Rush Limbaugh Being “Alinsky’ed”

Michelle Malkin writes:

I’ve blogged extensively about talk radio-bashing hypocrites such as P.J. O’Rourke, Phil Gramm, Lindsay “Go away, Loud Folks” Graham, and Trent Lott. I asked Rush to diagnose their pathology. “I think they all crave acceptance and inclusion in the dominant political and social cultures of Washington, which is run by the Left. They fastest way to do that is to be critical of their own party. This gets them loving treatment in ‘important’ New York/Washington media circles,” he said.

I’m struck by how similar this situation is to how some POW’s have been lured into being critical of their own country just to gain small amounts of favor from their Communist captors.

In my opinion, practically all of the Democrat Party, and a significant portion of the Republican Party, have been taken over by Democratic Socialist Communists. 

The Communists have accomplished many of their goals found in W. Cleon Skousen’s 1960 book The Naked Communist and which were recorded into the Congressional record over 46 years ago (January 10, 1963). One of those goals was:

Capture one or both of the political parties in the United States.

It appears that they have been completely successful in the Democrat[ic Socialist] Party, and largely successful in the Republican Party.

Michelle Malkin continues…

The same, self-styled intellectual protectors of conservatism in the Manhattan-Bethesda corridor who derided outsider Sarah Palin have always derided Rush Limbaugh for the same reasons: They’re not one of “us.”

Mike Huckabee calls that the “Wall Street to Washington axis of power.”

Michelle continues…

I’ve noted the ugly, anti-capitalist rhetoric used by Rush-bashers like Phil Gramm and Mark Helprin,who accuse the talk radio giant and his colleagues of the sin of making money. Which party is the party that’s supposed to defend profit-makers again? Oh, yeah.

Anti-capitalist rhetoric? You know where that comes from, right?

Only through the abolition of the capitalist system and the socialist reorganization of society can exploitation of human beings by others, and the evils of oppression, war, racism, environmental degradation, and poverty be ended. We seek to build a socialist society…

There is a civil war already raging in this country, and it is a battle for peoples’ minds.

The Democratic Socialist Communists have taken control of the education system in this country, all the way from public elementary schools through colleges and universities, and today’s youth are being trained to think as Socialists/Communists. Review that list of 45 Communist goals from the early sixties and realize how today’s education system actively promotes those goals.

If you aren’t familiar with Saul Alinsky, his hat-tip to Lucifer (yes, really), and his followers, then see this earlier post.

Alinsky’s thirteenth rule: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.

And back to Rush Limbaugh, Rush said that he is being “Alinksy’ed”

Rush, as usual, is right.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

27 Responses to Rush Limbaugh Being “Alinsky’ed”

  1. Jonah says:

    Rush’s quote highlights exactly what is holding back your part of the Republican party. Until you start accepting that those who disagree with you actually disagree with you, you’ll never convince anyone of anything.

  2. Jonah,

    What?

    Since when have I not accepted that those who disagree with me actually disagree with me?

    What’s your point?

  3. Jonah says:

    That’s exactly what Rush is saying. He’s arguing that when O’Rourke, Gramm, Graham et al. chastise the right, they don’t actually believe it, but rather are trying to get into the good graces of the left. Do you agree with Rush’s analysis?

  4. My view is that Communists have nearly completely taken control of the Democrat[ic Socialist] Party and have made significant inroads in the Republican Party.

    The Communists, in their document “The Road to Socialism USA”, clearlly view the “Ultra-Right” as an enemy and actively work at “Defeating the Ultra-Right“.

    I believe that people in both parties who chastise the “Ultra-Right” (that includes people like O’Rourke, Gramm, Graham et al.) are, either knowingly or unknowingly, aiding and abetting the Communists.

  5. Speaking of Alinsky, I wrote this almost eight months ago:
    The Alinsky Connection

  6. Ryan says:

    Mr. Pill, I think you have greatly overestimated the power of the communist party. People are not interested in communism – just look at their membership numbers. What makes you think a few people who support a failed ideology can infiltrate an entire party that elects its leadership? How would that happen? This is not an Austin Powers movie.

    You would probably consider me to be pretty liberal, and I know that communism does not work. So do the people we elected.

