PUBLIC FORUM : CLINTON'S STRONGEST ASSETS ARE HIS ENEMIES.

Bill Clinton must be the luckiest politician since William McKinley, who, as someone once cruelly pointed out, had the good sense to get himself shot so that Teddy Roosevelt could replace him.

The first year of Clinton's presidency was a disaster. First he was admitting gays into the military, which made the generals very unhappy, and then homosexuals were allowed to serve but only in secret, which made gays unhappy.

Then there was Hillary's health care plan, which took a nice compact car of an idea and blew it up into a blimp. It didn't fly.

Left to his own devices Bill Clinton would have been a one-term disaster. Then the radical right rode to his rescue.

In 1994, after cleaning many of the liberals out of Congress - the liberals never liked Clinton, anyway - the Newt Gingrich gang proceeded to shut down the government twice, bully women, threaten the elderly and try to starve children.

They made Clinton look like a centrist to most people. And that made the radical right start to hate the president.

The truly odd thing is that the few times Republicans actually worked with Clinton, they made progress on what they say are core issues to them: welfare reform, a balanced budget, an executive branch friendly to business.

True, abortion is still legal, evolution is still taught in most schools and women are still allowed to work outside the home without written permission from an adult male relative, but in a democracy you never get everything you want.

But that is exactly what the radical right demands: everything.

About four months ago, if any of them had noticed, the radical right won. But it wasn't enough. It was not enough to show Clinton as a man who lied to his friends.

They don't want Clinton weak and easy to deal with. They want him impeached. They are willing to burn down every house in America to throw this one politician out of his house.

Impeachment means a third government shutdown - no action on the budget or world affairs.

If this impeachment trial produces a recession, as it very well might, it will be a recession produced by the radical right. And the only thing that could have truly poisoned the chances of a Democratic Party sweep in 2000 will have been turned into an elixir of strength for Al Gore.

The radical right will have, once again, snatched defeat from the jaws of victory and dragged the entire Republican Party down with it.

- Kimit A. Muston

North Hollywood

The more I listen to the blather coming from the mouths of President Clinton's lawyers, the more convinced I become of the necessity of not only removing him from office but giving him a couple of years in the slammer with a diet of stale bread and water.

If lying under oath isn't a high crime, then why have so many ordinary citizens been deprived of their liberty for doing nothing more than Clinton has done? If the framers of the Constitution didn't spell it out, would it have been because they didn't conceive that a person elected to the highest office of the land would be so morally bankrupt as to lie when he has sworn to tell the truth?

- Ervine Brown

Burbank

Once upon a time GOP may have stood for Grand Old Party, but now it stands for Grovel Or Pay. I would not want this country's chief executive to be good at groveling.

- Irwin R. Langs

Burbank

The reason the House Democrats and the president are pushing for censure is because they know it won't stick.

The House has no constitutional authority to impose censure on the president. Clinton's supporters know that, and after he is censured they will pose a legal challenge to the censure. The judicial branch will then rightfully rule that Congress had no authority to censure the president and will remove the censure, and Clinton will walk away scot-free - the same thing that happens every time Californians pass a proposition that liberals don't like. Will we never learn?

- Jeff Zimmer

Sherman Oaks

Secession debate

I applaud the Daily News editorial Dec. 8 that supports expanding the debate over San Fernando Valley secession to include its potential socioeconomic and political implications. Clearly, to this point, these issues have not been given the kind of attention they deserve.

However, I would like to take issue with two points made in the editorial. First, to imply that my research into Valley secession is akin to pursuit of a conspiracy theory undermines your call for honest and open public debate. The use of land-use and zoning laws by groups in positions of power for exclusionary purposes is well-documented in urban literature. Whether or not one agrees that exclusion is the driving force behind Valley secession is a separate matter.

Second, my role as a graduate student is not to be either for or against Valley secession. Rather, I simply hope to illuminate the discussion, based on my research into secession movements, both international and domestic.

Again, I commend the Daily News for its call for open dialogue on these sensitive issues, and I welcome a fair presentation of all points of view in its news stories and editorials. As you suggest, enlightened debate is indeed the heart and soul of democracy.

- Tom Hogen-Esch

South Pasadena

`In the line of duty'

During this very difficult time at the Los Angeles Police Department, I would like to express my sincere appreciation to the Daily News for its thoughtful editorial, ``In the line of duty,'' Dec. 2.

This article captured many of the emotions we are experiencing as we mourn the loss of Officer Brian Brown.

Throughout my career with this department, I have attended many funerals of fellow LAPD family members. I will have attended three during this year alone - for Officer Steve Gajda, Officer Filbert Cuesta and, on the day I write this letter, Dec. 4, for Officer Brian Brown. It never, never gets any easier.

Among the emotions felt throughout the department, there is an immense feeling of gratitude to the residents of Los Angeles for their numerous gestures of condolence, including flowers, letters, cards, kind words and donations to the fallen officer's family. I share the gratitude with my fellow officers, and I would also like to offer my genuine gratitude to the men and women of the Los Angeles Police Department who risk their personal safety every single day in the name of public safety.

Every day I realize how honored I am to be associated with the heroic and dedicated men and women of this department. Their collective efforts have brought crime rates down to record lows for Los Angeles. They have achieved this impressive feat while always knowing the possible, ultimate price they may have to pay in accomplishing this outstanding work. Thank you, LAPD family. Thank you, Brian Brown.

- Bernard C. Parks 

Chief of police

Los Angeles

In regard to ``Fallen officer represents values we should cherish'' by Chris Biller, Opinions, Dec. 9:

I would like to add a few thoughts. We all should understand, remember and cherish the fact that these people not only start their morning not knowing how the day may end, but also are heading to a job where they put their lives on the line for complete strangers.

Everyone needs to think about what we say and how we teach the young to respect law enforcement. I fear by the time our children grow up there will be so few brave men and women embracing law enforcement as a career that a cry for help will be met with a 24-hour waiting period. Why would anyone join a profession where police are targets for weapons, where they are outnumbered and where disrespect toward them is becoming common practice?

- Karri Ashley

Newhall

Educating gifted kids

Regarding Cheryl Lozano's comments in ``Gifted kids snubbed,'' Public Forum, Dec. 2: If she had two kids, one gifted and one with special needs, I think she would have a different perspective on the apportionment of funds for educating each.

There is far more involved in ameliorating disabilities than there is in challenging strengths, as I have discovered with my own two sons - one gifted and the other with autism and severe learning disabilities.

Political correctness has nothing to do with the reality of the situation. The purpose of special education is to enable the children who need it to become as productive as possible and, ideally, pay taxes.

Some children with disabilities are too severely disabled ever to hold jobs. They are going to need care all of their lives. Special education can reduce the level of care they need, decreasing the expense. As a taxpayer, I consider this a good investment.

For gifted children's education, money is not the big problem. There seems to be a basic lack of understanding within the education establishment regarding the teaching of gifted children, and until the educators can figure that out, no amount of money is going to make things better, and it could make things worse.

Magnet programs that give so much homework the child doesn't have time for writing a novel, building model rockets or discovering unified field theory are not the answer for all gifted children.

- Jeannette Darlington

West Hills

As the mother of an 8-year-old special child, I can tell you that, without these programs, these children would not get the education that they need and deserve as much as gifted children do.

If children are truly gifted, they have the ability to get somewhere in life without special education, as the term indicates.

Without special education, students who need it would be unable to learn to their potential and become productive members of society.

- Debra E. Hazeldine

Panorama City