When word got out that Hillary Rodham wrote her college thesis on Marxist, Saul Alinsky, the media requested access to it!
This was when Ms. Clinton was First Lady. It wasn’t a surprise when the press was rejected in ITS quest to pour over Ms. Clinton’s research paper. After all, this woman had a long history of supporting people who were enemies of the United States. In my second installment, I discussed with you, Bill Clinton’s pardons of two murderous members of the terrorists group, “The Weather Underground.” What I didn’t report on were the number of people who were opposed to the pardons. Two of these people were New York U.S. Senator, Charles Shumer, and U.S. Attorney in New York, Mary Jo White.
White was a Bill Clinton appointee. She strongly opposed the Clinton administration establishing what WWW.Sixties-1Blogspot.com called, “The Wall Between Intelligence Agencies Tracking Terrorists, Reportedly Writing In A Scathing Memoriandum Years before 9/11: It Will Costs Lives.” Bill Clinton did not heed Mary Jo White’s prophetic advice!
On September 11, 2001, more than “Three Thousand Americans Lost Their Lives” after Islamofascists turned three commercial airliners in to missiles. According to Ben Johnson, The Managing Editor of WWW.FrontpageMagazine.com, Clinton was more interested in “Bostering His Wife’s Political Fortunes.”
To buttress his argument, Johnson says the former President issued pardons for members of the Puerto Rican Marxist terrorist organization, known as, FALN. Members of this blood thirsty group were responsible for some one-hundred and thirty bombings over the span of nine years. Apparently, this didn’t matter to Bill Clinton. The Justice Department and the FBI attempted to convince Mr. Clinton that what he was about to do, was wrong. But, since when did Bill Clinton care about right and wrong. Besides, he could have debated the heads of these two agencies on what right and wrong “Really Meant.”
Hillary Clinton says she had no input in the pardons of the Puerto Rican Marxist terrorists. However, New York City Councilman, Jose Rivera told reporters that he had approached Mrs. Clinton, and asked her, “To Speak To The President And Ask Him To Consider Granting Executive Clemency To The FALN members. Given her past associations with radicals, you can decide if Ms. Clinton played a role in the pardons.
Johnson makes an excellent point when he wrote the following:
“One can say a number of things about such a long and distinguished intellectually history of leftism, as well as her open lust for enough power to radically alter the American way of life. One cannot say it is moderate in any sense. Unlike Senator Obama’s histories with Wright or Ayers, Hillary Clinton’s history of radicalism consists of autobiographical journaling, personal activism, and advocacy on behalf of convicted, muderous terrorists”
You need to ask yourself, with Senator Clinton’s life being such an “Open Book,” why hasn’t this wealth of information provided in my research, been given to the public at large? We have received an overdose of the Reverend Jeremiah Wright. But, on Hillary Clinton, the social media and Conservative commentators have developed a severe case of, “THE STUPIDS.”
The Clinton White House took the unprecedented step of “Muscling Wellesley College” into instituting a new policy when it came to releasing the senior thesis of, “Either A President Or First Lady Of The United States.” The Clintons known for their strong arm tactics, took this unheard of action as a way of protecting the then, First Lady, Hillary Rodham-Clinton. To this day, the move only impacted one person, that being, Hillary Rodham-Clinton.
Rodham-Clinton wrote her senior thesis on, “There Is Only The Fight....’: An Analysis Of The Alinsky Model.”
The 92-page paper examines the life and techniques used by Rodham-Clinton’s Mentor, “Marxist, Saul Alinsky.” Alinsky was by all accounts, a very “Nasty, Man.” He just didn’t believe in defeating an opponent, he believed in destroying “Anyone Who Stood In His Way.” Does this sound like Hillary Rodham-Clinton? Alinsky came from Chicago, just like Hillary Rodham-Clinton. WWW.CatholicCitizens.Org reports Alinsky:
“Courted power wherever he found it. His alliances with prominent Catholic clerics, such as Bishop Bernard Sheil, gave him respectability. His friendship with crime bosses such as Frank Nitti--Al Capone’s second-in-command--gave Alinsky clout on the street”
As you have learned from reading my writings on this subject, Hillary Rodham was taken under Alinsky’s wing, “Personally, While Still A Student In High School.” So, it is not surprising that she would pay homage to “This Radical,” by making him the focal point of her senior paper!
