Prop 8 defender of sanctity of marriage is divorcing his wife

[PubliusInfinitum]

Alinsky's principles were developed for use by the powerless against the powerful. If you're trying to represent them as being politically partisan then you've not properly understood what he was on about.

Alinsky's rules were developed for use by the Communist against the Capitalist... If you are contesting that, then you've not read his work or you're a communist who is spreading disinformation in defense of the untenable.

No news there...

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

It is amazing to me how "conservatives" have such a hard time recognizing hypocrisy.

ROFLMNAO...

Well sadly the hypocrisy is a function of the ACTIONS OF THE INDIVIDUAL... DUMBASS!

Not the principle... Hypocrisy is a human flaw... Everyone that is a human being, is a hypocrit... everyone fails at some point to live up to that which they know to be right... that is the nature of the species.

The American understands that Principles are immutable, that they are necessary to a sound, sustainable culture; and in so doing, Americans work to get better day by day... recognizing their flaws, and striving to overcome them.

The Leftist wants to rationalize that it is the PRINCIPLE that is flawed... as it raises the threshold too high... thus it is the flawed PRINCIPLE that needs to be torn down, not the individual which needs to raise their individual means so as to enable themselves to cross those necessarily high principled thresholds.

 

[Cold Fusion38]

If you are so damn busy trying to FORCE your morals on EVERYONE ELSE that you forget to live by those principles yourself then you are a freaking hypocrite.

 

[Diuretic]

Alinsky's principles were developed for use by the powerless against the powerful. If you're trying to represent them as being politically partisan then you've not properly understood what he was on about.

Alinsky's rules were developed for use by the Communist against the Capitalist... If you are contesting that, then you've not read his work or you're a communist who is spreading disinformation in defense of the untenable.

No news there...

I've read his works, I've used his principles in leading labour disputes. His principles work.

You invoke "communism" because you're bereft of understanding what Alinsky was teaching and why. The word "communist" is frightening to you, you think it frightens others and as a label, for you it has great power, so you attach it to me because you can't think of any other way that you can blunt my point. This isn't the 1950s any longer. People like you will shit their pants when they hear the word "communist" but the pants-shitters are in the minority nowadays. Take a minute or two to calm down and check your pants, I think you just left a load in them.

 

[Diuretic]

Alinsky's principles were developed for use by the powerless against the powerful. If you're trying to represent them as being politically partisan then you've not properly understood what he was on about.

Yep and you are a tool, he is proud that his work for marxism lives on even though, you may not know what you do

His rules were "developed" for use for the masses to use to give power to the one who want to take over anything they felt necessary for the good of the ideals of marxism

"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."
L. DAVID ALINSKY

If you know anything about Marxism - which I suspect you don't - you'd know that it's not a single, unified concept. You might even know that Marx, in his later life, declared himself not to be a "Marxist."

You obviously know little about Alinsky's principles of community organising.

But feel free to display your overwhelming ignorance and prejudice, the two fit nicely together.

 

[PixieStix]

Alinsky's principles were developed for use by the powerless against the powerful. If you're trying to represent them as being politically partisan then you've not properly understood what he was on about.

Yep and you are a tool, he is proud that his work for marxism lives on even though, you may not know what you do

His rules were "developed" for use for the masses to use to give power to the one who want to take over anything they felt necessary for the good of the ideals of marxism

"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."
L. DAVID ALINSKY

If you know anything about Marxism - which I suspect you don't - you'd know that it's not a single, unified concept. You might even know that Marx, in his later life, declared himself not to be a "Marxist."

You obviously know little about Alinsky's principles of community organising.

But feel free to display your overwhelming ignorance and prejudice, the two fit nicely together.

Hahahahaha! This is funny. Considering the fact that I have stated many time today that even though you silly libs may not know any better, you are applying his Rules for Radicals to your postings.

My Rules for conservatives posts are starting to get a reaction from the left LOL

I think you may have unknowingly and unsuccessfully tried to apply this rule to your post

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.)

 

[mal]

What you do is what counts. Way too many extreme conservatives talk the talk but don't walk the walk. Ultimately it is the walk you walk not the talk you talk that counts.

Too many people use trying as an excuse. Trying is basically talking which too many conservatives do a better job of than doing.

Perfection is not Achievable... But setting Societal Standards is.

Liberals Hate Standards because they don't Understand that Failure is a Natural thing...

Learn from it, Moveon.com and Try to Illustrate how to Avoid it to other People.

