Shoot me now!: Ocasio-Cortez claims she’s part Jewish

Ocasio-Cortez still shows herself to be a slow-learning attention seeker, and now seems poised to repeat the whole Elizabeth Warren debacle. I’m not betting the menorah on this ancestry tale! (Click on the screenshot to read the dubious claim.)


But the center will not hold, methinks:

A spokesperson for Ocasio-Cortez, 29, did not immediately return a request for comment from NBC News asking how long she has known about her Jewish heritage and how she was made aware of it.

And now it seems that AO-C be doing a bit of backpedaling.  First, this:

So Ocasio-Cortez may not have genes from Sephardic Jews but has Jewish culture? What does that mean?

What it means, of course, is that she’ll pander to the Jews when it’s politically helpful, all the while opposing a two-state solution to the Israel-Palestine problem.

Then some more “clarification” in The Jerusalem Post:

Clarifying her comments, she explained, “Just because one concrete identity may not be how we think of ourselves today, nor how we were raised, it doesn’t mean we cannot or should not honor the ancestors + stories that got us here. I was raised Catholic, & that identity is an amalgam too – especially in Latin America.”

“If anything, the stories of our ancestry give us windows of opportunity to lean into others, to seek them out, and see ourselves, our histories, and our futures, tightly knit with other communities in a way we perhaps never before thought possible.”

My view: “DNA or shut up!” If she doesn’t have DNA evidence, she should have kept her gob closed, though going that whole Elizabeth Warren/ancestry route is dangerous.

And from another story (from July) in the same venue:

In a clear shift from proclaiming Israel has a right to exist during an televised interview on Saturday, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the Democratic candidate from New York City, took a neutral stance on a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in a live conversation on Sunday hosted by left-wing American news program Democracy Now!

The 90-minute discussion was moderated by Amy Goodman and was also attended by Barcelona mayor Ada Colau Ballano.

Near the end of the discussion, Goodman asked the 28-year-old candidate, “are you still for a two-state solution with Israel and Palestine?”

Without taking a firm stance on the conflict Ocasio-Cortez replied: “Well, you know I think this is a conversation that I am engaging in with activists right now because this is huge.”

Without specifying which activists she’s speaking with, Ocasio-Cortez kept a safe distance from a direct answer and added: “You know, especially over this weekend – and this is a conversation that I’m sitting down with lots of activists in this movement on and I’m looking forward to engaging this conversation.”

As I said, she’s the Sarah Palin of the Left. There’s even a bit of Trumpishness in her doing politics by Twitter.

64 Comments

  1. Ken Kukec
    Posted December 10, 2018 at 2:22 pm | Permalink

    To quote the lame duck governor of Wisconsin: Molotov!

    • Merilee
      Posted December 10, 2018 at 3:01 pm | Permalink

      Did Scott Walker actually say that??
      Speaking of Molotov, we just watched a hiLARious movie called The Death of Stalin, with Michael Palin playing Molotov and Steve Buscemi as “Nicky” Khrushchev. I laughed so hard I cried😂

      • Ken Kukec
        Posted December 10, 2018 at 3:20 pm | Permalink

        Indeed, he did.

        He’s always been a schlemiel. 🙂

        • JD Anderson
          Posted December 10, 2018 at 7:54 pm | Permalink

          I prefer a schlimazel, myself.

          • Ken Kukec
            Posted December 10, 2018 at 9:50 pm | Permalink

            If I recall correctly the way Leo Rosten broke it down, a schlemiel is the guy who always spills his soup; a schlimazel is the guy who always gets soup spilled on him.

            • Posted December 11, 2018 at 4:58 pm | Permalink

              Listen up! Shlep: the guy who knocks the iron off the ironing board. Schlemiel:the guy whose foot it lands on. Schlemazel: the guy who says Tsk tsk tsk.

        • Diane G
          Posted December 11, 2018 at 12:34 am | Permalink

          Lol, that’s hilarious!

      • Ken Kukec
        Posted December 10, 2018 at 3:33 pm | Permalink

        Yeah, I saw The Death of Stalin at the theater when it was first released and thought it was a riot.

