[You cannot say nothing will change. We can make the argument
that not enough is changing fast enough. These are not nitpicking
questions, because this is how the language we use communicates to
individuals who is included, who you consider a person.]
[[link removed]]

TALKING SOCIALISM | CATCHING UP WITH AOC  
[[link removed]]

 

Don McIntosh
March 24, 2021
Democratic Left
[[link removed]]


*
[[link removed]]
*
[[link removed]]
*
* [[link removed]]

_ You cannot say nothing will change. We can make the argument that
not enough is changing fast enough. These are not nitpicking
questions, because this is how the language we use communicates to
individuals who is included, who you consider a person. _

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on her way to speak at NYC’s Women’s
March, Photo by Corey Torpie

 

BRONX CONGRESSWOMAN ALEXANDRIA OCASIO-CORTEZ, BEST KNOWN AS AOC, IS
DSA’S FOREMOST SOCIALIST SUPERSTAR. HER JUNE 2018 PRIMARY WIN—A
29-YEAR-OLD TAQUERIA BARTENDER DEFEATING THE THIRD MOST POWERFUL
DEMOCRAT IN THE U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES—INSPIRED UP TO 10,000
PEOPLE TO JOIN DSA.

THE NETFLIX DOCUMENTARY KNOCK DOWN THE HOUSE DETAILS HER LIFE STORY
LEADING UP TO THAT VICTORY. SINCE THEN, HER INFLUENCE HAS ONLY GROWN.
EARNEST, FUN, RELATABLE, AND FIERCE, SHE BECAME ONE OF CONGRESS’
BEST KNOWN MEMBERS OVERNIGHT, AND USED THE ATTENTION TO PULL THE
NATIONAL CONVERSATION LEFTWARD. IN OCTOBER 2019, HER ENDORSEMENT
REVIVIFIED BERNIE SANDERS’ CAMPAIGN FOLLOWING HIS HEART ATTACK.

TODAY—WITH OVER 12 MILLION TWITTER FOLLOWERS, HER PICTURE ON THE
DECEMBER COVER OF VANITY FAIR, AND MASS CULTURAL APPEAL TO TEENS AND
THE NOT-YET-POLITICAL—SHE CONTINUES TO USE HER UNASKED-FOR CELEBRITY
TO BUILD SUPPORT FOR A DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST AGENDA. ON JAN. 28, MORE
THAN A QUARTER OF A MILLION PEOPLE STREAMED HER IMPROMPTU TEACH-IN ON
THE GAMER PLATFORM TWITCH.TV. THE TOPIC WAS THE GAMESTOP STOCK MARKET
REBELLION, BUT THE DISCUSSION ENCOMPASSED A CRITIQUE OF WALL STREET
AND A PLUG FOR A WEALTH TAX.

AOC SPOKE WITH ME BY ZOOM JAN. 26.

WHAT WAS YOUR PATH TO JOINING DSA?

I love this question because I think that my path in DSA very much
shaped my organizing strategy. I didn’t grow up in an incredibly
ideological household. I have friends that grew up the children of
unionists, professors, individuals two or three generations deep into
working class movements. That was not my family. I grew up very
working class. My mother cleaned houses. My father had a small
business. Both my parents grew up in extreme poverty.

What initially drew me to DSA was the fact that they showed up
everywhere that I showed up. I started my work as a community
organizer before I even knew about the existence of DSA, and I was
busy doing work in my community, working with children, working with
families, advocating for educational equity. A friend of mine invited
me to a DSA meeting in the Bronx/Upper Manhattan Branch. We were in
the basement of a church uptown, in Washington Heights I believe. It
was my first time being exposed to DSA, and to me it was like,
‘Okay, we’re hearing all this rhetoric and having discussions.’
And I’m like, ‘Okay, another group of folks talking.’ Like this
is great, this is encouraging.

This was around the time when DSA was picketing one of the major
camera companies in New York City, trying to call attention to the
warehouse workers. And they brought undocumented warehouse workers to
the meeting, and translated their testimony. And on top of that, the
chapter had free childcare provided to anyone who wanted to show up.
And that to me … at the end of that meeting, I was like, ‘Okay,
this is real.’

You know, there’s a lot of people who talk about class issues,
there’s a lot of people who are deep in the discourse of struggle.
But to me, as someone who grew up in these environments, it was the
translation to action that was distinctive to me.

_That_ is what made DSA initially distinctive to me, and made it
something that was flagged to me as worthy of continued attention. And
then Jabari Brisport ran for City Council. It felt like something
fundamentally different to me, even in the context of electoralism.

Ironically enough, before I ran for Congress, and before Jabari had
run for City Council in that first race, I myself had huge doubts
around electoralism. That’s why I dove into community organizing,
because I was one of those folks that felt, “We’re not going to
get any substantive change through electoral politics. It’s just not
going to happen.”

I felt that way because I grew up around Bronx machine politics, where
there was a lot of cynical use and weaponization of identity under the
guise of lobbyist-driven policies and corporate policy. I had
essentially given up on it, and I felt the only way we’re going to
do this is by committing ourselves to our communities.

And so it was that first meeting that I felt, ‘Okay, this is
something that’s real.’ Also, in the history of New York City and
in communities of color, when you have the Young Lords and you have
this organizing heritage, there has historically been tension between
DSA and these organizing collectives of color, whether it was Latino
and Puerto Rican collectives, Chicano collectives, black
collectives…. It was like, “Oh, it’s these white folks.
[LAUGHS.] There was this historical fissure. But it really felt like a
moment where we were coming together. And so when I would see DSA
showing up providing real structural support at BLM rallies, or
support for abolishing ICE, where we felt like there wasn’t this
class essentialism, but that this really was a multiracial class
struggle that didn’t de-prioritize human rights, frankly, I was
really impressed. And I felt like it was something worth being part
of.

_My_ run for Congress, so much of it was based in coalition building.
In the New York City context, I wasn’t a DSA candidate that was
homegrown from the start. I went through a process of earning the DSA
endorsement. And that was in addition to stitching a collective
together of the movement for Black lives and the movement for
immigrant rights. Our congressional district is half immigrant,
extraordinarily working class and just incredibly diverse in the Bronx
and Queens. Along with Senator Sanders’s campaign, which I also
proudly worked on, prior to all of this, you know, all of that, I
think, really contributed to this moment.

And, for me, there’s a real distinction between us saying that
we’re about something and us really being about it in our actions.
And it was really that distinction, in the action and in the praxis,
that made it distinctive to me and made it something to be a part of.

WHAT A GREAT STORY. THANK YOU FOR SHARING THAT.

DSA’S PRIORITIES REALLY ARE YOUR PRIORITIES AS WELL, GREEN NEW DEAL
AND MEDICARE FOR ALL IN PARTICULAR. THERE’S NO GETTING AROUND THE
FACT THAT EACH OF THOSE ARE GOING TO REQUIRE AN ACT OF CONGRESS. WHAT
IS THE MOST STRATEGIC THING THAT DSA MEMBERS AND CHAPTERS COULD BE
DOING RIGHT NOW TO BRING THAT ABOUT?

I’m a big believer in exercising a dual approach. First of all, I
think you’re right, there is no Medicare For All without an act of
Congress. The thing is legislation after all.

I think sometimes people fall into this trap of wishful thinking about
a poll question, thinking that support is solid, and that it is
unsusceptible to the propaganda of corporate lobbyists and the health
insurance industry. I think the first thing we need is real honesty
about the work to be done ahead of us. There are some issues that poll
really well, and the polling is concrete. There are other issues that
poll one way or another, and the polling can really fluctuate with
just one ad campaign.

Actually, we experienced this in a positive way with the Green New
Deal, in that the oil and gas lobbies have gone in so hard to try to
give the Green New Deal a bad name. And even after the total hammering
that it experienced by the Republican Party, it still doesn’t poll
that poorly. However, one thing that we _do_ see is that even in
areas where it may not poll as well as we would like, what we find is
that it’s highly susceptible to positive messaging. Once we go in
and either send organizers, or have other forms of messaging, and
actually explain what the Green New Deal is, polling skyrockets for
the issue. And so, in terms of tactics and what’s needed, I think we
need to actually make the case for single payer health care that is
free of cost at the point of service. And we have to say what we mean
by Medicare for All, because as we know, there are a lot of cynical
actors that try to add all these ellipses, like “Medicare for All
who want it that make less than $100,000 per year.” And that’s why
we have to engage in the work of organizing.