Barry for Example hasn't been Told he has EVER Failed, although he Obviously has...

Liberals tend to Surround themselves with People who Reenforce their Beliefs and Avoid those who Disagree with them.

Reminds me of a Liberal here Recently who was Mocking for Admitting that I Listen to those that I Criticize.

"You listent to Air America?"... As if that was a Slam Against me when Discussing why Idiots like Ed Shultz are Idiots.

Liberals just Trust that their Superior Liberals have Informed them Accuratly regarding Conservatives and Procede Accordingly.

Ignorantly.

And I Take my Own to Task also... SHOCKER!, eh!



peace...

You set societal standards by example not words.

I am a big believer in standards. I try to communicate my standards by example not empty words.

And you and the Left Attempt to Define not only the Individual in this Case by the Failure, but you also Attempt to Apply his Failure to ANYONE who Attempts to Live up to Standards or even Expects some Standards out of a Civil Society.

By the way, NO Individual's Failure lends Validation to Deviancy... Which is Really what this Thread is about.

A REPUBLICan is getting Divorced, so Homosexuals are Validated in thier Quest for something they are Incapable of Reflecting... Marriage.

Correct?... That's really the Goal here.



peace...

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Alinsky's principles were developed for use by the powerless against the powerful. If you're trying to represent them as being politically partisan then you've not properly understood what he was on about.

Alinsky's rules were developed for use by the Communist against the Capitalist... If you are contesting that, then you've not read his work or you're a communist who is spreading disinformation in defense of the untenable.

No news there...

I've read his works, I've used his principles in leading labour disputes. His principles work.

Well yes, they work... they produce angst and vitriol and they lead cultures towards civil war; where the angst they produce burns sufficiently hot to force those subjected to them to cease tolerating the rabble and kick the living shit out of them to shut them the FUCK UP!

This ain't Guatemala sis... "We the People;" are the opposition and we're armed to the TEETH! The Comrades are the unarmed feminized organizers of communities and when their shit hits the fans, the fans is going to cut through it with little effort and less concern for the shit's well being.

You invoke "communism" because

of the communist principles espoused throughout his work...

The word "communist" is frightening to you

No more so than the word 'herpes' or 'anal-warts' frieghtens me... I simply recognize that like communism, a healthy individual and by extension, the healthy culture should maintain sufficiently high standards to avoind exposing themselves to such virulent threats... As they're harder to get rid of than contract and there's no upside to having done so.

This isn't the 1950s any longer. People like you will shit their pants when they hear the word "communist" but the pants-shitters are in the minority nowadays.

Yeah, its pretty much the same thing with the word "Polio," but that's solved fairly quickly by a Polio infection coming to pass... and shitting one's pants over Polio comes right back into high fashion...

Communism is a virulent ideology that destroys everything it touches... There's only one cure and that is to burn it out; and in the US, we're quickly approaching the point where the Alinsky school of idiocy has rubbed sufficient people the wrong way that the heat is tending towards combustible...

And when we're done with these idiots... we'll begin to consider the Communist problems in Australia... and Europe...

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

If you know anything about Marxism - which I suspect you don't - you'd know that it's not a single, unified concept. You might even know that Marx, in his later life, declared himself not to be a "Marxist."

ROFLMNAO... Yet another attempt to define Leftism; specifically Marxism as some indefinable, unknowable species of thought... as if there is no means to comprehend collectivism and the stupefying tyranny which it represents on the whole...

You obviously know little about Alinsky's principles of community organising.

LOL... anyone notice the trend here?

The Gals are consistantly crying through sobs projecting that their opposition 'OBVIOUSLY DOESN'T KNOW XXX...'

This is of course the tired and tattered leftist ad populum farce... wherein the Comrade appeals to the popular concensus that their opposition is ignorant of 'what THEY KNOW...'

The best part is that they NEVER GET AROUND to telling you what it is that they actually KNOW... and this is due to the certainty that should they make THAT mistake, the conversation dries right up... as they prove themselves to be addle-minded fools.

 

[Harry Dresden]

It is amazing to me how "conservatives" have such a hard time recognizing hypocrisy.

question....do liberals recognize hypocrisy?....

 

[PixieStix]

It is amazing to me how "conservatives" have such a hard time recognizing hypocrisy.

question....do liberals recognize hypocrisy?....

Only if they get to project it?

