_______________ IT'S "ONLY SEX"? BY DAVID HOROWITZ (03/11/98)
	I always assumed that Salon presents columnists of widely diverging political philosophies so that its readers can develop a well-balanced view of the world. However, upon reading David Horowitz's column "It's 'only sex'? Tell that to Cmdr. Stumpf" I have come to suspect that your real point in carrying his column is to gleefully prove just how duplicitous right-wing conservatives can be. Firstly, he ridiculously equates a soldier's sworn testimony that Sgt. Maj. McKinney forced her to submit to having sex while seven months pregnant with an illegally tape-recorded conversation of Monica Lewinsky claiming that she willingly gave "the Big Creep" a blow job. He next calls Tailhook "only a sex party" and calls the activities that took place there "sexual frivolities." From the Inspector General's report, here are some of the milder "frivolities" that took place: The bartender "was grabbed and pinched on her buttocks and breasts throughout the evening. The more the victim would tell the men not to touch her, the worse the grabbing got. At one point, the victim was bitten on the buttocks while she was serving drinks. The bite was hard enough to cause a bruise." According to Armed Forces Journal International -- not exactly a bastion of liberal Navy bashers -- Cmdr. Stumpf borrowed an F/A-18 to use as his private transportation from Florida to Las Vegas. In addition, when Stumpf's promotion was sent to the Senate Armed Services Committee for confirmation, the Navy failed to flag his records as a Tailhook '91 participant, as required. Once it was discovered that Cmdr. Stumpf had been at Tailhook, Sen. Sam Nunn, D-Ga., and Chairman Sen. Strom Thurmond, R-S.C. -- now there's a left-winger for you -- then informed the Navy secretary that they would not have approved Cmdr. Stumpf's promotion had they received all the information regarding his service. It is pure hogwash to suggest that Cmdr. Stumpf's career was harmed by engaging in behavior similar to that attributed to the president. To put it bluntly, Mr. Horowitz is a big, fat liar. -- Marceline Therrien Oakland, Calif.
_______________ THE FALWELL CONNECTION BY MURRAY WAAS (03/11/98)
	Thanks again for the Murray Waas propaganda piece on the nasty right-wing conspiracy led by the great Satan and "Meester Beeg" Jerry Falwell. One of the hallmarks of the communist intellectuals was their capacity to convert any discussion of fact into a discussion of motive, and Murray is certainly keeping the tradition alive. Since he is unable to refute the basic facts regarding Clinton's criminal behavior, he contents himself with vast left-wing conspiracies weaving a complex web of intrigue, shady payoffs and sinister characters all neatly coordinated by the demonic trinity of Falwell, Tyrrell and Scaife. Hello! Murray! Have you seen Clinton's approval rating lately? If this is a vast conspiracy to get Clinton nobody's apparently paid it much attention. Maybe he's just suffering from cognitive dissonance at the realization that the Great Liberal Hope is just an Arkansas hippie with a $200 haircut. Just to recap the basics: 1) Jerry Parks documented Clinton's bimbo eruptions and he was executed by a still unknown assassin. His widow, Jane, and his son Gary both stand by their stories that this was a political hit. 2) Paula Jones is a real person and was in the hotel room with Clinton. 3) Dan Lasiter was convicted of distributing cocaine during the time that he was doing business with the Arkansas Development Finance Authority. ADFA was the agency created by Gov. Clinton that was used to launder the cocaine money. 4) Clinton did pardon his good buddy Dan Lasiter after his conviction. And for good measure: 5) Monica's candid admissions on the Tripp tapes are worth all the spin doctor baloney and perjured affidavits in the world. 6) O.J. did it. Murray, get over it! -- David Wright San Diego
_______________ A ROMP IN ROME BY FIONA MORGAN (03/11/98)
	I read with interest Fiona Morgan's tale of her experience in Rome. At the end of her tale she talks about how she continues to be harassed in Seattle and that she would "rather understand what's driving the behavior" than hear the "old feminist" statement: "It's not about sex; it's about power." If Ms. Morgan truly wants to understand the behavior, she needs to read some "old feminist" material and perhaps take additional social science courses. It is clear to me that different things are operating here: 1) Ms. Morgan feels that the attention of the Italian men was benevolent; 2) she feels that the attention of the U.S. men is malevolent. In the horror stories she heard before she went to Italy it was evident that some women do not experience unwanted (unexpected?) male attention in the same way. Some felt mauled, insulted and uncomfortable. Others felt charmed and beautiful. How much do you want to bet that all of the women who receive such attention -- welcome or not -- are white Americans or light-skinned Europeans? Do you think black people are harassed in this manner? Ms. Morgan probably fits the ideal standard of beauty and that is why she received such a "positive" response in this country and in Italy. Furthermore, I am not so sure that the Italian men's behavior is benevolent. Unless of course Italian women grope and proposition male visitors to the country. Italian men are maintaining their power over women by asserting the right to comment on women's bodies and touch women in an unwelcome manner. Because there is laughter in their eyes doesn't mean that Italian men's actions can be excused. The U.S. men (or rather the Seattle men) who harass out of meanness are still trying to control women's actions. The difference being that the U.S. is more uptight about sex than Italy. But in both countries sexuality can be used as a tool to oppress. -- D. Carter SALON | March 16, 1998