Posted on 02/11/2019 7:13:18 PM PST by DeweyCA
Earlier today I wrote about the Washington Post’s summary of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’ efforts to walk back an embarrassing FAQ which her office used as part of the rollout for the Green New Deal. As bad as the Post story was in some ways, at least it managed to convey some of the embarrassing twists and turns this story has taken over the past four days. The NY Times published a summary today which omits all the troubling details and manages to work in the standard “Republicans pounce” formula used routinely by the media for any story that embarrasses a Democrat. This headline is like a parody:
Ocasio-Cortez Team Flubs a Green New deal Summary, and Republicans Pounce
The opening graph of the story furthers the narrative by confusing the timeline:
Days after introducing her Green New Deal — a plan to combat climate change that has won the endorsement of several Democratic presidential candidates — Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez found the proposal enmeshed in confusion when her staff published a summary that included provisions not endorsed by the candidates.
As I pointed out this morning, the FAQ was posted on AOC’s site two days before the official rollout of the Green New Deal resolution. So she didn’t get in trouble “days after” because her office published the FAQ. She got in trouble because her office gave the FAQ to news outlets that published it, allowing people to read it.
In any case, the fact that this wasn’t just published on the web but was intentionally handed out to NPR and other outlets by AOC’s staff as part of the Green New Deal rollout doesn’t even get a mention in the NY Times version of events:
Over the weekend her staff backed away from the document, saying it was incomplete and had been published by accident, after Republicans pounced on the plan, citing a blog post of frequently asked questions. That post included language that called for economic security “for all who are unable or unwilling to work.”
“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,” Saikat Chakrabarti, Ms. Ocasio-Cortez’s chief of staff, wrote on Twitter, referring to the plan by its acronym.
The Times just skips over the fact this was intentionally given out to the media (not just published by accident to the website by some junior staffer). By ignoring that and leading with the claim this was all an accident, you set up the inevitable “Republicans pounced” dynamic.
That’s not all that gets left out of this story. By ignoring the embarrassing incident Friday night when AOC’s Green New Deal adviser went on Fox News and claimed the FAQ had been doctored and the fact that she retweeted the claim, the Times avoids giving readers the idea that maybe, just maybe, it wasn’t the FAQ that was a mistake it was the shoddy, self-serving attempt to claim this was all a big mistake instead of a revealing window into where AOC thinks the Green New Deal is headed.
Just think of the nonstop chaos, narcissism, gross incompetence and stupidity going on among Occasional Cortex’s staff.
....And the absolute incompetence and stupidity starts at the top, with Occasional Cortex herself, the dumb@ss of all dumb@sses.
30 braindead Democraps sponsored Markey's bill and assembled to support AOC's rollout of the Green Dream.
It is noteworthy that so many of the Dem Pres wannabes endorsed this farce.
the Green Noodle
Here’s her Green New Deal, in the exact form it was written (scroll down in article for full *.pdf):
Boxcar Barbie the Bug-eyed Bolshevik.
Yeah, Democrats leave Republicans alone when they screw up.
The Green Clusterfuch.
The Green Screw Deal
100%
Yes the Republicans did and yes it is political....that is how it is designed to work. Thank heavens for an adversarial system because if it was left to the NYT to report..........
Yes the Republicans did and yes it is political....that is how it is designed to work. Thank heavens for an adversarial system because if it was left to the NYT to report..........
In all fairness probably only one or two of them actually believe their own bull crap. They just know from their focus groups this is what they need to tell their lunatic base if they want to win their primaries.
8 Feb updated 9 Feb: Bloomberg: How the Green New Deal Almost Went Nuclear on Its First Day
By Ari Natter and Jennifer A Dlouhy
A fact sheet distributed by the office of progressive newcomer Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a Democratic representative from New York, said there was no room in the nation’s all renewable-energy future for nuclear plants.
But the reference caught many off guard and back-peddling ensued.
Giselle Barry, a spokeswoman for Senator Ed Markey, a Massachusetts Democrat who is the Green New Deal’s lead Senate backer, disowned the fact sheet and said Markey’s office wasn’t consulted before it was sent out. “We did not draft that fact sheet,” she said...
Markey sought to do damage control at a midday press conference, emphasizing the proposed resolution doesn’t address specific energy technologies. Language on nuclear power “is not part of this legislation,” he said. “The resolution is silent on any individual technology that can move us to a solution.”...
After the dust-up on nuclear power, Corbin Trent, a spokesman for Ocasio-Cortez, said a new fact sheet was being prepared.
But the damage was already done...
But nuclear power provides more than 50 percent of the country’s carbon-free electricity, according to the Nuclear Energy Institute, a trade group that represents companies such as Westinghouse Electric Co. and Exelon Corp...
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-02-08/how-the-green-new-deal-almost-went-nuclear-on-its-first-day
LOL!!! Chairman Mao would be sooo proud
I think so.
However AOC probably thinks he’s a item from a chinese menu.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.