  7. tanker says:

    It’s not necessary for them to be known as communists – it’s more important to them that their ideas hold sway. From the time of FDR on, this country has been run, advised, and shaped by those who idolize “the Russian experiment.” Social Security, health insurance, state-run schools, the list goes on. Take care of citizens cradle to grave, make them dependent, break up the family. Defame capitalism. Get God out of society, replace it with the religion of the state: environmental fanaticism, anyone? These things morph into socialism and fascism, depending on the emphasis. All the movements are related, and all end up in the same place. They all oppose individual rights and freedoms in favor of elite government control.

  8. Ryan,

    By the timestamp of your comment, it is obvious that you have not watched the Yuri Bezmenov lecture. Do yourself a favor and watch it, as people like you (who advocate socialism) are usually the first ones eliminated once the socialists reach stage 4: “Normalization”.

    You seem to think that socialism and communism are completely separate. They are not. They are tightly coupled. There is good reason why the Communist Party USA speaks of:

    a progressive democratization of the government, the economy, and society of our country on the road to and after winning socialism.

  9. Ryan,

    What makes you think a few people who support a failed ideology can infiltrate an entire party that elects its leadership? How would that happen? This is not an Austin Powers movie.

    You are correct that this is not an Austin Powers movie.

    This is not a joke.

    This is very real, and just because you don’t understand what is happening, doesn’t mean it’s not happening. It just means you don’t have eyes to see it, nor wisdom to undertand it.

    What is happening in this country is a very deliberate and determined process, which has already been applied in many countries around the world.

    Soviet KGB defector Yuri Bezmenov, a.k.a. Tomas Schuman, described it in detail over 25 years ago.

    Watch his full lecture, in seven parts: Part 1
    Each part has a link to the next part.

    Then maybe you will have eyes to see.

  10. Ryan says:

    Mr. Pill, did you ever suppose that some people see that there may be a middle ground ideology? That maybe some things should be socialized, and some things should remain out of government control? Do you ever think that some things, like childhood education and health care, should be available to all people, regardless of their income? Communism does not work – pretty much everyone knows that – it just does not fit with human nature, and it has been defeated almost everywhere now.

  11. Jonah says:

    It is true that the line from capitalism to communism passes through socialism, but that in no way implies that socialism leads to capitalism. You assert this all the time, of course, but I’ve seen no proof.

    This seems to be a pretty crucial fallacy in many of your arguments. For instance, in your previous post you link Obama to the Communist Party by noting that both tout their work “for peace, democratic rights, racial and gender equality, economic justice, union organization, and international solidarity.” If the communists listed hamburgers as a key platform position, would you give up meat? You may be ideological opposites, but you can still agree on basic stuff, no?

  12. Ryan says:

    Mr. Pill,

    I actually read, and watch a lot of the stuff you post, but I didn’t have time to watch this guy speak. Nothing he says could convince me that numerous government officials from both major parties are trying to turn the US into a communist state. That, my friend, is not going to happen. As Jonah says, socialism is a small part of communism, but that does not imply a natural progression. Heck, the US is no where near being a socialist country, and even the imposition of Obama’s entire platform would not make it a socialist country. Even countries that are proudly considered socialist countries are not even very socialist when you step back a bit.

    Do you really think that the citizens of the United States would sit back and allow a communist takeover? Let’s be real.

  13. l says:

    Black Liberation Theology = Communism

    Connect the dots.

  14. Ryan says:

    And how many people practice “Black Liberation Theology”? Don’t tell me more than 2% of the people in those few churches are politically active, and support communism.

    I find it funny that the same people worried about the US being taken over by communists are the ones who think that Jesus will soon sweep the Christians up to heaven to escape it all anyways. Why do you care?

  15. Jonah and Ryan,

    Watch this.

    And read this.

    Seriously, if you were an America-loving Christian, would you name your children after a Marxist revolutionary and a comprehensive treatise on the contents of Islam? Yet the man who did do that attended the same “church” that Obama attended for over 20 years, and succeeded Obama when Obama relinquished his Illinois Senate seat.

    Oh, but pay no attention to Obama’s church being friendly to Marxism and Islam.

