DESTROY CAPITALISM?– How or Why would anyone  want to do that?

Is all of this just coincidence?  

When reading about the “RULES”, pay special attention to Rules #5 and #12 that I’ve previewed for you below.  You’ve seen them before, actually you are seeing them in action right now… Just turn on the TV.

*RULE #5 IN ACTION*
If you were to analyze virtually any political controversy or debate, you will hear the liberal spouting some combination of this rule… Virtually, irrespective of what the discussion is! 
* Against, tax increases? Conservatives just want to protect the rich at the expense of the poor.
* Want to balance the budget? Conservatives don’t care about the poor.
* Want to protect our borders? Conservatives are racists.

*No matter the nature of the policy, turn it into an attack!*
Even the most noble of goals or policies are used against the political opponent, if at all possible. How? Just lie about it!
A prime example:
Do you remember that in the presidential campaign, in which, Mitt Romney compiled a list _contained in a folder_, of scores of qualified women to fill important positions within his administration? His goal was to lead the charge for women’s equality. Honestly, is there anything at all improper with this goal? Of course not!
*What did the Dems do?*
They used it as if he were berating, diminishing and even objectivizing women! All you heard from the democratic leaders was a constant refrain of accusations regarding the disgusting and improper “Romney’s folder full of women”! *they used his goal to lift women up, as a sledge hammer to knock him down!* THAT IS WHAT DEMS AND THE ALINSKY METHODS DO!
*To Dem leaders, TRUTH DOESN’T MATTER, INTEGRITY DOESN’T MATTER, FACTS DON’T MATTER… ONLY POWER MATTERS*

*RULE #12 IN ACTION*
*Rule #12* “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” It’s hard to argue your case, when you are forced to defend your character or defend your freedom in court.   Interestingly, Obama taught a course on “Rules for Radical” at Harvard. I assume the similarity between his style and the “Rules” is just a coincidence?  Hillary wrote her thesis on it.  Do you think they are above using these despicable tactics?

*Think about it*… How many republican leaders can you think of that were hit with charges of immorality, misconduct, illegality, or even an actual indictment just prior to an important election??? Then later have the charges dismissed, found not guilty, acquitted or overturned on appeal… *after the election???*  Does this sound familiar? 
We often see liberal prosecutors creating empty, trumped up charges and allegations against conservative politicians and leaders prior to an election. The charges don’t stick, and are ”usually” tossed out of court… but the stink  of the election lingers just long enough for the liberals get another win based on lies.

*Here are a few more examples of this rule in action:*
*Ted Stevens Alaska*. Had multiple charges of fraud and abuse of funds brought against him and endured an actual wrongful conviction a scant 2 weeks prior to the election. His conviction was then overturned after it was found the prosecutors had engaged in “_the systematic withholding of exculpatory evidence_” that *showed the allegations were false and that they allowed false testimony to be presented at trial*. Their actions were so egregious that the judge actually held the prosecutors in contempt of court and found guilty of “reckless professional misconduct”… but they were not fired! *The decision to not fire was made by the _Obama_ Justice Department*.
Yes, the conviction was overturned, but not before Stevens lost his long held Senate seat to a Democrat. http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB123863051723580701 The defeat of Stevens and his replacement with a Democrat was instrumental in the passage of Obama Care. *How convenient?!*

*Bob Packwood Oregon*– rightfully had issues due to minor sexual harassment. But Republicans forced him to resign. (isn’t that what Dems do with their bad apples?). NOT– Clinton had engaged in serial sexual harassment, lying under oath, allegations of rape… the democrats didn’t just continue to support him, they continually pretended it was nothing and was just about personal sex. See the irony? *I mean hypocrisy?*  For liberals, only the retention of power matters.

*Sarah Palin Alaska*– Immediately after becoming the running mate of John McCain in 2008 was hit with 14 various ethics charges. (Quite a coincidence?). Eventually she was acquitted of every single one of them!  But the election was lost… Sound Familiar? 

*Tom Delay*- House Majority Leader. After a failed attempt to indict, the second attempt was successful because the attorneys came in with “additional evidence”. Delay was convicted of money laundering and conspiracy charges; then acquitted due to egregious prosecutorial misconduct. This speaks volumes to the “new evidence”.  the charges were bogus, but it cost the Republicans one of their most effective leaders.  Again, right and wrong do not matter… only power matters to liberals.

*Kay Bailey Hutchinson*- Texas Senator was indicted and the case against her imploded as the judge decided the case was so bad he kicked it out of the court room.

Governor Rick Perry charged with “abuse of power” because of a Veto…(district attorney didn’t get what she wanted so she indicted the governor). It was overturned in 2016. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2016/02/24/charges-against-rick-perry-dismissed-by-texas-high-court-on-constitutional-grounds/.

DONALD TRUMP- Isn’t quite a coincidence that 20 years after the fact, women are coming out of the woodwork to say TRUMP basically abused them?  I wonder why they are all coming out now???  Could someone be paying them or promising them something, like fame and fortune?  Surely not!  That would be dishonest, wouldn’t it?  Why now.  I guess i’m a dunce, I just don’t get it.

