Letters

LIGHTS! CAMERA! CLINTON!

"About that new film Primary Colors: I go to the movies to escape from Bill Clinton, not to see him bigger than life!" STEVE DOUGLAS Louisville, Ky.

I am outraged that TIME has chosen to promote Primary Colors [CINEMA, March 16]. Joe Klein's book was never more than a trashy attempt to capitalize on his so-called inside knowledge of the Clintons and the seedy side of presidential campaigning. But you have dignified this trash with your outrageous comparisons ("real life, 1992" vs. "reel life, 1998") and brutal attempts to make the character of the fictitious presidential candidate seem to be a clone of Bill Clinton. Where is your responsibility as journalists? Have you no shame? ROSALIE ZWAIN Rancho Mirage, Calif.

Primary Colors' director Mike Nichols is simply wrong to say about Bill Clinton that "the very gift that makes him a great leader is the same thing that keeps him jumping on a lot of women." History shows that of all the Presidents ranked "great" or "near great" by historians, not one was compelled by his greatness to "jump on a lot of women." Some mediocre or failed Presidents--Kennedy, Johnson--did have this problem, which may be related to their failures, since regardless of the current opinion, character does count in making a man, or a President, great. MARC ROGERS Wortham, Texas

I would expect you to have a review of Primary Colors in your Cinema section, but not an entire cover story. What a waste of paper! LAWRENCE A. D'URSO Arlington Heights, Ill.

ASSISTANCE FOR PAULA JONES

In your story about the strategy of the attorneys for Paula Jones [NATION, March 16], you asserted that John Whitehead, the head of the Rutherford Institute, became involved with the Jones litigation "to raise the institute's profile." That is wrong. As Mr. Whitehead has repeatedly explained, the institute made its decision to assist Paula Jones in September 1997, when the press reported that her attorneys had departed because she refused to accept the President's settlement offer. Without attorneys or funds, Ms. Jones would have had no chance of having her day in court.

The institute has taken great pains to ensure that those who are financially supporting the Paula Jones litigation know exactly where their money is going and how it is being spent. Money sent to the Rutherford Institute for the Jones litigation is used to pay court costs and legal expenses (not attorneys' fees) for the ongoing case, and for nothing else. ALEXIS CROW, General Counsel The Rutherford Institute Charlottesville, Va.

JUDGING THE JUDGE

Your story on Federal Judge Norma Holloway Johnson, who will play a key role in shaping Kenneth Starr's investigation [NATION, March 16], said she "has acquired a reputation for tilting strongly in favor of the government." That statement is questionable, if not outright nonsense. You overlooked a volatile case, Murphy v. National Security Agency, in which Judge Johnson courageously ruled against the government and in my favor.

Her decision had a wide-ranging impact on the intelligence community. Judge Johnson enlightened NSA's personnel to the fact that they were not exempt from the law and that the information placed in my personal security file, and in those of all NSA employees, had to be accurate, complete, timely and relevant in accordance with the Privacy Act. The public can rest assured that any ruling by Judge Johnson in Starr's investigation into the President's activities will once again reflect the dictates of law, truth and fairness. ALBERT I. MURPHY Beltsville, Md.

CLARIFICATION

In our article "!Viva Selena!" [CINEMA, March 24, 1997], we referred to a book called Selena's Secret by Univision anchorwoman Maria Celeste Arraras. The book reports the results of an investigation into Selena's murder. Although in the article TIME characterized Ms. Arraras as one of the "scavengers...circling" after Selena's death, we were unaware at the time that Ms. Arraras had pledged to donate all profits from her book to charity. We apologize for any misunderstanding.

