LEFT-WING RADICAL INFLUENCING OBAMA?
Fox News
,2933,520841,00 .html
May 20 2009
This is a rush transcript from "Hannity," May 19, 2009. This copy
may not be in its final form and may be updated.
SEAN HANNITY, HOST: During the campaign we learned that candidate
Obama had internalized some of the lessons of the late great radical,
Saul Alinsky, but in a new column, the National Review’s Jim Geraghty
argues that Mr. Obama is ruling the country according to Mr. Alinsky’s
radical rules.
He writes, quote, that "moderates thought they were electing a
moderate. Liberals thought they were electing a liberal. Both
camps were wrong. Ideology does not have the final say in Obama’s
decision-making. An Alinskyite’s core principle is to take any action
that expands his power and to avoid any action that risks his power."
The author of that column, Jim Geraghty, joins me now.
Jim, thanks for being with us.
JIM GERAGHTY, COLUMNIST, NATIONAL REVIEW: Sean, very glad to be here.
â~@¢ Video: Watch Sean’s interview
HANNITY: Ridicule, the — one of the biggest weapons in the Alinsky
model. To ridicule your opponent. You see that aspect of it, because
I think that’s actually a key component in the tactics that are being
used by Obama?
GERAGHTY: I would. I would point out that he often lets surrogates
do it. We saw a little bit of his — Obama’s attempted ridicule at
the White House Correspondents Dinner.
But I think really, actually, he’s got everything from "The Daily
Show" to "The Colbert Report" to, you know, liberal bloggers,
entertainers, Bill Maher. He kind of outsources that aspect of the
Alinsky operation. So he can often seem above the fray. It’s all very
important, because seeming too snide or too hostile might actually
minimize his power.
The object is to look, you know, like he’s respectful and fine while
the other side are doing what they can to beat his opponents over
the head.
HANNITY: So pick the target, freeze the target, personalize it,
polarize it, all of that stuff that he talks about. You know, but we
did see it when Santelli and Robert Gibbs went after Santelli, they
went after Jim Cramer. They went after Rush Limbaugh. At different
times, they’ve gone after me by name, trying to demonize people. That
is a big part of the model and maybe even silencing talk radio could
be a part of that. No?
GERAGHTY: Oh, absolutely. Just one thing that’s interesting is I
think Jim Cramer was perhaps one of the most interesting examples,
because Jim Cramer, generally I like him, but even, you know, just
as a financial mind, not as a political guy. He only became an issue
to the Jon Stewarts of the world once he started criticizing Obama.
Cramer has been doing his, you know, fired-up and easily mockable
schtick for a long time.
HANNITY: And by the way, do that again.
GERAGHTY: Criticizing…
HANNITY: Show me how — show me how you do that…
GERAGHTY: I know it’s another network, but it’s an often entertaining
show. It’s for those who find Glenn Beck too laid back and calm.
And so it’s one of those things where I would say once you become a
critic of Obama, it doesn’t matter if you’ve praised him in the past,
it doesn’t matter if you were previously a friendly voice, you need
to be tamped down. And even Obama doesn’t do it. Other folks in his
administration or other allies will do that.
HANNITY: All right. There is a photo of Obama in a classroom teaching
students about Alinsky’s methods. So who is Alinsky? Why don’t you —
because you’ve taken the time to investigate. Who is he?
GERAGHTY: I think he’s best thought of as Obama’s ideological
grandfather. Alinsky died in 1972. It’s not like he ever met Obama, but
he had a great deal of influence on the Chicago community organizers
who were kind of the mentors for Barack Obama during his key formative
years as a young man. And it’s a very interesting approach.
It is — the book I picked up, "Rules for Radicals." And I would
just kind of point out that, for about 11 bucks, it was kind of the
Rosetta Stone for Obama’s decision making.
It kind of lays out that — that to a certain extent, it’s almost
Machiavellian. It basically says, yes, accumulate power. If you win,
you one remembers how you’ve one, and then you can enact the changes
you want.
HANNITY: All right. So — but no, go ahead. Finish your thought.
GERAGHTY: I was going to say that he almost kind of sneers at people
who say they wouldn’t compromise their principles and their pursuit of
power and their pursuit of their goals. And he says, "Oh, you know,
it must be really tough to tuck your angel wings under your covers
when you go to bed at night."
So the message coming up from Alinsky when it comes to accumulating
power is very clear.
HANNITY: So really for Obama, your analysis is that all of this for
him, following the Alinsky model, is about power. So, in other words,
if they want to dictate CEO pay, if they want to control or nationalize
the banks, we know now they’re going to — they’re going to own GM as
a result of this bankruptcy deal that we’re talking about. They want to
take over health care. They want to tell us what kind of cars to drive.
You’re saying that they want to nationalize health care. They want
to do all of this because it’s government power?
GERAGHTY: It is, but I would note that it’s not merely spending
government power, it’s about spending Obama’s power. And that Obama
will sacrifice his liberal allies if it will put him into a position
less than his power.
The three basic examples that just come to find are gays who wanted
to see an end to "don’t ask, don’t tell," and nothing has happened
on that front. Armenian-Americans who wanted him to denounce Turkey
for genocide back in the early part of the last century.
And I think another one probably would be those who kind of figured
there would be sweeping changes in counterterrorism policy, rendition
is sticking around and we’re seeing continuing tribunals at Gitmo, now
they’re talk Gitmo may not be closed within a year, all of these things
are being changed because Obama’s not going to risk his popularity
and his power just to placate people who are supposed to be his allies.
HANNITY: It almost seems like triangulation on speed, I mean when
you think about it…
GERAGHTY: It’s a good way of putting it, and I think to a certain
extent Obama’s goal — it makes him tougher to beat, but I would note
this means it’s not unbeatable. And to a certain extent, this is not
a liberal ideologue. This is a very careful and strategic…
HANNITY: All right.
GERAGHTY: … liberal ideologue. He’s not going to make the easy
mistakes with the military, the way Bill Clinton did.
HANNITY: But he does dramatically want to alter the American
economy. He does have hard-core leftist views. And it’s all about —
while he’s getting his power in the process, it’s all about advancing
those radical views, too. Correct or wrong?
GERAGHTY: No, you’re right on this. I think one of the things that’s
most infuriating for those of us who don’t often agree with President
Obama, is to note how often he will do the exact opposite of what
he’s saying.
He talked about how much he doesn’t want the government to run the auto
industry. And for those of us there’s a very simple way to avoid that,
which is to not do it. But instead, he has the ever greater government
role in running these American auto companies.
He keeps saying how he doesn’t want to bail out Wall Street, and yet,
you look at what Tim Geithner is doing in the extension of the TARP
funds and how they don’t want banks to give back the TARP money. He
keeps doing the exact same thing. Acting one way and doing the precise
opposite — saying on thing and doing the opposite.
HANNITY: Thank you for being with us tonight. Appreciate it.
GERAGHTY: Any time, Sean.
Watch "Hannity" weeknights at 9 p.m. ET!