Clinton and GOP

* There have lately been speeches by Republican Party members calling for respect for their candidate for president. No doubt a slap against President Clinton. While the president is not without human flaws (who is?), he has been a good president.

I could never vote for a man from a state where continual executions are taking place--especially one showing no mercy for a grandmother who, according to her daughters, had been terribly beaten up and abused. Women have got to stand up for themselves and express outrage at the treatment they have received.

DOROTHY R. CORSENTINO

Los Angeles

*

It is comforting to know that the president, who has vowed to “work until the last hour of the last day” of his presidency, has taken time out to bash the Republican candidate and his family.

This is the same man who, through his own actions, has debased and defamed the most respected leadership office in the world for the past eight years.

It makes me all the more convinced that it is time for a change. One that will replace one “I” word with another, “integrity,” when one thinks of the president of the United States.

SEAN HANAGAN

El Segundo

*

We constantly read that President Clinton is “seeking his legacy.” Mr. Clinton, seek no more. Your legacy is firmly in place. It is called impeachment.

MARY L. JONES

Whittier

*

Your Aug. 4 editorial complains that President Clinton couldn’t accomplish his goals because the majority in Congress was from another party. He certainly isn’t the first president to be in that position. It’s obvious that the president’s unquestionable skills at campaigning and fund-raising were no substitute for the leadership and integrity required in getting people to work together toward worthwhile goals.

MARGARET MORELL

Buena Park

*

Re “Gore Donor’s Labor Feud May Embarrass Democrats,” Aug. 4: I’m sorry, I didn’t know Democrats could be embarrassed. If lying, no integrity, vicious attack politics, acting as professional fund-raiser instead of president, selling the Lincoln Bedroom, selling military secrets to China, lying in civil suits to obstruct justice, accepting donations from other countries, womanizing and claiming to invent the Internet don’t embarrass them--geez, please tell me what does.

LAURA FRIDAY

Sherman Oaks

*

So, the Republicans feel that President Clinton has fundamentally dishonored his office, and candidate Bush has promised to restore “honor and dignity” to the White House.

Candidate Bush’s father, President Bush, and President Reagan before him both lied about their knowledge of the Iran-Contra affair. Which is more dishonorable, lying about an affair of state, or lying about a sexual affair, as Clinton did?

Besides which Clinton is not a candidate for the presidency. The American electorate should select the next president based on issues and not on Clinton’s indiscretions.

KEN and LOIS STONE

Los Angeles