Image provided by: University of Nebraska-Lincoln Libraries, Lincoln, NE
About The daily Nebraskan. ([Lincoln, Neb.) 1901-current | View Entire Issue (March 10, 1992)
Opinion !•—-------1 Priming the pump Bush's actions timed to win voter favor Some states have been getting big breaks from the Bush administration lately. And, by a strange coincidence, these states will have their presidential primaries soon. Since 1977, the automobile industry has been responsible for installing devices in automobiles to reduce the amount of gas fumes released into the atmosphere during car refueling. But the Environmental Protection Agency is expected soon to switch the responsibility to gas station owners, requiring them to install gas pump nozzles that do the same thing. It just so happens that Michigan’s primary is next Tuesday. To help out the struggling natural gas in dustry in the Southwest, Bush has announced regulatory changes en couraging the use of natural gas in cars and electric utilities. Texas has its primary today. To prepare lor Calilor nia’s June primary, Bush had the Interior Depart ment reverse policy and release billions of gallons of federally controlled water for farming in the drought-stricken stale. In an election year, voters’ cars arc filled with promise after promise by candidates with presidential aspira tions. But Bush has the advantage of authority to give the public what it wants. That becomes a useful tool to gain support and hall the decline of Bush’s popularity in recent presidential approval polls. This ability to give voters what they desire is a distinct advantage for incumbents. Whereas challengers only can promise results, incumbents like Bush can accomplish them with just a signature — and it usually turns out that the signatures appear on legislation that will satisfy a large number of voters in politically influential states. This raises the question: Is Bush the president of the United States as a whole, or just the stales with a large number of delegates up for grabs? Can voters in Nebraska, Alaska and other stales with a significantly smaller number of delegates count on special help from the government? Nothing is wrong with Bush using his power to help out troubled industries. But when he wails for an election year to finally act, one must wonder if he is motivated by a concern for the general well-being of the voters, or by a concern that he may be looking for a new line of work next year. -LETTER jHE EDITOR Baldwin shouldn’t get fees paid I would like to know why the ath letic department wants to pay for Baldwin’s medical and legal costs? Do they believe he set a l ine example that athletes all over should try lo emulate? Or do they just feel sorry for him as the “victim” of all of this. Sure. Call him the victim. While you’re at it, call Mother Theresa a Mafia boss and George Bush an under privileged welfare recipient. I just don’t understand why everyone for gets that he was the attacker. He was feeling a little nulso, so he grabbed the nearest human being and tried to squish his pain out of her head. He almost killed her. Almost killed a human being. Oh, in that case, let’s let him out of jail, but not here because people would gel UK) upset. Let’s pul him in Omaha. Let’s just hope that no dogs there need to be walked. Oh, and let’s pay lor all of his expenses, since p<K)r Scoity doesn’t have the money to pay for his little tirade. Her rehabilitation was expensive? Who cares! That’s her responsibility — she was the one who was walking her dog! She was at fault. We need to take care of our poor little Scoity, victim of the hard, cruel world. What a crock. Yvonne A. Sabalka freshman news-editorial -LETTER POLICY-— The Daily Nebraskan welcomes brief letters to the editor from all read ers and interested others. Letters will be selected for publi cation on the basis of clarity .original ity, timeliness and space available. The Daily Nebraskan retains the right to edit or reject all material submitted. Readers also are welcome to sub mit material as guest opinions. Whether material should run as a let ter or guest opinion is left to the edi tor’s discretion. Letters and guest opinions sent to the newspaper become the property of the Daily Nebraskan and cannot be relumed. Anonymous submissions will not be considered for publication. Let ters should include the author’s name, year in school, major and group affiliation, if any. Requests to withhold names will not be granted. Submit material to the Daily Ne braskan, 34 Nebraska Union, 1400 R St., Lincoln, Neb. 68588-0448. i ~ BOKRP ! ^ONRV 'VK f PONT l£T TlS SW? <*)T OF OftR S\SJCT . BRIAN ALLEN ‘Offensensitivity’ bars freedom Screw You! Not a very friendly little phrase, but apparently innocu ous. I often don’t find it forceful or biting enough to convey my thoughts, so I usually go with a related phrase starting with that evil “f-word.” Despite my low estimation of the viicncss of this phrase, it, along with some other choice phrases on a nov elty key chain, were enough to gel a University of Ncbraska-Lincoln cus todian fired for “interfering with the job performance of others” and “bring ing sexually oriented items to the work site.” The fired custodian, Douglas