Editorial
Nebraskan
University of Nebraska-Lincoln
Mike Reilley, Editor, 472-1766
Diana Johnson, Editorial Page Editor
Jen Deselms, Managing Editor
Curt Wagner, Associate News Editor
Chris Anderson, Associate News Editor
Joan Rezac, Copy Desk Chief
Joel Carlson, Columnist
Fair impeachment
Arizona Senate ousts ‘guilty’ governor
Inmost cases, it’s pos
sible that the opinion of
the people should
rightly determine the fate of any
lawmaker who has repeatedly of
fended or misled that public.
But in the case of former Ari
zona Gov. Evan Mecham, the
state’s senate was right on target
with its 21-9 decision to oust
Mecham from office.
“Let the people decide,” said
defense attorney Jerris Leonard
in an Associated Press story. Le
onard urged senators to acquit
the man who has offended Jews,
blacks, women and other con
stituents during his reign. He
suggested that the fate of the
governor could be decided in a
recall election.
A recall election isn’t neces
sary in this situation. The people
of Arizona would just as soon
bum Mecham at the stake as did
the witch hunters of Salem.
Mecham barely escaped a ban
from ever holding office in the
slate in a vote that fell three votes
short of a two-thirds majority.
Hundreds of people protested
his very existence in the
governor’s mansion as he re
fused to recognize Martin Luther
King Jr.’s birthday, allegedly
misused $80,(XX) from an inau
gural fund that could have gone
to promote the state and con
cealed $350,000 in campaign
funds. These are only the high
lights of a gubernatorial career
that dances with suspicious use
of funds and lack of respect for
other mankind.
“I’m very happy and relieved.
I think he’s a menace,” said
Barry Gabriel, who carried a sign
reading “Guilty. Guilty. Guilty.”
and was among a number of
protesters and supporters outside
the proceedings.
But Mccham should be con
gratulated for making his place
in history. The last governor to
be impeached Henry
Johnston of Oklahoma in 1929.
Acting Gov. Rose Mofford, a
democrat, declared “the end of
some difficult times in Arizona” j
and urged residents to purge “our
hearts of suspicion and hate.”
“Today, none of us are Repub
licans, none of us are Demo
crats,” Mofford said. “We arc all
Arizonans. Let us go forward
together as Arizonans."
Mccham is one individual
who got caught, one man who
managed to manipulate the vot
ers in his favor during his initial
election. His history of deceit
probably began long before the
gubernatorial campaign. It is dis
gusting that he got as far as he j
did.
Adam and Eve blamed for homosexuality
I wish to address my concern to the
gay epidemic in the country.
I view it as the “sign of the times”
in the prelude to the pre-Antichrist
period. One can argue theology and
psychology on the pro and con of
homosexuality. But to no one’s edifi
cation, because everyone has an opin
ion, however predicated on emo
tional biases.
Homophobia is rampant today
with the AIDS affliction or the so
called “gay plague.” The world, no
doubt, is full of its Paul Camerons and
Jerry Falwells. The modern-day
Scribes and Pharisees as history bears
out the truth of this. Gays arc the
people who are persecuted by the
dominant social order and their self
righteous demagogues.
The gay is merely the reflection of
human nature be it ugly and evil,
beautiful or reverent. Gays, like ev
eryone else bom into the human race,
inherited their nature from Adam and
Eve — first man and woman. And the
contrary. If the rcligious/secular
Pharisees today want to point fingers
they should point at the first man and
woman.
Clearly, the Camerons and Fal
wells overlook the biblical reality that
sin came into the world as the willful
and deliberate disobedience of Adam
and Eve. The selfish act of the hclero
sexual deed has since plagued man
kind to no end. Scripture concludes,
therefore, that the first man and
woman brought sin into the Creation.
To am pi i fy m y poin t a step f urthcr:
Gays did not invent sin. On the con
trary, gays have never claimed to
have originated sin.
The Ten Commandments are di
vine, no one can deny. Many gays
acknowledge the presence of Gold.
God commands, “Thou shalt not
commit adultery,” but heterosexuals
will fully violate this golden rule
daily.
Divorce among straights is astro
nomical by Victorian standards. The
gay issue is not your immediate prob
lem. It is nuclear war, world over
population, disease, civil strife, and
world famine. Gays do not have a
monopoly on righteousness but in my
opinion, neither does the straight
world since Adam and Eve. I will not
even begin to comment on the Swag
gart and Jimmy Bakkcr sex scandals,
but it remains an example of spiritual
wickedness in high places.
Harrel Marmelsteir
Harvard graduate
Alexis Woll
UNL undergraduate
Reader says 25-cent stamp not outrageous
Asa 1981 University of Nebraska
Lincoln graduate and an employee of
the Lincoln post office, I wish to
comment on the cartoon about the 25
cent stamp (Daily Nebraskan, March
28) I wonder how many people are
aware of the fact that we arc fortunate
to have the cheapest postage in the
industrialized world. In Australia a
stamp costs 26.1 cents (when con
verted to U.S. money), 32.6 cents in
Britain, 39.1 cents in France, 45.1
cents in Japan and 48.4 cents in West
Germany. North of the border it costs
36 Canadian cents to send letters that
are delivered only five days a week.
Furthermore, it takes less than 24
hours to deliver more than 90 percent
of the first-class mail we handle.
