Carl Davidson – 12/10/18

This page was last updated on January 3, 2019.

Listen and Learn; Carl Davidson (KD); Facebook; December 10, 2018.

KD describes himself on Facebook as a “Truthseeker, Changemaker, Student of The Way, Pilgrim on the Road.”

You can learn more about BCR’s leftster management here. “Leftster” is the combination of leftist and gangster, inspired by the left-originated “bankster.”

You can find other AOC-related pieces here and here.

Carl Davidson 12/10/18 @ 5:16pm: “LISTEN AND LEARN. Some folks on the right like to poke fun at her for being a lightweight. Just keep thinking that way, guys. You won’t know what hit you when you find yourself out in the cold.”

[RWC] The “her” to which KD referred is Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC), U.S. Rep.-elect for the NY 14th Congressional District. Sen. Bernie Sanders (BS, Socialist-VT) introduced AOC as “a bold progressive fighting for a Green New Deal and for other legislation, not only in terms of the environment, but all areas that are going to protect ordinary people against the greed of big money.”

The subject video is named “Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Stuns Crowd With Speech.” There was no speech, however, just Q&A with the rest of the panel. The video of the entire event is here. The Q&A appeared to be scripted; that is, AOC knew the questions ahead of time and wrote her answers. She did an okay job trying to cover it up, but AOC kept taking quick peeks at what I suspect were her answers/notes.

To start, somebody should probably tell pervy Uncle Bernie to keep his hands off of AOC.

If you watch the video, you’ll find AOC – as well as the panel - said nothing of substance. It’s all about this or that “justice.”

AOC had a “Draft Text For Proposed Addendum To House Rules For 116th Congress Of The United States” on her campaign website but deleted it earlier this week. Fortunately, I had already made a copy, but even better, so did the Wayback Machine.

If you think the Green New Deal (GND) is about swapping out current energy sources for “100% renewable energy,” get that thought out of your brain right now. Read the “Draft Text For Proposed Addendum To House Rules …,” and a chill should run up your spine. Here’s an example. A question in the FAQ section asks, “Why do we need a sweeping Green New Deal investment program? Why can’t we just rely on regulations and taxes alone, such as a carbon tax or an eventual ban on fossil fuels?” One of the answers is, “a country that is trying to change how its economy works will need to make big investments today to jump-start and develop new projects and sectors to power the new economy.” Wait! The GND is going to “to change how [our] economy works” and the result will be “a new economy?” I thought the GND’s goal was about swapping out current energy sources for “100% renewable energy.” Instead, we find its about establishing a fascist economy. A fascist economy is one in which businesses are still owned by the private sector on paper, but government regulation takes sufficient operating control to make the government the de facto owners. Communism is the next step on the slippery slope, going from de facto to de jure government ownership of businesses.

AOC: “It’s unsurprising that the response to any bold proposal that we have is to incite fear. To incite fear of loss. To incite fear of others. To incite fear of our future. But the only way we are going to get out of this situation is by choosing to be courageous. That’s the only way we’re going to get out of this.”

[RWC] AOC’s opponents incite fear? For at least the last 25 years, the manmade global warming (MGW) crowd has been telling us, if we don’t act today, MGW will become irreversible within the next fill-in-the-blank years. Is that not meant to incite fear?

Before that, the manmade global cooling crowd did the same thing. During the 1970s, publications like Newsweek (The Cooling World; April 28, 1975), Science Digest, The Christian Science Monitor, and Time (The Cooling of America; December 24, 1979) published articles about the impending “ice age.” Now that we know the truth <g>, how much damage would have been done if we had jumped on manmade global cooling the way MGW activists want us to jump on MGW?

In 1968, author Paul R. Ehrlich wrote the book “The Population Bomb.” According to Wikipedia, “The Population Bomb … warned of mass starvation of humans in the 1970s and 1980s due to overpopulation, as well as other major societal upheavals, and advocated immediate action to limit population growth.”

