Hoping Against Hope? A Response to Limbaugh & Teachout

I consider David Sirota to be a pretty lightweight progressive. Still your approach to attacking him made me a bit uncomfortable. But that's my problem not yours.

I too worry that Obama and Obama for America might not "get it right". But I keep the worries pretty much to myself. Don't want to chicken little it.

I agree that it would be great to do this from a true bottom up approach. I agree again that we, progressives of the last forty years, haven't done as well as we could have and now find ourselves in our current straights of dis-organization. So if it takes a top-down priming of the pump to get 'er going then I'm not going to spite my face by cutting off the nose.

I certainly wouldn't want all that great database effort handed over to the local machine hacks here in Illinois. But I do see real door-to-door and phone bank work organizing being done by the local DFA chapter here in my neck of the woods in Chicago. I am also seeing that same energy and oganizing filtering into some of the oldest of the old school progressive organizations here (IVI-IPO specifically). Indeed on Sunday, old schoolers and new, DFAers and bloggers and new unionists etc, have organized a forum to hear out the candidates for Rahm Emanuel's seat. That may seem like a small thing, but believe me it's huge.

So if the Obama pump priming goes right, then at some point those of us there will connect with those of us not there. And if the data is really usefully decentralized both of us's will know it immediately and recognize it. And if it's not, well we will recognize that as well, won't we.

I certainly have hopes.

and the sad thing is , they tarnishing the legacy of a great great man. Howrd Dean was a trail blazer, he was a new important voice, and his contributions will never be forgotten...but there is this cottage industry of his supporters and his campaign people who are put on a pedastel by the netroots and treated like demi Gods.

I read that article, and was sick to my stomach, I was planning to attend a meeting if there was one near...now..I am hosting one..here in Utah ..we could actually Sen.Orin Hatch( who I think is a reasonable man who can be persuaded), we can also voice our opposition to some of the things in the house bill( a loooot of pork), and support for increased infrastructure investment.

This is a Saul Alinsky radical rule number 13:  Pick the target, me, isolate it, polarize it.

When I read this as a quote from Limbaugh for the first time (god knows where) I thought of you...its too perfect...and i am glad to know that we are on the same track.

This is what 'they' are doing to limbaugh and the GOP and yet the folks at Open Left are freaking out...the sky looks good to me...its perfect.

Last weekend, I was a facilitator at "Camp Courage" in Los Angeles which trained about 220 organizers (gay and straight) on the subject of marriage equality.  It was developed by two Camp Obama alums, based on the Camp Obama model (including its most important tenet: Respect, Empower, and Include), and sponsored by the Courage Campaign which is an "online organizing hub for progressive Californians" founded by Rick Jacobs (who chaired Howard Dean's campaign in California).

What's exciting about Camp Courage is that although it is in response to the recent passage of Prop 8, it's not about a particular piece of legislation or candidate AT THIS MOMENT.  It's about, as Rick says, building a statewide "infrastructure" of organizers ready to engage their communities on the issue of marriage equality when the time is right and connected to each other via modern tools (the Courage Campaign runs the same software as MyBo).

Though most of the facilitators were former Camp Obama facilitators and Marshall Ganz, himself, gave his blessing to the endeavor (and his permission to quote his materials), Camp Courage truly was a grassroots effort and was unaffiliated with Organizing for America.

There will be many more Camps Courage in the upcoming months throughout the state.  Nobody is waiting for the Democratic Party to restore marriage equality in California--the people are gearing up to make it happen themselves.

For more info:  http://www.couragecampaign.org/page/s/CampCourageArmy

I certainly hope OFA won't fail.  But I can't see many of my friends and acquaintances organizing to pressure Congress into providing banks with $4 trillion in taxpayer cash.  In fact my household was this very evening talking about taking a couple weeks off of work to organize against that kind of proposal.

Especially now that Bush is gone, OFA can succeed only to the extent people continue to believe Obama represents something different in kind from the normal run of politicians.  And in that regard Geithner and Summers are starting to look like a problem for him.  Corporate tax breaks already in the stimulus bill and continued handouts to banks while protecting the bank shareholders and keeping the same management in place will blunt any enthusiasm for house parties, phone calling, letter writing etc.  To hell with Geithner's ideological committment to keeping banks in private hands.

A difference in kind is going to be a harder sell to the extent Obama waters down populist policies with corporate welfare in order to attract Republican votes.

