Jacques Mallet Du Pan, the 18th Century journalist who chronicled the French Revolution, famously warned that, “Like Saturn, the Revolution devours its children.”
Mallet Du Pan’s admonition should be particularly relevant to current Democratic officeholders. On Tuesday, New York Congressman Joe Crowley became the latest prominent Democrat to be devoured by his party’s radical immigration stances. If there was a more vocal advocate for amnesty and mass immigration, and a more adamant opponent of immigration enforcement than Crowley, it was not for lack of effort on his part.
Notwithstanding his relentless efforts in the cause of open immigration, Crowley went down to defeat in Tuesday’s primary election at the hands of an even more radical 28-year-old self-described Democratic-Socialist political neophyte, who a year ago was waiting tables. In her successful challenge, Alexandria Ocasio-Corte, blasted Crowley for not going far enough in his commitment to unrestricted immigration, including the abolition of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency. Crowley merely called the agency “fascistic,” and avocated for putting ICE “back on its leash.”
Ocasio-Corte made note of the fact that New York’s 14th Congressional District, covering parts of Queens and The Bronx, has undergone significant demographic changes since Crowley was first elected in 1998. About half of all district residents are now immigrants – a significant number of whom are illegal aliens, or members of mixed status families.
As a profile of Ocasio-Corte in In These Times observed, her challenge to the powerful 56-year-old Chairman of the House Democratic caucus is emblematic of a nationwide move to push out the old-guard party leadership and replace them with people who represent the party’s far-left base.
Crowley is not the first old-guard immigration enthusiast to be devoured by the mass immigration revolution he led. Long-time California Congressman Howard Berman, who used his seat on the Judiciary Committee to push relentlessly for ever-more immigration, was similarly dismissed by a constituency that was radically transformed through mass immigration.
The Democratic Party establishment has been playing with fire on immigration. The massive influx of immigrants – about half of whom rely on means-tested public assistance programs – does result in more Democratic voters. It does not necessarily benefit the Democrats who have fostered mass immigration. And, as the party gets driven inexorably toward Democratic Socialism by a growing base of government-dependent voters, many more establishment Democrats are likely to find themselves devoured by the Revolution.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez: A giant-killer with giant ambitions

By Peter Barry Chowka
The biggest political story of the week arising from last Tuesday’s primary elections was the David and Goliath takedown of entrenched Swamp Dweller Rep. Joe Crowley (D-NY) by someone who was given no chance.  Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, 28, who last November was working as a bartender, not only beat Crowley, who outspent her by 10 to 1 – she trounced him by a 15 point margin. The New York Times, her hometown paper of record, had devoted exactly two mentions to her campaign in news stories prior to her election victory.
Original caption: “This photo is from Nov. 14, 2017. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, 28, was then working as a bartender. Less than a year later, she defeated the likely next Speaker of the House, and will almost certainly be the youngest woman ever elected to Congress.” Source: Jeff Stein, WaPo viaTwitter
Crowley wasn’t just anybody. He was a 10-term Congressman and an old political hand. He was thought to be a leading contender for the top Democrat leadership role in the House, and maybe the next Speaker, if Rep. Nancy Pelosi winds up being deposed by her caucus either before or after the November elections. Ocasio-Cortez’s win was immediately compared to the 2014 triumph of another unknown, Dave Brat, a Tea Party candidate and a professor at Randolph-Macon College who took down House Republican leader Eric Cantor in an 11 point landslide primary win. That election surprise may have signaled a tectonic out-with-the-old-type shift in the makeup of the Republican Party that, two years later, came under the control of the now iconic outsider Donald J. Trump.
The left and the media are greeting Ocasio-Cortez’s win, “the most shocking upset of a rollicking political season,” as a kind of second coming – that is, of Bernie Sanders. Vermont Sen. Sanders enthusiastically endorsed his fellow socialist Ocasio-Cortez, who had worked on his 2016 presidential campaign. For her part, Ocasio-Cortez had warm praise for her mentor Sanders. Republicans who are cheering this win because they think it presages trouble because the Democrats are lurching too far to the left should remember that Sanders, who ran as a Democrat but is really a hard core socialist, did extremely well and might even have beaten Hillary Clinton if the primaries hadn’t been rigged by the DNC.
Ocasio-Cortez, a member of the Democratic Socialists of America, favors universal single payer health care (aka socialized medicine), tuition free for all four year college at state schools, and the elimination of ICE. Her unconventional decision to eschew campaigning in the final days and fly to Texas to demonstrate in solidarity with illegal immigrants – at the time seen as an unwise move – is now being assessed as a brilliant political stroke. In a comparison that is not too far afield, like Donald J. Trump she acts impulsively and speaks her mind and so far the constituents in her Congressional district in Queens, N.Y. (70% of them are “people of color”) seem to approve.
Ocasio-Cortez is assured of making it to the House in November as her district is as safe for Democrats as possible. Once there, where will she go politically? I predict further on to the left. What has she got to lose? Plenty of other ambitious high profile Democrats are heading in the same direction. A majority of her party has no problems with socialism and the promise of a handout for all has often been a winning strategy for Democrats (ask Barack Obama), who in recent years have remade themselves into Democrat Socialists. Remember the Newsweek cover at the time of Obama’s first inauguration? “We Are All Socialists Now.”
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez looking hopeful in a screen shot from a video by Sarah Lerner at O-C’s 2018 campaign Twitter
And what about Ocasio-Cortez’s future ambitions? In estimating this aspect, she reminds me of President Obama. He exuded hipness, he was attractive and articulate, he came out of nowhere when America seemed to crave something new – and he was the right color for the country’s emerging demographic shift that is slowly and inexorably transforming to minority-majority.
The thought of aiming for the very top job has apparently not escaped soon-to-be Rep. Ocasio-Cortez. On Thursday, basking in the glow of her daughter’s impressive victory, the newly minted pol’s 55-year old mother, Blanca Ocasio-Cortez, told the New York Post, “Her aspiration is to be the president.”
Source: Twitter
A friend of mine who is an astute observer of American politics with a sense of realpolitik, and who despises socialism because of what it did to her country in the last century, offered these observations about Ocasio-Cortez:
She is looking like a total construct. Groomed and primed in secret, and prepared for this political world. See how much she smiles, see how happy and young and healthy she looks. If you vote for her, you will also feel young and happy and healthy and smiley. That is the strategy and it will work, because socialism is a multi-generational strategy, and the advancing phalanx of socialist voters is FOUR generations deep.
Let’s hope that my friend is wrong. But at this point, can anyone be sure?
Peter Barry Chowka is a veteran reporter and analyst of news on national politics, media, and popular culture.  He is a frequent contributor to American Thinker.  Follow Peter on Twitter at @pchowka.



