The MacNeil/Lehrer NewsHour

MR. MacNeil: Good evening. I'm Robert MacNeil in New York.

MR. LEHRER: And I'm Jim Lehrer in Washington. After our summary of the news this New Year's Eve we have a year end conversation with our six regular regional editors and commentators, Tom Bearden reports on the boycott fight over gay rights in Colorado, and essayist Roger Rosenblatt reads some of Bill Clinton's mail.NEWS SUMMARY

MR. MacNeil: For more than three weeks American forces have been fighting an uphill and sometimes dangerous battle against anarchy and famine in Somalia, and today they got a face-to-face salute from the man who sent them there. President Bush completed the first of a two-day visit to the East African nation and is now spending the night off shore aboard the helicopter assault ship Tripoli. A key reason for that is security, which was underscored this evening when a barrage of heavy shelling was heard North of the capital between warring clans. No U.S. forces were involved in the latest skirmish and Mr. Bush was miles from the fighting. The President arrived in the sun-baked Somali capital early this morning after a brief stop in Saudi Arabia. The 18 hour flight from Washington marked Mr. Bush's 25th and probably final overseas trip as President. Security was very heavy as the President arrived at the American embassy to address some 1,000 U.S. troops. Just hours before his arrival, gunfire reverberated throughout Mogadishu. At the American compound, the President got a rousing welcome from the young Marines of Operation Restore Hope, and he returned the gesture.

PRESIDENT BUSH: Desert Storm showed our country once again that we have the finest fighting forces in the entire world, and now, and now -- and now we're seeing in a very different mission that same kind of expertise, that same kind of dedication, and your ears should have been burning because your general was telling me that every single person here, man and woman, is serving with this, not only this distinction, but with the sense of feeling for the people of Somalia, and in a sense then for the people of the world, so what I wanted to do was just come out here, wish you all well, thank you for serving this, the greatest country on the face of the earth. We're very, very proud of you and very, very grateful to each and every one of you. May God bless you, and may you all have a Happy New Year! Thank you so much.

MR. MacNeil: After his remarks, the President plunged into the crowd and exchanged jokes and talked football with some of the leathernecks. He then visited a relief center for some of Somalia's worst victims. It's called "The Place of Bones," and provides care for some 4,000 refugees. Mr. Bush was warmly greeted by some of the youngest residents. He seemed moved and encouraged by the work being done at the relief center.

PRESIDENT BUSH: Most of these children, they tell me, were literally starving two months ago. You probably saw it, but we're going to see more where nourishment hasn't taken yet, but it's encouraging to see them coming back. I think that's the good news. And I have great respect for the men and women that are doing this, these NGO's as well as the Somalians here. This is a cooperative effort, and it's just very, very emotional for me to see it. I'll tell you I have great respect for what you're doing.

REPORTER: You don't have any second thoughts about using Marines like this?

PRESIDENT BUSH: I have more respect for them. I thought I had the most possible before, and now it's even greater to see those kids that we saw a few minutes ago, away from home, halfway around the world, and doing something to touch other people it's the best of America. And I'll tell you I get very emotional.

MR. MacNeil: The President then flew back to the U.S.S. TRIPOLI, where for security he's spending the night. Tomorrow he'll leave the TRIPOLI and visit an orphanage in the town of Baidoa and meet with U.S. Army troops at a food distribution center at Bale Dogle.

MR. MacNeil: Once Mr. Bush leaves Somalia he'll fly to Moscow to sign a nuclear arms reduction treaty with President Yeltsin. The summit between the two men was switched to Moscow because of bad weather in the Black Sea port Cerci. Jim.

MR. LEHRER: In economic news today, the Commerce Department reported factory orders fell .9 percent in November. The decrease was caused by a big drop in orders for aircraft. An Amtrak train with more than 200 people aboard derailed last night in Michigan 60 miles Northeast of Chicago. Nine people were slightly injured. The accident is under investigation. Railroad officials said the train appeared to hit something on the track. They said vandals had put debris on the same track a few days ago.

MR. MacNeil: United Nations Secretary General Boutros Boutros- Ghali met with Muslim and Serb leaders in the Bosnian capital Sarajevo today. He opposes outside military intervention and made an appeal today to give the negotiations more time, despite angry protests from Bosnian residents. We have a report narrated by Vera Frankel of Worldwide Television News.

MS. FRANKEL: It was Boutros-Ghali's first visit to the stricken capital of Bosnia. He had guards and wore a flight jacket, but chose to travel in an unarmored car. After the Secretary General's heavily guarded convoy left the airport mortar shells reportedly fell close to the road. But the seven-hour visit was without serious incident. At the Bosnian presidency, he met Vice President Aub Ganich, who told reporters the U.N. help for Bosnia came much too late. Outside, the reception was even less diplomatic. Demonstrators chanted, "Ghali is a murderer, a fascist, a criminal." Carrying placards they surged forward, venting their anger on a man of peace who's become the focal point of their frustration. The Secretary General listened but had no words to offer. Afterwards, Ghali visited one of Sarajevo's main hospitals and spoke to some of the city's most recent war casualties. At a later news conference, he reiterated his belief that negotiation is the key to peace in Bosnia, not military intervention, as Bosnian Muslims want.

BOUTROS BOUTROS-GHALI, U.N. Secretary General: Peace enforcement may be more terrible for everybody than what is going on, so let us try once more, let us try it again.