        • Merilee
          Posted December 10, 2018 at 4:55 pm | Permalink

          Not at all what I expected. Kind of a Coen Brothers vibe. Got it on dvd at our library. The symphony scene at the beginning was a hoot, when the recording for Stalin didn’t work out as planned and they had to drag in a whole new audience off the street (babushkas and all), not to mention a new conductor in his pjs. I’m still chuckling🤓

      • Geoff Toscano
        Posted December 10, 2018 at 5:38 pm | Permalink

        I watched it this weekend. I’d been expecting a sort of slapstick and was surprised at just how dark it is. Apparently it’s historically inaccurate but so what? It captured the ‘feel’ of the events in a way that a documentary is unable to do, much in the way that the best debunking of conspiracy theories is through satire.

        • Merilee
          Posted December 10, 2018 at 6:24 pm | Permalink

          It really captured the chaos of the succession.

        • BJ
          Posted December 10, 2018 at 7:40 pm | Permalink

          Yeah, the first time I watched it, I was expecting “In the Loop after Stalin died,” so I didn’t think it was nearly as funny. On second viewing, I realized how fantastic it is.

          It doesn’t get much wrong, but it does compress events into a much shorter timeline and adds a couple of events that didn’t really happen.

          If anyone wants a historical review of it, check out this video. This Youtuber’s entire channel is amazing:

          • Merilee
            Posted December 10, 2018 at 8:31 pm | Permalink

            Cool! Thanks for the video.

  2. Ken Kukec
    Posted December 10, 2018 at 2:27 pm | Permalink

    If she doesn’t have DNA evidence, she should have kept her gob closed …

    So you won’t be sending her a complimentary membership in B’nai B’rith, boss?

  3. Michael Fisher
    Posted December 10, 2018 at 2:27 pm | Permalink

    Your top link in the pic is faulty. HERE’S A LINK THAT WORKS

  4. DrBrydon
    Posted December 10, 2018 at 2:29 pm | Permalink

    I wonder, given the anti-semitism within the left, whether this will help or hurt her.

    • BJ
      Posted December 10, 2018 at 2:34 pm | Permalink

      If she turns out to be Jewish (which she probably isn’t and I’m sure we’ll never find out), it won’t hurt her because she’ll be “one of the good ones.”

      • Ken Kukec
        Posted December 10, 2018 at 3:28 pm | Permalink

        From anti-Semite to self-loathing Jew, all in the course of the last day of Hanukkah, is that what you’re sayin’? 🙂

        • Posted December 10, 2018 at 4:46 pm | Permalink

          Jesús, María and Yosef, Alexandria Occasionally-Competent is now Alexandria Occasionally-Cohen. Amen…ded.

          • BJ
            Posted December 10, 2018 at 5:54 pm | Permalink

            Well done, sir. Well done.

          • Diane G
            Posted December 11, 2018 at 12:38 am | Permalink

            Good one! 😀

        • BJ
          Posted December 10, 2018 at 5:55 pm | Permalink

          This was her Hanukkah gift to the world.

          As with most gifts from narcissists, she didn’t really put much thought into it.

          • Ken Kukec
            Posted December 10, 2018 at 6:32 pm | Permalink

            I’ve known plenty of shiksas who’ve “had a little Jewish in ’em.”

            Bet you have, too. 🙂

            • BJ
              Posted December 10, 2018 at 7:38 pm | Permalink

              Hey! I’m a nice Jewish boy. I’m going to be an astronaut doctor-lawyer some day.

            • BJ
              Posted December 10, 2018 at 7:44 pm | Permalink

              My point is, nice Jewish future astronaut doctor-lawyers like me don’t speak so uncouthly. You surely have never known me to enjoy raunchy joke. I have a reputation to uphold.

              • Posted December 10, 2018 at 7:59 pm | Permalink

                I always assume that nobody ever remembers anything one says online anyway, so reputation does not come into it.

                But…has anyone ever noticed that our host uses a lot of British-English slang and non-U words – gob, bloody, etc.? (And btw, there is an alley in Bewdley, Worcestershire, called “The Gob”). Surely, most Americans do not normally use “bloody”?

