WOW, you've described a Cruz who is unrecognizable to those who've 'worked' most closely with him.
He doesn't actually work with ANYONE. He's a rabid ideologue who views compromise as a weakness. Shutting down the government cost the economy billions and accomplished nothing. Last I checked, Obamcare is still law.
And yeah, he has just the right temperament for foreign affairs.
Like Trump he's going to TELL everyone what to do. And foreign leaders will respond: "Oh, since you put it that way of course we'll do it your way. Whatever were we thinking?" LOL!
What else, oh yeah, he's a 'god whisperer' who has no respect for the principle of separation of church from state.
As for Saul Alinsky, I've never read a criticism of him from anyone who seemed to have read or understood his book.
Some Republicans seemed to understand and to use his sh*t though:
"Suddenly, the book was being touted as a way to beat the left at its own game by everyone from 69-year-old former House Majority Leader Dick Armey, whose nonprofit group FreedomWorks has emerged as a leading Washington bulwark for the tea party movement, to 25-year-old James O’Keefe, the self-styled activist investigative journalist who last year became a conservative hero for secretly recording employees of the liberal community-organizing group ACORN apparently offering advice on how to set up a brothel, to tea party leaders seeking to disrupt congressional town halls."
[quote ]Right loves to hate, imitate Alinsky
By Kenneth P. Vogel
| 03/22/10 05:28 AM EDT
Conservatives just can’t seem to make up their mind about Saul Alinsky.
Was he a tactical genius to be imitated, an agitator whose teachings will undercut the right’s goals, a devil-worshiper leading young conservatives down the path to damnation, or some combination of all three?
The modern right harbors an “almost schizophrenic view of what they can use and learn from Alinsky, and yet he is this totally evil guy,” said Sanford D. Horwitt, author of “Let Them Call Me Rebel,” a biography of Alinsky.
And the debate among conservatives, most of whom had never heard of Alinsky until recently, is only picking up steam nearly four decades after his death in 1972.
Often described as the father of modern community organizing, Alinsky helped poor and working class urban communities around the country push for improved living and working conditions by confronting, satirizing or negotiating with the establishment, as well as by building diverse coalitions including small businesses, labor unions and religious groups, such as the Roman Catholic Church.
He’s long been a hero on the left, but the right’s fascination with him dates to the 2008 presidential campaign, when lots of attention was paid to Alinsky’s impact on leading Democratic contenders Hillary Clinton, who wrote her college thesis about him, and Barack Obama, who trained in — and utilized — his community organizing techniques.
Alinsky strictly resisted political labels and affiliations, once explaining “if you think you've got an inside track to absolute truth, you become doctrinaire, humorless and intellectually constipated.” But conservatives began invoking his name as something of an epithet to sully the left’s tactics as sneaky, underhanded, unethical — or Marxist.
But a funny thing happened on the way to Alinsky taking a place alongside top contemporary conservative bogeymen like Michael Moore, George Soros and Jane Fonda. His seminal 1971 guide to organizing, “Rules for Radicals: A Pragmatic Primer for Realistic Radicals,” became a must-read for a new wave of conservative activists who mobilized — many for the first time — in opposition to the ambitious, big-government agenda pushed by President Obama and the Democratic Congress.
In the opening lines of “Rules,” Alinsky described its mission — and his approach — thus: “What follows is for those who want to change the world from what it is to what they believe it should be. 'The Prince' was written by Machiavelli for the Haves on how to hold Suddenly, the book was being touted as a way to beat the left at its own game by everyone from 69-year-old former House Majority Leader Dick Armey, whose nonprofit group FreedomWorks has emerged as a leading Washington bulwark for the tea party movement, to 25-year-old James O’Keefe, the self-styled activist investigative journalist who last year became a conservative hero for secretly recording employees of the liberal community-organizing group ACORN apparently offering advice on how to set up a brothel, to tea party leaders seeking to disrupt congressional town halls. power. 'Rules for Radicals' is written for the Have-Nots on how to take it away."
But in the last couple months, there’s been something of a backlash on the right, both as a result of the arrest of O’Keefe and three colleagues during a botched plot to embarrass Democratic Sen. Mary Landrieu, and because some conservatives are questioning whether Alinsky’s ideas and tactics — and, to some extent, the tea party movement as a whole — are intellectually consistent with American conservatism.
David Brooks, The New York Times’s leading conservative columnist, this month cited the tea party crowd’s embrace of Alinksy in blasting the movement’s “self-righteousness and naïve radicalism” and declaring it “radically anticonservative.”
Veteran Republican operative John Feehery then declared that when conservatives adopt Alinsky’s tactics, “they help further the cause of the left, which is social instability.”
