Loaded to the hilt with your hour-beyond-wingnut co-workers who think "Teh jooooz" and "teh commees" are still going to take over the homeland.

What name do you have for that place?

The source was ridiculed and deemed unacceptable by the Hillary Rah-Rah Machine here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6879419

But now it's okay? Hokey smokes, the spin must be making y'all dizzy.

Also there is more than one link in the OP.

Her senior thesis was a smug hit job on Alinsky. That's a fact. The letters in your other link are irrelevant in that regard and don't change the nature of her thesis, but you go on with your bad self if it makes you feel better.

I'll be the first to admit it when they made me, they broke the mold.

that once!

of his followers could have thought so.

I agree with many others that think otherwise.

I'll extend you the courtesy of not marginalizing your opinion. Reciprocity. Look into it.

Common sense. Look into it.

That does not change the nature of the thesis.

Why is that so difficult to understand? Drinking the kool aid seems to eradicate all common sense. You offer a red herring with a straight face.

The thesis denigrated the efficacy of Alinsky's life work. Period. That's a fact. What you're throwing out there is irrelevant and beside the point.

Have a nice evening.

He was a smart man. Of course he wouldn't have offered her a job if she'd "denigrated the efficacy" of his "life work." Why is that so difficult to understand?

Talk about drinking the kool aid. You better go look for an antidote.

Her thesis was exactly as I described it, critical of Alinsky. That's a fact. Whatever happened outside of that is, duh, outside of that, doesn't change that fact, and is not the point. What a dumb fucking hill to die on. Jesus H. Christ. I put my first person on ignore today. The first in 10 years. I've got a feeling that I'm going to break my own record today.

Bernie has the momentum. That's also a fact. See you at the ballot box.

which was surely involved in his subsequent decision to HIRE her -- counts for a lot more.

You must have me confused with somebody else.

Although they'd trash that as right-wing...anything to bash Hillary...they're nuts.

Bravo.

K&R

Thanks for posting it. It's always good to see primary sources.

Quick, someone be offended.

You know what I mean.

Alinsky is the great Satan to these idiots

a lot more than me

early history on Hillary, William.

first episode was great! I didn't watch the ones you have to pay for yet though

I read it years ago. It was a nuanced and balanced treatment in my view.

___perhaps more than anyone, it was Alan Schechter, a political science professor who mentored Clinton during her student years at Wellesley College, who had a ringside seat to her intellectual and political transformation amid the turbulent 1960s. A self-described “FDR progressive” raised in Brooklyn by the secular children of Jewish immigrants from Eastern Europe, Schechter, 71, met Clinton in his capacity as an adviser to the student government and went on to become a beloved professor who wrote her a glowing recommendation to Yale Law School. As her thesis adviser, Schechter steered Clinton to focus her project on Saul Alinsky, the irascible labor and civil rights activist who pioneered the practice of community organizing with his Depression-era campaign to improve conditions in the Chicago slum made notorious by writer Upton Sinclair.

Her approach was “instrumental, pragmatic, how do you get from point A to point B,” said Schechter, who recently discussed with the Forward his most famous pupil and her 1969 senior project. “She wasn’t studying Alinsky because of her interest in Alinsky and not even, I think, because of her interest in community organizing as such. It was much more that he had a particular approach to poverty.”

The senator’s 92-page thesis on Alinsky went largely unnoticed until 1992, when the Clintons, to the chagrin of Schechter, successfully lobbied Wellesley officials to close access to the paper as long as they occupied the White House. The project subsequently became a lightning rod for the couple’s Republican opponents, who alleged it might contain evidence that Hillary Clinton once held radical beliefs. The charge may well find its way back into heavy rotation if the New York senator advances to the general election, though a close reading of the thesis — now available at the Wellesley archives and posted on at least one conservative Web site — tends to back up Clinton’s own insistence that she was no emerging firebrand in college.

With a title taken from a T.S. Eliot poem, Clinton’s thesis, “‘There Is Only the Fight…’: An Analysis of the Alinsky Model,” takes a pragmatic approach to the issue of poverty alleviation. Her question is how best to help poor people in urban areas, and her approach is empirical rather than normative. The paper often takes a no-nonsense tone, as when Clinton sounds a skeptical note about the usefulness of “psychodramatics” in politics, or reminds her readers that discussing Alinsky “apart from his actions is like discussing current theories of international relations without mentioning Vietnam.”

Carefully footnoted, and written in academic prose, the paper examines both Alinsky’s community-organizing tactics and the government programs created by 1960s “welfarephiles” — and finds them both lacking. Clinton argued that Alinsky’s bottom-up community organizing is ineffective at producing long-term comprehensive reform, even as she criticized the federal anti-poverty programs of the 1960s for failing to solicit meaningful input from the intended recipients.

read more: http://forward.com/news/12202/clinton-s-thesis-on-leftist-icon-reveals-roots-00926/

Sure, encouraging minorities to become politically active might have made one a "Radical" in the mid-1960's. But what is about him that makes conservatives clutch their pearls and gasp. I keep coming across those "letters to the editor" from right-wing nuts that clearly have no clue about his actual writings and activities. They just mention the name along with "1960's radical left-winger" and Hillary Clinton, as if that's all one needs to know.

Is it maybe a name, that to them, "Sounds like he must be some kind of dangerous Jewish Bolshevik"?

Socialist!