Clinton Attackers

Kudos to Robert Scheer for his attack on the sleazy type of journalism that has been practiced by Matt Drudge and the supporting cast at Rupert Murdoch’s right-wing Fox News Channel (Column Left, Jan. 12). Anyone who has seen Drudge’s weekend show knows that it exists for the sole purpose of smearing Bill Clinton, Bruce Lindsey, Sidney Blumenthal and anyone else who criticizes the right-wing sociopaths who have tried to undermine the Clinton presidency since day one.

As a moderate Republican, I voted for Clinton in 1992. The Clinton-haters drove me out of the GOP a few years later and I am now a fiercely partisan Democrat. I think many other fair-minded Republicans are about to make the same switch.

MATT ROBERTS

La Mirada

*

James Pinkerton (Column Right, Jan. 12) suggests that Hillary Rodham Clinton is a good subject for more scrutiny. I guess the $40 million-plus already spent on investigating her and her husband was not enough. Leave it to the Republicans. If you can’t overcome a popular opponent, dig for dirt, but make sure you blame the Democrats for initiating the politics of personal destruction.

For a party that prides itself on the ethic of personal responsibility, the GOP and its supporters have sure fabricated a wonderful way to blame others for their own actions.

LARRY SHAPIRO

Rancho Mirage

*

Paul Conrad’s Jan. 12 cartoon illustrates perfectly the confusion plaguing the impeachment debate. Underneath a drawing of our founding fathers drafting the Constitution, one of them asks, “Is sex a high crime, a misdemeanor, or what?” Normally a highly insightful satirist, Conrad has fallen victim to the misunderstanding that the scandal is about sex.

In his deposition, President Clinton readily admitted to having sex with Gennifer Flowers. If he had done the same with Monica Lewinsky, none of the socially wrenching events of the past year--the Starr investigation, the humiliating presidential mea culpa in the wake of the stained dress, the House impeachment hearings and the trial in the Senate--would have ever happened.

SCOTT SPAULDING

Corona del Mar

*

I read Pinkerton’s Column Right and then I read Scheer’s Column Left. For a moment there I thought I was browsing at the tabloid rack at my local supermarket.

End it all now. Have Clinton try on Lewinsky’s dress. If it doesn’t fit, you must acquit.

ROBERT F. FALLER

West Covina

*

Some call the Senate trial of Clinton “historic.” Actually, it is the Republican Party that is on trial. It could be “historic” if the GOP becomes history as a result of the trial. Incidentally, “trial” is a misnomer. The whole impeachment process should be called “inquisition.”

RICHARD C. WONG

Northridge

*

Well, well, well--look who’s talking about compartmentalizing morality: Gerald F. Uelmen (Commentary, Jan. 13). Dean Uelmen was last seen as an active, participating member of the O.J. Simpson defense team. Was he compartmentalizing his morality at that time?

FRANK A. FERRONE

El Cajon

*

Thank you, House. Thank you, Senate. Because of you, I now believe there must be a God. There is no possible way that the evolutionary process of natural selection could account for a Republican Congress.

MARVIN BIERS

Tarzana

*

I would really like to see the wording of all these polls. The common argument of Clinton supporters seems to be “he only lied about his sex life, who wouldn’t?” and the old “whoever is without sin” defense. That has absolutely no weight or logic when enforcing the laws of a society.

The president especially should not be excused for committing perjury and obstructing justice--regardless of the reason. Sure, the Republicans aren’t saints, and their motives may not be entirely worthy of their cause, but the president should not be above the law regardless of his accusers’ shortcomings.

And as far as the success of the economy, any good citizen knows that Congress has the most influence on the economy--not the president. If he is removed, the economy will barely notice.

JEFFREY R. HURT

Cypress

*

Maybe the Constitution should be amended to read, “high crimes, misdemeanors and actions degrading the office of the presidency.”

GENE POLITO

Irvine

*

Unfortunately, what is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. Ken Starr should never have started his investigation into Bill Clinton’s sex life, even though it enabled him to author better pornography than Larry Flynt.

The only good that could come out of Flynt’s examination of the Republicans’ bedrooms (“Flynt Accuses Barr of Hypocrisy,” Jan. 12) would be a full apology to all of us (from Starr, Reps. Henry Hyde, Bob Livingston, Bob Barr and the rest of the hypocritical Republicans) for initiating the quest into Clinton’s sex life.

PAUL L. KIRK

Northridge

*

The Republicans can preempt Flynt by confessing all their sexual sins. Their Christian right friends will forgive them and their popularity will rise to rival Clinton’s.

JOSEPH GRODSKY

Los Angeles

*

So Flynt released the Barr report. The self-appointed independent hustler enjoys the quiet acquiescence of the left while he spends his unlaundered money to practice the politics of personal destruction. And where were the cries against “the politics of personal destruction” as demonstrated so wildly by Alec Baldwin, when he called for the death of Rep. Henry Hyde and his children on the Conan O’Brien show?

RENEE DALLAS

Orange

*

As part of the delusional electorate, I assumed that my vote really counted and that by exercising my rights at the ballot box, I would have some hope of participating in government. But I have been disabused of that notion. And to my everlasting horror, I must now rethink those things I have been teaching the next generation.

Apparently, my opinion and that of my fellow citizens are secondary to the personal opinions of those elected. I thought I was electing people who would represent me, but I have just been informed (by way of the House vote on impeachment and the continued spectacle in the Senate), that those elected understood the election to be a referendum to vote their personal opinion, regardless of the fact that it is contradictory to the wishes of two-thirds of the people they were elected to represent.

TAHNDA BAILEY

Los Angeles

*

Wouldn’t it be fantastic and awe-inspiring, though highly unlikely, if our House and Senate could demonstrate the fervor, passion and dedication to solving the problems of Social Security, Medicare, crime, elderly care and the homeless as they are with the impeachment of President Clinton? We can only dream!

LOUIS THOMPSON

Woodland Hills