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2010/03/right-l...z40Aatkqox [/quote]
He doesn't actually work with ANYONE. He's a rabid ideologue who views compromise as a weakness. Shutting down the government cost the economy billions and accomplished nothing. Last I checked, Obamcare is still law.
And yeah, he has just the right temperament for foreign affairs.
Like Trump he's going to TELL everyone what to do. And foreign leaders will respond: "Oh, since you put it that way of course we'll do it your way. Whatever were we thinking?" LOL!
What else, oh yeah, he's a 'god whisperer' who has no respect for the principle of separation of church from state.
As for Saul Alinsky, I've never read a criticism of him from anyone who seemed to have read or understood his book.
Some Republicans seemed to understand and to use his sh*t though:
"Suddenly, the book was being touted as a way to beat the left at its own game by everyone from 69-year-old former House Majority Leader Dick Armey, whose nonprofit group FreedomWorks has emerged as a leading Washington bulwark for the tea party movement, to 25-year-old James O’Keefe, the self-styled activist investigative journalist who last year became a conservative hero for secretly recording employees of the liberal community-organizing group ACORN apparently offering advice on how to set up a brothel, to tea party leaders seeking to disrupt congressional town halls."
[quote ]Right loves to hate, imitate Alinsky
By Kenneth P. Vogel
| 03/22/10 05:28 AM EDT
Conservatives just can’t seem to make up their mind about Saul Alinsky.
Was he a tactical genius to be imitated, an agitator whose teachings will undercut the right’s goals, a devil-worshiper leading young conservatives down the path to damnation, or some combination of all three?
The modern right harbors an “almost schizophrenic view of what they can use and learn from Alinsky, and yet he is this totally evil guy,” said Sanford D. Horwitt, author of “Let Them Call Me Rebel,” a biography of Alinsky.
And the debate among conservatives, most of whom had never heard of Alinsky until recently, is only picking up steam nearly four decades after his death in 1972.
Often described as the father of modern community organizing, Alinsky helped poor and working class urban communities around the country push for improved living and working conditions by confronting, satirizing or negotiating with the establishment, as well as by building diverse coalitions including small businesses, labor unions and religious groups, such as the Roman Catholic Church.
He’s long been a hero on the left, but the right’s fascination with him dates to the 2008 presidential campaign, when lots of attention was paid to Alinsky’s impact on leading Democratic contenders Hillary Clinton, who wrote her college thesis about him, and Barack Obama, who trained in — and utilized — his community organizing techniques.
Alinsky strictly resisted political labels and affiliations, once explaining “if you think you've got an inside track to absolute truth, you become doctrinaire, humorless and intellectually constipated.” But conservatives began invoking his name as something of an epithet to sully the left’s tactics as sneaky, underhanded, unethical — or Marxist.
But a funny thing happened on the way to Alinsky taking a place alongside top contemporary conservative bogeymen like Michael Moore, George Soros and Jane Fonda. His seminal 1971 guide to organizing, “Rules for Radicals: A Pragmatic Primer for Realistic Radicals,” became a must-read for a new wave of conservative activists who mobilized — many for the first time — in opposition to the ambitious, big-government agenda pushed by President Obama and the Democratic Congress.
In the opening lines of “Rules,” Alinsky described its mission — and his approach — thus: “What follows is for those who want to change the world from what it is to what they believe it should be. 'The Prince' was written by Machiavelli for the Haves on how to hold Suddenly, the book was being touted as a way to beat the left at its own game by everyone from 69-year-old former House Majority Leader Dick Armey, whose nonprofit group FreedomWorks has emerged as a leading Washington bulwark for the tea party movement, to 25-year-old James O’Keefe, the self-styled activist investigative journalist who last year became a conservative hero for secretly recording employees of the liberal community-organizing group ACORN apparently offering advice on how to set up a brothel, to tea party leaders seeking to disrupt congressional town halls. power. 'Rules for Radicals' is written for the Have-Nots on how to take it away."
But in the last couple months, there’s been something of a backlash on the right, both as a result of the arrest of O’Keefe and three colleagues during a botched plot to embarrass Democratic Sen. Mary Landrieu, and because some conservatives are questioning whether Alinsky’s ideas and tactics — and, to some extent, the tea party movement as a whole — are intellectually consistent with American conservatism.
David Brooks, The New York Times’s leading conservative columnist, this month cited the tea party crowd’s embrace of Alinksy in blasting the movement’s “self-righteousness and naïve radicalism” and declaring it “radically anticonservative.”
Veteran Republican operative John Feehery then declared that when conservatives adopt Alinsky’s tactics, “they help further the cause of the left, which is social instability.”
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2010/03/right-l...z40Aatkqox [/quote]
