Comments on: Political Relativism: Realistic Radicals vs. Rhetorical Radicals & the Art of Miscommunication

By: Individualist

Individualist — Mon, 26 Jul 2010 05:16:42 +0000

Has anyone noticed that Charlie Rangel is being investigated for ethics violations. Is anyone talking about the fact that the financial reform legislation has placed into law a requirement that anyone applying for a mortgage must first gain approval of the govenrment.

The more we talk about Sherrod and the NAACP and this crap we engender the democratic base and quit talking about our issues. Let's not lose sight of the ball people. If we want the deficit handled and our credit rating back we can't just elect Republicans, we have to elect Tea Party Conservatives. People that will finally do what is needed. This is a major effort and I think we need to understand the NAACP goal in riling us up over Racism. We need to seriously start treating the NAACP as the truly irrelevant group that the are and get the focus off Obama ad on the @$$ clowns in congress that are bankrupting us. We can't vote Obama out for another two years.

Remeber November, an elephant never forgets

By: CBrooks1976

CBrooks1976 — Mon, 26 Jul 2010 03:28:00 +0000

Lets not give the Alinsky type radicals to much credit.
There are still very, very few regular Americans who wouldn't reject out of hand everything the neo-radicals stand for.
The blame still belongs to us, we let this happen.
Obama has not one new idea that we don't have an answer for.

By: dicentra63

dicentra63 — Mon, 26 Jul 2010 03:03:46 +0000

Alinsky was worse than a relativist. He didn't care one way or the other what the truth was, he was merely interested in the gamesmanship involved in upending a current power structure and replacing it with another one. He was well aware that the new people in power would commit the same abuses as the old people, and he didn't believe in any kind of utopia.

He just dug stirring things up for the sake of stirring them up, and he was extremely good at it, and furthermore, he may have dedicated his book to Lucifer but he didn't believe in any devil or god apart from his own cleverness.

And yes, he would have had little use for true-believing ideologues like Shabazz or anyone else like that.

By: JoeKidd

JoeKidd — Mon, 26 Jul 2010 02:35:50 +0000

That's a good one!

I don't know who reads it to him — maybe he just looks at the pictures.

By: JoeInMichigan

JoeInMichigan — Mon, 26 Jul 2010 01:22:41 +0000

Ahhh…another Ann Coulter fan!
It is just too bad that most "conservative" pundits have bought into the liberal media line on Ann – that she is smart, but too much of a smartass…a "bomb-thrower", and so on.
Truth be told, Coulter is the smartest, bravest, most persistent, most well-armed (with actual facts), voice for the right since William F. Buckley. Ever read her books? They are chock-full of citations for every single claim she makes.
She's a true treasure, and pricks like Bill O'Reilly who refuse to acknowledge her value (while simultaneously tooting his own weak, out-of-tune horn) really do our cause a disservice.
Ann is too tough and proud to admit it, but so much of the criticism of her is due to the fact that she is a woman.
Maybe not blatant sexism (and what the fuck is that anyway?). It's something innate – some natural aversion to aggression and confrontation in a female.
When people tell me how Ann is "too confrontational", or that she says this or that solely to elicit some kind of reaction, or any of the other raps against her, I always tell them, next time you see her opining on anything, just do what I do – imagine that instead of her, it is a man saying these things.
No lie – in that context, her opinions don't seem any more aggressive or confrontational than those of any of her co-panelists.

By: Easter_Lily

Easter_Lily — Mon, 26 Jul 2010 00:05:20 +0000

Wow… really?
Well, that explains everything then.
Lucifer=The Father of Lies.

By: Davecat84

Davecat84 — Sun, 25 Jul 2010 22:14:07 +0000

I disagree. Obama memorized it years ago.

By: EyeOfCygnus

EyeOfCygnus — Sun, 25 Jul 2010 21:53:23 +0000

"There cannot be a standard of behavior that is ethically acceptable for one imagined group of people and non-acceptable for another." Unfortunately, our society tolerates far too much of this.
Back when I was in college, there was a campus organization which formed to protest apartheid. Ironically, many of the leaders of this organization were also agitating for the creation of a student union which would exclude whites.

By: richardporter

richardporter — Sun, 25 Jul 2010 21:52:28 +0000

If the Democrats retain both houses of congress this fall I will say it was all worth it and if we
had to we should had done more. But Thank G-d that Republicans per usual are very soft
and easy targets. G-d Bless 'em!

By: 4arepublic

4arepublic — Sun, 25 Jul 2010 21:24:54 +0000

Biden sort of looks like Alinsky, without his glasses.