ALINSKY'S "RULES" REMAIN ALIVE AND WELL IN 2010...FOR DEMOCRATS

The confidence of Democrats regarding the fact that anything positive awaits them after the votes are counted this November may have taken yet another major hit with a recent poll that now shows that only 38 percent of Americans think Barry is worthy of re-election. So adding insult to injury and with only 35 days remaining before the election, I think it very safe to say that there just might be a growing sense of panic amongst Democrats in Congress in that they may very well be witnessing their majority, at least in the House, slipping from their grasp. If such an event does take place, it could not take place at a more opportune and critical time. The damage not only to our economy but to our nation's reputation that has been inflicted over the course of the last nearly 2 years has been monumental. And we are now witnessing the Democrats beginning to pull out all the stops in an attempt to stem what could very possibly be some substantial election losses. And the plan that they are choosing to rely upon, as is usually the case, is one designed by their hero, Saul Alinsky. I must admit that before Barry “Almighty” came strutting into town I was not all that familiar with Saul Alinsky or his “Rules for Radicals.” Granted, I had heard the name mentioned on various occasions and always in connection with various Democrats, such as Hitlery Clinton, who has actually met Alinsky, but never really delved into exactly what was meant by the comments that I had heard. Since Barry has come onto the scene however, with him being such a devout practitioner of the Alinsky method(s), it’s difficult not to have become more aware of the threat that is now being posed. Democrats have long been much the more prone of the twp political parties to implement those tactics devised by Alinsky, not only in the political arena, but wherever they could be considered as being applicable to the successful achieving some level of advancement regarding the leftist, Socialist or progressive cause here in America and even abroad. And so it is now, with the election only 35 long days away, very clearly now, that the White House is desperate to find some type of attack to brand every day Americans as being ‘extremists’ all in an effort to help preserve Democrats in the Fall. And in their desperation, they appear to once more, to be turning to the employing of the weaponry espoused by Saul Alinksy and his Power Tactics against the American people. Saul Alinsky remains nearly a God-like figure to most, if not all of, those who are of the Liberal or Progressive persuasion, and his rules/tactics have served them pretty darn well over the last fifty or so years. And what the Republican Party is going to have to do if it wishes to, in fact, survive as a viable political party and avoid falling even deeper into obscurity, is to employ similar tactics. Also if the GOP doesn’t wish to be overtaken by a conservative third party, then it is going to have to drop the gloves and the dogma, and begin to fight fire with fire. Why should the political left have a monopoly on politically hardball tactics? They should not be considered as being immune to such tactics if they are to be successfully defeated. We are now watching Democrats resorting to that very common Democrat tactic that has them simply refusing to discuss any of the important and substantive issues, choosing instead to go down the path of character assassination and smear tactics against the opposition as once again being their standard weapon of choice as they attempt to maintain their grasp on control of Congress. It's nothing but more of the same Alinsky type tactics.



Always remember the first rule of power tactics (pps.127-134):


1. “Power is not only what you have, but what the enemy thinks you have.”


2. “Never go outside the expertise of your people. When an action or tactic is outside the experience of the people, the result is confusion, fear and retreat…. [and] the collapse of communication.


3. “Whenever possible, go outside the expertise of the enemy. Look for ways to increase insecurity, anxiety and uncertainty. (This happens all the time. Watch how many organizations under attack are blind-sided by seemingly irrelevant arguments that they are then forced to address.)


4. “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules. You can kill them with this, for they can no more obey their own rules than the Christian church can live up to Christianity.”


5. “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon. It is almost impossible to counteract ridicule. Also it infuriates the opposition, which then reacts to your advantage.”


6. “A good tactic is one your people enjoy.”


7. “A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag. Man can sustain militant interest in any issue for only a limited time….”


8. “Keep the pressure on, with different tactics and actions, and utilize all events of the period for your purpose.”


9. “The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself.”


10. “The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition. It is this unceasing pressure that results in the reactions from the opposition that are essential for the success of the campaign.”


11. “If you push a negative hard and deep enough, it will break through into its counterside… every positive has its negative.”


12. “The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative.”


13. Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it. In conflict tactics there are certain rules that [should be regarded] as universalities. One is that the opposition must be singled out as the target and ‘frozen.’


