Is her mudslinging remark to the other DNC candidates last evening the same.
I heard an interesting quote from a caller on Rush Limbaugh yesterday from a movie "She wants to play with the boys but when she is treated like one she crys"
Posted on 11/16/2007 7:53:16 AM PST by april15Bendovr
All of the above!!
Politics ain't beanbag.
The Beast could teach Machiavelli himself a few of the finer points of achieving and retaining political power.
I finished Alinksy’s Rules For Radicals last week.
The man was insightful and anyone on either side of any organizing effort would find it useful. It should be studied.
One of his first points is the obvious that the means/ends argument always comes down to which specific means and which specific end. The problem is that he defines every issue in the context of communism as the correct end. He can then rationalize any action.
Although his specific examples are fairly tame, Alinsky’s rhetoric is designed to inspire revolution. I didn’t get the feeling that he always meant revolution in the metaphorical sense. Thus Slick Hillie doesn’t want everyone understanding whose feet she was sitting at.
At one point he feeds 100 blacks with can after can of baked beans and gives them tickets to the symphony so they would as loudly as possible express themselves through their backsides. This was a real tactic designed to get wives to pressure their husbands to give into Alinksy’s demands.
The title should have never been Rules For Radicals but Farting At The Symphony.
Is her mudslinging remark to the other DNC candidates last evening the same.
I heard an interesting quote from a caller on Rush Limbaugh yesterday from a movie "She wants to play with the boys but when she is treated like one she crys"
Sorry post #6 meant for all
“Lest we forget at least an over-the-shoulder acknowledgment to the very first radical: from all our legends, mythology, and history (and who is to know where mythology leaves off and history begins -- or which is which), the first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom -- Lucifer.”
I first heard that quote on a radio talk show. As the host began reading it on air, and before he finished, I was thinking to myself, “How dare they us the name of Jesus to push their radical agenda.” And when I heard who he was talking about, my jaw dropped. I then thought, “How fitting!” for Hillary.
What happens when you mix Saul Alinsky’s Rules For Radicals with Karl Marx Communist manifesto? Does this sound more like Hillary?
1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.
2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance.
4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
5. Centralization of credit in the banks of the state, by means of a national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly.
6. Centralization of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the state.
7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the state; the bringing into cultivation of waste lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.
8. Equal obligation of all to work. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.
9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of all the distinction between town and country by a more equable distribution of the populace over the country.
10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children’s factory labor in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, etc.
While Alinsky and Hillary may agree on the ends, they disagree on the means to power. Alinsky promoted grass roots bottom-up methods, and Hitlery believes in imposing her goals top-down.
So when we say that Hillary is evil she really does have roots with Lucifer.
>>While Alinsky and Hillary may agree on the ends, they disagree on the means to power. Alinsky promoted grass roots bottom-up methods, and Hitlery believes in imposing her goals top-down.
Alinsky was clear that any means that reached any end he deemed as the best outcome was acceptable.
He repeated often that he was against an establishment which had all the money and power, while he, on the other hand, had bodies. He worked bottom up because those were the resources he had to invoke his socialist/communist revolultion.
If he had been in the Hillary/Stalin seat, he would not have hesitated to use money and power in a top down mode to reach his ends.
Excellent Q.
Every one she could get away with.
They have been woven into her DNA.
She breathes, spouts and passes such automatically. She’s a Marxist globalist machine on autopilot.
#11 explains the “blame Bush” mentality displayed by hildebeast and her RAT cohorts since day after election in November 2000.
I would agree with you there. Alinsky was a thief of ideas as well, much of what he takes "credit" for (methods not goals) he stole from a Dadaist group in NYC that went by a name that I can print only in part (Motherf------s). That group hated Alinsky and his ilk.
I remember years ago reading Gary Aldrich's "Unlimited Access" and every chapter had a quote comparison from Alinsky's "Rules for Radicals" and from "George Washington's Rules of Civility and Decent Behavior in Company and Conversation."
A stark contrast indeed.
ping
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.