I'd love to be asked to work hard to get single payer universal health care passed, especially if that meant spending some time in a Republican or Blue Dog district organizing constituents against a recalcitrant corporate hack.  But I'm not going to waste my time working to help pass watered down welfare for private health insurance companies disguised as "health care reform."

Right now I have no idea which way things will go.  Given what happened under Clinton, I'm kinda gun shy.

I can't say I've ever agreed with Limbaugh about anything before, but in that last quote you excerpted, it sounds like he gets what's going on. It's kind of fascinating to think about Rush reading Saul Alinsky to better get inside Obama's head.

Somebody should suggest to Rush that he should apologise for everything he's said and retire "for the good of the party/America". This would guarantee he keeps doing what he's doing until something gives.

In any case, who pays Rush's bills? What would Clearchannel prefer? A healthier Republican party or a bigger audience for Rush? There might be a Taylor Marsh situation developing here where the sponsors decide his direction for him.

Are you trying to "Rule 13" Sirota?

*buys more popcorn*

The most important name in political commentary and activism right now. Carpe diem.

Russell: What a great story. Exactly what I'm hoping will happen across America on a whole host of issues. Fantastic. "Organizing the President" indeed.

Britta: Yes, how freaky is that?!? Lushbo reads Alinsky? So we know he'll be adjusting accordingly, and now we must think three steps ahead to keep baiting and neutralizing Limpdick. He's a worthy adversary no matter how evil he may be. So we need to be asking how can we keep surprising him, since just following the Alinsky playbook might not be sufficient now that he's switched on and tuned into our strategies.

You know, I just joined that Facebook page for the sole purpose of responding to the notion that OFA is somehow undemocratic:

What about this is exactly horribly undemocratic? If anything, this is good for democracy, getting people both involved in the system and informed about the issues at hand. Yes, this is a propaganda machine, there is little doubt about that, but that describes almost any people or group who argue in support of or in opposition to issues (since propaganda is "information, ideas, or rumors deliberately spread widely to help or harm a person, group, movement, institution, nation, etc."). This is our country, and we not only have the right to mobilize to push through our issues (which, presumably, are the issues we agree with President Obama on if you're part of this organization) we have a duty to do so. Since there is absolutely nothing stopping the loyal opposition from forming an organizing arm in an attempt to stop the president's initiatives (and, if they believe in their cause, that's what they should be doing) there can't be anything wrong with Obama doing it.

And really, as the organizers here would probably agree, that's what it boils down to, if they other side is opposed to Obama's policies, then let them speak out and organize against them, but don't expect the community organizer not to organize his own supporters to get his policies through.

"The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie, deliberate, contrived and dishonest, but the myth, persistent, persuasive and unrealistic.” JFK

alas, I don't think he'll pay me to be one.

A bit O.T., but I think Teachout does not understand what a "shill" is or what they do -- from dictionary.com

While I agree with President Obama, I don't imagine myself getting a lot of profit, friendship, or loyalty from anybody for supporting his policies. Nor do I wish to deceive anyone else into supporting his positions. 

More on topic: I couldn't agree with you more, Al. I'm not a Democratic Party member, and won't be until the Obama organizing model takes over from my limited experience with those local DNC / Dem. Party folks. But I certainly count myself as a progressive thinker, voter, and supporter. If OFA acts and organizes in the way his campaign did: with respect, inclusion, and empowerment, they cannot fail. I'll be watching carefully for signs that OFA will act in that fashion. 

This is one of the best diaries that I have read on The Field in some time (and that is saying something!).  Rock On Al.

you should crosspost at Kos in the morning. the big orange is really starting to annoy me.

I dont think anybody has to change tactics just because Rush reads Alinsky too. The way to defeat somebody who is using Alinsky tactics is to be a good faith actor, take up less hypocritical positions than the opposition, be a better representative to more people than the opposition etc. If you can't do this for various reasons (ego? sponsors? faith? bigotry? history of stupid statements?) then you have to get out of the way or risk harming your cause. Win-Win.

I think Obama wants the republicans to choose acting in good faith for their voters interests. By making ads about Rush so early, he is giving Republicans plenty of time to learn the 'right' course of action before the next set of elections.

Ah, I missed this post when I sent the Limbaugh vid on another thread, hadn't refreshed the main field directory yet.

Here.

is that Obama is isolating obstructionist Repub legislators over in his corner.  Rush is already marginal - he marginalized himself, deliberately, to become the lightning rod he is.  But tagging Repub legislators who follow Rush's agenda with Rush's name is new.  The good Congresspeople can try to back away all they want; if this media narrative goes the way it is now, they'll still be the Rush Republicans in the House.

I'd like to invite teachout to come to Vigo County Indiana to meet 30 or so Obama organizers, campaigners, and canvassers who had virtually no meaningful assistance from the local Democratic party establishment and are thus plotting not the overthrow but the complete marginalization of that moribund and incestuous lot of sad-sacks known as the local Democratic party. And to think that OFA's implementation will yield some cookie cutter/cloning approach to local organizing is like, so 1990's. The gift of the Obama campaign--to those who actually worked on it--was precisely the liberty to NOT replicate the "system"; just because something worked in one place or was passed down the chain of command did not mean that it had to be done the same way if local solutions could be found to address local problems. If OFA were institutionalized as teachout suggests, it would fail! 

I joined the Facebook group also.  I am not happy with the money wasted on the banks.  I would welcome any ideas how to stop it.  I worked to get President Obama elected.  I did not vote for him to question all his decisions.  I would not have taken out the family planning money, yet I am not sure if that would have stopped the bill from passing the Senate.  I am not sure it will pass now.  If President Obama does not make enough of the right decisions, I will let him know.  I am not going to stop working because he does not do every thing I want.  No one said it would be easy.

C'mon Al, you know very well, having read the piece, that I'm not "hoping against hope", I'm hoping for it.

I'm thrilled with Obama, and I think he will succeed. I also think lots of organizations sprung from the Obama campaign and inspired by it will succeed--and their autonomy may be necessary for their power, and when the real fights come, their power (expecially if it can be more progressive) will be critical. I don't think OFA is one of them--and OFA is DNC organization, nothing more or less.

What I'm not thrilled about is an idea of self-government that puts the Presidency at the center of it--I've written about this more here, how Obama's own vision requires a rejuvenation of more power in the other branches:

http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/01/22/the_puzzle_of_power/

Z

The DFA people are angry that Obama declined to kiss Dean's ring after he was elected, though it's not clear to me that Dean was ever all that interested in having his ring kissed. I know he wanted HHS, but he wanted it because he's actually interested in the issue. The DFA people, however, thought he deserved as some perceived moral consolation, and were poutraged that Obama chose someone who knows Congress to carry out healthcare reform instead of a governor primarily known as a partisan crusader. Still, his worshipers continue to push the myth that Obama "owes everything" to Dean since, apparently, Howard invented the internet and young people. Of course, they don't realize that Obama's campaign was actually drastically different from the one that Dean ran in 2004. First of all, young people and the internet were only a small part of a broader mosaic, and I think you can see which approach was superior by considering the relative ineffectiveness and costliness of Dean's Iowa operation. Ultimately, Trippi and Co. knew how to burn through the money, but didn't know how to translate that into votes (and his October 2008 diaries questioning Plouffe and warning of the Bradley Effect, I think, indicate his level of actual political acumen). Apparently, they still don't grasp the advantages of having a disciplined, overarching leadership.

Russell:  Camp Courage.  Inspiring.

http://www.couragecampaign.org/page/s/CampCourageArmy

The name didn't come thru as a hyperlink.  Hope this does.

Al, I hope we're going to be able to read many of these writings in your soon to be published ( we hope!) book:  The Organizing of the President.

One of the most stunning successes of the Obama Campaign, was how they gave individuals responsibility, trusted them to be more than mere clerks, and let them grow & increase the responsibility they were taking on - must be terrifying to those who cling to anything they can to exercise what they see as 'power.'

Some of the Field hands saw a great example of that in the move of The Field to its true home The Narcosphere.

Again, thanks Al.

I especially appreciated the point made about the diversity -- racial and otherwise -- of the Obama campaign at the local level being unprecedented in recent Democratic/progressive campaigns. I was an organizer in Massachusetts & New Hampshire for Howard Dean's campaign and the lack of racial diversity and class diversity was an ongoing source of concern for many of us that we never successfully addressed, even in supposedly liberal bastions like Boston. The Kerry campaign was similarly not very diverse from a volunteer perspective -- except for the union folks who were involved. In contrast, the Obama campaign volunteer experience was incredible. As a frequent canvasser in New Hampshire, I had never seen so many people of color weekend after weekend flocking to New Hampshire to volunteer and at local events here in Massachusetts.

