I think the GOP would be making a mistake making this into some sort of cause celebre imputing Alinksi's views as Hillary's. George Allen's campaign tried something similar by taking excerpts out of Webb's novels to portray him as some sort of pervert. It doesn't work and just burnishes the image of the person you are attacking.
BTW: You ‘out’ yourself when you start a post with “Have you read it?”
I don't understand the "out" part. Care to elaborate? I just found your comments to lack specificity in terms of how this thesis will hurt Hillary. I read all of it and could not come up with anything specific in that regard, save the comparison I mentioned. And I tried very hard to find a hook to hang her on. Hillary's election would be a disaster for this country no matter what is in her thesis.
You wrote: “What is significant is what Hillary says or opines, not the quotes she takes from Alinsky.”
In fact the two are linked seamlessly as anyone can see when reading this document. That’s why the WaPo cals it an “Ideological Touchstone”. Hillary clearly is using Alinsky’s experience, tactics, and thought as the intellecutual point of departure from which she forms her own life plan.
But I am sure that obfuscating this is an important part of the line of defense which will be taken by Hillary’s backers — to the extent that they are actually confronted with this. 5500 page views on Free Republic isn’t quite the same as an article in NYT WSJ WaPo or a feature on FOX or CBS.
As for the GOP, what they do is up to them. It is a long way to Election Day. For all I know, the Dems will nominate Obama who is also an Alinsky acolyte. (see link:)
Great read:
“For Clinton and Obama a common ideological touchstone”
LINK: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/24/AR2007032401152.html