About Me

Name: Jax Hawk
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

WHY DID THE WHITE HOUSE ATTACK FOX NETWORK?

 







SAUL ALINSKY'S "RULES FOR RADICALS", RULE 10: If you push a negative hard enough, it will push through and become a positive. Violence from the other side can win the public to your side because the public sympathizes with the underdog.
 RULE 12: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it. Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions.


First the Obama administration and his Democrat sycophants attacked Rush Limbaugh, in what many saw as a foreboding sign about what Congress and President Barack Obama will try to do with the so-called "Fairness Doctrine,"
Even though Obama has stated he will not  push the fairness doctrine--he has made falls promises before!!
Democrats are continuing their attacks on talk radio icon Rush Limbaugh over his opposition to what he has described as "Obama's Porkulus Bill." And recently they have also targeted the growing ever popular Glenn Beck'

Radio and television ads were launched by MoveOn.org and other organizations condemning Limbaugh's opinion that such government spending is wrong, and then linking Republican lawmakers to Limbaugh through their opposition to Obama's massive $1 trillion "stimulus" plan.

Now they have committed the biggest mistake since Obama promised that unemployment would never exceede 8%.
The Communications director has labeled Fox News as the enemy and an arm of the Republican party! This is an absurdity not worthy of a spokesperson for the President of the United States. Ms.Anita Dunn is claiming something that anyone who has watched Fox News for at least 4 years will attest that they were as critical of President Bush as they have of Obama.

The problem is that president Obama has done so much to destroy the free enterprise system, redistribute the wealth, and make our country less solvent and safe. That there are so many stories to report is a fact no one who is aware of what is going on in Washington can deny. Unfortunately, the other major news organisations like NBC,CBS, ABC and CNN are so enamoured with Obama that they are wont to print or speak anything negative about their "messiah"!

There is no pressure on Congress by any of the major media except Fox, as they continue to spend our country into insolvency. Congress has got away with so much , all the while they were keeping the pressure on anyone who prints or says they are destroying our financial stability.
As reports surfaced about Obama’s coming $9 trillion in new debt that will place the United States on course for anywhere between $17 trillion and $20 trillion in federal debt when Obama is done was hardly discussed this week by anyone by Fox.
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, both companies with federal ties, announced their bonuses shortly after Congress and the Obama White House staff(and he too) excoriated Bankers and Brokerage houses for bonuses.
Not much was said by the main stream media, because that would put Barney Frank in a compromised position. The House passed HR1388, which was Obama’s plan for required community service for all children. Remember a few days after the election, the unpopular idea showed up on Change.gov and was quickly removed once word spread, helped by Fox's Beck, creating anger towards Obama. All this and so much more was overlooked by the "Lame" Media.


Now Team Obama would dismantle the world’s greatest health care system and substitue a government health plan. That’s a losing proposition, which is why Mr. Obama is increasingly resorting to fear and misleading claims. It’s all the candidate of hope has left. And as a Lone Ranger , Fox News is reporting the facts that Obama does not want the public to know for fear that his major promise to the Left is in danger of being rejected in Congres as it has in the American populace. Thus the targeting of Fox News by Ms. Dunn as the enemy, aka an opponent!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

SOCIALISTS DON'T WANT A BETTER ECONOMY

 





The leftist leaning Media tells the people that the TARP plan and Cash for Clunkers have been the impetus for the beginning of the economic recovery.
Conservatives like myself believe that the recovery is artificial, and we are in for a back slide in the stock market and the economy in particular.

If you analyse the effect that the TARP program has had, you will find that less than 15% of the hundreds of billions that were appropriated have actually been spent, and very little has gone to "shovel ready" plans!
The Clunker program is a temporary stimulus that is fast on car sales, but slow on payment to the auto dealers. Some dealers have as much as 45 million dollars outstanding.
Some well known economic experts, people who have analysed the clunker program, believe that once the program ceases there will be a dearth of sales as car buyers have tripled the pace of car purchases during the CFC program.

