MSNBC hype ‘Do or Die’ leftist climate panic as compromise = death


Nip for Chuck Todd on Tuesday Daily MTP, MSNBC’s Garrett Haake took up the climate panic map, highlighting a New York Times editorial titled Hysterically “Democrats have one year to save the planet.” We are missing “an opportunity for the United States to finally take major steps to curb the worst effects of a climate that is heading towards disaster.”

Haake’s guest was Leah Stokes, a professor who pointed out that she was quoted by Manjoo in his panic article. He told her “I want to talk about how you think this is crucial. The New York TimesFarhad Manjoo described it as a make or die moment, we’ll put some of his work on screen. “

But he only put this part on screen: “This could be our do or die time – with Democrats holding the White House and barely controlling Congress, this could be the country’s last best political opportunity to do so. something big about the climate. “

He left out the following thought: “After Biden’s announcement last week of a watered down compromise with centrist senators on an infrastructure plan, I am terrified that we are headed straight for death rather than doing it. “

Haake then asked, “Is that hyperbole?” [!] If the Democrats don’t take the opportunity they now have with both Houses and the White House to address this issue fully, what do we look to the corner of the next summer heat wave? “

The heat waves Haake was referring to were the historically high temperatures in the Pacific Northwest at the end of June. Yet neither Haake nor Stokes would explain how Congress could have stopped such an event which also shattered national records in Canada and this has been described as a once a millennium Event.

Still, Stokes asserted, “This is not hyperbole, what Farhad Manjoo wrote. I was quoted in this article and said it was a window of opportunity. Windows for policy change in Congress open and they close. “Shouting” we have a year to save the planet “is not meant to be a weather forecast. It is a tool to get your legislation passed.

Stokes said it was “so essential that 14 senators spoke out and said” no climate, no deal “” because “we need to clean the electrical system, to be 80% clean by 2030 . We can do this through a clean standard and by extending tax credits. These are popular ideas that the public supports, and it is actually quite viable, and the benefit of the reconciliation approach is that it makes it an investment program with the federal government. ”

As usual, it is first to pass the agenda of the left, to ask the questions then because we do not have time for the questions. Death is around the corner.

This segment was sponsored by Allstate.

Here’s a transcript of the July 6 show:

MSNBC

Daily MTP

1:08 p.m. ET

GARRETT HAAKE: The bipartisan part of the infrastructure legislation leaves out most of the big climate initiatives that were promoted by the White House in the jobs plan. This leaves the Democrats to do this alone on the reconciliation bill. I mean how you think it’s crucial. the New York Times‘Farhad Manjoo described it as a make or die moment, we’re going to put some of his piece on screen. Is this hyperbole? If Democrats don’t take the opportunity they now have with both Houses and the White House to address this issue comprehensively, what do we look to the corner of the next summer heat wave?

LEAH STOKES: It’s not hyperbole what Farhad Manjoo wrote. I was quoted in this article and said it was a window of opportunity. Windows of policy change in Congress open and close. And the last time we had the chance to pass a congressional climate law was 12 years ago. With the Waxman-Markey bill and why it is so essential that 14 senators stood up and said “no climate, no deal”. They won’t push forward any legislation this summer without a bold climate package and we know what needs to be in that climate package.

We need to clean up the electrical system, to achieve 80% cleanliness by 2030. We can do this through a cleanliness standard and the extension of tax credits. These are popular ideas that the public supports and are in fact quite viable, and the advantage of the reconciliation approach is that it actually makes it an investment program with the federal government. It becomes a kind of cost sharing you could say where the federal government says you know what? This is what we must do as a society to ensure the safety of people, to protect infrastructure. So we’re going to help cover the costs, that’s a great idea.

HAAKE Professor, you only have about 30 seconds left, but I think that’s important. Can you give me – if you sit down at the table and say, “Look, I can bring in three of these provisions, I can put a few things on the chair’s desk.” What’s the order here? What are the most critical things to happen to the president’s office when it comes to climate?

STOKES: We need things on electricity, like a clean electricity standard. On transportation, like support for electric vehicles and things on clean buildings to get fossil gas out of homes through things like heat pumps and induction cookers and if we get things on all of those topics, we can meet the president’s goal of reducing pollution by 50% by 2030.



Source link

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *