Barbara Olson perished when her plane slammed into the Pentagon on September 11, 2001. Two years before that, she wrote a devastating book on the past of Hillary Clinton. The puzzle of Hillary is that she is an idealist in a sense, but she is also a person who doesn’t let ethical considerations stand in the way of goals – such as getting rich, or achieving the restructuring of society that she believes is necessary.
In Olson’s biography of Hillary: “Hell to Pay” she tells the story of a 14 year old girl named Hillary, a Methodist who knelt by her bed to pray every night, and what’s more ironic, a conservative Republican. Hillary grew up to become a passionate advocate of social transformation. Perhaps her character was also transformed in the process.
Lets look at the political transformation:
The transformation started when the Reverend Donald G. Jones arrived in Hillary’s town of Park Ridge as the new youth minister.
Jones drew explicit parallels between the utopia of Karl Marx and the heavenly kingdom. He took the group into inner-city Chicago, where Hillary for the first time came to know poor people, “trailer people,” black people, Hispanic people—families who, he taught, would not have been welcome in Park Ridge, even if they could have afforded it. The University of Life took Hillary and her friends to nearby farms, where the students set up a program to babysit migrant children while the parents toiled. For the first time, Hillary performed social work for the poor, this time for Hispanic migrant laborers and their families.
So far, there would seem to be no problem. On the contrary, taking time to help migrants and poor people is praiseworthy.
At Wellesley college, Hillary took time from her studies to work trying to teach poor black children in Roxbury to read.
She was active in student war protests and increasingly vocal in private over her opposition to the [Vietnam] war…Hillary knew that she was sheltered. And the feeling that evil ran amok outside was at times overwhelming. On the day that day that Martin Luther King, Jr., was murdered, Hillary burst into her suite, startling her roommate, threw her book bag across the room, and yelled, “I can’t stand it anymore. I can’t take it.” She soon broke into sobs.
That doesn’t sound so bad either. She had principles, even if cautious types might not agree with all of them.
Then the path leads to the dark side. We see how Christian and Marxist ideas can produce a synthesis that excuses murderers.
For Hillary, the convergence of power and Christian ends had come together in Motive, a magazine for college-age Methodists…She told a writer for Newsweek that she still treasured a 1966 Motive article by theologian and SDS leader Carl Oglesby called “Change or Containment.” Oglesby is variously described as a Marxist or Maoist theoretician, in the piece so admired by Hillary, Oglesby defended Ho Chi Minh and Castro, and Maoist tactics of violence. “I do not find it hard to understand that certain cultural settings create violence as surely as the master’s whip creates outcries of pain and rage. I can no more condemn the Andean tribesmen who assassinate tax collectors than I can condemn the rioters in Watts or Harlem or the Deacons for Defense and Justice. Their violence is reactive and provoked…
Hillary spoke at her graduation to her fellow students, saying:
“We are, all of us, exploring a world that none of us understands and attempting to create within that uncertainty, “But there are some things we feel, feelings that our prevailing, acquisitive, and competitive corporate life, including tragically the universities, is not the way of life for us.” After this impenetrable declaration, she went even further into the depths of murky sixties thinking: “We’re searching for more immediate, ecstatic and penetrating modes of living.”
There is Hillary the non-materialist.
For Hillary’s thesis at Wellesley, Olson writes:
She interviewed [left wing organizer Saul] Alinsky, and concluded that Johnson-era programs [such as the Great Society, which was meant to solve poverty] did not go far enough. The problems of poverty made it necessary for a fundamental shift in the structure of power.
Remember when Obama promised to “transform America”? Hillary also thought it needed transforming.
All this happened by the end of her college years. Then Hillary went to Yale Law School.
In the town of New Haven, where Yale is located, members of the Black Panther Party, including the infamous Bobby Seale were being tried for murdering one of their own.
The victim, Alex Rackley, had been suspected by the Panthers as a police informant. What was certain was that he had been brutally tortured, beaten, scalded, mutilated, and killed. The evidence against the Black Panthers was overwhelming—including an audio tape of part of the “trial” to which Rackley was subjected. Two Panthers confessed to shooting Rackley as part of a plea bargain. But Bobby Seale fought extradition from California and became …a rallying point for student radicals who idolized the Panthers as the leaders of a necessary black insurrection against the repressive white establishment. That the Black Panthers could actually be guilty was an idea that had never occurred, or mattered, to their defenders, who were not at all fazed by a political act of protest against white oppression, or that glorified the killing of police officers—or, in their words, “pigs.” Yale was a natural forum, perhaps battleground, for the privileged white students who wanted to show their solidarity with the Black Panthers and the forces of revolution against the presumed racism of American law.
This sounds familiar. Just recently, Hillary Clinton told the 335,000-member National Fraternal Order of Police (FOP) that she won’t even bother applying for their endorsement for the 2016 election. This is at a time when the Black Lives Matter movement claims that police are killing blacks due to racism. It is also a time when police have been assassinated – in New York, in Dallas, in Mississippi and elsewhere.
At Yale, Hillary chose to serve as one of the editors of the Yale Review of Law and Social Action, where she worked side-by-side with future Clinton insiders Mickey Kantor and Robert Reich….It included many cartoons depicting the police as hominid pigs, their snouts wet while they mutter, “niggers, niggers, niggers, niggers.”
Now we could stop here, and say – wait a minute – the sixties caught up a lot of people who are somewhat sorry for their excesses, and their heart was initially in the right place. Or we could get alarmed at the above. I happen to be alarmed.
I mentioned Marxism. What about Stalinism? Hillary’s friends included Robert Treuhaft and Jessica Mitford. Treuhaft was a former lawyer for the Communist Party. He and his wife Jessica Mitford were both committed Communists. Stalinists, in fact. But heck, who doesn’t have radical friends.