It would be an extreme shame if all that organizing went to waste and wasn't leveraged on behalf of progeressive issues. I agree it would be better if this organizing was 100% locally driven, but that's unfortunately not where we are in this country. And the real test for OFA will be when (not if) a significant number of the members disagree with Obama on an issue they are encouraged to organize around.

That story up thread about the training in California is incredibly encouraging and is really a model for where I hope post-Obama campaign progressive organizing goes ultimately. OFA will no doubt have some degree of control/influence on future organizing. But it seems to me it might be like the best kind of parenting: teach your kids to be independent actors and question authority and they probably will at spome point. And that's what those organizers in California are doing. That model, if successful, will spread. Which can only be a good thing.

Oh and can I just say that even during the Dean campaign, many of us who were involved on the local level found Zephyr to be kindof annoying and preachy. There were some great folks employed by the Dean campaign but she never struck me as one of them.

I'm back everybody!  I got so darned busy with my exploding businesses I've barely had time to breathe, much less check The Field regularly...

I won't make THAT mistake again!

I've missed Al and all of the FieldHands and readers/commenters!

XOXO Pam

P.S. I'll put out a "shameless plug" for my businesses over at the Field Hands site later today...

waterprise2 AKA Pam

Liberal with a Capital L!

In the races for the AZ and TN Democratic Party chairs, grassroots activist candidates defeated the'establishment' candidates.

Republicans aren't the only ones looking over their shoulders right now.

I have it on good authority that the Obama organizers in Denver held a food drive shortly before the inauguration, collecting food for the already practically-empty food banks in the area.

Well, what has Ms. Teachout done?

"I would encourage OFA to throw all of its support and resources at local democratic parties and officials--to decentralize the data, and let local groups experiment. I believe Obama has largely done his job, by getting elected and by electrifying the country and showing people that they can have power; but for them to exercise it meaningfully, instead of simply acting as shills for Presidential policy, they will need to exercise it through our representative offices: Congress, and the state houses."

In other words: Oh don't worry about a thing, you did your part, just let those of us in the urbane political offices take over now, we can make the decisions for you and tell you what's important!

No thank you Ms. Teachout, no thank you.

Good points.  We've always known that when Liberal policy is debated against conservative policy on a level playing field, Liberals will win majority support all the time.  That's why they had to take over the message machine and get people voting against their own self interests, and Limpbaugh has been a big player in this.

So in a no holds barred cage match of Alinsky tactics against the likes of Lushbo, we'll be fine.  Although, for future sustainability of our various movements, it's still healthy to act as a Bobby Fischer at times, and examine our every move from multiple angles and look three steps ahead.  Seems Obama is great at this.

It really hurts my heart that you and others would paint all Democratic party workers with such a broad and ugly brush.

Yes, I became involved involved in my county party 5 years ago because that's what Howard Dean urged us to do.  It wasn't a bad organization then.  The then county chair is our new Democratic representative in Congress, Betsy Markey.    I, and other Dean supporters have been working our butts off, and yes, if I may say, organizing our county and moving it into the 21st century.  We believe that electing Dem Presidents are a good thing.  I was and am a rabid Obama supporter.  But where the hell is the Farm Team to come from if we don't work to elect Democrats all the way down the ticket!?

We have three county commissioners here, all Repubs, because the voters stopped voting before they got to these races on the ballot. We at the, damn it, grassroots level of the party have a helluva job convincing people that their lives are impacted far more heavily every single day by the actions of the city council and the county commissioners.

Please, help us out here.  Give some credit to the good, well-organized Democratic parties and the good, progressive people making that happen.  Do you really want the Party to die at the roots, and everything to come, top-down, from the President?  And the apparatus to re-elect the President?  And the hell with county races, and state house races?  We also didn't turn two state house races Dem this year, partly because so much the people resources as well as the financial resources were sucked up the national races.  If that keeps happening, you'll have a Dem president swinging in the wind with Republican everything for the foundation.

@ Lynn Aldrin - You write "you'll have a Dem president swinging in the wind with Republican everything for the foundation."

That's exactly what happened from 1993-2000 when Bill Clinton was president: Democrats lost city and town councils, state legislatures, governorships, US House and Senate members and Republicans gained ground at every single one of those levels.

You'll see in my essay, above, I wrote that there were "few exceptions" to the Clinton-McAuliffe model at the grassroots of the Democratic Party, but that most were still in the stone ages.