Ron Feyerhcrm
Lincoln
!!!1!!!sfivfstCAt.
p |i| 1II I! .It fTAnfa
I_—---1
Focus on issues, not on color
Tired, racist platitudes on Jackson s aspirations must cease
The political arena has heard
the cry ever since Jesse
Jackson entered the presi
dential race: “America won’t elect a
black man at this point in time.”
Discussion about Jackson and ra
cism has become common, if not trite.
But people still insist that Jackson is a
guaranteed loser.
Even Mike Royko, with his liberal
leanings, displayed such sentiment
when he posed the following question
in a recent column: “What’s that, you
say? Jackson will be a cinch to lose?
That’s probably true ..
Syndicated columnist Martin Got
tlieb recently wrote: “There are three
explanations for Jackson’s early suc
cess, such as it was: black support was
solid; black turnout was higher than
expected; and the field was
crowded.”
And, hnally, Gail bhechy s con
troversial profile in the January' issue
of Vanity Fair concluded that
Jackson’s candidacy is more of an
attempt to establish personal legiti
macy than a quest for the presidency.
She added that any socially unaccept
able rumors about Jackson won’t hurt
his “natural constituency.”
Meaning blacks, Gail?
Why do we continue to inculcate
the idea that Jackson, as a black man
or an unqualified upstart, has no
chance in November? Maybe he
doesn ’ t deserve the presidency—and
I am in no way endorsing him in this
column — but Jackson at least de
serves the chance to run w ilhout being
bombarded by tired platitudes aimed
at the political futility of his color.
“White Southerners will never
elect a black man — and Jackson
needs the Southern vote to win,”
people say.
Perhaps those who express that
sentiment say so because they would
feel uncomfortable w ith a black man
in the White House.
Others insist that Jackson’s ultra
left views and platform will not woo
conservative America. Jackson be
lieves in raising taxes for the wealthy
and granting anti-discriminatory
rights to homosex uals — two def in ite
strikes against him, critics say. But
what pu/.zles me about such claims is
this: Can any liberal Democrat, black
or white, win over people who voted
for Reagan?
-1-L
-i7T. . V
Jackson’s campaign volunteers
also seem incredulous about him gel
ling the Democratic nomination.
“We thought it might be close, but
we never cxpec ted this kind of blow
out,” Gerald Austin, Jackson’s cam
paign manager, told the Los Angeles
Times after the Michigan primary.
If Jackson continues to do well,
why will we discount his chances?
Because, deep in the country’s
subconscious, Americans think they
know Jackson can’t win. We thought
the same of arch-conservative Pal
Robertson, citing his unpopular tele
vangelist underpinnings.
It is in no way racist to be skeptical
about Jackson’s credentials. We also
do not have to be enthusiastic about
ms piauorm.
But questioning Jackson’s verac
ity on the basis of his race is as point
less as disdaining Robertson because
he was once a televangelist or Gary
Hart because he was unfaithful to his
wife.
There should be no special rules or
hidden agendas set for Jackson. We
do not have to feel like antebellum
plantation owners when we lake an
inventory of what he can and can’t
offer.
If Jackson wants to run, we should
examine his views and track record—
not how bigots will react to him on
election day.
Perhaps that is a cliche conviction,
but it is one bromide that seems to
elude Americans.
i ne punaus aia noi overestimate
Jesse Jackson,” Gottlieb wrote.
“They overestimated his opponents.
They assumed that somebody would
emerge from dwarfdom with a popu
lar, identifiable message. Nobody
has.”
So why do critics find fault in
Jackson’s message? Doesn't George
Bush also have a message? Is
Jackson’s message unpopular be
cause his views are outlandish? And
would we feel the same about a white
candidate with Jackson’s message?
Jackson, like any other candidate,
may be a political wimp. If Demo
crals decide he is, then he will not
make the ticket. So it is lime lor
people to stop pointing their 1 ingers at
potential racist decisions in Novem
ber and evaluate their own biases and
fears.
Harrah is a senior news-editorial and
Knglish major.
unsigned editorials represent of
ficial policy of the spring 1988 Dail)
Nebraskan. Policy is set by the Dail>
Nebraskan Editorial Board. Its mem
bers are Mike Rcillcy, editor; Diam
Johnson, editorial page editor; Joar
Rezac, copy desk editor; Jen Dc
selms, managing editor; Curt Wag
ner, associate news editor; Scott Har
tah, night news editor and Joel
Carlson, columnist.
Editorials do not necessarily re
i fleet the views of the university, its
i employees, the students or the NU
Board of Regents.
The Daily Nebraskan’s publishers
are the regents, who established the
UNLPublications Board tosupervisc
the daily production of the paper.
According to policy set by the
regents, responsibility for the edito
rial content of the newspaper hes
solely in the hands of its student edi
tors.
The Daily Nebraskan welcomes
brief letters to the editor from all
readers and interested others.
Letters will be selected for publi
cation on the basis of clarity, origi
nality, timeliness and space avail
able. The Daily Nebraskan retains
the right to edit all material submit
ted.
Readers also arc welcome to sub
mit material as guest opinions.
Whether material should run as a let
ter or guest opinion, or not run, is left
to the editor’s discretion.
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. Letter
should include the author’s name,
year in school, major and group af
filiation, if any. Requests to withhold
names will not be granted.
Submit material to the Daily Ne
braskan, 34 Nebraska Union, 1400 K
Sl, Lincoln. Neb. 68588-0448.