                Is it my ignorance of US-English or am I right? Before anyone else writes it, “stiff upper lip” is an 1830s Americanism, apparently: I once read somewhere from a source which I found convincing at the time, before my pre-pre-dementia days.

              • BJ
                Posted December 10, 2018 at 8:38 pm | Permalink

                You’re correct that these are not normally used here in the US, Dermot. I know them well because I watch so many British TV shows and movies, but I doubt they’re even that commonly known here. They’re certainly never used in conversation.

                I think most people on this site remember one another. There aren’t many regular commenters here. Regardless, I was just joking around. Ken knows I love tasteless humor and bawdy jokes 🙂

              • Ken Kukec
                Posted December 10, 2018 at 9:56 pm | Permalink

                Yes, our host likes to affect the occasional Britishism. It’s caught on, I think, with many of the rest of us. (At least, I know it has with me.) 🙂

  5. BJ
    Posted December 10, 2018 at 2:30 pm | Permalink

    It’s always a good idea to get your positions from “activists,” especially when they’re all from one particular side. They don’t have an agenda, so you can trust them to be neutral and give you all the facts. Really, what that statement says to me is, “I’m talking to the people who support me most vehemently to find out what they want me to say.” And now the claim of Jewish heritage seems likely to be used as a smokescreen for any future stumbles she might make into the realm of antisemitic remarks and/or affiliating herself with antisemitic “activists.”

  6. Posted December 10, 2018 at 2:40 pm | Permalink

    Does this, by her logic, also mean that she is a ‘Spanish colonizer’? Or should we rest easy knowing that she is a ‘likely other’.

    Makes no difference to me. I applaud her effort but think her age and lack of experience would be a drawback for a small- town councilwoman.

    • Davide Spinello
      Posted December 10, 2018 at 3:22 pm | Permalink

      I wish it was her age and lack of experience. The reality is that she is a successful and obvious product of “the studies”.

  7. Posted December 10, 2018 at 2:42 pm | Permalink

    The narcissism is strong in this one.

  8. Davide Spinello
    Posted December 10, 2018 at 2:50 pm | Permalink

    What an ignorant narcissist. Between her and “the future is female and intersectional” Gillibrand, the future of the Democratic party is bright, intersectional, and female. Many women march await ahead of us to protest Trump 2020 and the next buffoon coming after him.

    P.S.: I am glad this one is not stupid unlike Sarah “fruit flies” Palin. She is young, we have to be patient.

    • Davide Spinello
      Posted December 10, 2018 at 3:27 pm | Permalink

      I would also like to apologize for not saying that I hate every conservative (the far right). I apologize for writing a message that may divert the attention from the real problems, instead focusing on a hard working Jewish womynx of several descents, that is trying to resist Trump and Quillette.

      As a cis-het-normative-performative white male I apologize. I will try to do better, although there will be a steady state privileged residual in me.

      • mikeyc
        Posted December 10, 2018 at 3:48 pm | Permalink

        Can’t ever get rid of that stain, white boy. Kneel before your new masters.

  9. JonLynnHarvey
    Posted December 10, 2018 at 2:53 pm | Permalink

    You can surely say that up to a point you are culturally influenced by a culture without being so genetically.

    I know Westerners who lived for a long time in Japan who say that up to a point they have become culturally Japanese without claiming ancestry.

    • Posted December 10, 2018 at 5:06 pm | Permalink

      I suppose that if she publicly converts to Judaism, like Ivanka Trump did, Prof. Coyne would be satisfied even without DNA.

  10. Posted December 10, 2018 at 2:57 pm | Permalink

    Why is it nobody ever discovers they are direct descendants of the oppressor classes? Did they never have children? How is everyone the great great grandchild of indigenous Americans but never a conquistador? Always a slave but never a slave-owner?

    • Posted December 10, 2018 at 3:23 pm | Permalink

      ding ding ding ding

      Same reason reincarnated people are always famous people, and never the king’s piss-boy and whatnot.

    • Posted December 10, 2018 at 3:37 pm | Permalink

      I’ve read people claim that they have slave-owners as ancestors.