So I would say in terms of our strategic priorities, yes, it’s
continued organizing, yes, it’s also continued support on the state
level, for various health care initiatives, such as the single payer
proposal in the state of New York.

There’s a lot of that work that we can do outside of electoralism.
But there is critical electoral work to be done as well. I think the
strategy of supporting candidates, when that strategy is very
calculated, focused, precise, when we aren’t casting our net too
wide beyond the capacities of any given local organization, is
extremely effective. Mounting continued primary challenges or just
supporting candidates in general, putting candidates in open seats …
I’ve seen the impact of it from the inside—how much even incumbent
members of Congress will totally reinvent themselves in a far more
progressive direction, because they know that their communities are
watching.

In the best case scenario, we get incredible new members of Congress,
or we win these open seats, you know, Rashida Tlaib was an open seat.
And at worst, we get almost a radical change in the agenda of the
incumbent that is presently there. And so in many ways, it’s a
win-win in getting that internal traction, that is necessary.

WE’VE HEARD AGAIN AND AGAIN FROM CONSERVATIVE DEMOCRATS, THAT AN AOC
STYLE AGENDA MIGHT FLY IN QUEENS OR THE BRONX, BUT IT CAN’T WIN IN
MORE COMPETITIVE DISTRICTS OUT IN MIDDLE AMERICA. WHAT’S YOUR ANSWER
TO THAT?

I think it’s totally false. I think that their critique may be more
aesthetic, to be honest. After all, I was born in the Bronx, and I’m
bred in this community. And this is my community. So of course, you
know, if I just walk over to another state in Nebraska or whomever,
they’re gonna suss out real quick that perhaps I’m not a
Nebraskan. But I don’t think that that is really related to policy.
I think it’s because I’m a New Yorker, and I act like a New
Yorker. And you know what? I need to act like a New Yorker so that I
can represent New York’s 14th Congressional District. But I don’t
think that critique really holds water in terms of the actual policies
that we are supporting. Sure, in terms of my style of advocacy, it’s
not going to be the style of advocacy for another local community. But
I’m aware of that. And that’s not my job. My job is not to
represent any other district than mine right now.

It also applies the other way: They could not come to New York and to
our district and be successful here. So it cuts both ways. And I think
it’s important that we send the message that our communities are
just as necessary, and just as critical as any other. But that said,
again, this has nothing to do with the actual policy. A lot of times,
it’s the style of that advocacy, and I think that you can just see
the importance of a multiracial, and multi-identity, multi-gendered,
geographically diverse movement. That’s ultimately the strength and
beauty of our collective work with Bernie. There are communities that
I’m able to speak to and organize, there are communities that Bernie
and I are able to speak to and organize, and there are communities
that Bernie is able to speak to and organize. And when we come
together, we’re able to build trust, and expand that collective
power among all the folks that resonate with each of us individually.
The idea, like, “She’s not going to win in this one community or
another community” … I’m not trying to, you know? What we’re
trying to do is build movement in that community. And that is a very
different question than trying to litigate one personality versus
another.

SOME ON THE LEFT HAVE LOOKED AT BIDEN’S RECORD AND HIS DIFFERENCES
WITH THE BERNIE WING OF THE PARTY, AND THEY CONCLUDE THAT NO PROGRESS
IS GOING TO COME OUT OF THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION. WHAT’S YOUR VIEW?

Well, I think it’s a really privileged critique. We’re gonna have
to focus on solidarity with one another, developing our senses for
good faith critique and bad faith critique. Because bad faith critique
can destroy everything that we have built so swiftly. And we know this
because it has in the past, and it’s taken us so many decades to get
to this point. We do not have the time or the luxury to entertain bad
faith actors in our movement. But also we have to value our solidarity
with one another. For anyone who brings that up, we really have to ask
ourselves, what is the message that you are sending to your Black and
brown and undocumented members of your community, to your friends,
when you say nothing has changed? Perhaps not enough has changed. And
this is not a semantic argument. Just the other night, we in
collective struggle were able to stop the deportations of critical
members of our community. And that would not have happened in a Trump
administration.

THANK YOU.

