The uneven playing field of American politics has been well documented in countless books and articles throughout the years; the mass mainstream media traditionally sides with the Left, and it is up to those on the Right to get their message out, unfiltered, in less conventional ways.  It was always

looked upon as the cost of doing business for the Republicans on the right and they maneuvered their way around the media obstacles in the 1980s and the 1994 mid-term elections. 

Beginning with the election of the Clintons however, the playing field drastically changed, becoming more of a bloody battlefield with Republican bodies strewn from end to end.  This was the dawn of the Alinsky era in presidential politics.  Mrs. Clinton was a student of the radical teachings of the original “community organizer,” Saul Alinsky.  Although Alinsky died in 1972, his methods survived through his protégés and his books, one being Rules for Radicals, which he essentially dedicated to Satan. 

Barak Obama is now the most famous “graduate” of the Alinsky school of agitation and provocation. Mike Kruglik, a “direct descendant” of Alinsky, who was Obama’s Chicago instructor in Alinsky’s teachings, said Obama was the best student of Alinsky tactics he had ever had.  Kruglik went on to say Obama was “an undisputed master of agitation” who “could engage a room full of recruiting targets in a rapid fire Socratic dialogue…”  Obama himself described the four years he spent learning the science of Alinsky’s community organizing as “the best education of his life.”  This is a telling statement from a man who studied at Columbia and Harvard.  The underlying tenet in the Alinsky method is no different than the Communist rationalization; the ends justify the means.  An end that is achieved by deception and bully tactics is entirely justified, according to Alinsky.

Politicians who deliberately deceive the public to get elected, is nothing new; President Franklin Roosevelt masterfully conned his way into office in 1932 and a world war kept him there until 1945.  Since Roosevelt, deliberate deceit has become a mainstay in American politics.  Though it is human nature to hear what we want to hear and to believe what sounds compelling to us, it often leads to “buyer’s remorse.”  A case in point: the Carter Administration.  Alinsky takes this deceit to yet another level.  Barak Obama is a master at delivering a compelling, believable speech.  He knows how to play on a nation’s emotions.  He knows how to exploit a crisis for his own political gain.  His campaign rhetoric was believable by enough people to get him elected as president.  Obama compelled his supporters to value and take ownership of their vote.  He made his flock proud to vote for him; they felt vested in him.  This is precisely why it is so difficult to enlighten his supporters about who Barak Obama really is, and where his philosophical roots originated.  This is how President Obama can fundamentally change America’s economic landscape while grabbing more executive power, and go essentially unchallenged by the American people.

To understand who President Obama really is and why his tactics have succeeded, we must first learn the essence of Saul Alinsky.  Alinsky was a radical, left-wing organizer, born in Chicago in 1909.  He was the son of Russian-Jewish immigrants.  He was a Communist and Socialist sympathizer, although not an admitted member of either movement.  Alinsky’s main goal was to transform the “Have-nots” into the “Haves” by organizing the down trodden into raucous mobs who demand concessions from governments, employers, and the community at large.  Although a well-intended, altruistic goal, it is the methods and tactics Alinsky employed which deserve a closer examination.  His tactics were based on certain principles he acquired along his radical journey.  His main tactic : no matter what you do, you should always appeal to the person’s self-interests.   Alinsky also believed that in order to gain a group’s trust, you must adopt their ways; eat where they eat, worship where they worship, etc.  This is how Barak Obama became part of Reverend Wright’s congregation; more on this later.   Alinsky often said “to beat your enemies, you first have to seduce your allies.”

A year before he died, Alinsky penned his last and most influential book, Rules for Radicals, A Pragmatic Primary for Realistic Radicals.  He starts Rules for Radicals with an attack on all dogma.  “Dogma is the enemy of human freedom.  Dogma must be watched for and apprehended at every turn and twist of the revolution.”  He preaches all truth to be relevant.  He says “the organizer does not have any fixed truth” and is “free from the shackles of dogma.”  He believed, as most Liberals do, that “ethical standards must be elastic to stretch with the times.”  To Alinsky, the end justifies the means- moral utilitarianism- just do what works.  The following passage from Rules for Radicals may provide the clearest window into President Obama’s soul…”The man of action views the issues of means and ends in pragmatic and strategic terms, he asks for ends only.  Whether they are achievable and worthy the cost of means, only whether they will work.  To say that a corrupt means corrupt the ends is to believe in the immaculate conception of ends and principles.  The real arena is corrupt and bloody.  Life is a corrupting process.  He who fears corruption fears life.”  He goes on to say that a leader who places his personal conscience and personal salvation first, “does not care enough for the people to be corrupted for them.”

Let us examine Alinsky’s thirteen “rules for radicals” not merely as they pertain to organizing communities, but through the politically expedient prism of the Obama candidacy and subsequent presidency.

