Why Is AOC Such A Lightning Rod For The Right's Vitriol And Death Threats?

"DOH! AOC a moron cuz she a commie and gots dumb ideas 'bout  warmin'!"

Even as Trump last night  disgorged verbal diarrhea at a Michigan rally,  in turn  "profane, insulting, delusional, and absurd" in the words of one blogger, we saw how bereft of control and sense he really is. For example, even taking aim (wittingly or otherwise) at his own base, e.g. 

Trump jokes (?) about someone in the audience named Stanley who he says needs "plenty" of prescription drugs pic.twitter.com/HIbuC2ma44

529

6:17 PM - Mar 28, 2019

Twitter Ads info and privacy

 
The foul, fungal imp - and worst excuse for a human since Hitler -  also recruited his Russkie-colluding spawn Don Jr. to pound on Alexandra Ocasio -Cortez, the Dems' new rising star.  In the wake of  his verbal spatter  the gathered deplorables bawled "AOC sucks!"   Of course, as I will show in this post, the 29-year old novice House Dem Rep  has become the Right's number one "boogie girl"  as they circle the drain in AOC derangement syndrome.

Consider the cover of the recent (April 1st) TIME magazine. When I showed it to Janice she was pleased that such a bright young Dem star had achieved prominence so quickly.  When I  then showed her the opening paragraph  of the accompanying article on the assassination threats, i.e.  

 "In her first three months in congress, enough people have threatened to murder Ocasio Cortez that Capitol Police trained her staff to do risk assessments of visitors."

She was repelled and outraged.  "What the hell is wrong with these people?" Janice asked, her face red.   I  offered my opinion that most were doubtless imps incited by the crazed Right, including Limbaugh, Hannity and the other FOX assholes.  She agreed,  including  that the country has finally gone down the rabbit hole of  ultimate insanity. (Evoking the words of comedian Larry Charles on  Bill Maher's Real Time last Friday night: "The country is now in a battle between logic and madness.")

In the article, Charlotte Alter describes Ocasio-Cortez as the “Wonder Woman of the left, Wicked Witch of the right,”.  But why is she the Right's  "wicked witch" and why the need for death threats? Why the hyper-paranoid reactions across the board?  

One reason is the continuous stream of rabid  fulminations from the radical Right's media trolls, especially on FOX News.  But there are ancillary trolls and assorted knuckle -draggers dispersed throughout the Right's media axis.Take for instance this paranoid claptrap spouted in The Daily Caller:

"Both Fox News’ Brian Kilmeade and former Arkansas Republican Gov. Mike Huckabee have called Ocasio-Cortez’s authenticity into question suggesting that there are “forces” behind her. Huckabee said Thursday, “I know there has been some allegations that she was almost like the Manchurian candidate, recruited, prepared.”

Puh-leeze!  "Forces"?  Seriously? Where's the proof, nitwits?   Then there is this sort of twaddle from the imps at the Independent Sentinel which vented its spleen in typical fascist fashion,


"The cute communist Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has made the cover of Time Magazine. According to Brian Stelter, the author, Charlette Alter describes AOC as “the second-most talked about politician in America.....Her idiotic statements, her communist policies, and her anti-capitalist and anti-amazon failures to date went unmentioned. For them, she is a humble do-gooder going after the bad guys — Republicans (hush money, Citizens United, and so on)."

BWAAAAHAAA. Cry me a river.  Poor little rightist troglodytes  can't handle being one- upped on TIME by a 29 year old Latina Socialist. .They're mostly bawling because the only images shown of their traitor hero Trump were depraved. Oh, and totally justified .e.g.




But the histrionic reactions to AOC span the pundit-political  spectrum,  not only with the death threats from Reich wing nuts, trolls, cranks and  QAnon zombies, but the assorted rabid blurtations emanating from their garden variety deplorables, errr….base, e.g.

https://wokesloth.com/trump-supporters-freaking-aoc-made-cover-time-magazine/lindseyweedston/


No, you can't make this stuff up.  These folks really do lack a life, such that they need to consume almost every waking hour to take all their sundry grievances out on AOC.  She is the hated symbol for all they lack, including: brains, confidence, moral vision, and power.

