PAGE 2
THE DAILY NEBRASKAN
THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 20, 1969
THe march from the inside a community created
by Mike Haymar?
A band of about SO Mad Dogs, Crazies, SDS
Weathermen, and White Panthers gathered below
the CBS color camera. Shouting revolutionary pep
chants, they advanced on the parade marshals
who had linked arms to keep the shouting radicals
from walking through seated peace marchers
awaiting the beginning of the rally.
The marshals, peace marchers with the Job
of preventing violence, held only temporarily. The
revolutionaries pushed Into the crowd, knocked
over coffee, stepped on the seated marchers, and
shouted revolutionary cliches. The crowd countered
the invaders' clenched fist salutes with waving
peace fingers.
Someone began singing, "All we are saying
Is give peace a chance."
Someone else opened a crate of apples and
passed them around to distract from the
disturbance.
The noisy band succeeded neither in gaining
cooperation nor arousing confrontation. They
withdrew into their corners, contenting themselves
with shouting at the television cameras for the
rest of the day.
Although last weekend's activities In
Washington D.C. were both violent and peaceful
everything from a window breaking spree to the
carefully monitored march against death from Arl
ington National Cemetery to the nation's Capitol
the mood was more Woodstock than Chicago. For
many young marchers, their first trip to Washington
became a kind of love-in with the city, with its
citizens who opened their homes, and even with the
police.
The predicted housing problem for the half million
marchers never happened because Washingtonians
opened their homes. A young couple in Maryland
accepted eight Nebraaskans whom they had never
Seen, offered them rooms and fed them meals.
Churches donated their buildings for coordination and
housing centers. One elderly couple waited at the
end of the death march and asked passing youth,
"Do you need a place to stay?"
For many of the marchers, their first demonstra
tion against the war was the march against death
from Arlington to the Capitol. For two days, a con
tinuous, single-file line carried the names of U.S.
war dead and a memorial candle past the Lincoln
Memorial, the White House, and down Pennsylvania
Avenue to the Capitol.
Despite two cloudbursts Thursday afternoon and
a windy 23 degree cold Friday night, the line never
stopped. Along the way, marchers flashed peace signs
to sailors watching from the Navy Building; about
half the sailors returned the sign.
A marcher who had stopped for a light bought
a peace button for a Black policeman at the corner.
The Black man apologized that he couldn't wear it.
His sergeant had asked him to remove another one
that he had been wearing, but he assured the marchers
that hidden beneath his orange reflector he wore
three Moratorium buttons.
For the large march on Saturday, 6000 volunteers
lined the parade route shoulder-to-shoulder to prevent
any outbreak of violence. Soon after the muffled drums
and caskets at the head of the parade reached the
Washington memorial, the site of the rally, a rented
truck drove up and passed out fruit and lemonade.
The endless stream of celebrities at the rally
drew only an occasional response from the large
crowd, mostly because the sound system was inade
quate for the half million listeners. But late in the
afternoon at the same time 5000 protesters wer
running from tear gas at the Justice Department,
"Aquarius" danced at the memorial.
While the cast of "Hair" sang from the platform,
marchers formed dancing, snaking, hand-holding lines.
Five students carrying the letters P-E-A-C-E led a
long running line. Four concentric circles of dancing
lines encircled a laughing couple In a sleeping bag.
Attorney General John N. Mitchell called it a
violent demonstration, and a Michigan paper headlined,
"Marchers on Rampage in Washington."
Meanwhile, half a world away, the government
of which Mitchell is a part maintains a half million
men. They don't dance to "Aquarius."
Nebraskan editorial page
Some see hair
instead of head
"Our campus is being polluted! Yes, fellow
Nebraskans, on this very campus we have a few
(thank God it's only a few) subversives who are
spoiling our lives. These degenerates have committed
crimes against our sensibilities which must not go
unavenged.
For example, they aren't Impressed when we at
tempt to prove our masculinity by laying scratch
In our Mustangs.
They soil our hallowed Nebraska traditions by
removing their mohair sweaters and navy blue
- windbreakers and exchanging them for cheap clothing
'like army shirts and jean jackets. They besmirn the
name of our University by giving up their God-given
apathy and becoming involved in politics.
"" But the thing that really makes me mad is the
long hair. There are even a few who go without
getting a haircut for six months or longer. They
look so dirty that it makes me sick.
"" ' Whenever we see one, me and the boys show
off our ready wit by making clever remarks like,
"Golly, that guy needs a haircut!" or "Gee, Wilber,
look at the damn hippie!"
. lib. When we want to show our girls that we're mea,
we whistle at the long-hairs and then say, "Oh, It's
"boy."
!m v
Sometimes they look so bad that I have to bounce
.. them off the wall a couple of times and knock some
sense into their pinko heads.
They're chicken, too. Not one of them has ever
J done anything bad to me except once. That one actually
told me that I was insecure when I made one of
my witty remarks as he walked by. If he was a
man like me, he'd fight!
