HI
1
I
Should we keep
off the grass?
Drugs are definitely here in Lincoln and people are
interested in them.
Many groups have gone to great lengths to prepare
literature and programs condemning the so-called "drug
culture." Most of these have come from responsible groups
whose leaders are still reacting to anti-drug scare tactics
used in the 1930's. They are, for the most part, pointless.
Marijuana, perhaps the mildest drug of the new culture,
is probably the most often attacked. One of the most
common charges is that grass users usually go on to
harder drugs.
No one argues that heroia addiction is a good thing,
but many question the theory that grass leads on to harder
stuff.
Unlike most drugs, marijuana does not build up a
resistance in the body. Indeed, it takes less and less grass
for the experienced user.
Most regular users say it takes only a very small
amount for them to get stoned. This has been verified
by such anti-drug authorities as Dr. Sidney Cohen.
In an ETV interview last spring Cohen said that though
marijuana could be psychologically addictive, there was
no evidence that it led to heroin addiction. Though most
heroin users have used grass first, they have probably
also used milk or pablum or aspirin.
When pressed most drug "authorities," pro or con,
will say there is simply not enough information on marijuana
to determine its effects. Actually, the only thing sure about
marijuana use is that a first offense in Nebraska can
get you seven days.
Another argument is that if marijuana does not lead
to harder drugs then the drug culture does.
However, the psychedelic community generally deplores
the use of hard drugs. Heroin, cocaine and the like are
regarded as degrading by those who consider a psychedelic
experience the ultimate in individuality.
The heroin addict is shunned by the drug culture,
as well as normal society. If anything, the drug culture
guides people away from hard drugs.
But, there are dangers in the culture. LSD and
methedrine, better known as speed, are accepted parts
of the culture. These are dangerous drugs. Many people
don't come back from LSD trips and speeding can burn
out a young body in a short time.
With all drugs there is a need for care in use. This
is often not available to those who use drugs socially.
But, the drug revolution cannot be turned back by
unbacked statements and repressive laws. Prohibition didn't
work and neither will drug repression.
Drug use should not be approached irrationally on the
basis of "It's bad because it's bad." Youth are probably
more turned off by this sort of argument than any other.
The drug scene should not be a source of hysteria
among police and parents. It should be approached
thoughtfully and studiously.
Aldous Huxley saw society heading toward drugs early
in the century. Now, the drug scene is here. It will not
go away no matter how much it is repressed and preached
against.
But, rational Drought and research might produce facts
to modify and accept the culture before ft tears down
the society that bred it.
After all, free choice of safe alternatives has always
been the ideal, though not the practical, American way.
Bill Smitlierman
News Editor
THE NEBRASKAN
Telephones: Editor: 477 15M, Business: 473-230. News: 47MM. Second Cleat
postage paid at Lincoln. Neb,
Subscription rates art U par semester or 14.50 par yaar. Published Monday,
Wednesday, Thursday and Friday during tti school yaar octet during vaca
tions and eam parlods. Member of the Intercelleolate Press. National Educa
tional Advertising Service.
The Nebraskan it a student publication. Independent Of the University of Neb.
raska's administration, faculty and student government.
Addrms: The Nebraskan
M Nebraska Union
University of Nebraska
Lincoln, Nebraska e8i
Idlterlal Staff
Editor: Kellcy Bekert Managing Editor: Connie Winkler Newt Editor: Bill
Smithermant Sports Editors: Jim Johnston and Roger Rlfei Nebraskan Staff
Writers: Gary Seacrest. John Dvorak, Mick Morlerty, Marsha Banoert. Dave.
Brink. Steve Strasser, Pat McTee. Carol Goetschlus. Monte Gerlach. Charles
Harpstert Photooraprwrs: Dan Ladely. Mike Haymani ntertainment Edltort
Fred Elsenhartf Literary Editor: Alan Boyei News Assistant: Andrta
Thompson) Copy Editors: Laura Pertsch. Jim Cray. Warren Obr, Blythe
Ericksont N ght News Editor: Tom Lansworth; Night New Assistant: Leo
Schleicher.
Business Staff
Business Manaoer: Pat DiNatale; Coordinator; Sandra Carter! Subscription
and Classified Ad Manaaert Jan Boatman Salesmen: Greg Scott, I. Jan
Kidweit. J. J. Shields Circulation Managers: Chuck Balduff. Barry Pllger,
John Wuggoner.
PAGE 6
) Cj
I x feel I
by Frank Manklewlc
and Tom Braden
WASHINGTON Looking back now,
it appears to have been the year of
the overkill. Richard Nixon might have
taken a leaf from what is said to be
the forthcoming book of George Wallace
and gone only to those states where
he had a good chance to win. Instead,
he indulged in more than 20. The result:
Angry Democrats will come to
Washington disposed to skip the usual
amenities.
