Elizabeth Warren, Our Chief Scholar, Suggests Decreasing Carbon Footprint By Allocating It Somewhere Else

So Elizabeth Warren actively suggests that, even though air travel should be as limited as possible and she doesn’t agree with it, that it would be nearly impossible to exclude entirely… as she continuously slaps the “environmentalist” label on her back and continues on her merry way.

Let me give you a scenario –

Let’s say someone is wearing a red t-shirt to Target AND is not an employee of the Target corporation whatsoever. This person suggests that he or she is only an employee while wearing the shirt, but demands payment for the unprecedented “helpful deeds” …because ‘oh, well I don’t do it often because I don’t agree with it but I’m gonna keep doing it anyways in the name of effort… so where’s my check?’

Warren, you’re not helping anyone, and your plan sucks. So just stop.

“In an appearance on New Hampshire Public Radio Wednesday morning, Warren discussed some of the ways her campaign is hoping to reduce its carbon footprint. She admitted she still embraces air travel but claimed she “mostly” flies commercial.”

Studies have shown that short commercial flights emit a proportionate amount of CO2 to the amount that the population (equivalent to Somalia or Uganda) does in an entire year.

Aviation is known to be one of the fastest-growing polluters.

How about we look for ways to regulate the unavoidable impact of the aviation industry’s climate impact through offsetting emissions? I know this is one of many variables, so I’m not trying to cherry-pick here, but I don’t think I’m the one who should be worried about cherry-picking… *shifty eyes*

“We do those three things, we cut carbon emission in our country by 70 percent. Think about that, three things, 70 percent reduction,” she said.

“Warren’s admission, that she “mostly” flies commercial, follows reports of several climate-concerned 2020 candidates spending tens of thousands of dollars on private air travel throughout the course of their campaigns.”

So let me get this straight… she wants to reduce the amount of private flying she partakes in and wants to essentially increase the amount of commercial flying… so really, if you think about it, the commercial flying she plans to increase will match the carbon footprint she was once utilizing from private flying.

Following that train of logic, wouldn’t the numbers stay the same then?

I’m no mathematician, but this sounds like a ton of bull.

Here’s an excerpt from the Green New Deal that Warren so emphatically supports –

“We set a goal to get to net-zero, rather than zero emissions, in 10 years because we aren’t sure that we’ll be able to fully get rid of farting cows and airplanes that fast, but we think we can ramp up renewable manufacturing and power production, retrofit every building in America, build the smart grid, overhaul transportation and agriculture, plant lots of trees and restore our ecosystem to get to net-zero.”

First point – I don’t trust anyone who can say “fart” with a straight face.

Second point – reducing emissions is what would help reduce the carbon.

Third point – are we really going to trust a party to efficiently reduce the carbon footprint where they already suggest that proper brush management (ya know, the effort to minimize chances of these CURRENT wildfires) is disrespectful to the Earth?

Let’s just call her on her bluff, give her a horse and carriage, and send her out. Winter is coming!

Listen to "Mock and Daisy's Common Sense Cast" on Spreaker. A lot of common sense, no bull sense. Get Mock and Daisy’s UNIQUE take on the world, from the dinner table to the swamp on the new Mock and Daisy Common Sense Cast. Listen on Apple Podcasts, iHeart or your favorite podcast app!