Archive for the ‘Hillary Clinton’ Category

Hillary: “There is only the fight…”

August 22, 2007

Saul Alinsky via 

Our political views tend to evolve slightly over time.  Mine for example, in my younger years, were slightly right-of-center.  As I have gotten older, studied, read (contrary to Pat Schroeder’s position) and researched issues, I have moved farther and farther to the right.  As a result, I am a pretty staunch conservative, both fiscally and socially.

As Maynard points out on Tammy Bruce‘s blog, there are several prominent people whose positions have evolved over the years, including Tammy’s.  But, he also notes that Ronald Reagan and David Horowitz both stood with the Left in their youth, quite the contrary to Reagan as our 40th president or Horowitz as the editor of FrontPage Magazine today.  So, it is not impossible for a person to gradually take on different views.

But, I am not quite sure that Hillary Rodham Clinton has changed that much from her radical youth.  She is trying to convince voters that she is a centrist.  Now, pandering to the nutroots at the YearlyKos would seem rather contradictory to that effort but she professes a centrist position, nonetheless.

But, this may not make any sense to the average reader until they get a chance to look at Hillary’s thesis at Wellesley College in Massachusetts in 1969.  Her paper was on Saul Alinsky and deals with how to change America’s political culture.  The militant title, “There is only the fight…“, speaks to the Alinsky’s approach and, quite possibly, the author’s.

GOPublius has an HTML version of Hillary’s thesis and Freedom Underground has the PDF version of the same.  The HTML is an easier read on the eyes but having to click to get to different pages is a bit time consuming.

Oddly enough, the paper was locked away at the Clintons’ request, when Bill Clinton was elected as the 42nd president.

…the Clintons asked Wellesley [College] in 1993 to hide Hillary Rodham’s senior thesis…

Wellesley’s president, Nannerl Overholser Keohane, approved a broad rule with a specific application: The senior thesis of every Wellesley alumna is available in the college archives for anyone to read — except for those written by either a “president or first lady of the United States.” So far, that action has sealed precisely one document: Hillary Rodham’s senior honors thesis in political science, entitled ” ‘There Is Only the Fight…’: An Analysis of the Alinsky Model.”…

…Under Wellesley’s rule, Clinton’s thesis became available to researchers again when the Clintons left the White House in 2001 — available only to those who visit the Wellesley archives. But few have made the trip, and the document’s allure continued to grow. A purloined copy was offered for sale on eBay in 2001, then withdrawn when Clinton’s staff cited copyright law.

What was with the mystery of the paper written by the young leftwing Hillary?  Why would they want it secured from the public’s eye?  Interesting questions.  Unfortunately, we haven’t gotten any answers.  But, I would suspect that there is information there that they did not want the public to see.  Perhaps it could be Hillary’s fundamental political leanings? 

Does Hillary’s paper give us some deep insight into the aspiring Dem nominee for president?  You will have to read it for yourself and draw your own conclusions.  I think it does and I do not appear to be alone in that analysis.  Peggy Noonan, co-author of “The Case Against Hillary Clinton“, referred to Hillary’s paper as “the Rosetta Stone of Hillary Studies.” 

For those a little foggy on the Rosetta Stone, Cassandra has a refresher course on its significance in Noonan’s description.


Happy reading!


Edwards’ wife fights for his candidacy. Why can’t he?

August 17, 2007

Elizabeth Edwards

Elizabeth Edwards takes a “swipe at Hillary” and calls Obama to task on his “holier than thou” attitude, according to NewsMax.

Elizabeth Edwards Takes Swipe at Hillary 

Elizabeth Edwards, wife of Democratic candidate John Edwards, lambastes his rival Barack Obama as “holier than thou” on the Iraq war and accuses Hillary Rodham Clinton of failing to show leadership on health care and Iraq.

As her husband trails Clinton and Obama in national polls, Elizabeth Edwards has been an outspoken critic of his opponents. Last month, she said her husband would be a better champion for women as president than Clinton and more recently said, “We can’t make John black, we can’t make him a woman. Those things get you a lot of press, worth a certain amount of fundraising dollars.”

In an interview published in the August issue of The Progressive magazine, Elizabeth Edwards complained about Obama, who opposed the war when he was a state legislator in Illinois and later as a Senate candidate but has since voted for funds for the military.   more…

I guess the “silk pony”, as Michelle Malkin affectionately calls him, needed to bring out the muscle, since he is too busy with his hypocrisy on taking money, predatory lending and, possibly, conspiring with Henry Reynolds on a smear campaign against an unnanounced Republican candidate. 

Can’t you fight for yourself, John. 

John Edwards via 

I bet, if he asks, Liz might show him how to stand up for himself, without mussing his mane too much.

Meanwhile, John will keep up with the focus of his campaign from the beginning,…


…himself.  No wonder Liz is having to do the fighting. 

Is Hillary’s cleavage really news?

August 15, 2007

via The Washington Post

Come one, folks.  Is it really news that Hillary Clinton has breasts?  Robyn Givhan at the Washington Post seems to think so.

Now, if the story were broken that she had male genitalia, that might be news. 

Anyhow, Ann Althouse muses some more on Hillary and cleavage, if you’re up to it. (no pun intended…well, maybe a little)

WaPo is even blogging on Hillary’s bosom.  The recent Hillary Clinton fundraising letter is right in that it is “grossly inappropriate.”  It was so gross to me that the one photo of Hillary Clinton and her cleavage was enough to leave my lunch feeling less-than-settled. 

Anyone have a Tums?  Anyone?

Let’s get back to real news.  Let’s hear about Hillary’s socialist healthcare or her more recent venture for billions of dollars to have the government bail out homeowners who over-extend themselves with a socialist housing plan.  Let’s hear about what Hillary is hiding.  Let’s hear about her groveling to the leftwing nutroots and getting booed at the YearlyKos. 

There are too many boobs in government to worry about writing on Hillary’s cleavage or any other candidate’s.  There goes my lunch again.  I may never get these disturbing visions of Hillary and her cleavage out of my mind.  Thanks, guys. :-/

First, “Hillarycare” and now “Hillestate”? What’s next?

August 14, 2007


H/T to Michelle Malkin.

Michelle outlines Hillary’s newest way to redistribute America’s wealth in her dream socialist country.  First, we got “Hillarycare“, with her socialized healthcare program that the other Dems are now tauting as a foundation of their campaign platforms.

Now, she is pledging $1,000,000,000 here and $1,000,000,000 there to underwrite people who are over-extending themselves in the realestate market.  What do we call this one – “Hillestate“? 

Now, folks, that is a lot of zeros.  And, for yours and my tax dollars to underwrite people that aren’t smart enough not to over-extend themselves in the housing market is ludicrous.  Fannie and Freddie have no business being in existence anyhow.  It is just another corrupt beauracracy that eats up our tax money and show nothing for it, except the need to funnel in more money.

You can check out Hillary’s “four-point plan” for yourself.   You can check her out on CNBC pressing her agenda.

Michelle brings us the roundup from some money savvy folks who see the obvious pitfalls with this type of endeavor.

Why not click on over to Hillary’s campaign blog and give her a story of how you chose to live within your means and bought property you could afford.  Apologize to her up front that you cannot give her some sob story, because you were too busy being responsible and not expecting Fannie, Freddie or the like to bail you out.

Can we file this one under “stupid with a huge price tage to the American people”?

Others posting on this topic:  American Pundit / Matt Carrothers / Jonathan Hoenig / SocalMtgGuy /