Liberals spaced out by Sky lab 's advantages
ll is stili fashionable among tin?
radical chic circles of the liberal left to
condemn America's space exploration
program as a wasteful extravagane,
d'vcrtinn both attention and gigantic
sums of money away from pressing
earthly needs. Significantly, however,
many foimer critics of U.S. space
efforts now perceive the Skylab
Program in a more favorable light-and
well they should.
The common consensus is that the
Skylab set ies, a "permanent" orbiting
spar:e station manned intermittently
by three crews of astronauts, is the
most productive program of manned
fhghts yet launched into space. In
sharp contrast to other missions,
Skylab has been an earth-oriented
program from which practical payoffs
may be realised.
j Sophisticated cameras and sensors
! that measure temperature, color, light
I and other variables enable scientists to
i better scrutinize vast global regions.
I Environmentalists are able to monitor
j air and water pollution. Land-use
j problems can be examined. Diseased
crops may be more readily spotted.
Earlier detection of hurricanes and
other natural disasters now is possible.
Skylab-spurred advances in medical
technology are augmenting doctors'
abilities to remedy human ailments.
ohn
vihstnd
different
drummer
Apart from the usefulness of the
Skylab program, it is important to
note the bargain basement price at
which we are benefiting from it. The
current 1974 appropriation for the
space program of $3,046 billion (85
per cent of which goes to Skylab)
amounts to less than one and one half
per cent of the United States' total
annual budget.
This year's funding level for NASA
is the lowest since 1962 and represents
a startling 40 per cent drop from the
exorbitant mid-60s levels of over $5
billion a year.
In Congress, for the first time in
years, there is almost uniform praise
for space efforts. Indeed, such
improbables as Kennedy, Hughes,
Tunney and McGovern lent affirmative
votes to the lopsided 90-5 tally by
which the Senate authorized current
NASA funding.
New Jersey and Virginia were not
the only Republican disappointments
in this month's off-year elections.
Scores of U.S. cities also pave the GOP
something to worry about. While
many Democratic victories could be
traced to solely local issues, they were
far too numerous to be explained
away by the Republicans as mere
coincidence.
The GOP candidate for mayor of
New York City polled the lowest
Republican vote in the city's history
(16 per cent), and his party was left
with only five of 43 city council seats.
Connecticut took no fewer than 32
towns out of GOP control. Supposedly
entrenched Republican officeholders
in Philadelphia were swept out of
office. Minneapolis voters gave control
of their city council to the Democrats
for the first time in memory. The GOP
lost control of Cincinnati's local
government in its sharpest setback in
40 years.
Why did the Democrats do so well?
While local issues and personalities
played their inevitable role,
Watergate and it is painful for me to
admit it cast a pall over the entire
Republican party on election day. The
Democrats were able to get out their
vote. GOP voters either switched
parties or simply stayed home.
And yet, a handful of highly-placed
individuals were responsible for
Watergate, and got the Republican
Party. It will be another tragedy for
the American political system if the
people are unable to discern that very
sl-cii ui vi.li iluiji i.
Letters autx,:,n in the Daily Nebraskan at the editor's
discretion A lei tor's appeal unce is based on its timeliness,
or'gmai'tv. coherence and interest All (otters must be
accompanied by ih wnier's true name, hut may be
submitted ')t publication under a pen name or initials. Use
of such Icrtcs will be determined by the editor. Brevity is
encouraged All letters ,nu stibf'Ht to condensation and
editing.
Big Red head
Dear editor,
I would like to refer your readers to an article in
the Nov. 19 Lincoln Evening Journal. In it, Mike
Keller of the Corn Cobs explained to the members of
thc'Extra Point Club the plans to construct another
UNL' rnaf cot-- -another 'cot tonplck i n' head!
Wei!, that figures; this dad-burned university
performs in "creativity" as poorly as it does in other
areps- crappy!
I'd Mkt: o know why in Bob's name, $1200 to
$1500 is spent on a head for a mascot? Especially
when no one knows what value the head has as a
mascot. Why don't we name the football and other
athletic squads the University of Nebraska Heads?
If the Colorado Buffaloes can have Ralphie, who
's a buffalo, how come the Cornhuskers get stuck
will i a cottorpickin' head?!
John Johnson
"lAf crHe.cs wallow in vJATEBGArns . . .
PWIPfvir NIXOM, JOLV, 1973
1 ,3
A
7 Q
Health aide thanks
Ui'UI fllll'il,
On lich.i'f "I the health aides ol Cathei Pound
Hi :,kIi in I'-'IK, I woul'l like to sinceiely thank you
,'ni your c'm;ci ,k" of out recent "Beyond
Coiict : ii ion" symposium.
I 1 eel it it, veiy important that people realizo the
iiiti '(i.)i p.'i! ihe health aides play in programming
,ind n ii input tanily, with the overall welfare of
ht.jl.li i.M.il. id tin1 University. Student response to
urn .;(! piogiam and the appreciation of
d.ty 10 d,.y (umIiIi aide responsibilities has been
,,,,1 ,,,,,,, .y ('IH.Oll,l'in(.
The Cather-Pound health aides appreciate your
support and hope to continue as an important part of
the university community.
Randall L. Linton
Health Aide Coordinator
Tke old SKf.LL rtjp all, -me ornee ol cMfcrti6) &am
Myopic topic
Dear editor,
With newsprint in short supply, I can think of few
things less necessary than a special supplement on
fashion. I realize that reporting cannot and should
not be limited to relevant political and social issues,
but the world of fashion is too superfluous for a small
newspaper to bother with.
A little investigative reporting into the nature of
the fashion industry, how it operates, who it sells to,
how much influence it really has, would have been a
far more interesting journalistic venture. Surely the
Daily Nebraskan can leave tawdry publicising of
expensive clothes to Vogue and Esquire.
Paul L. Riedesel
Fashion gripe
Dear editor,
The special fashion edition (Daily Nebraskan,
Nov. 13) brought to mind a skeptical realization.
Noticing the greater amount of space was devoted to
advertising and speculating on the revenue the issue
obtained, I wonder if the Daily Nebraskan is guilty of
prostituting its format.
This is not to say the issue was of little interest to
many students, but rather that the format (being
representative of the student body), should be
oriented towards the purpose of that body, not the
glorification of Lincoln's fashion resources.
Thomas Spelts
Frills or function?
Dear editor,
My student days at the University of Nebraska are
behind me by about 25 years. Therefore, I have
refrained from commenting on the articles in the
Daily Nebraskan which I have disagreed with, feeling
that my opinions would not be of interest to you,
any of your associates or predecessors.
But finally, I've seen an editorial (Daily
Nebraskan, Nov. 14) which riled me up and provoked
me to comment, feeling that my background warrants
this.
daily nebraskan
I am the son of a one-time architect, a man who
supervised (not designed) the construction of a
building in Lincoln which I feel far su; passes the
beauty of any building on the UNL campus.
Back when I was in my early 20s, I was at the
campuses of the University of California at Berkeley,
the University of Texas at Austin, and Lousiana State
University at Baton Rouge.
Keeping this background in mind, i have to agree
with you; this campus is not emotionally-inspiring
along the line of "beauty." But I feat you fail to
comprehend that the buildings of any university
which has lasted over 50 years aie certain to be a
conglomerate of architectural styles. I have seen such
on the out-of-state campuses I mentioned.
With population expansions over these 50 years,
each campus's buildings are bound to be constructed
at diffeient times, designed by diffeient architects.
Gi anted, Oldfather Hall is not an atti active
building. I feel that you have failed, again, to
recognize an important fact: state universities are
dependent upon building appropriations from
respective state legislatures. I wish you could
understand that many state legislatures will not
appropriate money for a building whose chief design
is frills, rather than function.
Further, I will agree that the juxtaposition of the
newer Administration Bldg. with the older Teachers
College Bldg. is not really "attractive."
But you mentioned Love Library, disappr oving its
intended addition. Obviously, you are unaware of the
years it has taken to secure from the Legislature the
long-needed funds for expansion of that building.
"jkCX, YOG WOULPN'f ReC06WJZE-Tfl PlACf NOvO..
V 'kl , 3- II III I
Wfl 111 Jl
-ifi 1 1 ;l:
lillllfflrllllMlllTlilflllilllllfO?!"
hi I,
-l ira i fri
H 1 "' H !r
I', WSBHA ,
Further, you call this a "mediocre university."
Then what's keeping you here? If you'ie so
dissatisfied with conditions here, why don't you
leave?
Lastly, in your editorial, you appealed to put a lot
of faith in a newly created position of physical plant
coordinator.
I have to laugh at the allegation that any one' man
will even Ix; here long enough to upset (or even
influence) appieciably the "pattern" of variation of
architectural styles on this or any other
long-establish. id university campus.
You have the audacity to say Frank Lloyd Wright
would "turn over in his grave." I say my father and
many other architects would turn over in annoy. nice
at your obvious lack of knowledge and perception of
the entire situation.
Bei t Lorubribei 1 y
pa (jo 5
VV ( '( !' 1'
"(J.iy, Movemtmr 28, 1973
