What's Wrong With Saul Alinsky?

[angrysoba]

Okay, I left this comment on some other blog whose owner mentioned the Republicans' love of bringing up Saul Alinsky but I thought I would open up the question to a wider audience.

What's wrong with Saul Alinsky?

Here's my comment and a link to the post I responded to:

I’d never heard of him until I watched Newt Gingrich’s victory speech and even then I found it difficult Googling “Solla Linsky”. When I finally found him I expected his Wikipedia page to say that he blew up orphanges for the Weathermen but it actually said almost the complete opposite. For a few seconds I was scratching my head and then I remembered… it was a Newt Gingrich victory speech! Everything fell into place and normal service was resumed.

Arthur Goldwag

 

[crimresearch]

You say Alinsky, I say Atwater... let's call the whole thing off.

 

[mhaze]

Okay, I left this comment on some other blog whose owner mentioned the Republicans' love of bringing up Saul Alinsky but I thought I would open up the question to a wider audience.

What's wrong with Saul Alinsky?

Here's my comment and a link to the post I responded to:



Arthur Goldwag

Well, let's see. Have you read the book by Saul Alinsky? I have. If you have not, then you are basically doing what, expressing your ignorance?

If you have, did you find nothing wrong with his ideas?

Oh, by the way....your link doesn't really show much, if any, comprehension of these concepts.

Finally...why should I or anyone else care to educate you?

 

[Moss]

Well, let's see. Have you read the book by Saul Alinsky? I have. If you have not, then you are basically doing what, expressing your ignorance?

If you have, did you find nothing wrong with his ideas?

Oh, by the way....your link doesn't really show much, if any, comprehension of these concepts.

Finally...why should I or anyone else care to educate you?

You seem eminently qualified to enlighten us. Why then such vagueness?

 

[hgc]

It sounds like Newt, if he's nominated, will run against Alinsky (based on his post-SC speech). That sounds like a splendid idea. Try to tie Obama to some old radical that no one ever heard of. It's a winning formula!

 

[angrysoba]

Well, let's see. Have you read the book by Saul Alinsky? I have. If you have not, then you are basically doing what, expressing your ignorance?

We..he..hell, let's see? Have I read the book and am I "exposing" my ignorance?

If I had read the book and wasn't declaring my ignorance from the beginning I would hardly have written this now, would I, Sherlock?

I’d never heard of him until I watched Newt Gingrich’s victory speech

If you have, did you find nothing wrong with his ideas?

Why would I have read his book? I have never heard of him before. See above!

Oh, by the way....your link doesn't really show much, if any, comprehension of these concepts.

Why would it? I've never heard of him before. That's why I am asking about him here... D'oh!

Finally...why should I or anyone else care to educate you?

If you don't know what the "E" in JREF stands for then you are just exposing your ignorance. Anyway, I notice the dodge that you went to all the trouble to writing. You could have just ignored the post if you had no answer to the question. But to answer your question of why you should care, the answer is that you don't but I have noticed that the majority of other posters are quite civil and willing to share their knowledge here. It's obviously the type of radical communist thing that the vast majority of normal human beings are more than happy to do and just the type of thing that makes you bitter and spiteful.

 

[RandFan]

Well, let's see. Have you read the book by Saul Alinsky? I have.

Then answer the question.

 

[angrysoba]

You say Alinsky, I say Atwater... let's call the whole thing off.

That's a good response except that I didn't say Atwater and I don't know who is (note to MHaze: "I don't know" means "I don't know"). I was under the impression that Atwater had been somewhat forgiven since his "recantation" and death. Wasn't he the guy behind the "Southern Strategy"? I can see how his policy might be somewhat relevant, so that's why I am curious about what exactly the Republicans hate about Saul Alinsky.

 

[crimresearch]

That's a good response except that I didn't say Atwater and I don't know who is (note to MHaze: "I don't know" means "I don't know"). I was under the impression that Atwater had been somewhat forgiven since his "recantation" and death. Wasn't he the guy behind the "Southern Strategy"? I can see how his policy might be somewhat relevant, so that's why I am curious about what exactly the Republicans hate about Saul Alinsky.

2 sides of the same coin. Or 2 players at the same game.

Mentioning one without the other seems somehow incomplete.

 

[angrysoba]

2 sides of the same coin. Or 2 players at the same game.

Mentioning one without the other seems somehow incomplete.

Does it? I have no idea. So why didn't Newt Gingrich mention Lee Atwater in South Carolina?

How about instead of dodging the question with "whataboutery" you just tell us what is so demonic about Saul Alinsky?

 

[RandFan]

What's wrong with Saul Alinsky?

Well, let's see. Have you read the book by Saul Alinsky? I have. If you have not, then you are basically doing what, expressing your ignorance?

So, let me see if I have this straight, you have a question (a gap in your knowledge), you do some research, it doesn't resolve your question so you ask for assistance and...

Finally...why should I or anyone else care to educate you?

Forum rules prevent me from responding the way I'd like. Let me say this, claiming to have read a book that could provide insight but refusing to answer the question raises a number of questions in my mind. Things that make you go hmmmm.....

 

[jj]

Okay, I left this comment on some other blog whose owner mentioned the Republicans' love of bringing up Saul Alinsky but I thought I would open up the question to a wider audience.

What's wrong with Saul Alinsky?

Here's my comment and a link to the post I responded to:



Arthur Goldwag

Everything the current republicons say about Saul Alinksy is due to the fact that they are using his tactics as hard and harshly as they can in order to break down the system so they can replace it with a Christian Taliban.