    • Historian
      Posted December 10, 2018 at 6:14 pm | Permalink

      Actor Ben Affleck tried to coverup that an ancestor was a slaveowner. It didn’t work.

      https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2015/06/25/after-omitting-details-of-ben-afflecks-slave-owning-ancestor-finding-your-roots-is-suspended-by-pbs/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.00f6118a7da0

      • Ken Kukec
        Posted December 10, 2018 at 6:45 pm | Permalink

        I remember when I was a kid and one of these D.A.R. or Mayflower Society types would show up on the tube, my old man would say “Christ, don’t these people realize everybody’s got thieves and grifters and whores in their family tree — and some bad people, too?”

    • Posted December 11, 2018 at 12:35 pm | Permalink

      Don’t know if that’s a fair argument – I’ve found that if anything, it’s been difficult to get white-passing Latinos to accept that they have mixed white, black, and indigenous ancestry. Younger Latinos have been better about accepting this, however, as people have become more aware of the history of racism in the Americas. People used to be reluctant to claim black or indigenous heritage unless it was blatantly obvious, but I now see more and more people claiming their mixed race ancestry. I think it’s a step in the right direction, since people in Latin America and the US have a long history of judging others by their skin colors (I’m thinking of the racism I’ve seen in my own South American family, who is white passing but clearly has really mixed ancestry judging by the diversity of the appearances of my close relatives).

  11. Posted December 10, 2018 at 3:13 pm | Permalink

    Hell, my cousins are apes. So somewhere hence I have Jewish ancestors.

  12. Jenny Haniver
    Posted December 10, 2018 at 3:22 pm | Permalink

    This is rank cultural, and perhaps genetic, appropriation, pure and simple. I think she wants to have her cake and eat it, too.

  13. tubby
    Posted December 10, 2018 at 3:42 pm | Permalink

    Jewish ancestry won’t make her not a Catholic or make her support of BDS kosher.

    • Ken Kukec
      Posted December 10, 2018 at 6:48 pm | Permalink

      You make her for a converso?

      • tubby
        Posted December 10, 2018 at 7:50 pm | Permalink

        Uh oh, she might see the inquisitors if she’s caught lighting candles on Friday!

  14. Posted December 10, 2018 at 3:47 pm | Permalink

    A word of caution. Americans are not prepared to deal with a leftist like AO-C. Only when you hear people like Hugo Chavez (Venezuela’s former dictator), Nicolas Maduro (Venezuela’s dictator) or Gustavo Petro (runner up to the presidency last year in Colombia) you begin to understand their rationale. THEY ARE NOT STUPID LIKE THEIR COMMENTS SUGGEST (I apologize for the use of upper case letters but I must make emphasis on this) What they are doing is planting misinformation on people so when they are called for who they are, that is far left authoritarians who want to end democracy and basic freedoms, their constituents will not believe anyone else. It took Venezuelans many years to realize that Chavez and Maduro’s stupid comments were believed by millions of people who supported them until they ran out of food and it was too late. I believe that AO-C comments are believed in her district, and she will reinforce that with handouts and welfare, and that is all that counts to her.

    Ameircan liberals have never seen this kind of politics. I do not see how she can turn the united states into a venezuela, but she is definitely walking a path other have taken. Please, do not dismiss her as stupid or ignorant. She is not.

    • Ken Kukec
      Posted December 10, 2018 at 6:37 pm | Permalink

      Is that you, J. Edgar? I haven’t heard this kinda talk since the blacklists went outta style, since HUAC was finally euthanized.

    • Posted December 11, 2018 at 12:49 pm | Permalink

      Ugh can we stop comparing every left leaning politician in South America to Hugo Chavez? This is why Colombia is going to be saddled with center right law and order types for the foreseeable futute…

  15. phoffman56
    Posted December 10, 2018 at 4:18 pm | Permalink

    I am a descendant of Charlemagne. So are you, if you have any reasonable amount of European ancestry. In US, that’s much more than ‘just whites’. Many people love to have a ‘famous’ ancestor; but become deflated if that is Charlemagne or anyone living nearby there at least 1400 years ago, and if they carefully investigate solid scientific knowledge.

