make all private cars illegal (bye-bye, Ford Mustang & Toyota Prius)
  • Require the refit of all buildings in the US with green technology
  • Make airplane use illegal (except for government officials)
  • Close down the oil, nuclear, and coal energy sectors
  • Pay those who are unwilling to work
  • Eliminate the US cattle population (bye-bye, steaks, burgers, milk, yogurt, cheese, butter, …)
  • And a few other outlandish proposals

The mysterious case of AOC’s scrubbed ‘Green New Deal’ details

Democrats incredulously claim Republicans scrubbed AOC’s web page according to a 9 February 2019 Washington Examiner article.

On Feb. 5, the congressional office of Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez posted a new blog entry under “energy issues” detailing her “Green New Deal” proposal and answering “frequently asked questions.”

The page, announcing an 8:30 a.m. launch on Feb. 7, is now gone, and a top adviser suggested Friday it was actually authored and distributed by the GOP.

By the afternoon of Feb. 7, Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., removed the document from her website without explanation but following backlash and even ridicule over the radical plans outlined within it, including a call to “eliminate emissions from cows or air travel” — which would functionally ban the latter — and to provide “economic security for all who are unable or unwilling to work.”

The document vanished just hours after Ocasio-Cortez and Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass., formally unveiled a “Green New Deal” resolution that has so far attracted 67 Democratic co-sponsors in the House. It’s a nonbinding measure that is less detailed than the now-deleted FAQ document but calls for a complete and speedy overhaul of the nation’s energy, transportation, and farming sectors in order to eliminate carbon emissions in the coming decades.

The communications staff has so far not responded to an inquiry about the now-missing blog post.

But on Saturday morning, chief of staff Saikat Chakrabarti tweeted that the FAQ page was indeed posted by the Ocasio-Cortez staff but was done so in error. He called the page “an early draft of a FAQ that was clearly unfinished and that doesn’t represent the GND resolution got published to the website by mistake (idea was to wait for launch, monitor q’s, and rewrite that FAQ before publishing).”

Do you think that (possibly) they were fixing their own document and it had to come down during that time?

He Stabbed His Girlfriend’s Stomach to Kill Her Baby, Won’t be Charged Because of New York’s Abortion Law

He Stabbed His Girlfriend’s Stomach to Kill Her Baby

According to a 11 February 2019 Life News article, a murderer is having his charges reduced due to New York’s ungodly abortion laws.

A week ago yesterday, a New Yorker from Queens, Anthony Hobson, beat and dragged his girlfriend, Jennifer Irigoyen, down a flight of stairs and then stabbed her in the neck, abdomen and torso. He stabbed her in the stomach because he wanted to kill the baby he fathered (some news stories say she was 14 weeks pregnant and others put the figure at 20 weeks). The pregnant woman shouted, “He’s got a knife. He’s going to kill the baby!”

Hobson killed both the woman and her baby. He was immediately charged with two crimes, but the charge for killing her baby was subsequently dropped: it was noted that Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s new abortion law provides no penalties for the killing of unborn children; abortion was removed from the criminal code and inserted into the public health law. Cuomo has not commented on what he has wrought.

The Albany lawmaker who sponsored the bill that Cuomo lobbied for, State Sen. Liz Krueger, and her colleague in the senate, Anna Kaplan, authored an article in the Times Union that disagrees with the Queens prosecutor’s interpretation of the law. They say there is nothing in the law that prevents any prosecutor from charging someone like Hobson for a crime. They say Hobson could be prosecuted for first-degree assault, a sentence that is harsher than the previous sentence for “unlawful abortion.”

(Read more at 11 February 2019 Life News article)

This does not show the full depravity of the New York law, but it comes close.

End of Elizabeth Warren’s presidential campaign? New claim of ‘American Indian’ heritage

As we see in a 7 February 2019 USA Today article, it seems that the main stream media has turned against the false native American.

In her own handwriting, Elizabeth Warren claimed Native American heritage. It’s hard to imagine what she was doing if it wasn’t to advance her career.

Another week, another apology from Sen. Elizabeth Warren for her phony claims of Native American heritage. But the latest evidence against her should spell the end of her presidential ambitions.

Sen. Warren’s discredited story of Indian ancestry has made her an object of ridicule coming from President Donald Trump, who dubbed her “Pocahontas,” and conservatives generally who prefer the more pointed “Fauxcahontas.” Liberals seem to have been willing to give her the benefit of the doubt, seemingly accepting each new explanation for her shifting story of how and why she was mistaken for a member of the Cherokee Nation.

