On the Wall, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez versus Dan Crenshaw

Crenshaw Ocasio-Cortez

The debate about the border wall provides an excellent way to contrast two incoming freshman congress critters: Dan Crenshaw and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

I’m with those conservatives who believe that we need to take Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez seriously. It’s true that, thanks to her years at an American college, she went from a happy, laughing, dancing middle class girl to an angry Leftist harridan. And it’s true that her ideology is the same one that was responsible for over 100 million deaths in the 20th century, not to mention the fear and unhappiness that plagued easily another billion people in the same time. And it’s also true that her grasp of facts is, to say the least, weak if not out-and-out dishonest.

All the above is true, but what’s also true is that Ocasio-Cortez is excellent at social media, she’s pretty (if you like crazy-eyed angry women who hide behind kittenish cuteness), and the media adores her . . . just as they adored Barack Obama. The media has been a kingmaker before, and it plans simultaneously to protect Ocasio-Cortez from her idiocies while promoting her mediagenic charisma.

Ocasio-Cortez isn’t ready to be President any time soon (for no other reason than that she’s too young), but she can be a power broker. After all, we’ve learned never to underestimate a young, photogenic, telegenic Leftist media darling. As it is, it will take decades before America – indeed, the world — recovers from Obama’s ideologically-driven presidency.

Despite the small pocket of voters that elected her to Congress, Ocasio-Cortez is still a presence. With that in mind, please consider what she has to say about a wall securing our southern border – a wall, not to entrap people in the way of the Berlin Wall, but a wall intended to created an orderly way for genuine asylum seekers to present themselves at the US border, and a wall, moreover, that will protect Americans from people who break into our country, steal low-paying jobs almost solely for the benefit of rich white people, and who periodically commit violent crimes, the but-for cause of which is their unauthorized entry into the US:

Every day, immigrants commit crimes at a far lower rate than native-born Americans. [Editor: Not true, if for no other reason that most states don’t identify whether criminals are here legally or not. In Texas, which does, the statistics for illegals committing crimes are impressive, to say the least.] And not only that, but the women and children on that border that are trying to seek refuge and seek opportunity in the United States of America with nothing but the shirt on their backs are acting more American than any person who seeks to keep them out ever will be.


I can – I can tell you a very personal story.  And as many people know, I was working in restaurants just a year ago.  And when the president first assumed office with his – with his racist and violent rhetoric, people started to send themselves home.  And as we know, in restaurants, hospitality, every American eats if you can, if you`re lucky enough or we`re able to eat three times a day.  And that means we interact with the people who prepare our food three times a day.  When those people start to go home, local or rather go back to their countries which they originated from because many of them consider the United States their home, those places, they go into dysfunction.

I remember one of our lead cooks brought himself back to Mexico because he was so scared of the president`s rhetoric.  We had an insane amount of dysfunction.

Barring my one parenthetical comment, I won’t bother to pick through all the errors and irrelevancies in the above analysis, which I can only describe as juvenile. I just want you to consider the level of her analysis, rhetoric, and feelings about America and Americans. This is someone ruled by emotion and anecdote. She’s got the ear of the nation based upon a pretty face, a Leftist narrative, and some personal anecdotes.

That’s on the Left.

On the conservative side of the aisle in the House of Representatives, we also have a young (but not too young to be president), photogenic, telegenic up-and-coming star. That would be Dan Crenshaw, of course.

Where Crenshaw differs from Ocasio-Cortez, though, is that this former Navy SEAL has a staggering record of commitment, accomplishment, sacrifice, and patriotism. Moreover, he’s already proven with the Peter Davidson/SNL episode that he has tact, kindness, restraint, and an excellent sense of humor combined with a quick wit.

And now, with a recent Wall Street Journal editorial about the border wall, he’s proven (not that there’s any doubt) that he’s an intelligent and elegant thinker, who gracefully cuts to the heart of the matter, and who makes his points without unnecessarily denigrating people:

This week saw the culmination of the great wall debate. President Trump made his case—one I generally agree with—and explained what an extra $5.7 billion (approximately 0.1% of the budget) would do for the security of our southern border. Democratic leaders Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi immediately dismissed it. It is honestly surprising how quickly and thoroughly Democrats adopted the notion that a wall of any kind is such an obviously stupid and immoral idea. Well, is it? Let’s lay out the claims one by one:

• They’ll just climb over it, dig under it or break through it. Just like that huh? I spent 10 years as a Navy SEAL, and people often say, “Dan, you know better than anyone how ineffective a wall is.” Actually, I know how effective walls are, even against skilled SEALs. Planning to scale a 30-foot steel slatted barrier is a daunting challenge. Do you bring an enormous ladder all the way there? How do you get down from the top? Jump? Rappel? This isn’t a Tough Mudder course. A few skilled and well-equipped people may figure it out, but the reality is that most will be deterred

The same goes for “digging” or “breaking.” Tunneling would require special equipment and hundreds of hours to dig under the barrier, the base of which would penetrate many feet underground. To break through it, you’d need specialized circular saws, torches or explosives. Typical equipment for a special-ops team, but not exactly on the packing list for a migrant. And Border Patrol agents would easily detect such a ruckus.

Read the rest of the article here. (If it’s behind a paywall, you might still be able to view it at outline.com.)

As 2020 closes in on us, we Americans need to ask ourselves very serious questions about the quality of our future leaders:

Do we want people who have never had a life outside of government; who believe only in government; who have an incredible disdain for ordinary Americans; whose “think about the little people” narrative ends up serving only the ends of rich, white liberals; and whose analytical abilities are manifestly limited?

Or do we want people who have committed themselves to a life of service and accomplishment; who are not blind to America’s faults but love it still; who have a strong intellect and analytical abilities; and who believe in people rather than government?

With the incoming freshman class in the House of Representatives we have powerful representatives of both type of person. We need to take both very seriously because they are our, and our children’s, future.

About Bookworm 1339 Articles
Bookworm came late to conservativism but embraced it with passion. She's been blogging since 2004 at Bookworm Room about anything that captures her fancy -- and that's usually politics. Her blog's motto is "Conservatives deal with facts and reach conclusions; liberals have conclusions and sell them as facts."