You framed the question perfectly as it turns out The puppet master is George Soros the billionaire behind progressive secularism. Along with another one Peter Lewis of of Progressive. The Minister an apt choice of words is George 'Yoda' Lakoff. http://Moveon.org is the hatchet activist group. ACLU is another Same Sex is one of their two recent successes. Recreational Pot legalization is another. The current strategy is posing as 'friends of the court' amicus curie with specific friendly Soros backed Judges and changing the Constitution without amendment by court order. Hillary Rodham Clinton is their principle handmaiden. George Clooney is their front man in the glitterati. If you want to know the definition of secular evil.. There it is.

We regularly host their operatives, the exact word in this case, who under varying an changing names. attempt to influence conversations by posing as objectivists, libertarians, constitutionalists or seekers of knowledge. The technique is called 'Framing The Debate.'Lynne Stewart a radical leftist lawyer convicted of conspiracy for providing material support to terrorists, defrauding and making false statements.' is another of his group. Soros objects to US fighting terrorists Stewart an open advocate of violence had her legal bills paid by Open Institute another of George Soros's front groups.

They are both of Jewish cultural heritage and descent but both are advocates and supporters of radical islamists.

Soros survived WWII in Hungary and their were two ways to do that. The regular underground anti -Nazi movement and the Communist underground....The first have no record or memory of him under his original name.

After the war he was soon in London in the School of Economics and fast became more than extremely wealthy. Now resides, banks and does business offshore but lives part time in New York City.

Nothing secret about any of that I got it using Google for the most part. His non-US taxpaying business is in Curacao. Funny he wants to strip the rich but .......not where he is concerned.

"I always wonder after the fall of the 'Evil Empire' if he had found a new controller or become the puppet master himself. That's just a theory of my own."

Back to Lakoff who works out of SP Central UC Berkely provided the movements hand book Don't Think Of An Elephant, Know Your Values and Frame The Debate. See if you recognize from right here in the Gulch these points. "Never answer a question from your opponents point of view. Dodge questions and recite instead rehearsed answers.Everyone should read this book the dude is very open and the use of the book shows up here quite frequently.

If you don't want to spend the tenspot for that book or his others I have it on Kindle and it should make for some interesting post questions.

In the meantime I reframed the debate to my viewpoint and it's in New and Government under Define Not Divine and still a work in progress. Two parts the first comment is my opinion the rest is just condensed history.

Neat package of information to answer your question. Now it's time for FOGs' to step in...Friends of The George's

We used the exact same principle with new soldier especially new Lieutenants.

I just re-read the whole again. She has one part on subjective art which isn't versus objective art which is and writing is an art. Here is the actual quote I was looking for. p. 52 "I mentioned the complexity involved in writing a single sentence (what I put earlier) I said iyou could not figure out the sentence consciously.You sit down to write, the sentence comes out a "certain way, with editing you can improve it...." and a few paragraphs later goes in Concretizing Abstractions. So far that's it for editing as she said before editing is done best prior to writing. After is more a case of polishing 'white powdery snow had covered the landscape since yesterday's green vistas to white sugar coated snow.....' A contraction of her example.

I reaad your comment then dug out The Art of Fiction. There were as it turned out in one comment no 'final statements.' Her habit was to use some short five or six word description and form that give a one hour talk or lecture. The ability to say the same thing each slightly different addressing different questions and keep the participants engaged. speaks of multiple endings but another section rips the mystics whose mantra is "For those who understand no explanation is necessary; for those who don't none is possible." Dumbed down it becomes "You wouldn't understand or more simply duuuh. and she melted that into "I don't know why I don't intend to explain." We see that here far too often...still later If you have all the elements of tht which you wish to write about and fully understand them you will express exactly." She could do that in more than one language. I would 'guess' when I find more I will share it the goal of understanding clearly in advance of writing were the drafts and drafts of which you spoke. When it came time to write the final draft it flowed.k Then she went back to look for those jarring little inconsistencies or missing parts not more than once or twice. Her stated solution was to think over every aspect, anything relative, think it over 'until your mind exhausts itself then do it again and 'one morning you have the solution.....the scene comes to you and so do the words you need."

I thought it would take a while to find the above turned out they first five pages. Hope that helps
'.