MS. FRANKEL: Boutros-Ghali's hopes hinge on the resumption of peace talks in Geneva on January the 2nd, but there's little optimism among the Bosnian people he leaves behind. If the talks fail, the year ahead can only bring more death and more destruction.

MR. MacNeil: In contrast with the bloody disintegration of Yugoslavia, the nation of Czechoslovakia is set to break apart peacefully this evening. At midnight, it will separate into Slovakia and the Czech Republic after 74 years as a united country. In the Slovak capital of Bratislava, preparations are underway to celebrate the divorce. It was prompted by political and economic differences following the fall of communist rule. Officials in both republics said they would begin the new year looking for more foreign investment.

MR. LEHRER: At least 20 people died during a New Year's Eve celebration in Hong Kong tonight. Some 15,000 people were crowded into the city's entertainment district. Police said there was panic when some of the revelers began pushing and caused others to fall down. And that's it for the News Summary this New Year's Eve. Now it's on to a six-way year end conversation, the gay rights boycott in Colorado, and a Roger Rosenblatt essay. FOCUS - EDITORS' VIEWS

MR. MacNeil: We thought it would be appropriate on this last evening of 1992 to have some year-end observations from our regular panel of editors. We rounded them up yesterday for that purpose. Joining us are Ed Baumeister of the Trenton, New Jersey Times, Cynthia Tucker of the Atlanta Constitution, Clarence Page of the Chicago Tribune, Gerald Warren of the San Diego Union-Tribune, Lee Cullum of the Dallas Morning News, and Erwin Knoll of The Progressive Magazine published in Madison, Wisconsin. Starting with you, Clarence, let's start with the news today. President Bush is in Somalia. How is the year ending, would you say, for George Bush?

MR. PAGE: I would say with the exception of the pardon given for Iran-contra, it's ending very positively for him. He certainly is showing his strongest suit, which is international affairs in Somalia, as well as the progress he's shown with the strategic arms reduction talks, very important, very positive. Iran-contra is sort of a mixed picture.

MR. MacNeil: I'll come back to the pardons in a moment.

MR. PAGE: Sure.

MR. MacNeil: But let's just keep it sort of general for a moment. Erwin, would you agree that 1992 is now ending not with a whimper but a bang for George Bush?

MR. KNOLL: I think it's ending appropriately enough with a photo opportunity, which is what the trip to Somalia is. And I think 1992 has been to a very considerable extent a year when, when image triumphs over substance and when photo opportunities had precedence over real things.

MR. MacNeil: This has obviously been a hard year in many ways for George Bush, Lee Cullum. How do you think the year is ending for him?

MS. CULLUM: Robin, I think it's more than a photo opportunity. I don't want to close this year taking issue with Erwin Knoll as I have all year. It's time for good cheer and good will to Erwin Knoll and everybody else, but I do want to say I think that what he's doing is very substantive. The START talks finale is very substantive. I think what he's doing in Somalia is very important. He has, in fact, laid the groundwork for a Pax Americana. He did it in the Persian Gulf. He's doing it in Somalia, and I think he has set the pattern that will continue to the end of the century, throughout the next administration.

MR. MacNeil: Cynthia, how do you feel that the year is ending for George Bush?

MS. CULLUM: Well, it's too bad that he did have to mar it with the pardons in Iran-contra. I know you want to talk about that later, but I think it is a significant tarnish on what otherwise would have been an almost perfect end of his administration. I do think the START II is especially substantive, and that's something he and his administration should get a lot of credit for, because that's very important.

MR. MacNeil: Gerry Warren, how is the Bush presidency ending?

MR. WARREN: Well, it's not ending perfectly, Robin, because he's, he's not President after the 20th of January. Other than that, I think it's ending very well for him. The visit to Somalia, I think, is very important. One criticism we had of George Bush was that he forgot the symbolic requirements of the presidency. He has not forgotten that where foreign policy is concerned, and he has not forgotten that in Somalia. It's very important and very proper for the President of the United States to go to Somalia and support the people who are there doing a humanitarian mission. And so I think he has -- he has reason to feel pretty good about things at the end of the year, except for that one problem, which was the election.

MR. MacNeil: What do you think about the visit to Somalia and the symbolism at the end of the year?

MR. BAUMEISTER: Well, if I could have it both ways, he did get thrown out of office by the American people rather decidedly. He lost a race everyone said he should have won. It was his to lose and he lost it. On the other hand, the important thing of his week end I think is the, is the START thing. He did amazing work that I think has been obscured. He hasn't really been able to toot his own horn loudly enough on this.

MR. MacNeil: Let's pick up, Lee, on the point you make. I just wonder whether others agree with you. Clarence, do you agree that, that the President's actions in Somalia and maybe the stirrings in Bosnia now actually leave a kind of working definition of the U.S. role in the new world order for Clinton?

MR. PAGE: I think it is a working definition. It's not a clearly defined definition, unfortunately. But it's refreshing to see United States might used in service of a purely humanitarian mission. Only the most cynical would call it anything else, and that's very refreshing. It'svery encouraging toward, moving toward a new role for this country in a truly new world order. We must take the next step though and be able to work with other countries through the United Nations or through whatever means to build a truly multilateral coalition toward improving the lot of humanity, big countries and small countries alike working together. So that you don't have that shadow of colonialism hanging over it. But this is very positive. But George Bush has -- for the last couple of years, ever since he first articulated the new world order -- has never really defined it. He certainly opened up the door toward our country moving in that direction, but he's left it up to Bill Clinton and the rest of us to figure out just what it's all about.

MS. CULLUM: Yet, if could interject, Robin --

MR. MacNeil: Yes, Lee.

