Comments by "craxd1" (@craxd1) on "Hillary Called Honest, Crowd Erupts In Laughter And So Will You" video.
-
3
-
David Stewart
Keep in mind, that those aren't my words, but those of Alinski, Cloward, and Piven, which are parroted and taught by those such as Ayers. By the way, you can download Alinsky's book, Rules for Radicals, or read it online at archive.org, if you want to read all his hogwash.
https://archive.org/details/RulesForRadicals
The reason why that they want all that, is because they want everyone dependent on the government, in one form or another, and the more dependent the better. It lets them control the people, assuring their party the vote, and it sets up a totalitarian system. Those programs make it so that people will vote for a certain party, because they are afraid to lose what they have been given on a silver platter, (though conservatives are not against things such as social security, just the method that brought it about). Thus, your liberty and free thinking are taken away from you. That is what they did in Russia, and we all watched as it failed. The Marxists have watched their own failings happen several times, thus, they have resorted to other methods, by changing their philosophy slightly, to come back at it from a different angle. They had already changed their dogma several times, within the Frankfurt School, before its professors fled here. It has always failed.
Conservatism is not against the poor, nor especially the infirm or elderly. What they are for is a limited federal government, as per the US Constitution, and states rights. Lastly, conservatism is against wasting money.
One of the largest concerns, right now, is the national debt. All money (bills of credit) is borrowed into existence, from the Federal Reserve, (a private banking cartel, which is not a federal agency, and was installed by Woodrow Wilson), by the Federal Government, and the Fed is given bonds (IOUs), by our government, stating that they will be paid back with interest. The Fed sets the interest rates. So, what would happen, right now, if the Fed decided to sharply raise the interest rate? Where would the money to pay that extra interest come from? You see where this is going? They want the poor dependent on the government, and higher taxes mean more poor. Did you know that the Fed has told congress that they have "lost" several trillion dollars? Whose going to pay for that?
From the Fiscal Times:
"The U.S. military is good at fighting wars, but it sucks at managing money. Partly because of its convoluted bookkeeping systems, $8.5 trillion—yes, trillion—taxpayer dollars doled out by Congress since 1996 has never been accounted for."
http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/2015/03/19/85-Trillion-Unaccounted-Should-Congress-Increase-Defense-Budget
From Signs of the Times:
"$16,000,000,000,000.00 had been secretly given out to US banks and corporations and foreign banks everywhere from France to Scotland. From the period between December 2007 and June 2010, the Federal Reserve had secretly bailed out many of the world's banks, corporations, and governments."
"When you have conservative Republican stalwarts like Jim DeMint(R-SC) and Ron Paul(R-TX) as well as self identified Democratic socialists like Bernie Sanders all fighting against the Federal Reserve, you know that it is no longer an issue of Right versus Left. When you have every single member of the Republican Party in Congress and progressive Congressmen like Dennis Kucinich sponsoring a bill to audit the Federal Reserve, you realize that the Federal Reserve is an entity onto itself, which has no oversight and no accountability."
https://www.sott.net/article/250592-Audit-of-the-Federal-Reserve-Reveals-16-Trillion-in-Secret-Bailouts
Marxism, or Marxist Socialism, does not care about the poor, infirm, nor elderly, though they will lie to you, claiming that they do. They hate western society, and they have vowed to topple it, using any means necessary. They hate liberty and free thinking societies. They especially hate the middle class. They want a two class system, the rich lording over the poor.
3
-
David Stewart
Bill Ayers and wife Bernardine Dohrn. Ayers only retired six years ago, but is still lecturing. He was denied professor emeritus at the University of Chicago. Dohrn left Northwestern Law on August 31, 2013.
There are others, and they are generally tied to this lot. It's not so much what is lectured, but out of the hall, and what is pushed within the student groups.
As far as the constitution, there are many universities that state otherwise, generally conservative, when compared to the liberal ones who claim that the constitution can be bent at will. Anyhow, there are only two routes to making changes, which are the two ways of making amendments. It is the only way to legally change what is within it.
2
-
David Stewart
Oh Ayers and Dohrn, et al, did. That is what they call "political correctness". If anyone states a fact, such as mentioning the words "radical Islamic terrorists", then they were taught to retort that they are fascists, bigots, xenophobes, etc. That was even taught by Saul Alinsky, a Marxist, in his "Twelve Rules for Radicals".
Twelve Rules for Radicals:
RULE 1: “Power is not only what you have, but what the enemy thinks you have.”
RULE 2: “Never go outside the expertise of your people.”
RULE 3: “Whenever possible, go outside the expertise of the enemy.”
RULE 4: “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.”
RULE 5: “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.”
RULE 6: “A good tactic is one your people enjoy.”
RULE 7: “A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag.”
RULE 8: “Keep the pressure on. Never let up.”
RULE 9: “The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself.”
RULE 10: “If you push a negative hard enough, it will push through and become a positive.”
RULE 11: “The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative.”
RULE 12: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.”
Next, Saul Alinsky”s inspired Cloward-Piven Strategy: Eight steps to topple a nation and create a socialist state. (From Alinsky's activist group's printed literature):
1) Healthcare — Control healthcare and you control the people.
2) Poverty — Increase the Poverty level as high as possible, poor people are easier to control and will not fight back if you are providing everything for them to live.
3) Debt — Increase the debt to an unsustainable level. That way you are able to increase taxes, and this will produce more poverty.