Remember the 2005 hurricane season (Katrina and so on) and how we were told that was the new normal? The first major hurricane to make landfall in the U.S. after 2005 was Harvey in 2017.

AOC: “First of all, it’s just plain wrong. The idea that we’re going to somehow lose economic activity. As a matter of fact, it’s not just possible that we will create jobs and economic activity by transitioning to renewable energy, but it’s inevitable that we are going to create jobs. It’s inevitable that we’re going to create industry, and it’s inevitable that we can use the transition to 100% renewable energy as the vehicle to truly deliver and establish economic, social, and racial justice in the United States of America. That is our proposal and that is what we are here to do, because in the depths of darkness, in the depths of despair, which what we last saw - you know, when we think about where we were when the New Deal was established, we were a nation in depression, in Great Depression, we were a nation on the brink of war. We saw the rise of fascism creeping across in Europe. And no one would thought [sic] that a nation so poor, so scarce, and in such dire straits as we were in that time could pursue such a bold economic agenda. But we chose to do it anyway. We had the courage to do it anyway and that is what this moment demands of us right now. That’s what we have to do. We have to - this is going to be the Great Society, the moonshot, the Civil Rights Movement of our generation. That is the scale. That is the scale of the ambition that this movement is going to require.”

[RWC] Hurricanes and tornadoes generate economic activity, but they also destroy wealth. The GND is a variation of the “broken-window” fallacy. Believers in this fallacy assert the destruction of property (wealth) stimulates the economy because the property must be replaced and this results in spending and jobs. In this case, the “broken window” is any energy source not “100% renewable.”

How does a “transition to 100% renewable energy” serve “as the vehicle to truly deliver and establish economic, social, and racial justice in the United States of America.” What are the definitions of “economic, social, and racial justice?”

I’m sure AOC knows “we were [NOT] a nation on the brink of war” when the New Deal programs started in 1933. In fact, the U.S. enacted four neutrality acts during the 1930s, not repealed until the Lend-Lease program was enacted in March 1941. We didn’t declare war on Japan until the Pearl Harbor attack (12/7/1941) and we didn’t declare war on Germany and Italy until they declared war on us several days later.

Though times were tough, AOC laid it on thick (“so poor, so scarce, and in such dire straits as we were in that time …”). While the U.S. population during the Great Depression (1929-1941) was only about 70% that of the USSR, the U.S. GDP was #1 in the world and ranged from 2.0 to 3.3 times that of the world’s second largest economy, the USSR.

AOC knows the New Deal was a failure, the position of Henry Morgenthau, FDR’s Treasury Secretary during the Great Depression. Testifying before the House Ways and Means Committee in May 1939, Sec. Morgenthau said, “We have tried spending money. We are spending more than we have ever spent before and it does not work. And I have just one interest, and if I am wrong … somebody else can have my job. I want to see this country prosperous. I want to see people get a job. I want to see people get enough to eat. We have never made good on our promises … I say after eight years of this Administration we have just as much unemployment as when we started … And an enormous debt to boot.” Further, unemployment never got below 9.9% before the U.S. entered World War II. Sound familiar?

AOC spoke of “the rise of fascism creeping across in Europe” prior to WWII, but failed to mention the rise of communism “creeping across in Europe” via the USSR occupation of several Eastern European countries.

AOC spoke about how she “won a seat against all odds. We were outspent $4,000,000, and I had $300,000 in the bank.” Neither AOC nor any of the nodding heads on the panel mentioned she was talking about the Democrat primary. In the general election, AOC spent 625 times as much as her Republican opponent Anthony Pappas (AP), $1,562,487 to $2,500. After the election, AOC had 71 times as much in the bank as AP, $403,544 vs. $5,662.

Sen. Sanders: “We are living in a moment in history that has never existed before. The best minds in the world are telling us literally that we have 12 years – which is no time at all – to get our act together if we are going to leave our kids and grandchildren with a planet that is healthy.”

