Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Ed Markey to unveil 'Green New Deal' bill

[Mountain Man]

"A LIAR". This from a Trump supporter.

Let me see if I understand your logic:

Trump is a liar; therefore, nobody else is a liar.

That's so stupid only a liberal would believe it.

[Tassman]

Let me see if I understand your logic:

Trump is a liar; therefore, nobody else is a liar.

That's not the logic, why aren't I surprised. The argument is that it ill-behooves a supporter of a notorious serial liar to denigrate a political rival as a liar.

[rogue06]

Yep, there were and are. The right-wing is in full on lying and make stuff up mode.

Yes there were a couple of obvious parodies but when satirizing something that's already so far out there you always run the risk of a few people taking the joke seriously.

But more to the point, Ocasio-Cortez and her "expert" were running around claiming that the part about providing economic security for those "unwilling to work" wasn't true until her campaign manager revealed that their denial was the actual lie.

[Starlight]

But more to the point, Ocasio-Cortez and her "expert" were running around claiming that the part about providing economic security for those "unwilling to work" wasn't true

They are correct, it isn't true. It's not part of the Green New Deal as it has been proposed in the House resolution. They were, entirely reasonably, baffled about why people were asking them about that because they were well aware it wasn't in the resolution.

until her campaign manager revealed that their denial was the actual lie.

No. He revealed there had been a completely incorrect text released to the media in error as an accompanying 'explainer' of the Resolution text that didn't match to what was in the resolution. This was causing the media to get very confused and think the Green New Deal was about pretty crazy things - although many right-wingers were already busy entirely making up crazy things they felt like it was about. While it took everyone a while to work out what had caused the confusion, it seems mostly sorted now.

[Mountain Man]

That's not the logic...

It basically is.

[Mountain Man]

No. He revealed there had been a completely incorrect text released to the media in error as an accompanying 'explainer' of the Resolution text that didn't match to what was in the resolution. This was causing the media to get very confused and think the Green New Deal was about pretty crazy things - although many right-wingers were already busy entirely making up crazy things they felt like it was about. While it took everyone a while to work out what had caused the confusion, it seems mostly sorted now.

False.

CARLSON: When do we ever pay people who are, quote, unwilling to work?

HOCKETT: We never would, right? And AOC [Ocasio-Cortez] has never said anything like that. I think you’re referring to some sort of document, I think some doctored document that somebody other than us has been circulating.

CARLSON: That was in the backgrounder from her office, is my understanding.

HOCKETT: No, no, she tweeted it out to laugh at it. If you look at her latest tweets, it seems that some Republicans have put it out there. I don’t know the details.

...

Here is a link to the original FAQ posted about the GND on Ocasio-Cortez’s House webpage.

http://cc.bingj.com/cache.aspx?q=oca...Jnch56EPcazHTd

It was quickly taken down as the rollout began to resemble the Hindenburg crashing into the Titanic on George McGovern’s presidential campaign, but as you can see, the FAQ does brag about how the Green New Deal will “ensure everybody benefits from the newly created wealth. It guarantees… economic security to all who are unable or unwilling to work.”

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2...ucker-carlson/

So it wasn't a hoax or something tweeted out for a laugh but was actually published by Cortez and distributed to the media.

He also went on to lie about their plans to eliminate air travel, saying, "We’re talking about expanding optionality. We’re not talking about getting rid of anything, right?" even though the FAQ makes it pretty clear that eliminating air travel (and cows) is one of its ultimate goals.

"The Green New Deal sets a goal to get to net-zero, rather than zero emissions, at the end of this 10-year plan because we aren’t sure that we will be able to fully get rid of, for example, emissions from cows or air travel before then."

[Starlight]

False...

Indeed, your post is that. You're getting your wires crossed as usual. Have a lobotomy and stop reading / writing Breitbart and you might get on the path to sanity.

[lilpixieofterror]

Indeed, your post is that. You're getting your wires crossed as usual. Have a lobotomy and stop reading / writing Breitbart and you might get on the path to sanity.

Amazing the stuff Starlight will shove down the memory hole to hide the incompetence of his favored politicians. Don’t pay attention to the FAQ posted that accidentally told the truth!!

[Mountain Man]

Amazing the stuff Starlight will shove down the memory hole to hide the incompetence of his favored politicians. Don’t pay attention to the FAQ posted that accidentally told the truth!!

His was a weak rebuttal even by his low standards.

[Starlight]

Don’t pay attention to the FAQ posted that accidentally told the truth!!

The extent to which US conservatives seem so utterly gullible when it comes to improbable conspiracy theories always astounds me.

What 'truth' does it reveal? That someone in AOC's office staff or some group they were communicating with wanted some things or had some goals that didn't make it into the Resolution text during the drafting process? Because that's what it reveals to me. But we could assume that anyone, so in practice it tells us nothing.

Presumably AOC's office consulted with a wide range of activist groups, labor groups, experts, and the offices of other congress people (and they've said as much on Twitter and in interviews)... and everyone sent in their wish-lists, which all had to be merged, negotiated, and discussed as the proposal was drafted. The desires of some people and groups who were contributing will have been different to others and not everyone got everything they wanted, because that's how this process worked. Finally what came out of it was the Resolution text which is being proposed to the House as a whole. Since this is a Resolution not a Bill, all it does is authorizes the committee to produce a Bill on the topic within the general outline provided. Doubtless that Bill's final text will result from a process of discussion and compromise so likely won't go nearly as far as the Resolution itself does, and Dems may make deals to try and get some Republican sign-on.

But a kooky conservative conspiracy theory that all liberals everywhere have some sort of secret plan that's been revealed by a mistaken release of an old FAQ document that didn't match the official Resolution text is just kinda funny. Why would all liberals agree on these issues? Why wouldn't all liberals have slightly different views to each other as to what policies etc are best? I mean, I wish all liberals agreed with my views, but sadly that isn't the case. And if all the liberals agreed, why would they keep the policy goals secret? Why not release the policy goals and let the credit roll in from their base who would presumably be cheering them if their politicians were finally standing up for some liberal values instead of saying "well, we need to compromise 99% with the Republicans, but we'll try to give you 1% of change toward some liberal policies" that the ineffective Dem politicians of the last 30 years have been repeatedly telling their liberal voters. For your crazy conspiracy to work, not only do you need to assume that Dem politicians agree with each other on policy to an extent that is clearly well and truly not the case, but you need to assume that they are all secretly super-progressives despite the amount of time they spend mocking progressives, and you need to assume that they would want to hide from their own liberal voters that they themselves are taking popular progressive positions and instead prefer to openly embrace less popular centrist positions. It's kinda like a sandwich of stupid conspiracy theories all on top of each other.

[Mountain Man]

It's somewhat ironic that the effectiveness of a rationalization is often inversely proportional to the amount of text used to express it. It's like the old joke: "Weak point; yell louder."

[Bill the Cat]

"A LIAR". This from a Trump supporter.

Classic whataboutism

[Bill the Cat]

Amazing the stuff Starlight will shove down the memory hole to hide the incompetence of his favored politicians. Don’t pay attention to the FAQ posted that accidentally told the truth!!

And that 4 Presidential candidates hopped on and endorsed.

[Bill the Cat]

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

- Nancy Pelosi to Politico

[Sparko]

It's almost like they think people should focus on the Resolution they publicly proposed to congress, instead of whatever crazy the right wants to make up and/or choose to believe.

Right... ignore them accidentally releasing their actual plans and concentrate on the cleaned up version they submitted instead. Where they state things like a goal to be on totally renewable energy, but leave out the previously revealed "How" of eliminating cars and planes.