MS. CULLUM: -- the last time we were together, Clarence Page said very persuasively, I thought, that we had a benign colonialism going on in Somalia. And I think that's going to continue. I think we're going to have a United Nations colonialism in trouble spots around the world, and it's going to be a very important development. It's going to be important also as we bring these countries from third world to first world status that, that they have a stopping off spot at the second world level. There's a consultant in Dallas who has persuaded me of this. There's got to be an authoritarian regime for a while, not to radical but authoritarian, and that's going to be a major assignment I think for the United Nations over the years ahead.

MR. MacNeil: Erwin, how clearly do you think, how clear a definition is President Bush leaving of the U.S. role at the end of his presidency?

MR. KNOLL: Well, I'm appalled by what I've been listening to the last few minutes. I guess Clarence will have to count me among the most cynical, because I don't believe this is a purely humanitarian intervention in Somalia. I do believe Lee when she says that this is the beginning of the Pax Americana. And I'm just absolutely flabbergasted that anyone should think that's a good thing. A Pax Americana, it puts me in mind of the, of the classical historian who wrote they made a desert and they called it Peace. Who are we to impose our will on the world, to try to refashion it in our image, to tell all the nations on this planet here's what we want you to do and you'd better do it, or you'd better be prepared for the arrival of the U.S. Marines?

MR. MacNeil: Ed Baumeister.

MR. BAUMEISTER: But in Erwin's cynicism, I think, there's a belief in, in our power beyond what our power actually is. If you try to put together this U.N. peace force, I mean, just think of the instant situation in the Balkans. Kosovo, the Albanian section of the former Yugoslavia, that province, teaming with, with extremely active Albanians, who won't even talk to the Serbs now, so that gets the Macedonians involved. The Macedonians get the Greeks involved. The Greeks get the Turks involved. Now, how do you put together this Pax Americana force when your allies in NATO to them elect to be drawn into a Balkan war if it goes badly? I don't -- I think this new world order is still disorder. It's not the old order, that's clear, but it's disorder, and I don't see how a Pax Americana can be, can be imposed.

MR. MacNeil: Cynthia --

MR. KNOLL: I don't see how it can be either, Ed, but I think the effort is going to be made with appalling consequences.

MR. MacNeil: Cynthia, how --

MS. TUCKER: Well, Robin --

MR. MacNeil: -- clear do you think the definition George Bush leaves?

MS. TUCKER: I don't, I don't think there's much of a definition at all, and I don't think that we have one either. I think the discussion that you're hearing from us now suggests that we are still thinking about world affairs in, in a very old manner, Pax Americana, imperialism, colonialism. I think that almost by instinct President Bush did the right thing in Somalia. I think his stepping up pressure on Bosnia is also the right thing to do, but it comes by instinct. He has not arrived at a working definition of what American foreign policy should be. That will be Bill Clinton's task. Bill Clinton will also have to deal with the matter of immigration. What's going to happen when more and more Cubans try to hijack planes to fly to the United States? What's going to happen when even more Haitians try to gain entry? These are things that Bill Clinton is going to be forced to come to terms with very soon.

MR. MacNeil: Gerry Warren, what's your view on the kind of Pax Americana or a definition of the U.S. role Bush leaves as defined by the Somalia action, moves in Bosnia and so on?

MR. WARREN: Well, it's not Pax Americana and it certainly is not colonialism. It's more in line with the help that the United States gave to European countries after World War II. It's more in line with our role in Greece and Turkey after World War II. If you have to put a label on it, I, the one I like the best that I've heard is humanitarian intervention. I think Mr. Bush has defined it as far as it can be defined at this moment. Mr. Clinton must put flesh and bones on this policy, change it if he wishes to, but a lot of it requires a working relationship with the, with the United Nations. Right now, the United Nations wants to intervene in a humanitarian way, and when it does want to do that, it can't without the United States. That is just the fact of life.

MR. MacNeil: Let's move back to the Iran-contra pardon. Cynthia, I got the impression you wanted to say something about that.

MS. TUCKER: Yes, indeed, I did. I was greatly, greatly disappointed in President Bush. I thought it really marred what would have been a very graceful exit from office for him. He has taught over the last few years a lot about how much he believed in honor. He was always talking about how much his parents taught him about honor. And I thought these pardons were a very dishonorable thing for him to do. They leave quite a taint on his administration. They smack of a cover-up and suggest to the American people that he feared he would be even more deeply implicated himself if he allowed Caspar Weinberger to go to trial.

MR. MacNeil: Lee Cullum, do you think they were dishonorable, the pardons?

MS. CULLUM: No, I don't feel that they were, Robin. Now, my newspaper, the Dallas News, felt that the pardons were ill advised. But the editorial did go on to say that Lawrence Walsh seems to suffer from an excess of zeal. Personally I was glad to see Caspar Weinberger treated with compassion. I think it was called for, and I don't think compassion is dishonorable. I do agree with Leslie Gelb of the New York Times who said that the pardon was right; to call Weinberger's actions patriotism was wrong.

MR. MacNeil: Well, what do you think about the pardons, Ed?

MR. BAUMEISTER: Well, I don't want to try to claim the cynicism crown from Erwin, but when the first trial --

MR. KNOLL: I won't relinquish it.

