Bush-Gore Debate

* Over the past couple of years Arianna Huffington has evolved into a lyrical satirist whose biting wit is only eclipsed by her bull’s-eye marksmanship. Her Oct. 5 column galvanized in me the generalized uneasiness I have felt since Tuesday’s debate. The sadness, though, is that after the event and the satire, we are left with two candidates, neither of whom appears really desirable for the task at hand. We are faced once again with choosing the one who is less undesirable than the other.

JEFFREY GERSHOFF

Woodland Hills

*

In the debate, Gov. George W. Bush defined an at-risk student as “a kid who couldn’t learn.” Many at-risk students I have worked with were excellent learners. They were classified as being at risk because of poverty, because they move often, because of family drug use or a number of other formal criteria. If the governor’s definition is an indication of what he knows about education, I believe we are all at risk.

WILL OLLIFF

Culver City

*

I listened to a fair amount of post-debate analysis and read through your coverage, but I failed to find any mention of something that Al Gore said that puzzled and disturbed me. He promised, if elected, to protect us from “cultural pollution.” Just what is that and why do I need to be protected from it?

MORT BERNSTEIN

Los Angeles

*

The most memorable line came over and over from Jim Lehrer: “So you two don’t disagree on this issue.” That is why I’m voting for [Libertarian] Harry Browne.

AL CUPERUS

West Covina