_______________RAIN ON THE PARADE BY JEFFREY OBSER (09/10/98)
	Jeffrey Obser's article on the Million Youth March was a fairly accurate rendition of the events, but he missed the context in which the whole march took place. Khallid Abdul Muhammad's rhetoric falls flat in the largely integrated black neighborhoods of New York. Unlike other cities, there is no neighborhood in New York that is exclusively black. Blacks and Latinos live side by side, unlike L.A. with its strict racial boundaries and highway dividing lines. While there may not be many whites in some of these areas, everyone from Indians to Koreans shares space with blacks in these neighborhoods. Black and Jewish politicians share more common causes than they disagree. Both communities have shared a culture in the city and share many of the same tastes and habits. To hear a Muhammad come into the city and try to create some kind of false animosity between blacks and Jews is silly. Not to say that there aren't tensions between the two groups. Blacks do make anti-Semitic comments, just as Jews make racist comments. But to adopt Muhammad's worldview would require a rejection of black Christian theology, which rejects racism as evil, and his own Islamic faith, which stresses racial harmony. His sole power comes from his ability to make white people react. As long as they react to his idiotic worldview, he will be able to amuse and attract people. Of course, the city's chief bully, Mayor Rudy Giuliani, had to demonize him and attack black pols across the board. They were forced to join Muhammad as reluctant allies to protect free speech for their constituents. The problem was that the mayor, who loves the sound of his own voice best, didn't need to turn Muhammad into a free speech hero. Nor did he need to condescend to blacks by telling them to stay away. It would have taken a sea change for most blacks to follow someone so filled with hate and so lacking in clear logic. While black unity has some appeal, vile race hatred does not. However, what Giuliani did was unforgivable. He turned Harlem into an armed camp for no reason. The Nation of Islam and their disciples have never harmed a single white person to my knowledge. They have never desecrated a synagogue, lynched a white person or burned a cross. They have a history of big talk, in some cases inspiring hateful talk, but talk. Not action. There is a much greater chance of violence at a Mets-Yankees game than any event held by Muhammad. These men are fetishists for security and control. Even if there had been no police, the security would have prevented any rioting. As they did. But sending 3,000 cops to patrol six blocks of Harlem and then refusing to meet with the area's representatives may have set the stage for a truly horrific racial conflict. By not heeding the elected black leadership, ignoring the most important members of the clergy and sending thousands of police to monitor what should have been a nonevent, Giuliani has sent a message to Harlem and all nonwhite New Yorkers that they cannot be trusted to rally peacefully near their homes and churches. That they are unworthy of even the basic civic and political courtesies others receive in due course. The next time there is a police shooting, the mayor, isolated and arrogant, may send more police into a tense situation and the anger already felt by many will explode. Mayor Giuliani betrayed what should be an elected official's first duty: to keep a situation calm. Instead, he played into Muhammad's hands by acting like the paranoid racist he was charged with being. His actions endangered both police and citizens. So did Muhammad's. His cries from the stage have made him many enemies within New York's black community. I have never seen such a lack of common sense on the part of adult leaders in my life. It is not without reason that every mainstream newspaper in New York has made allusions to Giuliani as a dictator and Muhammad as his partner in idiocy. My fear is that their combined stupidity will unleash a tragedy that neither will suffer from and both will try to exploit. -- Stephen Gilliard New York
_______________HUSH, HUSH, SWEET MONICA BY GARY KAUFMAN (09/09/98)
	You are so right about our wanting the "famees" et al. to shut up. But it goes farther than that. I also want TV biographies and scoop magazines such as People and Vanity Fair to stop going on and on about movie people. There are other people in life in other occupations who are interesting and have done, are doing, interesting things. I am 63 and sometimes think I am just out of it, but when I look back to my much younger years I recall that I always felt this way. Movie stars are interesting and "cool" but form just a small wedge of the life pie. I must be wrong, though, else why would these publications be able to stay in business? -- Shirley Larsen
