|
Post by Skeptic on Jun 21, 2010 12:43:37 GMT -5
Very good read. When Obama come on the scene I was doing a bunch of background on him. I'm the kind I don't believe the media, I want to know for myself. So, I read two of Saul Alinksy's books. One scary dude. Obama is following the playbook to the letter. But, those in love with Obama will never do the research. Just like the Republicans who loved Bush would never check into his past to see what a screw up he was and how many businesses he destroyed. The best informative source I have seen why us "little" people will never matter to Republicans is Michael Moore's movie "Capitalism, a love story". That's why I've said for a while now, you can't win with either party. It's Marxism or rich looking out for rich. The more ya know: Saul David Alinsky (January 30, 1909 – June 12, 1972) - the more ya know: David Joel Horowitz (born January 10, 1939) Horowitz has more in common with Limbaugh than being a four time offender in marriage - both will say, and have said, just about anything to make a buck. And neither of the aforementioned crumbs need fear facing Alinsky in an afterlife... When it comes to Horowitz, et al - hold your nose and follow the money. Period. Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter! - Isaiah 5:20 P.S. From the above posted link re Saul Alinsky: Alinsky did not join political organizations. When asked during an interview whether he ever considered becoming a Communist party member, he replied: "Not at any time. I've never joined any organization—not even the ones I've organized myself. I prize my own independence too much. And philosophically, I could never accept any rigid dogma or ideology, whether it's Christianity or Marxism. One of the most important things in life is what Judge Learned Hand described as 'that ever-gnawing inner doubt as to whether you're right.' If you don't have that, if you think you've got an inside track to absolute truth, you become doctrinaire, humorless and intellectually constipated. The greatest crimes in history have been perpetrated by such religious and political and racial fanatics, from the persecutions of the Inquisition on down to Communist purges and Nazi genocide."
|
|
|
Post by KathyInArkansas on Jun 21, 2010 13:24:33 GMT -5
Very good read. When Obama come on the scene I was doing a bunch of background on him. I'm the kind I don't believe the media, I want to know for myself. So, I read two of Saul Alinksy's books. One scary dude. Obama is following the playbook to the letter. But, those in love with Obama will never do the research. Just like the Republicans who loved Bush would never check into his past to see what a screw up he was and how many businesses he destroyed. The best informative source I have seen why us "little" people will never matter to Republicans is Michael Moore's movie "Capitalism, a love story". That's why I've said for a while now, you can't win with either party. It's Marxism or rich looking out for rich. The more ya know: Saul David Alinsky (January 30, 1909 – June 12, 1972) - the more ya know: David Joel Horowitz (born January 10, 1939) Horowitz has more in common with Limbaugh than being a four time offender in marriage - both will say, and have said, just about anything to make a buck. And neither of the aforementioned crumbs need fear facing Alinsky in an afterlife... When it comes to Horowitz, et al - hold your nose and follow the money. Period. Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter! - Isaiah 5:20 P.S. From the above posted link re Saul Alinsky: Alinsky did not join political organizations. When asked during an interview whether he ever considered becoming a Communist party member, he replied: "Not at any time. I've never joined any organization—not even the ones I've organized myself. I prize my own independence too much. And philosophically, I could never accept any rigid dogma or ideology, whether it's Christianity or Marxism. One of the most important things in life is what Judge Learned Hand described as 'that ever-gnawing inner doubt as to whether you're right.' If you don't have that, if you think you've got an inside track to absolute truth, you become doctrinaire, humorless and intellectually constipated. The greatest crimes in history have been perpetrated by such religious and political and racial fanatics, from the persecutions of the Inquisition on down to Communist purges and Nazi genocide." Verrrrry Interesting...don'tcha just hate it when what someone thought that they knew, they really don't know at all and the really dangerous ones are those who don't know what they don't know. Someone can just throw out a link such as the one currently circulating from Horowitz and people just latch onto it as if it is gospel. Sheep to the slaughter, it is so easy.
|
|
|
Post by Barb on Jun 21, 2010 14:04:42 GMT -5
I think it's amusing Obama never met Alinsky, yet they try so hard to wrap his career around him.
WTF? No one worries about truly evil ties like Cheney and Haliburton?
Oh that's right...Obama's middle name is Hussein and therefore, he is an evil Muslim out to conquer this country. I forgot because I love him so much.
|
|
|
Post by rid0617 on Jun 21, 2010 15:19:44 GMT -5
Sheep to the slaughter, it is so easy.
You know that does run 2 ways?
I think it's amusing Obama never met Alinsky, yet they try so hard to wrap his career around him.
