UNIONS play by rules very different from the ones played by civilized society. According to the unofficial playbook of UNIONS, Rules for Radicals by Saul Alinsky, the tactics are all laid out from the start. First establish credibility, then agitate by creating resentments and fanning hostilities, then bait the opponent into reacting.
I am not making this up. Alinsky’s tactics are laid out by these direct quotes from his book, as follows:
“Tactics are those conscious deliberate acts by which human beings live with each other and deal with the world around them. … Here our concern is with the tactic of taking; how the Have-Nots can take power away from the Haves.” p.126
Always remember the first rule of power tactics (pps.127-134):
1. “Power is not only what you have, but what the enemy thinks you have.”
2. “Never go outside the expertise of your people. When an action or tactic is outside the experience of the people, the result is confusion, fear and retreat…. [and] the collapse of communication.
3. “Whenever possible, go outside the expertise of the enemy. Look for ways to increase insecurity, anxiety and uncertainty. (This happens all the time. Watch how many organizations under attack are blind-sided by seemingly irrelevant arguments that they are then forced to address.)
4. “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules. You can kill them with this, for they can no more obey their own rules than the Christian church can live up to Christianity.”
5. “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon. It is almost impossible to counteract ridicule. Also it infuriates the opposition, which then reacts to your advantage.”
6. “A good tactic is one your people enjoy.”
7. “A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag. Man can sustain militant interest in any issue for only a limited time….”
8. “Keep the pressure on, with different tactics and actions, and utilize all events of the period for your purpose.”
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. It is this unceasing pressure that results in the reactions from the opposition that are essential for the success of the campaign.”
11. “If you push a negative hard and deep enough, it will break through into its counterside… 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. In conflict tactics there are certain rules that [should be regarded] as universalities. One is that the opposition must be singled out as the target and ‘frozen.’…
“…any target can always say, ‘Why do you center on me when there are others to blame as well?’ When you ‘freeze the target,’ you disregard these [rational but distracting] arguments…. Then, as you zero in and freeze your target and carry out your attack, all the ‘others’ come out of the woodwork very soon. They become visible by their support of the target…’
“One acts decisively only in the conviction that all the angels are on one side and all the devils on the other.” (pps.127-134)
Mike Pons, the president of the North Miami Beach Police Union (IUPA) is apparently taking lessons from Teamsters president James Hoffa, Jr. (son of Jimmy Hoffa) on how to utilize Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals. On Labor Day, Mr. Hoffa got on a soapbox and threatened people with anti-tea party rhetoric by telling the crowd of union members that the union members are the president’s army and they’re going to “take these son-of-a-bitches out.” Nice, huh?
These types of inappropriate speech and behavior are nothing new when it comes to UNIONS in general, and Mike Pons in particular. On August 2, 2011, at a council meeting, Mr. Pons went postal on the Council a week after the former Chief Rafael Hernandez was fired.
In this speech he blamed the Mayor and Council if any police officers get laid off and emphatically denied that the UNION is at fault. He then sneered at the Council for being worried about the bond rating, as if being downgraded by Fitch for not having adequate reserves is no big freaking deal. Hey, Pons! I realize you’re completely clueless about economics, but having your credit rating dimished is a really big deal!
In all his brilliance, and not letting a good crisis go to waste, Pons then blames the bond companies like Fitch for creating the sub-prime mortgage mess that led to the real estate bubble and its eventual burst, which then led to the disastrous economy we’re in right now. Talk about a freaking stretch! Typical UNION lies.
After he bashed the City Manager by accusing him that the “books are incorrect,” he had the audacity of telling the Mayor, Council and Manager that they have “disrespect for the police department,” by stating that the Manager “fired our Chief, then promoted Larry Gomer to Chief and you haven’t formally sworn him in.” He finds that disrespectful! Hey, Ass Clown! It would be disrespectful…IF YOU WERE EVEN REMOTELY CORRECT ABOUT THAT! But, as usual, you’re WRONG! An interim Chief is never sworn in.
Idiot.
These are the typical games and tricks that UNIONS play.
