Posted on 04/10/2015 7:44:53 PM PDT by LeoWindhorse
“I’m a Saul Alinsky guy,” he said [Rep. Raul Grijalva] referring to the community organizer and activist who died in 1972, “that’s where I learned this stuff.”
(Excerpt) Read more at wsj.com ...
You are so funny. He represent South Tucson. He and his daughter in city government are a knee deep in the transformation of this country. He is really very odd, too. He cares more about wild burros than the water that Tombstone, AZ needed. I mean he is Mexican. But then again, MECHA and La Raza are still very strong around here and he’s bringing up the next generation of Aztlanians via Alinsky.
The G-man is a Marxist, pure and simple. Read about his background and communist/Marxist affiliations at www.keywiki.org and in the books “The Enemies Within/Communists, Marxists and Progressives in the US Congress”, 2011, 2013 and upcoming 2015 editions.
Sadly, most voters don’t know what a Marxist is.
Raul is not dumb or poorly educated. His is a convinced Marxist however. Many years ago, I met him before he rose in the political ranks. Interesting conversation. He had an extensive knowledge of the Mexican revolution which was an interest of mine.
y’all got to defeat this a-hole ....
turn that Alinsky stuff back on him , run it thru him and destroy him any way you can . We have to rid America of these vile villains . One way or another
Raul is truly a despicable pos.
Or Alinsky, or English.
South Tucson is more mexican than Mexico. He’ll be reelected 10 years after he’s dead.
“Sadly, most voters don’t know what a Marxist is.”
I know one voter and government employee who knows what Marxism is. I heard him today; he’s a spokesperson for the State Dept. His name is Rathke - ring a bell? His father (or uncle or relative) was a key player in the formation of Acorn. Obama knew he’d be a valued employee. The Messiah still has plenty of tricks up his sleeve.
The Alinskyization of the ‘rat party is the single biggest contributor to the coarsening and incivility of our culture that so many, especially those in the ‘rat party, complain about today......
we should invade Mexico and start impressing our ways and culture upon them . Think they’d like that ? Smiths and Jone’s in Mex gov... hmmm not a bad idea
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mexican%E2%80%93American_War
We should have consolidated power in victory and not withdrawn . Mexico might have been a pretty good place by now if it had been incorporated into the USA back then
The author of Enemies Within, Trevor Louden was in town last week, and on one of our local radio stations he called Grajalva out as a commie, as well as a state legislator from Phoenix. I couldn’t make the event, but, it is shameful that we have Marxist that are supposedly public servants.
Louden is from New Zealand, and he realizes that the US is big brother to countries like his, which were selflessly saved during WWII, and he worries for the security of the world if we cannot fill that post any longer.
I’ve heard him interviewed on the Buckmaster radio show. I can see how he can come across as learned. But, it is obvious he wants the US divided and conquered.
Once again, I can’t read the article. Says I have to pay. I don’t want to subscribe to the WSJ right now.
I totally agree. We goofed. But maybe not. Maybe there were too many Mexicans for us to have succeeded in conquering them.
You are right. Tucson is always the last in the state and the country to count their votes. The dead who vote are sluggish, but they do get to the polls and vote left, even if they never did that in life.
They’ll have his seat given hereditary to his daughter, who though married, still carries his name.
Oh, no. I am so sorry. My husband has been a subscriber since college. Let me see what I can do.
Here is the article in full. ( BTW, I did not post this thread.)
Arizona Rep. Raul Grijalva, the ranking Democrat on the House Natural Resources Committee, recently caused a stir by sending letters to seven university presidents seeking background information on scientists and professors who had given congressional testimony that failed to endorse what is the conventional wisdom in some quarters regarding climate change. One of the targets was Steven Hayward, a colleague of mine at Pepperdine’s School of Public Policy.
Though the congressman lacked legal authority to demand information, his aggressive plan, which came to light in late February, should not be a surprise at a time when power holders from the White House on down are employing similar means against perceived enemies.
Mr. Grijalva left a clue about how he operates in 2013 when the magazine In These Times asked about his legislative strategy. “I’m a Saul Alinsky guy,” he said, referring to the community organizer and activist who died in 1972, “that’s where I learned this stuff.”
