PUBLIC FORUM : CLINTON BEING BLAMED FOR SOCIETY'S FAILURES.

David C. Wilcox (Public Forum, Oct. 20) argues that ``Return of the witch hunt'' by Arthur Miller (Opinions, Oct. 16) is a ``vivid example of the president's defenders' refusal or inability to engage in critical thinking.''

A refusal or inability to engage in critical thinking? Miller's article was one of the most concise, rational and important examples of critical thinking I've read concerning President Clinton's situation.

The ideologies of the president's most severe critics on this issue are no different from those of the puritanical extremists of 300 years ago, who are once again looking for a ``witch'' to burn.

Today's witch is to blame for our children getting the wrong messages about sex and marriage, or for the discomfort we feel at ``having'' to explain oral sex and infidelity.

The only ``spell'' at work on today's society is a self-inflicted one. It is the spell of denial of the fact that the majority of American citizens sit idly by, crippled by disillusionment and fear surrounding issues that overwhelm them, then complain when their lives are in turmoil and out of control.

We hurry to point the finger and blame our neighbors, our politicians, our teachers and our police rather than turn the finger inward and take responsibility for what we as parents, husbands or wives could be doing better. It is easier and certainly less painful to blame others for what we alone have allowed to become worse.

As Miller so eloquently stated, ``Not often does one sinner raise so many so quickly out of their moral slumber.''

- Megan J. Miller

Chatsworth

Re ``Clinton's mockery of family the issue,'' Viewpoint, Oct. 18:

Thank you for forwarding the message of Steven A. Schwaim, senior writer/analyst of the Family Research Council. It was on target.

How a person conducts his life, in all areas, is important. Bill Clinton is not excluded. Because of his position as president, it is even more important for him to set a good example.

As a person who deals with children and families on a daily basis, I have firsthand knowledge of the terrible toll children pay for the extramarital games their parents play. Parents are gambling with their kids' health and well-being when they are disloyal to their partner.

We do not live in vacuum tubes. We live together on this planet, and we influence those around us, for better or worse.

- Mary May

Sunland

Election commentary

Your main reason (Editorials, Oct. 22) for rejecting Sen. Barbara Boxer's candidacy centers on the Clinton scandal, her only sin being her belated participation in the chorus of those Democrats who called the president a cur and stopped just short of asking for his impeachment.

Maybe I missed the boat when the Democrats pilloried Clarence Thomas and Bob Packwood for their sexual peccadilloes.

I did not see any Republican senator or congressman publicly condemning those illustrious public servants for the shame they brought to our country. The same Republicans who are shrieking today in their newfound pulpits were deafeningly silent then. Why, all of a sudden, are the rules different for the Democrats?

I believe our country deserves to elect to the seats of government individuals who have a vision beyond selfish parochialism. Boxer may not possess that quality, but as events of the past few months have shown, neither does the Republican mainstream.

So, come Tuesday, I am voting for Boxer.

- Komla Prosper Ametu

Sylmer

I am supporting the re-election bid of Barbara Boxer for one reason. She has consistently supported the administration of President Clinton, and I feel the president has done a lot of good for our country.

On the local level: While I have faith in the abilities of both of the candidates for governor, I feel that after 16 years of having Republicans in power, it's time to give the Democrats a chance. Therefore, I urge my fellow Californians to elect the team of Gray Davis for governor and Cruz Bustamante for lieutenant governor.

- Harold Longanecker

Reseda

No doubt I will not be able to convince SOAR (Save Open Space and Agricultural Resources) opponents to vote in favor of Proposition B in Ventura County and Proposition P in Thousand Oaks, but for those who are undecided, consider this:

SOAR expires in 2021. It can be viewed as an experiment that can easily be changed if it is found to have problems. The opposite is not true. Unbridled development is not reversible.

Am I mistaken, or is traffic almost to the point of gridlock daily? Per-capita taxes are increasing to provide the infrastructure needed to support more growth. Recent examples are sewer rates and a large school bond.

