Salon | Letters to the editor

_______________ PROPHET OF THE PLAGUE BY TERRY DIGGS (06/11/98)

As interesting as your piece on Charlton Heston's election as head of the NRA was, no one in the media is focusing on the true dangers posed by providing Heston with a bully pulpit.
The NRA now has "Moses" for a mouthpiece. As a cultural icon, Heston can now convincingly further the disinformation campaign of the NRA. On "Politically Incorrect" the other night, Heston wrapped himself in the flag and stated that he would stand up for the Bill of Rights. The host and the guests uncritically accepted Heston's statements. Yet Heston's (and the NRA's) interpretation of the Second Amendment is inaccurate, misleading, historically incorrect and legally unsupportable. While Heston and the NRA claim the Second Amendment confers an individual with the right to bear arms, and that the Amendment was enacted to, among other things, enable the citizenry to oppose a tyrannical government, no court of last resort, including the U.S. Supreme Court, has ever so held.
Our constitutional form of government was created to provide for peaceful changes of power, and to allow the people to remove oppressive officials through the electoral process. In fact, it was enacted to eliminate the need for armed rebellion, not to empower it.
The federal courts have always held that the Second Amendment confers a right on the states to maintain militias and not give individuals the right to possess arms. If one looks closely at the litigation sponsored or funded by the NRA, one will see that the NRA never appeals gun control cases on Second Amendment grounds. Why? Because they know they will lose, and their lies will be exposed. They are quite content to mislead the populace, but terrified of actually allowing judicial review of their legal position.
The press unwittingly abets this propaganda by referring to a candidate's support for "the right to bear arms" or the Second Amendment's guarantee of "the right to bear arms" without ever explaining just what the amendment really provides for. This encourages the people to believe (as polls routinely show they do) that the amendment gives them an individual right to bear arms.
Heston and his ilk must be challenged on this whenever they spew their party line. The press needs to serve the people (and not just their appetite for scandal and titillation) by accurately reporting what the courts have always held regarding the meaning of the Second Amendment. Otherwise, by the time the truth comes out, it will be too late.
-- Jeff Ryan
Thank you so very much for the interesting article on Charlton Heston and the NRA. The use of "The Omega Man" as a frame of reference was clever and well done. "The Omega Man" has long been one of my favorite movies, not for its covert messages, but for its almost unbearable cheesiness and doomsday sci-fi goofiness. Terry Diggs does a great job of examining the movie's subtexts and showing how they illuminate the mind-set of Heston and his legion of "believers."
The only point missed in the analysis is the ending of the movie. Heston literally dies for the sins of the "family." The last shot is one of him slumped dead in an overtly Christ-like pose: head tilted, arms to the side, knees slightly bent and bleeding from his wounds. His "flock" escapes to start again and the sinners are left to rot. While it is tenuous to draw deep meaning about a person or philosophy from a movie as awful as this, it is instructive in seeing how closely Heston's real-time ideas and actions mirror those from his fictional roles. He truly seems to have internalized the fear, loathing and violence of many of his roles.
What disturbs me most about the NRA stance (and the movie) is how easily and readily the "other argument" is dismissed. The "family" recognizes, as does Heston's character, that certain beliefs and ways of doing things lead to the awful realities of their world. The "family" goes to extremes to prevent it from happening again, but, more disturbingly, Neville just dismisses the truth. He knows his way is folly, but strives to keep it going because that's just "the way it is." That surely plays out in the NRA stance, where the bloody results of their views are horrifically evident and the solution is found in following their views even more stringently.
Like Neville in the movie, Heston and his followers are not really interested in saving anyone but themselves. There is no dialogue, no compromise, no trying to understand, no attempt at a better way. Heston is the savior, leading the blind, but unlike Christ it will not be him who is martyred in the name of what he believes. It will be good people, charming children and others who are more open to what the other side might have to say.
-- Michael Garringer
Terry Diggs must surely think that glibness is a virtue. His piece about newly anointed NRA honcho Charlton Heston is so trivial and petty that it is essentially meaningless. I find Heston to be personally repellent, and though I'm generally opposed to gun control, I have some real issues with the NRA. However, if the best Diggs can do is wield a fictional 25-year-old film part against Heston and the NRA instead of facts, logic and reasoned arguments, maybe Diggs should save his breath and Salon's space.
-- Andrew Rice
Terry Diggs' take on "The Omega Man" and new NRA president Charlton Heston's worldview was right on. He omitted, however, one critical part of that film, which is central to understanding how Heston perceives himself and his role in preserving "his" culture: the ending. As his character Neville sprawls dying on a piece of modern art sculpture, having been speared by the zombie leader Matthias, Neville/Heston becomes Christ on the cross! With his last breath, he is able to pass along to the only other nonzombies a bottle containing the antiplague serum made from his blood. Heston has saved his people countless times on film, so there's little wonder he feels the need to do it now for real.
-- Dave Maley
_______________ A CLINTON CRITIC'S TAX-EXEMPT LIFESTYLE BY JONATHAN BRODER AND JOE CONASON (06/09/98)

I imagine that you think your attack on R. Emmett Tyrrell Jr. is clever. The joke's on you guys, though: While Tyrrell and a few others have had the guts to investigate the most corrupt White House in your nation's history, you seem all too willing to curry favor with a man who is soon to face impeachment. You've only brought shame on yourselves by your assaults on Mr. Clinton's detractors. I feel bad that a group as intelligent and articulate as the Salon staff would make such a choice.
-- Jamshyd N. Hrab
North York, Canada
Well, isn't this a cozy picture: Bill Clinton with the editor of this rag's nose up Bill's ass. That must be the central premise of the bias this rag suffers from. The godless children of liberals believe more in the states' obligation than anything else -- no goals, no morals, everything is OK. We can excuse anything. There doesn't need to be outcome-based education or competition. You've successfully diluted the fabric of the next generation. This pissed-off American hopes the wrath of our ancestors smite down this piece of crap and Bill Clinton in one stroke.
-- Jack Truman
SALON | June 15, 1998

R E C E N T L Y+| THE AFFIRMATIVE ACTION OF GWYNETH PALTROW BY CAMILLE PAGLIA

If you'd like to submit a letter to the editor for publication,
please e-mail us at salon@salonmagazine.com.
Letters may be edited for clarity and conciseness.
If you do not wish the letter to be published, please say so.

