Clinton’s State of the Union Speech

As a Democrat I thrilled to President Clinton’s State of the Union address (Jan. 25), but he still doesn’t get it. The answer to welfare is jobs. Our family was on welfare during the Great Depression in the ‘30s. Millions of Americans were on welfare. The Depression ended with the bombing of Pearl Harbor and President Roosevelt’s declaration of war. The minute defense plants opened and jobs galore were offered, the ranks of the unemployed and welfare recipients melted like butter in a high-noon Sahara sun. Since World War II wars have been the backbone of our economy. The current recession can be traced to the end of the Cold War.

The President was batting a thousand until he recommended increasing the defense budget by $25 billion, adding to the $1.5 trillion he has committed to defense over the next six years. Robert Borosage (Commentary, Dec. 6) cites the Pentagon with the largest source of waste, fraud and abuse in the federal government. Borosage writes that as much as $100 billion a year from the defense budget could get our country back on track.

SAMUEL M. ROSEN

Newbury Park

Before the entire nation of viewers, Bill Clinton became a Republican in just 1 hour and 20 minutes. What a speaker! When he comes to believe what he said, so will I!

DON BAGGOTT

Corona del Mar

Bravo for President Clinton’s attack on PAC payola! PACman Newt Gingrich and his pandering “revolutionaries” just don’t get it: You can’t clean House with dirty hands.

JOHN HEANER

Los Angeles

Clinton’s State of the Union address helped illustrate his failure to take meaningful action against illegal immigration.

He told us how he greatly improved security at our border. However, later in the speech he implicitly admitted his failure to secure the border when he said that unless we guarantee more loans to Mexico, illegal immigration will increase. He also talked about the burden that illegal immigrants put on American taxpayers, yet he campaigned against Proposition 187.

On the illegal immigration issue, Clinton only will talk the talk. It is up to the Republican majority to walk the walk.

ALLAN J. FAVISH

Tarzana

Following Clinton’s State of the Union address, I’m left wondering why there must always be an immediate “response” by the opposition party. This custom started several years ago, and I’ve never understood it.

No matter who the President is or what party he belongs to, he is the President of all the people, and is trying to unite the country to move in one direction. This is not a political campaign speech. In fact, the President stressed that accomplishing our national goals will take a strong bipartisan effort.

I find it very tacky for the opposition party to immediately jump on the airwaves and do their best to undermine what he has just said. This causes divisiveness, which is the last thing this country needs.

DENNIS F. HANRAHAN

La Habra

As I watched the State of the Union, I could not help but notice Mrs. Clinton’s proud and upbeat demeanor in spite of what I deem a bad rap she has been getting from some critics.

We once again have an extremely intelligent, active and strong-willed First Lady who is willing to pitch in to work for the President and to support him in the world’s most difficult job. Whether or not you agree with Hillary’s viewpoint, we need to give credit where credit is due.

NORMAN A. NERO

Granada Hills

Re “Dornan Assails Clinton, Draws a Reprimand,” Jan. 26:

Rep. Robert Dornan (R-Garden Grove) seems to have wrapped himself in his patriotism so tightly that he has evidently cut off oxygen to his brain. Does being a Republican mean never having to say you’re sorry?

JOHN BOYER

Lake Arrowhead

I just read the article about the tirade made by Dornan in which he dressed down our President. I just want to add my hearty “Hear, hear” to his comments.

No wonder our congressmen don’t know how to act. When they tell the truth they get punished.

JERRY D. CLAXTON

Corona

There is nothing new about Clinton’s “centrist” strategy (Jan. 23); it is the warmed-over fare from the Carter Administration that attracted only 43% of those who bothered to vote in 1992.

Almost half the voting-age population stayed home that year and in 1994 more than half neglected to cast ballots.

The Democrats should stop apologizing for the progressive program of change that this country requires for its social and economic health. We certainly don’t need a “covenant” that sounds like the Republican “contract”! How about a new deal?

ANTHONY GARAVENTE

Carson