 So yesterday, after Republican Senator Mike Lee of Utah made a fool of himself on the Senate floor attacking Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's Green New Deal, after the Republican Party has been trying to paint this as something that only elites care about, which is hilarious because it's actually going to affect us peasants more than elites, they'll be protected and insulated from the consequences of climate change, and after three Democrats chose to side with Senate Republicans and block the Green New Deal, block a vote on the Green New Deal, including Doug Jones, Joe Manchin, and Kirsten Sonoma, it was clear that Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez had enough. And I think that she would probably contend that reasonable criticism is not just fair, but it's warranted. In fact, I would welcome criticism and a lot of input over a policy like the Green New Deal, but unfortunately, discourse surrounding this issue has not been constructive, it's been batshit fucking insane, because think about the things and the claims really that Republicans are making. She wants to ban cows, she wants to ban hamburgers, she wants to ban air travel, nonsense, complete nonsense. So it's clear that she's done with the bullshit, so she took the time to not just roast all of the liars who've been talking shit about the Green New Deal and lying about the Green New Deal, but she also took the time to make the case for climate change action and she made what I think was probably one of the most powerful cases for action on climate change I have ever seen. Take a look. From that, when we talk about the concern of the environment as an elitist concern, one year ago I was waitressing in a taco shop in downtown Manhattan. I just got health insurance for the first time a month ago. This is not an elitist issue, this is a quality of life issue. You want to tell people that their concern and their desire for clean air and clean water is elitist? Tell that to the kids in the South Bronx which are suffering from the highest rates of childhood asthma in the country. Tell that to the families in Flint whose kids, their blood is ascending in lead levels, their brains are damaged for the rest of their lives. Call them elitist. You're telling them that those kids are trying to get on a plane to Davos? People are dying. They are dying. The response across the other side of the aisle is to introduce an amendment five minutes before a hearing and a markup. This is serious. This should not be a partisan issue. This is about our constituents in all of our lives, Iowa, Nebraska, broad swaths of the Midwest are drowning right now, underwater, farms, towns that will never be recovered and never come back. We're here and people are more concerned about helping oil companies than helping their own families. I don't think so. I don't think so. This is about our lives. This is about American lives and it should not be partisan. Science should not be partisan. We are facing a national crisis and if we do not ascend to that crisis, if we do not ascend to the levels in which we were threatened at the Great Depression, when we were threatened in World War II, if we do not ascend to those levels, if we tell the American public that we are more willing to invest and bail out big banks than we are willing to invest in our farmers and our urban families, then I don't know what we're here doing. I don't know what we're here doing. We talk about cost. We're going to pay for this whether we pass a Green New Deal or not because as towns and cities go underwater, as wildfires ravage our communities, we are going to pay and we're either going to decide if we're going to pay to react or we're going to pay to be proactive and what we know is that prevention, when you spend less money on prevention, you can prevent a lot of that damage from happening in the first place. So it's not a question of whether we're going to spend the money because I'm very sad to say that the government knew that climate change was real starting as far back as 1989 when NASA was reporting this and the private sector knew way back in the 1970s. So we had until around the time I was born to address this issue. I wish it didn't have to cost so much. But I'm going to turn 30 this year and for the entire 30 years of my lifetime we did not make substantial investments to prepare our entire country for what we knew was coming. So now it's coming all up at the end. It's like when we live our whole lives and we don't eat healthily and we don't move and we pursue unhealthy activities and then at the end of our lives our health care costs are very high. We have the choice to lower the cost now because I can tell you the cost of pursuing a Green New Deal will be far less than the cost of not passing it. And with respect to our brothers and sisters and neighbors that are in agriculture, bring them to the table. Let's hold hearings. Let's add provisions. Let's amend the legislation to accommodate for the just transition and for the encouragement of those industries to grow. And I would also encourage to my colleague on the other side of the aisle that thinks we're trying to ban cows to actually read the resolution and understand that there's nothing to that effect in the legislation. And not only that but we're trying to invest in these communities and our agricultural workers so that they can enjoy prosperity into the next century. That right there is why hands down she's one of the best because what you see is someone who actually cares about you. She's not there to advance her career. She's not trying to position herself for a career in the private sector to become a lobbyist. She's fighting to improve our lives to stop climate catastrophe. And that was just such a passionate and powerful case that I feel like I want to share it with everyone because she's really the only person in Congress or one of a few people who's taking this crisis seriously, which is sad because if there was some other situation that could lead to the planet becoming uninhabitable, let's say hypothetically there was an asteroid headed to earth. People would be scrambling. But the thing about climate change is that it's not a threat that's visible. I said this before. There's really no way that you can see climate change itself. It's kind of this amorphous idea. So it kind of creeps up on you in a really insidious way. And that kind of makes it seem as if it's not really the threat that it is. But that couldn't be further from the truth. So this may be redundant but I do want to get to some specific quotes even though you just heard her. I think that these are really powerful things that she said. She states quote. This is about our lives. It should not be partisan. Science should not be partisan. And I think that because it is partisan, it goes to show you just how poor of shape our country really is in, just how right wing the Overton window is. And I admit that it seems like the Overton window is starting to shift a little bit to the left in certain areas. But by and large, the fact that something as objective as science has been politicized, it's baffling. She also said if we can't ascend to the level to take this on, then I don't know what we're here doing. And that's exactly it. Because we keep hearing from people on both sides of the aisle that it's really