WSJ Writer Destroys Ocasio-Cortez's 'Idiotic' Green New Deal
Wall Street Journal’s Kimberley Strassel says proposal reads like Democrat parody bill
© press
A Wall Street Journal writer has responded to Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's "Green New Deal" proposal with scathing critique, describing it as "idiotic" and reading like a parody of the Democratic Party written by Republicans.
WSJ’s Kimberley Strassel shredded Democratic socialist Ocasio-Cortez's proposal saying it made her "laugh so hard" that she "nearly cried."
“By the end of the Green New Deal resolution (and accompanying fact sheet) I was laughing so hard I nearly cried,” Strassel said on Twitter.
“If a bunch of GOPers plotted to forge a fake Democratic bill showing how bonkers the party is, they could not have done a better job. It is beautiful.”
1) By the end of the Green New Deal resolution (and accompanying fact sheet) I was laughing so hard I nearly cried. If a bunch of GOPers plotted to forge a fake Democratic bill showing how bonkers the party is, they could not have done a better job. It is beautiful. #GreenNewDeal
— Kimberley Strassel (@KimStrassel) February 7, 2019
Kimberly Strassel is the Potomac Watch columnist for the Wall Street Journal editorial page, and she has a nifty knack for cutting through all the BS and simply telling it like it is.
© press
According to Fox News, the Green New Deal, pushed by freshman New York Democrat Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, attempts to radically transform the country, including rendering air travel obsolete, move the U.S. to rely completely on renewable energy with net-zero emissions, and guarantee economic security even for people who are “unwilling” to work.
But the sweeping proposal was hit with mockery once the details were unveiled on Thursday, with many pointing out how unrealistic the suggestions are.
Strassel pointed out that in order to live up to the proposal’s promise of 100 percent of renewable energy, a space as big as the entire state of California would have to be dedicated solely for the facilities, wind turbines, and solar panels.
2) See Ron Bailey for look at sheer number of turbines, solar panels, facilities necessary just for the "renewable electricity" bit. Wud need 500k square km, bigger than California. Also note, govt will pay for these--not private sector. https://t.co/wQ0C6wonha
— Kimberley Strassel (@KimStrassel) February 7, 2019
The proposal’s suggestion of putting charging stations “everywhere,” upgrading or replacing “every building” and developing high-speed railway across every state may also hit a wall due to permitting laws.
Said Strassel: "3) Also, AOC would put charging stations 'everywhere,' upgrade or tear down 'every building' in the country (homes and businesses), install high-speed rail across every state, upgrade all our infrastructure. (Maybe once Ds allow permitting reform? LOL. LOL. LOL.)"
3) Also, AOC would put charging stations "everywhere," upgrade or tear down "every building" in the country (homes and businesses), install high-speed rail across every state, upgrade all our infrastructure. (Maybe once Ds allow permitting reform? LOL. LOL. LOL.)
— Kimberley Strassel (@KimStrassel) February 7, 2019
Strassel notes that the Green New Deal is far from just a proposal to curb emissions and create more environmental regulations – it’s also about implementing radical left-wing measures.
“Somehow, government-run healthcare, ‘family sustainable’ wages, paid leave, and ‘affordable’ housing are also ‘required’ for a clean economy,” the writer wrote.
“I would love to understand this logic. (And imagine what wages will need to be to pay for billion-dollar-per-kilowatt electricity).”
4)Somehow, government-run healthcare, "family sustainable" wages, paid leave, and "affordable" housing are also "required" for a clean economy. I would love to understand this logic. (And imagine what wages will need to be to pay for billion-dollar-per-kilowatt electricity)
— Kimberley Strassel (@KimStrassel) February 7, 2019
The proposal also says "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." That set Strassel up yet again.
"5) Key part though people is bit in fact sheet that explains why resolution is not immediately banning fossil fuels or demanding zero-emissions across economy. Because 'we aren't sure that we'll be able to fully get rid of farting cows and airplanes that fast.' Note 'fully.' "
5) Key part though people is bit in fact sheet that explains why resolution is not immediately banning fossil fuels or demanding zero-emissions across economy. Because "we aren't sure that we'll be able to fully get rid of farting cows and airplanes that fast." Note "fully."
— Kimberley Strassel (@KimStrassel) February 7, 2019
© press
But even those pushing for the document aren’t sure it can actually be achieved within 10 years.
In a now-deleted FAQ page on Ocasio-Cortez’s website, the document explains that it’s calling for an elimination of greenhouse gas emissions rather than an immediate ban on fossil fuels because "we aren't sure that we'll be able to fully get rid of farting cows and airplanes that fast."
“Planes run on fossil fuel. No fossil fuel, no visits to granny. Cows produce methane, why alarmists want to get rid of livestock,” Stressel wrote.
“She can't do it ‘fully’ in 10 years, but AOC is coming after your air miles and bacon. This is honesty (sp) about how Democrats would micromanage private life.”
6) Planes run on fossil fuel. No fossil fuel, no visits to granny. Cows produce methane, why alarmists want to get rid of livestock. She can't do it "fully" in 10 years, but AOC is coming after ur air miles and bacon. This is honesty about how Ds wud micromanage private life.
— Kimberley Strassel (@KimStrassel) February 7, 2019
Lastly, the Green New Deal, which doesn’t exactly reveal how it will be funded, except for the suggestion that the Federal Reserve could step in and extend credit.
“And how to pay for mass trillions in cost? Don't worry! Federal Reserve will just ‘extend credit’ and ‘new public banks can be created to extend credit too,’” the writer tweeted.
“Because, you know, like, money is just paper, and how hard can it be to make some more of the stuff, right? Right?”