The point is… the democratic party and its leaders are hypocrites with little care for honesty, “good policy” or integrity… (Note: I say “good policy”, because they are not stupid. They have to know what works and doesn’t…  History has proven what works and what doesn’t.  See http://allsolutionsnetwork.org/blog/a-tale-of-two-leaders-and-two-recoveries  and  How liberal policies caused the financial meltdown.    …but often, what works, http://allsolutionsnetwork.org/blog/the-reality-of-taxation doesn’t garner as many votes…  and as I think we’ve established, it’s all about the votes.

Speaking of Votes… Does voter fraud exist?  Liberals say no… Why?  http://wp.me/p2EGlL-3U3  

This doesn’t mean I believe conservatives are perfect. But you don’t see the above in their playbook. And, for anyone who cares, No Bill Clinton is not an example of a false unwarranted accusation. He was fined $90,000 and lost his license to practice law because of his perjury regarding Monica Lewinski.

*No Honesty, No Integrity… consistent agendas that have at their core nothing other than a quest for the acquisition and maintenance of pure, unadulterated power. My question to all Americans, HOW CAN AMERICAN, IN GOOD CONSCIENCE, SUPPORT THIS PARTY?*

 SEE THE RULES FOR RADICALS 

Although, all of these disingenuous tactics are used, From what I’ve seen, the most despicable and widely used is #12.
Pay attention to liberal politicians arguments and that #12 is the norm.  Ignore the facts, just attack and ridicule the enemy.

* RULE 1: “Power is not only what you have, but what the enemy thinks you have.” Power is derived from 2 main sources – money and people. “Have-Nots” must build power from flesh and blood. (These are two things of which there is a plentiful supply. Government and corporations always have a difficult time appealing to people, and usually do so almost exclusively with economic arguments.)
* RULE 2: “Never go outside the expertise of your people.” It results in confusion, fear and retreat. Feeling secure adds to the backbone of anyone. (Organizations under attack wonder why radicals don’t address the “real” issues. This is why. They avoid things with which they have no knowledge.)
* RULE 3: “Whenever possible, go outside the expertise of the enemy.” Look for ways to increase insecurity, anxiety and uncertainty. (This happens all the time. Watch how many organizations under attack are blind-sided by seemingly irrelevant arguments that they are then forced to address.)
* RULE 4: “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.” If the rule is that every letter gets a reply, send 30,000 letters. You can kill them with this because no one can possibly obey all of their own rules. (This is a serious rule. The besieged entity’s very credibility and reputation is at stake, because if activists catch it lying or not living up to its commitments, they can continue to chip away at the damage.)  EDITOR’S NOTE:  The idea is basically to use their desire to do the right thing against them!  Do you remember what they did to Romney because of his folder of women to which he wanted to give opportunity?  They destroyed him!  
* RULE 5: “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.” There is no defense. It’s irrational. It’s infuriating. It also works as a key pressure point to force the enemy into concessions. (Pretty crude, rude and mean, huh? They want to create anger and fear.)
* RULE 6: “A good tactic is one your people enjoy.” They’ll keep doing it without urging and come back to do more. They’re doing their thing, and will even suggest better ones. (Radical activists, in this sense, are no different that any other human being. We all avoid “un-fun” activities, and but we revel at and enjoy the ones that work and bring results.)
* RULE 7: “A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag.” Don’t become old news. (Even radical activists get bored. So to keep them excited and involved, organizers are constantly coming up with new tactics.)
* RULE 8: “Keep the pressure on. Never let up.” Keep trying new things to keep the opposition off balance. As the opposition masters one approach, hit them from the flank with something new. (Attack, attack, attack from all sides, never giving the reeling organization a chance to rest, regroup, recover and re-strategize.)
* RULE 9: “The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself.” Imagination and ego can dream up many more consequences than any activist. (Perception is reality. Large organizations always prepare a worst-case scenario, something that may be furthest from the activists’ minds. The upshot is that the organization will expend enormous time and energy, creating in its own collective mind the direst of conclusions. The possibilities can easily poison the mind and result in demoralization.)
* RULE 10: “If you push a negative hard enough, it will push through and become a positive.” Violence from the other side can win the public to your side because the public sympathizes with the underdog. (Unions used this tactic. Peaceful [albeit loud] demonstrations during the heyday of unions in the early to mid-20th Century incurred management’s wrath, often in the form of violence that eventually brought public sympathy to their side.)
* RULE 11: “The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative.” Never let the enemy score points because you’re caught without a solution to the problem. (Old saw: If you’re not part of the solution, you’re part of the problem. Activist organizations have an agenda, and their strategy is to hold a place at the table, to be given a forum to wield their power. So, they have to have a compromise solution.)
* RULE 12: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions. (This is cruel, but very effective. Direct, personalized criticism and ridicule works.)

*No Honesty, No Integrity… agendas that consistently have at their core nothing other than a quest for the acquisition and maintenance of pure, unadulterated power. My question to all Americans, HOW CAN AMERICAN, IN GOOD CONSCIENCE, SUPPORT THIS PARTY?*

http://wp.me/p2EGlL-4TE