MR. BAUMEISTER: -- balloon went up that said he might pardon it, it was clear that a pardon was in the works. And I think you're talking here tonight to members of the 10 percent of the American people who still care at all about Iran-contra. I mean, 90 percent of the American people have been numbed by it, and that's unfortunate. And it's maybe even tragic that people don't care more about what happens in their government. It was -- our newspaper said it was a dreadful thing to do even though Weinberger, we think, is a, is a capable public servant, but it's part of this feeling people have that the government is really up to no particular good. How much -- $31 million spent on this -- how about the other investigations government has conducted of itself, one branch or another? The S&L Senators and Representatives, the House bank scandal, the House post office scandal, all these things, I mean, even off the East coast of New Jersey on Staten Island, the U.S. Attorney is investigating the Staten Island borough president because of his stand on some conviction that a customs officer had. There's always investigating going on. People are tired of it. They think it's not the business of government, and I think sadly people will forget that this, this thing happened and that the pardon happened.

MR. MacNeil: Gerry Warren, how do you feel about the pardons?

MR. WARREN: Well, I think he did it because of his sense of honor, not, not the opposite. I -- our newspaper said that we wish he hadn't done it. We are very critical of Walsh. We think Walsh is a highly partisan prosecutor and has probably broken some canons of judicial and attorney ethics in the way he's conducted himself. Personally, I am very fond of Cap Weinberger and have been for 30 years. My personal belief was that he would have cleared himself, and I would like to have seen him clear himself, but Bush was operating with the full authority of the Constitution behind him. So you can't call it dishonorable. He did it because he felt that this thing had gone far enough, and enough is enough.

MR. MacNeil: Clarence Page, how do you feel about the pardons? Has Bush tarnished the end of his presidency with it?

MR. PAGE: Well, my newspaper took a similar stance to Gerry's newspaper and to what Lee was saying earlier, that we didn't like the pardon.

MR. MacNeil: And these are all newspapers that are known to have a fairly conservative editorial stance.

MR. PAGE: From what? I am not known --

MR. MacNeil: No, I don't mean you, but I mean the Chicago Tribune.

MR. PAGE: No, but I agree too though that we didn't like the pardon. At the same time we're not terribly pleased with the way Lawrence Walsh has been handling it, but if we were going to find somebody to pardon, Caspar Weinberger's about the sympathetic figure because here is somebody who was trying to take the fall for an enterprise that he didn't agree with, that he actually opposed, but let me say something about George Bush. While I didn't like the action, I think Bush didn't do anything to help himself by taking this action. He obviously did put a stain on the very positive moves that we were just talking about, Somalia, the Somalia mission, the START mission. Erwin Knoll's cynicism notwithstanding, who else was doing something about these starving people? And as I've said on the show before, it's a shame 300,000 had to die before we took an action but at least we took an action. Who else in the world was doing a darn thing to help these folks? Somalia in the post Cold War world has no strategic value anymore. We are not trying to colonize Somalia. The U.S. will be very happy to get out of Somalia after it's got some kind of a stable government or sense of order over there, but if we're the only ones who are going to take that kind of a role in this new world, then let's do it. I see nothing but a humanitarian mission. I see nothing that Bush has done with Iran-contra but hurt himself. He hasn't gotten himself off the hook. He can try to pardon himself but that'll only make him look worse in history. So I think in a way Gerry Warren is right. George Bush was acting out of a personal sense of honor and not something that's going to really help him.

MR. MacNeil: What's your view of that, Erwin?

MR. KNOLL: I think the pardons were disgraceful, but as Ed Baumeister said not really surprising. They're the latest installment in what has become the conventional mode of American foreign policy, that is, to act in secret, to act illegally, to cover it up, and then to excuse the perpetrators. I'm particularly irked by all the expressions of compassion for Caspar Weinberger. There are people in this country serving prison terms because they broke the law in order to put food on the table for their families. And we're supposed to feel sorry about a high office holder who abused his position, who lied to Congress, who lied to the American people? No. I'm -- I don't feel any compassion. And as for the zealotry of the, of the prosecutor, Mr. Walsh, I'm appalled again to hear this condemnation of an earnest prosecutor by people who often tell me how we need more law and order in America.

MR. MacNeil: Anybody want to come back on that?

MR. PAGE: Well, I think Lawrence Walsh has -- I have nothing against him being a zealous prosecutor. I think that I saw on this show yesterday, I think it was Mr. Fein defending the administration, saying that this was something like the anti-war protesters back in the '60s, a patriotic act. Well, those protests were done out in public, as Erwin Knoll and I very well remember. There was nothing, there was no cover-up, there was nothing done in secret there. This Iran-contra action was a secret subversion of the normal process. It deserves to be fully investigated and prosecuted, however, Walsh has stained his own prosecution by appearing so publicly zealous, by not being more dispassionate about it. That's all I meant.

MR. BAUMEISTER: And if you judge him by results, $31 million, a lot of overturned convictions, really not much.

MR. MacNeil: Yeah. Gerry Warren.

MR. WARREN: Robin, my concern about Walsh is that he seemed not to be interested in, in learning the truth about Iran-contra and what went wrong and more interested in bagging the President, whether it's Reagan or Bush. He's after the President's scalp, and I, I think that's wrong. This, these pardons do not condone Iran- contra. I think the full facts ought to come out about Iran-contra, and we ought to learn the lesson once and for all that you cannot set up a secret foreign policy in the basement of the Executive Office Building.

MS. TUCKER: Robin, if I may interject --

MR. MacNeil: Yes, Cynthia.