While Obama and his cohorts in Congress are "crowing" about the recovery they are responsible for. Many, including I say it is just the natural progression of past recessions taking place.All the depressions in the past have an inverse Bell curve pattern if you chart them. I believe we are still at the bottom and will remain there for another six months as there is very little encouraging news from the labor market.

We have a president who readily brags that he grew up and gravitated to radicals during his formative years, and it is possible that Obama is a Marxist/Leninist! After all he has so far appointed 44 Czars who are not responsible to anyone but him! Sounds tyrannical to me! And one is a Communist, The Green Czar!

Leninism holds that capitalism can only be overthrown by revolutionary means; that is, any attempts to reform capitalism from within, such as Fabianism and non-revolutionary forms of democratic socialism, are doomed to fail. I do not believe Obama is an advocate for revolution, but he apparently believes in redistribution of wealth and changing our free enterprise system to one where the government runs our lives from cradle to grave!

The first goal of a Leninist party is to educate the proletariat, so as to remove the various modes of false consciousness the bourgeois have instilled in them, instilled in order to make them more docile and easier to exploit economically, such as religion and nationalism. This going full force by Obama and his willing propagandists, the Media!
Once the proletariat has gained class consciousness the party will coordinate the proletariat's total might to overthrow the existing government, thus the proletariat will seize all political and economic power. Sounds like what happened to General Motors and the auto workers union!

Lastly the proletariat (thanks to their education by the party) will implement a dictatorship of the proletariat which would bring upon them socialism, the lower phase of communism. After this, the party would essentially dissolve as the entire proletariat is elevated to the level of revolutionaries.Source:Encyclopedia Britannica

Don't laugh! This is not as far fetched as you might think. If they get Obamacare and Cap and Tax passed, they will control most of our lives at home and in the work place! I believe that is the place where socialism resides!

It is my belief that what Obama wants to do to this country is based upon the "father" of Community Organizing, Saul Alinsky)1902-72), as this is where Obama spent his years before he entered politics. Community Organizing in Chicago, the birthplace of Alinsky.
Alinsky wrote a book called: "RULES FOR RADICALS"

In the first chapter, opening paragraph of the book Alinsky writes, "What follows is for those who want to change the world from what it is to what they believe it should be. The Prince was written by Machiavelli for the Haves on how to hold power. Rules for Radicals is written for the Have-Nots on how to take it away."

In Rules for Radicals, Alinsky outlines his strategy in organizing, writing in the prologue,

"There's another reason for working inside the system. Dostoevski said that taking a new step is what people fear most. Any revolutionary change must be preceded by a passive, affirmative, non-challenging attitude toward change among the mass of our people. They must feel so frustrated, so defeated, so lost, so futureless in the prevailing system that they are willing to let go of the past and change the future.
Does this not sound like "a crisis should never be wasted", as uttered by Rahm Emanuel!!

This acceptance is the reformation essential to any revolution. To bring on this reformation requires that the organizer work inside the system, among not only the middle class but the 40 per cent of American families – more than seventy million people – whose income range from $5,000 to $10,000 a year [in 1971]. They cannot be dismissed by labeling them blue collar or hard hat. They will not continue to be relatively passive and slightly challenging. If we fail to communicate with them, if we don't encourage them to form alliances with us, they will move to the right. Maybe they will anyway, but let's not let it happen by default." Source:Wikapedia

This is why Obama and his associates are so attached with such organisations as SEIU, ACORN, and the Auto Workers Union to name just a few "at the ready" activists and enforcers!

Maybe I am just way off base, but something does not pass my smell test. Obama is cozy with Socialist like Chavez, and sends two billion dollars during the middle of a recession to Brazil for off shore drilling! But will not allow off shore drilling off our shores to help US get independence from oil producers that hate us and our economic system!

