_ Editorial
- - --——^
NetJraskan
University of Nebraska-Lincoln
___2
Mike Reilley, Editor, 472-1766
Jeanne Bourne, Editorial Page Editor
Jann Nyffeler, Associate News Editor
Scott Harrah, Night News Editor
Joan Rezac, Copy Desk Chu’f
Linda Hartmann, Wire Editor
Class abuse probed
Athletes must excel in classes, too
The Intercollegiate Ath
letic Committee has
completed an investi
I gation into possible abuses of
summer classes by student-ath
: letes — and the review process
apparently didn’t go down like
clockwork.
The committee will report its
findings to the Faculty Senate
Dec. 8.
The committee is looking at
two classes in particular:
Healthy Lifestyles, a three
credit-hour sophomore-level
course; and a senior-level, inde
pendent-study course dealing
with sports psychology, also
worth three credit hours.
Legendary stories have circu
lated around campus for years
about athletes taking classes
that require no work. But in this
case, the classes appear to be
worthwhile. As football coach
Tom Osborne pointed out, both
classes could benefit athletes
uecause uicy ueai wiui sucn
topics as nutrition and stress
management.
One of the disturbing things
uncovered in the investigation
was the way in which the classes
were publicized. More than 90
percent of the students in both
courses were athletes, so it is
clear that other students were
not informed of the availability
of the classes.
But there also was a lack of
communication within the in
vestigation itselt.
The investigation began in
the summer, but Osborne said
that neither he nor other Ne
braska athletic department offi
cials were aware of the investi
gation until recently.
It seems unlikely that a thor
ough investigation could be
completed without the assis
tance of Osborne and other ath- ;
lctic officials. If the committee
wishes to do a complete investi
gation it should meet with ath- j
letic officials, determine the
problem and then suggest pos
sible solutions.
Athletes dcserve_the chance
to succeed also as students.
There are too many stories of
athletes like Kevin Ross, a bas
ketball player who graduated
from Creighton University and
could barely read.
Two years ago, the NCAA
devised Proposition 48, a rule
that required incoming athletes
to attain certain scores on their
ACT or SAT to be eligible to
play collegiate sports. Schools
that allow athletes to take
“cream-puff’ courses to keep
theireligibility would be defeat
ing the purpose of the rule; that
is, to make sure that athletes
receive a strong education.
The Lincoln Journal-Star
quoted Roger Grooters, the di
rector of academic programs for
the athletic department, as say
ing that a “significant number”
of football players had academic
problems last season. To correct
this problem, the athletic de
partment should increase the
number of academic advisers
for athletes, which it already has
begun to do, and restrict players
who arc having academic
trouble from both practicing and
competing in their sport until
their academic troubles have
been resolved. Taking “easy”
classes is not the answer.
There is no evidence to sug
gest that the courses in question
were set up to help athletes
remain eligible, but if any evi
dence is uncovered by the com
mittee, strong action should be
taken.
FLIGHT
FLIGHTY
I
Conservatives need unity
‘Born again’ support for Robertson could weaken Republicans
/ obertson needs devoted
• • followers.” Thus reads the
AVlead headline on the October
edition of the “UNL Good News: A
Conservative Christian Newsletter.”
The accompanying story addresses
the fact that Pat Robertson could make
quite a decent showing in his bid for
the Republican presidential nomina
tion if everyone in America who iden
tifies with “bom again” Christianity
will get behind his campaign. I have
no doubt that this is true. I also have no
doubt that, for a variety of reasons,
millions of voters who so identify
have little interest in supporting
Robertson for president. I know of at
least two in my house.
James
Sennett
m
Robertson represents the latest and
most ambitious effort of the so-called
“New Religious Right.” Not content
with backing borderline devotees like
Ronald Reagan, these crusaders have
decided that it is time to put one who
is wholly and unswervingly their own
in power. The dream is an admirable
one, fully in keeping with the spirit of
democracy, even if it is unrealistic and
even a bit quixotic. However, there is
good reason to believe that the
Robertson campaign will actually be
detrimental to the goals of the reli
gious right, even while purporting to
represent its finest hour.
This political alliance defies defi
nite description. However, certain
facts are apparent, and they make
postulating a nigh and a low goal of the
movement defensible. It is safe to say
that the new religious right has the
high goal of establishing a govern
ment strongly grounded in a distinc
tive moral outlook, one that is dedi
cated to the traditional values of the
Judeo-Christian heritage. This high
goal also includes a full slate of poli
cies that reflect moderate to extreme
political conservatism. But there is a
low goal, which is to not lose any of
the ground gained during the Reagan
administration.
The alleged “softening” of Sur
geon General C. Everett Koop and a
pending arms control agreement not
withstanding, America is a lot more
the way these people want it to be than
it was before the Reagan years. If the
religious right can’t accomplish its
high goal of putting its own candidate
on Pennsylvania Avenue, they will at
least want to make sure that someone
is elected who will secure the low goal
and continue to move the country —
slowly but surely — toward the high
goal. In short, the primary concern for
these people should be that the Reagan
agenda be maintained.