You do understand, of course, that even Howard Dean did not directly aid local parties financially, but, rather, state parties. And a lot of that money got wasted last year by the bureaucrats at that level. You can't honestly say that looking across your state you see such valor and merit that you see in your local organization, can you? Your local might be one of the positive exceptions, but it can't justify dumping good money after bad on the remaining more than 90 percent of local party organizations that are the aforementioned beehives of hackery.

What you will have, under OFA, is a Congressional District-level office and staff organizer to whom to bring your suggestions and requests. I'm guessing you'll get more response on your needs there than you've ever gotten from the state or national level. And, in any case, OFA isn't replacing the Democratic Party, it's going to be additional to it. If you think the party apparatus is useful, it's still going to be there.

my original response to the article you included in your comment.  I was tired after a long day of chasing after children, cleaning my house, and dealing with the virus my teenager downloaded. What I wrote was very disagreeable.

I should first tell you that I find it very condescending and disrespectful when people tell me what I "need to" do.  I realized a long time ago that I can only make decisions about my own actions and behavior and my ability to help someone else is greatly improved if I listen mindfully and ask thoughtful questions.  I learned this when I started out as a community organizer and it was one of the most important learnings of my life.  So instead of trying to teach others, a paternalistic approach that is not sustainable, I learned to listen, assist, and make connections.  Does this approach sound familiar?

All I can say is that I tune out every "expert", "pundit", and "strategist" who says anything sounding like "Obama needs to".  What follows is always spectacularly irrelevant.  My experience with the Democratic party is that it also functions in this same paternalistic, highly irrelevant way.  Yes, there are some good folks to be found here and there but the organization is broken.  Locally, we are working with new Democratic party leadership but they have a very steep climb ahead of them to make their organization function--and we don't have that kind of time.

There were three places where I found excellent analysis and support throughout the campaign--the field, fivethirtyeight, and the Obama campaign.  They asked questions, listened carefully, and recognized that the volunteers were a treasure of wisdom and good information.  Over the course of 18 months, I called 35 states, traveled to 5, and organized in my own community.  When the Obama field organizer got here before our caucus the first thing she said was "How can I help".

The messages I tried out in my phonecalls found their way to national ads and call scripts because the lines of communication ran both ways.  They also ran between supporters--we emailed, phoned, and had conference calls with each other to share information, help new volunteers, etc.  We also just helped each other and became friends.  We shared our lives.  So the people who continually dismiss candidate then President Obama as "just speeches" or belittle what he has done as just describing community (this is what you did in your article) don't get it.  We actually built a community and now we live in it and continue to welcome new people every day.

There are too many things in your article to address in this comments section. I can't resist this one though-- The President's executive order bringing additional accountability and transparency to his office was not a "concession".  Noone asked him to do this--there were no negotiations, he didn't give anything up after a losing a battle.  I would caution you about equating corruption with power.  I would submit that he did not lessen his power one bit--in fact I think he earned a great deal of political capital and trust.

We are living in a new political paradigm now Z.  If you would like to learn how this one works, there are millions of us who would be happy to help.

the saddest thing to me, after the last election, was that not only did we lose the opportunity to take the white house, and the soul of the country, we also lost big left outside...the lone voice of sanity on my browser.

and now i'm starting to feel that the cherry on top of this astounding 36 flavors presidency is that al is sticking around this time...shooting from the hip, keeping us hip to what the heck is really going on.

this gets better every week. thanks for keeping me hip to just how much better!

But the email makes OFA sound like one of those top-down organizations where the top is so distant and powerful and the bottom so vast that the commuication will be largely one way. It sounds like the purpose for calling for house meetings is to marshall grass roots support for this stimulus package that has too much political appeasement and not enough healthcare or mass transit.

The people at the bottom, I hope, are creative and vital and argumentative and meet and organize and pound out positions and actions true to their own realities. How else to keep the organizations going unless there are really excellent refreshments? It will surprise me if intermediaries who are hoping to advance up the organization support much dissent. I hope I'm wrong. If the people on top really listen to the people on the bottom, it will be a much better draw than flaming brandy sundaes.

That "submit your questions to Obama on the internet" deal wasn't encouraging. I hope they're still trying for real 2-way communication. It hasn't even been 2 weeks.

