This is ridiculous. Show me just one item on the list of Saul Alinsky's tactics that Rush doesn't use... just one.
Just one.
RULE 1: "Power is not only what you have, but what the enemy thinks you have." Power is derived from 2 main sources - money and people. "Have-Nots" must build power from flesh and blood. (These are two things of which there is a plentiful supply. Government and corporations always have a difficult time appealing to people, and usually do so almost exclusively with economic arguments.)
Have nots build power by taking from the haves via coercive government. The haves are motivated and earn a living and invest a part of their earnings. If more people understood this they wouldn't be wasting their energy on protesting poverty and hoping the tax-payer will pay their mortgages that many should not have gotten into in the first place.
RULE 2: "Never go outside the expertise of your people." It results in confusion, fear and retreat. Feeling secure adds to the backbone of anyone. (Organizations under attack wonder why radicals don't address the "real" issues. This is why. They avoid things with which they have no knowledge.)
Rush talks about lots of things (economics/philosophy/politics/sports/pop culture.) Now I happen to agree with Alinsky that going out of your expertise is a problem for many people including Rush and I don't see too much immoral with this, though efforts should be made to learn as much as possible instead of just avoiding subjects.
RULE 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.)
Going outside the expertise of the enemy is to find the truth not just to create insecurity and anxiety. This just sounds like artifice without substance. If you hit on some truth it will naturally knock some people off balance but that shouldn't be the main point. Some arguments are irrelevant whether they knock people off balance or not.
RULE 4: "Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules." If the rule is that every letter gets a reply, send 30,000 letters. You can kill them with this because no one can possibly obey all of their own rules. (This is a serious rule. The besieged entity's very credibility and reputation is at stake, because if activists catch it lying or not living up to its commitments, they can continue to chip away at the damage.)
Looking for hypocrisy is fine I have no problem with that. Though the left usually doesn't put much standards on themselves so when Conservatives point it out it doesn't have the same impact like when a Conservative doesn't live up to his/her standards.
RULE 5: "Ridicule is man's most potent weapon." There is no defense. It's irrational. It's infuriating. It also works as a key pressure point to force the enemy into concessions. (Pretty crude, rude and mean, huh? They want to create anger and fear.)
Liberals are funny. What can I say? Sure Limbaugh uses that but conservatives find liberals funny without him. Just look at bizarre political correctness, though I find that sometimes it's more scary than funny. I'll concede this one for you if you want.
YouTube - the HUGO CHAVEZ singing classic video !
YouTube - Cindy Sheehan Defends Hugo Chavez
This ridicules itself because she is sincere. It looks delusional. Conservatives think "Do people really believe this? LOL!"
RULE 6: "A good tactic is one your people enjoy." They'll keep doing it without urging and come back to do more. They're doing their thing, and will even suggest better ones. (Radical activists, in this sense, are no different that any other human being. We all avoid "un-fun" activities, and but we revel at and enjoy the ones that work and bring results.)
Rush enjoys freedom of individuals to pursue their best. The left is about envy and forcing equal outcomes. One is positive and one is sadistic.
RULE 7: "A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag." Don't become old news. (Even radical activists get bored. So to keep them excited and involved, organizers are constantly coming up with new tactics.)
There's rarely a situtation where there's such boredom that government is not increasing in size and there's not something to complain about. Even when Republicans push for big government there's something to complain about. Rush did well in the last 8 years despite Republican electoral victories.
RULE 8: "Keep the pressure on. Never let up." Keep trying new things to keep the opposition off balance. As the opposition masters one approach, hit them from the flank with something new. (Attack, attack, attack from all sides, never giving the reeling organization a chance to rest, regroup, recover and re-strategize.)
See above. Rush doesn't have to fake dislike for left-wing policies. If anything the share of the GDP in the hands of the government increases two steps forward and one step back and then another two steps forward in the past century. There is no forced energy that has to be aroused. The cause should generate enough energy on its own.
RULE 9: "The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself." Imagination and ego can dream up many more consequences than any activist. (Perception is reality. Large organizations always prepare a worst-case scenario, something that may be furthest from the activists' minds. The upshot is that the organization will expend enormous time and energy, creating in its own collective mind the direst of conclusions. The possibilities can easily poison the mind and result in demoralization.)
(The left is terrifiying. I've met socialists and communists in university and they are conformist and ego-maniacs that want massive government intervention. They are actually more terrifying then they show themselves as. Though the above quote of "wasting energy and poisoning the mind" has more to do with sadism than making laws that work.)
RULE 10: "If you push a negative hard enough, it will push through and become a positive." Violence from the other side can win the public to your side because the public sympathizes with the underdog. (Unions used this tactic. Peaceful [albeit loud] demonstrations during the heyday of unions in the early to mid-20th Century incurred management's wrath, often in the form of violence that eventually brought public sympathy to their side.)
(The public should only sympathize with the underdog if the details warrant it and not simply because they are an underdog.)
RULE 11: "The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative." Never let the enemy score points because you're caught without a solution to the problem. (Old saw: If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem. Activist organizations have an agenda, and their strategy is to hold a place at the table, to be given a forum to wield their power. So, they have to have a compromise solution.)
(The left and right have different solutions. Also calling something a "constructive alternative" reeks of phony alternatives put together on the fly just to have something ready.)
RULE 12: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it." Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions. (This is cruel, but very effective. Direct, personalized criticism and ridicule works.)
The left does this to avoid debate. Conservatives talk about individuals to help illustrate ideas about human nature and they want laws to be based on that.
Nice try though with the moral equivalency though.
ditto heads - unite 
Not nice to point that out. Or the fact that, because of Europe's negative population growth and aging population, in the future those generous social welfare programs (that we Americans should all be so envious of) will only continue by expanding the workforce through massive immigration. Which, of course, is already taking place.