MS. TUCKER: -- how is it that these pardons do not condone Iran- contra? That is precisely what they do. These pardons suggest that a high office holder can lie to Congress and get away with it. I don't understand how we expect our government to function if it's okay for one branch of government to lie to another. And I don't understand how we expect that the public will ever know the truth about Iran-contra now that some of the leading figures in it have been pardoned. They will certainly not come to trial. That was the most likely way for us to tell the truth. As to whether Lawrence Walsh wanted to find out the truth or whether he wanted George Bush's scalp, the two may be connected. If George Bush was intimately connected with Iran-contra -- and there's much evidence to suggest he was -- then Lawrence Walsh had to try to get at that evidence.

MR. MacNeil: Do you want to come back, Gerry?

MR. WARREN: Well, I have not seen that evidence. Perhaps Cynthia has in Atlanta, but I haven't seen the evidence that says that President Bush or Vice President Bush is intimately involved. I think there are ways to get the full story out on Iran- contra, and it ought to be done. I think we ought to publish everything that has been said and written in this case and get it out and let the American people make that decision. The Walsh prosecution process was not the way to do it.

MR. MacNeil: Gerry, since we're looking back at the year, you were the person in this group who lives closest to one of the biggest stories of the year, the L.A. riots.

MR. WARREN: Right.

MR. MacNeil: What kind of lasting impact do you think they've had on the country?

MR. WARREN: I'm afraid the lasting impact has not been the one we wanted to see when this group got together sometime ago right after the riots. I would have hoped that coming out of this you would have seen the greater emphasis on understanding diversity in our major cities, dealing with the problems that diversity brings to our major cities, but I don't see that. Unfortunately, I see at a time of economic distress around the country more and more distrust of immigrants and of persons who don't look and sound and talk just like we do. So I am afraid once again we run the risk of not learning the lessons of a major conflagration which was based on racial problems.

MR. MacNeil: Clarence Page.

MR. PAGE: Well, I have to agree with Gerry. I had the same hopes when we were talking back at the time of the riots. As the embers have cooled though so has the American concern. One thing that struck me about our program and those days was that, you know, black folks and white folks and others don't talk to each other with very much candor in this country anymore. We've lost the common language of race since the civil rights era. And at least for a few days there we were, a little window opened up in which we were really talking, and we were really looking past all the, the political euphemisms and everything else and talking about how we really felt as Americans. But then just as the political candidates, Bush and Clinton, scampered back out to the suburbs again, so did the rest of the American conscience. I'm afraid the only legacy of those riots is that a lot more people have bought more burglar alarms and more guns.

MR. MacNeil: Lee, is that right?

MS. CULLUM: Oh, I completely agree. You know, we have seen the drastic suburbanization of the country, and Americans have never liked city living. If you remember, Thomas Jefferson did not approve of the city. He didn't like urban aggregations. He thought country squiredom was the answer, and that's what we're seeing in suburbia. I think it's a trend that's going to continue, and I think our cities are in desperate trouble.

MR. MacNeil: Erwin, do you have any hopes that Clinton is going to make a difference in this regard?

MR. KNOLL: Marginal hopes. I do want to say, Robin, because it's almost the end of the year, that I agree with Clarence, as I sometimes do, and with Lee, as I occasionally do, and with Gerry, as I never do, about what each of them just said, about the trouble in our cities and the shameful neglect of the consequences of the Los Angeles riots and what they should have taught us. I have some hope that some of these problems will at least be addressed, but I think the problems are formidable, and I can't draw any comfort from the fact that what happened in Los Angeles in April was almost totally ignored by both the Bush campaign and the Clinton campaign.

MR. MacNeil: How about you, Cynthia, are you hopeful that this is going to be the -- that race relations can actually improve under a Clinton administration?

MS. TUCKER: Well, Robin, I think there were two separate things that we saw in the unfortunate Los Angeles riots. We saw a reaction to crude racism, that which affected poor Rodney King, and all African-Americans and many white Americans responded to that in the same way. We are -- many of us are awfully put off by that kind of very grotesque expression of racism, and I think, yes, race relations can probably improve in the coming year. But we also saw in the wake of the LA riots the desperate poverty of many folk who live in America's inner cities. That is another kind of problem. And I don't know whether there is any real hope for helping them.

MS. CULLUM: I think Cynthia is right. Race relations among the middle classes will improve considerably, and that will not make the slightest difference to the inner cities. That's the tragedy.

MR. MacNeil: Ed.

MR. BAUMEISTER: Well, I think if you compare the upheaval in Los Angeles to the Clarence Thomas/Anita Hill upheaval, which it was, in gender relations, that's had a much longer lasting effect I think. It was, I don't think, as big an upheaval. It goes back to what Gunner Murdall wrote in the 1940s. "This is an American dilemma which we still have not come to grips with no matter what episode, what modern episode succeeds whatever episode of the past." We still as a nation are not willing to come to grips with it. We simply are not.

MR. MacNeil: Clarence, how do you feel about the future of this subject under Clinton?

MR. PAGE: Thank you for giving me a chance to express some optimism as we look ahead to the new year. I think we Americans are always trying to form, to use that old redundancy, a more perfect union. We're trying to get past that, that Gunner Murdall's dilemma, or what W.B. DeBoise even earlier called the B problem of the 20th century and the century had hardly even begun. As we move toward the 21st century, I hope that, well, one thing about Bill Clinton being a baby boomer, being a product of an era that saw the civil rights era, that saw young people say we can make a difference, and now us former young people are getting kind of long on the tooth now, but the young people coming up behind us have attitudes more liberal in these areas than we did, but they need some guidance. I think the Clinton administration right off the bat, what we've seen so far, his cabinet picks, have consciously tried to get a better mix than we have seen in the past without sacrificing merit, without sacrificing quality of talent, and I think he did that. That's a very positive sign. I hope these kind of signals will get us past some of the cynicism of the '80s that said I am all right and now you get yours. Maybe we can start to pull together without some common purpose.