This past Tuesday, September 6, 2011, after the Council passed the budget on the first hearing (the second and final hearing is scheduled for September 20, 2011), Mr. Pons approached Mayor George Vallejo and accused him of being a “tea party activist.” Pons also used a few other choice words, all of which was captured on video by Channel 10 for its 11:00 news broadcast . Pons was like a rabid, raging bull and didn’t give the Mayor a chance to get a word in.
As you can see in this video, in the case of Mike Pons, president of the UNION, versus the City of North Miami Beach, his target was the Mayor! He picked his target, froze it, personalized it and polarized it. The fact that James Hoffa and Mike Pons are practically interchangeable with one another proves that they are all cut from the same cloth.
Pons has the Rules for Radicals down to a science! He’s already pulled some of these scare tactics on the Mayor, Council, City Manager and residents. By getting in the Mayor’s face, telling the Mayor that he doesn’t care about public safety, he is “freezing the target” and disregarding the Mayor’s arguments, as in Rule #13. By publicly ridiculing him by accusing the council of not swearing in the interim Chief, even though he was wrong, he is practicing Rules #1 and #3. By constantly telling everyone that crime will rise exponentially if even one cop is laid off, Pons is practicing Rules #8 and #9. By planning protests and encouraging his members to storm every council meeting and budget workshop, he is practicing Rules #8 and #10. By refusing to negotiate and shooting down each and every offer of compromise by the City Manager, yet telling the public that it’s the Manager who has stonewalled, Pons is utilizing Rules #4 and #12. Yep, it’s quite obvious that Saul Alinksy’s Rules for Radicals is Mike Pons’ textbook, maybe even his bible.
Mike Pons, as president of IUPA, needs as many members as he can. Layoffs are an anathema to him because that means there will be less dues coming into the UNION’s coffers. Without the much coveted income, Pons’ power would be greatly diminished.
No one in the City of North Miami Beach wants to see police officers laid off. But the reality is that the economy is in the toilet and municipalities all over the country are making painful cuts. Unfortunately, this is resulting in the loss of employees, including police officers. By attempting to make it personal, by grandstanding and by getting in the Mayor’s face to the point that the news media thought it was a great show, Mike Pons is only proving that it is HE who doesn’t give a crap about North Miami Beach. He is nothing but a UNION thug. He wants to make us believe he’s on the side of angels and that all of us are the “devils on the other side.”
As the saying goes, sometimes people are forced to make the difficult decision of choosing between the devil we know and the devil we don’t know. Mike Pons would have us believe that by passing a responsible, balanced budget for the City of North Miami Beach, we will suffer the consequences of the devil we don’t know. If Mike Pons, a/k/a UNION president, is the devil we do know, I think I’ll take my chances with the one we don’t.
Mike Pons would make Jimmy Hoffa proud!
Stephanie Kienzle
“Spreading the Wealth”
Steph, Mike Pons is a registered Republican. Look it up!!!! Please stop reading the Glenn Beck book of tactics.
I don’t care if Pons is a Republican or a Democrat. I wouldn’t care if he was registered with the Socialist Party, the Green Party or the Frat Party! He’s a UNION thug, plain and simple. If he really is a Republican, then SHAME ON HIM!
As for your Glenn Beck comment, those Rules for Radicals were written by Saul Alinsky in 1971. As much as I’m sure Beck would like to take credit, those are not his “book of tactics.”
I don’t know who you are, but if you think you’ll be able to change my mind about unions or union tactics, save yourself the effort. It won’t work and you won’t be able to censor me. If you don’t like my blog, and if what I say upsets, annoys or aggravates you, then just don’t read it. It’s not as if I charge for subscriptions. Although, if I thought people would buy it I probably would.
Wow.. Pass the patron please. Kick it up a notch! Just in time for football. This is better then halftime.
Okay Steph let’s talk about the rules for radicals in a different context:
The Council and “STP” have done the following:
1. Rule 13- “Picking and freezing the target” well the Council, Manager and STP have certainly employed this rule as it pertains to the police department/union. Mind you I’m not a big fan of unions but rule 13 is alive and well ON BOTH SIDES of the budget this year.
2. Rule 9- “The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself.” Again, the “threat” from the about mentioned group is that if layoffs are not done, financial Armageddon will ensue. Which may or may not be true but again living up to rule 9 seems to be the overriding theme from the Council, Manager and STP.
