MMiiiiLuiiimiMiiiii(iiiiitii;:.iafatiiniBg(iB
.! i. J
MONDAY, OCTOBER 14, 1968.
Page 2
The Daily Nebraskan
DAILY
1
mmeimtarj
itonals
NEBRASKAN
c
fcd
'tit
r .4
'I
4 t
V
i
4 deaf ear
to dissent
J'm 22 years old and Vm tired.
America has worn me out. I don't be
lieve in God, and I don't believe that
America is the golden center of the
universe. You can get away with not
believing in one of these, but not botli.
Anonymous
in Life magazine
One of the anomalies of this dying year of
disenchantment is the way all the ideas have
become cliches, all the hopes bromides, all the
statements potentially disruptive waiting to be
analyzed for their inflammatory possibilities rather
than for their worth.
TO THOSE IN power, it matters not what
the activists have to say. What matters is how
many people are listening, how great a chance
there is for a confrontation over any particular
issue. The administration, for example, is reading
the Nebraskan not with an eye for the arguments
and problems of disenchanted youth expressed
therein, but rather to search for a theme which
mignt be taken up by enough students to cause
trouble.
In brief, they are not listening.
When that young man told a Life magazine
reporter of his disenchantment, of his weariness,
of his lack of anything to believe in, he was ex
pressing a problem so deep-rooted, so vital to any
understanding of youth as a whole, that it is hard
to see how it could be overlooked.
To the majority of those who are trusted with
guiding this University, as with others, however,
the statement is merely something to be weighed
and measured, valued on a scale of disruptive
potential, and then forgotten.
As with many other statements, the anonymous
youth's speech was an attempt to say, "There's
something wrong here. Nothing makes sense. Why
are things happening the way they are?"
The question will go begging. The fact is that
the power elite, the men involved in keeping the
shackles on youth in order to maintain the status
quo. don't give a damn if the question is ever
answered. The important thing to them is that
they get through the year without having to confront
students eye to eye, without having to explain
this discrepancy or that injustice, without having
to explain on any kind of ideological level what
is wrong with their way of doing things.
It seems that the dissenters have so grown
in numbers that it would no longer be possible
to ignore their ideas. As potential troublemakers,
the dissenters are not being overlooked. As thinkers
with a legitimate problem and something to say,
however, they are being totally ignored.
Jack Todd
1
3
4
5
8
9 0
Inside report . . .
Of a front-runner and a debate
by Rowland Evans
and Robert Novak
EN ROUTE WITH NIXON
Vice President Humphrey's
demand that Richard Nixon
face him in debate has now
surpassed the Vietnam war
and the racial crisis as the
most difficult issue facing the
smoothly efficient Nixon
campaign, with no final Nixon
response in sight.
To nail down his challenge,
Humphrey fund-raisers have
now received a pledge of cold
cash to cover one-half the cost
of a network debate if free
time is unavailable.
WITH NIXON so far in
front that the election seems
to be in the bag, it is natural
he would do everything to
avoid the unknown pitfalls of
a face-to-face confrontation.
Front-runners never want to
debate their opponents.
Thus, Nixon up to now has
taken refuge behind section
315-B of the Communications
Act. This prevents the TV
networks from offering free
time to any presidential con
tenders unless they offer it
to all the minor candidates
too.
Even if Congress does
amend that law third party
nominee George Wallace will
be included, and Nixon says
he will not be a party to giv
ing Wallace exposure on na
tionwide television.
But that excuse is no longer
valid, because of Humphrey's
offer to raise one-half the ap-
With election year 1968 almost in
the bag for Richard Milhouse Nixon,
Hubert Humphrey has thrown one last
issue in his path. Can Nixon success
fully dodge Humphrey's request for a
public debate? To debate or not to
debate, these reporters say, has become
the first solid issue Humphrey lias been
able to develop.
proximately $250,000 to buy
network time and finance the
kind of debate Nixon could
not turn down a Humphrey
Nixon debate with Wallace
exluded. In fact, Humphrey's
eagerness for a Nixon debate
may soon lead him to offer
to finance the entire cost.
We can now report that,
before Humphrey made his
offer to pay a half share of
the debate costs, Minneapolis
grain man Dwayne Andreas,
Humphrey's astute chief fund
raiser, had pledges in his
pocket for $130,000 from two
big contributors enough to
cover Humphrey's share. The
prospect of a dramatic con
frontation and a chance that
it might reverse Humphrey's
fallen fortunes have loosened
pursestrings that otherwise
have stayed tightly shut to
the Democratic presidential
nominee.
