Focus on Clinton

I truly believe your editorial "Paula and the President" (May 11) misses the main point by focusing on Mrs. Jones' motivation. If, and I stress the word if, the basic details of her story are correct, the real issue is President Clinton's action, regardless of Mrs. Jones' motives.

If Clarence Thomas was guilty of the behavior attributed to him, this was a valid consideration in his confirmation as a Supreme Court justice.

Should the presidency be held to a lesser standard? In fact an objective comparison of the two cases would indicate that the charges against President Clinton are far more serious.

Anita Hill essentially claimed verbal abuse, never even hinting that Judge Thomas inappropriately touched her, exposed himself or made bold physical advances.

Ms. Hill and Judge Thomas knew each other; and his actions, if accurately described, could be construed as an awkward and fumbling way of initiating an unsolicited advance.

President Clinton's alleged behavior was for quick sexual satisfaction in a manner that at a minimum treated a woman as strictly a sex object to be used; and at worst, verges on assault.

Additionally, nobody else has ever come forth to accuse Clarence Thomas of sexual indiscretions; the sheer number of accusations against President Clinton almost dictates that Mrs. Jones' charges be given a degree of credence.

You used the words "greed" and "dirty politics" in trying to impugn Paula Jones' story. Anita Hill has gone on to make huge profits from her notoriety, and no reasonable person would imply that her timing was not initiated by politics.

No, the motives of Anita Hill and Paula Corbin Jones are not the issue; the character of our elected and appointed officials is what requires our focus.

It is beyond my comprehension to say, as was done in 1992, that the moral character of the president is not an issue. Mr. Clinton's behavior, as seen in multiple charges, demands the scrutiny of ++ the press and, if warranted, the justice system.

Vincent J. Cucuzzella

Ellicott City

Multiple Choice

It's hard to pin Bill Brock down when it comes to the length of time he has resided in Maryland, but John O'Donnell's April 23 article helped clear up the confusion.

Now we know that it's a multiple choice question where all answers are correct: 20 years (visited Maryland); eight years (bought property in Maryland); six years (voted in general election); three years (got Maryland driver's license) . . .

That surely must end the confusion for most voters. As Mr. Brock is uncomfortable with being called a carpetbagger, maybe the charge should be set aside for more interesting things that we will undoubtedly be learning about the man.

Still I find it curious that he and his wife took four years to "transition" to Maryland. Most people rent a truck, call a few friends and move over the weekend. Most people also get a Maryland drivers license 30 days after moving here, as required by law, and start to pay Maryland state taxes from day one.

But those things are for the common folk like you and me, and sometimes those Washington elitists exempt themselves from the bothersome laws that you and I must obey.

Pamela Asa

Severna Park

Nixon Legacy

As I read the postmortems of the Nixon legacy, one thing becomes perfectly clear: Richard M. Nixon continues to divide this country in death, just as he did in life.

Some observers concentrate on Nixon's accomplishments, such as opening relations with China, founding the Environmental Protection Agency, and pursuing Mideast peace.

But in my view they are missing the point. Any successes Nixon achieved are greatly overshadowed by his "us vs. them" mentality -- "us" being the Nixon White House and what he considered to be patriotic Americans, and "them" being Democrats, activists, and citizens rebelling against the Vietnam war, which included most of the country's youth.

His distrust of so many Americans, demonstrated by his enemies list, FBI and CIA surveillance of citizens, and the sordid Watergate episode, caused irreparable harm to our country -- it destroyed the element of faith between its citizens and fTC America's government and institutions.

Even now, 20 years after Nixon's resignation and just a short while after he is buried, the commentary over Nixon's legacy unveils evidence of a still-divided nation: folks either loved him or hated him.

Bruce Harris

Pikesville

Latest Polluter

Used only a few times in summer, the gasoline-powered lawn mower has nevertheless been named as the latest polluter.

But buses and trucks, which are used daily, are much worse.

J. Small

Baltimore

Gun Control Myths

. . . What is confounding to me are the half truths and innuendoes surrounding the whole gun control issue expounded our politicians.

This seems to be a massive cover-up because of past faux pas of the politicians' inability to control crime and education in our cities and to make the legitimate gun enthusiast the "cannon fodder" for their ineffectiveness. . .

Here are what I consider the myths expounded by the press and our politicians on the gun control issues:

Myth 1. The National Rifle Association is the bad guy, made up of uneducated rednecks.

We have in our club scientists, doctors (M.D. and Ph.D.) chief executive officers, chief financial officers, professionals as well as people in the trades.

Heretofore some of us rebelled against the NRA idea that there is a conspiracy of taking all guns away from everyone.

We now believe that this could be a reality, and our only effective means to combat this is to contribute to the NRA, support elective officials who support the legitimate gun owner even if it means bypassing truly talented candidates.

I am personally re-considering contributions to the symphony and opera and instead diverting those funds to the NRA. I believe that the lawful gun owner is an endangered species.

Myth 2. Gun shows are an unregulated way to pick up a pistol or assault weapon, circumventing the waiting period and registration process.

In all the gun shows I have attended I have never seen a gun purchased without the necessary paperwork. Gun shows are an excellent way to buy obsolete parts for many older guns. The expertise of these vendors is outstanding.

A collector thinks nothing of spending $2,000 or $3,000 for an antique gun. Contrary to common beliefs, the gun business is highly sophisticated and takes a good mind to understand the various ramifications of loads, ballistics, metal, etc.

Myth 3. NRA doesn't train. Not only does the national but also the local chapters provide many training sessions on gun safety and self defense.

There is no one like the youngsters who are more intolerant of their peers when one of them is involved with a safety infraction. I have helped many law enforcement personnel develop skills in order to help them qualify.

Myth 4. Assault weapons have no sporting function. I would like to see Senators Mikulski and Sarbanes compete in a high-power match where they would offhand shoot an M1 or M14 weighing over 10 pounds and hit a target, let alone a bulls-eye 200 yards down range and then tell me this is no sport. . . .

Donald W. Johnson

Baltimore

Fear of Trains

It was good to read Paul R. Schlitz's letter making several good points in his defense of light rail (May 11).

I spent a grand total of 12 years commuting on assorted modes of public transport in both Germany and England, where these safe, clean and efficient ways of getting around are indispensable.

America's fear of public transport is a continuing source of amazement both to myself and to visitors from Europe, who have grown accustomed to leaving the car in the drive.

I am often told that the reason Europe has its plethora of trains, buses, etc., is because of limited space for cars in its aging cities; and that the streets are crumbling and being washed down the drain.

I don't think so; I would prefer to turn things around, and say that the reason America has no decent public transportation is an unwillingness to forget the car for once, and try something much better, less stressful and far less aggravating.

Give it some thought as you crawl along those smooth, wide Baltimore boulevards. There must be a reason Europeans have kept their public transport, and no, it's not because they can't afford cars.

im Marshallsay

Glen Burnie