Well here it is, the news we have all been waiting for. Hillary Clinton has now declared that she will run for President of the United Sates in 2008. Maybe this will dampen what Mike Ghallager describes as "Obamania". I turned NBC and CBS news tonight (yes I still do that) and I swear that I heard Hillary's name a dozen times in three minutes. The network news breathlessly showed Hillary "standing up" (while sitting down) to former SecDef Don Rumsfeld, and Hilary's live interview, in which she stated that she wanted to put a cap on troops in Iraq, and begin a "phased withdrawl" out of Iraq. And yet she claims on her website that she was quoted as saying that she wants the Iraq War to come to a "right end," whatever that means in Hil-speak. I have linked campaign promises from her website. I could spend the whole night amusing myself by cracking some lame jokes at her expense, but for your sake I will try to contain myself. 

    First off, who would be the first lady if Hillary was president? Perhaps John Kerry could be a fill in (when he returns from helping troops stuck in Iraq), if Hillary's ego wasn't big enough for both jobs. Before I go any further I promise you that I won't repeat her campaign slogan "I'm in. And I'm in to win" ad infinatum. I wonder how much she had to pay someone to come up with that slogan? I mean after the city of Baltimore paid some advertising firm $500,000 to come up with the "Get in on it" those slogans must be selling through the roof. (Meanwhile my sister comes up with "I am not interested in cooperation just capitualtion" for free. Sweet.) Hillary then starts playing up the whole "conversation with America" thing that seems to be the new Washington fad. She says,

    "I am announcing that I will form an exploratory committee to run for president...I want you to join me not just for the campaign but for a conversation about the future of our country -- about the bold but practical changes we need to overcome six years of Bush administration failures...As a senator, I will spend two years doing everything in my power to limit the damage...Bush can do. But only a new president will be able to undo Bush's mistakes and restore our hope and optimism...renew the promise of America -- the idea that if you work hard you can count on the health care, education, and retirement security that you need to raise your family...these basic values of America...are under attack from this administration...only a new president can regain America's position as a respected leader in the world."

    I paraphrased and condensed several paragraphs into what you see above because that is what I want to address. First, what exactly is an "exploratory committee?" It seems to me that an "exploratory committee" is just a group of people telling people what to do, which could indicate the Hilary can't make any decision for herself, and would just be a slave to the "experts" and what is PC at the time. I would rather have a president who can make decisions for him/herself (and go against public opinion at times) based on their intuition and experience. Then Hillary gives the crusader line: "I will not be a tool, I will fight for you, I will stand up for you." That's right, we all believe that seeing as politicians (Republicans and Deomcrats) are so very trustworthy. If Hillary really wanted to limit the "the damage...Bush can do" then why did she vote for the Iraq War in the first place. She only stopped supporting it when it became politically popular to do so. 

    Rather than presenting concrete plans and solutions, Hillary seeks to sway potential voters by emotion. She sticks to the trite political talking points: she will be the champion of health care, of education, and of retirement security. Translating this campaign rhetoric from Hil-speak to layman’s terms it comes out, universal health care for all, free education, and an expanisve welfare state. One wonders how she will manage this and still keep the budget under control, which was another one of her promises. This of course leads to an even greater redistribution of wealth and higher taxation, a strategy which we all know to yield great success. Hillary continues her campaign pitch by stating the classic rhetoric that she will return "America to a respected leader in the world." This leads me to this thought: The world is full of criminals at this point, such as Islamic jihadists, dictators, and other corrupt indiviuals worldwide. Just as the common criminals and thugs on the streets of America don't respect the authority of police, so the world doesn't respect America. The evil in the world sees America as one of the few bastions of freedom and hope remaining and hate us for it. So world respect is not one of my top priorities right now. Bringing Islamic jihadists and dictators to justice is. When these forces respect America it will be for a different reason. It will not be the false respect that the world community gives those who are Politically Correct, and Politically Popular, but it will be the respect that prey gives to a great hunter.

Mike Grant

Mike Grant

    I just finished reading another outstanding book, “Enemies” by Bill Gertz. “Enemies” is about the intelligence agencies of the United States and how effective they are at their job. So if you want to find out the truth about how many enemy spies are in the US, how successful our enemies are in conducting espionage operations, and just how good the US is at combating these foes. BUY AND READ THIS BOOK! However, if you do not want to be outraged, disgusted, and have to suppress the urge to take every self-serving, incompetent, bureaucratic idiot at the FBI and CIA and shake them like a rag doll, DO NOT BUY AND READ THIS BOOK! Because you will feel above emotions and feel like taking said action.

    Bill Gertz pulls no punches in this extremely well-written, informative and disturbing book. Gertz goes into great detail about the hostile regimes facing the United States, such as Russia, China, Iran, Islamic terrorist groups and (surprisingly) Cuba and what the US does to counter these threats, which is about nil. “Enemies” is chock full of Gertz’s own observations, interviews with intelligence officials, and declassified documents which are used to paint a disturbing picture of the US intelligence apparatus. Gertz writes that the biggest problem (of many) that the US intelligence agencies have is the lack of an aggressive, successful counter-intelligence operation (CIO). A good counter-intelligence (CI) program, as defined in “Enemies”, is “...quite simply, the process of identifying and catching foreign spies, either to neutralize them or to exploit knowledge of their activities for one’s own purposes” and “Turning enemy agents --- convincing captured spies to work as double agents rather than go to jail --- is one of the highest objectives of US counter-intelligence.” Unfortunately, Gertz says that CI is one of the United States’ biggest failings.

    Gertz writes that our CI failures are caused by complex issues, some of which are near impossible to correct, such as our lack of trustworthy Chinese and Arabic sources. But other problems are far more correctable, and Gertz outlines them in “Enemies.” They include:

(a) serious lack of “humint” or human intelligence agents
        · caused by downsizing of CIA’s humint by the Clinton administration 
        (covered in Bill Gertz’s book “Betrayal”)

(b) change in philosophy by the CIA of how to conduct intelligence ops and if CI is needed
        · caused in part by Clinton Administration 
        · caused in part that CIA never had an aggressive CIO

(c) self-serving bureaucrats preserving careers at the expense of National Security
        · FBI / CIA have repeatedly promoted agents who have blown CIO
        · FBI / CIA have repeatedly covered up disastrous failings to save jobs of bosses     
        · FBI / CIA have repeatedly ignored executive orders from the President to correct 
          flaws  

    As a result of all these problems the US is extremely vulnerable and has been fleeced and will continue to be fleeced by enemy regimes. Bill Gertz goes into much greater detail about these issues, even including declassified intelligence reports, than I have (obviously) and since I don’t want to steal his “thunder” I will conclude by saying that Bill Gertz has done a great service to the public in writing this book. Hopefully the issues he brings to light in “Enemies” will be addressed, but I am not very confident. Again, I say BUY AND READ THIS BOOK! You will not regret it.

Mike Grant