The Smartest Woman in the World

Parent Cafe
41

<p>

</p>

<p>I’m your son’s age and it was pretty big news. I mean I didn’t know all the details obviously but I knew impeachment proceedings had brought against Clinton and I knew in vague terms he had cheated on his wife (I specifically recall discussing it with my parents, who neither divulged all the details nor hid the entire story, but I asked them what he did was illegal). And I recall watching 60 minutes and such. I knew more or less who Ken Starr, Linda Tripp, Monica Lewinsky were, and I sure as heck know who they are now. Honestly if you want to know that badly, it’s pretty easy in the age of Google. If you want to get scholarly about it, go to a database and type in Clinton. Or, just follow general contemporary media, because somehow in 2007, we’re still preoccupied with this. It’s an insult to the intelligence of peoplemy age to say that a) they should have known nothing about it in the first place b) by now they still know nothing about it and c) it needs to be force-feed to them by widespread media denunciation of Clinton. </p>

<p>I highly doubt she’s going to be elected. Honestly if she got the nomination I would be fine except for the fact it would be a stupid move because she’s completely unelectable. The only chance is if Romney magically gets the Republican nomination because he’s unelectable due to the alienation of the evangelicals Christians who pushed Bush over the edge in '04. Or Giuliani, she might have a shot with Giuliani. But Clinton (Hillary) is just so wide open for a Republican campaign, if they run her and lose they just walked right into that one. People (some people) have such a visceral reaction to her, but it’s almost trendy to. I see people who otherwise should agree with her politics that are all on the “Hate Hillary” bandwagon. I would rather that she not get the nomination anyway, I like Obama better, I find Clinton’s record kind of conservative but then again she’d pretty much be held to liberal politics so I wouldn’t be all that concerned. Sadly neither will probably win because the DNC sucks at running campaigns but I like to think this is their year. We can dream anyway. Honestly though, the fact that they somehow parlayed two of the widest open elections into losses is not incredibly comforting. Plus foreign policy is so potentially advantageous here that I’m sure the Republicans will milk their foreign policy for all it’s worth.</p>

42

<p>And they’ve had years of using the DOJ to try to surpress the minority vote.</p>

43

<p>Snopes did not debunk the entire story and their liberal bias was very evident. Here are some actual sources.</p>

<p>**The story is no hoax, though. Its basic elements can be found in respected Hillary biographies and exposes such as Barbara Olson’s “Hell to Pay,” David Brock’s “The Seduction of Hillary Rodham,” Joyce Milton’s “The First Partner” and Carl Limbacher’s “Hillary’s Scheme.”</p>

<p>Here are the facts.</p>

<p>In May 1969, fishermen discovered the body of Black Panther Alex Rackley floating in Connecticut’s Coginchaug River. Rackley’s captors had clubbed him, burned him with cigarettes, scalded him with boiling water and stabbed him with an ice pick before finally shooting him in the head.</p>

<p>New Haven detectives learned that the Panthers suspected Rackley of being a police informer. Panther enforcers had tied him to a chair and tortured him for hours. Police arrested eight Panthers and later extradited Panther leader Bobby Seale from California, after a witness accused Seale of ordering Rackley’s death. (1)</p>

<p>Campus radicals supported the Panthers. They organized mass protests in support of the so-called “New Haven Nine.” Hillary was right in the thick of it.</p>

<p>By the time she entered Yale Law School in 1969, Hillary was already a radical celebrity on campus. Life magazine had featured Hillary in a piece titled, “The Class of '69,” which showcased three student activists whom Life’s editors deemed the best and brightest of the year. A line Hillary used in her Wellesley College commencement speech appeared under her photo: “Protest is an attempt to forge an identity.” (2)</p>

<p>At Yale, Hillary helped edit the Yale Review of Law and Social Action – a left-wing journal which promoted cop-killing and featured cartoons of pig-faced police. (3)</p>

<p>A series of hard-Left mentors introduced Hillary to the brass-knuckle realities of revolutionary activism. As a Wellesley undergraduate, she met and interviewed radical o’rganizer Saul Alinsky, whose Machiavellian tactics she admired. Hillary’s senior thesis supported Alinsky’s call for class warfare. (4)</p>

<p>At Yale, Hillary found a new Svengali in the form of left-wing law professor Thomas Emerson, known around campus as “Tommy the Commie.” Emerson recruited Hillary and other students to help monitor the trial of the New Haven Nine for civil rights violations. Hillary took charge of the operation, scheduling the students in shifts, so that student monitors would always be present in the courtroom. She befriended and worked closely with Panther lawyer Charles Garry. (5)</p>

<p>Some believe that the enormous pressure exerted by the Left helped ensure light sentences for the New Haven Nine. Whether or not this is true, the punishments were mild.</p>

<p>“Only one of the killers was still in prison in 1977,” reports John McCaslin in the Washington Times. “The gunman, Warren Kimbro, got a Harvard scholarship and became an assistant dean at Eastern Connecticut State College. Ericka Huggins, who boiled the water for Mr. Rackley’s torture, got elected to a California school board.” (6)</p>

