Our man hoppe Where have a11 the issues sone?
JlJl by FRANK MANKIEWICZ and TOM around the Vietnam issue as thoug
by ARTHUR HOPPE
Now that Mrs. Onassis is being called a home-wrecker
in the headlines for writing four thank-you notes to a married
gentleman, the flaming sex scandal of the Calvin Coolidge
Administration can no longer be withheld from public scrutiny.
The scandal is well documented in a hitherto-secret letter
found in the rumble seat of a Model A Ford roadster.
It is signed, "Grace (Mrs. Calvin) Coolidge." It is addressed
to Cyrus Hockding, the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Agriculture
who cut a dashing figure at The First Presbyterian Church's
Baked Bean Suppers in Washington during the Coolidge years.
The first hint we have of the scandal appears in the
salutation of the letter: "Dear Mr. Hockding."
The word, "dear," is defined by the dictionary as "highly
esteemed, cherished, loved." And what are the first three words
Mrs. Coolidge addresses to her cherished, loved Mr. Hockding?
"I desire you ..."
Proceeding with guilty haste from this shocking declaration,
Mrs. Coolidge quickly adds, ". . . to know of my gratitude
to you . . ." (Here, in the first two lines, we find Mrs. Coolidge
confessing not only her passionate desires for Mr. Hockding's
future favors, but her gratitude for who-knows-what romantic
interludes in the couple's hidden past.)
Pressing girlishly on, she writes, ". . . for sending me, that
slim volume (Ah! We all know what comes in slim volumes,
don't we?) entitled, "A Statistical Abstract of Fiscal 1924 Maple
Syrup Production in Vermont.' It brought back many pleasant
memories."
(Many pleasant memories of what? We can only speculate.
But let it be remembered that Mrs. Coolidge's intimates in
variably described her as "gay and charming." "She's a real
sex pot," said one, "compared to Cal.")
The letter continues: "Thank you for the inscription in
the fly leaf . . ." (What mad, insane words of love did that
inscription employ? We know not. The book is unfortunately
lost.) ". . . and in return allow me to convey my best wishes
to you." (Her best wishes for what? And how does she plan
to convey them? Ah, love's sweet secrets!)
But by now- she is overwrought with emotion she can
no longer contain. And in her two closing words she reveals
all pledging that she is, in truth, his with all the sincerity
of an impassioned heart. In an outburst of inflamed ardor,
she writes:
"Sincerely Yours."
The only puzzle is how Mrs. Coolidge could have been
so indiscreet. Surely, all public figures know that every private
word they write will be eagerly read by us multitudes sooner
or later.
They can only try to make the best of it. But, never
fear, we'll make the worst of it.
by FRANK MANKIEWICZ and TOM
BRADEN
It is a fashionable cliche in this city
to say that Richard Nixon has pre-empted
the issues, and the Democratic response
to the program set forth in the State of
the Union was so weak as to make this
cliche like all cliches a statement
of surface truth.
"I am particularly pleased to have such
strong presidential support" was Sen. Ed
mund Muskie's response to the President's
statements on the environment. It will not
make a good campaign slogan.
And former National Democratic
Chairman Fred Harris' plea that the
President's welfare reform is not enough
merely focuses attention on the fact that
it was Mr. Nixon who proposed the
reform.
Mr. Nixon has even succeeded in seiz
ing the inflation issue. He never mentions
the word without reference to his
predecessor and leaves the Democrats with
the easy choice of espousing waste and
price controls or shutting up.
Pollution, Vietnam and race are issues
which remain to be seized if only there
is boldness to seize them not matters
on which parties should only jockey for
position.
It is startling that no one rises to
ridicule a President who tells his govern
ment agencies military and civilian
to do something about their own pollution
of air and water in three years. One is
reminded, but not by the Democrats, of
the girl who said "I'll give you just 15
minutes to get your hand off my knee."
For the most part, the Democrats walk
around the Vietnam issue as though it
were say, calendar reform. Yet the
percentage of Americans who want im
mediate withdrawal is 35 per cent and
rising.
It is Vietnam which is a root cause
of inflation. Yet the President concealed
its cost in the budget with no complaints
from the Democrats. Can anyone imagine
the response of Gerald Ford or Melvin
Laird if Lyndon Johnson, had come up
with a budget concealing the cost of the
war?
