Quote:
Originally Posted by scottw
Spence's overall point is similar to the dribble that we were subjected to regarding Obama and all of his distasteful associations with radicals and communists and terrorists and 20 years in the Hamas supporting church of hate..."just because he surrounded himself with these people for his entire life doesn't mean he's like them"..."it just makes him open minded".....Alynski is a deeply disturbing amoral freak who justifies any depth of depravity of his own actions and methods by first deamonizing an enemy that he creates...his idea of right and wrong are determined by the effectiveness or ineffectiveness of his methods and not by any sense of decency...he is/was a deciever and a subverter....the idea that we should take from someone so depraved, instruction and guidance is pathetic...tells you exactly where the NEA is today...
"Looking toward a radical voice to challenge ideas and perhaps derive innovative solutions may seem novel or overly intellectual, but if the end state desired is positive this depends on who is defining "positive" doesn't it? I'm not sure why there's any issue. I'm personally a big fan of irreverent and unique solutions to issues."
"overly intellectual" that's hilarious, how about deviod of conscience, hey while you are at it, why don't you look to Hitler for radical, irreverent and unique solutions to population control...there are plently of people who have been screaming about overpopulation who might consider "the end state a positive" regardless of the method...if this is your "overly intellectual" standard
I have no doubt that you'd admire someone like Alynski, people like Alynski and Obama are very atttractive to wanna be intellectuals and as you've shown continually that the truth is something that you play games with, you demonize others for engaging in behavior that you stoop to regularly and you revel in continuing to twist and turn at the losing end of an argument, your first instict is to decieve and mock, like Alynski, you aren't bound by and sense of truth or fiction, right or wrong, any method which gets to "your" desired end is perfectly acceptable...
this is a common thread that runs through much of the controlling political class right now....their first instinct is to decieve, seems that much of the deception is catching up to them and time is running out but they are Alynskites from Obama on down, which makes them dangerous because they are not bound by any sense other than acheving their means...
|
I don't particularly admire him personally, but I do think he's looked at as a brilliant man who was very effective at what he did...because he had an incredible insight into how people really communicate...as ugly as it sometimes might be.
If there's knowledge in his writing that has value, it's up to the reader to apply it in a manner they see fit for good or bad. Hell, I'd wager Karl Rove has a leather bound edition of R4R on his desk for easy reference. It's not like the Right can claim virtue, in fact I'd argue that the Right is a hell of a lot better at deception than the left politically speaking. They're great at grass roots organizing as well...I'm sure it's all in the book.
All your other blather is just the same moral relativism argument rehashed over and over sprinkled with lame ad hominem attacks you substitute for real substance.
Keep trying.
-spence