Image provided by: University of Nebraska-Lincoln Libraries, Lincoln, NE
About The daily Nebraskan. ([Lincoln, Neb.) 1901-current | View Entire Issue (April 5, 1993)
■ Nebraskan Monday, Aprils, 1993 m_^■Ri 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 Showing support United States should provide Russia aid Despite the desperate state of the domestic economy, President Girtton is making a wise investment by deciding to offer Russia a generous aid package. Ginton recognizes that the United States should do what it can to help the suffering people of Russia as the country struggles mrougn us iransiuon 10 democracy. The $1 billion aid package he offered Russia at this weekend’s summit in Canada is a fitting gesture to help feed the starving people in Russia. But the Clinton administration admits that the package is much more than a humanitarian gesture. It is also an investment in the future of Russian President Boris Yeltsin, who has struggled recently with the hard-line Communists in the Russian Parliament. The United States should do whatever it can to support Yeltsin, his fledgling democracy and the other nations emerging from the former Soviet Union. For years, the United Stales has tried to push its democratic domino on the Soviet bloc. Now i that the first chips have started 1 to fall, the president should do what he can to continue that momentum. Equally important are the savings that sharing the world with another democratic superpower would bring to both countries. Not having to worry about protecting the United States from a huge enemy will allow the presidents of both countries to concentrate on domestic ills. It will also guarantee that the money the government does spend is not wasted. A large humanitarian investment now could save billions of dollars in defense spending in years to come. But the results of a USA Today/CNN/Gallup Poll show Ginton may have a much more difficult time convincing Americans that the aid plan — which will also cover the Ukraine and other parts of the former Soviet Union — is a worthwhile venture. The survey found 80 percent of Americans opposed increased aid to Russia; 56 percent doubt that supporting Russian democracy would reduce U.S. military spending; and 55 percent said additional funds would not help Russia move toward democracy. The aid package has a few less obvious benefits as well. The plan Ginton proposed will give the new president a good opportunity to gain experience in foreign relations. It will be the president’s first major test of foreign-policy ability, an area of inexperience that former President Bush pressed during the election. Continuing support for the move toward democracy will also help relations with the new nations. That movement was immediately obvious in the focus of this weekend’s summit. For the first time since the U.S.-Soviet summits began in 1959, the leaders of the two nations were able to sit down and concentrate on something other than nuclear weapons. SulT editorials represent the official policy of the Spring 1993 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 orthe NU Board of Regents. Editorial columns represent the opinion of the author. The regenu 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 iu 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 Nebraska) retains the right to edit or reject all material submitted. Readers also are welcome to submit material as guest opinions. The editor decides whether material should run 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 not be published. Letters should included 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 Nebraskan, 34 Nebraska Union, 1400 R St., Lincoln, Neb. 68588-0448. 'MtU. WU-LO E.ORW. ... -G£>un,noe UjOR terr*^ v^CAJNEEP M EtlRK 6W» W*»J -- 'MElCOWE. <d -1 I-• ‘Fools’ I would like to express my opinion on your April Fool’sexlra in the Daily Nebraskan. I think you can take out the April and call yourselves fools. I’m not going to get into any specifics, but some of your humor did not belong in a campus newspaper, rather it belonged in a pornography magazine. I’m sure you thought it was all in fun, but I feel it was very tasteless. I guess this is what I have grown to expect from the DN after other tasteless articles and pictures. I probably would not have thought twice about it and just thrown the paper away as usual, but April 1 -2 was the stale Future Farmers of America convention. Thousands of high school kids from around the state were on campus during this time and I’m sure many of them had extra lime on their hands to read the DN. I do not think too many teachers or parents from around the state really appreciate your humor, either. I think you need to get your act together. David M. Fiala senior agribusiness Parody The “parody” of the Daily Nebraskan (DH, April 1, 1993) was the most tasteless, crude, lewd, scatological, testosterophilic, misogynistic, sophomoric, frcshmoric, hctcronormal, specicsist assemblage of drivel I have ever read. Uh, you gonna publish another one real soon? Henry Eugene