Select graphic for larger view.
FORWARD: DNC Chair and Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman-Schultz (D/Fla) violated House Rules and used the floor of House of Representatives to smear Congressman Allen West (R/Fla) by name, in which she bleated many disgusting lies about Alen West as she has also done in their mutual state of residency, Florida, in times past. Wasserman-Schultz, prior to being named by Barack Obama as Chair of the DNC, engaged in street-level displays harassing Rep. West during his campaign for the House (which he won, despite Wasserman-Schultz’s nasty, public statements about him).
Now we as a nation are in a debt crises due to Barack Obama’s refusal to write a budget prior to the current debt-ceiling expiration of August 2, 2011. Despite a majority in Congress by the Democrats for two years (House and Senate), Obama and the Democrats produced no budget, offered no constructive solutions, made no efforts until the Midnight Hour to address the issue of our national debt-ceiling. One might conclude from this that Obama wanted a debt crises, that he wants a default on our national debt; note that as President, one of the chief responsibilities of any and each President is to pay the national debt. A default of such would mean a refusal of responsibilities or incompetence at the job or both.
And a debt crises? Useful to that “change” we’ve heard Obama boast about; the cards seem to build to that conclusion based upon the behavior by Barack Obama, what with refusals to create a budget and one that could pass Congress, and now with his refusals to modify his demands such that he could work with a Republican House majority on this Midnight Hour of Obama’s making.
The Saul Alinsky tactics in use by Barack Obama and many other Democrats today have long-since become glossy-apparent as to be too much costume jewelry worn to the laundromat, but exist they do and in play they are. And Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, chair of the Democratic National Committee (“DNC”), as named by Barack Obama (he wants you to “want her in a foxhole with you”) is nearly seedy in her reliance on Alinsky tactics, not even trying to be subtle, just flinging the tactics here, there, all about like the bottles of Communism Juice that they are.
Pick your target, “freeze it” and then chew away at the ankles with abandon of truth, fairness, social propriety and reality itself — that means, lie with abandon while you attack the target, then take the retorts that are sure to come and accuse your target of attacking you. Then enlist other useful associates to mimic and mime your complaints about being attacked and restate your accusations as if they were made by your target about you. Generalize it by victim-classification and you’ve got a frozen untruth in use to deceive but deception doesn’t seem to matter to those who use Alinsky’s cunning but crooked ways.
That behavior typifies “trolling” when it’s conducted on the internet — it is that — and most who use the internet are well familiar with the behavior involved: the trolls calling their targets trolls because that’s what trolls do: assert their accusations as yours and attack you with the pejorative of “you’re a troll” (or, off the internet or by way of it, bite the ankles, riot in the streets, burn down the buildings, steal the goods, hack someone else’s property, etc. — it’s the same psychological bog and Saul Alinsky asserted the bog as the preferred Communist methodology to enact Communist “change” in societies not yet submitted to such — essentially, to get one’s way without regard for how one does it, the “ends before the means” ugliness that Saul Alinsky and now his practitioners practice, meaning, actions without moral considerations).
Alinsky’s bog book became cultural handbook for an entire generation (or a few) from it’s 1971 publication forward but by present day one would think that the dreadful psychology that a Communist cretin fancied would be out of trend by now — later generations are more intelligent and insightful by some than they were in the gullible, disco days of 1971 when lacking specificity while being crafty was cool. Gonzo blew it’s life away but some people such as the Alinsky-afficiondos never “got current”.
But, unfortunately, Alinsky’s bog of ideas hasn’t worn out-of-trend yet among the Communist/Marxist mostly academic American Leftwingers — they are, sadly, still pursuing the failed tactics as asserted by Alinsky, as pummeled with poverty by Fidel Castro, as parroted by Hugo Chavez, as proven inept by Karl Marx and his other followers, dependent on the rich soak for their very survival. Today’s Democrats’ rendition as “Progressives” is simply another runoff from the same bog: another sales term recently applied to dress-up and distract from the more cumbersome, burdensome label of “Communists.” Progressives sounds prosaic, Communists sounds aggressive, so, the Democrats have gone with the prosaic label. Prettier, perhaps, though deceptive, like a man-eating plant.
Today’s Democratic Party is just such as those, moved so far to the Left that if Marx were alive today, the DNC and Alinsky would find him caught in their roots (though Alinsky’s tactics are derivatives of an Italian Communist, Antonio Gramsci, not Karl Marx). Enter Debbie Wasserman-Schultz to chair the DNC, the Alinsky useful idiot for Barack Obama’s plans of “change”: America from a Republic with a Capitalist economy to Americka The Changed with a Communist-Committee rendition of federal government rule over individuals, and individual liberties tossed as they incumber that goal.
“Obama learned his lesson well. I am proud to see that my father’s model for organizing is being applied successfully beyond local community organizing to affect the Democratic campaign in 2008. It is a fine tribute to Saul Alinsky as we approach his 100th birthday.” –Letter from L. DAVID ALINSKY, son of Neo-Marxist Saul Alinsky.
Obama helped fund ‘Alinsky Academy’: “The Woods Fund, a nonprofit on which Obama served as paid director from 1999 to December 2002, provided startup funding and later capital to the Midwest Academy…. Obama sat on the Woods Fund board alongside William Ayers, founder of the Weather Underground domestic terrorist organization…. ‘Midwest describes itself as ‘one of the nation’s oldest and best-known schools for community organizations, citizen organizations and individuals committed to progressive social change.’… Midwest teaches Alinsky tactics of community organizing.”
