Excellent. You've clearly missed my point. Past constitutional transgressions do not rationalize current ones. It's been the statist method to circumvent the Constitution that is the real issue. In that Alinsky has clearly played a strong role. Merely citing a "Parade of Entitled Victims" is irrelevant. The Issue, again, is the subjective morality of Religious Statism, codified by the soviets in their social science of "Psychopolitics" that has been used by Alinsky and others to circumvent the Constitution and indoctrinate their statist religious beliefs. Your responses are a good example, as they are are very doctrinal, according to the subjective morality of religious statism. Here's the text on Psychopolitics, its really a handbook on how to indoctrinate the unconstitutional, sociopathic, subjective morality and dogma of Religious Statism.
http://www.lawfulpath.com/ref/brainwsh.shtml Welcome aboard Ken. IMHO an excellent post that goes to the heart of key issues facing us. In both countries a significant failing is a lack of understanding of very key fundamental constitutional and moral issues.
In King's case, my assessment, not shared by all here, is that his personal experience corrupts his conceptual outlook. "I did it so it must work and be good!" The reality is that King's prescription may work well for people like him but, like Karl Marx's theories, fail to take into account the nature of mankind. It is the failing of most of the left's footsoldiers. Their leaders are different though. They just want to run things.