Warren’s 1986 registration card for the State Bar of Texas could put an end to all that. The Washington Post obtained a copy of the signed document in which she wrote that her race was “American Indian.” This supports the two critical charges against her: that she knowingly and personally claimed Native American heritage, and that she did so for the purpose of career advancement.

Lie-a-watha. Faux-a-hontas.

Elizabeth Warren Identified as American Indian in Texas Bar Registration

A 6 February 2019 article in Slate showed how Elizabeth Warren claimed Native American heritage on a form to the State bar of Texas.

Elizabeth Warren, who is on the verge of formally announcing a presidential bid, apologized on Tuesday for ever having identified as American Indian.

“I can’t go back,” Warren said in an interview with the Washington Post. “But I am sorry for furthering confusion on tribal sovereignty and tribal citizenship and harm that resulted.”

At the same time, the Post discovered unequivocal proof that the senator had formally identified as Native American in paperwork decades ago, as she had written, by hand, “American Indian” in the “Race” field in a 1986 form for the State Bar of Texas. The form reads: “The following information is for statistical purposes only and will not be disclosed to any person or organization without the express written consent of the attorney.”

(Read more at Slate)

This woman has no ethical leg to stand on when accusing others of infractions.

6 things to know about the new Democrat House


1. By reviewing the Ocasio-Cortez initial announcement on the “Green New Deal,” we can see her blind spots and her focus

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Suggests Super Wealthy be Taxed Up to 70% to Fund ‘Green New Deal’

In a 4 January 2019 Mediaite article, the basic information on the Anderson Cooper interview of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez in which she first unveils the Green New Deal appears in print.

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez sat with Anderson Cooper for an upcoming 60 Minutes interview set to air this Sunday, a portion of which has been released as a promotion. In the released segment, Ocasio-Cortez reveals how exactly she suggests paying for the environmental agenda known as the “Green New Deal” — with remarkably higher tax rates for the super wealthy.

Ocasio-Cortez suggests in the clip that in her esteem, people should be doing more to pay their “fair share.” When Cooper pressed on how she could possibly pay for the deal, she pointed to the progressive tax rate system in the 1960s, explaining that if you earn 0 to $75,000 a year, you would only pay 10% or 15% in income tax.

She continued:

“But once you get to the tippie tops, on your $10 millionth, sometimes you see tax rates as high as 60% or 70%. That doesn’t mean all $10 million are taxed at an extremely high rate. But it means that as you climb up this ladder, you should be contributing more.”

(Read more at Mediaite)

From reading this, we can glean:

  • Regarding her view of salaries and rich people
    1. Ocasio-Cortez doesn’t seem to understand that if income (or another reward) is removed, people will likely not produce at the same level
    2. The people earning $10 million are company owners that — when they scale back — may cause many people to lose their jobs. It seems she didn’t learn anything from Obama’s “The Great Recession” or Solyndra.
    3. She objectifies rich people as miniature banks for funding her pie-in-the-sky programs (not as people capable of compassion, mercy, or other laudable traits).
    4. She wants to divide us (the noble “green” voters) from the “rich” (who, according to her, do not pay their “fair share”).
  • Regarding her elevated view of “green” projects
    1. She assumes that “green” projects are so noble that they will escape strong questions by the press
    2. When she does get the muted criticism that this is “radical,” she glosses over the undercurrent of association with the failed states of the USSR, Cuba, Venezuela, and many other broken states by glorying in the title.

Democrats are dangerous to business

2. By reviewing the details of her “Green New Deal,” we can see how it will explode costs and kill jobs

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s ‘Green New Deal’ is more dangerous than you think

The 3 January 2019 Washington Examiner opinion piece that describes Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez proposed “Green New Deal” should be reviewed by all (along with the linked draft resolution).

Rep.-elect Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., hasn’t officially started her first term in office, but she’s already pushing a massive, far-left proposal that would fundamentally transform much of the economy and push the country closer than ever to socialism.

For several weeks, you might have heard Ocasio-Cortez reference the creation of a “Green New Deal,” but until recently, few people knew what would be included in the plan. In a draft resolution to form a select committee in the House that would help develop legislation to put her plan in action, Ocasio-Cortez finally outlined numerous proposals that she says should be part of future Green New Deal legislation. Taken together, the many ideas included in Ocasio-Cortez’s Green New Deal would be the most radical policy shift in modern U.S. history, dramatically increasing the size and power of government and running up the national debt by trillions of dollars.

According to Ocasio-Cortez, the Green New Deal, which has been endorsed by Sens. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., Cory Booker, D-N.J., Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., and at least 40 House Democrats, would eliminate nearly all fossil fuels from the electric grid and force everyone in the country to buy from power companies selling only renewable energy.

