Zone1 A question for the USMB left.

[Orangecat]

I have a sincere question for the lefties here.
Why do you so many of you label disagreement as “hate”?
Example:
“I believe marriage is a religious institution, between a man and a woman.”
Lefty answer: “Why do you hate gays?”
Or:
“”I’m against abortion.”
Lefty answer: “Why do you hate women?”

Is it an Alinsky thing, painting your adversaries as extremist haters?
Something else?

 

[Magnus]

I have a sincere question for the lefties here.
Why do you so green label disagreement as “hate”?
Example:
“I believe marriage is a religious institution, between a man and a woman.”
Lefty answer: “Why do you hate gays?”
Or:
“”I’m against abortion.”
Lefty answer: “Why do you hate women?”

Is it an Alinsky thing, painting your adversaries as extremist haters?
Something else?

Why do you hate Alinsky?

 

[Augustine_]

I have a sincere question for the lefties here.
Why do you so green label disagreement as “hate”?
Example:
“I believe marriage is a religious institution, between a man and a woman.”
Lefty answer: “Why do you hate gays?”
Or:
“”I’m against abortion.”
Lefty answer: “Why do you hate women?”

Is it an Alinsky thing, painting your adversaries as extremist haters?
Something else?

Your beliefs causing you to seek to inflict misery on people is not much different from hatred

 

[Orangecat]

Why do you hate Alinsky?

Well played, but I don’t hate him. Pretty cunning dude, imho.

 

[Orangecat]

Your beliefs causing you to seek to inflict misery on people is not much different from hatred

I don’t believe in causing anyone misery. Nice straw man, though.

 

[Robert W]

I have a sincere question for the lefties here.
Why do you so green label disagreement as “hate”?
Example:
“I believe marriage is a religious institution, between a man and a woman.”
Lefty answer: “Why do you hate gays?”
Or:
“”I’m against abortion.”
Lefty answer: “Why do you hate women?”

Is it an Alinsky thing, painting your adversaries as extremist haters?
Something else?

They grew up accepting Democrat propaganda. I recall when I was a Democrat, Me and my whole family accepted Democrat propaganda. Once a person votes for Democrats, it resembles the Mafia supporting Italians.

 

[Oddball]

Pretty cunning dude, imho.

Not even clever...That retort was on a tee.

 

[Robert W]

I don’t believe in causing anyone misery. Nice straw man, though.

GOD, how much more misery can be inflicted on us than by Democrats? They run our borders and it is they allowing millions of illegals to swamp America.

 

[Orangecat]

Not even clever...That retort was on a tee.

Well, clever enough to fool legions of leftist useful idiots. That’s not a high bar, though.

 

[Oddball]

I don’t believe in causing anyone misery. Nice straw man, though.

The presupposition is that the left are "helpers"...And if you don't agree that their "help" is effective and/or is counter-productive, then you're in favor of suffering.

It's a slight variation on the pedantic "you hate X" riff.

 

[Augustine_]

I don’t believe in causing anyone misery.

I'm sure you think so

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

I have a sincere question for the lefties here.
Why do you so many of you label disagreement as “hate”?
Example:
“I believe marriage is a religious institution, between a man and a woman.”
Lefty answer: “Why do you hate gays?”
Or:
“”I’m against abortion.”
Lefty answer: “Why do you hate women?”

Is it an Alinsky thing, painting your adversaries as extremist haters?
Something else?

I believe and the facts back me up, a marriage is a contract between two people.

Saul Alinsky? You people know nothing about him. Go back to that drunkard with his chalk board/gresse board on FOX News.

 

[Orangecat]

I'm sure you think so

And I’m correct.
Pro tip: You’re not a mind reader. You can barely think at all, if your post history is any indication.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Why do you hate Alinsky?

HE has no idea who and what Alinsky is and was.

 

[Orangecat]

I believe and the facts back me up, a marriage is a contract between two people.

Saul Alinsky? You people know nothing about him. Go back to that drunkard with his chalk board/gresse board on FOX News.

You also believe men can have periods.
/mic drop/

 

[sparky]

either you got game or you don't......~S~

 

[Robert W]

The presupposition is that the left are "helpers"...And if you don't agree that their "help" is effective and/or is counter-productive, then you're in favor of suffering.

It's a slight variation on the pedantic "you hate X" riff.