_______________TRUE ROMANCE BY JACK HITT (09/09/98)
	While Jack Hitt's article on the possibility of true love between Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky was interesting, he failed to discuss the other perspectives. One view would be that President Clinton is a sexual predator who is "compelled" to act on his obsessions about women -- e.g., his remark to K. Willey that he had wanted to do that ever since he had seen her, proving that the kiss and grope was a symbol of his obsession. The other possibility is that his paraphilia is associated with his emotional problems vis-à-vis family life and interpersonal relations. If it is true that he has a disorder of love, then this would affect his presidential decisions, clouding anything where he sought approval. -- Marshall Metze, Ph.D. I wish I could agree with Hitt. But the argument that he loves her fell apart when he called her "that woman." I don't like Bill Clinton, for reasons that have nothing to do with this episode. But I can tell you this, if he loved her and had an affair, I think that people, even me, would accept his behavior -- prior to his January denial. If, however, we now found out that he actually did love her, I think it would ruin him. After all, he betrays Hillary repeatedly, and then puts a gigantic knife in the back of Monica -- twice -- just to keep his job. If this is the way he treats the women he loves, he has a strange way of displaying his affection. -- Don Fishback
_______________MONICA'S BETRAYAL BY JENN SHREVE (09/09/98)
	The article, "Monica's Betrayal," written by Jenn Shreve, was way off base. It smells of ignorance of the facts and outright cheapness. What I hear from Shreve and other Clinton supporters, including the president himself, is that breaking your vows to God and your wife is OK as long as you almost say you are sorry (and almost sound sincere), blame getting caught on someone else, blame those who tell the truth (under oath) and having false polls saying no one cares. I care and so do my friends and neighbors. Clinton has lost my confidence as president and commander in chief despite his "job performance." His actions in this illicit affair are not excusable or condonable as some people try to convince us. Those who believe they are check their own ethics and morals at the door. -- John Graham You need to get another mother to write this column. Ms. Lewinsky has taken enough B.S. from those who have not the sense or gumption to realize that she was treated badly by a man who makes a habit of treating women badly. William Clinton is not a friend of women, he is a chameleonlike opportunist who preys on male and female alike, using and discarding people with the same reckless abandon he exhibited by his actions during the past two years. I am a Democrat, a feminist and a senior citizen who believes in accepting responsibility for one's actions. -- Sharyn Perrin La Pine, Ore. While I agree with Shreve that a woman who enters into a relationship with a married man makes a sort of unspoken agreement to not go public with the affair, Ms. Lewinsky had no choice. She kept quiet for as long as she could. Finally, she had to cut a deal -- first to protect herself and second to protect her mother. She could not afford to risk calling Ken Starr's bluff. Maybe Ken Starr would have ultimately decided to not indict either Ms. Lewinsky or her mother, but she could not afford to take that chance. Certainly not for a man who was more than prepared to have her go down in order to protect his own behind. However, the portion of Shreve's article I found the most incredible was her statement that even after cutting the deal with Starr, Lewinsky should have lied. She was bound by law to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. That is what you promise to do when you are sworn in at a grand jury proceeding, a courtroom or a deposition. For Shreve to advocate that Ms. Lewinsky should have promised to tell the truth, but then to have done otherwise is scary. -- Carl Hagmaier Danville, Calif. By any stretch of the word, how can adulterers call their attempts to keep their secret a code of honor? To call it such is to elevate adultery to an acceptable behavior. Adultery destroys lives and families. There is nothing romantic about people who break their solemn marriage vows to fulfill their desires. Yes, it does happen and more often than we would like. So does child abuse. That doesn't make it right. As for men not being "romantic" if they are just seeking sexual servicing, let's not be naive. The first lie an adolescent male learns to tell well is "I love you, baby, I really do." I can remember an older sibling teaching me the fine art of giving a few little gifts and how to say the right words to acquire the prize that every teenage boy dreams of. Additionally, when you have a male of elevated position along with the desire for sex, and a woman who might be open to seeking to elevate herself through a relationship, any sincerity is veiled in untruths and selfish manipulation. But we have come to call such acts "love," have we not? Mr. Clinton can best express love by keeping a loving commitment to his wife, and lovingly refusing the advances of a young intern. And, even if we allow for the affair, love would have been taking the whole blame for the affair and defending your lover to the end. -- Mike Reith Fairfield, Calif. SALON | Sept. 16, 1998

R E C E N T L Y+| SECRET LIVES OF THE REPUBLICANS, PART ONE BY JASON VEST

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.