Opinion
_ - •
Nebraskan
Editorial Board *
University of Nebraska-Lincoln
Chris Hopfensperger.Editor, 472-1766
Jeremy Fitzpatrick.Opinion Page Editor
Alan Phelps.Managing Editor
Brian Shellito.. • • Cartoonist
Susie Arth. Senior Reporter
Kim Spurlock... Diversions Editor
Sam Kepfield..Columnist
-1 I
Learn a lesson
Candidates should avoid dirty campaigning
A note to the members of PARTY and VOICE:
Before this year’s ASUN campaign turns into nothing
more than a mudslinging brawl, let’s all get a few things
straight.
Dirty campaigning isn’t, “Our party is strong because we have
this and this and this.”
Dirty campaigning is, “Our party has this and this and this.
Their party doesn’t. So, obviously, we’re better.”
Dirty campaigning isn’t concentrating on the solutions to the
problems that face the university.
Dirty campaigning is making an issue out of some minor
detail and trying to create and capitalize on a misunderstanding
between the public and the parties.
Dirty campaigning isn’t that easy to explain. But voters know
it when they see it, and they don’t like it.
It is the voters’ job to determine which party has the best
choices for our student leaders. The voters do this by comparing
the strengths of the platforms and the candidates. The voters
listen — to the candidates, to their friends and to the media —
and learn.
Telling the voters what to think of one’s own group is well
within the expectations of any campaign. But telling the voters
what to think of the competition becomes nothing more than
baseless name-calling.
The weaknesses of the two groups, therefore, are up to outside
sources to determine. It is the best way to ensure an educated
electorate when the system forces the voters to find the truth for
themselves. - - -**** —
But when the candidates try to press their opinions on the
public, it becomes dirty campaigning. If the politicians of the real
world have learned anything in recent years, it is that voters are
fed up with dirty campaigning.
The student senators should lake a lesson.
Misrepresentation
Senators obeyed NR A, not common sense
Nebraska’s state legislators showed last week that they have
more concern for powerful political interests than they do
for the well-being of the children of this state.
The Legislature refused for the second lime on Thursday to
reconsider a bill aimed at preventing the accidental shooting of
children. On a 22-21 vote, our state senators refused to even
debate LB83, known as the child protection act.
It can hardly be argued that the state wouldn’t be served by a
law that would make gun owners guilty of a misdemeanor if a
child were injured, killed or caused property damage with an
unattended firearm. Surely requiring gun owners to be responsible
enough to keep their weapons out of the hands of children isn’t
too much to ask.
But our legislators, showing little leadership and less courage,
wouldn’t even discuss the bill.
It’s not surprising why. The Omaha World-Herald reported
Friday that three National Rifle Association lobbyists — two of
them from Washington, D.C. — worked against the bill last
week.
Obviously the NRA thinks children should be as armed to the
teeth as they think the rest of society should be.
Nebraska’s state senators served other interests than the people
they are supposed to represent this week. The next time a child is
accidentally shot or killed with a firearm, we will know where to
look for those who could have done something about it and
didn’t.
Staff editorial* represent the official policy of the Fall 1992 Daily Nebraskan. Policy is set by
the Daily Nebraskan Editorial Board. Editorials do not necessarily reflect the views of the
university, its employees, the students or the NU Board of Regents. Editorial columns represent
the opinion of the author. The regents publish the Daily Nebraskan. They establish the UNL
Publications Board to supervise the daily production of the paper. According to policy set by
the regents, responsibility for the editorial content of the newspaper lies solely in the hands of
its students.
The Daily Nebraskan welcomes brief letters to the editor from all readers and interested others.
Letters will be selected for publication on the basis of clarity, originality, timeliness and space
available. The Daily Nebraskan retains the right to edit or rejectall material submitted. Readers
also are welcome to submit material as guest opinions. The editor decades whether material
should nan as a guest opinion. Letters and guest opinions sent to the newspaper become the
property of the Daily Nebraskan and cannot be returned. Anonymous submissions will mat be
published. Letters should included the author's name, ytv in school, major and group
affiliation, if any. Requests to withhold names will not be granted. Submit material to the Daily
Nebraskan. 34 Nebraska Union. 1400 R St., Lincoln, Neb 68588-0441
toil
I m
^ ■ __
VOICE
I would like to comment on the
Feb. 26 VOICE article. I think that it
is disappointing that an ASUN presi
dential candidate felt it necessary to
manipulate the press in order to in
crease his exposure. I noticed that the
topic of Keith Benes’ so-called “press
conference” was to discuss issues of a
past debate.
Let me enlighten him that there is
an appropriate time to vent concerns
intnxluced in a debate — it is during
closing arguments. I know that Benes
was the last speaker in closing argu
ments, and he should have taken that
opportunity to express his thoughts
during that time. Maybe the reason he
didn’t do this is because he can’t think
on his feet. Did he need an extra day
to come up with a response? He won’ t
get an extra day at an NU Board of
Regents meeting. I suggest that Benes
stop taking advantage of the press in
order to cover his inadequacies.