MS. TUCKER: Robin, if I may add a quick note to what Clarence just said about --

MR. MacNeil: Yes, Cynthia.

MS. TUCKER: -- Bill Clinton's cabinet, I do think the symbolism of his cabinet's selection is important, and in saying that, I certainly don't mean to dismiss merit. I think Clinton managed to choose a very capable cabinet, which is also quite diverse. And I think sending that kind of signal to the American people is important because I think it matters what America's leaders say and do. Bill Clinton has the opportunity to use the presidency as the bully pulpit to improve race relations, and I really am very optimistic that he will do that.

MR. MacNeil: Are you optimistic, Gerry, about that?

MR. WARREN: Well, I'm optimistic about his, his opportunity. He has the opportunity to, to make some breakthroughs in race relations beginning with the opportunity to break the cycle of welfare dependence. And the road is open to him now to come up with some real innovations and some real reform in the welfare area, and that would be a big start. I applaud the diversity of his cabinet. It remains to be seen whether they're qualified. It remains to be seen whether it's a capable cabinet, and whether he can handle all the diverse ideas, but the President alone can do a lot to eliminate the cynicism in the minds of the American people about government and how it works. That is his No. 1 challenge, I think, to see to it that government does deliver and delivers in ways that are not onerous to the American people.

MR. MacNeil: Well, I'd like to thank all six of you very much for joining us and to wish you all Happy New Year!

MR. LEHRER: Still to come on the NewsHour tonight, gays in Colorado, and a Roger Rosenblatt essay. FOCUS - COLORADO BOYCOTT

MR. LEHRER: We turn now to that Colorado dispute over gay rights that has divided communities all over the state. Tom Bearden reports.

DEMONSTRATORS: [chanting] Amendment 2, it's got to go.

MR. BEARDEN: It was a call to boycott the whole state of Colorado. Protesters lined up on New York City streets chanting, "No revenue, no rights," as the mayor of Denver arrived for a radio talk show. Their message was blunt: Coloradans must pay for the choice they made on November 3rd, when the state's voters approved Amendment No. 2, a constitutional amendment which bans laws that protect gays and lesbians from discrimination.

PHYLLIS LUTSKY: The people of Colorado need to know that there are repercussions when they pass these kind of hateful amendments.

DEMONSTRATORS: [chanting] We're not going in. We're here. We're queer. We're not going in.

MR. BEARDEN: The national economic boycott has caught fire, and Colorado has already been burned. Since the election, the state has lost millions of dollars from businesses who have cancelled plans to visit the state. The City of Denver alone has suffered 11 million dollars' worth of lost convention business. Even Atlanta, where state law forbids sodomy, announced its intent to do no business in Colorado. The target of the New York demonstration, Denver's Mayor Wellington Webb, says nobody in the state expected such a visceral and widespread reaction.

MAYOR WELLINGTON WEBB, Denver: I don't think that anyone anticipated the reaction of people calling for boycotts with the passage of Two, and I don't think anyone considered the national implications of this being in practically every magazine across the country, on practically every talk show from New York to California and every state in-between.

MR. BEARDEN: The amendment that has attracted all this national attention states that no laws can be enacted which provide gays with protected status, quota preferences, or a claim of discrimination.

KEVIN TEBEDO, Colorado For Family Values: We're not surprised that the National Association of Gay and Lesbian Doctors cancelled in Denver out of San Francisco. Yeah, you know, we kind of expectedthat.

MR. BEARDEN: Kevin Tebedo, who heads Coloradans For Family Values, the group which pushed the measure onto the ballot, says the amendment was not intended to hurt gays. He says it was meant to ensure that gays not be given special privileges.

KEVIN TEBEDO: The people in the state do not want to give homosexuals protected class status. They believe they already have equal rights, and they do, and we've not removed any rights that any Colorado citizen had prior to Amendment 2, and they don't have, they have the same rights they always have had right now. And the voters in Colorado realize that, and realize that it would not be fair to grant this very powerful special interest group protected class status, and that's why they voted for it.

MR. BEARDEN: Pollster Floyd Ciruli says the ballot issue attracted a wide range of voters.

FLOYD CIRULI, Pollster: While there were clearly some voters who are very strongly anti-gay or have strong religious sentiments against homosexuality, there were clearly a lot of voters who were simply saying I don't support the idea of special rights, I am increasingly not supportive of additional affirmative action programs, even though that wasn't involved here, and again there were some people who were just anti-government, who were coming out saying, limit taxes, limit government spending, and limit the growth of government in the area of creating new rights.

MR. BEARDEN: Before the election, all the polls showed the measure would be soundly defeated, but Ciruli thinks many voters didn't want to tell pollsters their true feelings.

FLOYD CIRULI: People gave socially appropriate answers. They were being told by the media and the campaigns that to vote yes for this was to be in favor of discrimination. And people simply don't like to tell pollsters that they're going to take an action that looks like discrimination.

TONY OGDEN, Equality Colorado: [on phone] I think that all of those strategies are going to have to be looked at, you know, together, and in line with your proposal.

MR. BEARDEN: Tony Ogden, who heads a group formed to fight Amendment 2, thinks people were also misled about its true intent, which he says is to deprive homosexuals of their basic civil rights, the right to sue over discrimination.

