Alexandria’s one-world dominion in which Indians own casinos and America.

Is Alexandria Ocasio Cortez really a working, functioning lawmaker, or is she just a cutish Latina waif prancing around on the political stage, spitting out grandiose Liberal drivel to anyone who will listen numbly?

Every time I hear her blather for an extended period of time (anything over 10 seconds), I’d like to retort (wisely, in Spanish, of course), “Como?” the universal Spanish bark of puzzlement. Similar to “Pardon???” (the multiple question marks are necessary as they denote a raised eyebrow and incredulity).

Or in the parlance of 70’s Black jargon, “Whatcha talking ’bout, Willis?”

In other words, AOC is simply an elected socialist blogger with nothing substantive up her sleeve other than rote rejoinders designed to soothe the anguish and frail despondencies of a her ethnic Socialist crew.

Her motif is one of repetition and tiresome chanted lyricism, laden with emotion and defensive histrionics. But if you listen closely, you will note her words are vapid mantras that barely peer into the enigmatic paradigm that is the elemental structural basis for our 21st Century dystopia. As far as Alexandria is concerned, it’s all about “I.C.E. is bad” and “immigrants deserve more rights than American citizens.”

In fact, in this clip from Friday, she ventures to castigate with a dubious assertion that “human mobility is a right.”

What on Earth is “human mobility” and why exactly would it qualify as a “right?”

Obviously, a rhetorical question, and I don’t presume to insult your intelligence by asking it with any sense of earnestness; in Cortez’ Rainbow of Immigrants world, “mobility” is the unfettered ability and freedom to cross international borders at will. Countries do not possess a sovereign right to stop anyone from entering their domain. In this quasi-Socialist Utopia, immigrants can waltz across the American border when they wish and no immigrant is “illegal” (especially of the Latino variety).

In fact, her most egregious articulation of an unhinged radical agenda occurs at the one-minute mark when she declares, passionately, that

 

“we are standing on Native land, and Latino people are descendants of Native people, and we cannot be told [?] and criminalized simply for our identity or our status.”

 

In Cortez’ Leftist fantasy, the only pertinent consideration for today’s cultural dynamic is who was “wronged” hundreds of years ago. Ignore the fact that the Native American population was unable to defend itself against the more persistent and wily European invaders in a Darwinian clash that saw a more powerful and superior culture claim its conquered land.

In other words, the Indians lost, babe, get over it.

 

There is no logical reason Latino’s, merely by virtue of their largely Native American genetics, should be scuttled to the front of the line for that hereditary reason alone.  Reason tells us no group should reap the guilt-ridden “benefits” of belonging to a race of people who could not even defend their home. Today’s aspiring politicos, boldly embracing the revolutionary, leftist post-digital evolution of the future, seem awfully mired in the intractabilities of the past.

Embrace the future, trivialize the past seems to be their narrative except when it suits the convenience of their opportunistic rants.

Our post-Millennial generations value the collective blob of amorphous society over the sanctity of the delineated State;  they were raised on open doors and this is the world they will institute one day.

We’ll be gone, thankfully.

Blogger’s note regarding his ancestry (pertains to this post)..33