Then there are the hyperventilating pundits ensconced in the mainstream media, filling column space with gibberish castigating AOC.  Bear in mind these are supposed to be the intelligent, college-educated people who ought to know better, unlike the bozos cited above. (Recall that Harvey Mansfield - a Professor of Government at Harvard-  had referred to Trump voters as the "lower half of the IQ curve.")

Peggy Noonan's recent WSJ op-ed ('Dem Mean Girls Are Trump's Offspring', March 23-24, p. A13) is a case in point.  Like the extremist Right slackers, trolls and conspiracy mongers it leaves a lot to be desired.  Most especially regarding her egregious analogy of the new young female House Dems (i.e. Rep. Ilian Omar, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortex) to Trump, and calumniating them as Trump's "offspring".  

Peggy, Peggy, Trump already has offspring (Ivanka, Don Jr., Eric) with whom we can compare your claims and they don't hold up. I mean comparing the likes of goofball Eric, and dolt Don Jr. to AOC, are you mad?  Just as bad, comparing bubble- head bimbo Ivanka to AOC or Ilian Omar, i.e. as Trump "spawn"?  You've been sucking too much vape effluent - or snacking to excess on  MJ candy bars.

Noonan actually had the nerve to write:

"When Chelsea Clinton was accosted by a New York University student the student herself reminded me of Ms. Ocasio -Cortez in her certitude, self-rightouesness and chic."

Fair enough (Noonan got the 'chic' right), but  OTOH, how can anyone compare an NYU student's verbal  unloading on Chelsea to AOC's  death threats?  I mean we're talking about apples and oranges here, chalk and cheese. So how in hell can Peggy claim any remote basis for AOC being "like an angry student" - when at least that student never uttered a death threat against Chelsea the way the FOX-stoked zombies have unleashed them on AOC?

Noonan and other critics also seemed to have missed the memo that AOC is actually an intellectual voice. As noted in the same TIME article, her "2017 high school microbiology project - on the effects of anti-oxidants on roundworms - won 2nd place at the Intel Engineering and Science Fair."

Can any of the dolts and twerps who photo-shopped the insulting TIME parody cover of her (as a "Moron", in previous link) say as much? No, I doubt it. I doubt any of these goobers even took a high school science course - or if they did, passed it.

Noonan thereby made her biggest error in even remotely trying  to paint the new crop of Dem House reps as behavioral (or verbal) spinoffs of Trump.  Yes, they may be outspoken,  but at least they all possess higher order working brains and can articulate their positions, as well as criticisms - whether of Ronald Reagan or capitalism.  This as opposed to bombastic tirades or babbling incoherently like street drunks. Indeed, AOC's recent roasting of the idiot Utah GOP rep Mike Lee was classic, e.g.

https://ijr.com/ocasio-cortez-roasts-sen-mike-lee/


Then there was Neolib tool Patricia Murphy,  in one Roll Call piece from 2 months ago,  who actually had the blind temerity to compare AOC's popularity and personality projection to Anthony Weiner's,  E.g.

 “Ugh. Eye rolls. 'How long until she crashes and burns?'  'It’s not whether she’ll blow up, it’s how and when.'  And this was from the Democrats... Famous blowhard and former Rep. Anthony Weiner had already alienated most of his Democratic colleagues by yelling on the floor and showing up on MSNBC most nights well before he ended up in jail for inappropriate texts with a 15-year-old girl. It’s hard to say which came first — the gigantic egos that made these men make horrible decisions or the press attention that fueled the egos. Either way, their heat-seeking personalities won them few allies."

But AOC is not a "heat seeking personality". She is an intelligent and energetic freshman legislator not prepared to stay quiet or roll over in the face of Trumpite tyranny while most pols punt and mutate into poltroons.  One thing no one, no critic can say - in the pantheon of epithets- is that Alexandria is a poltroon. (If you don't know the meaning, look it up).  To her credit, Ms. Murphy does concede:

"The AOC challenge for Democrats is unique. On the one hand, the congresswoman is a boon — she’s an Insta-savvy bundle of energy and enthusiasm who can bring millions of voters into the Democratic fold. Hers is also an essential voice for the Democratic leadership to hear from as a young, Latina progressive like the voters they most need in the future.

