Sandy’s crying game explained

I wrote about the theatrical tears of Sandy Cortez last week in “Don’t cry for me…” Sandy shed tears when she changed her “No” vote to “Present” on the funding for replenishment of Israel’s Iron Dome defensive system. She subsequently issued a statement that proclaimed and explained her meltdown:

Yes, I wept. I wept at the complete lack of care for the human beings that are impacted by these decisions, I wept at an institution choosing a path of maximum volatility and minimum consideration for its own political convenience. And I wept at the complete lack of regard I often feel our party has to its most vulnerable and endangered members and communities – because the death threats and dangerous vitriol we’d inevitably receive by rushing such a sensitive, charged, and under-considered vote weren’t worth delaying it for even a few hours to help us do the work necessary to open a conversation of understanding.

I won’t even try to unpack this. The overwrought prose gives expressive form to Sandy’s tears. The statement is written in what I refer to as the educated illiterate style:

The damage of this careless process created very real spillover effects into our community. It created a real sense of panic and horror among those in our community who otherwise engage thoughtfully in these discussions, and fueled the discussion to devolve to a point where it became clear that this vote would risk a severe devolution of the good faith community fabric that allows us to responsibly join in a struggle for human rights and dignity everywhere – from Palestine [sic] to The Bronx and Queens.

The devolution cries out for an editor.

The Times of Israel notes, by the way: “[G]iven her apparent full-throttled opposition to the bill, Ocasio-Cortez did not explain why she only voted to abstain, rather than oppose the legislation.”

Responses