Americans better wake up to what the Obama administration is doing to our once strong and proud country. Uncle Sam can't run Medicaid/ Medicare/ Prescription Drug Benefit now, they are insolvent by 2017 according to a recent GAO report. I can't trust them in small things, how can I trust them in really big things?
Or maybe that is the plan? instead of reducing taxes and stopping spending, they will increase taxes, and keep spending until massive inflation occurs, and our dollar is worthless! Then we have the emergency they need to "CHANGE and SAVE" the USA with Socialism and total government control!!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

OBAMA AND THE ALINSKY CONNECTION

Monday, May 04, 2009

 





Government’s view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.” —Ronald Reagan

One of the stories that you will not hear or read from the "Propaganda" arm of the Obama administration(MSN), except the denial that is found on the ABC News Net site as reported by Jake Tapper. It is the claim that Obama operatives used extortion type pressure to force the main opponent of the Chrysler bankruptcy settlement to agree to Obama's plan. The story is that, "A leading bankruptcy attorney representing hedge funds and money managers told ABC News Saturday that Steve Rattner, the leader of the Obama administration's Auto Industry Task Force, threatened one of the firms, an investment bank, that if it continued to oppose the administration's Chrysler bankruptcy plan, the White House would use the White House press corps to destroy its reputation.
Thoms Luria , Global Practice Head of the Financial Restructuring and Insolvency Group at White & Case, told ABC News that Rattner suggested to an official of the boutique investment bank Perella Weinberg Partners that officials of the Obama White House would embarrass the firm for opposing the Obama administration plan, which President Obama announced Thursday, and which requires creditors to accept roughly 29 cents on the dollar for an estimated $6.8 billion owed by Chrysler.
Perella Weinberg Partners, Lauria said, "was directly threatened by the White House and in essence compelled to withdraw its opposition to the deal under the threat that the full force of the White House press corps would destroy its reputation if it continued to fight. That’s how hard it is to stand on this side of the fence."

This story, if true, would be an illustration of the fact that Obama learned well the theories outlined by his mentor in Chicago, Saul Alinsky.
The president made the charge in his press conference that the Perella Weinberg firm was selfish because they opposed his structured "rapid bankruptcy" of Chrysler. He showed not only that he was willing to take sides in a pending court case. The first time any president did this! But was willing to demonize any one who opposed him!
His statement illustrates he is willing to lie and mis-represent the facts to accomplish his desired end as this quote will illustrate. ""While many stakeholders made sacrifices and worked constructively, I have to tell you some did not," the president said. "In particular, a group of investment firms and hedge funds decided to hold out for the prospect of an unjustified taxpayer-funded bailout. They were hoping that everybody else would make sacrifices, and they would have to make none."
Actually they were willing to settle for 50 cents on the dollar, whereas, they were offered only 29 cents!


I have included some quotes from various sources that describe the philosophy and rules for engagement as taught to his students and are found in his "Rules For Radicals". These qoutes illustrate that
Alinsky advises his followers that the poor have no power and that the real target is the middle class: "Organization for action will now and in the decade ahead center upon America's white middle class. That is where the power is. ... Our rebels have contemptuously rejected the values and the way of life of the middle class. They have stigmatized it as materialistic, decadent, bourgeois, degenerate, imperialistic, war-mongering, brutalized and corrupt. They are right; but we must begin from where we are if we are to build power for change, and the power and the people are in the middle class majority."Obama has made the middle class think he is there "savior"!

"Only two kinds of people can afford the luxury of acting on principle, those with absolute power and those with none and no desire to get any...everyone else who wants to be effective in politics has to learn to be ‘unprincipled’ enough to compromise in order to see their principles succeed.
The Radical may resort to the sword but when he does he is not filled with hatred against those individuals whom he attacks. He hates these individuals not as persons but as symbols representing ideas or interests which he believes to be inimical to the welfare of the people". (Alinsky 1946: 23)