Ann, I think these house parties are an excellent occasion to support the push for more health care and mass transport in this bill. People just need to phrase it not as 'Obama has disappointed me with the lack of healthcare in the stimulus' but more like 'here in our neck of the woods we feel that more money to healthcare would be better'. How do you know it is not Obamas intention to get grassroot push towards shifting the balances somewhat?  Besides the obvious purpose of getting people informed to better being able to counteract media spin, maybe the idea is to get constructive dissent?

OFA saying 'lets have house parties for this topic' is the only way they will happen on a national scale. And people doing it once for Obamas agenda may do it again for their own purposes. So I see no downturn at all.

I've a diary on this over at DKos and it's interesting the level of vitriol over there regarding Daschle.  Is it another instance of the progressive blogosphere shooting itself in the foot?
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/2/2/83443/48496/653/691942

KD

Thanks for the post on OFA 2.0 Al, and I think you truly understand what it will be and how it will help progressive causes.

I don't think that OFA 2.0 will be an uncritical media outlet for the President, as Teachout puts it. It will be a medium not only to deliver the message of President Obama's priorities to the American people but more importantly to give feedback on those priorities from the American people to the President. OFA Organizers will be writing weekly reports on the issues important in their districts and sending those up right back to the Whitehouse.

OFA will also be helping people organize around local issues and give them the tools and training to lobby local electeds and their Rep's and Senators. And if they don't respond their constituents will be fully prepared to work to elect candidates of their own. Elected Officials will have to play signifigantly more attention to the people they represent once they have been effectively organized to hold them accountable.

One name that was tossed around before they settled on "Organizing for America" was "We the People" and that is exactly what OFA is there to do, give the American people the tools to exercise their power in numbers. As Saul Alinsky taught, power is derived from two main sources - money and people. Well, we'll have the people and through new experiments in grassroots fundraising (another big focus of OFA) we'll have that power of money.

Will people be organizing independantly of OFA? Of course! Groups like the Field Hands and other progressive groups will definitely be gearing up as well, and where our intrests overlap their will be powerful partnerships formed.

I can tell you as a former Obama staffer that we get appeals for our resumes every week from progressive organizations who are starting up massive national field departments (though I am holding out to get into OFA 2.0) It's going to be a great time to be a Community Organizer!

OFA will not be the only group out there, dictating a monolithic "Obama Agenda" to the people. We will be one of many groups empowered by the lessons of the Obama campaign, and (if you'll forgive me for being perhaps a little starry-eyed and youthfully idealistic) we together will forever change the face of democracy in America.

Power we be put permantly back into the hands of the The People and out of the hands of corprate lobbyists. And power will be taken out of the hands of Chicken Little progressives and ineffective local and state democratic parties and into the hands of people that are willing to get out there, get their hands dirty and do the work, rather than stand on the sidelines and belittle those who do.    

On a little sidenote, there are other technological advances OFA 2.0 will be focusing on as well, but as a former organizer I'm always weary of devulging too much information I've gotten through my friends at the DNC. I'll just say that one aspect will be a new supercharged voter file that will rock your socks off! But you might have to be a nerdy campaign staffer to get excited about something like that. 

Tim - Great stuff. Please do send me an email so we can converse more: narconews@gmail.com

I can't say I've ever agreed with Limbaugh about anything before, but in that last quote you excerpted, it sounds like he gets what's going on. It's kind of fascinating to think about Rush reading Saul Alinsky to better get inside Obama's head.

Of course Rush gets it.  He's been paid very well indeed by his backers to get it.  And Alinsky predicted, back in the early '70s, that guys like Rush would get it well before mainstream liberals would.

All throughout Rules, Alinsky held that nice polite mainstream liberals, the sort that thought him somewhat icky and déclasse, would avoid his book like the plague -- as they had always held him at arm's length, at best, during his career -- yet the conservatives would, as they had always done throughout his career, be poring over his stuff like Talmudic scholars given the Dead Sea Scrolls.

It's not just Rush, and it's not just now.  Some of the key points Alinsky emphasizes for getting an organization of poor and working-class persons off the ground -- keeping it simple ("never go outside the experience of your people"), giving them an easy-peasy task to get their blood up and show them they can win (because they've been so ground down they need to have an easy victory in order to let go of the comforting, soul-deadening fatalism that keeps them from risking themselves emotionally by committing to a cause), and keeping your ultimate goals well hidden from the people you organize (and everyone else) until you establish a rapport with them -- all were put to mind-blowingly effective use by Ralph Reed in using single-issue politics to build right-wing coalitions.