_______________ PROPHET OF THE PLAGUE BY TERRY DIGGS (06/11/98)
	As interesting as your piece on Charlton Heston's election as head of the NRA was, no one in the media is focusing on the true dangers posed by providing Heston with a bully pulpit. The NRA now has "Moses" for a mouthpiece. As a cultural icon, Heston can now convincingly further the disinformation campaign of the NRA. On "Politically Incorrect" the other night, Heston wrapped himself in the flag and stated that he would stand up for the Bill of Rights. The host and the guests uncritically accepted Heston's statements. Yet Heston's (and the NRA's) interpretation of the Second Amendment is inaccurate, misleading, historically incorrect and legally unsupportable. While Heston and the NRA claim the Second Amendment confers an individual with the right to bear arms, and that the Amendment was enacted to, among other things, enable the citizenry to oppose a tyrannical government, no court of last resort, including the U.S. Supreme Court, has ever so held. Our constitutional form of government was created to provide for peaceful changes of power, and to allow the people to remove oppressive officials through the electoral process. In fact, it was enacted to eliminate the need for armed rebellion, not to empower it. The federal courts have always held that the Second Amendment confers a right on the states to maintain militias and not give individuals the right to possess arms. If one looks closely at the litigation sponsored or funded by the NRA, one will see that the NRA never appeals gun control cases on Second Amendment grounds. Why? Because they know they will lose, and their lies will be exposed. They are quite content to mislead the populace, but terrified of actually allowing judicial review of their legal position. The press unwittingly abets this propaganda by referring to a candidate's support for "the right to bear arms" or the Second Amendment's guarantee of "the right to bear arms" without ever explaining just what the amendment really provides for. This encourages the people to believe (as polls routinely show they do) that the amendment gives them an individual right to bear arms. Heston and his ilk must be challenged on this whenever they spew their party line. The press needs to serve the people (and not just their appetite for scandal and titillation) by accurately reporting what the courts have always held regarding the meaning of the Second Amendment. Otherwise, by the time the truth comes out, it will be too late. -- Jeff Ryan Thank you so very much for the interesting article on Charlton Heston and the NRA. The use of "The Omega Man" as a frame of reference was clever and well done. "The Omega Man" has long been one of my favorite movies, not for its covert messages, but for its almost unbearable cheesiness and doomsday sci-fi goofiness. Terry Diggs does a great job of examining the movie's subtexts and showing how they illuminate the mind-set of Heston and his legion of "believers." The only point missed in the analysis is the ending of the movie. Heston literally dies for the sins of the "family." The last shot is one of him slumped dead in an overtly Christ-like pose: head tilted, arms to the side, knees slightly bent and bleeding from his wounds. His "flock" escapes to start again and the sinners are left to rot. While it is tenuous to draw deep meaning about a person or philosophy from a movie as awful as this, it is instructive in seeing how closely Heston's real-time ideas and actions mirror those from his fictional roles. He truly seems to have internalized the fear, loathing and violence of many of his roles. What disturbs me most about the NRA stance (and the movie) is how easily and readily the "other argument" is dismissed. The "family" recognizes, as does Heston's character, that certain beliefs and ways of doing things lead to the awful realities of their world. The "family" goes to extremes to prevent it from happening again, but, more disturbingly, Neville just dismisses the truth. He knows his way is folly, but strives to keep it going because that's just "the way it is." That surely plays out in the NRA stance, where the bloody results of their views are horrifically evident and the solution is found in following their views even more stringently. Like Neville in the movie, Heston and his followers are not really interested in saving anyone but themselves. There is no dialogue, no compromise, no trying to understand, no attempt at a better way. Heston is the savior, leading the blind, but unlike Christ it will not be him who is martyred in the name of what he believes. It will be good people, charming children and others who are more open to what the other side might have to say. -- Michael Garringer Terry Diggs must surely think that glibness is a virtue. His piece about newly anointed NRA honcho Charlton Heston is so trivial and petty that it is essentially meaningless. I find Heston to be personally repellent, and though I'm generally opposed to gun control, I have some real issues with the NRA. However, if the best Diggs can do is wield a fictional 25-year-old film part against Heston and the NRA instead of facts, logic and reasoned arguments, maybe Diggs should save his breath and Salon's space. -- Andrew Rice Terry Diggs' take on "The Omega Man" and new NRA president Charlton Heston's worldview was right on. He omitted, however, one critical part of that film, which is central to understanding how Heston perceives himself and his role in preserving "his" culture: the ending. As his character Neville sprawls dying on a piece of modern art sculpture, having been speared by the zombie leader Matthias, Neville/Heston becomes Christ on the cross! With his last breath, he is able to pass along to the only other nonzombies a bottle containing the antiplague serum made from his blood. Heston has saved his people countless times on film, so there's little wonder he feels the need to do it now for real. -- Dave Maley
_______________ A CLINTON CRITIC'S TAX-EXEMPT LIFESTYLE BY JONATHAN BRODER AND JOE CONASON (06/09/98)
	I imagine that you think your attack on R. Emmett Tyrrell Jr. is clever. The joke's on you guys, though: While Tyrrell and a few others have had the guts to investigate the most corrupt White House in your nation's history, you seem all too willing to curry favor with a man who is soon to face impeachment. You've only brought shame on yourselves by your assaults on Mr. Clinton's detractors. I feel bad that a group as intelligent and articulate as the Salon staff would make such a choice. -- Jamshyd N. Hrab North York, Canada Well, isn't this a cozy picture: Bill Clinton with the editor of this rag's nose up Bill's ass. That must be the central premise of the bias this rag suffers from. The godless children of liberals believe more in the states' obligation than anything else -- no goals, no morals, everything is OK. We can excuse anything. There doesn't need to be outcome-based education or competition. You've successfully diluted the fabric of the next generation. This pissed-off American hopes the wrath of our ancestors smite down this piece of crap and Bill Clinton in one stroke. -- Jack Truman SALON \| June 15, 1998