Hillary, Obama and the Cult of Alinsky: “True revolutionaries do not flaunt their radicalism, Alinsky taught. They cut their hair, put on suits and infiltrate the system from within. Alinsky viewed revolution as a slow, patient process. The trick was to penetrate existing institutions such as churches, unions and political parties…. Many leftists view Hillary as a sell-out because she claims to hold moderate views on some issues. However, Hillary is simply following Alinsky’s counsel to do and say whatever it takes to gain power.
“Obama is also an Alinskyite…. Obama spent years teaching workshops on the Alinsky method. In 1985 he began a four-year stint as a community organizer in Chicago, working for an Alinskyite group called the Developing Communities Project…. Camouflage is key to Alinsky-style organizing. While trying to build coalitions of black churches in Chicago, Obama caught flak for not attending church himself. He became an instant churchgoer.” (By Richard Poe, 11-27-07)
So, what does this have to do with the smearing screed by Debbie Wasserman-Schultz of Colonel Allen West? Everything. Wasserman-Schultz as Chair of the DNC and Obama’s appointee during this, his re-election cycle, is in need of manipulating voter support including campaign donations, and Obama’s dismal refusal to serve our nation with a national budget, relies upon — among other goals of theirs — reduction of defense funding. Allen West is an Army Colonel as also a Congressman, and, he represents a contingency in Florida that Wasserman-Schultz needs in real terms to be formable like clay: veterans, elderly, disabled dependent on Social Security, Medicare and in many cases also Medicaid. If they believe in West’s credibility, Wasserman-Schultz looks like the manipulative person she is, using the vulnerable for her political purposes, and Obama’s.
Wasserman-Schultz also appears to be unusually venomous to and about West, who is notably honorable and straightforward. I can imagine that his popularity (again, he won his last campaign from among mostly the same constituency that also elected Wasserman-Schultz, though the latter has not undergone a recent test as West has by constituents, nor passed such a test). Her street-level protests about West before his campaign headquarters from two years ago appears to be psychologically unhinged by Wasserman-Schultz.
Now return to the present day and to Wasserman-Schultz’s screed from the House floor about West, insulting him with Alinsky-level lies, claiming he’s “anti woman” and some sort of Dark Knight of Destruction as to Medicare and Medicaid (none of that is true): here’s Wasserman-Schultz’s nasty speech.
To which Colonel Allen West responded, in writing (in an email sent to Wasserman-Schultz, copied to other significant recipients):
From: Debbie Wasserman-Schultz Is ‘Vile … Despicable … Coward,’ Says Allen West
– from The Other McCain, July 19, 2011
From: Z112 West, Allen
Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2011 04:48 PM
To: Wasserman Schultz, Debbie
Cc: McCarthy, Kevin; Blyth, Jonathan; Pelosi, Nancy; Cantor, Eric
Subject: Unprofessional and Inappropriate Sophomoric Behavior from Wasserman-Schultz
Look, Debbie, I understand that after I departed the House floor you directed your floor speech comments directly towards me. Let me make myself perfectly clear, you want a personal fight, I am happy to oblige. You are the most vile, unprofessional ,and despicable member of the US House of Representatives. If you have something to say to me, stop being a coward and say it to my face, otherwise, shut the heck up. Focus on your own congressional district!
I am bringing your actions today to our Majority Leader and Majority Whip and from this time forward, understand that I shall defend myself forthright against your heinous characterless behavior……which dates back to the disgusting protest you ordered at my campaign hqs, October 2010 in Deerfield Beach.
You have proven repeatedly that you are not a Lady, therefore, shall not be afforded due respect from me!
Steadfast and Loyal
Congressman Allen B West (R-FL)
While I don’t condone “personal attacks” I also do not define what West did and expressed in that email statement of his as a personal attack but an appropriate, and necessary, retaliation to a highly irregular personal attack BY Wasserman-Schultz, who is busy along with other Democrats/Progressives/Communists/Leftwingers claiming to be victimized by the “personal attacks” of West’s that don’t exist while Debbie’s do.
The Democrats have, since, brought out other “useful fools” to service Wasserman-Schultz’s complaints of being victimized by Colonel West, all of them females among Democrat public officials, all of them bemoaning some “anti-woman” aspect to Colonel West’s retort — which doesn’t actually exist, that aspect, but don’t let that stop the Democrats (Wasserman-Schultz, DNC, other useful complainants — as long as they’re females).
Their logic, if it can be called that: Wasserman-Schultz is a woman so if she’s criticized, in this case by West, then that represents a critic and their criticisms being “anti-woman”.
We’ve heard this complaint before, however, from Wasserman-Schultz: “the Republicans are anti-woman” she’s complained. One is “anti-woman” if Leftwing women don’t get indulged with what they want — abortions on the taxpayers, defense budgets redirected to pay for “healthcare” for women (throw in the kitchen sink here). This complaint is part of Wasserman-Schultz’s and the DNC’s Obama-re-election platitudes as it is also a keen aspect of Obama’s demands for public funding for the deplorable siphoning from Medicare, Social Security to make his “Obamacare” possible: one is “anti-woman” for (fill-in the blank here). Wasserman-Schultz refers to this ugliness she and the Democrats have invented as “the Republican war on women” — what’s cloaked there is Wasserman-Schultz’s and the DNC’s war on truth, justice and sanity.
Colonel Allen West, though blunt in his emailed statement, did nothing wrong. Quite the contrary, he responded to indecency and deceit by Wasserman-Schultz with a direct expression that names the issue and calls her to task as an individual who has clearly gone past the goalpost of reasonableness.
To one who practices Alinsky tactics, Wasserman-Schultz is left with the bones of a bad game plan, engaged in tactics that are as dead as disco, while Colonel Allen West has run a touchdown.