Liberal billionaire George Soros gives millions each year to fund a left-wing media empire that promotes far-left opinions. It’s only natural that some of those Soros-funded or Soros-linked media are pushing the eco-socialist Green New Deal and hoping to influence the upcoming presidential race. The Green New Deal resolution was introduced by Democratic Socialist Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) and Sen. Edward Markey (D-MA). Ocasio-Cortez described it as a “comprehensive agenda of economic, social and racial justice,” aiming to force a New Deal-like federal mobilization designed to “achieve net-zero greenhouse gas emissions through a fair and just transition.”
In the latest of a series of anti-Trump rants promoted by CNN, anchor Brooke Baldwin touted a "fiery opinion piece" accusing Trump of leading America down a path to tyranny by Jeffrey Sachs on CNN.com. Sachs is a renowned international economist, and a Democrat (He donated $2,000 in 2003 to Howard Dean for President.)
On Monday’s Morning Joe, the panel brought on liberal economist Jeffrey Sachs to talk about the Republican tax reform bill currently making its way through Congress. Somewhat predictably, Sachs used his platform to attack the plan as a form of “theft,” the “biggest heist in history,” and a plot by America’s “richest gazillionaires” to “bankrupt” the country for their own personal enrichment. Although the panelists repeatedly tried to get Sachs to say something sane about the Republican plan’s corporate tax cuts, he instead insisted on reverting to his talking points and never explained how letting people keep more of their own money is “theft.”
Appearing on the Thursday edition of MSNBC’s The Last Word, The Nation's Katrina vanden Heuvel suggested that money in politics is discriminatory toward African-Americans: “Fifty years ago, African-Americans were discriminated against by poll taxes, literacy tests. Today, the skyrocketing costs of campaigns, including the super PACs you mentioned, these billionaires, have made everyday Americans rightful vote mean not a enough, mean too little.”
It was enough to make a blogger in mom's basement spit out his Cheetos in surprise. On today's Morning Joe income redistributionist and global climate kvetcher Prof. Jeffrey Sachs praised the UK Conservatives for creating jobs via an austerity budget. In a second surprise, Sachs criticized fellow lefty traveler Paul Krugman.
Said Sachs of the Conservatives: "they governed well . . . they got the economy going again. They got it stabilized, they got the debt crisis Britain was facing under control and they created a lot of jobs and they got rewarded last night." And a bit later, the normally reserved Sachs permitted himself a petite smile when Joe Scarborough asked if Paul Krugman, who had criticized the Conservatives' austerity budget, thinks he "knows what is better for the British people than the British people?"
As a blizzard threatened to bury northeastern U.S. cities with snow, MSNBC blanketed its coverage with connections to man-made climate change.
Repeatedly, the cable network which is part of NBC Universal, tried to link the snowstorm with climate change (a phrase often used synonymously with global warming) in at least five of its shows on Jan. 26. While MSNBC hosts and guests said that "scientists think" climate change could be causing more snow, some actual scientists disagreed. But those views were not represented in those MSNBC discussions.
During her MSNBC show Now on Monday, Alex Wagner had on guest Jeffrey Sachs of Columbia University’s Earth Institute, who took advantage of the blizzard set to strike New York City and New England to invoke climate change and blame the “big oil industry” and Republicans for “voting down science” in a Senate vote last week.
Not to be outdone, Wagner took her own swipe at those who don’t subscribe to the view that the storm was bred by humans and climate change: “[J]ust with the flight delays, the economic impact of travel and travel cancellations, it seems like framing this sort-of changing climate in an economic context is a pretty powerful way to get people to start caring a little bit more about the changes that are happening to the Earth.”
Bloomberg’s Eric Roston attempted to keep a straight face while promoting a draft report for the United Nations. It said U.S. emissions would need to be “cut to one-tenth of current levels, per person, in less than 40 years.” Short of societal regression, it is unclear how that could be done.
“It’s perilous to say these things in the U.S., where a mere description of the scale of the climate challenge too often invites ridicule and dismissiveness. Americans are each responsible for about 18 tons of carbon dioxide a year. Taking that down 90 percent would mean a drop in emissions to what they were in about 1901 or 1902. Cue ridicule and dismissiveness,” Roston wrote.
Charlie Rose, during a panel discussion about the new UN report on climate change, had the audacity to insult global warming skeptics as “climate deniers” even as he brought on a so-called expert who once predicted the “greenhouse effect” would cause “food riots” all across North America...in 1995.
Everyone remembers the great North American Food Riots of ‘95? Right? Well that crazy scenario was dreamed up by one of the UN report co-authors Princeton University professor Michael Oppenheimer. On PBS's Charlie Rose show Oppenheimer dismissed climate change skeptics as people who “just like to stand away from the crowd.”
More typhoons will happen unless liberal energy policies are adopted, and those who disagree have “blood on their hands” – at least according to climate alarmist Jeffrey Sachs.
Sachs, a friend of liberal billionaire George Soros and head of The Earth Institute at Columbia University and a favorite of the news media, appeared on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” on Nov. 12 to discuss the recent tragedy caused by Typhoon Haiyan in the Philippines.
(video after break)
In an interview with liberal economist Jeffrey Sachs for Meet the Press's Press Pass segment on Sunday, moderator David Gregory worried about skepticism of big government: "...a lot of it has to do with what role does a government play in creating more structural balance in the economy, creating more jobs...doing what nobody else can do for the economy....but that the country writ large does not support....So what changes that and what happens in the absence of that movement back toward government playing a bigger role and spending all of that money?" [Listen to the audio or watch the video after the jump]
Sachs began his response by leveling criticism against the Obama administration's massive stimulus program: "...there's a lot of skepticism, and it's understandable. If the government wastes money or runs huge deficits and so forth, you can't be very confident....What you can't do is say, 'We're going to spend a trillion dollars, or nearly a trillion dollars, and we're going to work it out in the next five weeks and we're going to throw it on to the floor of Congress before anyone can even read it.'"
While you were watching Rand Paul's historic filibuster and the debate surrounding budget sequestration, an economic theory battle was waging between two of the nation's foremost liberal economists Paul Krugman and Jeffrey Sachs.
In his most recent salvo published at the Huffington Post Saturday, Sachs spoke heresy to Obama-lovers across the fruited plain including Krugman claiming that following the 2008 financial crisis, "It was the Fed, not the fiscal stimulus, which prevented a fall into depression."