This policy alone would create widespread economic chaos. Without government subsidies, renewable energy costs significantly more than many forms of traditional energy generation. My colleagues at the Heartland Institute found that electricity prices are, on average, increasing by 50 percent faster in those states that have created renewable power mandates compared to those that have rejected these economically destructive policies. This is especially troubling news for working-class and lower-income Americans, who spend much larger shares of their income on energy than wealthier families.

Not only is Ocasio-Cortez proposing to eliminate the hundreds of thousands of jobs in the fossil fuel industry in the United States, even though America recently became a net-energy exporter, she’s demanding this transition occur in just 10 years, from 2020 to 2030. This mandate would be virtually impossible to achieve because wind and solar energy sources still rely on back-up generation from fossil-fuel-powered energy when the wind isn’t blowing and the sun isn’t shining.

Ocasio-Cortez’s proposal doesn’t merely advocate for a gigantic shift in the U.S. energy industry. Her draft resolution says one of the proposed House committee’s priorities would be “upgrading every residential and industrial building for state-of-the-art energy efficiency, comfort and safety.” Taken literally, this mandate would cost trillions of dollars. There were about 136 million housing units in the United States in 2017, not including any businesses. Even if it would cost just $10,000 to “upgrade” every home and apartment, an extremely low estimate, this one relatively small part of her plan would cost more than $1.3 trillion.

(Read more at the Washington Examiner)

As much as people have enjoyed the sudden renaissance of jobs caused by Trump’s deregulation, Ocasio-Cortez’s turn towards the bureaucracy of socialism must be resisted. Not only does it abandon our resources of oil, gas, and coal — it cannot do anything to regulate the biggest polluters (China, India, and third world countries).

Additionally, Ocasio-Cortez’s proposed bill plays loosely with tax dollars being collected and handed out. In fact, it is wrong on so many levels, because:

  1. The quickest way to raise the price of a commodity (like electrical power) is to mandate that the public buy that commodity from a monopoly (the green power producers)
  2. The best way to ensure a service (like the installation of green power conduits) is inordinately high-priced involves requiring everyone install them under penalty of law
  3. Ocasio-Cortez’s proposed bill eliminates the use of natural resources (that — through gasoline formulation technology and scrubbing technology — have become increasingly cleaner)
  4. Ocasio-Cortez’s proposed bill eliminates currently good-paying jobs in a time window too short to allow a workable transition

3. If the above issues are not enough, Ocasio-Cortez doubles down on forcing entrepreneurs from New York

Ocasio-Cortez Tax Plan Creates 82.7% Top Income Tax Rate for New Yorkers

If we go to a 4 January 2019 article by Americans for Tax Reform, we find a bleaker picture painted for the job creators of New York.

In an upcoming 60 Minutes interview, Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) will call for federal income tax rates of up to 70 percent as part of a proposal to create vast new government spending programs.

The current top federal income tax rate is 37 percent, so the Ocasio-Cortez plan will nearly double the tax rate for the top bracket.

New York State has a top income tax rate of 8.82 percent while New York City has a top rate of 3.876 percent. So under this proposal, her constituents would pay a top combined income tax rate of 82.7 percent:

Federal income tax rate: 70.0%
NY state income tax rate: 8.82%
NYC income tax rate: 3.876%
TOTAL: 82.696%

New Yorkers would not be the only ones suffering under the Ocasio-Cortez plan. California taxpayers would pay a top rate of 83.3 percent (70 percent plus the California rate of 13.30 percent).

(Read more at Americans for Tax Reform)

If this is not a formula for speeding the exodus of businesses from New York, I don’t know what is.

Pelosi gives it away to foriegn nations

4. For those concerned with border security, the new House Democrats have nothing. But they do have a nice gift for the dictators of Central America.

Democrat Spending Bill Offers $12 Billion More for Foreign Aid, $0 for Border Wall

A 3 January 2019 Breitbart article outlines the excesses the Democrats have taken to advance socialism and abortion internationally.

The spending bills proposed by House Democrats to end the partial government shutdown offer no funding for a U.S.-Mexico border wall, but provide over $12 billion more in foreign aid than the Trump administration requested, according to a statement on Thursday from the White House Office of Management and Budget.

The statement warned the new House Democrat majority of President Trump’s intention to veto the bills, noting that the administration “cannot accept legislation that provides unnecessary funding for wasteful programs while ignoring the Nation’s urgent border security needs.”