MR. BEARDEN: Why did 53 percent vote for the amendment?

TONY OGDEN: Because they thought that this was an issue of special rights. And again this is an issue of basic civil rights. No one should be denied a job. No one should be denied housing. No one should be denied a public accommodation solely by virtue of their religion, solely by virtue of their gender, solely by virtue of their sexual orientation. Now, gays, lesbians and bisexuals only do not have access to legal recourse or do not have access to administrative recourse in the event they are discriminated against.

PERSON: [on phone] Good afternoon. Gay and Lesbian Community Service. John, can I help you?

MR. BEARDEN: The amendment had two immediate effects. First it cancelled out laws in three Colorado cities which specifically protected gays. Second, gay activists claim it's led to a threefold increase in hate crimes. Ogden and Sue Anderson, who heads the Gay and Lesbian Crisis Phone Bank, brought their concerns to the police chief.

TONY OGDEN: For many people November 3rd gave them license to be able to do subtle intolerant types of things. Somebody who had a "no on 2" sign on their door for three months prior to the campaign, five days after the campaign their door was torched, and clearly, that was a result of,you know, post Amendment 2 belief that there's license to discriminate.

MR. BEARDEN: Anderson says the amendment has encouraged extreme behavior.

SUE ANDERSON, Director, Gay & Lesbian Community Center: A man called us and said that he had overhead this conversation on a bus and it was a bus route that passes three gay bars, and there were five skinheads on the bus, and one of them said, well, we're going to go out and we're going to get some fagots tonight, and another one responded, yeah, ever since this election, since this law passed, no one's going to stop us. And I think that's sort of the general perception out there among the extremists who actually commit the acts of hate violence.

MR. BEARDEN: Tebedo says the amendment is irrelevant when it comes to hate crimes.

KEVIN TEBEDO: Somebody calling up and harassing you on the telephone was illegal before Amendment 2; it's illegal now. And it's -- someone threatening you was illegal then; it's illegal now. And it makes no difference how you had sex last night.

MR. BEARDEN: While Tebedo may discount the complaints, they have outraged gays across the country. But the boycott is not just a reaction to increased harassment. The boycott has gained such steam because Amendment 2 opponents worry that what succeeds in Colorado could spread.

SPOKESMAN: What we have seen in some other states is that very harsh anti-gay initiatives lose. But what Colorado seems to indicate -- and we are clearly a bellwether state. We're the state that passed term limitation the first time, along with Oklahoma, and now it's practically becoming the wave across the country, and just passed in 14 states. So we're a bellwether. What Colorado seemed to indicate is that if you frame it along the lines of creating special rights, along the lines of creating a new category for affirmative action remedies, you can defeat gay rights.

MR. BEARDEN: In Colorado, the boycott effort is being led by a grassroots group called Boycott Colorado. Organizer Terry Schleder.

TERRY SCHLEDER, Boycott Colorado: Well, a boycott is, sends a real strong signal to the state that discrimination and hatred and bigotry will not tolerate it. When people are outraged, as they are, over the passage of Amendment 2, we're hearing calls, hundreds of people a day that are saying we're not going to spend our money in a state that denies basic civil rights to one group of people. People are also very fearful. If discrimination can occur against gays, lesbians and bisexuals in one state, no minority is safe anywhere. This amendment has implications on all minorities everywhere.

MR. BEARDEN: Denver Mayor Wellington Webb, who strongly opposes the amendment, launched a multi-state tour to fight the boycott. He met with national media and elected officials. He says boycotting Colorado would be as inappropriate as boycotting the South during the early days of the civil rights movement. It also would be a harsh blow to tourism, a major state industry.

MAYOR WELLINGTON WEBB: [Arsenio Hall Show, December 2] What I've been telling other mayors around the country is as opposed to boycotting Colorado, I think you need to ask yourself two questions: One, does your city have an equal protection ordinance protecting gays and lesbians? Only a few do. Los Angeles does, but many other cities in California do not. No. 2, if the wording on the ballot said that you're going to, you don't want gays and lesbians to have special rights, would the people of your state have voted yes or voted no. In Colorado, they voted yes because they were saying they didn't want gays and lesbians to have special rights. And it wasn't special rights; it was equal rights. But the wording was real deceptive.

SPOKESMAN: I feel that we're particularly vulnerable to any boycott that occurs because our particular reliance on the entertainment industry.

MR. BEARDEN: Denver business leaders got together to plot a strategy to top the economic drain.

MAN: The convention department is identifying those groups that are most likely to look at cancelling or cancelling, and each group will have a direct sales call made by the president or the vice president of the convention bureau.

MR. BEARDEN: Much of their attention has been aimed at the arts and film community. Producers of this Ironside episode, a TV program already in the works at the time of the election, said they'll think twice before filming here again. One ABC mini-series that could have brought in $10 million of business decided against filming in Colorado. And well-known performers like Whoopie Goldberg and Joan Rivers have endorsed the protest. Tebedo says a successful boycott would prove his point about gays.

KEVIN TEBEDO: What this campaign has served to do is expose the truth that the homosexual political lobby in this nation is very powerful, very entrenched in the number of segments of our society entrenched in politics, entrenched in the media, in Hollywood, without a doubt that they've penetrated a number of areas. There's nothing wrong with that. There's nothing illegal or bad about, but they've been trying, the homosexuals have been trying to portray themselves as this underprivileged, downtrodden, weak, anemic group of people that need protections under civil rights laws because of their homosexuality.