Many Conservatives thought that Rodham-Clinton’s paper would reveal one “Bomb Shell, After Another.” Her thesis was finally made public in 2001. Those who read it, wondered why did the Clintons keep the paper under lock and key. Although she “Defends Alinsky,” WWW.Boston.Com says her writing is devoid of passion for Alinsky. If anything, Rodham-Clinton reveals that she was disappointed and “amused by his divisive methods and dogmatic ideology.”
I think that young Hillary “Masked Her True Feelings For Alinsky.” Of course, if you were too lazy to “Think,” you missed the essence of what Ms. Rodham was attempting to convey!
Rodham-Clinton quotes Alinsky by saying:
“The radical believes all people should have a high standard of food, housing, and health..the radical places human rights far above property rights..the radical believes completely in real equality of opportunity for all peoples regardless of race, color or creed”
Rodham-Clinton then goes on to “Critique Alinsky, The Marxist”:
“Much of what Alinsky professes does not sound ‘radical.’ His are the words used in our schools and churches, by our parents and their friends, by our peers. The difference is Alinsky really believes in them and recognizes the necessity of changing the present structures of our lives in order to realize them”
If I can proffer some observations on Rodham-Clinton’s critique. What Alinsky was discussing “Is Radical.” He was espousing, “Socialism.” After all, the man was an unabashed “Socialist.” So, we should not be surprised by his words. Furthermore, keep in mind the year that Rodham-Clinton wrote her senior thesis. It was 1969. And no, all was not well in America. The Civil Rights Movement was continuing to progress. Dr. King had been assasinated!
Although Dr. King talked about equal treatment for African-Americans, and this included, food, housing and health, I do not ever recall hearing Dr. King talk about placing “Human Rights Above Property Rights.”
So, her words are, “Pretty,” however, think of what Alinsky was calling for. He was calling for a “Redistribution Of Weath.” In other words, “Taking From The Haves And Giving To The Have Nots.” This is “Marxism, 101.”
Yet, Rodham-Clinton pretends that what Alinsky was talking about was “Common place In America.” She cites our churches, our parent, their friends and our peers who “Preached The Gospel According To Saul Alinsky.”
I don’t know about you, but I never heard this message from my parents, their friends: Nor my church or peers. This message is pure unadulterated, “Marxism.” And Hillary Rodham received an “A” for her senior thesis. By now, she had fully assimilated the doctrine of, “Marxism.”
In the meantime, you have to understand something about Wellesley College. In his book, “The Truth About Hillary,” author, Edward Klein intimates that this was a “Radical Learning Institution.”
“There was a long tradition at Wellesley, though it had not always been called by that name. In the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, Wellesley girls who had lesbian relationships called them “smashes,” “mashes,” crushes,” and “spoons.” Men were not permitted to attend college dances, instead, upper-class women donned tuxedos and black ties, and brought gowned freshmen and sophomores as their “dates.” In those early days of college, Wellesley women who loved other Wellesley women did not consider themselve strange, since relationships they formed were the norm rather than the exception”
Hillary Rodham-Clinton has a long history of associating with radicals, who despise this country, and wish to not only change its tenor, but perform a “Complete Overhaul On Its Culture.”
This is a woman who is well-schooled in using and abusing individuals, in order to get her way.
While the press and Conservative commentators bludgeon the Reverend Wright and Barack Obama story day and night, they are “Missing The Real Story.”
They and millions of misguided Americans are helping to possibly usher into the White House, “The First Socialist In Our Nation’s History.”
You can not say that Hillary Rodham-Clinton has not been clear on her political ambitions and plans for this country.
Her dream is to change our “Democracy Into Marxism.” And she has a flotilla of fools who are being used by her as, “Useful Idiots.”
Dr. Forest Lewis is a trained clinical pyschologist. He is the author of Diary of a Black Man Who Escaped From the Democratic Political Plantation
Dr. Forest Lewis is a Capitol Hill Coffee House staff writer.