Brass Lincoln Clinton God bless Bill Clinton! At last we have a president who dares to dip into the pockets of the rich capitalists who pull the strings of our politicians. Not only must we lax the rich heavily but we the people must stop our sheep-like attitudes and cease the tolerance of soc iall y acceptable whi te collar crime. Wc must quit allowing landlords to steal deposits from the poor, as well as make insurance companies pay on claims instead of forcing those with valid claims to fight a losing battle in court against their well-paid (and therefore more represented and influential) lawyers. We must prevent corporations from polluting our en vironmen t and gelling us involved in wars. Defense contractors must be stopped from bui Iding weapons of mass destruction in the guise of providing American jobs. We must stop the filthy rich, corporate farmers from wiping out the family farm. Cigarettes and booze companies must be held accountable for literally pushing their legal, socially acceptable drugs. The list goes on and on. Paul Koester senior agronomy Opinions As I read Gary Young’s column on the nature of contemporary politics (DN, March 29,1993), I was struck by the unique perspective he presents. Although Young does raise some interesting points, his column firovokes me to point out the imitations of his views of American culture toward the political process. I hope that Young, both as a journalist and and as a law student, recognizes that the heart of our political process lies in the virtue upon which that process is built: freedom of expression. As much as any of us would rather have it, in order to assure that our own voices arc heard in the political arena, we have to be willing to allow the voice of opposition to be heard. Of course, this freedom is conditional, but more on that later. Despite what Young may believe, 1 truly doubt that the columns and cartoons of other journalists arc swaying America from religion. Religion in general, and Christianity in particular, have a firm grasp on our society and our culture. For better of for worse, religion has a role in our country. Young points to the murder of Dr. David Gunn and the bizarre and rather stupid assertion of New York Times columnist Anthony Lewis that the murder reflected the mainstream anti abortion movement. He also recognizes the equal I y stupid opin ions of leaders of Operation Rescue and others in the anti-abortion movement, who took the stance that although Gunn’s murder was wrong, they view him as a mass murderer and somehow that makes Gunn’s murder OK. These are opinions of other citizens. Not agreeing with them doesn’t invalidate them. Only if a large number of the citizens of America push to have their representatives pass laws based upon these opinions arc they going to have much political significance. This holds true for the standoff in Waco, Texas and the bombing off the World Trade Center. Our culture and our political system is based on people spouting off their opinions on these and other issues. If people choose to agree or disagree with them is a matter of personal choice. Young seems to suggest that if we all thought alike on moral issues (which sounds like, in Young’s context, a plea for us all to become Christians) we could resolve these differences and get on with our lives. The fact is that America is, and has from its creation, been comprised of a diversity of people. Since the time of its creation the diversity has grown in size, composition and complexity. In a country like ours, agreement is neither achievable, nor really desirable. What may be moral perfection to my mind, being a smart mouthed, liberal, atheist college senior in Nebraska, may be evil incarnate for a well-spoken, conservative, Bjuddnisl mother of four in Ohio. At tne very ncan 01 wnai maxes America significant in terms of freedom, and what Young seems to have a problem with, is the freedom of the citizens to express themselves. I’d be both naive and incorrect to believe that freedoms are without limit. Freedom of speech and freedom of expression arc limited by the U.S. Supreme Court, and as a law student Young should recognize that. Wc certainly don’t have the freedom to compromise the security of the government, nor to harm other persons. The recent offenders in this are the cultists in Texas, the bombers of the World Trade Center and the murderer of Gunn, not the media who react to these events, nor other members of the religious organization unrelated to these events. I personally would prefer to have the media blitzkrieg surrounding the events of the past month. I'll put up with any anti-abortion ignoramus long before I’ll allow fear of confl ict cower me into giving up my own right to make moral judgments. The real key to making America’s political process work lies in the intelligence and diligence of its citizenry. Americans need to be bright enough to listen to what is being said and evaluate it rationally. Rationality, similar to beauty, is in the eye of the beholder. James A. Zank senior art and English