expensive and you know it's just not feasible. Dianne Fine Science said it's never going to pass. Well then leave. If you're not willing to step up to this challenge, then you should not be serving. You should step down and allow someone to get in who actually is willing to take on this issue. It's a wicked problem that can only be dealt with by people who understand just how damaging this will be if we don't take action. A lot of people don't understand it. She also made, I think, such a fantastic point that I really haven't heard many people make. Quote, we talk about cost. We're going to pay for this, rather we pass a Green New Deal or not. Because as towns and cities go underwater, as wildfires ravage our communities, we are going to pay. That is such a perfect point. And it's clear that we're already paying. Puerto Rico is paying. California is paying. There are small island territories who are paying, who are seeing sea levels encroach on their land. So we may not see some of the most catastrophic consequences manifest that scientists initially warned us about, but we will. And we're seeing the start of that. She also says, I wish it didn't have to cost so much, but I'm going to turn 30 this year. And for the entire 30 years of my lifetime, we did not make substantial investments to prepare our entire country for what we knew was coming. So now it's coming all up at the end. It's like we live our whole lives and we don't eat healthily and we don't move and we pursue unhealthy activities. And then at the end of our lives, our health care costs are very high. The cost of pursuing a Green New Deal will be far less than the cost of not passing it. That was said perfectly. It was brilliant. I wouldn't change a single word. And I've made this point for people who are fear mongering about the potentially bad consequences that passing the Green New Deal may have on our economy, which I would argue that the economic consequences are actually all good because we could be a world leader in investing in renewable technology. But really, even if, let's say, hypothetically speaking, the worst case scenario comes to fruition and we pass the Green New Deal and it hurts the economy, is that still preferable to doing nothing and allowing climate change to ravage the world and make our planet become uninhabitable? Yes, reasonable people who have a self-interest in living should come to that conclusion because think about this, the economy can't exist without a habitable planet. If the planet becomes uninhabitable, if humans go extinct, what do you think happens to the economy? See, but what we're thinking with regard to action is how it would affect our short-term profits. And since a lot of companies are more worried about their short-term profits than the long-term health of the planet, then this is why it's so difficult to take action. Now, I do want to address some of the criticisms that I've seen with regard to the Green New Deal and how Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez may have undermined them because I think that this is genuinely people not understanding why she included provisions in this that she did. So she includes Medicare for All in the Green New Deal and people say that she included identity politics. So they say, why would you soil something that would otherwise be fantastic climate change specific legislation with identity politics? Why include Medicare for All if that's irrelevant? And I'll tell you why. So if you've watched any of my videos about the Green New Deal and climate change, I always say we can't just talk about climate change mitigation because it's here and it's getting worse. So we also need to start talking about climate change adaptation, how we as human beings live with the reality of climate change. So what AOC is doing here is she's meeting that requirement I initially set out because Medicare for All is crucial when we are talking about climate change because climate change will inevitably increase the necessity of medical care. The thawing of the Arctic ice may give rise to archaic diseases and make people that are already unhealthy susceptible to new diseases that we weren't aware of that we don't know how to cure right away. And her supposedly including identity politics is an acknowledgement that climate change is not going to affect everyone equally. Poor communities and communities of color will unquestionably be the ones that suffer the most, especially in coastal states like Florida, which will be underwater. A large part of Florida will be underwater when sea levels rise. So this will force them to flee their homes. So obviously it's going to be the case that if you are poor, you will be more vulnerable. You will be displaced because of climate change. So she's being sensitive to the reality that it's going to hurt specific people, marginalized communities and affect them more than it will affect other people. So what she's doing is she's meeting the standard that I set out, not because of me, but because she is thinking about this in a thorough way because she's taking a holistic approach and she's trying to say, listen, this is what's going to happen. So we need to start crafting policies and devising plans that can stop the inevitable harm it will ultimately do to marginalize people. We need to be able to meet the need for increased health care concerns that will arise. That's what she's doing. So she's focusing on both mitigation and adaptation. And I get that it may seem as if Medicare for all and thinking about the impact this will have on marginalized communities may seem irrelevant. It may not seem germane to the Green New Deal, but understand it is. It absolutely is. So we've got to do everything. We've got to take a kitchen's-ing approach and just attack this from every single angle because this is going to be the challenge of our lifetimes. And it poses an existential threat to humanity. So we can't afford to be purposefully obtuse here and pretend as if this won't have unforeseen consequences as if climate change won't lead to more medical concerns and won't further exacerbate the suffering of poor communities and communities of color. So what she's doing is she's demonstrating that she understands this issue better than anyone I have ever seen in elected office. Anyone I've ever seen. Because you can't just focus on what you know will happen. You have to be able to not only try to predict but prepare for things that you couldn't have predicted. We have to arm ourselves with the capability to fight this. She gets it. I wish other people would. So my hat goes off to her because what she's doing here is incredibly important, but even if she's taking heat from the right wing, even if Fox News and even Democrats are attacking her for how unrealistic the Green New Deal is, she's the only person who's putting forward a plan that meets the IPCC's 12-year deadline. And even if in the moment she's going to be attacked and vilified and smeared, history will look back and remember her as the hero and everyone else as the cowards. It's only a matter of are you going to jump on board and help her or are you going to sit on the sidelines as everyone else smears her? I know I'm not. I'm going to defend her because she's fighting the fight for our lives that nobody else is willing to take on. And I applaud her for that.