They were just on the belt ready to go. And you just cannot say that
nothing will change. We _can_ make the argument that not enough is
changing fast enough. And these really are not nitpicking questions of
semantics, because this is how the language that we use communicates
to individuals _who_ is included and who do you consider a person.
When you say “nothing has changed,” you are calling the people who
are now protected from deportation “no one.” And we cannot allow
for that in our movement. That’s not a movement that I want to be a
part of. And I know that’s not the movement that _we_ are a part
of. We’re so susceptible to cynicism. And that cynicism, that
weaponization of cynicism, is what has and what continues to threaten
to tear down everything that we have spent so much time building up.
We’re allowed to win too, by the way. [LAUGHS.]

I PREFER WINNING, ACTUALLY.

MILLIONS OF PEOPLE ARE EXCITED ABOUT YOU BEING IN CONGRESS AND ROOTING
FOR YOUR SUCCESS. BUT AT THE SAME TIME, NO OTHER FIGURE HAS BEEN
TARGETED BY THE FOX NEWS CROWD QUITE LIKE YOU HAVE. WHY DO YOU THINK
THAT THEY WORKED TO MAKE YOU SUCH A BOGEYMAN FOR THE RIGHT WING, AND
WHAT’S IT LIKE TO BE ON THE RECEIVING END OF THAT?

I think they’ve done it because they know that we are a threat.
Particularly because of the fact that I’m a movement candidate. If I
was just some kind of one-off singular candidate, I do not believe
that we would be attracting the energy and attacks that we attract. So
much of this organized power and organized capital has frankly
correctly identified that my candidacy is not an individual venture,
but that it is representative of an actual working class movement.
There is a rush to define me to the country before I have the
opportunity to define myself. And if you can get enough people to just
tune me out or tune any other person out before they even get the
opportunity to hear what one has to say, you’re able to go a long
way in preserving the current power structure. However, I don’t
think that strategy lasts the test of time. I think it was a very
strong short-term strategy. I mean, it continues to be a strategy. But
I honestly believe that what was just attempted was: We’re going to
throw the book at any candidate like this. We’re going to make an
example out of her for everyone else. And then we’re just going to
tar and feather her in the press. And then we’re going to mount a $3
million Democratic primary challenge against her that’s bankrolled
by Wall Street, that was also a Latina, down to having a hyphenated
last name. [Ed.: AOC was challenged in the 2020 Democratic primary by
Michelle Caruso-Cabrera.] And it was just the most cynical, disgusting
thing. But it was also trying to convince Democrats that this is too
dangerous, and that this is a liability. They did that in hopes that
it would succeed. And not only was it not successful, but we crushed
them, just completely crushed them.

IT WAS VERY EXCITING TO SEE THAT RESULT.

It _is_ exciting, because they weaponized all the cynical powers of
trying to get someone of my ethnicity, trying to even confuse people
in terms of the name—Caruso Cabrera versus Ocasio Cortez. And [her
campaign] had, you know, $3 million, she was a CNBC anchor, so she had
TV and camera training and all of it. And the fact that it was so
desperately unsuccessful, I think really speaks to the strength of
this movement, that there _is_ a glimmer of hope that it
will _not_ be distracted by all of the kind of tricks up this
corporate establishment’s sleeve. And then beyond that, we went to a
general election, which had $10 million behind it, backed by a
Republican who then tried to do this whole … I might be getting my
my music references mixed up, but trying to do like this whole like
“John Mellencamp” vibe, trying to convince people that he’s not
actually Republican, that he’s just a working class dude. So it
really shows what their strategy was, which is “we’re gonna throw
the book at her,” and we’re gonna try to wound her so badly that
she doesn’t win re-election and this just becomes a flash-in-the-pan
thing. I mean, in the general election it was the second most
expensive congressional race in America.

I DID NOT REALIZE THAT.

Yeah, in the United States, it was the second most expensive race in
the country. And so their strategy was to make quick work of us. And
they threw everything that they could, and it didn’t work. And now I
think they have a problem on their hands. [LAUGHS]

YEAH, BECAUSE YOU GOT RE-ELECTED. IN FACT YOU ABSOLUTELY CRUSHED.

And not only that, but we also expanded our presence with the election
of Jamaal Bowman and Cori Bush. It’s really showing that this is not
going away.

