In the book this statement is made"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."
"Why do I care?" you ask. "Some political kook wrote a book, Stephen's reading it, blah, blah, blah, it doesn't affect me."
And, that my friends, is where you are wrong. :D
Mr. Alinsky has, in effect, written the playbook for the liberal movement today; which our sitting President follows religiously. In fact, if you read this, and look at some of the things that he, Hillary Clinton, Harry Reid, and some others do, some things may start to click. A brief summary of what I've read so far, followed by a specific example from our President's behavior
1.Example of "Have-Nots Taking From the Haves"
"Joe the Plumber" When Obama was campaigning, he was walking a neighborhood where a plumber was playing football in the front yard with his son. Joe the Plumber looked Senator Obama in the eye and said "Your tax plan is going to take away from my business, isn't it?" Obama replied "I think when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody." This is his philosophy, plain and simple
2. Ethics are a luxury
Seriously. According to him, ethics are all well and good, but if you get in a situation where you need to, by all means, go ahead and do something unethical. There is nothing inherently right or wrong, ever. You do what you must do to win.
Example: When the President appoints someone to a position, it is required by the Constitution that the Senate confirm them. . . unless the Senate is not in session. So, when a President wants to appoint someone that he knows the Senate won't like, he merely waits until the Senate is out of session, and then appoints them. He's not the first to do this; but here's the unethical part. When President George W. Bush tried to do this back in the winter of2007-2008, the Senate democrats (which included Senator Obama at the time) invented this thing called a Pro-Forma session, which means that they're not meeting, but they're in session, so recess appointments won't work. This winter, the Senate was left in pro-forma session to keep this same thign from happening. President Obama went ahead and made not one, not two, but four recess appointments anyway, insisting that it's "Not really a session."
3. Make what you say sound good.
It doesn't matter what you say, it just matters that it appeals to people on an emotional level. Don't let them think, because if they think, then they might realize that maybe you're wrong.
Do I really need to go through this? Pretty much every speech he's ever made, especially when he was campaigning. "Hope, Change" etc. All feel-good emotion, no substance.
This is a brief summary (I'm maybe halfway through); but now let's get to the heart of the matter. Go back and re-read the quote at the beginning. Then think about it for a second. Go ahead, I'll wait.
Okay. So, what happens when the Have-Nots take away from the Haves? There are two possible outcomes:
1. The Have-Nots become the Haves.
In this scenario, all that has occurred is that the people who want but don't have have taken away from the people who do have. Theft, really, is what has occurred here.
2. Everybody becomes a Have-Not
There were once two Russian peasants. Both of them have one cow. One of the peasants gets another cow, so he now has two. His neighbor cries out to God. "God help me!" God appears and says: "what do you want me to do?" The peasant replies "Kill the cow". This is basically what happens in this scenario. And how has that helped anybody?
This has been "Politics With Stephen" :)
Interesting...! :)
ReplyDelete