FOR MANY IN VALLEY, VIDEO FAILS TO FAZE.

Byline: David R. Baker, Lee Condon and Alex Roth Daily News Staff Writers

For many, it was the bombshell that bombed.

Across the San Fernando Valley on Monday, the much-anticipated public airing of President Clinton's grand jury testimony was not nearly potent enough to change people's opinion of the president.

Those who supported Clinton found they still did once the four-hour videotape stopped rolling, even though it had been hyped as a potentially fatal blow to the president. Most who already wanted him driven from office found fuel to be even more determined to see Clinton go.

If there was one unifying sentiment, it was that many Valley residents said they simply want the matter dropped, immediately. Even as they scorned Clinton's evasive answers to some questions asked on the tape, they said he should be allowed to stay in office.

``He's been through an awful lot,'' said Northridge homemaker Kim Whitman, 46, a Republican who voted for Bob Dole in 1996. ``Leave the poor guy alone.''

Others saw in Clinton's measured, sometimes legalistic testimony further proof that he was no longer fit to serve the country.

``It only confirmed what I knew all along,'' said Bill White, a retired engineer who lives in Arleta. ``He should resign. He's an insult to the presidency.''

The unedited testimony surprised many viewers because of its lack of surprises. Some who heard portions on drive-time radio or watched at home said it added little to the reams of sometimes lewd details included in last week's report on the affair from Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr.

The president's evasiveness at times irritated Glendale coffee house manager Cindy Christy, 38.

``I didn't think he was truthful when he said he didn't recall things,'' she said. ``If you're fooling around on your wife, and you're in the Oval Office, I think you'd remember.''

But while some thought the president's evasiveness seemed foolish, others found themselves sympathizing with Clinton.

Before sitting down to watch the testimony, interior designer Sondra Pechter wanted Clinton to resign or be impeached. But after seeing the video, the Altadena resident experienced a ``complete turnaround,'' she said.

``The video made him look better. A lot of his responses were good, on a human level rather than a political level,'' Pechter said. ``He was more human than in his public relations speeches.''

Now, she'd rather see the whole debacle simply stop.

``You end up seeing both sides as equally bad,'' said Pechter, a Republican. ``You end up just wanting it to wash out.''

Leilani Stevenson, 52, of Van Nuys said she felt like weeping as she watched Clinton testify. After the public flogging he has received, she said, impeachment or resignation would be too harsh a punishment.

``I think the public humiliation is better than what impeachment would do,'' she said. ``The man has been stripped bare before the people.''

Not everyone agreed. Todd Fellman of Santa Clarita, convinced that Clinton should resign, hoped the videotape would sway the public against the president.

``I think the American people are still dumb to this thing,'' said the electrical engineer with Boeing Co. ``They need to be hit over the head until they pay attention.''

But some people, already sickened by the scandal, said they had no intention of listening to either Clinton's testimony or more charges against him.

``I don't care if the head of my company has an affair, so long as he's doing a good job running the company. And that's what the president is there to do,'' said Tina Wilson of Granada Hills, who added, emphatically, that she had not watched the videotape.

``He shouldn't have lied,'' she said. ``But the question shouldn't have been asked.''

CAPTION(S):

3 photos

PHOTO (1) - Bill White

of Arleta

(2) - Leilani Stevenson

of Van Nuys

(3) - Kim Whitman

of Northridge