Well, it’s wakc-up-and-smell-lhc
coffee time. Pat Robertson will not be
the next president of the United Stales.
He will not even be the next Republi
can nominee for president. His cam
paign is more symbolic than serious.
The support he gamers will be surpris
ing (frightening?), but it will not be
decisive.
And here lies a subtle danger.
Robertson’s campaign will be signifi
cant in one very important way. It will
split the Reagan coalition. The reli
gious right was a very important ele
ment of the unified effort that put
Reagan in the White House twice.
While this component is not strong
enough to put a person in all by itself,
it will play a vital role in who is finally
nominated and elected.
Arguably, the one Republican
candidate who could most effectively
carry on the Reagan agenda is Robert
Dole. I think it is beyond doubt that he
could do so better than George Bush.
The “wimp factor” is more than cam- ;
paign rhetoric. Bush does not have the
chutzpah to go toe to toe with Con-1
gress the way Reagan does. Dole I
alone has the political clout, ihe§/
steely-eyed glance and the very subtle I
mean streak that will be required to f
“stay the course.” In many ways Dole
could be considered even more of a
conservative than Reagan — and cer
tainly more than Bush.
OUI IICIC 15 UIC IUU. L/UIC Will IIUI
win the Republican nomination with
out the support of the religious right.
The retreat of this element to its own
special-interest candidate will give
Bush just the edge he needs to secure
the nomination. Barring any scandals,
the wide Republican field will stead
ily narrow to a battle between the two
big boys. If Robertson holds out until
the convention he will sacrifice the
low goal on the altar of the high goal.
He will not be nominated, but neither
will Dole. Bush will be given the nod.
But George Bush is more beatable
in a national election than Dole, and
even if he is elected, he will not be able
to keep the tight reins that Reagan has
established. The conservative tapes
try. so carefully woven over eight
years of charismatic leadership, will
unravel quickly under this man, who
has spent most of his political career in
low-profile positions.
Pat Robertson wants to be presi
dent. Millions of Americans want Pat
Robertson to be president. But the
move is ill-timed and potentially dis
astrous. To paraphrase Inspector
Clouseau, “Patrick, now is not the
time.”
Scnnett la a graduate student In philoso
phy and campus minister with College* a
reer Christian Fellowship.
Letters
Writer missed the best song on the tape
After reading Charles Lieurance’s
review of the Broadside tape, I was
upset that Who is the School?, an
apparently improvisalional band that I
consider more emotional and creative
than some of the tape’s material, was
not even listed as one of the 11 bands
on the tape. Evan Eiscntrager’s per
cussion piece was also unfortunately
omitted from mention.
Mark Krause
freshman
art
Hamilton's defense of abortion selfish
Nanciana Hamilton’s response
(Daily Nebraskan, Oct. 30) to James
Sennett’s column on Jessica McClure
is not the first pro-abortion letter I
have ever read. However, it may be
the most offensively selfish defense of
abortion ever to be printed.
Hamilton’s argument totally ig
nores the rights of the unborn child,
which are also at issue. I fail to see by
any stretch of morality, logic or
simple common sense how one can
place a person’s social or economic
convenience over another’s pre-emi
nent right to life.
Furthermore, I cannot believe that
by carrying a baby to term, it necessar
ily follows that the mother’s “life is
destroyed by any resulting stigma,
ostracism and ridicule.” I would
rather be stigmatized for not aborting
an undesirable pregnancy than for
committing legalized murder. Be
sides, less than 3 percent of abortions
in this country arc performed in cases
of rape, incest or to save the life of the
mother.
If you want a 100 percent effective
form of birth control, Hamilton, I
suggest you and/or your husband have
yourselves fixed. That way all inter
ests involved would be protected. You
need not further fear having your life
style disrupted and no future life
would be threatened with extinction.
It takes a different kind of strength and
determination to keep a baby than the
kind you speak of to destroy it. It is
called unselfish motherly love. Your
own mother evidently had it.
Mark Ludwig
junior
law
Editorial Policy
Editorials do not necessarily re
flect the views of the university, its
employees, the students or the Nil
Board of Regents.
The Daily Nebraskan’s publishers
are the regents, who established the
UNL Publications Board to super
vise the daily production of the
paper. _
According to policy set by the
regents, responsibility for the edi
torial content of the newspaper lies
solely in the hands of its student
editors.__
Letter Policy
The Daily Nebraskan welcomes brief
letters to the editor from all readers
and interested others.
Letters will be selected for publica
tion on the basis of clarity, originality,
timeliness and space available. The
Daily Nebraskan retains the right to
edit ail material submitted.
Letters and guest opinions sent to
the newspaper become property of the
Daily Nebraskan and cannot be returned.
Anonymous submissions will not be
considered for publication. Letters
should Include the author’s name, year
in school, imyor and group affiliation, if
any. Requests to withhold names from
publication will not be granted.
Submit material to the Daily Ne
braskan, 34 Nebraska Union, 1400 R St.,
Lincoln, Neb. 686880148.