But for every interview that the congresswoman does from now on, they are also finding themselves called on to respond to, explain, defend or rebut her statements as a democratic socialist. Hours after she suggested to Anderson Cooper that some amount of income over $10 million could be subject to a 70 percent tax rate in the future, presidential hopeful Julian Castro was asked by ABC’s George Stephanopoulos if 70 percent was a realistic tax rate. Castro threw out 90 percent."

Oh, and don't forget Eisenhower, aka Ike, that good old socialist who had 90 percent to marginal tax rate in actuality!   Further, Sweden has a 70% top tax rate and consistently remains near the top of happiest nations in yearly surveys. Go figure!    Besides which, if Dem candidates are truly serious about proposals like Medicare for all, Medicare buy- ins, or even a public option (to the ACA) they will have to get serious about higher taxes to pay for them.

What we need is for all the Dem candidates  who are championing these new Medicare programs to do is to come clean about the need for new, higher taxes. I suspect at least increased to the 35 % marginal rate. Oh, and no more tax cuts!  Do that, be honest and you won't have to "respond to, explain, rebut or apologize"   for AOC's remarks.  You will instead develop a coherent narrative as to why we NEED higher taxes to secure the benefits that our citizens (who are not among the one percent) need, especially health care.  See e.g.

• Oprah got perfect response from Danish woman on their social welfare state 

Note: Alexandra Ocasio- Cortez will be on MSNBC 'All In' tonight, talking about the Green New Deal and related issues.

See also:

Republicans

Do You Have What It Takes To Be a Republican? Take This Simple Test

AND:

Cody Fenwick

Article Tools E-mail | Print Comments (0)

Donald Trump

Here Are 7 of the Wildest Moments and Lies from Trump’s Profane and Uninhibited Campaign Rally

Why A.O.C. & Protesters May Have Been Right To Chase Amazon From NYC

Protesters in Queens, NY protesting Amazon's corporate welfare M.O.  

 Despite  Amazon's vacating of its planned center in  NYC  - under pressure from strong citizen protests of corporate welfare giveaways-   we've since learned the battle against the behemoth isn't over. Not by a long shot.  In a piece from six days ago (WSJ, 'Amazon Faces Activists in Virginia, Too',  March 16-17, p. A5) we learned there is also unrest in  Crystal City (near Arlington).  In fact, protesters and activists "object to giving tax dollars to one of the world's richest companies and disapprove of Amazon's contracts with the federal government."

People, protesters and activists, are not just being ornery and trying to chase jobs away for hard working citizens.  They want to ensure the cost of any new jobs isn't more than they're really worth.  I mean, seriously, a community like Queens, New York,  is really going to plop $3 billion into Jeff Bezos' lap just to get 25,000 drone jobs?    What do I mean by drone jobs, and why don't we have quality jobs instead?

Let me answer the last question first. We have drone jobs such as I highlight below, because we have winner take all markets. These markets - according to the authors of the book, The Winner Take All Society - sustain distorted processes (namely for participation) that allow only a few real winners in the best jobs, with the best incomes. The others who participate (the majority)  do so to enrich the spoils for the few winners, while they come away with scraps.

The classic case is the newly- minted fiction author.   In the 1990s,  early 2000s this was an abiding aspiration especially for many of those (mainly men, age 50 and older) who had been downsized from corporate jobs..  Alas, their need for an income- earning novel - despite many works being of decent quality- fell victim to two forces: 1) the massive mergers of many small, independent book publishers into a few huge entities, e.g. the mega growth of Bertelsmann AG, and 2) the smashing success of the 'Harry Potter' books, which essentially "ate up" all the disposable income available to purchase other novels.    The result? Winner take all, namely Potter author J.K. Rowling:

Becoming a billionaire while the tens of thousands of would-be novelists ended up getting the dregs, or maybe not even that.   The cruelest aspect is that many critics agreed Ms. Rowling's writing wasn't even that good ("I've seen fourth grade students who write better!" was one comment I often heard) but the hype was enough to drive sales to the top.  The first movie deal ensured the success of the rest of her books, no matter what. Meanwhile, other fiction authors - many excellent - languished, because all the dollars were chasing Rowling's books.

This brings us to the "seasonal" Amazon worker Heike Geissler, whose book (Seasonal Associate)  - - relating  her inside experience of one fulfillment center (in Leipzig, Germany)-  ought to be required reading.  Especially for all those whining about the loss of the Amazon center in Queens. By all rights, given her writing ability, Geissler shouldn't have had to labor away at an Amazon fulfillment center anywhere. In a world based on rewarding actual quality and merit,  rather than winner -take -all victors who benefit from similar processes and markets, she should have been sitting pretty with a least a million euro in the bank. 