3. Rule 12- “The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative.” The alternative offered up by the CM et al, is layoff employees, with a specific focus on the police department. Tell me exactly how many other departments in this city are ACTUALLY laying off physically occupied positions? Not “vacancies” or positions they created, had no funding for and claim they are saving money by not hiring someone they never had or any other BS like that.
4. Rule 8- “Keep the pressure on, with different tactics and actions, and utilize all events of the period for your purpose.” Okay so at the beginning of this budget “crisis” we heard that the problem is/was less revenue. Lately the Mayor has changed this up to the phrase “we don’t have a revenue problem, we have a spending problem”. A different tactic because according to…
5. Rule 7- “A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag. Man can sustain militant interest in any issue for only a limited time….” So the “we have a revenue problem” gets to be a drag so interest must be sustained by changing the problem.
6. Rule 6- “A good tactic is one your people enjoy.” And I think the STP and many other “wanna be unelectable council people” certainly are giddy about the prospects of the PD being dismantled.
7. Rule 2- “Never go outside the expertise of your people. When an action or tactic is outside the experience of the people, the result is confusion, fear and retreat…. [and] the collapse of communication”.
Well because no one has yet to explain the finance budget presentation satisfactorily my guess is because it’s outside the expertise of “your” people. (not your people Steph, I mean the Councils people). This finance thing is still a question/issue that has not been revisited or answered to anyone’s satisfaction.
My point in all this is that the rules for radicals can be interpreted and applied, not only by unions, but by seemingly well intentioned people that need to press their argument. I think if I wanted to spend the time I could find a way the council, CM and/or STP have employed every one of these rules in the same fashion that you say the union has.
I just wish this was over and done with; but then again I wish the true, actual revenues, budget numbers were known. I suspect they are not as transparent as we would all like them to be and that really neither side is playing fair or being “transparent”.
Just my opinion. Keep up the good work Steph!
Very good, Frank! Although I think most of these things apply to the union, I can see your point on some of them. It does work both ways, and many of these “tactics” can be used by people on both sides of the aisle. I do think, however, that you misconstrue the mayor’s comment, “We don’t have a revenue problem – we have a spending problem.” What I am quite sure he means is that the revenue is what it is, and we have to learn to live within our means. The problem is that we are spending more than we take in. I have heard the mayor say on many occasions that government budget processes are usually backwards. What that means is that a manager (in our case Baker) first planned how much money was needed for salaries, payroll, pension, services, etc., and THEN went about creating the means to pay for them. This is why the reserves of both the city and the utility are depleted now. Baker decided what we needed and then scrambled for the cash. Mayor Vallejo has always said that this is “putting the cart before the horse,” and I happen to know that he believes you first need to see how much money you have, THEN decide how it is to be spent. Please realize that I have known Mr. Vallejo for many years, and he and I have had numerous conversations about economics and government long before he ever contemplated running for mayor. We have very similar views on fiscal responsibility and I know exactly what he meant by this comment. I do see what you mean that it could be misconstrued by people who don’t understand what “spending problem” actually means. – yes, it is a problem that our revenue has shrunk, but it’s a bigger problem that government can’t accept that reality and thus continues to spend as if nothing has changed.
Regardless of semantics, and regardless of the “rules and tactics,” the in-your-face, out of control temper tantrum displayed by Mike Pons was unprofessional, unacceptable and rather crude. The fact that this was recorded for posterity makes it embarrassing. Does he not know how he comes across? Or, does he not care? I would hope that at least some of the union members are appalled by the fact that this uncouth, uncontrollable and belligerent man represents all of them. If I were a member of any group, and the head of the organization behaved like that in public, ESPECIALLY in front of television cameras, I know I would want to look for the nearest hole to crawl into out of sheer embarrassment. I would then resign from the organization and get as far away as humanly possible from such crassness. He sort of reminds me of Myron in that Myron behaved like a petulant, spoiled brat and had absolutely no shame about his behavior. I have always been of the belief that people have a right to their feelings, but they don’t have a right to act out in public. But the good news is that as long as there are people like Pons who misbehave, I’ll always have something to write about . 🙂
I disagree with your comments about Mike Pons. He was approached by the Mayor, not the other way around. The Mayor wanted to have a discussion and Mike tried to avoid a discussion since there were many people present, including cameras and including me. The Mayor insisted in engaging Mike into a conversation and was out of line in doing so. The Mayor should have respected Mikes request to speak at another time and the Mayor should have never touched him.