Not that I'm arguing against these things; they are necessary to keep up with growth. The rate of tax increases will follow the rate of growth. Stream and ocean pollution from street runoff is getting worse, and only the surfers seem to care. Fortunately for us, our increasing air pollution blows inland to others.

With all the great places to live in our nation, why do we have to crowd in such a disproportionate share here?

Vote yes on Propositions P and B. Remember pretty and beautiful.

- Burt Elliott

Thousand Oaks

I'm sick of hearing confusing and misleading ads against Proposition 10.

These ads are paid for by the tobacco czars. They know that an increase in cigarette taxes will cause fewer teens to become smokers, as has been proved elsewhere. Why else would they be spending tens of millions of dollars to defeat it - out of their great and abiding love for the democratic process? Give me a break.

It's really very simple: Proposition 10 will take money away from Big Tobacco and put it to infinitely better use. It will, at the same time, cut the number of teen smokers.

Please don't let the tobacco czars succeed. Send them a clear and unmistakable message that we're tired of being played for suckers. Vote yes on Proposition 10.

- Mark Jones

Sun Valley

How could anyone in good conscience vote for or endorse any proposition or bond issue in this state, especially Proposition 10?

Today, initiating any proposition or bond only establishes more bureaucracy with less results. It seems that the only priorities of these new hierarchies are to establish plush offices with plush salaries, then sit back and marvel at their newfound wealth.

We are told that more money is needed from the taxpayers, yet we are also told that California has a major cash surplus in the billions. How can someone say on the one hand that we need money and, on the other, we have too much money?

As experience has shown, Proposition 10 will do nothing for the children, but it will, with certainty, enrich a new group of bureaucrats.

- Louis Thompson

Woodland Hills

After listening to and watching all the usual election rhetoric about the various propositions, a practical question about Proposition 5 comes to mind: Why is it needed?

Proponents say it will ``allow the Indians to keep what they already have,'' referring to casinos on the reservations. Is someone threatening to take that away? Who? How? No one has said that, so what's the danger?

Proponents also say it provides for ``sharing the profits with tribes that don't have casinos.'' That sounds a bit like socialism to me.

If I understand the current situation correctly, any tribe can negotiate with the government to open a casino now, so why is this law needed? Also, as to sharing the revenues, if any tribe operating a casino wants to share its revenue with another tribe, is anything stopping it right now?

Opponents say there would be no local control, zoning or otherwise, over any new casinos. There would be no tax benefits to the community and no compliance with worker safety and pay regulations. Proponents say exactly the opposite. What's the truth? Only a lawyer can tell, and do you really expect a lawyer to tell the truth?

I'll be voting against Proposition 5 until someone convinces me it's needed. I will not vote in new laws just to have laws. We have more than enough already.

- Jerry Schwartz

Granada Hills

As to the pressure being applied upon California Indian casinos by the big Nevada casinos, the first thought that comes to mind is, ``Well, well, so the white man is trying to do it to the Indians - again.''

- Dana Dreyfuss

West Hills

On Oct. 22, you printed an article regarding public school enrollment breaking records. The solution, according to our superintendent, is to pass more bond measures, which are simply a disguise for more taxes on homeowners.

As a single person and homeowner who has chosen not to have children, I do not feel any responsibility for educating other people's kids, especially the children of illegal aliens. If I wanted the financial burden of raising a child, I would have had my own.

I'll pay ``my fair share,'' as liberals like to say, but how about parents taking on a bigger burden for the children that they chose to have, especially those who live in apartments and pay virtually nothing in school taxes?

- John Andrews 

Sherman Oaks

I cannot believe your editorial of Oct. 18 on Proposition 4 (banning body-gripping traps).

When it comes to comparing domestic and wild animals, there is no difference at all in the cruelty and agony that they suffer at the hands of man.

- Rosemary Calabrese

Northridge

I have been following the gubernatorial campaign between Gray Davis and Dan Lungren since the beginning. Very frankly, neither of the candidates has showed either a strategy for future direction of the state of California or the qualifications and ability to lead our state.

All they have been doing is finger-pointing. If this is the way they plan to run our Golden State, I prefer to vote for Snoopy; at least he might have a plan of his own.

- Robert Brunell

North Hollywood