YOU’RE ONE OF 435 REPRESENTATIVES IN THE HOUSE, FOUR OF WHOM ARE
OPEN SOCIALISTS NOW. PESSIMISTS MIGHT LOOK AT THAT AND FIND THAT
DAUNTING, BUT YOU PUT ON A RECENT TWITTER VIDEO
[[link removed]] IN WHICH YOU
LISTED ALL THE SPECIFIC THINGS YOU PERSONALLY GOT DONE IN TWO YEARS.
YOU TRIED TO DO IT IN TWO MINUTES. IT TOOK YOU FOUR, TALKING AS FAST
AS YOU COULD. SO FOR OUR READERS, WHAT ARE SOME OF THE MOST IMPACTFUL
ITEMS ON THAT LIST?

Well, for me, I’m already thinking about this term so far, things
that aren’t in the video but have already been early wins. And by
the way, this just speaks to talking about how nothing will change …
we’ve already had really two very significant wins. One
non-electoral, which was the Hunts Point Produce workers, being able
to support them in securing wage increases and protecting their health
care in their strike efforts. [Ed.: At the nation’s largest
wholesale produce market, located in the Bronx, Teamsters struck for
first time in 35 years. AOC skipped the presidential inauguration to
join them on the picket line. After a week on strike, they won $1.85
an hour raises]

The reason I bring this up is because I do not believe that they would
have had the structural and community support they were able to
generate, if we hadn’t been building momentum on both electoral wins
and non electoral wins. You know, if Joe Biden didn’t win the
presidency, that would have been a harder strike. Even though they
don’t seem connected, there _is_ something to be said about the
morale of seeing your actions manifest into change. I don’t know if
as many elected officials would have shown up if they didn’t feel
like more people weren’t paying attention. And so to have that
institutional support for their demands, really allowed the community
to rally around, along with the on-the-ground support that DSA
provided.

You know, I thought one of the things that was so inspiring in talking
to many of these unionists was that they expressed to me shock, every
night that I was there, that so many young people showed up to the
picket line. They had no idea what was going on. But they were
thrilled. And they knew that it was adding so much power to their
strike efforts. And it really kind of goes both ways too. It elevated
the consciousness of even the unionists, of the fact that they
weren’t alone, and that their struggle was part of a larger
collective one, really made the strike stronger. And the other [win]
was being able to secure $2 billion for FEMA reimbursements for
funeral expenses.

FOR THOSE WHO DIED OF COVID.

Yeah, for individuals who have died of COVID. And there’s a couple
of reasons why this was so important. First of all, this was a
homegrown effort. New York 14 was the most heavily impacted
congressional district at the outbreak of the pandemic. And Elmcor and
our constituents in East Elmhurst, which is kind of in the shadow of
Elmhurst Hospital, the most heavily hit hospital in the country at one
point, they reached out immediately. And they said, this is a disease
that is disproportionately impacting people along lines of race and
class. It is disproportionately impacting the Black, the brown and the
low income. And as a consequence, the subsequent deaths, particularly
at the beginning, were concentrated among Black patients, brown
patients and low income patients.

So you take that a step further, and the expenses for a funeral can go
$5,000 to $10,000. That is a life-altering expense for a working class
family, when the average American has 400 bucks in savings, especially
in the middle of a pandemic, when this is not something that is
planned or expected at all. That’s the kind of death that is
earth-shattering, that can put a family under for a decade plus, if
not more. I experienced this myself when my family lost my dad, and we
saw how expensive it was. And it took a decade to get out from that
debt.

So when you target this for reimbursement, it’s actually quite a
progressive cash transfer. Because when you are reimbursing those who
have died of COVID, and COVID is disproportionately impacting the
Black and the brown and the working class, you are able to lift those
families or at least patch them through to prevent inequity and
inequality from further bottoming out the bottom. And that’s the
reason we prioritized it so much. The fact that we were able to
actually pass it on to the Trump administration is pretty remarkable.
We were able to get $2 billion authorized under Trump. Now that FEMA
is operating under Biden, we can now work with the administration to
administer these funds, and dole them out in a way that is not going
to be as stonewalled or corrupt as it would be under the Trump
administration.

ONE OF THE EXCITING THINGS ABOUT YOUR EARLY DAYS IN CONGRESS WAS YOUR
WILLINGNESS TO BREAK FROM CONVENTION, LIKE WHEN YOU BLEW THE LID ON
THE FRESHMAN ORIENTATION THAT WAS CRAWLING WITH CORPORATE LOBBYISTS,
OR APPEARED AT THE SUNRISE MOVEMENT SIT-IN IN PELOSI’S OFFICE. HAS
YOUR STRATEGY SHIFTED AT ALL FROM THOSE DAYS?

