In the reading list, do you see the following:
Christopher Hitchens - "No One Left to Lie To"
Ann Coulter - "High Crimes and Misdemeanors"
David Schippers - "Sell Out"
Ruddy & Limbacher - "Bitter Legacy"
R. Emmett Tyrrell - "Boy Clinton"
Dr. Paul Fick - "The Dysfunctional President"
Ambrose Evans Pritchard - "The Secret Life of Bill Clinton"
L.D. Brown - "Crossfire: Witness in the Clinton Investigation"
Gary Aldrich - "Unlimited Access"
Roger Morris - "Partners in Power"
Martin Gross - "The Great Whitewater Fiasco"
Doug from Upland - "The Official Clinton Bashing Limerick Book"
Doug from Upland - "Willy's White House Limerick Book"
Unless those books are read and discussed, it is a sanitized course that will not examine the real Clinton. Many, many people believe that a rapist occupied the White House. Will that be discussed? Will there be a discussion about how a so-called stalker and troubled young woman was given top secret clearance at the Pentagon? Will she discuss how Bernie Schwartz sold banned technology to the ChiComs and gave 900K to the DNC to avoid prosecution?
I think we should send her your list and suggest that she add it to her list of research material, so that her class won't be a whitewash of the Clinton years and that her students will know that the Clinton's were trash of the lowest kind.
...it is a sanitized course that will not examine the real Clinton.Amen to that. The required reading list given by the prof is a joke. B.R. Barber will probably be presented as one of the 'objective' portions included for balance. Barber's writings are part of the ultra liberal philosophical mainstay used by communist, I mean liberal, educators. Skocpol's work is beyond apologetic, it is downright Clintonian in her final analysis where she "points out" that if it had not been for the "huge federal budget deficit created by Reagan's tax cuts" the Health Care Plan may have been politically feasable, blah blah blah. Wesley Clark is not only mentally unstable, but will be regarded by future historians (unfettered by the modern leftist press) as a war criminal, not an expert, in regards to Clinton's Balkan legacy. The other works aren't much better, and some are worse. The only exception being the "Mad as Hell" book, no doubt included just to show how he got in office the first time. This course looks like it was put together by Willy himself after snortin' a whole eightball of peruvian blueflake. Kiss some more young minds goodbye.
not examine the real Clinton I agree.
The course, however, is about Clinton presidency, not his person. It is true, of course, that Clinton's presidency was to a great extent about his self-centered person, but these are not the same.
To study art you do not need to know much about the artist himself. Here is the same distinction.
Surely, someone else could have come up with a different list, but I do not find the syllabus to be outrageous.