To bow to the President as the
Democrats have done with their mild re
joinder engineered by former Ambassador
Averell Harriman "Bring home the
troops in 18 months" is another way
of saying that for the next year 3,000
to 5,000 American deaths will be acceptable.
The decision leaves millions of Americans
with no means of political expression on
what they regard as a great moral issue.
Meantime, the problem of race con
fronts Americans with another such issue.
The President and Vice President appeal
to our basest instincts while Democrats
fearing a party split stand mute.
It is strange to reflect upon a party
so bemused by the apparent success of
its opposition that Vice President Agnew's
question, "Would you want to be operated
on by a doctor admitted to school under
a (racial) quota?" is considered smart,
short-term politics.
The nation grew great in a religious
tradition that taught us not to yield to
prejudice but to overcome it and in a
political tradition that faced problems
rather than toyed with them. At least one
political party ought to say so.
RAPPING
DEAR EDITOR:
Occasionally, in journalistic
circles, a pseudo-columnist
decides to launch an attack
without even a few facts on
which to base his opinions.
Congratulations, Mr. Bruce
Cochrane, for you have beaten
everyone to the punch this
year.
In reference to his "Times
Are Changing?" column on
page four. 1 must say that
either Mr. Cochrane was not in
possession of true facts or does
not know how to recognize truo
facts.
His disgruntlement arises
over a bill introduced by me at
the Feb. 17 Council on Student
Life meeting. Mr. Cochrane
bases his entire attack on the
assumption that the measure
was designed to get a certain
fraternity off the hook. He is
wrong.
THE NATURE of the
punishment being considered
against the fraternity prompted
me to urge the CSL to consider
disciplinary measures assessed
groups and organizations at the
University. At the previous
meeting (Feb. 10), the CSL
held a hearing on student
discipline and courts. At that
time, one CSL member sug
gested that fines are an inap
propriate form of punishment,
and indeed may be contrary to
civil law.
As are most bills, my motion
was introduced to open
discussion, on the nature of
punishments assessed at the
University
FURTHER, I was fully
cognizant that no action would
be taken on the motion im
mediately, but that it would be
placed on a future agenda. I
asked for no immediate action;
Instead I expected the question
of discipline of groups of
students to be placed on a
future agenda with the question
of individual discipline.
I also recognized the fact that
IFC action against t h e
fraternity will be decided long
before any decision is made by
CSL. And we do not make
retroactive policy, Mr.
Cochrane.
Further, Mr. Cochrane, I
consulted Vice Chancellor Ross
following the meeting and
agreed with his suggestion that
action should not be taken on a
measure such as mine until the
specific Incident to which Mr.
Cochrane refers Is resolved.
FURTHERMORE, I told the
CSL that I will disqualify
myself from consideration of
the specific Incident If an ap
peal reaches the CSL. I explain
ed my concern with the specific
incident to the CSL to insure
openne3s in any future discus
sion. Now, sir, my realization of
the nature of punishments at
the disposal of University
organizations (and not just
IFC, but Panhel and ASUN and
every frat house on campus)
prompted the motion. If that is
"dishonest", you are full of it.
All legislators, at any level,
deal with matters of im
portance to themselves for
they are the representatives of
their constituents.
It is not my purpose to
"strike a crippling blow at the
Greek system." I stand by my
record of personal and editorial
work (and not just words) to
help the Greek system shake
the vestiges of its past. What
have you done, Mr. Cochrane?
ALSO. MR. COCHRANE, not
only did I support the strong
pledge contract, I actually
helped write the thing. I doubt
that I would try to eliminate it
now.
If my bill is enacted, IFC will
still retain sufficient and ap
propriate disciplinary tools
revocation of the pledge con
tract, for instance.
Finally, the contention In
Cochrane's final paragraph is
the verbalization of a child's
tantrum. I never have
challenged the right of two
thousand men to live with their
system. I am one of those two
thousand. I am not trying to
throttle anything (although
there is at least one person
who, if throttled, might by his
quietness help the Greek
system).
Mr. Cochrane, next time at
least attend a meeting of that
group which you plan to
criticize. And at least find out
one or two facts before
launching your fleet of idiocy
before 18,500 students.
Ed Icenogle
ICE CUBES
ma
10 lb.
Bag
LOWEST PRICES
IN TOWN
AT
DIVIDEND
16th & P St.
Just South
of Campus
mm
Dividend Bonded Gas
WE NEVER CLOSE
FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 20, 1970
THE DAILY NEBRASKAN
PAGE 5