I never met Christ but I try to wrap my life around him.
|
|
|
Post by rid0617 on Jun 21, 2010 15:21:29 GMT -5
This is one debate that will go on. Time will be the definition whether this man was a mistake or not. I think a lot of people in this country (not here) need to get over the fantasy how they showed they were not racist because they elected a black man. I have lost track of how many times I've heard that. People coming out and saying they elected him to show they wern't racist and because he as cute.
Personally I believe it was time for a democrat because the rethuglicans screwed things up so bad. But I don't believe Hillary would have surrounded herself with so many radicals and 2 individuals who admitted blowing up buildings in protest.
|
|
|
Post by KathyInArkansas on Jun 21, 2010 16:36:48 GMT -5
This is one debate that will go on. Time will be the definition whether this man was a mistake or not. I think a lot of people in this country (not here) need to get over the fantasy how they showed they were not racist because they elected a black man. I have lost track of how many times I've heard that. People coming out and saying they elected him to show they wern't racist and because he as cute. Personally I believe it was time for a democrat because the rethuglicans screwed things up so bad. But I don't believe Hillary would have surrounded herself with so many radicals and 2 individuals who admitted blowing up buildings in protest. Hillary was most definitely my first choice...I'm not real pleased with Obama at the moment; but, neither do I think he is the ruination of this country. And of the two choice we had in Nov 08, he was the best choice in my opinion. I do find it somewhat puzzling that you refer to the GOP as "rethuglicans" and then admit to voting libaterrorist. They would be so much worse for people, like yourself and your family, who are in the same situation as you have outlined here amongst friends.
|
|
|
Post by rid0617 on Jun 21, 2010 16:46:04 GMT -5
While I do agree with some libertarian views, the only reason I vote for them the majority of the time is since I have no use for the current democrats or republicans the only other option is stay home and do nothing. Guess you could say I'm a conservative when it comes to morals, liberal when it comes to individual social issues.
You kind of faced the same thing. McCain was a joke so there was only one other choice unless you stayed home and didn't take part. I'm really tired of voting for the least of the 2 evils during the past several elections.
|
|
|
Post by Skeptic on Jun 21, 2010 18:49:15 GMT -5
The more ya know: Saul David Alinsky (January 30, 1909 – June 12, 1972) - the more ya know: David Joel Horowitz (born January 10, 1939) Horowitz has more in common with Limbaugh than being a four time offender in marriage - both will say, and have said, just about anything to make a buck. And neither of the aforementioned crumbs need fear facing Alinsky in an afterlife... When it comes to Horowitz, et al - hold your nose and follow the money. Period. Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter! - Isaiah 5:20 P.S. From the above posted link re Saul Alinsky: Alinsky did not join political organizations. When asked during an interview whether he ever considered becoming a Communist party member, he replied: "Not at any time. I've never joined any organization—not even the ones I've organized myself. I prize my own independence too much. And philosophically, I could never accept any rigid dogma or ideology, whether it's Christianity or Marxism. One of the most important things in life is what Judge Learned Hand described as 'that ever-gnawing inner doubt as to whether you're right.' If you don't have that, if you think you've got an inside track to absolute truth, you become doctrinaire, humorless and intellectually constipated. The greatest crimes in history have been perpetrated by such religious and political and racial fanatics, from the persecutions of the Inquisition on down to Communist purges and Nazi genocide." Verrrrry Interesting...don'tcha just hate it when what someone thought that they knew, they really don't know at all and the really dangerous ones are those who don't know what they don't know. Someone can just throw out a link such as the one currently circulating from Horowitz and people just latch onto it as if it is gospel. Sheep to the slaughter, it is so easy. That's why they (scumbag hatchet men like Horowitz, and the miserable pricks who pay him) do it. It works. Horowitz isn't worthy to be a patch on one of Alinsky's shoes, but who will bother to find out? And so it goes. Trouble making community organizers always get what's coming to them anyway... And seeing the multitudes, he went up into a mountain: and when he was set, his disciples came unto him: And he opened his mouth, and taught them, saying, Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed are they that mourn: for they shall be comforted. Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth. Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness: for they shall be filled. Blessed are the merciful: for they shall obtain mercy. Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God. Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God. Blessed are they which are persecuted for righteousness' sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. - KJVHB, Matthew 5, 1-10 :peacesign:
|
|
|
Post by Barb on Jun 21, 2010 23:25:44 GMT -5
Sheep to the slaughter, it is so easy. You know that does run 2 ways? I think it's amusing Obama never met Alinsky, yet they try so hard to wrap his career around him. I never met Christ but I try to wrap my life around him. are you comparing Alinsky to Christ?
|
|
|
Post by rid0617 on Jun 21, 2010 23:47:38 GMT -5
Because everyone has someone whose teachings they agree with and follow. The comparison was Obama and his radicals never met Alinsky personally, I never met Christ personally. It doesn't affect if a person follows their teachings.
