Archive for November, 2013

UNDERSTAND OBAMA BEFORE IT’S TOO LATE

November 12, 2013

~~~Alinsky

The media has been conspicuously silent on the connection between our President and Saul Alinsky’s bible for “community organizers.” Clearly Alinsky exerted an immense influence over the world’s most well recognized community organizer, President Barack Obama. Hillary Rodham wrote her Honors Senior Thesis at Wellesley College on Saul Alinsky, the thesis sought to fit Alinsky into a line of American social activists, including Eugene V. Debs, Martin Luther King, Jr., and Walt Whitman. All college records of Hillary and Obama have now been sealed. To understand why the Obama-Hillary team functions as it does, we need to be familiar with the vision that Alinsky delineated in person to Hillary and in his book to Barack.

Here are some of the Rules and ideas that the team swallowed hook, line, and sinker:

(1). Politics is all about power relations, but to advance one’s power, one must couch one’s positions in the language of morality.

Community organizers are “political realists” who “see the world as it is: an arena of power politics moved primarily by perceived immediate self-interests, where morality is rhetorical rationale for expedient action and self-interest.”

(2). There is only three kinds of people in the world: rich and powerful oppressors, the poor and disenfranchised oppressed, and the middle-class whose apathy perpetuates the status quo.

“The world as it is” is a rather simple world. From this perspective, the world consists of but three kinds of people: “the Haves, the Have-Nots, and the Have-a-Little, Want Mores.” The Haves, possessing, as they do, all of “the power, money, food, security, and luxury,” resist the “change” necessary to relieve the Have-Nots of the “poverty, rotten housing, disease, ignorance, political impotence, and despair” from which they suffer.

The Have-a-Little, Want Mores comprise what we call “the middle class.” While Alinsky believes that this group “is the genesis of creativity,” he also claims that it supplies the world with its “Do-Nothings.” The Do-Nothings are those who “profess a commitment to social change for ideals of justice, equality, and opportunity, and then abstain from and discourage all effective action for change” Alinsky remarks that in spite of their reputable appearances, the Do-Nothings are actually “invidious” (offensive, undesirable). President Obama’s constant theme of helping the middle class is clearly a lie. He holds only disrespect and contempt for them.

This being so, they are as resistant to change as are the Haves.

(3). Change is brought about through relentless agitation and “trouble making” of a kind that radically disrupts society as it is.

Since both the middle and upper classes have none of the organizer’s enthusiasm for radical change, he must do his best to “stir up dissatisfaction and discontent” He must “agitate to the point of conflict.” The organizer “dramatizes…injustices” and engages in “‘trouble making’ by stirring up” just those “angers, frustrations, and resentments” that will eventuate in the “disorganization of the old and organization of the new.” He is determined to give rise to as much “confusion” and “fear” as possible.

(4). There can be no conversation between the organizer and his opponents. The latter must be depicted as being evil.

If his compulsion to “agitate” makes it sound as if the organizer is disinclined to converse with those with whom he disagrees, that is because, well, he is. Alinsky is blunt on this point: “You don’t communicate with anyone purely on the rational facts or ethics of an issue.” It is true that “moral rationalization is indispensable,” that the organizer must “clothe” one’s goals and strategies with “moral arguments.” But there can be no conversation with one’s opponents, for to converse with them is to humanize them.

The organizer’s objective is to demonize those who stand in the way of his designs for change.

The reason for this is simple: “Men will act when they are convinced that their cause is 100 per cent on the side of the angels and that the opposition [is] 100 per cent on the side of the devil.” The organizer “knows that there can be no action until issues are polarized to this degree.”

Elaborating on this theme, Alinsky asserts that in “charging that so-and-so is a racist bastard and then diluting” this “with qualifying remarks such as ‘He is a good churchgoing man, generous to charity, and a good husband,’” one convicts oneself of “political idiocy.” The winning strategy is to “pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.”

(5). The organizer can never focus on just a single issue. He must move inexhaustibly from one issue to the next.

The organizer “must develop multiple issues,” for “multiple issues mean constant action and life.” Alinsky explains: “A single issue is a fatal strait jacket that…drastically limits” the organizer’s “appeal,” but “multiple issues…draw in…many potential members essential to the building of a broad, mass-based organization.” The only “way to keep the action going” is by “constantly cutting new issues as the action continues, so that by the time the enthusiasm and the emotions for one issue have started to de-escalate, a new issue” has emerged “with a consequent revival.”

(6). Taunt one’s opponents to the point that they label you a “dangerous enemy” of “the establishment.”

Finally, in order “to put the organizer on the side of the people, to identify him with the Have-Nots,” it is imperative that he “maneuver and bait the establishment so that it will publicly attack him as a ‘dangerous enemy.”

Just because Barack Obama has left behind the low-income Chicago communities in which he once agitated doesn’t mean that he left behind the skills as a community agitator that he learned from Saul Alinsky. Rather, he now regards the country as his community to organize as he sees fit.

Obama not infrequently invokes American ideals, even while he conspires to “fundamentally transform” America.

In spite of what he says, Obama does not want national unity. There can be no unity with a people who one wants to fundamentally transform.

The President regularly speaks and acts as if there is perpetual class warfare being waged by “the Haves” on “the Have Nots.” Indeed, this is what he wants Americans to believe. It is this desire on his part that accounts for why he spares no occasion to demonize both “the richest one percent” who he accuses of refusing to pay “their fair share,” as well as those Republicans who threaten to impede his plans to raise taxes.

Again, Obama does not want unity. He wants division.

Obama relentlessly moves from one divisive issue to the next, from Obamacare to gun-control, from amnesty for illegal immigrants to support for “same-sex marriage.” We see now why this is so.

Obama does not want unity. He wants to keep the country as polarized and confused as possible.

To discern why Obama speaks and acts as he does, we need to know about Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals, stay tuned.

How the Government Took Your Wealth

November 5, 2013