Rule #1) Power is not what you have, but what the enemy thinks you have.  Barak Obama mastered the use of a teleprompter during his campaign in order to sound more articulate and intelligent.  This tactic worked considerably well after eight years of perhaps the least expressive president in our country’s history.

Rule #2) Never go outside the experience of your people.  This is why the Democrats, including Obama, thrive in a “town hall” type gathering; they have mastered the ability to tug on individual heartstrings, using individual hard-luck stories rather than address policies that affect the common good.

Rule #3) Whenever possible, go outside the experience of your enemy.  We saw this tactic employed repeatedly by Obama’s minions in the media whenever they interacted with Sarah Palin.  It was also employed simultaneously by the Clinton campaign and the Obama campaign, vis-à-vis race relations.

Rule #4) Make the enemy live up to their own book of rules.  This tactic has served Obama and the Democrats well for some time.  It cuts directly into the vulnerability of the right-wingers, who espouse a moral and ethical code of conduct, therefore precluding them from using the same underhanded tactics employed by their enemies on the left.  Right-wingers are hamstrung from “fighting fire with fire” due to their own moral code of ethics.  In other words, they bring a knife to a gunfight. 

Rule #5) Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.  It is almost impossible to counter-attack ridicule.  This tactic is often employed by Liberals who cannot win an argument on merit by resorting to clichéd name-calling.  Obama takes it a bit further by creating fictitious foes, using the straw man argument, then ridicules the straw man.  It is masterful.

Rule #6) A good tactic is one that your people enjoy.  One gets the idea that the top Democrat “henchmen”, like Carville and Bagala, truly enjoy crushing their opposition.  Alinsky, in his 1946 book Reveille for Radicals, wrote that merely defeating the enemy is not enough; you must “crush the opposition.”

Rule #7) A tactic that drags on too long is a drag.  The Obama administration is fast tracking everything, violating their own promises of transparency and web posting in favor of ramming unpopular, expensive programs, such as healthcare, so-called climate change bills, so-called stimulus bills and "bailouts" down the throat of the American People.  Eighty percent of Americans are happy with their current healthcare, yet they want to force an expensive, ineffective program to replace the current system which is best in the world.  True to this Alinsky rule, the Democrats are moving fast without sufficient time for debate on any of these measures.

Rule #8) Keep the pressure on.  Employ different tactics, if necessary.  Again, the attempted destruction of Liberal enemy #1, Sarah Palin comes to mind.

Rule #9) The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself.  This tactic was employed in order to get the Obama so-called Stimulus bill passed, as well as the numerous “bailouts” pushed by Obama.  His own Chief of Staff, Rahm Emmanuel, said “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste.” He said of the Obama economic crisis, “This crisis provides the opportunity for us to do things that you could not do before.”  If Democrats can exaggerate a threat by fear-mongering and demagoguery, people are more likely to accept their big government solutions.

Rule #10) The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain constant pressure upon the opposition.  The Democrats, including Obama, have been employing this rule while pushing their dubious climate change and health care agendas through Congress. 

Rule #11) If you push a negative hard and deep enough it will break through into
 its counter-side.  Again, see Rule #7.

Rule #12) The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative.   Have your alternative plan ready and in place from the beginning.  If the Democrats are unsuccessful in pushing a too far-reaching and too large piece of legislation, like their climate change bill or their impending health care bill through Congress, they are still likely to get some close facsimile of the bill passed.

Rule #13) Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.  The Obama administration attempted this against Rush Limbaugh. They also employed the tactic of ridicule against Limbaugh, and maintained the pressure through constant attacks from the condescending Robert Gibbs.  The Obamaniacs also used this against Bristol Palin, in an attempt to denigrate her mother, Sarah, who is pro-life.

Are we not surprised that President Obama has gone around the world, vilifying his own country?  With an outlook like Alinsky’s, one cannot help being a cynic.  However, an important difference between Obama and Alinsky is that Alinsky seemingly used his rules and tactics for the advancement of the down-trodden.  Obama employs the Alinsky tactics clearly for his own advancement. Obama, who hardly attended church prior to his attempt to organize a Chicago community, found the church that most in that community attended.  This was Reverend Wright’s church.  Obama continued to attend for twenty years in order to keep the voting support of the community for his state senate and eventual U.S. senate runs.  

Saul Alinsky is a God-like figure to Liberals, and his rules/tactics have served them well over the last fifty or so years.  If the Republican Party does not want to fall deeper into obscurity, they should employ similar tactics.  If the GOP does not want to be supplanted by a conservative third party, it should drop the gloves and the dogma, and fight fire with fire.  Should the political left have a monopoly on underhanded tactics?  Not if they are to be defeated. 

 American political campaigns have become tantamount to a Jerry Springer show.  We want to see a knockdown, drag out fight, with lots of jabs “below the belt”.  Oh, and make it quick because our attention span is now measured in milliseconds, and we will probably not even remember yesterday’s show.  This is what we learned from the Obama campaign. 

This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it