|
|
|
Post by Barb on Jun 22, 2010 0:25:35 GMT -5
Because everyone has someone whose teachings they agree with and follow. The comparison was Obama and his radicals never met Alinsky personally, I never met Christ personally. It doesn't affect if a person follows their teachings. Following Jesus Christ is very different from following ANYONE else, so the comparison just doesn't work. I don't NEED to have personally met Jesus Christ to believe in Him, but I damn well wouldn't wrap my life around anyone else I didn't know. Tell me more about how you see Obama "playing the Alinsky handbook to the letter."
|
|
|
Post by rid0617 on Jun 22, 2010 1:11:43 GMT -5
Honestly Barb it would be a total waste of time. You and others will never turn against Obama no matter how much he screws up. I will not change my mind until he quits screwing up. Since this is an opinion forum I merely state my opinion. I do not try to change people's way of thinking. People have to look for that in themselves. You would have to read the book "Rules for Radicals" and some of the writings of William Ayers and you will find the path this government has been going down since President Obama was elected.
|
|
|
Post by Skeptic on Jun 22, 2010 6:01:20 GMT -5
Because everyone has someone whose teachings they agree with and follow. The comparison was Obama and his radicals never met Alinsky personally, I never met Christ personally. It doesn't affect if a person follows their teachings. Following Jesus Christ is very different from following ANYONE else, so the comparison just doesn't work. I don't NEED to have personally met Jesus Christ to believe in Him, but I damn well wouldn't wrap my life around anyone else I didn't know. Tell me more about how you see Obama "playing the Alinsky handbook to the letter." Barb, Please read the links, not just the names of the links. The purpose of those dates is not to prove people did or didn't meet personally; those are links to the two men's biographies. Please, read the biographies. It takes less time than reading the crap that started this - and you should read that too. Then you won't find yourself asking someone who spreads crap to praise it too! You're arguing with people who have swallowed it whole and are now spreading it with shovels - and don't even want to know why other people are holding their nose and gagging!!! The more ya know: Saul David Alinsky (January 30, 1909 – June 12, 1972) - the more ya know: David Joel Horowitz (born January 10, 1939) And for what it's worth, the founding fathers of this country were a bunch of radical activists who would have been hanged if the people they disagreed with had won the argument!!! :peacesign:
|
|
|
Post by Barb on Jun 22, 2010 11:37:08 GMT -5
I know, Skeptic and I did read them. (well, the Alinsky one...just got to the Horowitz one now.)
I consistently ask people who claim to have "studied something" or "researched" to share the information they have found and to enlighten us as to how they arrive at whatever conclusion they have decided. 90% of the time I get replies like Rid's. I'm disappointed he didn't sit in the 10% arena. When I ASK for someone to explain what they have posted, then I expect the courtesy of a reply. Not an insult to me. I'm glad there were people who answered my questions about Bush. The more I tried to squash their argument, the more I realized I was supporting a moron and I had no choice but to change my mind and admit how very wrong I was. I'm not ashamed of that. I thought my information and my thoughts were valid, but they weren't. And I didn't argue with comments like "It would do no good" or "your mind is already made up" - I sought information to counter the argument. When it wasn't there, I realized that I was wrong to support the man that I eventually ended up totally disgusted with. I clung to my misconception for longer than I normally would because I wanted my son to be in Iraq for a valid reason. Risking his life for a purpose. I concluded my son was in the MILITARY for a valid and heroic reason...it is not his fault the the CIC was an irresponsible joke. I have such respect and affection for every person who enlists to serve this country...and I find it to be a horrible tragedy for them when their commander disregards their lives, and feels its ok to kill thousands of people for no fucking good reason. I was soooo wrong about Bush and I am proud that I finally wised up.
As for Alinsky...I don't really find anything wrong with following some of the guidelines he established with the IAF. I also don't believe he was communist, and the information you provided supports that. I think it is a daunting task to work with inner city people who have lived in poverty and lack education. I can't imagine how you would encourage them to be better without encouraging them to rise above their situations and fight the wrongs. It definately would require small meetings, one on one encouragement and provoking them to want to change. Even if one could consider this to be "communistic"...maybe we should all open our minds to accept that even what we see as a negative could contain some positive aspects. Take the good from the bad. And upon reading what you provided, Alinsky's teachings were modified to include and encourage those from religious communities. So wanting "change" is considered to be communist? How silly and how naive.
I'm still interested in what alarming conclusions Rid has reached in his research on how Alinsky influenced Obama.
At least I learn from the information you provide Skeptic. Thanks.
|
|
|
Post by KathyInArkansas on Jun 22, 2010 14:46:39 GMT -5
Barb, what a thoughtful post...wish I could give you a big fat emerald.
|
|