but doesn't accurately refer to what Piven called for; apparently actual words didn't fit the image she wanted to push. The apologists version:
So perhaps economically hard-pressed Americans aren't wusses after all. They may not have the courage or the know-how to organize a protest at the local unemployment office, which is the kind of action Piven urged in her December essay, but they stand ready to shoot the first 78-year-old social scientist who suggests that they do so.
What Piven actually said:
"An effective movement of the unemployed will have to look something like the strikes and riots that have spread across Greece in response to the austerity measures forced on the Greek government by the European Union, or like the student protests that recently spread with lightning speed across England in response to the prospect of greatly increased school fees."
Y'know, those riots and strikes where in which people have been murdered, private and public property destroyed, Deity alone knows how many injured. THOSE riots and strikes, that somehow have little resemblance to 'a protest at the local unemployment office'.
And who is Ehrenreich, who comes to the defense of Piven?
Along with her colleague Frances Fox Piven, Ehrenreich is an Honorary Chair of the Democratic Socialists of America.
So one socialist lies to protect another; anybody surprised?
And yeah, I think they are scared; they're realizing just how badly they've pissed people off, both by the action they called for and by their screaming "I'm being threatened by him actually READING MY WORDS ON THE AIR!!!"