    “Liberation Theology” is Marxist. Don’t drink the Kool-Aid.

  16. The “Black Liberation Theology” movement, which includes both Louis Farrakhan’s Nation of Islam and churches like “Rev.” Wright’s Trinity UCC, honestly believe that Obama is the Messiah to lead them into their promised land.

    You really have to watch these three videos to understand:
    It’s The Theology, Stupid – Part 1
    It’s The Theology, Stupid – Part 2
    It’s The Theology, Stupid – Part 3

    All 3 videos replaced by this 1 video:

  17. Ryan says:

    Let’s just agree that Black Liberation Theology, or whatever they teach at those churches is ridiculous, okay?

    I just feel that it’s only slightly more ridiculous than that which is taught at the rest of the churches.

  18. Ryan,

    Black Liberation Theology, is not “ridiculous”, it’s Marxist.
    And it is part and parcel of what Obama believes.

    What is taught in most churches in America is truth. And Obama rejects that truth, yet still wants people to believe he is a Christian.

  19. Ryan says:

    I am amazed at all the digging and investigating you do to find tiny shreds of information to disprove Obama’s credibility, but you are willing to base your entire life on the teachings of one unsubstantiated and conflicting book.

  20. Ryan,

    A Seasoned Journalist Chases Down the Biggest Story in History

    The Project: Determine if there’s credible evidence that Jesus of Nazareth really is the Son of God.

    The Reporter: Lee Strobel, educated at Yale Law School, award-winning former legal editor of the Chicago Tribune—with a background of atheism.

    The Experts: A dozen scholars, with doctorates from Cambridge, Princeton, Brandeis, and other top-flight institutions, who are recognized authorities on Jesus.

    The Story: Retracing his own spiritual journey, Strobel cross-examines the experts with tough, point-blank questions: How reliable is the New Testament? Does evidence exist for Jesus outside the Bible? Is there any reason to believe the resurrection was an actual historical event? . . .

    This remarkable book reads like a captivating, fast-paced novel. But it’s not fiction. It’s a riveting quest for the truth about history’s most compelling figure. What will your verdict be in The Case for Christ?

  21. Ryan says:

    I know the book well Mr Pill. Strobel calls himself a journalist, but he does not start or end the book with an objective opinion. There are billions of people who believe very strongly in god – so I’m not surprised that a few of them have written books.

    I have my own very strong reasons to believe that a personal god does not exist. Most Christians I know say they have had an experience in their lives, that they say has led them to be absolutely positive that god exists, and that he is personally involved in their lives. My answer to them when they say that is:

    What sort of loving god gives you that experience, and not others?
    Why does this god give millions of Americans that experience, but leaves the people in remote South American tribes completely alone?
    What sort of loving god allows someone to live a good life, and just because he used the inquisitive mind supposedly given to him by, and in the image of, god to question his existence, condemns him to an eternity in hell?

  22. Ryan,

    God loves you, and he offers you His love (what you call “that experience”) whether you accept it or not.

    All of mankind descends from people who knew God personally. There are few people on Earth who have never heard of Him, but even for those, they had ancestors who at one point knew of Him, but turned their back on Him.

    God doesn’t condemn us to hell. We condemn ourselves. Adam chose to bring sin into the world through his own willful disobedience. God loves us so much that he sent his only Son to take the full punishment of all of our sin.

    For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved.

    John 3:16-17

    Got that? God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved.

    If you reject the gift of His Son, you reject salvation from Hell.

    I don’t want you to go to hell, but if you do go, don’t blame God for that…it’s not His fault, it’s yours.

  23. Oh, and you say that Strobel did not start with an objective opinion. To some extent, you are right, because he started his journey as an atheist who set out to disprove the claims about Jesus that his wife had just come to accept.

    Strobel is both an attorney and a journalist, and while he was objectively seeking the truth, he did start out with a preconceived conclusion…to disprove the claims of Jesus’ divinity.

    He found the truth, and he was honest enough to change his preconceived notions.

  24. Pingback: Rush Limbaugh Explains, Again, His “I Want Obama’s Agenda to Fail” Comments, Sean Hannity Show « Frugal Café Blog Zone

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s