Instead we learned that after years of living hand-to-mouth on freelancer checks and translator assignments, and with two kids  to raise, she was forced to take the  Amazon job because she needed the money.  As she relates the situation: (p. 5) "You do get child benefits for the two boys, you can pay your bills, but unfortunately they don't get paid on time...you have to take the first job that comes up and get money in the bank."

She had the option of  applying for  welfare, of course, but like here in the U.S. there were way too many hoops to jump through and besides - as a proud German- she had her pride. So it was Amazon or bust.  In the Afterword to Ms. Geissler's eye-opening book,  Kenneth Vennemann writes:

"Heike plays with these insidious euphemisms, the barefaced lies of 'flat hierarchies' and 'special handling'.  Hence the ugly title, SEASONAL ASSOCIATE, the word associate here so far removed from the idea of partnership and sharing that it makes me snort with cynical laughter."

Well, it made me snort in the same way when I read Heike's book, i.e. of having to earn money from being an Amazon  tote drone.  Of course,  there are hundreds of variations on the theme of 'working for Amazon' which anyone can find by Googling. Sob stories galore, and many of which do elicit sympathy for the those who found themselves in this behemoth's grip. But as Vennemann observes -  "there have been a few undercover pieces on Amazon by journalists, but they went into far less detail."

Indeed, reading Heike's account you are right there with her as she has to work at the receiving end, unpacking boxes and entering products into the system.  Also, consuming half of her lunch break time just getting to and from the company cafeteria. Sounds like a piece of cake? Well it wasn't. It was sheer numbing hell for the weeks she spent during one holiday season.  As she describes one particularly harsh day of drudgery  (p. 100):

"You replace the Band Aids on your hands. Your thumbs, forefingers, middle fingers  on both hands now have long hangnails from all the reaching into totes and boxes and from cutting and folding cardboard. Harmless irritations but they make every movement harder."

What about relief from the endless drudgery, backbreaking hoisting of boxes, opening them etc.?Well, Heike writes there are assorted ways  the over- worked drone might find relief (p. 169):

"How far does your influence extend at Amazon? You receive inbound units and enter them into the system.  You could hide products. Perhaps not forever, but at least for a few days you could hide products from others and thus remove them from the commodities cycle.  You could damage products and pretend they arrived already damaged. …"

And so on.  Anything imagined, anything to slow down or halt the relentless, soul killing "commodities cycle" - which like the assembly line of old is remorseless in its mechanical demand for human compliance and attention.

Reading the book one has the takeaway that Heike is no dummy but college- educated and an accomplished writer to boot.  In some ways, Geissler is an atypical Amazon warehouse worker, at least culturally. .And yet, in the most important way, she appears exactly like every other Amazon warehouse worker:  How many others in the Amazon maze ought to actually be in much better jobs, say if there were no winner take all markets?

Back to the authors of that book, 'The Winner Take All Society' (Ch. 6, 'Too Many Contestants?', p. 102):

"When we assert that winner take all markets attract too many contestants, what we really mean is that society's total income would be higher if fewer people competed in these markets and chose other occupations instead."

So follow this now.  If there were fewer millions chasing first novels or other book rewards, including for trash fiction, children's books and other works, there'd be more monetary rewards to go around for fewer remaining competitors. Ditto,if there were fewer people chasing Ph.D.s who then wanted to become academics - because there simply aren't enough academic positions available. Oh, unless they want to be adjuncts - and have to patch together teaching at multiple sites, while often ending up on food stamps, e.g.

http://chronicle.com/article/From-Graduate-School-to/131795/

Then there is the following most germane point and reason why the "too many contestants"   phenomenon makes it rough for all competitors. (ibid.):

"Market incentives typically lure too many contestants into winner take all markets, and too few into other careers. One reason involves a well documented human frailty: the tendency to overestimate our chances of prevailing over our competitors."

Adding:

"The decision to compete in a winner take all market is akin to buying a lottery ticket. If you win you win many times more than if you were in a less risky career. If you lose, you earn much less."