<p>Hillary’s defenders argue that she played no “significant” role in the New Haven Nine’s defense. This is semantic hairsplitting. Obviously, Hillary was less “significant” than Charles Garry or “Tommy the Commie” Emerson. But Hillary served as a trusted lieutenant to these movers and shakers. Moreover, she had a national profile as a campus activist. Hillary was no rank-and-file student protester, as her apologists claim.</p>

<p>Indeed, Hillary’s work for the Panthers won her a summer internship at the Berkeley office of attorney Robert Treuhaft in 1972. A hardline Stalinist, Treuhaft had quit the Communist Party in 1958 only because it was losing members and no longer provided a good platform for his activism. (7) “Treuhaft is a man who dedicated his entire legal career to advancing the agenda of the Soviet Communist Party and the KGB,” notes historian Stephen Schwartz. (8)</p>

<p>The defense of the New Haven Nine marked Hillary’s initiation into the sinister underworld of the hard-core, revolutionary Left. To my knowledge, Hillary has never publicly renounced nor apologized for her role in that movement.</p>

<p>References</p>

<ol>
<li><p>Joyce Milton, The First Partner: Hillary Rodham Clinton. William, Morrow and Company, Inc., New York, 1999, p. 35. Barbara Olson, Hell to Pay: The Unfolding Story of Hillary Rodham Clinton. Regnery Publishing, Washington, D.C., 1999, p. 55. Return</p></li>
<li><p>Milton, 1999, p. 34; Olson, 1999, pp. 40-45. Return</p></li>
<li><p>Olson, 1999, p. 59-61; Evan Gahr, “Hillary and the Cop-Bashers: Will the Real Ms. Rodham Please Stand Up?” JewishWorldReview.com, June 20, 2000. Return</p></li>
<li><p>David Brock, The Seduction of Hillary Rodham. The Free Press, New York, 1996, pp. 14-17; Olson, 1999, pp. 46, 48, 50. Return</p></li>
<li><p>Milton, 1999, p. 17; Brock, 1996, pp. 31-32; Olson, 1999, p. 54-56. Return</p></li>
<li><p>John McCaslin, “Hillary for the Defense.” Inside the Beltway, The Washington Times, June 12, 1998, p. A9. Return</p></li>
<li><p>Olson, 1999, pp. 56-57. Return</p></li>
<li><p>Brock, 1996, p. 33. Return **</p></li>
</ol>

44

<p>Bailey, it’s really quite interesting to see when it is that you happen to show up to join in on a discussion. I thought having multiple usernames was against CC’s TOS.</p>

45

<p>Sorry, Bailey, but even your second source shows no connection between Hillary and the protest, and it proves she wasn’t involved in the legal defense of the New Haven Nine, but merely played the role Snopes said she did.</p>

<p>You also plagiarized it, word for word from Richard Poe: <a href=“http://www.legaled.com/hillaryatyale.htm[/url]”>http://www.legaled.com/hillaryatyale.htm&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

<p>What you’re not saying is that Poe himself calls the piece you originally cut and pasted an “agiprop classic” and has this to say about it:</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>So much dishonesty, from the ghostnic, to the agiprop itself, to the plagiarism…</p>

46

<p>

Yes, and <em>everyone</em> should be held to this same standard. Everyone.</p>

47

<p>I would love to see an end to the ghostnics. But in my book, the plagiarism is at least as bad. </p>

<p>The kids make fun of me for saying this, but I really don’t like it when people try to deceive their fellow posters, whether it’s with a ghostnic, by taking credit for others’ work, or by posting something they know is false.</p>

48

<p>alwaysamom: Would you be kind enough to tell us who you think Bailey is so as not to leave the impression it might be me? I’ve been accused of being another poster three times now–I hope this isn’t the fourth. I haven’t researched the facts about Hillary and the Panthers, so I can’t support or not support Bailey’s assertions. However, I do think it’s fascinating that every time someone jumps in with a “conservative” or anti-liberal opinion, that person is accused of being someone who has posted here previously. You appear to live in such an insular world that you are shocked that any of the 1,000 people reading this thread so far might have strong opinions that don’t align with yours and might feel moved to express them. It’s actually rather funny to watch.</p>

49

<p>

</p>

<p>I could not agree more. Slightly off topic but I remember feeling a great deal of sympathy for John Kennedy Jr. when he failed the NY bar (more than once). It is one of the tougher bar exams - and with his being the subject of intense scrutiny by the media I am surprised that he pulled it off at all.</p>

50

<p>HH, I’m so happy that I amuse you! </p>

<p>I don’t have any way of knowing for sure who Bailey is and I don’t have the means to confirm who it is, as you very well know, but I imagine one of the mods will check. My comment was a logical extension of not recognizing the username and checking his/her previous posts. If you do the same, you’ll see why I commented. Five posts since ‘joining’ in December, and all five were contributions in a similar way. </p>

