Editorial
IT'J^lil'V Eric Pfaimer, Editor, 472-1766
^ _ Victoria Ayotle, Managing Editor
ftj m ^ ^ Darcie Wiegert, Associate News Editor
X V 1,1X (X 5^ lv cl X X Diane Brayton, Associate News Editor
_ ... Jana Pedersen, Wire Editor
_ ecaarsrffi
Spend money wisely
Bomber cash better spent on deficit
For two months, U.S. strategic nuclear forces have stood
by uselessly as the conventional buildup has escalated in
the Persian Gulf.
At the same time, the United States and the Soviet Union
have embarked on an unprecedented partnership against an
| upstart aggressor, even going so far as to sign a joint con
1 demnation of Saddam Hussein’s invasion of Kuwait.
Nonetheless, the stealth bomber — an aircraft designed spe
| cifically to deliver nuclear warheads into Soviet airspace
1 guarded by radar — continues to gamer support in Congress.
The Senate on Monday night rejected an amendment 50-44
that would have stopped the B-2 program at the current six
bombers. President Bush wants 75 bombers, at a cost of $865
million each.
Lawmakers could find a better place to use that money. The
■ ieucrai ucucu, pcmapx
| The billions going for the B-2 wouldn’t even be a drop in
|| the bucket that is the S3 trillion national debt. Still, starting the
1 deficit-reduction plan by cutting a useless weapon would make
I sense.
§ The B-2 is a plane without a mission. It is designed to
jg penetrate Soviet airspace with its radar-evading technology, a
I task that was conceived while the Cold War still raged. ,
I But as the Soviet Union continues to explore glasnost under
| President Mikhail Gorbachev, relations between the superpow
| ers continue to thaw. And that makes penetration of Soviet
I airspace a less and less likely scenario.
| Backers of the B-2 say the future of Soviet leadership is
I volatile and not firmly in Gorbachev’s hands. What they fail to (
■ say is that no Soviet president could afford to engage in a
I continuing amis race with the United States, because the Soviet
■ economy is even worse off than that of the United States.
g Unless Congress and the president make wise budget j
1 choices, however, the U.S. economy soon could be in a similar j
1 shambles. i
i The House already has voted to cut the bomber. Because the i
I Senate failed to follow suit, a conference committee is discuss
ing the B-2’s fate. Members ol that committee should consider
a future with a deteriorating economy before they Uxik to the
Cold War past when deciding whether to continue the program. j
Then they might realize that the Cold War 1ms been replaced
by two new conflicts. And those opponents — Iraq and the
deficit — won’t be intimidated by the stealth bomber.
— Kric Planner
for the Daily Nebraskan I
Opininn,
K^Treapek i
DN’s criticism inconsistent
The Daily Nebraskan apparently
has a thing or two to learn about
cultural pluralism.
Lisa Donovan and the rest of the
editorial board did well to decry a
fraternity’s distribution of a T-shirt
that offended Mexican-Amcncans
(Letter to the editor, DN, Oct. 9). The
DN was also right to criticize Phi
Kappa Psi last year for selling a T
shirt that was obviously racist.
Last April, however, the DN sup
ported an administrative decision
allowing Students For Choice to util
ize university property in selling T
shirts that insulted Catholics. The T
siiirts depicted “The Incredibly Shrink
ing Women’s Right to Choose” and
said in addition, “Rated PG, papal
guidance suggested.”
Last week. Students For Choice,
Early Warning! and the Gay/Lesbian
Student Association distributed a flier
encouraging people to picket the
appearance of Cardinal John O’Con
nor. Specifically, the poster asked
people to “Picket die Pope’s Mouth
piece.”
. EkJonna Rayburn, a coordinator
of Students For Choice, said the fliers
are fair game because they bring at
tention to Catholics’ views about
abortion (DN, “Poster is creating
unholy controversy, Oct. 12). If
Rayburn and other pro-choice activ
ists wish to criticize the Catholic
Church for its stand on abortion, that
is certainly their prerogative.
However, such criticism should
refrain from mockingly and conde
scendingly portraying Catholics as
nothing more than a bunch of un
thinking puppets. The pro-choice T
shirts and fliers clearly cross the line
between a fair criticism and an unfair
attack on one’s religion. Such insults
amount to a cultural slut of equal
magnitude to Farmhouse’s uninten
tional mockery of the Mexican cul
ture.
We have yet to see the DN criti
cize the flier, though.
From the DN’s standpoint, a cul
tural slur’s acceptability apparently
depends on which particular culture
is victimized. Thai’s unfortunate.
If the DN is sincere in its hostility
toward cultural bias, then its position
should be consistent.
Joe Luby
junior
history and math
CAN'T 4W TW0\ I
"l pO SOMETHING \
V CONSTRUCTIVE. )
Drinkin’ with the Lincoln cops
Training program shows that impairment comes before legal limit
Bottles of vodka, rum, Seagram’s
7 and amarctlo lined a table.
Mixers and ice were stacked
up and ready to go. So were four
volunteers who took the afternoon
off. A bartender served up the drinks.
“OK, shoot ’em down, guys,” he
said.
No, this wasn’t Duffy ’son a Thurs
day night. Television cameras focused
on two of the volunteers, community
health educators for the state Depart
ment of Health. The only entertain
ment we had was a deck of cards and
our drinks, which kept getting re
filled.