Spiro Agnew, too, indulged in overkill.
In at least 30 of the 37 states he visited
be called respected citizens well-nigh
certain of taking their posts as honored
representatives everything from
radical-liberals to promoters of crime,
violence, drugs and pornography. They
can hardly be expected to return him
the polite respect which we teach our
children should be the due of a Vice
President
Overkill begets overkill. Republican
prognostications of sweeping victories
leading to seven Senate seats led
reporters, including these, to doubts so
grave as to lead in turn to incaution.
"The Republicans will lose seats in
both the Senate and the House," we
predicted on Nov. 1, and we were half
wrong. But the President was more than
half-wrong, and the Vice President a
great deal more wrong than that. Look
ing back, it is hard to find anybody
who was not at least half-wrong, except
the great American people who provide
the ultimate judgment of wrong and
right.
At least they do so in a procedural
sense. But a free election is not, after
all, an end in itself. What matters is
what the people want it to do, and
here it is hard to duck the conclusion
that they want it to do pretty much
what they have been doing.
Take crime, for example. Did the
voters say that the solution for crime
was the no-knock and preventive deten
tion advocated by Mr. Nixon and
overkilled by the rhetoric of Agnew?
Then why did they defeat Sen. Joseph
Tydings (D-Md.) who wrote the bill and
pushed it through?
Or take "permissivists,' one of
Agnew's favorite overkill words. Did the
voters decide they don't want any more
Overtoiling to a draw
"permissivists"? Then why did Califor
nians defeat the man who started the
whole thing, Superintendent of Public
Instruction Max Rafferty who ran as
usual on a platform of being against
"heavy-booted slobs who like to stomp
on old ladies with polio"?
Are they determined as the White
House at one time suggested on a
stronger defense? Or, as Agnew put it,
that they were opposed to radic-Iibs who
thought defense expenditures too high?
Then why did they elect Lowell Weicker
(R-Conn.) who opposed the ABM and
voted for McGovern-Hatfield and whose
election despite his party registration
can hardly be counted as a plus
for the President?
Looking back now, it is clear that
the President's use of the Social Issue
was a flop (witness the defeat of George
Murphy who stood to gain most by
presidential overkill of the incident at
San Jose), but it is equally clear that
the Democrats' use of the economy as
an issue was also overkill. It worked
where unemployment was over 6, as
in Michigan; it did not work where
unemployment was about 4, as in Ohio
and New York.
Looking back, the only thing that
seems to have been proved is that the
famous Southern Strategy is dead, dead
in the Northeast where Republicans
gained and in the mountain states which
Democrats swept, as dead in Georgia
and South Carolina where Mr. Agnew
labored hard as George Wallace is
a'lve in Alabama.
But that, too, is a procedural decision,
having to do with politics and not
with the tougher questions about what
the country wants to do. On those tough
questions the voters ignoring the
overkill came to no decision at all.
Dr. EBb Pocrates
Dear Dr. Schoenfeld:
If a married girl (age 19) wants a tubal
ligation mast she first have had at least
one child? Or can she only obtain this
operation because of Infection or some
other medical reason?
Is it possible to have a spinal
anesthetic? How long must a person be
hospitalized? And finally, what is the ap
proximate cost?
ANSWER: Tubal ligations involve
cutting the fallopian tubes (the passages
between the ovaries and the uterus) and
tying off the severed ends. The result is
usually permanent sterilization: At
tempts to reconnect the fallopian tubes
after such a procedure are rarely suc
cessful. Total hospitalization for a tubal ligation
is is about four days and the cost runs
between $600 and $800. When the surgery
is done following delivery of a baby the
cost is less and only a extra day's stay
in the hospital is necessary. Spinal
anesthetic may be used.
But I doubt if a reputable physician
would do a tubal legation on a 19 year old
girl who had never borne a child. You
have left about 20 potential child bearing
Post-election analysis reveals Ultimate Truths
by ARTHUR HOPPE
The election analyzers have now
analytically analyzed the election results
to explain what they all mean. It is
therefore now time to analyze the elec
tion analyses to explain what they all
mean.
FIRST, WUAT do they mean to Mr.
Nixon?
Here, the analysts have shown con
clusively that the political debts Mr.
Nixon garnered by his Intensive cam
paigning plus the gain of several Senate
scats assure his re-election in 1372.
Then the analysts have shown con
clusively that the enemies Mr. Nixon
made, the divisiveness he created and
the loss of a dozen governorships assure
his defeat in 1972.
Thus we see that Mr. Nixon will now
be returned to the White House in 1972
if he wins the election.