Depends. Listen to the head of the Homeland Security now being impeached. Mayorka would tell you thousands of times he secured the border. He has massively lied though.

 

[Robert W]

HE has no idea who and what Alinsky is and was.

Saul Alinsky

The Rules[edit source]​

1. "Power is not only what you have but what the enemy thinks you have."
2. "Never go outside the expertise of your people."
3. "Whenever possible go outside the expertise of the enemy."
4. "Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules."
5. "Ridicule is man's most potent weapon. There is no defense. It is almost impossible to counterattack ridicule. Also it infuriates the opposition, who then react to your advantage."
6. "A good tactic is one your people enjoy."
7. "A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag."
8. "Keep the pressure on."
9. "The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself."
10. "The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition."
11. "If you push a negative hard and deep enough it will break through into its counterside; this is based on the principle that every positive has its negative."
12. "The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative."
13. "Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it."

 

[MisterBeale]

Why do you hate Alinsky?

Mostly? Because he was an evil, soulless agent of chaos. He made no attempt to hide how twisted he was.

". . . Now, a crucial clarification: I don’t think it’s technically accurate to say that Rules for Radicals is “dedicated” to Lucifer, as is often claimed by Alinsky’s detractors. (It’s also hard to criticize them for making that assumption.) Looking at the book carefully, it appears to be dedicated to one person: There is a page that says simply “To Irene,” and nothing else. On the page prior to the Irene dedication is a list of “Personal Acknowledgements,” where Alinsky lists four friends: Jason Epstein, Cicely Nichols, Susan Rabiner, and Georgia Harper. Following the Irene page is another page, the controversial one, in which Alinsky offers three quotes, the first from a Rabbi Hillel, the second from Thomas Paine, and the third from Alinsky himself, giving his nod to Lucifer. One well-known fact-checker source (Snopes) describes this as “three epigraphs on an introductory page.” I suppose that’s an acceptable way to characterize it. And the third of the three is an “epigraph” (if you will) to Satan.

But we shouldn’t let Alinsky off the Lucifer hook so easily.

Alinsky, for one, was asked about the Lucifer acknowledgment in his March 1972 interview with Playboy magazine near the end of his life, a swan-song that every Alinsky aficionado knows about. Here’s the exchange, which came at the very end of the interview, with Playboy apparently judging it a fittingly provocative close to the extremely lengthy interview:

PLAYBOY: Having accepted your own mortality, do you believe in any kind of afterlife?

ALINSKY: Sometimes it seems to me that the question people should ask is not “Is there life after death?” but “Is there life after birth?” I don’t know whether there’s anything after this or not. I haven’t seen the evidence one way or the other and I don’t think anybody else has either. But I do know that man’s obsession with the question comes out of his stubborn refusal to face up to his own mortality. Let’s say that if there is an afterlife, and I have anything to say about it, I will unreservedly choose to go to hell.

PLAYBOY: Why?

ALINSKY: Hell would be heaven for me. All my life I’ve been with the have-nots. Over here, if you’re a have-not, you’re short of dough. If you’re a have-not in hell, you’re short of virtue. Once I get into hell, I’ll start organizing the have-nots over there.

PLAYBOY: Why them?

ALINSKY: They’re my kind of people.

“They’re my kind of people,” said Alinsky. “Hell would be heaven for me.”

Tongue-in-cheek again? Yuk, yuk, yuk. Hilarious, just hilarious.

For the record, when I googled the Alinsky-Playboy interview this week I found the aforementioned excerpt posted at (among other places) a Satanist website. There, the author, in an article titled, “Saul D. Alinsky: A role model for left-wing Satanists,” writes of the exchange: “I’m not sure whether Alinsky really was a Satanist/Luciferian of some sort or whether he was just joking. He may well have been just joking.”

Maybe. Pretty funny, eh?"

The Hillary-Alinsky-Lucifer Connection - CatholicCitizens.org

BY PAUL KENGOR , July 26, 2016 The devil is in her details. In his speech at the Republican convention last week, Ben Carson made a statement that raised some […]

catholiccitizens.org

 

[Augustine_]

And I’m correct.
Pro tip: You’re not a mind reader. You can barely think at all, if your post history is any indication.

Sure, you don't hate gay people and a woman's right to choose, you just vote and behave as if you do