On Thursday, one of the leading political (and legal) minds in the conservative movement made an offer to the democratic socialist ‘rising star’ that has been much-ballyhooed by leftists in the United States. This gentleman offered her $10K if she would debate him, or even appear on his YouTube show and podcast, to defend her political beliefs.
In a move that should shock no one who is an observer of the political left in the United States, this DNC star refused to debate someone who would actually ask her the hard questions. However, she went further than that; she also tried to play the victim, suggesting what this person did was little better than catcalling.
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is a person who has repeatedly shown, in friendly interviews with media figures unlikely to press her or highlight her ignorance, that her knowledge of many topics goes no further than soundbites designed to inspire her base.
Much of what ‘democratic socialist’ Ocasio-Cortez says tends to fall apart upon review, whether it’s her statement that unemployment is low because so many people have two jobs (not only is that not how the Bureau of Labor Statistic’s unemployment numbers work, but fewer people have multiple jobs now than they did in recent years), or her claim that the military got a $700 billion budget increase “which they didn’t even ask for,” where she apparently mistook the word ‘increase’ for the entirety of the U.S. Military budget for 2017-18, which was $700 billion.
It’s not hard to understand why conservative speaker, thinker, and talk show host (and purveyor of what he claims to be the best tumbler for conservative uses) Ben Shapiro would want to debate her. Indeed, one debate between the two of them would likely showcase the complete lack of intellect, understanding, and knowledge behind Ocasio-Cortez’s claims and much of the ‘democratic socialist’ platform as it currently exists.
Of course, Mr. Shapiro, and most people with any understanding of politics surely didn’t expect for a second that the debate would ever happen.
Many were said to assume that Ocasio-Cortez would ignore the offer of good money, likely knowing that she couldn’t survive that debate and still look electable, even in a predominantly left-leaning district.
Instead, Ocasio-Cortez went on the offensive, slandering Shapiro and comparing his offer of free money for a serious political debate to catcalling.
Just like catcalling, I don’t owe a response to unsolicited requests from men with bad intentions.
And also like catcalling, for some reason they feel entitled to one. pic.twitter.com/rsD17Oq9qe
— Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@Ocasio2018) August 10, 2018
Apparently, in her mind, someone wanting to debate her ideas means that they have “bad intentions.”
Her tweet, which drew much mockery from those on the right, also drew attention to the fact that she had been offered a chance to debate for $10,000, or a little more than a sixth of the average median yearly income for an American citizen for a debate, yet refused to rise to the challenge.
Instead, she seems to prefer going to talk shows where people like Trevor Noah won’t dig deep into her political statements, or the ridiculousness therein.
It almost appears that this much-celebrated leftist politician, who won her primary in a district that votes heavily democratic in every most elections, may realize that much of what she says is wrong or impossible to defend, like when she said that the ‘Medicare for all’ plan she supports, put forward by Bernie Sanders, would save money being spent on burial costs.
Frankly, much of what she says is just silly and shows a lack of understanding on almost any topic that one would expect a politician to be aware of.
It wouldn’t be in her best interest to enter into a debate with someone like Shapiro, who has an impressive education (including a Juris Doctorate from Harvard), as well as a track record of being hard to beat in debates, even by leftist ‘luminaries’ such as Cenk Uygur.
However, her response to his offer of a debate was simply over the top in its negativity, its assumptions, and in her attempt to act as if being asked to debate is somehow the same as having lewd things yelled at her at a Brooklyn construction site.
There is no indication that Shapiro acted with ‘bad intentions’ when he offered her a large sum of money to defend her political viewpoint for two hours.
Indeed, for the American voter, he has nothing but the best intentions: unveiling the lack of knowledge behind her campaign claims.
Normally, that would be a job for the mainstream media, but it almost seems that because there’s a ‘D’ in front of her name, they’re not interested in asking her the tough questions.
If Ocasio-Cortez represents, as some journalists and political pundits have suggested, the future of the Democrat Party, it sounds like the party has a bleak future filled with soundbites and nothing to back them up.
If she can’t even stand up to Ben Shapiro, how will she fare when faced with policy experts and cold, hard, unfeeling statistical and financial analysis?
Likely, not well.