MR. BEARDEN: Webb sees another lesson.

MAYOR WELLINGTON WEBB: I said to a group of gay rights activists the night of the election -- some of them I said, I don't know why you thought it would be so easy -- these are not temporary struggles. The struggles for human rights and equal rights are lifetime struggles.

MR. BEARDEN: The lesson for Colorado business leaders is that business as usual is not possible in a politicized social climate. Roger Smith of the Denver Convention Bureau.

ROGER SMITH, President, Denver Convention Bureau: There's not a track record anywhere that we can follow. More and more social issues are going to affect the venues chosen by national trade and professional associations. We are the benefactor here of the National Association of OBGYN that's coming in '94. They pulled out of New Orleans because of the strict abortion law in the state of Louisiana. More and more groups are using social issues as a major part of where they go.

MR. BEARDEN: The amendment now is being challenged in Colorado courts by the American Civil Liberties Union which claims the law is unconstitutional because it violates the equal protection clause of the U.S. Constitution. And members in the Colorado legislature have tried to repeal the law. But barring any further action, Colorado's Amendment 2 will officially take effect in January. ESSAY - DEAR MR. PRESIDENT

MR. LEHRER: Finally tonight, essayist Roger Rosenblatt reads some letters to the new President.

ART LINKLETTER: [talking to children] What's a cynic?

LITTLE GIRL: [answering] Where you wash your dishes.

ROGER ROSENBLATT: Whatever happened to those much advertised cute and adorable remarks made by children? With Art Linkletter observing that kids say the darndest things and Jack Barry quoting "From the mouths of babes ofttimes come gems." Bill Clintonmay be wondering about that these days. Since his election in November, Mr. Clinton has been receiving seven thousand to ten thousand letters from citizens every day. Twenty percent of these letters come from children. Some letters are the products of class projects. Some are self-inspired. Almost none of them is cute or adorable. "Dear President Clinton, As we are seeing the economy begin to turn around, we should be sure not to raise interest rates so that this recovery will begin to gather steam and with it create new jobs. These new jobs are badly needed, especially in our inner cities, where people have suffered the most during this recession." "Dear President-elect Clinton, I am a very concerned 12-year-old girl about your stand on abortion. I realize that you are pro- choice and I know that I can't change that. I'm pro-life. I was wondering if you can't get rid of abortion, can you at least lower the percentage of women having abortions?". "Dear President-elect Clinton, We should promote the importance of education. I am constantly hearing about students who do not take school seriously. We, the students, are the future of America. We need to create special programs for city schools and other schools that are hurting." What these letters tell Mr. Clinton is something that people who have been studying children have known for years. Contrary to their reputation for cuteness and adorableness, children can be both sophisticated and hard-nosed in their views, as earnest and informed as a great many grown-ups on matters of policy and national need. "Dear President-elect Clinton, Homelessness is another obstacle to overcome. And we think that it is an imperative problem. Funding should be earmarked for soup kitchens and projects that could renovate boarded-up buildings into low cost housing for the poor and homeless people." "Job training for the homeless would be a good idea too, so that they could earn money and not become homeless in the future." There is a kind of literary sub-genre in which writers express their views of life by addressing letters to children. The letters of Lord Chesterfield to his son. The letters of Ghandi. "Never take a mean advantage of anyone in transaction," Dickens wrote to his son. "Be not made and asked to carry the burden of other men," wrote Walter Raleigh to his boy. Nikola Sako wrote his son, Dante, "Help the weak ones that cry for help. The assumption behind these letters is that children are empty vessels, ready to be filled with the wisdom of the ages or of the aged. The letters Mr. Clinton is receiving are from full vessels and are more down to earth. "Dear President-elect Clinton, another equally important situation is AIDS. Millions of people are dying. Every day people become infected by HIV and many people are still uneducated about sexually transmitted disease. We must put more money into AIDS research and AIDS education." These kids don't fool around. "Dear President-elect Clinton, I hope you are not joking about cleaning the environment. That's what George Bush said just to become President. And what happened was, he did not get re- elected. He got a lot of people angry. You would not want that to happen to you, right?" And they don't go easy on the media either. "Hi, I am 10 years-old. I hope they leave your cat alone. The press is so nosy they will do anything to get a story." That's about as cute and adorable as these letters get. They do offer an interesting way for Bill Clinton to begin the new year. Here in stacks of paper lies not a chorus of sweet sopranos harmonizing, "I'd liketo buy the world a Coke," but serious-minded, if under age, Americans who seem genuinely to believe that problems addressed intelligently will be solved. Kids generally express hope effectively because they symbolize it or because they have less experience with disappointment. In any case, their correspondence here represents the whole country's encouragement, as well as the country's old idea that with a new President, as with a new year, all things are possible. Dear President-elect Clinton, enjoy your mail and Happy New Year! I'm Roger Rosenblatt. RECAP

MR. MacNeil: Again, the major story of this New Year's Eve with Somalia, President Bush completed the first of a two-day visit to the famine-ravaged nation. He met with refugees, relief workers, and U.S. Marines and called Operation Restore Hope an A-1 success. Tomorrow the President visits an orphanage before flying off to Russia to sign a nuclear arms reduction treaty. Good night and Happy New Year, Jim!

MR. LEHRER: Well, good night and Happy New Year, Robert! And we'll see you tomorrow night. Have a great New Year's Eve and New Year's Day! Until then, I'm Jim Lehrer. Thank you and Happy New Year!