Perhaps this quote from Alinsky's "Rules for Radicals", best explains the mode of operation that Obama is using to "extort", threaten and coerce those who oppose his plans.
" Saul Alinsky points out, is that eight months after securing independence, the Indian National Congress outlawed passive resistance, making it a crime. In conclusion on the subject of the morality of means and ends, as Alinsky writes: 'Means and ends are so qualitatively interrelated that the true question has never been the proverbial one, 'Does the End justify the Means?' but always has been 'Does this particular end justify this particular means?" (Alinsky 1972: 47).
And the one rule that Obama has learned well and is using daily is this:"13) Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it (Alinsky 1972: 130).Alinsky would find out who the CEO is in a company that he wanted to "CHANGE", and hound that person. In the organophosphates debate it is one scientist that he targets and the validity of his findings. Obama uses this to demonize those who opposed his Chrysler deal, and you can be sure this will not be the last time he uses this tactic!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

OBAMA USES SAUL ALINSKYS THIRD PRINCIPLE

 





Government’s view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.” —Ronald Reagan

REACTING TO THE REPUBLICAN REJECTION (ENMASSE) TO the House version of OBAMA'S BUDGET SPENDING BILL. MASQUERADING AS A STIMULUS PACKAGE.
OBAMA HAD THIS TO SAY ON NBC'S MATT LAUER SHOW;"Mismanagement by the nation’s lending institutions was so extreme that the losses sustained by banks still cannot be calculated and more are likely to fail, President Barack Obama warned. In my opinion he left out the role of Barney Frank and his Committee!

In an interview airing Monday on NBC’s TODAY show, Obama said the nation’s banks were in “very vulnerable positions” because of the reckless risk-taking that led to the meltdown of the financial services sector late last year. The situation he inherited 13 days ago is so bad that “it is likely that the banks have not fully acknowledged all the losses that they’re going to experience,” Obama said in the interview, which was conducted Sunday at the White House.

Stressing that ordinary Americans’ deposits, which are insured by the federal government, would be safeguarded, the president said banks were “going to have to wring out some of these bad assets.”
He forgot his plan to take over all the bad loans by forming a government bank to hold the bad paper!

Inevitably, he told TODAY anchor Matt Lauer, “some banks won’t make it.”

The president’s message appeared to be a shot across the bow of Senate Republicans, who have objected to the $825 billion bailout of the financial system that was approved last week by the House. Leading Republican senators said they would oppose the bill unless there were major changes, echoing the concerns of their counterparts in the House, none of whom voted for the legislation.

This is classic Saul Alinsky! His primer for Radicals lists as number three of his principles: "A threat is more terrifying than the thing itself"! The "thing" in this instance is the threat of banks failing as they did in the Great Depression!

Once again OUR new President has shown me that he learned his lessons well during his formative years in the city of Chicago.
In Chicago the activists of is time called Mr. Alinsky the "jesus"
of community organization/ Source: Bio. of Jack Mendelson

And while Obama is giving scare tactics speeches to "beg" Americans to back his spending Bill. He has appeared on all major networks to try to scare the people into doing what most people are resisting, commit economic suicide! Congresswoman Sheila Jackson (D-Tex.)has proposed a bill that would increase the number of legal immigrants from 480,000 family visas to 960,000.

"Chain migration is the primary mechanism that has caused legal immigration in this country to quadruple from about 250,000 per year in the 1950s and 1960s to more than one million a year since 1990. As such, it is one of the chief culprits in America's current record-breaking population boom and all the attendant sprawl, congestion, school overcrowding, and other impacts that reduce American's quality of life". Source:Numbers USA

H.R.264 (Save America Comprehensive Immigration Act of 2009) - would double the number of family-based visas from 480,000 a year to 960,000 a year. In addition, this legislation would make a number of technical changes to family-based visas that would further chain migration. And in my opinion will contribute to deepening the economic drain on the U.S. Treasury, with the incumbent taxes that accompany the rapidly growing number of goods and services that new immigrants who are here legally are entitled to.

AMERICANS WAKE UP! WE HAVE A LEFTIST IN THE OVAL OFFICE WHO WANTS TO CREATE A BROADER BASE OF VOTERS WHO ARE DEPENDENT ON THE GOVERNMENT FOR THEIR LIVELY HOOD, AND WILL SECURE THE "change" THAT OBAMA INTENDS TO MAKE. CONVERTING OUR GOVERNMENT TO SOCIALISM!!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (2) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

DO WE HAVE A ONE ISSUE PRESIDENT? SOCIALISM!