4) Gun Control — Remove the ability to defend themselves from the Government. That way you are able to create a police state.
5) Welfare — Take control of every aspect of their lives (Food, Housing, and Income).
6) Education — Take control of what people read and listen to — take control of what children learn in school.
7) Religion — Remove the belief in the God from the Government and schools.
8) Class Warfare — Divide the people into the wealthy and the poor. This will cause more discontent and it will be easier to take (Tax) the wealthy with the support of the poor.
http://www.fromthetrenchesworldreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/12112357_1066302156715778_4293103776881640390_n-560x391.jpeg
Time magazine wrote, in 1970, that "It is not too much to argue that American democracy is being altered by Alinsky's ideas." Hillary idolized Alinsky, and wrote her senior thesis on his work, with Alinsky helping. She corresponded with him until his death, which came out in published letters. Alinsky spread that first in Chicago, then to New York, California, and several other large metro cities. Bill Ayers loved citing Alinsky.
Sanford Horwitt wrote that "U.S. President Barack Obama was influenced by Alinsky and followed in his footsteps as a Chicago-based community organizer. Horwitt asserted that Barack Obama's 2008 presidential campaign was influenced by Alinsky's teachings."
Also, see here:
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2014/02/bill_ayers_and_obama_both_quote_alinsky.html
There are many other examples, and the above does not really expose all the means of doing it, but it is taught, especially within student societies. Like I stated, Mark Levin exposed some of it recently. Heck, some of this even taught for debate and rhetoric, but they make good use of it for politics. Anyhow, compare that to Obama and the Clinton's actions and rhetoric.
2
-
1
-
David Stewart
Ah, you've not seen the politics taught, (now called the "New Left"), then, which stems from the Marxists who came from the Frankfurt School, nor seen the propaganda handed out by the "Students for a Democratic Society", which is a Communist front group, that everyone thought had died, but is back on campuses. From Columbia University, to the University of Chicago, and now, even Georgetown, it's being taught. When you mention it, their rebuttal is always "you're a conspiracy theorist", or "you're a nutter", and the "constitution is fluid, and not worth anything today", but it has been exposed. A good source on it is Mark Levin, who speaks about it occasionally.
1
-
David Stewart
I did not write that, as I directly quoted it from the leftists and Marxist's literature. It was written by Alinsky, Cloward, and Piven, which is quoted regularly by Bill Ayers. Ayers even quoted Alinsky's writing, when he debated Dinesh D'Souza at Dartmouth. You'll have to determine if what Alinsky stated is true, the same as I.
Below is where the use of "political correctness" originates from, and how to use it against your enemy. This is from chapter three (A Word About Words) of Saul Alinsky's book, Rules for Radicals.
Rules for Radicals, pp 49-51, Quote:
"The question may legitimately be raised, why not use other words—words that mean the same but are peaceful, and do not result in such negative emotional reactions? There are a number of fundamental reasons for rejecting such substitution. First, by using combinations of words such as "harnessing the energy" instead of the single word "power," we begin to dilute the meaning; and as we use purifying synonyms, we dissolve the bitterness, the anguish, the hate and love, the agony and the triumph attached to these words, leaving an aseptic imitation of life. In the politics of life we are concerned with the slaves and the Caesars, not the vestal virgins. It is not just that, in communication as in thought, we must ever strive toward simplicity. (The masterpieces of philosophic or scientific statement are frequently no longer than a few words, for example, "E = mc2.") It is more than that: it is a determination not to detour around reality. To use any other word but power is to change the meaning of everything we are talking about. As Mark Twain once put it, "The difference between the right word and the almost-right word is the difference between lightning and the lightning bug."
"Power is the right word just as self-interest, compromise, and the other simple political words are, for they were conceived in and have become part of politics from the beginning of time. To pander to those who have no stomach for straight language, and insist upon bland, non-controversial sauces, is a waste of time. They cannot or deliberately will not understand what we are discussing here.
"I agree with Nietzsche's statement in The Genealogy of Morals on this point:
""Why stroke the hypersensitive ears of our modern weaklings? Why yield even a single
step . . . to the Tartuffery of words? For us psychologists that would involve a Tartuffery of action . . . For a psychologist today shows his good taste (others may say his integrity) in this, if in anything, that he resists the shamefully moralized manner of speaking which makes all modern judgments about men and things slimy.""
End Quote.
Here, it is taught, that if you use peaceful words, you dilute the meaning (making them an aseptic imitation) of your opponent's words, while making your opponent look "slimy", cruel, bigoted, etc. These so-called peaceful words are used to hide truthful facts. This is why Hillary called a good majority of Americans a "basket of deplorables", along with the rant about people being sexists, fascists, etc., because we agreed with Trump, when he said "radical Islamic terrorists". When you look into this, the rabbit hole goes deep.
1
-
LMDAO! Bill and Hillary have been caught in tons of outright lies, from Bill's time as the Arkansas Attorney General, to his presidency, and Hillary as Secretary of State. There was also a trail of dead bodies left behind them, when people talked. Many were informants against Hillary's law firm, Bill's governorship, and a cocaine smuggling ring in Little Rock. Now, there's six more bodies tied to Hillary and Bill (not counting the dead at Benghazi). You be the judge. Oh yes, all those bodies, around 20 that I know of, were officially called suicides or robberies. New autopsies, on several, proved murder.
1