The statement reiterated President Trump’s request for “at least $5 billion for border security” and asserted that the Democrats’ proposal “does not come close to providing these necessary investments and authorities.”
The White House then highlighted the billions in funding the Democrats are offering for “unnecessary programs at excessive levels” beyond what the Trump administration requested, including:

  • $12 billion more for “international affairs programs,” including $2.9 billion more “for economic and development assistance, including funding for the West Bank/Gaza, Syria, and Pakistan, where our foreign aid is either frozen or under review.”
  • $700 million more than requested for the United Nations, including restored funding for the United Nation’s Population Fund, which would undermine the administration’s Mexico City Policy that bars the use of taxpayer dollars for foreign organizations that “promote or perform abortions.”
  • Approximately $2 billion more than requested for the Environmental Protection Agency
  • $7.1 billion more than the administration requested for Housing and Urban Development programs

(Read more at Breitbart)

Of course, these Democrats have to know that these measures will not pass the Republican Senate and will not be signed into law by President Trump.

Still, forget reality. These are the Democrats.

5. Democrats know from commercial sources that America wants Border Security

Americans want border security, and the numbers show it

A 5 January 2019 Fox News article on a recent Gallup poll shows that most Americans value border security.

President Trump is far from alone in his determination to secure our borders — according to a recent Gallup poll, Americans view immigration as the second-biggest problem facing the country today.

That’s bad news for the Democrat Party, which is hellbent on opposing the president’s efforts to fix our broken immigration system, especially the border wall he needs in order to get illegal immigration under control.

The Democrats have a very simple, two-part strategy on immigration: first and foremost, they want to keep President Trump from fulfilling his promises to the American people; second, they want to make it even easier for foreigners to enter this country illegally.

With Democrats now in control of the House of Representatives, it’s no surprise that Americans are deeply troubled by the immigration crisis.

Over the past several decades, millions of illegal immigrants have successfully evaded our efforts to enforce immigration laws, putting local economies and welfare programs under tremendous pressure to cope with the massive influx of undocumented workers and their families, most of whom receive at least one form of government welfare.

In fact, illegal immigration costs taxpayers a staggering $134.9 billion a year while contributing only $19 billion in state, federal, and local taxes. At the federal level, medical costs make up the lion’s share of government expenditures on illegal immigrants, while education is the largest single expense that illegal immigration imposes on state and local governments.

(Read more at Fox News)

Although it is the Democrats who seem hellbent on denying border security to America, I have to admit that the Republicans have had ample chances to fix the problem over the past two years.

6. If you don’t live in a major population center, the Democrats do not care about you.

Nolte: Tyrannical Democrats Introduce Bill to Kill Electoral College

According to a 4 January 2019 Breitbart article, the Democrats would like to silence the fly-over states between New York, Chicago, and Los Angeles.

Desperate to bring the Tyranny of the Majority to our representative democracy, on the first day Democrats assumed control of the House of Representatives, Rep. Steve Cohen (D-TN) submitted a bill to kill the electoral college.

“In two presidential elections since 2000, including the most recent one in which Hillary Clinton won 2.8 million more votes than her opponent, the winner of the popular vote did not win the election because of the distorting effect of the outdated Electoral College,” Cohen said in a press release. “Americans expect and deserve the winner of the popular vote to win office. More than a century ago, we amended our Constitution to provide for the direct election of U.S. Senators. It is past time to directly elect our President and Vice President.”

Democrat frustration over losing the presidency when they won the most votes is certainly justified. But it is also their own fault. If these triggered snowflakes would get over their Red State prejudices and dare to live amongst us, that influence might flip enough states. But they refuse to. These snobby bigots find Middle America icky, so they cower together in coastal and big city bubbles.

If you will pardon a small digression… never forget that those who claim to believe in Global Warming also choose to stubbornly live on the very same coasts that are supposed to be underwater already.

Anyway, eliminating the electoral college is the road to tyranny — which is why Democrats and the media desperately want it eliminated.

Trust me, the last place any free person wants to live is in a country where 51 percent of the population can strip the rights away from the 49 percent.

Imagine a country where the only way to get elected president is to appeal to the left-wing extremists who live in large population centers, which is exactly what would happen. In fact this would be the only way to win the presidency because it would be the easiest — the cheapest as far as ad buys, getting out the vote, and that most precious commodity of all: time. Campaigns are going to go to where the most votes are.

(Read more at Breitbart)

While the Democrats know that getting rid of the electoral college would require an amendment to the constitution, I have read elsewhere that Democrats are doing an end-run on the electoral college by getting individual fly-over states to voluntarily give their delegates to the popular winner of the overall presidential election.