Posted on 03/02/2007 5:01:02 AM PST by AZRepublican
WELLESLEY, Mass. — The senior thesis of Hillary D. Rodham, Wellesley College class of 1969, has been speculated about, spun, analyzed, debated, criticized and defended. But rarely has it been read, because for the eight years of Bill Clinton’s presidency it was locked away.
As forbidden fruit, the writings of a 21-year-old college senior, examining the tactics of radical community organizer Saul D. Alinsky, have gained mythic status among her critics — a “Rosetta Stone,” in the words of one, that would allow readers to decode the thinking of the former first lady and 2008 presidential candidate.
Despite the fervent interest in the thesis, few realize that it is no longer kept under lock and key. As MSNBC.com found, it is available to anyone who visits the archive room of the prestigious women’s college outside Boston. With Clinton’s opponents in the 2008 presidential race looking for the next “Swift Boat” attack ad, and the senator herself trying to cast off her liberal image, Clinton's 92-page thesis is certain to be read and reread by opposition researchers and reporters visiting the campus.
(Excerpt) Read more at msnbc.msn.com ...
I just think the evidence is out there in plain sight and does not require a diversion into digging up something that almost certainly no longer exists or has been modified.
And, every ounce of energy that goes into what will be portrayed as a kookie, conspiracy-mongering futile quest for "hidden evidence" at Wellsley College will be an ounce of energy that is NOT spent on defeating the adult Hillary.
Just wait and see what the Google Cache and archive.org bring up for future "leaders" in the next couple of decades!
Apparently, they are. : )
Check yer pings.
strange, I had the same thought ....
I believe the lady author who died in Pennsylvania on 9-11 had reviewed it. It was mentioned in her book so I would guess that hubby has a copy.
Some people might be willing to gloss over her 1971 summer internship for Communist Party USA lawyer Robert Treuhaft as a "college flirtation" with Communism. It was quite a change from her membership in the Young Republicans in 1965. It certainly seems more than a passing interest, though, when you examine her 1969 Wellesley College senior thesis, which praised Saul Alinsky, a Marxist activist who advocated lying low, hiding one's true agenda, getting into the system, gaining power and then striking to bring the system down. Regarding attacking the positions of one's opponents, Alinsky said, "Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it." Sounds pretty much like her entire political career so far.
LOL, isn't it amazing how the very thought of a Clinton seemingly turns a Republican in to a tinfoil hat wearing freak?
Hillary's new title for these Rules is Refuting the Politics of Personal Destruction.
They read like a template of President Bill Clinton's Political Stratgery: 1988-2001.
For a woman accused of moving to the political center, Hillary Clinton - more than any other Democratic candidate - knows the terrain on the Hard Left.
Mrs. Clinton, who majored in political science at Wellesley, chose leftist organizer Saul Alinsky, author of Rules for Radicals, as the centerpiece of a 1969 thesis on poverty in the United States.
Her paper earned an "A" and - when she graduated - it was shipped off to the archives.
But it was sealed in the nineties when reporters - looking for a scoop on Mrs. Clinton - came knocking at Wellesley.
The hunt for the missing thesis began.
First, columnist Barbara Olson, author of a couple of books on the Clintons, came across a bootleg and wrote about its contents in a 2000 column ("Hil's Thesis Reveals Her Mind").
Next, a copy showed up on eBay.
Bidding (and fake bidding) reached $50,000.
Then a wire service reported that the thesis was available at Wellesley, where it had been returned to the archives in 2001 when the Clintons left the White House.
But it was too late.
The "missing" thesis had become political lore.
One writer complained - as recently as 2004 - that Mrs. Clinton continued to keep it "under lock and key," and another repeated the rumor in the Wall Street Journal.
Neither was correct.
But lost in the treasure hunt was the importance of what it actually said.
Why, in the world, was it sealed?
Maybe it undermined President Clinton.
He proposed the same community-based programs in 1993 that Mrs. Clinton had railed against in 1969.
Or maybe it was perceived - by some in her cadre - as un-American.
It depicted an ideal world.
But it warned that only certain people could build that world and probably only with conflict.
Much of this she attributed to Alinsky.
Mrs. Clinton added a few criticisms, too: she mentioned his "contradictions" more than once, and chided him a couple of times for "war-like" rhetoric.