BUT IT IS CLEAR that Mr. Nixon's
Southern Strategy worked In Ohio, New
York and several other Northern
States.
Unfortunately, it didn't work too well
in the South. It didn't work too well
in Illinois either. But that was because
Adlai Stevenson HI is the son of Adlal
Stevenson.
Similarly, the son of Gene Tunney,
the son of Robert Taft, the son of Joseph
P. Kennedy and the son of a Rockefeller
all won. True, in Maryland, the son
of Senator Tydings was beaten. But he
was beaten by the son of Senator
Beall.
THUS THE RESULTS prove a can
didate is fortunte these days if the voters
know his own father.
In several areas, however, victory
went to candidates whose own fathers
the voters didn't know. These unknown
fathers include the fathers of Gowrnor
Reagan, Governor Wallace, Senator Sten
nis and James Buckley.
But they were elected, most analysts
agree, on the strong Conservative tide
that engulfed California, Alabama,
Mississippi and half of Ohio. It didnt
engulf New York, where two Liberals
piled up 60 per cent of the vote over
Conservative James Buckley, who won.
But then he's William Buckley's brother,
which proves something about brothers.
It's unclear what
MEANWHILE, most anlaysts agree,
a strong Liberal tide engulfed California,
Minnesota. Wisconsin and half of Ohio.
The problem in California was that
both tides engulfed the voter. Each
voter. The California voter walked into
the voting booth, the results show, and
voted in a Conservative mood for
Governor, a Liberal mood for Senator,
a Conservative mood for Attorney
General and a Liberal mood for State
Superintendent of Public Instruction.
THIS PROVES what we have all long
felt about moody instability of Calif or-
nians.
So a thoughtful analysis of the State-by-State
analyses explains what they all
mean.
They all mean that the voters, in
a conservatively-liberal or vice versa
mood, want either fresh new faces or
experienced leaders who stressed law
and order or bread and butter issues
to go to Washington and get America
out of Vietnam InunedUUIy or sooner
or later.
THE PEOPLE HAVE SPOKEN. The
mandate is clear. U we are going to
preserve our sanity in these troubled
times, if we are going to preserve our
cherished democratic heritage, if we are
going to preserve our inalienable right
to vote as we please, then we're going
to have to abolish election analyzers.
It's them or us.
years. Once a tubal ligation is performed
it's too late to change your mind.
Dear Dr. Schoenfeld:
Foot yers ago I contracted serum
hepatitis and was hospitalized for a
month. Bed rest and proper diet, etc.
were recommended for at least sis
months following my release. Bat I didn't
follow the advice.
Now especially when I ran around
and get run down I turn yellow.
Sometimes worse than others. Is there
anything I can do about this crummy
color? Have I fooled up my liver:
ANSWER: Serum hepatitis is usually
caused by sharing syrines and needles or
through transfusions of contaminated
blood. The other type of viral hepatitis,
infectious hepatitis, is transmitted
through feces or possibly urine or saliva.
Serum and infectious hepatitis cause an
identical disease state. Symptoms include
nausea, vomiting, fatigue, darkening of
urine, light-colored stools and yellowing
of the eyes and skin. Viral hepatitis
weakens the liver and makes it more
susceptible to further attacks.
Make sure you're under the care of a
physician who gives you periodic
checkups.
Dear Dr. Schoenfeld:
I am a male, age 19, with a height pro
blem. I am only 5'9" and have been for
the past two years. I believe that I should
be taller because the result of the male
adults in my family are much taller.
I heard that male hormone Injections
will Increase the height ef a male in
dividual. Is that true?
ANSWER: Maybe a professional
basketball team would consider that you
have a problem but your height is about
average. Hormones are used experimen
tally to increase height in some cases
though I doubt you would be a candidate.
An endocrinologist could determine
whether you're capable of further growth
by examining x-rays of your arms and
legs.
Last summer I met a German Inventor
who had patented a method of removing
nicotine from tobacco. He couldn't find
one manufacturer interested in the pro
cess. Why? Nicotine is apparently
necessary to cause addition to cigarettes
and the tobacco industry wants to keep
Its customers hooked.
Filters on cigarettes may turn out to be
nothing but a gimmick. A study in the
British Medical Journal of September 19,
1970 reported observations on 38 cigarette
smokers. Some used "high retention
fitters and some "low retention" filters.
Those using "high retention" filters puf
fed their cigarettes more frequently and
thus received nearly the same amount of
nicotine as those using "low retention"
filters.
Dr. Shoenfeld welcomes your letters.
Write to him at 2010 7th Street, Berkeley,
Calif. 94710.
:,
i
f-4
y
H
; '
it
THE NEBRASKAN
FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 13, 1970
FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 13, 1970
THE NEBRASKAN
PAGE 7
r