The question that remains, I suppose, is one that asks will the American people once more continue to fall for such blatant and obvious subterfuge by the Democrat Party. Or, will at least enough of them finally come to see it for what it really is? Regarding the anger and distrust that many Americans now feel toward Congress, will this still be an effective tool for Democrats to use as they proceed to grab at every straw in their effort to maintain their control of Congress? Or will there still prove to be enough simpletons out there to make it an effective and worthwhile tool for the Democrats use? Barry’s political advisers continue to look for ways to help Democrats and alter the course of the midterm elections in these final weeks. They are considering a whole range of ideas, including national advertisements, designed to cast the Republican Party as having all but taken over by the Tea Party "extremists," people who have been involved in such discussions have said. “We need to get out the message that it’s now really dangerous to re-empower the Republican Party,” said one Democratic strategist who has spoken with White House advisers but requested anonymity to discuss private strategy talks. Of course. But I cannot help but wonder as more mainstream Americans become aware of what it is that’s actually behind Barry’s agenda, will they also come to realize just how dangerous it is for our nation to pursue such an radical agenda, an agenda which is driven by the writings of a man who was in turn driven by his hatred of America? That man is of course, Saul Alinsky. And we know, or at least we should know by now, that we now have a devout disciple of Alinsky currently in the Oval Office. And had we a responsible media we would have known that long before he was ever elected or even before he became any kind of a viable candidate for that matter. So shouldn't we now be looking at least a little closer for what it is that might be motivating Barry "Almighty" as he proceeds with his drive to destroy our country. And then also we have in the person of none other than former U.S. Commission on "Civil Rights" Chairman Mary Frances Berry, a long-time and very prominent liberal activist, who admitted in a July 2010 interview with Politico that the left is trying to smear the Tea Party movement as "racist" for purely strategic reasons. It is not out of any genuine concern that the movement is itself actually racist. Berry called the tactic an "effective strategy" and just could not bring herself to actually denounce or condemn it. Of course not, because for Democrats it’s never about having anything that would even remotely resemble a honest discussion about the issues, it’s all about the slandering of the opposition! This idiot Berry, who is now the Geraldine R. Segal "Professor of American Social Thought and History" at the University of Pennsylvania, was asked, "will branding the Tea Party 'racist' work?" Berry replied, “Tainting the Tea Party movement with the charge of racism is proving to be an effective strategy for Democrats. There is no evidence that Tea Party adherents are any more racist than other Republicans, and indeed many other Americans. But getting them to spend their time purging their ranks and having candidates distance themselves should help Democrats win in November. Having one's opponent rebut charges of racism is far better than discussing joblessness.” And so my friends, that's pretty much it in a nutshell!


It should now be seen as being official that Barry “Almighty” has now become the most famous, or is it infamous, “graduate” of the Alinsky school of agitation and provocation. Mike Kruglik, a “direct descendant” of Alinsky, who was once Barry’s Chicago instructor in Alinsky’s teachings, has said on prior occasions, that Barry was the best student of Alinsky tactics that he has ever had. Kruglik went on to say Barry was “an undisputed master of agitation” who “could engage a room full of recruiting targets in a rapid fire Socratic dialogue…” Barry himself has described the four years that he spent learning the science of Alinsky’s community agitating as “the best education of his life.” That short little comment alone should tell you a lot right there about the man who is now our president. Because the underlying tenet in the Alinsky method is really no different than that of the Communist rationalization; that being that the ends always justify the means. An end that is achieved by deception and bully tactics is entirely justified, according to Alinsky, and therefore Barry, and therefore the Democrats if it results in they're being able to retain control of both houses of Congress. It should come as no big surprise to anyone that politicians work to deliberately deceive the public to get elected, it is far from being something that is new. Democrat Party icon FDR masterfully conned his way into office in 1932 and with the assistance of a world war, managed to stay there until 1945. Since then, the practice of purposeful and deliberate deceit has become pretty much standard practice in American politics. Even though it is human nature to hear what we want to hear and to believe what sounds compelling to us, it more often than not leads to a case of severe “buyer’s remorse.” One case in point is the Carter Administration. Another case in point is, I think, Barry “Almighty” who, although he is a master at delivering a very compelling, believable speech, has not turned out to be what many of those who voted for him had hoped or anticipated. There is absolutely no doubt that he knows how to play on the nation’s emotions and he knows how to exploit a crisis for his own political gain. (Never let a good crisis go to waste) His campaign rhetoric was considered as being believable for a sufficient number of people to get him elected as president. Barry compelled his supporters to value and take ownership of their vote. He made his flock proud to vote for him, they felt vested in him. This is precisely why it is so difficult to enlighten his supporters about who Barry really is, and where his philosophical roots originated. That and the fact that many voted for him and still support him for no other reason than because both he and they are, black. This is how Barry, as president, has been able fundamentally change America’s economic landscape while grabbing more executive power thus far. We should not be all that surprised that Barry “Almighty” has seen fit to go around the world, vilifying his own country and every opportunity. With that being said, there is however, a very important difference between Barry and his hero Alinsky, in that Alinsky seemingly used his rules and tactics for the advancement of the perceived down-trodden. Barry, on the other hand, with his being ever the narcissist, chooses rather to employ the Alinsky tactics clearly for his own advancement. Barry, who hardly attended church prior to his attempt to organize a Chicago community, found the church that most in that community attended. This was Reverend Jeremiah Wright’s church. You all remember him, right? Barry continued to attend for twenty years in order to keep the voting support of the community for his State Senate and eventual U.S. Senate runs. Everything has a purpose.