<p>Trust me, I do not live in an insular world and I know many people, even some in real life!, whose views do not align with mine, but whose opinions I respect. I actually welcome this because it makes life interesting to have intelligent discussions on various topics. However, when a discussion on a topic such as this goes on for three pages and someone who has posted a total of five times suddenly jumps in, well, that, to me, is suspect. I don’t know which of our more regular posters Bailey is. A few possibilities come to mind. </p>

<p>p.s. Bailey’s posts were not expressions of opinion. They were out and out crappola.</p>

51

<p>Just curious-- Why does HH seem to think that alwaysamom was implying (or, in HH’s terms, left the impression) that the mysterious “Bailey” might be her (HH) in disguise??? I see nothing in alwaysamom’s post to suggest that in any way whatsoever. There does seem to be a pattern, particularly on threads with “hot topics”, that some relatively “unknown” (and frequently new) poster will suddenly “pop in” out of nowhere with some very strong statement (oftentimes off topic, and with the seeming intent to incite or derail the thread, imo). Then, when someone gets understandibly a bit suspicious,they get jumped all over. Then someone cries “foul” or “victim” and its off to the races. </p>

<p>With all due respect, alwaysamom’s hypothesis seems reasonable. I imagine many have observed a pattern that occurs in many threads. It makes me wonder if, when someone feels “attacked”, a volley of back channel PM’s are initiated wherein the person who feels attacked asks their cc “buds” to come in, perhaps under a different name, to their defense, so it doesn’t look like the same old cast of characters comes in to play, for lack of a better term, the “conservatives vs the liberals” game. </p>

<p>And for the record, no one backchannelled me to ask me to post this, It is merely my opinion, my observation, and under my screenname. I can only hope any personal attacks will subside, not escalate. Please, no flame wars. No name-calling. Please. (Note: I do not feel that name calling or personal attacks have yet occurred here-- I am saying that I hope we can engage in preventative medicine and avoid it).</p>

52

<p>I could be wrong, but I think this thread jumped the shark when it became a debate about Black Panthers, possibly before when it became a debate about smearing and foul play, and certainly once it hit the point where the 1-post history person became the focus of conversation based on the grenade that was clearly intended to inflame and draw attention.</p>

<p>Speaking of mature, adult disagreements, how does this one resonate with folks here?</p>

<p><a href=“http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hUcFWPgB8oY[/url]”>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hUcFWPgB8oY&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>We’re approaching this level. Fast. If there was a way for all of us, in unison, to stick our righteous swords into the heart of this beast-thread, I would prescribe that fate. Now. Before we all have no more dignity than one Phillip Wellman.</p>

53

<p>Good points, D’yer. Yes, the introjection of the black panther stuff was done by non other than “Bailey” (Post # 32) and then reattempted (post #43). </p>

<p>As for Wellman, I particularly enjoyed his stealth-like attempt to slither on his belly to the mound, to steal the resin bag and hurl it across the infield. I do believe he took a bow after being ejected from the game, before his final exit from the field. This I find entertaining. Sad, but entertaining, and not at anyone’s expense but his own. The flame wars that occur on CC are rarely (though sometimes they are) entertaining.</p>

54

<p>

As possibly the most middle-of-the-road moderate on this board (who finds little to admire in the leaders of either party), I see NOTHING in this original post to warrant the ensuing vilification. I took this post to reflect genuine surprise and curiosity (but granted, I didn’t come to the thread with political “baggage”). I would urge some of you to take a step back and try to be a bit more objective in your assessments of posts. And remember, “message sent rarely equals message received.”</p>

<p>~berurah</p>

55

<p>

</p>

<p>Then how do you explain the use of the “the smartest woman in the world” insult? This is only used by people trying to vilify Hillary Clinton. </p>

<p>It’s also misleading to portray Hillary as “hiding” something that she herself published years ago, but that I would give a pass to, because OP probably isn’t well informed enough to know that.</p>

<p>But no one would use the “the smartest woman in the world” meme innocently. It’s one thing to write an inflammatory post about a political figure. But it’s an entirely different thing when you’re called on it, to play the “Who me? Why, I had no idea…I’m just an innocent babe in the woods” card.</p>

56

<p>Hilary and the Black Panthers may very well be an urban legend.</p>

<p><a href=“http://www.snopes.com/politics/clintons/panthers.asp[/url]”>http://www.snopes.com/politics/clintons/panthers.asp&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

57

<p>yes, razorsharp. That’s what conyat said in post # 33, which, I believe, led to post 43 (and the second reply- post #45).</p>

58

<p>He did not provide the link, so I did so.</p>

59

<p>Huh, you’re right. I thought I had. Thanks. </p>

<p>Everyone should read it to get the real story, Otherwise, they can’t really fathom the depths that the people who spread this race-baiting UL are going to.</p>

60

<p>We should start a thread (if one hasn’t already been written) on urban legends. There are so many of them…</p>