I will find out more about that to confirm your statement about who approached who. The newscast didn’t show the entire exchange. As far as the Mayor touching Mike Pons on the shoulder, I can tell you that this is a simple gesture that some people use when having a conversation. The Mayor does tend to do that when speaking to people. For some people, this a subconscious act and it is not meant as a sign of disrespect. Most people understand that and don’t mind. Some people, however, don’t like to be touched. It’s a matter of personal preference, and I’m quite sure the Mayor is now aware that Mr. Pons is not to be touched at all for any reason whatsoever.
“3. Rule 12- “The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative.” The alternative offered up by the CM et al, is layoff employees, with a specific focus on the police department. Tell me exactly how many other departments in this city are ACTUALLY laying off physically occupied positions? Not “vacancies” or positions they created, had no funding for and claim they are saving money by not hiring someone they never had or any other BS like that.”
Officer Frank, 13 full-time warm-blooded human beings are being eliminated from other departments in the general fund (this includes two Code Enforcement Officers, who are paid from the PD but are not really police officers, IMHO). Six full-time living, breathing humans are also being let go from the utility (5 in water, 1 in sewer). With a few exceptions, every part-time person in the city is being let go. Furthermore, a “vacancy” is not a made-up position. A “vacancy” was once occupied by a warm body performing a job function and VACATED at some point during the last year. Had those individuals not vacated those positions between last Oct. 1 and now, they or the equivalent number of other real live people would also have to be let go to achieve the same bottom line. Moreover, vacancies have been wiped from every budget for the last few years…at least in “other departments.”
Hi Stephanie: While I still love you and your hair, I have to agree with yeahright and disagree with you about Mike’s behavior. I was there at the Council Meeting (missing you of course 🙂 and it was true. Mike Pons was being interviewed by the Channel 10 cameraman when the Mayor came and started talking to Mike, which then escalated into a heated conversation in which both parties were trying to see who could “grandstand” the other. Both parties knew the camera was rolling, and they were both guilty parties as to what happened. Actually, in my personal opinion, the Mayor seemed scared and intimidated by the response he received from Mike. I kind of noticed that the Mayor wasn’t the same in the Council Chambers after that incident.
RickyTicky, I sent your comment to the mayor for his response. To be fair I would like his side of the story, too. I was not there, and I only know what I saw on the newscast. I cannot and will not comment on something I don’t know. The only thing I can tell you is that from what I saw on the video is that it was Pons who was raising his voice and being a bully, while the mayor appeared to be calm and rational. It did not appear that the mayor was “grandstanding” at all. I will tell you that I know the mayor was not scared or intimidated. This I know for a fact. He does not intimidate easily, if at all. Of that I am absolutely sure.
Steph, you are the Mayor’s newspaper and media outlet, pushing his agenda. You are like MSNBC one sided. Get a little bit more fair and balanced, please.
Actually, I’d much prefer you accuse me of being Fox News than MSNBC. But, I digress. The truth is this:
1. This is my blog, not a newspaper or a media outlet.
2. It’s called Voters Opinion because it’s this voter’s opinion.
3. My opinion is not “fair and balanced.” My opinion is my opinion, and as you can tell, I have lots of them.
Now, I make absolutely no excuses for defending the mayor. Why should I? I have known him for years. We have the same ideas about government. I believe in his message. I encouraged him to run for office. I campaigned for him. I was thrilled that he won!
So far he is doing exactly what he said he was going to do and exactly what I hoped and expected him to do. He’s not disappointing me in the least. If he happens to do something I don’t agree with I will write about it. But, so far I have no complaints at all.
I hope this clears matters up for you. I never claimed to be a reporter. I’m just a blogger who has an opinion about almost everything. If you want to read it, great. If not, that’s cool, too. But if you’re looking for “fair and balanced,” watch Fox News. If you want your news with a side of Kool Aid, watch MSNBC.