Replies

Up until a couple of years ago, I had been trying to figure out a way to obtain a copy of “Rules for Radicals” because it is the bible followed by Obama and his associates. I had been trying to get it without paying for it, and the copies at the library were backordered for months. To my surprise, one finally came in after about a six month delay.

When I was about a third of the way through “Rules for Radicals”, I concluded that reading it tells volumes about the people who profess to following it as a bible, especially the ones pushing the legislation we have seen in the last two years.

The book explains a lot. And none of it is good.

I was going to dictate the entire thing and make an audiobook out of it to give to my close associates, who, like me, don’t want a single red cent to go to anyone associated with writing, printing or distributing that hideous work. Unfortunately (or fortunately) I couldn’t stomach hearing myself read it in a way that would make it easier on the ears to listen to (To put the inflection in the right places means you have to read it as if you believe it, and I gave up after one chapter.)

It is probably one of the most amoral, twisted works I have ever read. Given that Alinsky wrote a dedication to Lucifer, I shouldn’t be surprised. The dedication was taken out of later editions so as not to offend the clergy he was attempting to recruit, but the version I read had it. Apparently, it was a copy from the 1980's, and they figured it was safe to put it back in.

From what I can see, reading that book enables one to understand what makes Obama (and his devoted followers) tick.

The very FIRST paragraph exposes very clearly what they are all about:
"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 power. 'Rules for Radicals' is written for the Have-Nots on how to take it away."

It is unrestricted class warfare, pure and simple. And it is the bible of Obama and his like-minded followers.

As for the tribute to Lucifer: “Lest we forget at least an over-the-shoulder acknowledgment to the very first radical: from all our legends, mythology, and history (and who is to know where mythology leaves off and history begins — or which is which), the first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom — Lucifer, I had trouble believing it until I got a copy of the book that actually had the dedication, so I took a picture:

Thanks for the feedback and the screen shot. Have to admit I've never read the actual book, partly for the reasons you mentioned. Chilling to see the pic re Lucifer. Yes, class warfare and communist manifesto 101 it sounds like.

"Rules for Radicals' is written for the Have-Nots on how to take it away."

Man, Obama used to teach a course on Alinsky. Chilling again. His God (besides Marx) and his Bible. . hard to believe he's POTUS. . It almost a head scratcher and at times I think, "How the hell did this happen in America?" I know, I know. . .

It is probably one of the most amoral, twisted works I have ever read. Given that Alinsky wrote a dedication to Lucifer, I shouldn’t be surprised. The dedication was taken out of later editions so as not to offend the clergy he was attempting to recruit, but the version I read had it. Apparently, it was a copy from the 1980's, and they figured it was safe to put it back in.

I tried reading it a few years ago, and couldn't finish it for pretty much the reasons you listed here. It's a view of a sick, evil mind at work. It's not even logically consistent, which is probably one reason why liberals seem to adore it.