Some Republican leaders
have told us that Nixon's
reluctance to accept the
Humphrey challenge is
already beginning to hurt him
politically among rank-and-file
Republican voters. They
worry that, if Nixon continues
to play coy in the face of
Humphrey's harassment on
the debate issue, Humphrey
soon will charge him with
cowardice and make the
debate the central issue of the
campaign.
AT THIS writing, the inner
Nixon strategy team has
made no final decision on how
to handle this. In fact, it had
not even held a full-scale
private strategy session on
the issue.
But within the Nixon camp
there is wide difference of
opinion. Some advisors say
privately that Nixon is now
so confident of himself and
the momentum of his cam
paign that he might suddenly
decide he wants a debate with
Humphrey. But these same
advisors worry that Hum
phrey might get under Nix
on's skin and cause him to
lash out in the old Nixon style
or even lose his temper, as
he did in his famous "last
press conference" following
his defeat in the 19 62
California gubernatorial race.
That could be diastrous for
Nixon.
Other advisors ridicule that
prospect. Nixon, they say, has
complete mastery over his
emotions and would never let
Humphrey get under his skin.
Moreover, Nixon, they say,
does not put Humphrey in the
same class as John F. Ken
nedy, who turned the 1960
debates into his strongest
political asset.
But the Nixon camp knows
that debates are high-risk af
fairs for front-runners. An off
hand remark or a wayward
word could be extremely
dangerous.
Just as risky, however, is
a decision not to debate. The
Nixon camp has read the
record of the decision by
President Eisenhower's
Secretary of Labor, James P.
Mitchell, not to debate his
Democratic challenger in the
19 61 New Jersey
gubernatorial campaign.
Mitchell, regarded as the
front-runner, lost to Richard
Hughes. Hughes is still Gov
ernor. Thus, to debate or not to
debate has become the first
real threat in the Nixon camp
and the first solid issue
Humphrey has been able to
develop.
Cc 1968. Publishers-Hall Synd.
Our Man Hoppe . . .
Sex education:
a new outlook
Once upon a time there was a young lad named
Horatio Alger, who was determined to struggle
and persevere and somehow get himself a good
education. A good sex education.
But the little lad faced many hurdles. The
first was the local school board, which voted 5-4
against showing Horatio any sex education films.
The second was Horatio's parents, who voted 2-0
against allowing Horatio to attend any Adult
Movies.
"ADULT MOVIES," thundered Horatio's father,
"are corrupting the morals of our youth and
destroying our American way of life."
So Horatio was 18 and on his own before lie
saw his first Adult Movie. He didn't, of course,
understand it. But he thrust forth his chin and
vowed to persevere.
For two years, Horatio persevered. He saw
Adult Movies thrice weekly and twice on Saturdays.
"It was a hard struggle," he said proudly on
reaching 20, "but at last I have won myself a
good sex education."
It was then that he met Miss Penelope
Trueheart and fell in love.
"All I desire on this earth," he said, falling
to his knees one night in her apartment, "is to
be the father of your child and spend the rest
of my life as your husband."
"Oh, dearest," said Miss Trueheart ecstatically,
"when will we be married?"
"AS SOON AS we have a child," said Horatio,
drawing on his good sex education. "For we can't
have one afterward, you know. People never do."
"And how do we have a child?" she asked,
blushing modestly.
"There are several ways," said Horatio. "The
easiest. I believe, is for you to smoke a cigarette
on the couch. I will pounce on you. Your hand
will go limp and the cigarette will fall on the
carpet. (We can use an ashtray, I suppose, if
you worry about fire.) And then you will cry."
"I don't smoke," said Miss Trueheart.
"Then we'll have to throw our clothes on the
floor," said Horatio, "though it isn't very tidy.
But please turn up the heat first as we have
to lie under just a sheet and talk. Then I will
go for a drive and you will cry."
"Will you take me in your arms, dearest?"
she asked hesitantly.
"YES," SAID Horatio. "In the shower."
"I don't have a shower," said Miss Trueheart,
close to tears.
"Well, I guess we can skip that," said Horatio
dubiously, as he threw his tie on the floor. "Come,
my love, I can hardly wait."
So they threw their clothes on the floor , gut
under the sheet, talked, and then Horatio dressed
and went for a drive while Miss Trueheart cried.
Larry Grossman ...
University students
have already sold out
- A large number of University students today
hold that it is impossible to remedy the ills of
our society by working within existing structures.
The charge is often heard that a gradute in
industry or government loses his ideals when con
fronted by the conformist pressures of bosses and
fellow workers.
THE SYSTEM is inflexible and forces each
man to adapt or be crushed. Those who accept
the system are sell outs.
The persons who believe these myths overlook
two basic premises. A. Social and economic struc
tures are products of human effort and are as
subject to change as is man..B. Student critics
of the system often display the kind of conformity
in their own lives which they so oppose in persons
who work for the system.