    Actually, you (as above) and I are both descendants of every human from what is now Europe 1400 years ago–rather, every such human who happens to have any presently living descendants. And that’s about 80% of all Europeans living to adulthood at the time. Charlemagne is known definitely to have a now living descendant (and that has little to do with him fathering > 17 children, among whom were Pippin the Hunchback, Hruodrud, Ruodhaid, Adelheid, and Hludowick–you remember them surely!).

    See Adam Rutherford “A Brief History of Everyone who Ever Lived” (2016), p.160-161 and nearby.

    I think there is every reason to be confident in Rutherford, this geneticist scientist/science popularizer. Anyway the original papers are referenced there. I’d be interested to hear a serious dispute of that last ‘confidentness’ I exhibited.

    Relevance here:

    So far as the DNA aspect of this type of thing is concerned, unless some pretty small upper bound is put on the allowable number of generations back one is allowed, the whole thing is a total crock.

    If the designation of some people as being Jewish began about 3000 years ago, I suspect there are very few USians alive now none of whose ancestors was Jewish.

    Even more jolting, the following is solid, even though contemplating the people just below makes one initially tend to disbelieve: present day Inuit inhabitants of Greenland; plus Australian Aboriginals or the recent Evangelist-shooting Sentinel islanders; plus remote Amazonian tribes.

    The surprising fact is that there was at least one human living only 3600 years ago who is the ancestor of EVERY human alive today; probably lots of such universal ancestors from, say, what are present-day Taiwan and Malaysia, to get you thinking how that might have happened, given the widely dispersed and ‘isolated’ groups above.

    See the same reference, continuing to read the above to p. 164

    So having a common ancestor for all humans alive brings us much closer to the present than the estimates of the time of “mitochondrial Eve”, where the line backwards is a very special one–maybe 50 times closer if I remember correctly.

  16. Adam M.
    Posted December 10, 2018 at 4:51 pm | Permalink

    “I’m looking forward to engaging this conversation.” Well, the interviewer is a asking for your thoughts. Engage! 😛

    • BJ
      Posted December 10, 2018 at 5:59 pm | Permalink

      But how can she answer when she hasn’t met with the activists yet? She doesn’t know what they want her to say.

  17. Posted December 10, 2018 at 5:40 pm | Permalink

    Possibly true. But why should it matter?

  18. ubernez
    Posted December 10, 2018 at 10:01 pm | Permalink

    I am stardust…

    • Diane G
      Posted December 11, 2018 at 12:50 am | Permalink

      “We are stardust, we are golden
      We are billion year old carbon
      And we got to get ourselves back to the garden”

      Oh, wait. You meant sensu Sagan.

      • Ken Kukec
        Posted December 11, 2018 at 4:13 am | Permalink

        🙂

  19. Posted December 10, 2018 at 10:55 pm | Permalink

    She just FELT it, so it must be true.

  20. Posted December 11, 2018 at 12:49 am | Permalink

    After a few generations, like five or six, the fact that you are descended from one particular individual means practically nothing. You may not even have any DNA from that person. The further back you go the less it means.

  21. Pray Hard
    Posted December 11, 2018 at 9:01 am | Permalink

    Makes one proud to be a liberal, huh?

  22. Kirbmarc
    Posted December 11, 2018 at 12:38 pm | Permalink

    Sigh. (*facepalms*)

    This is just a consequence of the excessive focus on “identity” in politics: people are trying to claim some identity or another to signal their virtue.

    I understand the origin of the focus on identity on the left: the aims of defending civil rights and fighting against discrimination are noble ones.

    However an excessive focus on ancestry is a waste of time at best, needlessly divisive at worst.

    When it comes to blood quanta, and remote ancestors it’s better to simply let the matter slide. Lots of African Americans have European ancestors: does this mean that they’re all white? Vice versa, some “white people” in the US have some Native or African remote ancestry…again, does this make them “black”?

    This attitude towards ancestry is likely a consequence of old racist laws and principles (like the “one drop” policy) that were created to discriminate against non-white people in the US.

    Now some people think that the same standards of “one drop” ancestry can be used for a moral end, to improve the lives of the oppressed.

    I don’t think that’s the case, and we’re more likely to witness cringe-worthy claims of remote ancestry, like in the case of Warren or Ocasio-Cortez, which do not really matter, but make for great fodder for the right.


%d bloggers like this: