William F. Buckley, Jr .
A look at the GOP
NEWSDAY
II
RV'U 1
w
THE UPPERCUTH
MICK MORIARTY, editor
CONNIE WINKLER, managing editor
JOHN DVORAK, news editor
GENE HILLM AN, advertising manager
JAMES HORNER, chairman, publications committee
. I EDITORIAL STAFF
Staff writers: Gary Seacrest, Bill Smitherman, Jim
Pedersen. Steve Strasser, Dave Brink. Marsha Bangert, Carol
Coetschius, Charlie Harpstor, Bart Becker, Mike Wilkins,
Dennis Snyder, Marsha Kahm, Roxanne Rogers, Vicki Pulos,
Ann Pedersen. Sports editor: Jim Johnston. Sports writers:
Warren Obr, Steve Kadel. Photographers: Mike Hayman Gail
Folda. Entertainment editor: Larry Kubert. Literary editor:
Alan Boye. East campus editor: Marlene Timmerman.
Artists: Linda Lake, Greg Scott. Design editor: Jinn i Gray.
Copy editors: Tom Lansworth, Don Russell, Laura Willers.
Night editor: Leo Schleicher. Night news assistant: Rodney
Wortman.
BUSINESS STAFF
Coordinator: Sandra Carter. Salesmen: Steve Yates, Jane
Kidwell, Greg Scott, Barry Pilger, Tom Hafel, Cindy held.
Ken Seven ker. Business assistants: Janice btapieman,
Charlotte Owens.
Telephones: editor: 472-2588, news: 2589. advertising:
2590. Second class postage rates paid at Lincoln, Nebr
Subscription rates are $5 per semester or $8.50 per year.
Published Monday through Friday during the school year
except during vacation and exam periods. Memjw ofthe
Intercollegiate Press, National Educational Avertismg Service,
College Press Service.
The Daily Nebraskan is a student publication, independent
of the University of Nebraska's administration, faculty and
student government v,, iininf.
4
' Address: me uauy ncumsivn..,
3kBJ University of Nebraska, Lincoln, Nebraska 68508.
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 31,
A memorandum by a
prominent conservative is
circulating among his peers. It
tells succinctly and
un sentimentally the thoughts
and dissatisfactions of an
influential group of Americans.
Without associating myself
fully with its analysis or
conclusions, I pass it along as
politically eyecatching:
The split that has emerged
among American conservatives
was bound to do so under the
zigzag Republican
administration. The split first
shows itself over tactics, but
upon examination spills over
into strategy as well.
AMERICAN conservatives in
general are oriented more
towards politics than towards
philosophy. The immediate
issues are political. It is easier
to raise money, to justify your
existance, to do something, if
you are politically oriented. We
could all join in deploring
Lyndon and in urging the GOP
to take a conservative stance..
But something happened on
the way to 1971. America
changed. Haven't you noticed?
The conservative movement,
however, didn't change with it.
We are still wearing the politics
of the early sixties like a
comfortable old shoe.
Meanwhile, they've stolen the
rest of our wardrobe. At this
point I could easily digress into
several chapters on Our
National Plight. But I'll spare
you and simply note in passing
the crime scourage, the
breakdown of morals, the
collapse of the churches, the
attack on the military and on
patriotism, our palsied
response to subversion (yes,
subversion) in our schools, the
hydra-headed menace of the
counter-culture, our fiscal
problems, the media; and
brooding over the whole mess,
our seeming powerlessness to
confront these problems much
less to lick them, is - the man
in the White House.
Here we come to a ticklish
problem. Some sophisticated
ambivalence seems called for,
as befits the tragic human
condition. On the one hand,
we should continue to try to
salvage what we can from the
old politics. Every roadblock
1971.
helps, and this is what can
make politics an honorable
profession. But I think we
deceive ourselves if we pretend
that roadblocks can hold back
a tidal wave. So I believe in
playing the Washington game,
the lobbying game - but never
pretending that this will be
enough.
I THINK our problems are
first spiritual, second cultural,
and only third political. But
the indirect help that politics
can give can be important and
even decisive, if we are willing
to venture out of the shallow
water.
Did you see the article on
the Institute for Policy Studies
in the current Esquire by Garry
Wills? The IPS grew out of that
left wing of the Democratic
Party in the early sixties. A
group of bold, inventive
wreckers set about thinking up
"unthinkable" programs;; and
suddenly their programs
became gospel among the Libs,
and often enough the criteria
dear editor. . .dear editor. . .dear editor. . .dear editor. , .dear editor. , ,dear
editor. . .dear editor. . .dear editor. . .dear editor. , .dear editor. , .dear edi
tor. . .dear editor. . .dear editor. . .dear editor. . .dear editor. . .dear editor
. . .dear editor. . .dear editor. . .dear editor. . .dear editor. . .dear editor. , .
dear editor. . .dear editor. . .dear editor. . .dear editor. . .dear edito
r. . .dear editor. . .dear editor. . .dear editor. . .dear editor. . .dear editor. . .
Voegler's opinions
Dear editor:
This is the first of three
letters I am intending to send
to the Nebraskan during
the course of the campaign. This
one shall deal with PACE. The
second with NSA and the
"People's Peace Treaty", and
the last with the role of ASUN.
I am doing this because I feel
that as a candidate for
President of ASUN the student
body is entitled to know where
I stand. I feel this should be
printed in the student's
newspaper which is accessible
to everyone.
Students ' willhave a choice
on April 7, between two forms
of PACE. Unfortunately,
students will not get the
ultimate choice of whether
they want PACE or not. I see
no logical or moral reasons
why this decision should be
denied them. No doubt ASUN
is afraid of the possibility that
the plan could be voted down.
If this happened, then it would
put them in an embarrassing
position, since they have spent
several hundred dollars
advertising and consistently
have said that student support
for the program was great.
Petitions and endorsements
from organizations may indicate
student support, but they do
not substitute for the ballot
box.
I personally feel that PACE
would not be voted down. A
simple way to run the election
would be thusly: give the
students three choices; the
ASUN plan (A), the Regents
Special Committee (of which I
was a member) plan (B), and
no plan (C). If A plus B is
greater than C, then the one, A
or B, with the most votes is
passed. If C is greater than A
and B, then the matter is
simply and quickly ended.
Certainly you run the risk that
your plan could be defeated. I .
think the risk is worth the
THE DAILY NEBRASKAN
of national policy. These guys
had enough guts and
imagination to be "irrelevant"
- and so were able to carve up
the face of America. While we
plod along ... I get the feeling
that some conservatives would
sooner admit to incest than to
political irrelevance.
Suppose, just suppose, that
we dared to look beyond the
next White House press
conference; that we were
willing to risk leaving the
womb of respectability; that
we entertained venturesome
ideas with minds at least half
open. Would we go into shock?
Would we be willing to explore
a few ideas like these?
WELFARE Let's quit
horsing around. The permanent
denizens of the welfare rolls, as
distinct from the handicapped
and the helpless and the
temporarily unfortunate, are
moral criminals and should be
treated as legal criminals too. If
parents of a child born out of
legitimacy that you would
gain. No more could people say
that the majority of students
are against PACE in any form.
Those for and those against
PACE have an equal
opportunity to rally
supporters. It might even get
people out to vote, which
everyone in ASUN would
benefit from.
At their March meeting, the
Regents amended the ASUN
plan to include some form of
mail refund, in addition to
something like a refund
window. Any form of refund
process is an administrative
hassle, and expensive. Now we
have two refunds with ASUN's
plan. A mail refund means that
checks would have to be used
for payment. They would have
to be channelled thru the
capitol and the state, at the
cost of $.35-$. 50 a check. An
accurate mailing list would
have to be kept up and there
would be extra forms,
envelopes, and postage to
handle. Several extra
employees would have to be
hired by the Bursar's Office
for several weeks to process the
refunds. All of this expense
would come out of the budget
of the Ad ministration, not out
of PACE funds raised. With
tight budgetary problems this
certainly would be a strain.
Perhaps ASUN should agree to
pay for the expense of
administering the program out
of its budget, or at least share
the cost.
The Regents Plan is not
perfect either, but from the
discussions I've had recently
with several administrators, I
think it would be the best plan.
It would be the most
convenient for the individual
student, and easiest for the
Bursar . to handle. I urge all
students to vote for this
alternative.
PACE is admirable in its
basic intent. If this idealism
can be matched with
pragmatism, then the
University can become an
wedlock are unable or
unwilling to care for the child,
the parents should be jailed
and the child should be put in
an institution. For the second
bastard, the parents should be
sterilized. (Here I note
parenthetically the distinction
between punitive sterilization
and eugenic sterilization. The
latter is forbidden by the
natural law, by the Catholic
Church, and I trust by other
churches. Not so the former -though
I have no doubt the
bleeding hearts would be
aghast at the idea.)
Drastic, yes. But does
anyone doubt that our present
system calls for a drastic
remedy? We should never
forget that the cost of welfare
is only secondarily financial. It
breeds a growing underclass
that saps the foundations of
education, morals and
patriotism, that assures an
ever-growing criminal cadre.
Welfare attacks America.
outstanding example to many
other schools who might want
to consider a program like this.
Doug Voegler
Rockets no joke
Dear editor:
The Rocket Grease and
Freedom Party wishes to
counter the claim that they are
running their campaign as a
joke. We are a joke as much as
we consider ASUN a joke.
While our campaign methods
and platform statements may
appear absurd, we urge
students to examine the
context that they appear in.
ASUN exists on the absurd
notion that students have
power. ASUN is conducting
elections in which only a few
students will vote, to illustrate
student power. This is absurd.
The Electoral Commission is
supervising the campaign under
a number of absurd rules.
Other candidates are running
under the absurd premise that
they will give students a voice
in running the University.
This year has aptly
demonstrated that the Regents
and the Administration allow
ASUN to exist as a farce into
which students can funnel their
frustrations, in vain. Even that
great illustrator of what
students can get working
through the system was
imperiously threatened by
Regent's veto.
Thus-ASUN as it exists is
absurd. Campaigning
legitimately is absurd. The
Rocket Grease and Freedom
Party is absurd, but validly so
because it aims to demonstrate
the above through its
absurdity.
We make one serious
statement; if we are elected, we
will do our best to destroy
ASUN as it exists now. What
will replace ASUN? That's up
to the students. Perhaps the
whole idea of student
government is absurd. Well see
what the students want.
Rocket and Co.
PAGE 5