With them now beginning to, I think, become more aware that their stock has taken the same serious tumble as have home values, Congress' most vulnerable Democrats are now attempting to utilize yet another Alinsky style tactic. That being a declaring of independence, of a sort, from their party's main agenda in all possible venues that may be available to them. From Facebook profiles and television advertisements to news interviews and campaign websites leading up to the Nov. 2 elections, nary a word is being spoken by Democrats about their party affiliation. The so-called "rebranders" include Democratic Reps. Betsy Markey and John Salazar in Colorado, Zack Space in Ohio, Jason Altmire in Pennsylvania, Glenn Nye in Virginia and Joe Donnelly in Indiana. In Texas, Rep. Chet Edwards, once promoted as being a potential running mate for our buddy Barry, has suddenly become a very vocal critic of his party's policies and agenda. Some political strategists seem to be of the opinion that this tactic may very well prove to be potentially damaging to efforts to drum up a Democrat turnout at a time when the party needs it the most in an effort to stave off the opposition and protect its majority in Congress. "They want to get turnout as high as possible among those who vote for Democrats," said Joseph Bafumi, a government professor at Dartmouth College. "Running away from the president or the party might not be the way to do it." Democrats such as Altmire, Edwards, Space and Nye stand out for defying party leaders on leading issues such as health care, but they are having to defend themselves, and rightly so, because of the "D" that comes after their name. Titus and others have raised eyebrows for carrying water for Barry “Almighty” in vote after vote, only to pivot and say they are not beholden to a party. Huh? Salazar, for example, opposed federal money for abortions and new clean-energy taxes. But then he turned right around and voted for many Democratic priorities unpopular among conservatives, including the stimulus bill, health care reform and debt-financed extended unemployment benefits. Now, sliding toward the middle has proven in the past to be a time-tested tactic that can bring about some positive results. And it could appeal to moderate Republicans, as well as the gullible and uninformed, as well as of course to the supposed nonpartisan voters “alarmed” by the number of "supposed hard-right" candidates running under the GOP banner this year. Rep. Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, chairman of the House Democrats' campaign committee, said ideological diversity will prove to be very much of an asset for Democrats as Tea Party fever continues to push Republicans to the "far right." The far right? "The Democratic caucus is a big-tent caucus," Van Hollen said. "We don't have a purity or an ideological test the way the Republicans do." I would very enthusiastically disagree with Mr. Van Hollen on that point. Republicans, on the other hand, argue that the Democrats are doing nothing more than attempting to whitewash their political records during the sluggish economic recovery that has focused voter anger on Washington. "Democrats may try to run away from their party's unpopular agenda, but their voting record tells the real story," Rep. Pete Sessions of Texas, who leads the committee charged with electing House Republicans, said in a statement. "Our responsibility over the coming weeks is to remind voters that House Democrats have been complicit in backing a big-government agenda that has done nothing to create jobs in this country." Well, they had better get to it then!


As well as being a referendum regarding the Socialist path we now would seem to be embarked upon, the November election may also prove to be a referendum on the type of tactics being used far too often in today's elections. Even with that being said however, the Republicans can ill afford to be caught flatfooted when finding themselves on the receiving end of these type of tactics. As mentioned earlier many are going to have to be willing to grow a pair and very enthusiastically fight fire with fire. They cannot be afraid of getting down and dirty if that is what it is going to take to yank control from the grasp of those who are busily driving our country into the ground. We are at 35 days and counting. The time for being hesitant has passed, the time for urgency is now.