Benghazi Remembered

From my brother, one of many still at large, Denis

THE  BATTLING BOYS OF BENGHAZI 

We're the battling boys of BenghaziNo fame, no glory, no paparazzi. Just a fiery death in a blazing hellDefending our country  we loved so well. It  wasn't our job, but we answered the call,fought to  the Consulate and scaled the wall.We pulled twenty Countrymen  from the jaws of fateLed them to safety, and stood at the  gate. 

Just  the two of us, and foes by the score,But we stood fast to bar  the door.Three calls for reinforcement, but all were denied, So we fought, and we fought, and we fought 'til we died.  We  gave our all for our Uncle Sam,But Barack Obama didn't give a  damn.Just two dead seals who carried the load  No thanks  to us, we were just "Bumps in the Road." 

--   Anon.  USMC

Hilary Clinton:  "What difference  does it  make?"

The DETAIL

TIME NOW, Al Jezeera TV clip and report.  One operative spouting Prophet Mohammed nonsense.

Never Forget

And a Merry Christmas to all. 

Saul Alinsky Rides Again

WALL STREET JOURNAL on Pailin:

...Contrary to most reports, her decision had been in the works for months, accelerating recently as it became clear that controversies and endless ethics investigations were threatening to overshadow her legislative agenda. "Attacks inside Alaska and largely invisible to the national media had paralyzed her administration," someone close to the governor told me. "She was fully aware she would be branded a 'quitter.' She did not want to disappoint her constituents, but she was no longer able to do the job she had been elected to do. Essentially, the taxpayers were paying for Sarah to go to work every day and defend herself."

This situation developed because Alaska's transparency laws allow anyone to file Freedom of Information Act requests. While normally useful, in the hands of political opponents FOIA requests can become a means to bog down a target in a bureaucratic quagmire, thanks to the need to comb through records and respond by a strict timetable. Similarly, ethics investigations are easily triggered and can drag on for months even if the initial complaint is flimsy. Since Ms. Palin returned to Alaska after the 2008 campaign, some 150 FOIA requests have been filed and her office has been targeted for investigation by everyone from the FBI to the Alaska legislature. Most have centered on Ms. Palin's use of government resources, and to date have turned up little save for a few state trips that she agreed to reimburse the state for because her children had accompanied her. In the process, though, she accumulated $500,000 in legal fees in just the last nine months, and knew the bill would grow ever larger in the future....

But Palin friends say such commentary misses the real point. "The Beltway media can't understand someone not consumed with presidential ambition," one told me. "Maybe Sarah Palin won't run for president and maybe her family situation made it tougher to handle the barrage of attacks that come with that territory. The real issue that should be asked is why a mean-spirited system has to treat people who run like that, instead of why someone may choose not to go through it."

This is our "progressive movement," the one that Obama worked for and Clinton praised in a thesis: Saul Alinsky's purpose in the Rules for Radicals -

THE PURPOSE

The life of man upon earth is a warfare...
--Job 7:1

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 this book we are concerned with how to create mass organizations to seize power and give it to the people; to realize the democratic dream of equality, justice, peace, cooperation, equal and full opportunities for education, full and useful employment, health, and the creation of those circumstances in which man can have the chance to live by values that give meaning to life. We are talking about a mass power organization which will change the world into a place where all men and women walk erect, in the spirit of that credo of the Spanish Civil War, "Better to die on your feet than to live on your knees." This means revolution.

The significant changes in history have been made by revolutions. There are people who say that it is not revolution but evolution, that brings about change--but evolution is simply the term used by nonparticipants to denote a particular sequence of revolutions as they synthesized into a specific major social change. In this book I propose certain general observations, propositions, and concepts of the mechanics of mass movements and the various stages of the cycle of action and reaction in revolution. This is not an ideological book except insofar as argument for change, rather than for the status quo, can be called an ideology; different people, in different places, in different situations and different times will construct their own solutions and symbols of salvation for those times. This book will not contain any panacea or dogma; I detest and fear dogma. I know that all revolutions must have ideologies to spur them on. That in the heat of conflict these ideologies tend to be smelted into rigid dogmas claiming exclusive possession of the truth, and the keys to paradise, is tragic. Dogma is the enemy of human freedom. Dogma must be watched for and apprehended at every turn and twist of the revolutionary movement. The human spirit glows from that small inner light of doubt whether we are right, while those who believe with complete certainly that they possess the right are dark inside and darken the world outside with cruelty, pain and injustice. Those who enshrine the poor or Have-Nots are as guilty as other dogmatists and just as dangerous. To diminish the danger that ideology will deteriorate into dogma, and to protect the free, open, questing, and creative mind of man, as well as to allow for change, no ideology should be more specific than that of America's founding fathers: "For the general welfare."

The only people who tut-tut at statements that Obama, Clinton, Social Organizers and most of the left's leaders are Alinsky graduates are the democrats who don't pay much attention to things like books and resumes.

At least, they won't be afraid of what history teaches after a take over - the useful idiots, the self-proclaimed "intellectuals" are the first to be destroyed. They are a threat as they can undo what they have done.

Watch for money and jobs to quickly emmigrate, followed by people, those rich people who are supposed to pay for my new car.

Alinsky Students: Hillary and Barry (Barack)

Here is some food for thought, no matter how your preferences fall. The Alinsky school is new to me as a serious philosophy, which is the way he would want it, but it is worth investigating and fearing. Like I have said privately, something about the clearly bright Obama reminded me of the Manchurian Candidate.

When I heard him say he would "redistribute the wealth" I put him in the Marx box, along with Maxine Waters, who slipped the other day to say she wanted to "socialize" the oil industry. She quickly restated herself without much success by saying "we" would run the oil business [that didn't move off shore, I guess.]

Now we learn, Obama was a teacher of a methods of hidden revolution and paid (and brilliant) Alinsky "agitator," a job Hillary turned down to go to law school. Only recently did I hear of paid agitators. This is all a bit disturbing because it has gone on for a generation and is well established. Hilary's, now secret, senior thesis was on Alinsky. The media skips over the paid agitation days.

Let me quote "Kos," another self proclaimed rich, poor kid, on his interviewing for the CIA:

Every single one of them was liberal… people who want to make the world a better place… people who are internationalist… That was an eye-opening experience for me.

Hence, the undercutting of the Iraq effort by the CIA and State Department who are out to get President Bush, et al, as noted int a previous blog entry. They don't follow the chain of command, being smarter than the rest of us and all. "Internationalist" is to "Marxist" as "progressive" is to "socialist."

The term "liberal" no longer means liberal, it means, to me, a busy or stupid anarchist who is pissed off. Its original meaning was a person willing to push beyond the status quo to assure individual rights, which is what many "liberal" think it still means as they follow the "liberal" Alinsky fans, who are actually in favor or the state stamping out individual rights. {For the common benefit, of course. Are these people forgetting something called history?}

Here is Poe's article. He is a successful author and has a current book out with David Horowitz, which means half of you already deny it, so won't bother reading it.

Hillary, Obama and the Cult of Alinsky

by Richard Lawrence Poe Monday, November 26, 2007 12:00 am Eastern Time

Archives 2 Comments ShareThis

MOST AMERICANS never heard of Saul Alinsky. Yet his shadow darkens our coming election. Democrat frontrunners 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.