WashPost: ‘Tribal Identities’ Replace Ideology in Democrats’ Primaries



tribalism
Courtesy Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Campaign via AP)

The Democratic Party’s activists are picking candidates based on their racial, sexual, and cultural tribes instead of their ideology, the Washington Post admits.
In a June 26 New York primary, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez defeated Rep. Joe Crowley, the fourth-ranking Democrat in the House, by appealing to voters’ “tribal identities of class, age, gender and ethnicity,” not their ideology, said the Post‘s article.
The article is headlined “The worst thing to be in many Democratic primaries? A white male candidate,” and it continues:
… Democratic voters are increasingly embracing diversity as a way to realize the change they seek in the country.
Given an option, Democratic voters have been picking women, racial minorities, and gay men and lesbians in races around the country at historic rates, often at the expense of the white male candidates who in past years typified the party’s offerings.
The “tribal trend,” said the Post, is driven by “the party’s growing dependence on female and minority voters,” and it has sidelined the expected ideological disputes between left and far-left candidates:
“The ideological part is only a very small piece. There is something deeper going on,” said Simon Rosenberg, a strategist at the New Democratic Network. “In this new social media age of politics, compelling, authentic candidates who can tell positive stories about themselves are succeeding over lifer politicians.”
The paper notes the very different divides in the GOP, where rival candidates champion and compromise rival ideological viewpoints, largely independent of their personal stories, race, sex, origin or lineage:
The closest analog to Crowley’s downfall was Dave Brat’s unexpected 2014 Virginia primary defeat of Rep. Eric Cantor, a Republican leader seen by many as a future House speaker. But that race, between two white men of similar age and background, hinged on the conservative [ideological] dispute over immigration and a determination by voters to upset the ways of Washington.
Unlike tribal Democrats who organize themselves into semi-fixed identity groups, the conservative GOP conserves the classical intellectual ideals built into the U.S. Constitution, and which aspires to help all people compromise on their voluntary political differences, regardless of color, sex, creed or tribe. According to the libertarian Mises Institute:
“Classical liberalism” is the term used to designate the ideology advocating private property, an unhampered market economy, the rule of law, constitutional guarantees of freedom of religion and of the press, and international peace based on free trade. Up until around 1900, this ideology was generally known simply as liberalism …
 [Recent U.S.-style] social liberalism deviates fundamentally … it denies the self-regulatory capacity of society: the state is called on to redress social imbalance in increasingly ramified ways.
The Post article does not clearly define “diversity,” even though it uses the term four times. For example, it says “Democrats generally place a far higher value on racial, ethnic and national diversity than Republicans.”
That sentence contradicts the rest of the article because it suggests Democratic voters want a variety of candidates — regardless of the candidates’ actual identities, views, and ideologies. But the rest of the article shows that Democratic voters oppose a wide variety of candidates and instead favor candidates who match their narrow and semi-fixed tribal identity as feminists, Latinos, blacks, “transgenders,” gays, etc.
The Post’s authors may be using the “diversity” word to describe two political extremes — the progressives’ preference for government-imposed civic variety and the Democrats’ various grass-roots, semi-permanent, “tribal” identities.
The progressive, elite-socialist ideology of “diversity” uses government to impose variety on settled, coherent communities with the goal of fragmenting political resistance to progressives’ centralized power. This form of divide-and-rule diversity is aided by the business-backed importation of migrants from incongruous cultures, such as Somalia and El Salvador, Islam and Christianity, or Indian universities and Central American farms.
U.S. conservatives oppose the centralized variety of “diversity” and the grass-roots variety of semi-fixed tribalism.
Conservatives instead favor a small-government ideal which allows a shifting mix of personal freedoms and voluntary affiliations. They expect people — regardless of race, class, sex or birthplace — to organize themselves and their ideas to meet their own needs, be it a local soccer league or a new political party, a pool party for youths or safe suburbia for families, or high-tech development and low-tech welfare.
Read the Washington Post article here.
MEXICO EXPANDS THE LA RAZA SUPREMACY WELFARE STATE TO ALL 50 FORMERLY U.S. STATES.