To a true-blue American these "people" are
revolting. They are ruining this country and our
University. I came to this University to get an educa
'tion, not to be exposed to a lot of liberal ideas
" "and long-haired communist punks.
" ' Therefore, I appeal to you, my fellow Americans
- and loyal Go Big Red students. Let's make things
. .: the way they were In the 50's.
wit-..
Wear your penny loafers with pride! Drink beer
''til you get sick and be proud of It. Punch all your
...buddies in the shoulder and ask them now much
they "got" the night before. And above all, don't
...listen to what all those damn long-hairs are telling
you.
Mary Pat Fowler
Staff Writer
RFK lives in ideals
Dear Editor:
In reference to the squabble
over the closing of the charity
concession stand by the
Athletic Dept., I would say
that what is needed is a
resolution to Investigate AS UN,
not the Athletic Dept.
What ASUN and supporters
of the resolution do not seem
to realize is the tremendous
amount of money Involved In
fielding athletic teams.
Think of the amount of
money required to transport
50 football players and their
gear to away games. Reduce
this figure to say an average
of 15 participants in each of
the other sports basketball,
baseball, track, swimming,
etc. The cost to the student
were he forced to support this
program would be unbearable.
'That the Athletic Dept. can
bo self-supporting should be a
factor for praise rather than
for Inquisitorial resolutions.
The Athletic Dept. must have
a monopoly on concessions to
help it continue to be self-supporting.
.
-viOthcrwlse student ticket
prices will Inevitably Stave to
be raised. Do the supporters
of the ASUN resolution want
to pay $1540 or more tor a
season football ticket? I do not
Do they want to pay lltt-lj
for aa all-sports ticket? I do
not.
Charity does have its place
though, and I suggest that
those who are so concerned
about charity quit competing
with the Athletic Dept. and
work through the proper
channels by giving more
generously to AUF next time
around. I am sura It could
use greater support.
Mike Butler
Dear Editor:
I was amazed to read
Professor Stock's letter In
which he said that he was
disturbed by the reactions of
a random sample of students
to Nixon's speech. On the con
trary, it is his letter which
should be the source of con
cern, for it revealed fun
damental misconceptions about
' the purpose and process of
college education.
What his letter seems to Im
ply Is that the task of college
teachers is to mould students
to think exactly like
themselves, and that the suc
cess or failure of a teacher
Is to be measured by the ex
tent to which the views of his
students oa political questions
agree or disagree with those
of Professor Stock.
It is obvious that Professor
Stock is Impatient with the
Vietnam debate which, un
fortunately, he is willing to
blame upon his colleagues. But
'perhaps what bothered me
most in his letter is the fact
that he is not willing to credit
us (students) with more
mnturitv and independent
judgment
John A. Zana
CM
Open Forum
Dear Editor:
An open letter in response to
Prof. Edward N. Megay's letter
of Nov. 10 to an anonymous
colleague:
It was heartening to learn
that you are well versed in tie
politics of the era of Socrates if
not in the current university
political system. As 1 look
around I am sure your
anonymous colleague is pleased
to be compared with Socrates,
however unfavorably.
It might have been more in
teresting If you were to relate
the behavior and conduct of
Socrates rather than simply the
"charges" against him. Surely
you are aware that the dif
ference between conduct and
"charge" is often substantial.
This is especially true in the
event the charges are leveled
by the common rabble.
Remember the McCarthy (Joe)
days?
Few of us have the stuff to
become Socrates.
While your anonymous col
league admitted to having been
labeled a troublemaker, your
letter charged him as one.
Might not your disparaging
remarks as to "why" rest en
tirely upon the "charge" rather
than the fact?
I'm surprised that you think
your colleague surprised with
the Internal politicking nt
university staff and mi
ministration. Isn't the in
troductory course in Political
Science required of us all as a
matter of course at the H A.
level? If not, it sliould !e.
The student reporter did a
commendable )oh In his article.
Staff members should not re
quire review of quotes or lu
trepretatlons lu order thai
students cun do their best us
freely as possible. This Is to
remind you that the article is
the reporters', aud further, the
word "whine" is yours not the
reporters'.
Friend Edward. I salute you
for having the guts to make
your caustic remarks openly.
Hopefully you are enough of a
"practical" politician to
reserve your gutty approach
for those already labeled, and
for the lower and non-administrative
ranks.
Rert Evans
Asslstr.nl Professor
Deur Editort
To C. M. Dalrymple. writer
in the "Open Forum" of the
Nov. 13 Daily Nebraskan:
Since "Nixon himself is
ignorant of the basic powers
given the people by the con
stitution ..." I suggest you
point this out to the Supreme
Court, which will then explain
tliis aspect of the Constitution
to " our President. (In
terpretation of the Constitution
is a duty of the Supreme
Court.) Of course there is the
possibility that the Supreme
Court justices are also so
ignorant of the Constitution
that they do not understand the
Constitution as full v as you
do
You imply (he President is
nt fault because ". . . he
chooses to ignore public ap
peals." The fact that a
President does not im
mediately act upon on such
appeals does not necessarily
mean he has not considered
the merits of the appeals. If
a president should heed public
appeals, which should he
heed?