Sip.
We were spending the afternoon
in a back room at Lincoln Police
Department headquarters. The bar
tender doubled as Dave Anderson, an
instructor for the National Law En
forcement Training Center.
The volunteers, Mike, Lisa, Shirley
and I, were guinea pigs in part of a
federal program to standardize sobri
ety tests for drunken driving. Kind of
like Harris Labs with alcohol and no
needles.
i he point ot the drinking session
was not just to have a good time on
hump day. It was to give 23 officers
of the Lincoln and University of
Nebraska-L incoln police departments
and the Lancaster County Sheriffs
Department some field training in
recognising drunken drivers under the
standardized system.
But that’s not to say it wasn’t a
good time.
Swallow.
At first, all four subjects were a
little bit tentative. It’s not every day
that you get to drink in front of the
cops. When they’re mixing the drinks
for you, it makes the situation that
much more absurd.
None of us were told how much wc
were drinking. But it’s not loo hard to
guess when your second 7 and 7-Up is
twice as strong as the first.
“The experienced drinkers, I give
them doubles; the others I mix singles
for,'’ Anderson said.
Gulp.
Lisa must have been getting
doubles.
An officer asked her to count back
wards from 100 to 88.
“100,99,98,97,%,95,94,93,92,
91,90 — 99,98.”
She lost track somewhere. Mike
and I didn’t. We bobbed our heads as
she counted. Then we analyzed our
head-bobbing. Wc were philosophi
cal drinkers. No bar-room brawls here.
I was the lightweight of the group,
putting down “only” eigh* 7 and 7’s
in a little more than an hour, .-isa had
9 1/2 drinks, Shirley 10 1/2. Mike was
the heavyweight — 14 ounces of
alcohol in about an hour and a half.
Chug.
It was time to do some sobriety
checks.
First Anderson repeated the con
trol tests that had been performed
earlier while I was sober. My depth
perception, reaction time and blood
alcohol content were measured.
Eric
Pfanner
The depth perception test lined up
three little Jeeps in a viewfinder. I had
to pick out which one was closest and
which was the farthest away. They
sure bounced around a lot more the
second time ...
Next came reaction time.
I sat facing the simulated gas pedal
and brake. 1 pushed down hard on the
gas. The red light flashed on. I jerked
my right fool off the gas. My left fool
went down hard on the clutch.
Oops. These simulators wercauto
malics. So much for reaction time.
After the imaginary crash, I
stumbled over to the blood alcohol
testing machine.
.067.
The legal intoxication limit in
Nebraska is .100 percent. I was .033
under the legal limit. But I didn’t feel
like I could have driven safely — on
a simulator or on the road.
But that decision was up to the
authorities. The 23 officers divided
into teams of five. They pul each of us
through the senes of standardized tests,
then guessed our BAC and whether
they would arrest us under similar
conditions on the road.
Anderson said the technique is not
100 percent effective. But it’s pretty
close.
I he standardized rules don’t take
the place of observation,or of a breath
lest. An officer still has to have a good
reason to pull someone over on suspi
cion of drunken driving, and still has
to make an arrest before making a
breath test.
Instead of random tests, the new
system gives the officers a step-by
step procedure to follow.
The first group started by taking
my pulse. I was bored so I started
thinking about possible headlines for
my column. How about “Fuzzy na
vels with the fuzz,” or “Drinkm’
DeKuiper’s wid dc cops.” Try “Lin
coln’s finest... 80 proof.” Enough.
Next came a series of eye tests. I
followed a small flashlight up and
down up and down left right left right
and down again now up. Stop Circle
around and around and around and
around now I’m going to touch your
nose touch your nose your nose nose
don’t be surprised. Try not to cross
your eyes — this is the convergence
test.
The eye tests, called nystagmus,
arc the major difference between the
new technique and traditional sobri
ety tests. Supposedly, they are fool
proof.
Anderson said that’s because nys
tagmus measures involuntary jerking
of the eyes that can’t be controlled by
the subject. Experienced drinkers can
outwit some traditional tests, which
focus on body movement, but the
nystagmus test will give mem away.
Could have fooled me. Any of the
tests would have shown that 1 had
been drinking. The question was how
much.
All four groups guessed nghi —
my BAC was below the legal limit
The other group members were not so
fortunate. In fact, they were sloshed.
Their BAC’s ranged from .118 to
.160.
And the nystagmus lest proved to
be accurate. All but one of the groups
guessed right on every one of the
subjects.
Officers had to decide w hether they
would have arrested us. None would
have hauled me in. But my drinking
buddies — all three would have been
standing across from a judge pretty
soon. All but one group would have
arrested all three. The five groups
guessed right then, on 19 of 20 tries.
Thai’s 95 percent accuracy.
Arid that’s the point of the pro
gram: To test more effectively, to
reduce the number of drunken drivers
on the street and ultimately, to cut
down on the number of traffic fatali
ties.
What the program also shows,
though, is that you can be seriously
impaired even when you arc under
the . 10 BAC.
Most volunteers arc surprised they
can drink as much as they did and not
be over the legal limit,” Anderson
.i’ll drink to that.
Wanner u a senior news editorial mJd‘,r I
and the Daily Nebraskan editor tn chief.