CASE OF CHAIN MIGRATION THAT DESTROYED HAZELTON, PENNSYLVANIA.

http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2018/06/city-journal-hazleton-pennsylvania-and.html

$1.3 billion: The annual cost of illegal immigration to Pennsylvania’s taxpayers;
·         $5,003: The annual cost per illegal alien to the state of Pennsylvania;
·         $273: The annual cost of illegal immigration to each U.S. citizen household in Pennsylvania;
·         203,000: The estimated number of illegal aliens living in Pennsylvania.
·         30 percent: The percent of the federal prison population comprised of immigrants – most of whom are here illegally.

VIDEO:

THIS AMERICAN LIFE
NPR PROGRAM ON AMERICA UNDER LA RAZA OCCUPATION – GRIM!

http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2017/12/american-life-america-under-mexican.html

We spent eight months and did over a hundred interviews to try to bypass the usual rhetoric and get to the bottom of what really happened when undocumented workers showed up in one Alabama town. Pictured: Albertville “Miss Chick” 1954.

“Open border advocates, such as Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg, claim illegal aliens are a net benefit to California with little evidence to support such an assertion. As the CIS has documented, the vast majority of illegals are poor, uneducated, and with few skills. How does accepting millions of illegal aliens and then granting them access to dozens of welfare programs benefit California’s economy? If illegals were contributing to the economy in any meaningful way, CA, with its 2.6 million illegals, would be booming.” STEVE BALDWIN – AMERICAN SPECTATOR

 

Trump promises Wall Street, the Plundering U.S. Chamber of Corporate Fascist, Mexico and voting illegals:

NO (real) WALL, NO E-VERIFY, CONTINUED NON-ENFORCEMENT, OPEN BORDERS ADVOCATE TO HEAD DHS….

But isn’t that already the La Raza Supremacy Democrat’s agenda???


OPEN BORDERS ADVOCATES FEINSTEIN AND PELOSI ARE BOTH CLOSET REPUPUBLICANS!


OPEN BORDERS: The Democrat Party’s Weapon of Mass Destructionon the American Worker

http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2016/09/the-la-raza-mexican-crime-tidal-wave.html







Pelosi: Progressive Constituents Call Me ‘Corporate Pawn’



Pelosi-Politico-Screenshot
463

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) said on Wednesday that her San Francisco Congressional District is so liberal that progressive constituents refer to her as a “corporate pawn.”

Pelosi made her remarks after reporters asked her about Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s shocking upset of Rep. Joe Crowley (D-NY) on Tuesday evening and whether Democratic Socialism is ascendant in her party.
“It’s ascendant in that district perhaps. But I don’t accept any characterization of our party presented by the Republicans. So let me reject that right now,” Pelosi said.
Pelosi, known for her ability to raise money like nobody else on the left in Congress, added of Republicans: “They spend tens of millions of dollars characterizing me as this left-wing person where in my District they call me a corporate pawn because my district is so progressive.”
Crowley outspent Ocasio-Cortez ten to one, but Ocasio-Cortez’s used Crowley’s corporate contributions against him, making the race about the people in her district versus Crowley’s corporate donors.
“This race is about people versus money. We’ve got people. They’ve got money,” Ocasio-Cortez said in her viral campaign commercial. “It’s time that a Democrat who takes corporate money, profits off foreclosure, doesn’t live here, doesn’t send his kids to our schools, doesn’t drink our water, or breathe our air cannot possibly represent us.”
THE PLUNDERING BARONESS PELOSI:

Nancy Pelosi triples her loot since the banksters nearly destroyed America’s economy and demands endless hordes of illegals to keep wages depressed!



MAKES YOU WONDER HOW MANY ILLEGALS SHE EMPLOYS AT HER ST. HELENA, NAPA WINERY …. The same county where an ILLEGAL started a fire that killed dozens and did millions of dollars in property damage!