Clinton’s High Poll Ratings

Jan. 21, the Lewinsky scandal breaks. Clinton’s approval rating 60%. Aug. 17, President Clinton admits to an inappropriate relationship. Approval rating 62%. Sept. 11, the Starr report is released. Clinton approval rating 64%. Sept. 21, president’s “secret” grand jury testimony broadcast on TV. Clinton approval rating 66% (Sept. 23). Message? The grand right-wing conspiracy can’t bring down one of the best presidents of our century. You Republicans better quit while you’re ahead or beware election day, Nov. 3.

A.J. CATOLINE

Los Angeles

*

Seems as if the only way the Republicans will hear the 65% of the average Joes and Marys like me and my wife will be in November. I’m not too pleased that they’re more fixated at seeing someone bleed than hearing what I want done. I’m what you might call a flaming liberal, but I voted them in the last three times mainly because I thought we needed a change. Now when my time comes up again, I won’t forget this blatant disregard.

PAUL ESPINOZA

Temecula

*

After the boomeranged fiasco of the videotape release, is it not time to end these Starr chamber proceedings?

MICHAEL D. REAGAN

Riverside

*

Carol Tavris and I share the same fears for the presidency and democracy (Commentary, Sept. 23). My solution, however, will result in strengthening instead of weakening as hers does. The presidency is in its historic low point because of the current president. Asking Congress to pass a resolution to instruct the attorney general to do anything is unconstitutional. Other democracies have come and gone. Ours endures for only one reason: the Constitution.

The solution: Clinton should resign, which will give us a chance to regain respect for the presidency, and Al Gore should pardon the Clintons. This will rid us of Kenneth Starr. If Clinton chooses to fight it out, then the law and the Constitution absolutely must be followed, which is impeachment. Any other course will do damage to our representative republic.

WARREN H. RAABE

Lakewood

*

I am appalled at the media’s enthusiasm in reporting the salacious details of the Starr investigation. I am also appalled at the public’s apathy regarding this matter, which, in spite of its apparent disgust at the sensationalist reporting techniques, continues to support the media by watching, reading and listening to such reports, thus perpetuating the behavior.

We should be ashamed of ourselves--we are all at fault, we are all responsible.

JACQUELINE A.B. ANTEAU

Sherman Oaks

*

When they separated the legislature from the judiciary, I wonder if the Founding Fathers really intended the legislature to ignore the basic rules and principles of fairness. The way they publish evidence and lurid details selectively will come back to haunt the GOP, much as the McCarthy trials did. I look forward to the day when I can say with pride that I’m a Republican.

MIKE STRONG

Corona del Mar

*

The sheer paranoia and dementia of Starr and the at-times “deer-in-the-headlights” look on President Clinton’s face was as brutal and telling as television is ever likely to be.

ALFRED HUETE

Spring Valley, Calif.

*

Now that we have all had the opportunity to see and read all about the evidence in the Starr reports, written and videotaped, I have one question to pose to the Grand Old Party. Why do I get the overwhelming feeling that it is not about sex, lies or videotape, but about something left unavenged years ago? Is this about “even the score, from ‘74”?

NANCY H. JIRASH

Glendale

*

For those who cannot define “character,” but know it when they see it: early Monday morning, the Clinton tapes on TV and the Cal Ripken story in The Times. Enough said.

RICHARD SHERMAN

Port Hueneme