~~~GoldCoin

Please allow old uncle Gene to tell you how the government steals your wealth. As late as 1933 you could take a $20 bill into the bank and exchange it for a $20 gold piece. Yes, once upon a time the United States currency was actually worth something. The Democrats could not stand that! The Democrats, specifically Franklin D. Roosevelt, put an end to that in 1933. Today a $20 bill won’t even allow you to touch a $20 gold piece. In fact it would take at least 75 $20 bills to buy one.

Try this visual, if you buried 1,000 $20 bills in the back yard in 1933 and your kids dug them up today they couldn’t buy a well equipped Buick. They could have bought 30 nice automobiles in 1933. If you buried 1,000 $20 gold pieces back then with the exact same value as the $20 bills, what would that be worth today? In today’s dollars it would be worth about $1,500,000.00. I could buy 50 luxury cars with that kind of money. I call that stealing.

You see, the gold in Fort Knox and in the Federal Reserve once belonged to those who had gold certificates like the one pictured. So now who owns all that gold? Not you, and not you and not me. The Federal Reserve writes a check and gives it to the Treasury Department. The Treasury Department issues Bonds and sells them. Retirement funds, foreign governments and investors buy the bonds. Sounds neat and tidy except for one thing, the Federal Reserve wrote the check with zero balance in the checking account. Yes, the check was not backed by anything. The FED did not create wealth, all they created was debt. There is no scarcity of debt in the United States, no, we have plenty of that.

The National Debt is just the tip of the iceberg, our unfunded requirements amount to about 7 times our National Debt. Rather than showing a willingness to cut spending, tighten the government’s belt and pay down the National Debt, our government is creating more and more National Debt ever second of every day. The dollars you have in your pocket are not even backed by Soylent Green.

It does not take a Rocket Scientist to see where this path leads. It takes somebody smarter than Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Chuck Schumer, Harry Reid, John McCain, Lindsey Graham, Dick Durbin, Mitch McConnell, Nancy Pelosi and Bill O’Reilly, somebody like a smart fifth grader. The path America is on leads to total economic collapse and the destruction of our country. Mexico and Iran will pick our bones dry. Our military will be armed with sticks and rocks. Our marble school buildings will be homes for rats and mice. Rice and beans will be a delicacy.

This is not one of those fairy tales where they lived happily ever after, this is the harsh truth. The patriots who try to save America are fought tooth and nail by the Democrats and the Republican National Committee alike. You may have forgotten when a Liberal Democrat, a Liberal Republican and a Conservative Independent were running for Congress in New York. Liberals favored the Democrat and Conservatives favored the Independent. The Republican National Committee gave the Liberal Republican a million dollars after which she dropped out of the race and endorsed the Democrat. Her name is Dede Scozzafava. The Democrat narrowly defeated the Conservative with the help of the RNC. Do you see what Conservatives are up against?

All is not despair, Ted Cruz won in spite of the RNC. There is hope and the very real possibility that Conservatives can save America. Every single one of us must employ social media to the maximum extent possible and get involved in every aspect of Local, State and National Government. Now get to work!