Spartacus Compares Bovine Flatulence Regulation to Defeat of Nazis and Moon Landing…

Cory “Spartacus” Booker rallies his presidential coalition to advocate for the Green New Deal by comparing bovine flatulence regulation to the U.S. moon landing and defeat of World War II Nazism.

The over-their-head irony is that “Nazism” is technically national socialism; which is exactly the current point of political advocacy within the Spartacus coalition. WATCH:

These four 2020 presidential candidates have now signed themselves up to defend all of the ridiculous points of advocacy within the Green New Deal.

.

.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Big Stupid Government, Dem Hypocrisy, Economy, energy, Environmentalism, Fabian Socialists - Modern Progressives, Legislation, media bias, Notorious Liars, Occupy Type Moonbats, Professional Idiots, propaganda, Socialist, Transportation, Typical Prog Behavior, Uncategorized, US Treasury, USA. Bookmark the permalink.

260 Responses to Spartacus Compares Bovine Flatulence Regulation to Defeat of Nazis and Moon Landing…

  1. Mike diamond says:

    This professor is the reason that AOC,is nuts,because her professor is nuts !

    Like

    • farrier105 says:

      It is virtue signalling on a massive scale. AOC wants the US to be the carbon offset for China, India, and Mexico. Those three can pollute the hell out of everything as long as we go completely off fossil fuels. Carbon pollution from China won’t hurt the planet. Only US carbon pollution does that. So why call it GLOBAL warming?

      Liked by 1 person

      • stripmallgrackle says:

        AOC, being OC D-NY, is very clever, as autocrats go. She set out to become a celebrity/lawmaker, and with media cooperation she has accomplished exactly that in less than a year. She is using Alinsky’s rules as a threat against democrat leadership to advance her own interests, whatever those are, and those may include the proletariat revolution (she sounds typical on this point, and she appears to be sold on the ‘soft revolution’ fantasy (the one where nobody gets hurt (except for ‘those people’ (who deserve it!)))). One word of criticism from Pelosi, and OCD will unleash a salvo of epithets, starting with everybody’s favorite showstopper: racism. There is little doubt that behind closed doors the party is debating whether or not she is worth keeping around.

        She claims to be an economist from Boston University, but, as we can see from her new handout, she couldn’t pass the final in ECON 101. Worse, her prolix bullet points violate the ultimate commandment for a democrat: Thou Shalt Not Give Away The Game. It’s doubtful she will have much party support when she has to start campaigning again, for real, in 15 months.

        In short OCD is a flash in the pan.

        Like

  2. Herbert Kroll says:

    There are many resemblances with what happenned a hundred years ago, during what is called “The Progressive Era”: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_Era

    Prohibition, a main feature of the period, considering the corruption it created, will give you an insight into what such a “Progressive Era” comes down to.

    Look up the ‘Bootleggers and Baptists’ theory, it will explain a lot of what is happening.

    Like

  3. Pokey says:

    Don’t underestimate these bozos. They are committed and they are all members of Congress and none of us are. The plot just sickens.

    Like

  4. JeePacorn says:

    The resolution itself should be quoted to the extent possible. In it, the author and sponsors state that the Federal Government must create a GND that REQUIRES:
    a) guaranteeing a job with a family-sustaining wage, adequate family and medical leave, paid vacations, and retirement security to all people of the United States.
    So what is that wage? And what is retirement security? Put these folks (67 co-sponsors in the House already) on record as to what that “minimum” is for all of those things.
    b) providing all people of the United States with : (i) high-quality health care; (ii) affordable, safe, and adequate housing; (iii) economic security; and (iv) clean water, clean air, healthy and affordable food, and access to nature.
    Again, define what these mean? Let’s let the devil of the details emerge so we can see exactly how out of touch these people are.
    c) the resolution provides protections AND “focused” opportunities to “indigenous peoples, communities of color, migrant communities, deindustrialized communities, depopulated rural communities, the poor, low-income workers, women, the elderly, the unhoused, people with disabilities, and youth”. Given the completeness of this list, what group or groups are expressly left out of the “focused” opportunities? And what led to that exclusion? (Get them to state clearly that the future they are interested in creating is one that is devoid of opportunity for white men, unless they are defined as “poor” or “low income” (as those terms are defined–and again, let them define it))

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s