John Williams
senior
finance
‘Truth’
I’m writing in response to Biljana
Obrado vic’s article, “Media distorts
Serbian action” (DN, Feb. 25,1993).
First of all. I’d like to say that the
truth is sometimes hard to swallow.
Whether you like it or not, Serbs arc
committing atrocities in Bosnia. Tens
of thousands of civilians have fallen
victim to Serbian guns. Since the war
started (as a result of Serbian aggres
sion) it has been estimated that be
tween 20,000 to 50,000 Bosnian Mus
lim women have been raped. Sorry,
let me correct myself by pointing out
that children as young as 9 years old
are also included. The difference be
tween these rapes and those that have
been committed in other wars is that
the Serbian military has indoctrinated
rape as part of their ethnic cleansing
program.
You may argue that the Muslims
have also committed rapes and atroci
ties — on a lesser scale — and I’ll
accept that. But what I’d like to point
out to you is that the rapes and atroci
ties committed by the Muslims are a
result of backlash in response to what
the Serbian soldiers (especially the
Chetniks) have been doing ever since
this horrific war started. I’m not say
ing that these actions by the Muslims
are justifiable or praiseworthy, but I
can understand why it’s happening.
In your article you also mentioned
of the hardships Serbians in Belgrade
are undergoing because of the inter
national blockade. In addition you
also mentioned that people are hav ing
a difficult time getting jobs. Let me
paint a clearer picture for you of who
is suffering the most. Because of the
embargo the Bosnian Muslims are
short of weapons u> fight with. Maybe
this is one of the reasons why the
Serbians are “celebrating” the em
bargo. At the same lime, while the
Serbs in Belgrade are having a hard
time finding jobs, the Bosnian Mus
lims are fighting for their very exist
ence. Maybe what the Serbs should be
“celebrating” is the fact that they now
have a new ally — winter.
Mahmoud Al-Alawy
senior
agronomy
Brian Shellito/DN
India
Having traveled the length and
breadth of India, we would like to
make a few comments on Mark
Baldridge’s remarks (DN, Feb. 25,
1993). As citizens of India, we do
agree that such a situation (toes exist,
albeit in a few places. To extrapolate
such a situation to the entire country
issacrilegious! At the same time, we
are not ready to agree that the third
world stinks. Does only India repre* •
sent third-world countries or was it
your selection?
Baldridge, did you travel exten
sively in India? If so, it is remarkable
how you fell into the ditches and
smelled feces, and didn’t bump into
the beauty of India. On the other hand,
if you have not seen India in its en
tirely, you are not fit to contribute to
Diversions about a country as diverse
as India. Anyone who travels to an
other country would make an attempt
to know something about the country.
Did you try to know India other than
what the Western media depicts it —
as a land of slums, snake charmers,
tricksters and castcism? Anyone
would call us fools if we just visited
New York and Los Angeles and ste
reotyped the entire United States as a
crime-ridden nation.
Traveling needs a fat purse guy!
So, if you could have afforded a few
more bucks, you could have found
your civilization — a westernized
restaurant with an aromatic toilet. By
the way, a taxi is a “taxi” in India.
What you have shown in the picture is
called something else (if you care to
know). Gelling to know a country is
not as easy as you think. Do not
wallow in shallow waters and try to
write about a vast country .
Nagcndra Hegde
Mysore Jagannatha
graduate students
veterinary and biological sciences
This is with reference to “Sewer
aroma swells in India” (DN, Feb. 25,
1993). A person traveling places needs
to have an open-minded and rational
outlook. India is a country with cul
tural diversity and rich traditional
values developed over thousands of
years. There are numerous monu
ments, gorgeous places and beautiful
temples which speak of the science
and architecture existing in India.
Millions of tourists visiting India
every year are amazed by the scenic
beauties of the Himalayas, the desert
of Rajasthan and the rain forests in
South India. I pity the author, who
having traveled all the way to India,
has devoted his lime solely to sani tary
conditions existing in India. I feel a
ua vel article should project an overall
view of a country. I am surprised to
see the article appear under the topic
International Journey.
Durga Shiva
Lincoln
Limbaugh
With all the talk about Rush
Limbaugh, I decided to find out what
all the fuss was about. Therefore, a
few nights ago, I watched his show on
TV. Wow! I was shocked and dis
mayed by what I saw.
The program consisted of
Limbaugh making very derogatory
statements about others, usually
simple one-liners, all based on dis
torted or non-related facts. In fact,
there was very little substance to the
program at all. It was overly simplis
tic in its message — and very nega
tive.
Although talk radio and TV shows
do serve an important function, in
forming the public and offering a
forum tor debating the issues of the
day, it can also oftentimes be mis
used. The Rush Limbaugh show re
ally offers little, if anything, except
for intolerance, fear and ignorance
about others. How do our communi
ties, how does the world, benefit from
that?
Jim Anderson
Lincoln