WHILE WE FIGHT OVER "STIMULUS" RUSSIA STAKES CLAIM TO NORTH POLE!





The present financial debacle in Washington is taking more time to resolve than President Obama had planned. He entered the Oval Office and began signing executive orders that fulfilled campaign promises like the closing of Gitmo in one year.

But while the President is making his way through his plan to direct OUR free enterprise system into a Socialist, government controlled, government employed country. The Russians are doing more than rattling their scimitars!

The latest move of the Putin/Medvedev coalition in Moscow is the move to claim the Arctic as their property.

The government-controlled newspaper Rossiyskaya Gazeta is preparing Russians for the notion that "the fight for the Arctic will be the initial spark for a new division of the world." Artur Chilingarov, a member of the Russia parliament and Moscow's chief ideologue when it comes to conquering the Arctic, puts it this way: "We are not prepared to give our Arctic to anyone."

Chilingarov -- who in August 2007 used a remote-controlled submarine arm to plant a Russian flag made of titanium on the ocean floor at the North Pole at a depth of 4,261 meters (13,976 feet) -- wants to "present evidence to the United Nations within one year" that the North Pole belongs to the Russians. His threat to those in the West who disagree is simple: "If these rights are not recognized, Russia will withdraw from the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea."

Alexander Dugin, a political scientist and well-known intellectual backer of Moscow's neo-imperial claims to a Greater Russia, becomes so caught up in nationalist fervor that he loses his grasp on biological realities: "The purpose of our being lies in the expansion of our space. The shelf belongs to us. Polar bears live there, Russian polar bears. And penguins live there, Russian penguins."

Although the Arctic may be somewhat lacking in penguins, Russia's frozen north does contain vast mineral resources. Arctic Russia is already responsible for 11 percent of the country's gross domestic product and 22 percent of its export earnings.

The intended expansion of Russia's northern border by at least 150 miles (241 kilometers) and 1.2 million square kilometers (463,000 square miles), an area three times the size of Germany, promises to yield immense natural resource earnings.

It was precisely these riches that Russian Deputy Minister of Natural Resources and Ecology Sergei Donskoy discussed at the Arctic Frontiers conference in the northern Norwegian city of Tromsø, where several hundred scientists, politicians and economic experts came together last week.

"We hope to find reserves of oil and gas corresponding to about 20 percent of Russian reserves," Donskoy said, outlining Russia's plans for the Arctic.

Under that plan, geologists will first study the Barents Sea and the Kara Sea. They expect to find at least two to four large oil or gas fields beneath the ocean floor in each of these two seas. According to Russia's environment minister, a petroleum engineer by trade, the fields contain an estimated 3.3 billion tons of oil and up to 5 billion cubic meters of gas.

If all goes according to plan, the first gas from the Arctic should begin flowing in 2013 or 2014, says Hervé Madeo, the deputy director of an energy consortium led by Russia's Gazprom that is developing the Shtokman field in the Barents Sea. Of the field, he says: "It is one of the largest in the world and unique in Russia."

Despite the financial crisis, preparations for drilling are moving forward at a fast pace. The project "has too much potential" for the global economic downturn to affect it much, Madeo claims.

Moscow has unveiled aggressive new plans to exploit the Arctic's natural resources.
The gas field could become the first major milestone in the development of the energy reserves of the north. This prompted Norwegian Rear Admiral Trond Grytting to comment sarcastically in his presentation at the Tromsø conference (entitled "From the Cold War to the Hot Arctic"): "We have lots of natural resources, military personnel and disputed borders in the Arctic. This has never been a recipe for peace".
While Obama talks about windmills and small electric cars to wean ourselves off crude oil. The Russians and Chinese are marching forward at a rapid pace to control the crude oil resources located in the Artic and Africa.
Will the American people stand still for the Obamaphiles , Eco -freaks and Goreites while they make millions on Carbon Credits scams. While at the same time those who Ronald Reagan called the "Axis of Evil" gobble up the available crude oil resources, and continue to pollute the atmosphere while advancing their hegemony?