At Yale she met Bill Clinton. Clinton campaign coordinator Neal McDonald remembered that Bill “had a girlfriend in every county (of Arkansas].” So why did Bill choose Hillary?
According to Dick Morris, another Yale student, also a former follower of Alinsky, but one who reformed, “Sunday-morning [Bill] Clinton felt no hypocrisy in marrying Hillary Rodham,” Indeed, he probably saw marrying for brains as a notch above marrying for glamour as Kennedy had done. It mimicked more closely the behavior of his other role model, FDR, who betrothed to Eleanor but tarried with Lucy Mercer.”
As we know, just like Bill’s role model JFK, Bill’s pursuit of women continued after his marriage. The book shows that Hillary had to obfuscate this to the public as much as possible. Perhaps this means she was a good wife, perhaps it means that she was a liar. Or both. As far as ethics goes, the book gives the impression that her political career with Bill did not bring out the best in Hillary. But she was indispensable in keeping it going.
“Walking around” money was a southern tradition. It was taken for granted that the Democratic party had the right to work with labor unions and church groups to disburse large sums of cash to bribe people to vote. Bill [Clinton] himself had handled piles of such money for the McGovern campaign in Texas. Now it was his turn. Paul Fray matter-of-factly explained to the candidate that dairy interests in the state were willing to put up the cash to buy absentee ballots. All Bill had to do was say “yes.” Left to himself, there is little doubt what he would have done. But Hillary had not yet become the operator she was later to become. From an adjoining room, she found out about it and allegedly killed the deal.
Losing to Republican Frank White in 1980, Bill visited [Dan] Lasater at his Quapaw Towers apartment…Bill had to have known that Lasater was a dealer of drugs as well as bonds. The very apartment he visited was widely known as the e-ticket to euphoria, the scene of legendary parties that rivaled the groupie rock scene for its outrageousness, with ashtrays brimming with cocaine, and young women and high school girls offering themselves as party favors.
Now consider this: “Asked which U.S. president of the past 25 years they admired most, 42 percent [of Americans surveyed] named [Bill Clinton] — more than twice the percentage of any other president.”
Its as if a large group of the American people don’t care about government money used for personal enrichment, and that a man who represents them has the sexual appetite of a unusually prolific rabbit, that he lies to cover up both attributes, and incidentally, implements left-wing ideas. But I digress.
Hillary started showing truly unethical behavior when Jimmy Carter became president Under his administration, Hillary was appointed to the Legal Services Corporation (LSC), a federally funded nonprofit organization established by Congress. LSC was a leftist organization already, but she carried it to new heights:
[She] put together a cadre of committed activist lawyers who…could use individual cases as levers with which to broaden mandates for social welfare spending, to create new rights needing new programs… Under her leadership, the LSC budget grew from $90 million to more than $321 million. What she did with the money was a serious scandal, but one which she managed to brazen her way through—like scandals to come. The LSC used public funds to print political training manuals to show “how community organizations and public interest groups can win political power and resources.” The LSC contributed taxpayer dollars to a mayor’s campaign in Georgia, as “a project to educate clients about their rights in the legislative process.” It held training programs that taught political activists how to harass the opposition, from nailing dead rats to an opponent’s front door, to the black arts of private investigations and dirt digging.
in the 1980 election, the LSC diverted funds from cases and threw its resources into a frantic effort to use indigent clients in a letter-writing campaign against Reagan. In a later investigation, Republican Senate aides were astonished to see videotaped training sessions in which staffers spoke openly about how they were organizing the LSC’s national network to defeat Reagan.
Says Olson: “she had spearheaded a deliberate, national plot to undermine the political process with millions of dollars’ worth of staff work and the diversion of taxpayer money into political campaigns.”
By this point, we have to ask, what is going on? It seems that Hillary had the idea that the end justifies the means, even if the means are illegal. Perhaps she also thought that this was the way the game is played, or that if the power structure is really irredeemable, then she might as well exploit it. Who knows?
Hillary chaired the New World Foundation from 1982 to 1988, where she disbursed funds to some other militant organizations:
…left-wing recipients of Hillary’s largesse included the Committees in Solidarity with the People of El Salvador, or CISPES. CISPES unabashedly sought to bring a Communist revolution to Central America.
There were plenty of other nasty groups that got the funds.
Olson sums up:
Hillary rolled up her sleeves and made sure that American taxpayer dollars were disbursed to people dedicated to terror, disinformation, and violent revolution. She has never expressed a single word of regret for her support for these organizations and causes.
The U.S. constitution is to some extent a system of restraints on power. Whether it is ideal can be debated, but consider this:
William Dixon was a member of the committee that investigated the impeachment of Richard Nixon. After seeing Hillary, who was also on the committee, in action, he said that Hillary “paid no attention to the way the Constitution works in this country, the way politics works, the way Congress works, the way legal safeguards are set up.”
Hillary’s “idealistic” statements when she graduated from Wellesley against our “acquisitive, and competitive corporate life” seem like a bad joke. As far as “acquisitiveness”, she has, with Bill, amassed over a hundred million dollars, in a way that would make anyone cynical about the way our government works.
So what is the “devil’s bargain” of Hillary Rodham Clinton? The bargain is that for the sake of power to carry out her ideals, and for the sake of money to live a good lifestyle, she has transgressed all sorts of moral boundaries. And the devil’s bargain exists for American voters in a different form. They are all too willing to overlook character flaws, and there will be hell to pay.
Olson, Barbara. Hell to Pay: The Unfolding Story of Hillary Rodham Clinton (Kindle Locations 2107-2108). Regnery Publishing. Kindle Edition.