But she called his plan "constructive," seemed to endorse the principle that society had to be reorganized in a top-down model, and - at the end of the paper - compared Alinsky to national heroes like Martin Luther King.
Sure, it was written in 1969.
But, in the context of her recent statements, it seems relevant to the present.
It makes her campaign song - "You Ain't Seen Nothin' Yet" - seem more like a threat than a promise.
To read Mrs. Clinton's senior thesis, please contact:
Wellesley College Archives
Margaret Clapp Library
Wellesley MA 02481
(contact number at link)
And, every ounce of energy that goes into what will be portrayed as a kookie, conspiracy-mongering futile quest for "hidden evidence" at Wellsley College will be an ounce of energy that is NOT spent on defeating the adult Hillary.
I agree that we must avoid being marginalized, but, conversely, we must not discount any of the evidence against these creatures.
We must examine potential evidence and use what is relevant, and use it smartly. To simply throw out evidence would be to allow the clintons' tactic to work.
As I wrote recently elsewhere:
FAKE OUTIf functional assassination is the clinton sucker punch, the reputation for assassination-in-fact is the clinton coup de grâce.
To make sure their repulation always precedes them, the clintons never miss an opportunity to spread the rumors around themselves. By repeating every allegation of clinton murder and mayhem—while affecting an incredulous air, of course—the clintons intimidate and silence their critics even as they marginalize the enemy.
The outrageousness of the clintons' crimes, actual and apparent, will always work to the clintons' advantage, making the disabling of these flagrant psychopaths all the more challenging.
But disable them we must.
For the children.
STALINIST RISING?
HILLARY CLINTON ABUSE OF POWER
(WHERE IS THE UNREDACTED BARRETT REPORT ANYWAY?)
Hillary Rodham
You are assuming that the thesis that is visible now is the thesis that was written then ......
Thinking the same thing. Especially given missus clinton's inclination to redact material unhelpful to her continual grasp for power and treasure.
STALINIST RISING?
HILLARY CLINTON ABUSE OF POWER
(WHERE IS THE UNREDACTED BARRETT REPORT ANYWAY?)
HILLARY! Can a chintzed-and-powdered villain win the White House?
LEADING INDICATORS SAY 'NO'
MISSUS CLINTON'S SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE PROBLEM - PART SIX
CLINTON-GEFFEN IMBROGLIO-PART SIX
HILLARY CLINTON = 'GANGSTER POLITICS, DUAL MONARCHY AND THE MORAL CONSISTENCY OF A DOORKNOB': Pat Caddell
CLINTON-GEFFEN IMBROGLIO-PART FIVE
AL GORE, THE OSCAR, THE NOBEL, THE CLINTONS + DAVID GEFFEN
CLINTON-GEFFEN IMBOGLIO-PART FOUR
HEAR DENNIS MILLER: WHY GEFFEN DUMPED HILLARY,
WHY CLINTON 'DOES NOT WANT TO LOCK HORNS WITH DAVID GEFFEN'
CLINTON-GEFFEN IMBROGLIO-PART THREE (video and transcript)
CLINTON vs. GORE + GEFFEN: POST-OSCAR ANALYSIS
(HAS HOLLYWOOD DUMPED HILLARY?)
CLINTON-GEFFEN IMBROGLIO-PART TWO
WHY THE GEFFEN IMBROGLIO SIGNALS CLINTON'S END
'HILLARY'S STRATEGY--NOBODY GETS TO CRITICIZE HER' -- CHRIS MATTHEWS
with a WARNING FOR DAVID GEFFEN
CLINTON-GEFFEN IMBOGLIO-PART ONE
Absolutely brilliant analysis. Many people are exposed to more intellectual influence in college than at any time before or after. That's why the near-total Leftist takeover of the education establishment is disastrous for America. The minds of most of our future leaders are being molded by Marxists in college, and only those young people most thoroughly grounded in ethical and political principles survive untouched. No conservative should send his child to one of these "elite" institutions, even if it was his alma mater. I really think much of the leftward drift of the media and even of Republican elected officials can be traced to the universities.
"Maybe the ink or paper...can be analyzed to determine its age."
Nah, just look at the font.
Dan? Is that you?
Dan? Is that you?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