What sort of stuff? Mr. Grijalva sent his letters not to the professors but to university presidents, without (at least in the case of Mr. Hayward) the professors’ knowledge. Mr. Hayward was not even employed by Pepperdine at the time of his congressional testimony in 2011.
But targeting institutions and their leaders is pure Alinsky; so are the scare tactics. Mr. Grijalva’s staff sent letters asking for information about the professors, with a March 16 due date—asking, for instance, if they had accepted funding from oil companies—using official congressional letterhead, and followed up with calls from Mr. Grijalva’s congressional office. This is a page from Alinsky’s book, in both senses of the word: “Power is not only what you have but what the enemy thinks you have,” reads one tip in his 1971 “Rules for Radicals.”
Yet adopting Alinsky’s tactics may not in this case fit with Alinsky’s philosophy. This is Alinsky with a twist. Despite myriad philosophical inconsistencies, “Rules for Radicals” is meant to empower the weaker against the stronger. Alinsky writes: “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 a similar vein, the political philosopher Jean Bethke Elshtain supported Alinsky’s work in getting disengaged communities—typically in lower socio-economic strata—to assume the difficult responsibilities of citizenship. As a way of challenging “big government,” even conservatives such as former House Majority Leader Dick Armey have recommended Alinsky’s tactics (minus his professed hatred of capitalism, etc.).
But what happens when Machiavelli’s Prince reads and employs “Rules for Radicals”? In 2009 President Obama’s friend and adviser Valerie Jarrett was asked on CNN about media bias, particularly at Fox News, and she responded: “What the administration has said very clearly is that we’re going to speak truth to power.” I remember thinking: “Wait a minute, you’re the White House. You are the power.”
In that sense President Obama’s election was both the climax of Alinsky’s vision and an existential crisis for that vision. Alinsky promoted the few tactics available to the downtrodden: irreverence, ridicule and deception. “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it,” he wrote. So the rise to power of the world’s most famous community organizer raises a question: Should Alinskyite tactics be employed by those in power, or should they be reserved for those without?
Mr. Grijalva’s campaign against seven academics serves as a cautionary tale of what can happen when power adopts these strategies to suppress opposition. The congressman’s office arranged additional pressure by notifying national and local media that these professors were under “investigation.” On the day the letters went out, the Washington Post blared: “House Dems: Did Big Oil seek to sway scientists in climate debate?”
After receiving a call from a Grijalva staffer, our local Malibu Times obliged with the front-page headline, “Pepperdine Professor Investigated by Congressman.” The online Delaware News Journal, the hometown newspaper for David Legates at the University of Delaware, wrote: “UD’s David Legates caught in climate change controversy.” Alabama’s Huntsville Times had a piece under the headline: “Arizona congressman asking questions about outside funding for UAH climate expert John Christy.”
To their credit, several editorial boards came to the defense of the professors. The Arizona Republic, the home-state newspaper of Mr. Grijalva and targeted Arizona State University professor Robert Balling, wrote that Mr. Grijalva’s campaign “fits the classic definition of a witch hunt.” Rep. Grijalva on March 2 acknowledged to National Journal that some of the information he demanded from the universities was “overreach” but defended his demand for information about funding sources.
How did it come to this? The inability of politicians to confront another’s argument, much less to attempt to persuade the other side, has become standard operating procedure. Now this toxic approach is extending to the broader world of policy—including scientific research. Instead of evaluating the quality of the research, opponents make heavy-handed insinuations about who funds it—as though that matters if the science is sound. And now just about every climate scientist employed by an American university knows that Washington is watching.
More broadly, what has happened is that a generation of American politicians who came of age during Saul Alinsky’s lifetime has moved into positions of institutional power that he so often derided as “the enemy.” They are showing an inability to leave behind Alinsky’s tactics that were intended for the weak against the strong. Civil discourse and academic freedom suffer while the “Prince” becomes more powerful.
Mr. Peterson is the executive director of the Davenport Institute for Public Engagement at Pepperdine’s School of Public Policy.
Leo, his district has been gerrymandered, as has mine, where our congresswoman is from northern AZ and we are outside of Tucson.
I agree with you. His mandate is to take away from us, who he perceives as the powerful and the elite. What he does not realize he is powerful and of the elite. He is not only vile, as you put it, he is a hypocritical opportunist.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.