W. Geiger, has filed a lawsuit for rein statement, back pay and lost pension benefits after being fired last July for bringing to work an electronic key chain. At the push of a button, the key chain displayed several phrases or words, including “screw you.” Two supervisors found the key chain offensive and told Geiger not to bring it back to work. Geiger was placed on administrative leave the next day when he told a supervisor he had placed the key chain in his locker before work. Come on. Lei she reasonable here — he was told not to bring the key chain to work again and, in my view, he didn’t. Sure, he brought it to campus again, but he put it in his locker before work, before he clocked in. He couldn’t possibly have been interfering with anyone’s job performance on the second day, when he didn’t bring the key chain “to work.” He only brought it to his locker before work. And as for “sexually oriented items,” that’s kind of a judgment call. While I don’t know what the other phrases on the key chain were, If “screw you" is any indication, it sounds to me as though the key chain was more insulting than “sexually ori ented.” If this precedent of dismissal for sexually oriented materials holds, I suppose any U NL employee could be fired for having condoms in his or her wallet or purse, or birth control pills, or a lingerie catalog, or any of about a million other items that could be in any way construed as having some relation with sexuality. “Work site” is another judgment call. Evidently, an employee’s per If we try to eet rid of everything that any one finds offensive, we mil he lift wjlh a very bland, drab and unstimulating cam pus. not to mention one totally devoid of anv type of freedom of speech or expres sion. sonal locker is considered pari of ihe work site. I wonder how far this “site” ex tends. Are the grounds and parking lots included? If so, I suppose if I were a university employee, I could be fired for having the “Girls of the Big Eight" issue of Playboy maga zine under the scat of my truck. It sounds as though we have a few supervisors, administrators and, in deed, a large portion of the campus suffering from what Opus, in Berke Breathed’s cartoon strip “Bloom County,” termed as “Offensensitiv ity.” I’m sorry, but it is not possible to protect everyone from being offended at all times. I’m sure someone proba bly was offended by Geiger’s key chain. So what. As I am writing this, someone is walking near me with what 1 would consider a “sexually oriented” phrase on a T-shirt. If I had the same hyper sensitive and easily offended altitude that is being displayed by some uni versity officials, I would jump up and demand she be fired instantly on the same grounds as Geiger. The sexually oriented phrase I’m referring lo happens to be a man^ bashing type of phrase that I find somewhat offensive. But I ’m sure not everyone docs, and to expect to be protected from everything I find of fensive would not only be a ridicu lous expectation but would severely limit my awareness, not to mention the rights of others. Arc we going to ban everything anyone linds offensive? I’m often much more offended by vocal liberals, radi cal feminists and professors who as sign too much homework than I ever have been by any key chain. But to ban them all from campus, while resulting in a much belter environ ment for me personally, would not benefit the campus as a whole. Offensivcncss, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder. What I find offensive is not what many other stu dents find offensive. Everyone secs things a little differently. That’s the diversity UNL officials arc continuously trying to obtain. No matter what the subject, someone will find it offensive, but as long as it doesn’t encroach on the rights of others, we just have to live with it. It does people good to be offended once in a while. It gets them thinking and often presents to them new ideas and thoughts. n wc try 10 gci rm oi cvcryming thal anyone finds offensive, we will be left with a very bland, drab and unsiimulaling campus, not to men tion one totally devoid of any type ol freedom of speech or expression. While I have no doubt thal the custodial supervisors had the best ol intentions in the firing of Geiger, they would do well to remember the words of Court Justice Louis Brandcis: ‘‘The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but with out understanding.” University officials, in their zeal to get rid of Geiger and his offensive key chain, may well have created a belter working environment for a few employees. But by setting a prece dent against anything offensive, they have shown their lack of understand ing by undermining their own goals of diversity and toleration. Allen Is a senior mechanical engineering major and a Daily Nebraskan columnist. -EDITORIAL POLICY-— Staff editorials represent the offi cial policy of the Spring 1992 Daily Nebraskan. Policy is set by the Daily Nebraskan Editorial Board. Editorials do not necessarily re flect the views of the university, its employees, the students or the NU Board of Regents. According to policy set by the re gents, responsibility for the editorial content of the newspaper lies solely in the hands of its students.