Looks like she did get it, if briefly:
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Hil's College Thesis
Reveals Her Mind
By BARBARA OLSON
"He who fears corruption fears life."
— Saul Alinsky, "Rules for Radicals"
This quote immediately came to mind after my reading of Hillary Rodham's Wellesley College senior thesis — a document kept under lock and key since the 1992 elections.
Back then, when researchers and journalists were searching for information on the newly elected First Couple, Wellesley suddenly declared that it would seal the thesis of any graduate who became President or First Lady.
A few weeks ago, however, I came into possession of Hillary's suppressed thesis. In those 75 pages, the future First Lady reveals herself as someone steeped in the political lore and history of one of America's most political cities. No, not New York — Chicago. There she began her political journey from Goldwater girl to leftist icon.
The thesis' title, "There is Only the Fight ... An Analysis of the Alinsky Model," exposes Clinton's strong ideological attachment to her most influential mentor, Saul Alinsky.
Reading this work makes it clear why she had to remove it from public view, for Alinsky, who died in 1972, was a radical social activist who preached grass-roots organizing and intense, confrontational politics.
While Clinton was studying under Alinsky, he was preparing what would be his final and most important book: "Rules for Radicals," published less than two years after Hillary graduated from Wellesley and only one year before his death.
Alinsky's hold on Hillary is astonishingly evident in her thesis, which is replete with his yet-unpublished political tactics. The thesis reveals that he was moving from local organizing efforts to a new arena — the national stage.
She wrote: "His [Alinsky's] new aspect, national planning, derives from the necessity of entrusting social change to institutions, specifically the United States government."
Alinsky, we can now see, taught Hillary the political tactics that she successfully deployed in Arkansas and the White House and is now beginning to use in New York.
What were his lessons?
Alinsky defined "obtaining power" as a key tactic of organizing his "mass jujitsu." His formula for attack: "Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it and polarize it."
This principle has become the essence of the Clinton rapid-response tactic and a key aspect of Hillary's attacks on what she has dubbed "a vast right-wing conspiracy."
The Clinton White House has adhered to Alinsky's rule that "ridicule is man's most potent weapon" and followed his advice to "let nothing get you off your target."
Hillary discusses another Alinsky rule — "power is the very essence, the dynamo of life" — in her thesis. Clearly, she had absorbed his lesson that one must first obtain power to achieve real change.
But nowhere in her thesis — or in her later life — does she seem to recognize the classical liberal critique that the relentless pursuit of power is antithetical to democracy.
Perhaps the most prescient part of the thesis is a quote from a profile of Alinsky in The Economist: "His charm lies in his ability to commit himself completely to the people in the room with him. In a shrewd though subtle way, he often manipulates them while speaking directly to their experience."
http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3883a222798a.htm
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Amazing Barbara .... what a patriot, what a tremendous loss.
I have BKO's last book. I need to read it again.
I've got to reread Barbra's book, it's been years since I read it. And then, I need to spread the word....as do all of us!
In this post...you posted what BO wrote "The Clinton White House has adhered to Alinksky's rule that "ridicule is man's most potent weapon..."
If that is the case..and Hillary likes and abides by that rule...then that picture of her on this thread with her finger up her nose...SHOULD be on all candidates' mailings that are running against her...
I must say that I disagree with the Alinsky part of this. Ridicule is not "man's most potent weapon". I must get to work, I'll say more later.
But let me just say now that it is my opinion that it may be because of this type of belief that at least two of our most listened to talk show hosts, Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh, could have had more than a little to do with the Republicans losing elections the last time around.
Simply, constantly "ridiculing" the opponent or political "opposition" serves to energize them. It's the old "don't awaken a sleeping lion" thing.
More later, but suffice it to say, that if our talkshow hosts don't improve their personalities and self-righteous performances they will continue to contribute to the election losses. (jmo)