It’s been an up-and-down couple of weeks for proponents of the Green New Deal. Before details were released, it was already being heralded as the greatest thing since President Obama’s election. Then, the details came out and even many on the left were taken aback by the ambitious and incoherent provisions of the deal as detailed in a FAQ section on Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s government web page.
But that was just a draft. They took it down. At least that was the story.
Unfortunately for proponents, they were caught a little flat-footed as questions started pouring in about, well, all of it. Even if we dismiss the less-draconian concepts such as eliminating air travel or the less-sane ideas like taking care of those who are unwilling to work, the left is still stuck with a proposal that the most frugal estimates put at costing around $7 trillion while other’s consider the decade-long cost to be in the HUNDREDS of trillions of dollars.
This is, of course, ludicrous. There’s not enough money in the entire world to pay for the proposal if its cost is somewhere between the lowest and highest estimates, but that hasn’t stopped leftist media from regrouping. Now that the dust has settled a little bit, they’re doing everything they can to recommit to this concept. It’s not that they suddenly believe in this fairy tale. It’s that they don’t want this to be the issue Republicans attack in the 2020 elections.
One article in particular that I read from CNN (yes, sometimes I need to see what the other side is thinking) really struck me for its honesty about the situation. Though I stopped reading it in paragraph two when it referred to “non-partisan” PolitiFact, I went back to it just now to digest the awfulness fully (see the sacrifices I make for our readers!).
To be clear, much of what this article says is correct. It asserts the GOP will take the tenets of the Green New Deal and use it to scare voters into thinking it’s even worse than Obamacare. From 2010 through 2016, Republicans attacked Obamacare incessantly and it worked, giving them the House in 2010, the Senate in 2014, and the White House in 2016. Unfortunately, they stopped there and didn’t actually go after Obamacare with the same fervor they held in their campaign rhetoric and now the Democrats have turned the issue on its head.
But here’s the thing. Obamacare may have been bad, but the Green New Deal truly is worse. It’s not even close. Even if we take at face value the notion that the Green New Deal is simply an ambitious framework around which real legislation can be forged, we have to look at the core issues entailed in order to see the true damage it can do. This is a socialist document. It’s a call for the same levels of insanity that drive the Medicare-for-All movement. Within its frivolous attempts to change perceptions of air travel, cows, and job creation is a deep-rooted desire to convert Americans to needing more government.
NOQ Report needs your support.
The Green New Deal represents the far-left’s desire to make more American dependent on government. At the same time, it aims to increase the levels of dependency for those who are already in need of assistance. It wants Democrats to latch their wagons on the notion that if we become a militantly environmentalist nation, that will serve the dual purpose of giving us fulfillment while saving the planet.
I believe most leftist journalists understand this, but they see in the ridiculous framework a path through which Republicans can be defeated wholesale in 2020 as long as the left can control the narrative surrounding the Green New Deal. They fear another Obamacare counterinsurgency that would wipe out the anti-Trump gains they made in 2018, so they’ve adopted a stance that the Green New Deal isn’t as bad as Fox News says it is. Meanwhile, they’re doing everything they can to say, “look over here and not at the Green New Deal.”
The politics behind what the Green New Deal represents is more in play than the tenets of the proposal itself, at least in the eyes of leftist media. It’s not that they want to promote the concept. They simply don’t want the concept to derail their party in the next election.

Pingback: 'Nox & Friends
Anonymous
September 20, 2018 at 2:53 am
I can answer this, as I was lucky to click a link to her ratings the day her name was announced. They did in fact quietly remove the reviews.
There were maybe 6 or 7 reviews and they were polarized. About 3 good and 3 bad from what I remember. The bad ones said she was an annoying grader, made her seem like a bitch, and one said something along the lines of being unhinged. The others were your typical positive reviews. If I remember correctly, the latest reviews were posted in 2014. The earliest, 2011?
DBS
September 27, 2018 at 4:45 pm
I saw one from 2016 and one from 2017. They are now gone.
Water Bear
September 20, 2018 at 1:07 pm
The score on her reviews (or lack thereof) prompted me to make a face similar to them.
0.0
Sabre22
September 20, 2018 at 3:15 pm
Last time I looked the god reviews were there and there were no bad ones (NO surprise there)
meThree
September 20, 2018 at 9:16 pm
It does not really matter, does it?…. Giving the fact that we all know that she lies and that she is an extreme Leftist who associates with Hillary’s lawyer and other “great” people.
M
September 28, 2018 at 12:13 pm
She’s a total liar. Wonder how much she was paid for this bs?
Ronald
September 30, 2018 at 10:24 am
Another interesting thing is that the wayback machine (internet archive) only shows archives saved twice, starting on Sept. 16, 2018 and ending Sept.20, 2018. This is referring to the California State University, Fullerton entry, which is now being claimed as a “different” Christine Ford, but I am not buying it. They also scrubbed the bad reviews from that page as well.
Ganon
September 30, 2018 at 7:38 pm
ask the anons on 8chan. they screen shot it before it was scrubbed