May 18, 1998
Carolyn C. Gargaro

Has anyone wondered why India is suddenly testing nuclear weapons? Could it be that China is strengthening its satellite and missile technology at an accelerated pace due to the favors and information received from President Clinton, and that India is feeling extremely threatened? And now that India is testing weapons, China is supplying its ally, Pakistan, with weaponry. Now Pakistan plans to start their own nuclear tests. What a grand chain of events - all set into motion by our own President and his desire for money.

Does the name Fred Thompson ring a bell? You know - the guy who warned us that China had plans to gain access to the White House and proprietary information? Fred Thompson, the man who Democrats scorned and laughed at. Maybe we should go back and take a closer look at what he was saying, now that perhaps people will be a little more willing to listen.

The more information that comes out, the more complicated and unethical this whole situation becomes, and the more I worry about the security of this country. My thoughts have been summed up perfectly in an articulate article by William Safire. For a more in depth look at the Chinese-US-Clinton connection, please read this article. I also recommend my friend Matt Wallace's letter to the editor about this issue, as well as Mike Cavanaugh's article. Matt was also the first one to inform me of William Safire's article. But make sure you come back and finishing reading this article - I'm not quite done yet.

As I sit here this evening listening to political talk shows, I hear people trying to divert the issue by saying, "Oh well, see? This shows that we need campaign finance reform! See?! If the Republicans had been more cooperative..." and then the tirade starts about the Republican party in a clever maneuver to take focus off the fact that a Communist country - a country which is not only a world economic leader, but a world leader in human rights violations - is gaining White House access and military technology in exchange for the almighty campaign dollar. On a side note, if the Democrats are so concerned about human rights violations, WHY are they cozying up to China for campaign money? Can anyone say "hypocrisy"?

Campaign finance reform would have prevented this? Can someone explain how? Would we somehow allow this kind of transaction? This kind of selling of military information for money from a foreign country is illegal - if Clinton would break the law now, what would keep him from breaking these wonderful new campaign finance reform laws? This isn't a matter of bad campaign finance laws which allow something that should not be allowed - this action is already illegal! Will campaign finance reform somehow reform Clinton's ethics too?

This isn't a Monica Lewinsky type case, even though some of the media keeps trying focus on that in a desperate attempt to somehow tie this to sex so that they can tell us "it doesn't matter" and continue the "vast right wing conspiracy" mantra. This has nothing to do with sex!

This is a case about NATIONAL SECURITY - a case about WORLD SECURITY and a case about a President compromising the United States for money. I don't want to hear about the Republicans being money-hungry - I don't want to hear about campaign finance. What I want to hear is a congressional vote to halt to the Presidents' upcoming trip to China. I want to hear that Democrats are going to put aside their political differences to investigate this gross misuse of power.

We were told back in 1992 that character didn't matter - it didn't matter if Clinton had unethical ties in Arkansas - it didn't matter that Clinton demonstrated against the USA in a foreign country - it didn't matter that Clinton was out of touch with the workings of the military. It appears now that Mr. Clinton's ignorance on military matters and his pattern of unethical behavior may have compromised national security and the safety of the United States.

I highly doubt that our economic prosperity will be of great importance if the U.S. is flattened by a nuclear war. Perhaps we should think about that the next time we are told that "character doesn't matter."