[RWC] As I noted previously, the MGW crowd has been making this claim for at least the last 25 years. Each new year has pushed the drop-dead date out by another year or so. Shouldn’t we be preparing for our inevitable demise by now instead of wasting time on a futile attempt to fix the unfixable?

BS also spoke of the GND generating millions of jobs. As of November 2018, the U.S. unemployment rate was 3.7%. From where will AOC and BS get the employees to fill those jobs? I suspect AOC and BS will say they’ll get the employees from jobs killed by the NGD. What about the transition when we’ll need to keep our current systems running while the government builds its “100% renewable energy” systems?

Unless we’re in a Groundhog Day event, aren’t we always “living in a moment in history that has never existed before?”

Please read my papers Healthcare and Socialist Security & Medicare.

In Peace, Friendship, Community, Cooperation, and Solidarity. <g>

Below is a portion of the “Draft Text For Proposed Addendum To House Rules For 116th Congress Of The United States.”

6.: “SCOPE OF THE PLAN FOR A GREEN NEW DEAL AND THE DRAFT LEGISLATION.

6.A: “The Plan for a Green New Deal (and the draft legislation) shall be developed in order to achieve the following goals, in each case in no longer than 10 years from the start of execution of the Plan:

6.A.i: “100% of national power generation from renewable sources;

6.A.ii: “building a national, energy-efficient, ‘smart’ grid;

6.A.iii: “upgrading every residential and industrial building for state-of-the-art energy efficiency, comfort and safety;

6.A.iv: “decarbonizing the manufacturing, agricultural and other industries;

6.A.v: “decarbonizing, repairing and improving transportation and other infrastructure;

6.A.vi: “funding massive investment in the drawdown and capture of greenhouse gases;

6.A.vii: “making ‘green’ technology, industry, expertise, products and services a major export of the United States, with the aim of becoming the undisputed international leader in helping other countries transition to completely carbon neutral economies and bringing about a global Green New Deal.

6.B: “The Plan for a Green New Deal (and the draft legislation) shall recognize that a national, industrial, economic mobilization of this scope and scale is a historic opportunity to virtually eliminate poverty in the United States and to make prosperity, wealth and economic security available to everyone participating in the transformation. In furtherance of the foregoing, the Plan (and the draft legislation) shall:

6.B.i: “provide all members of our society, across all regions and all communities, the opportunity, training and education to be a full and equal participant in the transition, including through a job guarantee program to assure a living wage job to every person who wants one;

6.B.ii: “take into account and be responsive to the historical and present-day experiences of low-income communities, communities of color, indigenous communities, rural and urban communities and the front-line communities most affected by climate change, pollution and other environmental harm;

6.B.iii: “mitigate deeply entrenched racial, regional and gender-based inequalities in income and wealth (including, without limitation, ensuring that federal and other investment will be equitably distributed to historically impoverished, low income, deindustrialized or other marginalized communities);

6.B.iv: “include additional measures such as basic income programs, universal health care programs and any others as the select committee may deem appropriate to promote economic security, labor market flexibility and entrepreneurism; and>

6.B.v: “deeply involve national and local labor unions to take a leadership role in the process of job training and worker deployment.

6.C: “The Plan for a Green New Deal (and the draft legislation) shall recognize that innovative public and other financing structures are a crucial component in achieving and furthering the goals and guidelines relating to social, economic, racial, regional and gender-based justice and equality and cooperative and public ownership set forth in paragraphs (2)(A)(i) and (6)(B). The Plan (and the draft legislation) shall, accordingly, ensure that the majority of financing of the Plan shall be accomplished by the federal government, using a combination of the Federal Reserve, a new public bank or system of regional and specialized public banks, public venture funds and such other vehicles or structures that the select committee deems appropriate, in order to ensure that interest and other investment returns generated from public investments made in connection with the Plan will be returned to the treasury, reduce taxpayer burden and allow for more investment.”