I couldn't agree more with Christopher's take on the Hillary Clinton candidacy.

I remember interviewing the former FBI chief in Little Rock, someone who initially liked Bill Clinton and was eloquent in his concern about post-9/11 civil rights.

He did, however, change his view on Bill Clinton once he looked into the case of Juanita Broaddrick, the woman who accused the former Arkansas governor of rape. (In addition to the chapter, "Is There a Rapist in the Oval Office?" in the paperback version of Christopher's book, No One Left to Lie To, see Washingtonpost.com Special Report: Clinton Accused; <link>)

The FBI Special Agent in Charge told me he was "shaken" by his personal conclusion that Ms. Broaddrick had in fact been sexually assaulted by Bill Clinton.

I might add one other particular to Christopher's spot-on charge that: "Indifferent to truth, willing to use police-state tactics and vulgar libels against inconvenient witnesses, hopeless on health care, and flippant and fast and loose with national security: The case against Hillary Clinton for president is open-and-shut."

Hillary Clinton, under fire about her commitment to civil rights, has lately been loudly proclaiming her fealty to the Democratic Party's best traditions on human rights.

However, just two years ago, Hillary--the purported "expert" on international relations--said there should be "lawful authority" for torture in some cases. (See, for example, <link>.)

Her stand was opposite to that of every other major Democratic presidential candidate in 2007-2008, and the heat she took for it caused her to make one of her famous "flip flops."

Democrats hungry to regain the White House need to ask themselves, as is asked in Mark 8:36, "For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul."

Martin Edwin Andersen

(Winner of the 2001 U.S. Office of Special Counsel's "Public Servant Award," the first ever given to a whisteblower in the national security category for uncovering "recurrent and persistent" security and ethics violations in Janet Reno's Justice Department. See: <link>)

She lost me with her support in the runup to Iraq and bothers me greatly with attempts to now mollify that stance (unlike Edwards who apologized for that error). Your judgement take and biblical reference is bang on.