"Wait... weren't you just complaining that he practiced the politics of division, or something like that? You're entitled to not like the guy, but you get bonus points if your reasons aren't mutually contradictory."
My views of him are not contradictory and are pretty easy to pick up. I don't know how anyone can even began to come to that conclusion. Let me ask this: In your opinion, who was Alinsky trying to help and did it work? "Huh. All I know is that nobody else had ever heard of the guy until Obama got elected, and then community organizer became a dirty word." You should clarify and say that nobody you know had heard of him. He's actually old news to those who pay attention. I first heard of him when the Clinton's where in the White House. In fact, there is another missing document issue with Hilary. Her senior thesis was on Alinsky. She asked Wellesley not to release the thesis. Her opponents wanted the thesis in order to prove her socialist creds. In the end, it was a wild goose chase for her opponents. "AH. They are not crazy *enough* for you, I get it. The *National Standard*version then? The Michael Savage version? Whatever." When I think crazy, I think of MSNBC or the Huffington Post and I certainly don't utilize those. I don't read the National Standard. I don't like William Kristol or Fred Barnes (who seem to be frequent Fox contributors). I can't stand Michael Savage. So, you're right, whatever. "Less than, lol. You're the neo-liberal here ;) " More than you know, if you consider the original definition of "liberal" ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism ) and not the current definition. Classical liberalism is the philosophy committed to the ideal of limited government, constitutionalism, rule of law, due process, and liberty of individuals including freedom of religion, speech, press, assembly, and free markets. "I think we seriously disagree on the meaning of the word conservative. In my world, conservatives don't squander lives and money on ventures that work against the interests they are supposed to be managing." Mine either. I think you are equating Republicans with conservatives. They are not the same. There are actually very few Republicans who are conservative. If you are equating the two, then it sounds like you are accusing Republicans of warmongering for profit. That's fine. However, the Democrats are just as guilty, if not more so. Right now, it looks like Obama is ramping up for a nice Middle East action to protect/expand oil interests. "Eh. They've learned to gerrymander and sell out to big business, especially in Ontario. But they are still a nanny state -- they just let people destroy the environment as well." Then welcome to Canada Part Deux. J - Government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it. - Ronald Reagan >From an early age, smart people are reminded of their intelligence, separated from their peers in gifted classes, and presented with opportunities unavailable to others. For these and other reasons, intellectuals tend to have an inflated sense of their own wisdom. It is thus arrogance, and not intelligence, that leads them into trouble. Theyre so smart, hubris compels them to believe, that they can run everyone elses life. But no one is that smart. Whats more, theorists devising systems for the rest of us to live under often have a difficult time running their own lives. Mundane tasks are to them what quantum physics is to the rest of us. - Daniel J Flyn ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:346080 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