I would suggest that many thousands of current Amazon workers are like Heike Geissler. They tossed their hats into the ring of  one or more 'winner take all'  markets- then lost the "lotto", and now have ended up packing and unpacking totes at an Amazon fulfillment center.  Just a hypothesis, it could be wrong.  But my point is that because so many fell into this backstop job, this last resort work - doesn't mean it's the only answer or best opportunity for anyone else- including those in the Queens who missed their chance because of the protests.. As even the authors of the WTAS book note, if taxes were dramatically increased there'd be much more  to fund other jobs of quality - as opposed to the current narrow band of good jobs paying well, e.g. Google  techie, banker, tenured prof, or top fiction author.

I write all this by way of Geissler's insights showing  the life of an Amazon worker  - wherever he or she is - is not sweetbread.  Hence, all those capitalist snarks who condemned Alexandria Ocasio- Cortez and others for driving the commercial giant out of Queens because of "loss of jobs" need to get a grip. They also need a better perspective on the nascent issue of corporate welfare and its toxic impact on communities.

The activist critics also miss another point, highlighted in a recent issue of FORBES (March 31, 'Reimagining Capitalism', by Randall Lane, p. 30) noting how it was a self-inflicted error on Bezos' part. As Lane writes (p. 35):

"But Bezos was bloodied just as badly (as the activists, politicians). He's worth over $130 billion (at least until his divorce settles) and Amazon is worth $800 billion. Why extract a measly $3 billion in corporate welfare from New York? In the truest Friedman sense because he has shareholders and he could."

But the point is, at least by not gouging out that huge chunk Bezos would have taken the wind out of AOC 's (and the protesters') sails.  That he chose not to also highlights the power of corporate welfare which has been growing like a cancer for over three decades.

In my book, The Elements of the Corporatocracy I had written:

"The egregious Santa Clara ruling, legally created an instant class of  'supercitizens' - and de facto 'super persons'.  Unlike the normal person-citizen, these were able to live forever, or as close to that sublime  state as de-regulating laws allowed.  They could live in multiple places at  once (branch offices), and even transmogrify themselves via mergers, etc. or 'amputate' themselves into smaller companies bearing the same overall identity, and run by a single interlocking directorate.

These 'corporate persons' were (over time) also able to access a host of special rights and privileges - not afforded ordinary flesh and blood citizens. These included: special tax-write offs, government and state subsidies, as well as deductions.(Like 'tax deferred benefits' packages for CEOs). And, in the late 20th century, a generous form of government subsidy known as 'corporate welfare'  which would extract,  on average - by late 1999- $1,186 from each taxpayer to fund and underwrite  corporate profits and projects. The ostensible reason to 'create jobs', but of course this was a rank myth .

In effect, the stage had been set for endemic and anomalous political and economic imbalance that was built into the very legal system, and manner of governance."

Given this, it's beyond pathetic WSJ columnist Peggy Noonan could have been squawking ('Welcome to New York, Amazon - Now Go Home',  p.A15):

"Here is the truth: New York's progressives weren't tough, they were weak. They don't know how to play this game."

Her solution:

"You quietly say 'yes', go to the groundbreaking, and welcome our new partner to prosperity. Then you wait. And as soon as the new headquarters is finally built and staffed you shake them down like a boss."

Oh, and be sure to:

"Go to your friends in the big New York papers and tell them, 'Amazon's cruel. The shifts are so long the elevator operators are peeing in bottles. And when Bezos dropped his wallet the receptionist broke her back picking it up for him."

Ha, ha and ha! Real funny, but typical of Noonan's cluelessness in this case. But in fact the real cruelty of the Amazon work load is laid not on elevator operators or receptionists but the "associates"" who daily have to load up tons of crap in fulfillment centers, to dispatch to demanding consumers.  Associates like Heike Geissler.

For all those now whining about the loss of those "precious" jobs I invite you to read her book, which offers a stark portrait of self-estrangement, instability, and loneliness on the modern-day assembly line. Like many similar earlier works we see the clash between a worker’s individuality and the brute facts of life in the warehouse, which is what drives the book. Heike's book is also far more literary in style, as she appeals to the likes of Gertrude Stein, Emil Cioran, and Mónica de la Torre  for historical perspective, and to make sense of the tedium that overwhelms her each day. .