What is the difference between adapting one's,
self to the values of the business world and
tolerating the everyday grind of classes at the
University? Most of us are subjected to daily
ordeals with uninspired and uninspiring professors
who spill out drivel and call it education.
. Rather than challenge or question the profes
sors, we sit in silence. The stale air of the classroom
is rarely disturbed by discussion from students.
Lectures and classes end not with bangs but with
whimpers.
' There is no need for the majority of students,
including those critical of the Establishment, to
say anything more about selling out after gradua
tion. By their attitudes and actions in the classroom,
they have shown their willingness to accept things
as they are.
The University ideally should be a forum of
ideas. In reality it is a combination of a last
childhood fling and a dress rehearsal for the
Chamber of Commerce. Few students temper the
rough edges of their training with education.
UNLESS TODAY'S student is willing to work
for change in the University, and most seem
unwilling to do so, there should be no more criticism
of the Establishment. By a passive acceptance
6f the University as it is, the University student
tuts already sold out.
(QMmM
mmn
Good policies
Dear Editor:
I wish to express my
personal appreciation to the
Daily Nebraskan for its
responsible news and editorial
policies. It has amply
demonstrated that its
responsiblity is not limited to
the campus, but rather ex
tends to all mankind.
Not only does the Daily
Nebraskan give good
coverage of life on the cam
pus, but also it has been in
formative and outspoken on
the many important social
problems that face the nation
today.
Of even greater significance
is the awareness and concern
which it has shown of world
problems. Its Teports of the
thousands of innocent women
and children dying daily in
Biafra from starvation and of
the efforts being made on the
campus to raise funds for
these children are a case in
point.
John A. Anaza
SA's story
re-evaluated
Dear Editor:
The Daily Nebraskan in its
ceaseless endeavor to
manufacture sensational news
out of rather commonplace
and obvious facts has come
out with an expose of Student
Assistants.
Included in the major
"finds" pf this article were
the following: (1) student
assistants are not highly
disciplined police cadres, but
are "individualistic"; (2) 1tis
role of a Student Assstant on
a residence hall floor cannot,
incredibly, be described in a
one-sentence quotable quote
or perhaps even in one
paragraph and is, for the
purpose of an abbreviated
and simplistic interview,
"nebulous"; (3) the primary
tole of a Student Assistant
is "counseling and being a
friend to the student, not the
policework."
IT IS THIS last statement,
made by the author of the
article on page 3 of Wed
nesday's (October 9, 1968)
paper, which is the most in
teresting. Interesting because
it potentially refutes the title
of the expose: "SA: The
Individual Who Doesn't Ex
ist", and because it raises the
disturbing question: if
"counseling and being a
friend to the student" is the
main purpose of the student
assistant why is the main
purpose of the Daily's article
directed at attacking the stu
dent assistant's use of disuse
of his policeman's powers?
Could it be that the Daily3
article has missed the point?
That the Student Assistant is
not primarily a policeman at
all? If that's true, then the
Daily Nebraskan's headline is
grossly misleading, since it
has called Student Assistant's
"invisible men" while failing
to indict or even discuss their
major role in the University
residence hall.
But perhaps a word is in
order about the "Daily's"
treatment of the student
assistant as a policeman. It's
true he may not make a very
good policeman by FBI stan
dards. He has had precious little
training in the field of law
enforcement and, hence, he
relies, as you recount with
great incredulity, heavily
upon his own sense of right
or wrong. But whereas vou
claim that the administration
has not made any effort to
lay down guidelines for Stu
dent Assistants in the field
of alcoholic beverages I would
be forced to disagree with
you.
Indeed, had your Interview
of Cather Hail Student
Assistants proceeded beyond
the quotable quote stage, and
had your zeal for facts been
somewhat higher, yon would
have discovered that the
University has laid down
guidelines, has presented
these guidelines to the Cather
Hall Student Assistants (to
name one specific group) and
has received assurances that
the guidelines will be followed.
Daily Nebraskan
TELEPHONES Editor 7MSS8, News fit-HM. 8ntIW
Subscription rain, arr U pet aemmtcf m or the academic year.
Published Morula? Wednesday Thnrwia and rrtdas dnrlna e 'J1'
exoer' iturinr vacation and exam oerfods by fte students f Bar ,mlr"?
of Nebraka andet the tormdlrtkm at the "Volt !uhromrnlttM m ttiHl'tst
Publications Publication shall be tree Tom eeajnrehip by a HobeommKt.
or ail) perron outtd the iiniverstti. tsemners m "wo w
Member Associated Cotiaxlat' National educational Adiwttdo Santo.