 

[Cold Fusion38]

Oh yeah we RECOGNIZE it. We can see it for what it is and although MANY Dems don't hold themselves to a high enough standard for public office at least they don't pretend to be for family values while they are f'ing some tart in another country.

 

[JBeukema]

Liberals have an Easy Job... They don't have any Standards, so they don't have to Worry about being held to any...

Plenty of Room in Hell for those who don't even Try.



peace...

What you do is what counts. Way too many extreme conservatives talk the talk but don't walk the walk. Ultimately it is the walk you walk not the talk you talk that counts.

Too many people use trying as an excuse. Trying is basically talking which too many conservatives do a better job of than doing.

Perfection is not Achievable... But setting Societal Standards is.

Liberals Hate Standards because they don't Understand that Failure is a Natural thing...

Learn from it, Moveon.com and Try to Illustrate how to Avoid it to other People.

Barry for Example hasn't been Told he has EVER Failed, although he Obviously has...

Liberals tend to Surround themselves with People who Reenforce their Beliefs and Avoid those who Disagree with them.

Reminds me of a Liberal here Recently who was Mocking for Admitting that I Listen to those that I Criticize.

"You listent to Air America?"... As if that was a Slam Against me when Discussing why Idiots like Ed Shultz are Idiots.

Liberals just Trust that their Superior Liberals have Informed them Accuratly regarding Conservatives and Procede Accordingly.

Ignorantly.

And I Take my Own to Task also... SHOCKER!, eh!



peace...

'liberals' = 'all liberals'

if he meant 'some', he would have said it... read what he wrote carefully...

 

[Harry Dresden]

Oh yeah we RECOGNIZE it. We can see it for what it is and although MANY Dems don't hold themselves to a high enough standard for public office at least they don't pretend to be for family values while they are f'ing some tart in another country.

oh ok i see what ya mean..... guys like Kennedy....high moral character.....

 

[JBeukema]

Oh yeah we RECOGNIZE it. We can see it for what it is and although MANY Dems don't hold themselves to a high enough standard for public office at least they don't pretend to be for family values while they are f'ing some tart in another country.

oh ok i see what ya mean..... guys like Kennedy....high moral character.....

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S99AukhkgW4]YouTube - Kill Hannah - I Wanna Be A Kennedy[/ame]

 

[Gunny]

San Diego CityBeat - Ironic divorce

Ironic divorce
Protector of traditional marriage Doug Manchester leaving wife of 43 years
By Eric Wolff


In July 2008, hotelier and developer Doug Manchester donated $125,000 to help gather signatures for a proposition that would ban same-sex marriage in California. The early money was crucial to getting the initiative—which ultimately passed—on the ballot. At the time, he told The New York Times that he made the donation because of “my Catholic faith and longtime affiliation with the Catholic Church,” which preferred that marriage remain between a man and a woman. Indeed, the Catholic Church has vehemently opposed gay marriage. Then again, it’s also not too keen on divorce.

On Oct. 9, 2008, Manchester ended 43 years, eight months and nine days of marriage to Elizabeth Manchester by moving out of their La Jolla abode. The couple spent the next several months trying to reach a quiet settlement on how best to distribute millions of dollars in cash and other assets. In July, those talks totally broke down, and Doug started playing financial hardball with Elizabeth, allegedly draining the couple’s shared accounts and stealing her mail. On Aug. 6, Elizabeth filed a petition for redress in family court. All of the information in this story comes from those petitions. CityBeat contacted attorneys for both parties, but neither returned calls by press time. <more>

There's no irony here. Matter of fact, there's nothing of interest here. Who cares?

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

If you are so damn busy trying to FORCE your morals on EVERYONE ELSE that you forget to live by those principles yourself then you are a freaking hypocrite.

So what? How does that effect the immutable principle for which the hypocrit advocated? Come on douschebag... BE SPECIFIC!

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Oh yeah we RECOGNIZE it. We can see it for what it is and although MANY Dems don't hold themselves to a high enough standard for public office at least they don't pretend to be for family values while they are f'ing some tart in another country.

Again... the issue for this imbecile is that Fidelity and the Sanctity of Marriage is not a valid, true and sustainable principle; because this guy said it was and was later found falling short of that principled threshold.

ROFLMNAO...



Leftists...

 

[Cold Fusion38]

I have a problem with people who try to legislate MORALITY and have no morals themselves.

 

[Harry Dresden]

I have a problem with people who try to legislate MORALITY and have no morals themselves.

do you know why these two are divorcing?......