Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is still getting flak for her misinformed comparison of US detention centers for illegal entrants to Nazi concentration camps (and to all the hair-splitters trying to defend her, her invocation of the phrase “never again” in her original post made it clear that she was indeed making reference to the Holocaust). But she’s doubling down and insisting it’s her critics who should apologize.
I’m beginning to wonder if she’s just doing this to get invitations for free travel. So far, I’ve invited her to accompany me the next time I visit one of the actual concentration camps or the Holocaust memorial in Jerusalem, and a leader of our border guards invited her to come tour a detention center to see what they’re really like and the nightmare the guards are dealing with thanks to the Democrats’ policies that are encouraging mass illegal immigration.
And now, a third invitation: Polish Parliament member Dominik Tarczy?ski was so distressed by her cavalier conflating of protecting our borders with the mass incarceration and murder of millions of Jews to score “political points with enflamed rhetoric” that he wrote a letter formally inviting her to come tour Auschwitz. Having been there myself on more than one occasion, I can assure you that it would take a heart of stone or a brain of concrete not to grasp the enormity of the tragedy and horror that took place there.
Tarczy?ski wrote, “I wish to extend the olive branch of education to you, Congresswoman, and would be delighted if you would accept my offer to come to Poland and study the concentration camps here for real, so that you can see firsthand how different it is from your immigration processing centers on the U.S. border.” He noted that Poland was where “Adolf Hitler set up the worst chain of concentration camps the world has ever seen.”
I like the idea of the “olive branch of education.” It reminds me of the small tree branch my mother would have made me fetch to "educate" me if I’d ever said something that offensive. I sincerely hope she takes MP Tarczy?ski up on his kind and generous offer. I’m sure it would be a very educational trip for AOC. In fact, his letter should alone should be very educational for her, since he mentions that the Nazis were “the National Socialist German Workers Party of Germany.” Doesn’t that sound “progressive”?
While AOC is comparing our efforts to keep up with the tsunami of illegal immigrants to the Nazis, Karol Markowitz of the New York Post has noticed something about all those Democrats running for President: they may not go as far as AOC, but they’re all blasting President Trump for his “cruel,” “callous” and “inhumane” border policies (even those that are exactly the same as Obama’s) – and yet none of them will tell us what they would do to fix the problem.
They claim they don’t want “open borders” (which at least some of them obviously do – even though “open borders” is a euphemism for “the end of the United States as a sovereign nation.”) As far as I know, only back-of-the-pack contender John Hickenlooper has actually called for giving 10-year-plus visas and a pathway to citizenship to every one of the estimated 11 million illegal immigrants currently in the US.
As California is proving every day, the combination of open borders and lots of citizenship-level privileges creates a magnet for illegal immigration. That’s so obvious that many Californians see and reject it, while most Americans east of California recognize it as the suicidal insanity it is. Most of the Dems’ Presidential hopefuls aren’t politically suicidal enough to admit that’s what they want. So what do they say instead?
As Markowitz points out, they declare that they want “comprehensive immigration reform.” And that means…?
Well, they’ll get back to you on that after the election. “Comprehensive immigration reform” is like “common sense gun laws.” It means they’ll apply the same failed, anti-American nostrums that punish law-abiding citizens while making the real problems worse, but under a vague new name that makes it sound more reasonable.
Ms Markowitz rightly notes that the Democrats’ big problem is their unthinking “Resistance” stance. They have to oppose whatever Trump says or does, even when he says things that are unquestionably true (“there’s an illegal immigration crisis at the border”) and wants to do things they once supported (she points out that under Obama, the US spent $2.3 billion building and maintaining 654 miles of Southern border barriers, with Speaker Nancy “Border walls are immoral” Pelosi’s support; and that while Trump “cruelly” deported over 256,000 people last year, Obama deported over 409,000 in 2012 alone.)
So far, the media have let the Democrats slide on the “You attack Trump a lot for how he’s dealing with this problem, but what would YOU do about it?” question. That’s because they like attacks on Trump (they think it’s their job, too.) So chances are that question won’t be asked in the upcoming reality shows masquerading as debates.
But the voters who attend town halls and other candidate events shouldn’t let them off the hook. If a candidate slams how Trump is dealing with overwhelming illegal immigration but refuses to say specifically what he or she would do differently, then assume that answer means “I have no answer, I just really want to be President.”
What could possibly make CNN, CBS, ABC, C-SPAN and Fox News join together in solidarity and protest? The South Carolina Democratic Party’s decision that none of those news networks will even be allowed to cover this week’s Democratic Presidential debate, which will be hosted by the famously nonpartisan and objective MSNBC, which also apparently will be the only outlet allowed to cover it. The other networks called this “the antithesis of openness.”
Maybe MSNBC insisted on it in hopes that a monopoly will boost its ratings (average of 1.66 million viewers in prime time, down 19% from last year.)
You can read more at the link about this attempt either to resuscitate MSNBC or keep Americans from seeing this slow motion train wreck. Also, catch the article above it that contains the sage observation that the Democratic debates will be the biggest gathering of liberals since Woodstock. Except to listen to their proposals, you’d assume that the liberals at the debates were taking more LSD than the ones at Woodstock.