Editorial Staff
Editor JacJt Todd: Managing Editor Ed Iceooitlei News Editor Lrnn GottschaTki
Niehl News Editor Kent Cockson; Ealtmial Past Assistant Molly Murrelli nsMni
Nleht News Editor John Kranda; Sports Editor Mark Ctordon, AjBtisUuit Sport Editor
Randv VorKs Senior Staff Writers- John Dvorak. Urry Fcikbolt, Georse Kaufman,
Julie Morris. Jim Pederseni Junior Staff WHters: Barf Oennis, Tarry Grab. Holly
Rosenberser. Bill Smitberman. Connie Winkler'. Senior Cop- Ediior Joan Waageoeri
Copy Editors: Phyllis Adkisson. Dave Filipi. June Waanoner, Andrea Woods) Photo
graph Chief Dan Ladelyi Photographer Jim Shawi Artiats Brant Skinner and Gail
Piessman.
Business Staff
Business Manager J. L. Schmidt: Bookkeeper Roeer Boy! Production Manarer
John Fleming; National Ad Manager Friti Shoemaker; Busmen Secretary and
Classified Ads Linda Ulrica: Subscription Manager Jan Boatman i Circulation Man
agers Ron Pavelka. Rick Dor an: Salesmen Meg Brown, Joel Darts, Ciena Friaodt,
Itaacy Gullliatt. Dan Looker, Todd Slaughter.
I am not quite as ready
as you are, based on my
personal knowledge of the
student assistant in Cather
Hall, to leap to the conclusion
that the guidelines will be ig
nored. I regret for the sake
of your credibility, that in
"Reader's Digest" fashion
you have relied most heavily
upon anonymous student
assistants in anonymous
dormitories to "prove" what
you wish to prove.
Apparently the "Daily" s
terribly distrubed that some
infractions of dormitory
regulations g o undetected
while others are detected
(and presumably punished). I
would suggest to you that the
only way we could have total
enforcement of state and
federal laws within the
dormitory system would be to
go to a Gestapo-type opera
tion using massive searches,
massive police units, and
massive invasions of student
privacy.
WHILE THIS would result
in consistency and total en
forcement (both of which
goals you implicity endorse)
and would be more
aesthetically pleasing to you
than our present system of
individual judgment based on
University guidelines, I would
suggest that there are few
besides you within the
University system who crave
such a policy.
Failing total enforcement,
the student assistant Li com
pany with residence hall stu
dent government will continue
to enforce regulations with as
much concern as you have
for existing state and federal
laws, and as much concern
as we have for individual
student rights.
Neil Danberg
But, oddly enough, though they faithfully
repeated this routine every night for seven years,
they never did have a child.
With his good sex education, Horatio privately
blamed Miss Trueheart for neither smoking nor
having a shower. But he was too gallant to say
so.
MORAL: Adult Movies may, indeed, destroy
our way of life. And the human race along with
it.
Warren Storms ...
Why we're there
You know it's strange how so many people
:an condemn the United States for its participation
in the Vietnam War when they themselves have
never been confronted with the tragedies that the
South Vietnamese have endured. Any soldier, sailor,
or Marine can tell you why he is over there and
whether or not he believes we should be there.
Yes, ask any G.I. why he's over there and chances
are he'll say that any freedom seeking people on
earth have a right to live free from fear and
terrorism, and that he is proud and glad to be
doing his part not only to help the South
Vietnamese, but to prevent also the prospect of
ever having to fight a land-based war in this coun
try. In this day and age here in the United Staes
we are doing over there? We have an intensive
burned to the ground with all of its inhabitants
killed, and yet this is an everyday occurrence
for the South Vietnamese people. One just has
to see for the first time how the people of South
Vietnam suffer in order to realize the necessitv
of our involvement. If we don't stop communist
aggression here it will spread and the clouds
of World War III will be in the making.
Does one ever stop to think about the good
we are doing over there. We have an intensive
pacification program going on in Vietnam and
the living conditions of the people have improved
tremendously. But we seldom hear of the good
things we are doing, as people would rather believe
we are involved in a useless war of which no
good can come.
But contrary to the opinion of many we are
winning the war in Vietnam, ve are winning
the pacification program and we are winning the
confidence of the people of South Vietnam.
Someday they will be able to stand on their own
and we won't be needed any longer, but until
then we must not lose faith.
As long as armed aggression Is prevalent in
this world of ours we will continue to hear arms,
for the threat of communism Is very real and
it's spreading. We will continue to fight as long
as necessary, but keep in mind that by so doing we
will always be a nation that is free.
A Farmer J&ariM
l(!i''l '"UiHi'JI
i, cXansK frer I'jwAgf-fM' 31 "-7'
. 4 Jlt. A