I assume that when Medvedev said he hoped to make the USA a full partner with Russia, he intended that we should allow anything they want as long as they do not launch mislles against us.
On the day Obama was elected,the Russian "puppet president" had this to say: " "I stress that we have no problem with the American people, no inborn anti-Americanism. And we hope that our partners, the US administration, will make a choice in favor of full-fledged relations with Russia," Source: Der Spiegel.com

Then why did they have nuclear missles aimed at the USA all during the cold war?

In 1971 Saul Alinsky had this to say about CHANGE:
"What follows is for those who want to change the world from what it is to what they believe it should be. The Prince was written by Machiavelli for the Haves on how to hold power. Rules for Radicals is written for the Have-Nots on how to take it away".[

"There's another reason for working inside the system. Dostoevski said that taking a new step is what people fear most. Any revolutionary change must be preceded by a passive, affirmative, non-challenging attitude toward change among the mass of our people. They must feel so frustrated, so defeated, so lost, so futureless in the prevailing system that they are willing to let go of the past and change the future. This acceptance is the reformation essential to any revolution. To bring on this reformation requires that the organizer work inside the system, among not only the middle class but the 40 per cent of American families - more than seventy million people - whose income range from $5,000 to $10,000 a year [in 1971]. They cannot be dismissed by labeling them blue collar or hard hat. They will not continue to be relatively passive and slightly challenging. If we fail to communicate with them, if we don't encourage them to form alliances with us, they will move to the right. Maybe they will anyway, but let's not let it happen by default."Source: Wikapedia
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

THE ALINSKY DEMOCRATIC CONNECTION

Monday, May 12, 2008

Power Drives Politicians





Too many people who will go to the polls next November will be voting because of what the person they will vote for has promised they will do for the voter. Love of self and the drift towards the "big brother will take care of me" philosophy, has made voters pawn of wordsmiths who can eloquently promises things they know will be impossible to produce. Things that a large portion of the population feel they need and have a right to have.


The problem is it takes the Congress and the President to deliver Presidential campaign promises, and that spirit of co-operation has not existed since the Roosevelt "reign" during the years of WWII.

Advocacy politics is really about the quest for power. The power to accomplish the politicians quest to attain a powerful position in the here and now and in history.

We are faced with two Democrats who are both radical leftists hiding in "sheep's clothing" and a Republican who can be best described as left leaning moderate in John McCain.


The only decision for the voters is who will maintain our free capitalist system if elected, and not try to march us further down the road to Godless Socialism?

Many media sources have noted the radical acquaintances of Obama like Bill Ayers and his radical Pastor Wright. They also hav wrotten and spoken about the Clinton's association with Charley Trie, Chung, Riady,John Huang and the Lippo banks. But there has been little coverage of both having connections with the political philosophy of a Chicago activist named Saul Alinsky (1909-1972), an advocate of "power" politics. He once said this:"“The greatest enemy of individual freedom is the individual himself.” – Saul Alinsky, Rules for Radicals


To help those who drop by to read my blog, I enclose an article written in 2007 by Richard Poe, which illustrates the background and basic philosophic principles that motivate two of the candidates. Bloggers note: So enthralled with Alinsky, she brought Saul Alinsky to the Wellesley campus to give his views on revolution. So worshipful was she that Alinsky offered her a job after she graduated. She turned him down to continue her studies. source:Newsweek