MR. GATES GOES TO WASHINGTON

In his appearance before the Senate Judiciary Committee looking into antitrust matters [TECHNOLOGY, March 16], Bill Gates said, "At the end of the day, there's only one question: Are we allowed to innovate?" But that is not the issue. It is whether he will sell a product that allows others to innovate and compete in the marketplace. If IBM had used tactics similar to those of Gates' Microsoft in negotiating the design of DOS with Gates & Co., the history of the personal-computer industry would have been significantly different. Gates needs to be reminded of this. ROGER J. PATTERSON Muscat, Oman

At the Senate hearing, Gates was badgered to answer loaded questions and respond to competitors' envy-ridden charges of unfairness while he could have been doing what he does better than anyone else--creating wealth. If Americans cannot like a brilliant man who has increased the standard of living, created an industry, and is a legitimate hero to people all over the world (a living embodiment of the American Dream), I cannot imagine whom they would like. Gates is Atlas holding the economy on his shoulders. He could simply shrug. AMESH ADALJA Butler, Pa.

My jaw dropped as I read Gates' "diary," surely the worst prose ever showcased in a national publication. Is it possible? Could the captain of global industry be little more than an idiot savant? BEN MADDEN Los Angeles

America has a rare and precious asset in Gates. He is a man whose work improves people's lives, making our working hours more productive and more fun. Gates must bring in hundreds of millions of dollars in foreign exchange to America each year. If he makes billions as a result, good luck to him. Will bringing down Microsoft and Gates benefit America? It may soothe the envy of his competitors, but it won't be of long-term benefit to the world. America should celebrate him, not persecute him. BARBARA BANNISTER KwaZulu, South Africa

LEE KUAN YEW ON ASIAN VALUES

After reading the comments of Singapore's Lee Kuan Yew on China's Premier Zhu Rongji, Asian values and Confucianism, I gained considerable new insight into the Asian world [WORLD, March 16]. I found myself thirsting for more wisdom from this remarkable man, particularly for a more detailed critique of the roles of the U.S. and the IMF in ameliorating the Asian crisis. Singapore is indeed fortunate to have such a leader. ERIK C. LARSEN Winter Park, Fla.

EST TOOLS FOR LIVING

Re your story on the Landmark Education Corp. [SOCIETY, March 16], the firm that is carrying on est, Werner Erhard's self-help programs: before I participated in the seminar called the Forum, I couldn't get out of my own way. The Forum and other Landmark programs have given me the tools to create excellence consistently in my life, in my family and in my community. Werner Erhard, personal problems aside, will someday be realized as an innovator and a genius in the field of ontology, the study of being. DENNIS E. BLUTE Peabody, Mass.

There are other organizations following a similar credo based on est teachings. They are all extensive moneymaking schemes shrouded in the psycho-babble of leadership. They tear down people's insecurities without providing the absolutely necessary rebuilding process. Someone needs to take action against these "self-help" seminars before more people are physically, psychically and psychologically damaged by the process. I certainly was. I attended an est program two years ago. It was the worst experience of my life. To this day the nightmare experience continues to be quite real. JUDITH SWEDEK Boulder, Colo.

A major part of Erhard's legacy to Landmark Education is the repackaging of ancient, valuable teachings into an easily digestible format that reaches into your heart, maybe even into the marrow of your bones, in a brief seminar. (THE REV.) PONDURENGA DAS Berkeley, Calif.

TO CENSOR OR NOT

Bruce Handy, a self-professed "liberal member of the media elite," stated that young girls should not be portrayed as "ripening, imminently deflowerable teases" [SPECTATOR, March 16]. Yet Handy "doesn't have a problem with genuine obscenity when it involves adults." I'm amazed when men who think of themselves as thoughtful and intelligent refuse to recognize the irony of their own duplicity. Child pornography is an early step in desensitizing males to accept adult pornography that depicts women as "deflowerable" and even abusable teases. How genteel of Handy to suggest we condone and support those same degrading messages only when they apply to adult females. GAIL SNYDER Woodstock, Ga.

Censorship will remove a problem from view but surely will not solve it. In order to make our children safe sexually and treat the "predator" mind, would it not make more sense to discuss and heal? In this time of general assault upon liberal values, it is important to remember that liberalism trusts dialogue and democratic process, and has faith in the basic goodness of human beings. It is also important to recall that each of us can have a right-wing part of our mind that needs to be revealed and healed. JAN STEPHEN CAVANAUGH West Hurley, N.Y.