As with other, earlier accounts, Geissler exposes many of the horrors of the job, but what her book reveals, above all else, is how working in a place like Amazon erodes one’s sense of self.  One begins with an individuality, an identity - and above all-   dignity and self- respect. One ends up as a cipher, a drone,  an unthinking cog. From the start, Geissler highlights this erosion, switching between the first and second person—a means of distancing herself from the events she chronicles. Although the self she describes is, in fact, her, it is also not her.  The latter in the sense that -  as a single temp worker subject to the immense power of a global corporation —Heike Geissler ceases to exist. For example, the Heike Geissler of literary acumen and uncommon insights into the world of capitalist drudgery and 'profits over people' .

As she writes in the book’s opening pages, “[You’ll] realize that your trouble and suffering are by no means specific to you, but astonishingly generic. Yes, you are generic.”  

In the end, AOC and her fellow Queens NY protesters and activists were right to send Bezos and Amazon packing, despite what those like Noonan claim.  Yeah, they lost maybe 25,000 jobs but spared those 25,000 from becoming ciphers and Amazon drones.  Now that $3b saved can be used for health care clinics, free child care and civic improvements as well as  basic income for those who need it, and might have been impacted by the absence of those mind-numbing jobs. 

See Also:

Corporate America | Economic Policy | Government

New Yorkers Were Right to Oppose the Amazon Deal

by Larry Beinhart | February 23, 2019 - 7:11am | permalink

Excerpt:

 "Most Amazon employees race around warehouses looking for goods, then put them in those custom Amazon boxes, with computer printed labels, then take them to the loading dock, constantly under the pressure of clocks that say they have to fill so many orders an hour. According to Glassdoor.com, Warehouse Associates make $14 an hour. If they work a 40-hour week, 50 weeks a year, that's all of $28,000.."

AND:

Wealth Inequality

There’s Plenty of Wealth to Go Around — It Just Doesn’t

Corporate Media Pushes Socialism Bogey To Scare Voters - But Will They Be Smart Enough Not To Bite?

The asinine brainwashing of the American masses has occurred in many forms, but no where as consistently and insanely as the campaign against socialism (as embodied, for example,  in the cartoon above which appeared in Monday's Denver Post).  With the midterm elections now merely 62 days away, the bogey meme of mad, liberty destroying socialists is again being circulated.  Never mind real U.S. Socialists are among the sanest and most rational of D-candidates, such as Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez, e.g.

Brane Space: 28-Year Old Democratic Socialist Beats The Dem .

In a recent NY Times op-ed piece, columnist Paul Krugman queried how it is the corporatists and conservos repeatedly manage to game the American voter on the issues of Medicare for all, Social Security and other socialist programs. He wrote:

"Why do they imagine they can get away with such brazen fraud, because that’s what it is? Do they imagine that voters are stupid?  Well, yes. In recent rallies Donald Trump has been declaring that Democrats want to “raid Medicare to pay for socialism.”

But the more important target is the news media, many members of which still haven’t learned to cope with the pervasive bad faith of modern conservatism."

I don't necessarily accept that the conservatives assume that voters are stupid, and neither do the corporate media. What I do believe is that they exploit the vast ignorance of most Americans regarding different economic systems, especially socialism.   A huge part of this ignorance relies on the typical American's inability to discriminate between the different forms of socialism.

For example, democratic socialism applies to limited control of the means of production, and services and is specific to democratic states. By contrast, neither Marxist Socialism or National Socialism were peculiar to democratic states. Indeed, in the latter, Reich Laws replaced the democracy and democratic legal infrastructure of the Weimar Republic, so in many ways the term - confected by Hitler and the Nazis - is really a cynical  distortion of true socialism. 

In the case of Marxist socialism or Marxism (as manifested in the old USSR) one beheld  total state control of ALL goods and services. This was to the extent nearly all jobs were created by the state, wages set by the state and pseudo-markets created where there were no genuine needs to fulfill and others (especially for growing food) left under-developed. In addition, no such entities as stock markets or commodities exchanges existed.

In other words, there was scant choice or latitude to act outside the limited purview dictated by state control. THIS is what today's hysterical socialism critics (like the WaPo cartoonist Lisa Benson) are really about, i.e. showing a clueless voter about to insert his 'Bill of Rights'  ballot  into the  slot designated "insert freedom here".  Then asking himself,  "What could go wrong?"