"Most Americans never heard of Saul Alinsky. Yet his shadow darkens our coming election. Democrat front runners Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama both worship at the altar of Alinskyism.
In a 1971 book called
Rules for Radicals, Alinsky scolded the Sixties Left for scaring off potential converts in Middle America. True revolutionaries do not flaunt their radicalism, Alinsky taught. They cut their hair, put on suits and infiltrate the system from within.
Alinsky viewed revolution as a slow, patient process. The trick was to penetrate existing institutions such as churches, unions and political parties.
In his native Chicago, Alinsky courted power wherever he found it. His alliance with
prominent Catholic clerics, such as Bishop Bernard Sheil, gave him respectability. His friendship with crime bosses such as Frank Nitti – Al Capone’s second-in-command – gave Alinsky clout on the street.
In our book
The Shadow Party: How George Soros, Hillary Clinton and Sixties Radicals Siezed Control of the Democratic Party, my co-author David Horowitz and I trace the rise of Alinsky’s political influence since the 1930s.
He excelled at wooing wealthy funders. Start-up money for his
Industrial Areas Foundation – a training school for radical organizers – came from department-store mogul Marshall Field III, Sears Roebuck heiress Adele Rosenwald Levy, and Gardiner Howland Shaw, an assistant secretary of state for Franklin Roosevelt.

Alinsky once boasted, “I feel confident that I could persuade a millionaire on a Friday to subsidize a revolution for Saturday out of which he would make a huge profit on Sunday even though he was certain to be executed on Monday.”
One Alinsky benefactor was Wall Street investment banker
Eugene Meyer, who served as Chairman of the Federal Reserve from 1930 to 1933. Meyer and his wife Agnes co-owned The Washington Post. They used their newspaper to promote Alinsky.
Agnes Meyer personally wrote a six-part series in 1945, praising
Alinsky’s work in Chicago slums. Her series, called “The Orderly Revolution”, made Alinsky famous. President Truman ordered 100 reprints of it.
During the Sixties, Alinsky wielded tremendous power behind the scenes.
When President Johnson launched his War on Poverty in 1964, Alinsky allies infiltrated the program, steering federal money into Alinsky projects.
In 1966, Senator Robert Kennedy allied himself with union leader Cesar Chavez, an Alinsky disciple.
Chavez had worked ten years for Alinsky, beginning in 1952. Kennedy soon drifted into Alinsky’s circle.
After race riots shook Rochester, New York, Alinsky descended on the city and began
pressuring Eastman-Kodak to hire more blacks. Kennedy supported Alinsky’s shakedown. The two men had an “understanding”, Alinsky later wrote.
Alinsky’s crowning achievement was his recruitment of a young high school student named Hillary Rodham. She met Alinsky through a radical church group.
Hillary wrote an analysis of Alinsky’s methods for her senior thesis at Wellesley College. They remained friends until Alinsky’s death in 1972.
Alinsky tried to hire Hillary as a community organizer, but she chose instead to attend Yale Law School. Nonetheless, Alinsky’s network continued guiding Hillary’s career.
Fresh out of law school at age 26, Hillary received a prestigious appointment to the House Judiciary Committee’s Watergate investigative team in 1974. She got the job on the recommendation of Peter and Marian Wright Edelman.
The Edelmans have been trusted mentors of Hillary since 1969. New Republic editor Martin Peretz called Marian “
Hillary’s closest sister and ideological soulmate”. Marian Wright Edelman also happens to be an Alinskyite, having served on the Board of Trustees of Alinsky’s Industrial Areas Foundation.
Many
leftists view Hillary as a sell-out because she claims to hold moderate views on some issues. However, Hillary is simply following Alinsky’s counsel to do and say whatever it takes to gain power.
Barack
Obama is also an Alinskyite. Trained by Alinsky’s Industrial Areas Foundation, Obama spent years teaching workshops on the Alinsky method. In 1985 he began a four-year stint as a community organizer in Chicago, working for an Alinskyite group called the Developing Communities Project. Later, he worked with ACORN and its offshoot Project Vote, both creations of the Alinsky network.
Camouflage is key to Alinsky-style organizing. While trying to build coalitions of black churches in Chicago, Obama caught flak for not attending church himself. He
became an instant churchgoer.
That Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama share an Alinskyite background tells us two things. First, they are leftists, dedicated to overthrowing our Constitutional system. Second, they will go to any length to conceal their radicalism from the public.
That is the Alinsky method. And that is today’s Democratic Party".


Do we really want to trip merrily down the road toward the kind of Government that asks you to give up your freedom to make your own way, for a government that takes care of you from cradle to grave in a way that it feels is best for you and the "common good"!

 

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »