Posted on 07/25/2015 2:43:03 PM PDT by ebb tide
And who would be that pimp?
and I just may answer.
Or not.
Try to not take everything so personal?
If I had intended to lay into you for something, you'd not be having any doubts as to what it was all about.
Oh, and please refrain from comparing FRiends directly with Satan.
Think you can manage that?
I apologize. By repeating the words of others in what seemed an approving manner, I assumed you were saying it. So then were you repeating the words of others in an unapproving manner?
Many people don't, which is why we have ended up in such a collectively deplorable state and those of us who adhere to traditional values are being forced back on all fronts by the savant's of Satan's methodology.
I don't take the article to declare that the Vatican operatives in question are adherents to Alinksy himself per se, although it is hardly a stretch of the imagination to suppose that men in the business of politics, well-educated men at least, would be intimately familiar with his writings, just as they would familiar with the works of Machiavelli and Guicciardini.
It is not a coincidence that the left has been rolling with more collective success in nearly every quarter (political, national, ecclesiastical) in the past century than at any other time. Their suddenly apparent success has been the result of a long and oft invisible campaign going back much further in history. Alinsky merely synthesized all the tactics of political and cultural agitation and subversion into one handy, easy-to-use reference that can be applied (with varying degrees of panache and refinement) by common rabble-rousers and international theorists alike. In that sense, the Vatican operatives in question are Acolytes of Saul Alinsky, even if they aren't following his edition of Satan's playbook.
In any event, why do you take such issue with what is, overall, the most superficial facet of the article? No offense, but your grand arrival to the comment section of this article is reminiscent of a belligerent drunk bellying up to a bar. I rather get the sense that you looking to ruffle feathers for your own amusement.
1) I never compared anybody on this forum to Satan.
2) My question was not unkind.
3) I don’t give a hoot about any of you “answers”. They are worthless, in my opinion.
Please point out the post in which I repeated the "words of others" or retract your false accusation.
was not comparing anyone to Satan. Just their 'writings', huh? All the same, according to you...
But it was ridiculous. Don't you know who the blogger overlord is around here? I was making reference to that. That knowledge alone should have explained everything.
I'm not sure why that would need to be explained to anyone who has been here for years...
Your question, "and who would be that pimp", as it came about, also, in addition to not being up to speed on freeper culture, seemed to me that if was if you had assumed I was implying something that included yourself. As such, it was like an accusation in the form of a question.
Yet in #2) statement quoted just above you just acknowledged having asked me a question, and in several comments on this thread, you have asked questions.
But ---you say you don't give a hoot about answers, and others' opinions are "worthless".
That's part of what I was talking about when I had said "ask more kindly and maybe you'll get an answer". Can you see it yet?
Yet if it were true (no 'hoot' available) then its not entirely logical to have asked questions.
I get the impression that despite what you are saying, opinions of others have some value.
Gunner is a tough customer though, ain't he? lol
Everyone has their reasons. I think I understand his.
But thanks for the thread.
From the article;
Name calling is always the desired tactic of harassment. Lately, this is the tack of choice by the Pope’s minions. Enter Bishop Sanchez Sorondo, Chancellor of the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences (PASS), and mastermind of the radical papal environmental agenda. PASS serves as the launching pad (sorry, NASA), for the radical climate change/global warming/UN sustainable development agenda.In response to criticism that he excluded and barred diverse scientific opinions on climate change, and inexplicably, only invited rabid UN pro-abortion advocates, Bishop Sorondo responded with what can only be described as Alinsky rancor and venom. His baffling hostility and defensiveness spoke volumes.
...
...So, when criticism arises over the skewed selection of papal experts at the PASS, Bishop Sorondo dusts off Rules for Radicals and engages in political hard ball name calling. Case in point, when the Heartland Institute delegation of preeminent climate scientists raised objections about the partisan, unscientific, anti-life stance of all the Vatican experts, Bishop Sorondo unloaded. Bishop Sorondo unleashed a torrent of demeaning barbs, calling the Heartland 7 “Tea Partiers,” and “Deniers who funded by oil interests”. Then, Sorondo finished off with an arrogant flourish, “we can invite any one we want.” Testy, eh? Not so merciful, your Eminence.
They did stack the deck. The game was rigged. The sought for conclusions foregone. It was more as stage managed theater rather than anything like discussion --- unless one's idea of discussion is pre-agreement on all major points.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.