Next question?

 

[RandFan]

2 sides of the same coin. Or 2 players at the same game.

Mentioning one without the other seems somehow incomplete.

I know a bit about Atwater. I was a fan at one time. I know nothing about Saul except that which I just read about on Wiki. Could you let us in on what you know?

 

[mhaze]

We..he..hell, let's see? Have I read the book and am I "exposing" my ignorance?

If I had read the book and wasn't declaring my ignorance from the beginning I would hardly have written this now, would I, Sherlock?....

Right. So why not start with Hillary Clinton's college thesis on the subject of Saul Alinsky?

Oh, and yes, I have a copy. It's not a stupid argument to ask for help on that thesis, because they've made such an effort to keep you from seeing it. Alinsky's book, though, is readily available, isn't it? I can have it on my Kindle in 30 seconds...

Here's an example statement by Gingrich.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/01/22/who-is-saul-alinsky-a-gingrich-line-explained/

... the former House Speaker invoked the name in his victory speech after the South Carolina primary, saying: "The centerpiece of this campaign, I believe, is American exceptionalism versus the radicalism of Saul Alinsky."

And earlier, at a New Year's Eve campaign event in Iowa, Gingrich declared that Obama "really is sort of a classic Saul Alinsky radical whose basic ideas are the opposite of what we need to create jobs."

So who is Saul Alinsky, and why is Gingrich so insistent on linking that name to Obama?
​

I'll note that Gingrich's statements are factually accurate, as you can easily compare the suggested methods of Alinsky with the Bamster. But why should I or anyone else care if some liberals or someone of any persuasion knew who Alinsky was?

 

[johnny karate]

The smug condescending tone and belittling...

Yes , we certainly can't have any of that, now can we:

Well, let's see. Have you read the book by Saul Alinsky? I have. If you have not, then you are basically doing what, expressing your ignorance?

If you have, did you find nothing wrong with his ideas?

Oh, by the way....your link doesn't really show much, if any, comprehension of these concepts.

Finally...why should I or anyone else care to educate you?

 

[varwoche]

For years, the only time I ever heard of Alinsky was when mhaze waved his name about in an opaque manner. Since then, I noticed Alinsky mentioned by David Horowitz and Glenn Beck, solidifying my impression that these references are inane straw men of some kind or another.

 

[A'isha]

Right. So why not start with Hillary Clinton's college thesis on the subject of Saul Alinsky?

I think Clinton not wanting to release her college thesis on Alinsky had more to do with not wanting to give people like you ammunition for your conspiracy theories than with her not wanting to reveal The Truth behind her secret Alinsky-Soros-Islamo-Socialist-Feminazi-Commie-Fascist plot to destroy America.

 

[angrysoba]

Right. So why not start with Hillary Clinton's college thesis on the subject of Saul Alinsky?

The smug condescending tone and belittling of conservatives coupled with confessions of ignorance....well, let's just say it leaves a bit to be desired.

Oh, and yes, I have a copy.

Ermm... that link says nothing about Saul Alinsky. He's only mentioned once as the subject of Hilary Clinton's subject. Would you care to tell us what is so damning about the paper and what it says about Alinsky? Or are you just trying to string out this pointless game of pretending there's some awful dredful secret that you are privy to and anyone who isn't is stupid?

The smug condescending tone and belittling of conservatives coupled with confessions of ignorance....

Your first response was smug and condescending and hilarious in that you thought you had "exposed" my ignorance even though I had declared it without any shame whatsoever in my OP.

Is this not smug and condescending?

Well, let's see. Have you read the book by Saul Alinsky? I have.

Why not just brush that chip off your shoulder and join an adult discussion instead of wallowing in a vat of self-pity?

 

[angrysoba]

Here's an example statement by Gingrich.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/01/22/who-is-saul-alinsky-a-gingrich-line-explained/

... the former House Speaker invoked the name in his victory speech after the South Carolina primary, saying: "The centerpiece of this campaign, I believe, is American exceptionalism versus the radicalism of Saul Alinsky."

And earlier, at a New Year's Eve campaign event in Iowa, Gingrich declared that Obama "really is sort of a classic Saul Alinsky radical whose basic ideas are the opposite of what we need to create jobs."

So who is Saul Alinsky, and why is Gingrich so insistent on linking that name to Obama?
​

I'll note that Gingrich's statements are factually accurate, as you can easily compare the suggested methods of Alinsky with the Bamster. But why should I or anyone else care if some liberals or someone of any persuasion knew who Alinsky was?

I know what Gingrich said!

I mentioned in the OP that that was the reason for writing the post!

Now, what is wrong with Saul Alinsky?

(Also, you need to find out the meaning of argument. Newt Gingrich gave nothing that can fairly be called an argument. He threw out some red meat. That's all.)

 

[angrysoba]

Edited by kmortis: 

Removed previously moderated material

You don't know the facts. I have not offered any opinion, either.

You've offered nothing.

The thesis could be anti-Alinsky, or pro-Alinsky, etc.

It's off-topic. It isn't the subject of the thread.

But back on the subject of Alinsky, .

Well, thanks very much. After your derailing attempts, you mean?

yes I am willing to discuss the book. Get your copy and pick a chapter and page.

You really aren't getting this at all, are you? This is not a thread in which I am taking up the views of Saul Alinsky - and no one else seems to be either - in order to do battle with those who disagree with him, it is one in which Gingrich Republicans are being asked what they find so objectionable about Alinsky. Your constant deflections and inability to articulate anything of any substance are only making you look foolish.