A government whose policies
are Instantaneously formulated
In favor of whomever can
assemble the noisiest or
biggest mob is not a govern
ment I would like to live un
der. You state, "More par
ticipated in the Moratorium
than have ever voted for any
American president." A writer
in the editorial page of the
Nov. 13 Omaha World Hearld
states, ". . . ten times as
many Americans voted for
George Wallace as took part
in the Oct. 15 moratorium."
(I feel that the World-Hearld
dislikes Wallace as much as
it dislikes protesters.) 1 resent
wishful thinking being passed
off as "fact." Could someone
provide some "facts" with
better documentation?
Paul Bondo
Dear Editor:
May I suggest that your
November 12 editorial sup
porting Governor Tiemann's
re-election In 1970 Is
premature? A decision one
-ear prior to the election,
without knowledge of other
possible candidates or even
about Tkmann's platform for
the next four years, does not
reflect thoughtful consideration
of alternatives and con-
sequences. .
Jerry L Petr
random
. Ron Alexander
Today, Nov. 20 .would have been Robert Kennedy's
forty-fourth birthday. Whether he would have
celebrated In the White House or the Senate Office
Building is a question in a pointless debate.
The Young Democrats and workers from the 1968
campaign are presenting a living memorial In which
we hope to remember what Robert Kennedy thought,
what he did, and how he challenged people. The
sole purpose of such a remembrance Is to ask if
Robert Kennedy is alive In his approach and his
goals. And is Robert Kennedy relevant to the 19708?
Robert Kennedy was born a Democrat, and was
born into a rich family. His roots were implanted
in a social system from which his family reaped
benefits in excess of anything most Americans could
imagine. Robert Kennedy had it made from the day
he was born. He was also above average In In
telligence. He had great ambition and vast talents
in organizing campaigns, talents witnessed by his
management of John Kennedy's successful campaign.
Jack Newfield, a Kennedy friend and journalist,
says that RFK was a conflicting, vulnerable man,
yet a tremendous healing force and possibly the only
one for us this century. He says that Kennedy was
the one politician who might have united the black
and white poor into a new majority for change.
Robert Kennedy was a political man. He took
stands on thousands of Issues and used his Influence
and name to get support for them. Robert Kennedy
began to oppose the Vietnam war In Febr. 1968,
at which time he said the only real solution to the
conflict was a coalition government In the South.
He took national television to Appalachia, exposed
the corrupt officials, horrendous conditions, and then
lectured America on its responsibility. He helped create
a community college In Bedford-Stuyvesant. He offered
blacks and poor whites a political voice.
He used his name, his office and his charisma
on those problems he felt needed resolving. Robert
Kennedy doesn't fit any role of popular idol. He
was too political to fill the bill. He spoke against
too many traditions. Institutions and people to remain
unassailable. He had warts and didn't mind their
jelng seen.
What was Robert Kennedy's approach? He was
critical to the point of alienation and beyond. He
was as much as exiled from Lyndon Johnson's ad
ministration. He was anathema to American business,
for he spoke too often about paying for American
poor. He attempted to provide a purpose for Blacks,
youth, and blue collar workers. And from every group
he demanded action and Involvement.
Robert Kennedy believed In America and her In
stitutions. But the change In direction he sought would
have radically chunged those Institutions. He died
before the direction could be changed. Whether or
not he could have made America more couslderate
Is unknowable. Whether he will be relevant to the
70'a is yet to be seen.
W. H. Auden says: "What he was he was: What
he is fated to be depends on us. Remembering his
death, how we choose to live will decide its meaning."
DAILY NEBRASKAN
Sac tlatt pottm pan tl LNkM. n.
IHwmi CtNtw vt-tsM. Mm Winn. ,! VMN.
-"' fn r rw ihwIk r M iw yur.
yw hum ,, mitlm amj turn par.
Mtw mitrou frr-m. NtlMMt Iwwm MhUMm
HfrrCJV
"" ""wtw tKvttv aa in Qui
AMraui Dally Matratkaa
M Nakratka UMM
Vmnrtlly at Mttratka
Lineal n, NrkrtUi mm
titarial It
MM-, (w Kent CtctwM. Kiwi wm
Jim FMtmni NtaM Mm Idllan J. L. itumj. oav itM.M
Wrtlan t Dvarak. tiH SmllnamKm. lara lifi.lHxi (in
Piwtwra-Mwri Dsn iMvty, Jim Daaa, MnH Rnanaara. Mill
malar. hyll. Acuta. " rmJa" " "--
iniiwM llatt
Dli. Jm wilt. It- w
V