I don’t think so. I do think that the pandemic has complicated those
things a little bit, because a lot of stuff really does happen behind
closed doors. And it’s funny, but you know, people will say and do
things at a cocktail party that they will not do on a Zoom call. So I
would say that the opportunities for disruption have varied a little
bit in this digital situation that we’re in, but I still think they
exist.

One thing I do think _has_ changed is that I do believe we’re
getting more sophisticated. I think about all of our tactics as
different tools in a toolbox. And when I first started, I had a
hammer. And when you have a hammer, everything’s a nail, as they
say. But then as you learn about other methods, you can get a wrench,
and then you get a screwdriver, and then you’re able to add a lot
more to your tools. You add the tools of electoralism — supporting
other members to join. You have the tools of sunlight.

There’s this one moment I’ll never forget. We were going through
the appropriations process, I believe in 2019 or so. And basically,
this is how we fund the entire government, we go along and we fund
each agency after the other. And there are these massive
multi-thousand-page packages. And I remember finding … sometimes
it’s as simple as hitting Control-F and just trying to find every
policy-related keyword, to see what’s getting appropriated, and see
what you can dig through. That’s literally how some folks go about
this, when you’re given 1,000 pages of legislation 48 hours before
it drops. But we found this really bizarre appropriation for fossil
fuel facilities, and it was like a multi billion dollar giveaway, I
believe, at the time. And we were like, “Where did this come from?
Did someone slip this in?” And we were gonna propose an amendment to
take it out. So we raised the question about this. And because no one
wanted to ‘fess up and actually own that they were the one who put
that in, it was withdrawn without actually making it a floor fight.
Yeah. I don’t think we ever got to the bottom of who was behind
that. Clearly, you know, this is lobbyist driven. This was a
lobbyist’s language that someone asked to put in. But because the
actual line item was so shameful, no one wanted to actually ‘fess up
to the fact that they put this in.

There are so many of these wins, that aren’t necessarily public
fights every time. They are wins to the tune of millions and billions
of dollars that could then be shifted to other priorities. Some of
that work is quiet, but it is just as significant as some of the
public fighting and organizing. Not to disparage that either, but they
complement one another.

YOU’RE FAMOUS FOR SKILLFULLY CLAPPING BACK AT HATERS FROM TIME TO
TIME, BUT YOU DON’T COME OFF AS MEAN, AND YOU NEVER PUNCH DOWN. HOW
DO YOU STAY SO POSITIVE?

Oh, thank you. Well, you know, positivity is an organizing tool. And I
say that with so much earnestness. There’s a reason why Jabari
[Brisport] won, there’s a reason why Zohran [Mamdani] won, there’s
a reason why Marcela [Mitaynes] and Phara [Souffrant Forrest] —
these wins that we had on the state level, why those candidates won.
Look at them. They are relentlessly positive. They are people that you
want to be around. And they are not cynical, and they do not engage in
“more socialist than thou.” They are just relentlessly positive.

And I think the most important thing that we can do in order to win is
to be people and spaces that people want to be around. And that is our
organizing priority. We have to make Medicare for All something
that _everyone_ wants to be a part of. We have to make Green New
Deal something that everyone wants to be a part of. I think people
sometimes are dismissive of this, in thinking that it’s less serious
than study. But who’s gonna join your book club if it sucks? Who’s
gonna join your reading group if they feel judged? So the important
thing we need to do is to really create something … excuse my
language … but that’s fucking fun.

Photo by Corey Torpie

_Don McIntosh is a member of the Democratic Left editorial team._

_Democratic Left is the magazine of the Democratic Socialists of
America. Signed articles do not necessarily express the position of
the organization._

*
[[link removed]]
*
[[link removed]]
*
* [[link removed]]

 

 

 

INTERPRET THE WORLD AND CHANGE IT

 

 

Submit via web [[link removed]]
Submit via email
Frequently asked questions [[link removed]]
Manage subscription [[link removed]]
Visit xxxxxx.org [[link removed]]

Twitter [[link removed]]

Facebook [[link removed]]

 




[link removed]

To unsubscribe, click the following link:
[link removed]