Well, a lot if he was voting on behalf of old -style Soviet socialism!  But that's not what we're about!  We're about democratic socialism which even Oprah had to be educated about not too long ago,  when even she raised misbegotten fear of socialism and the welfare state.e.g.

• Oprah got perfect response from Danish woman on their social welfare state 

As Oprah rumbled on  about "socialism" with a fearful expression, a Danish citizen on Skype quickly informs her: "We think of it as being civilized. As taking care of each other...the elderly, the sick."   The Danish woman had clearly exposed Oprah's brainwashing - and Oprah is not a dumb American.

Want to see a "welfare state?"  Look at the billions now being given to soy, dairy, hog, sorghum, corn, cotton and other farmers to compensate them for the losses sustained via Trump's tariffs!

My first exposure to democratic socialism in fact came about while living in Milwaukee in the 1950s. At that time, Frank P. Zeidler was the city's  last Socialist Mayor,

 I  thank my mother for educating me on the contributions of Mayor Zeidler - who was a member of the Socialist Party of America. On assorted streetcar trips in the early 1950s (back from her night school - teaching English to the foreign-born)  she'd point out special landmarks and places in Beer City and inform me how these were there thanks to the efforts of Milwaukee's Mayor.

Before Mayor Zeidler, Emil Seidl became Milwaukee's first Socialist Mayor in 1910, followed by Daniel Hogan who lasted from 1916-1940 keeping the city out of debt during the Great Depression. Zeidler,  in his mayoral election campaign, noted the problem of ethnic division in other parts of the country and how this was exploited – especially by wealthy Republicans- to keep working class people divided. Zeidler vowed, if elected, he’d ameliorate these divisions and ensure all Milwaukeean Working class folks benefited – whether Croatian, German, Polish or whatever. Zeidler ended up winning three terms, enduring from 1948 until 1960 and turning Milwaukee into a prosperous post-war city.

Jobs proliferated, especially in major manufacturing (Allis –Chalmers etc.) while the Breweries hired thousands with excellent pay and benefits, including health care. Housing abounded as well, affordable housing off of Greenfield Ave. and Teutonia and in other suburbs to the north and west. Parks, meanwhile, were the envy of many other cities for their beautiful layouts, amenities and services. I can still recall going to Washington Park (across the street from where my family lived on W. 48th and Cherry Streets) on the 4th of July for band performances and later fireworks. 

So my appreciation for a respectable, beneficial socialism commenced at a very early age, and was reinforced by further study of many different socio-economic systems as part of a wide-ranging liberal arts education..Unlike today's  "steeples" of specialization which turn academics into isolated practitioners of their craft - unable to communicate across disciplines -  Loyola's liberal arts emphasis lent itself to the formation of latter day "Renaissance men" - and women. True critical thinkers who would definitely be an asset in much of today's media.

But instead, more often than not,  when conservos take egregious shots at socialism, for example, the corporate media almost always parrot what's circulated from Right think tanks. Whether the press or electronic media, there is too much of a rush to fall in line in "monkey see, monkey do"  fashion.  They fail to question the conservative tropes and memes circulated and all citizens suffer as a result - especially in perpetuating citizen ignorance.

What we desperately need is more eye opening "Eureka!" moments such as encountered by Oprah visibly  and markedly seen in the previous link.

At the same time there may well be cause for some hope. In a recent FOX News poll, it was found that 46 percent favored a Medicare for All health care system, far in excess of the 31 percent who didn't. That is a clear majority who favor the most socialist of all medical program options, and one being articulated by a number of Dem candidates, including Ms. Ocasio-Cortez.

Now, if we can just get more of the mainstream media to be supportive, or at least less prone to scribbling codswallop like a recent WaPo  Neoliberal editorial entitled  “The cosmically huge ‘if’ of Medicare for all." . 

At least in this (WaPo) case, a serious fact check  (and debunking) was made thanks to Matt Bruenig’s  Jacobin journal article here. But one wonders how many of those who read the editorial also read the takedown of its lies, distortions in Jacobin or ancillary sources.  What we need is to get to a place of citizen education where critical thinking enables them to pierce the veil of misinformation on mere reading and parsing of the claims made.

As can be seen from the circulation of the socialism cartoon that day may well be a long time off.