Penny-pinching
Student stretches every dollar, just like dad
l was doing something 1 never
thought I would be forced to do ... I
was going to use a coupon at Taco
Bell.
Yes, at the place where you could
feed a small Ethiopian village with a
sweaty twenty, I was going to use a
coupon.
I thought back to what could
have possibly driven me to this lack
of-funds desperation.
Now the worst fear of a 13-year
old is not that he’ll one day be
forced to dress in drag and sing
“Like a Virgin” in front of a
retirement home. He knows nothing
about “pledging,” although this will
be his worst fear at a later time.
No, a 13-year-old’s worst fear is
that he’ll grow up to be like his
father. It is at this tender age when
everything you do has to look
“cool” and it is suddenly realized
that, well, dad isn’t.
I was 13 when I realized that I
didn’t want to grow up to be like my
father. The sole basis was his
obsession with... coupons.
Dad possessed what I called “the
box.” It was a big tan box that
contained thousands upon thousands
of coupons. So obsessive was my
father with it, that he would never
leave the grocery cart alone, fearing
someone might run off with “the
box.”
Now I’m 19 and my deepest fear
has come true — I have become my
father.
I have been faced with the same
numb reality that confronts many
college students: A dwindling
personal budget that leaves me
picking up pennies, no matter what
side is showing.
Yes, I stood in line at Taco Bell
and yes, I used a coupon there. I
saved 89 cents (sales tax included)
and yes, that 89 cents mattered!
Why? Because at the end of the
month, it may come down to that 89
Kasey Kerber
“A 13-year-old’s worst
fear is that he’llgroiv up
to be like his father. It is
at this tender age when
everything you do has to
look ‘cool’ and it is
suddenly realized that,
well, dad isn’t.”
cents. Then I can laugh and say
“Well, guess I’m glad I used that
Taco Bell coupon after all!”
To think I used to make fun of
my father when he sat at the kitchen
table on Sunday mornings, clipping
coupons for hours on end. Now I’m
running around like a politician on
election day just trying to find a
Sunday paper.
Yet clipping coupons is not the
only way to make personal funds go
the extra 89 cents (with sales tax!).
Another way to make money last is
in the dating area.
Quick question to all the ladies:
Know how you always say that
childbirth is the most painful
experience in the world and that
men will never know the meaning of
such misery?
Well, next time you go out on a
date with a guy, take a close look at
his face when the price rings for two
movie tickets, two medium drinks, a
large tub of popcorn and a box of
Junior Mints.
You may only see it for a
moment — a slight sucking in of the
breath or possibly flaring of the
nostrils. I guarantee it, though —
there’s pain there when a guy comes
to the realization that he’ll pretty
much be handing over his entire
wallet.
Guys counter this by urging dates
to go to Starship 9. Pay no heed that
it often plays such quality hits as
“The Big Green” or “Babe” for
weeks on end — it’s a buck-fifty per
ticket.
Women counter being taken to
Starship by begging their “guy” to
buy them a little something, like a
box of Junior Mints. The guy gives
in, not fully knowing that she will
eat every damn mint and agressively
hit him with the half open box when
he tries to take one.
But that’s dating, bizarre even
when it comes to something as
simple as money.
Certainly all ways for student
penny-pinching have not been
examined. You see, many methods
of making the buck last are illegal.
Not-precisely-legal means range
from trying to stuff food into your
“refillable” drink cup at the food
service building to selling your soul
to Columbia House under three
different names.
So whatever your means are of
making your personal budget last,
just remember: Pride is optional,
Van Damme is a buck-fifty, Junior
Mints are sweet revenge and 89
cents might mean the difference
between life and death (with sales
tax).
Kerber is a freshman news-editorial
major and a Daily Nebraskan columnist.
Ab-ortion
As ugly as it sounds, let women choose
Two Saturdays ago, right before
the anniversary of Roe vs. Wade,
more than 2,000 anti-abortion
demonstrators headed from the
Capitol to the Federal Building on
10th Street. These obviously
dedicated demonstrators did their
part to keep the abortion issue in the
spotlight.
They have many supporters,
including Ben Nelson. The Ne
braska law banning Medicaid from
paying for abortions caused by rape
or incest was declared unconstitu
tional recently. Yet our faithful
public servant declares that he will
keep fighting this decision. It’s the
principle of the thing.
• And a grand principle it is.
Abortion is an ugly word, with ugly
connotations: A vacuum coldly
sucking the life and the soul out of a
woman and killing the innocent
young life inside her. The fetus, a
miraculous creation of God, was
made from the combination of two
separate people’s DNA. Without
that intimacy, that act of love, the
formation of another person could
not occur.
As it was meant to be, pregnancy
is a wonderful event from the
conception to the anticipation of
birth. Labor isn’t so great, but the
pain is soon forgotten as the mother
holds the newborn in her arms and
Daddy proudly looks at the new
addition to the family. It is truly an
act of love.
But the Medicaid ban does not
uphold these high ideals. First of all,
the Medicaid recipient is not
financially independent. Most
cannot pay for their own abortions if
they so desire. This means that the
government is using the poor and
the helpless as an example. Free will
is an important issue in the decision
of a mother to have her child. If that
is not present, then what dedication
does the mother have to that child?
Forcing people to do anything
against their will inevitably leads to
a breakdown somewhere.
Kristi Kohl
“Abortion isn’t an easy
decision for anyone to
make. But giving
women the option of a
clinical abortion gives
us more of a voice in
our futures. ”
But the initial problem is
intensified by the manner of
conception. In cases of rape or
incest, it takes a very forgiving and
strong woman to love the baby that
is half the man that hurt her. The
event has been a violation from the
start, and it is hard to think of it as
wonderful. Morning sickness and
the woman’s growing stomach
would only be physical symbols of
the violation that occurred. The
woman would have to deal with the
emotional hormonal changes as well
as the emotional trauma of the rape
or incest.
In cases like these, abortion is a
viable solution. Not all women in
these cases will choose it for
different reasons. But it should be
available—not only in concept, but
in practice. This means that the
women who can least afford to have
a baby should have this option as
well. This means allowing Medicaid
to pay for those abortions that
happen by this means.
Abortion isn’t an easy decision
for anyone to make. But giving
women the option of a clinical
abortion gives us more of a voice
in our futures. Why? In the event
of an unplanned and unwanted
pregnancy, abortion crosses the
mind at least once. If the condi
tions are unsafe, then that isn’t a
choice. The prospect of having an
abortion forces a woman to think
about more perspectives and gives
her a concrete goal to work for. If
abortion isn’t an option, she would
be less prepared to become a
parent because she hasn’t had to
make an active decision in the
pregnancy.
Parenthood is demanding. From
the beginning, a tiny, helpless baby
is a big responsibility. For the first
month, it’s often an around-the
clock job. It can be exhausting,
especially for single parents who
can’t trade shifts while the other
sleeps. And, don’t forget, the mother
has just undergone probably the
most excruciating ordeal of her life
so far.
If the love for the newborn baby
and the responsibility for caring for
him or her aren’t present, then that
will lead to problems down the road.
Child abuse and neglect are major
social problems that still occur. It’s
a vicious cycle that will lead to
another generation of neglectful
parents if we’re not careftil.
Finally, the “right-to-life” and
“pro-choice” mottos are not mutu
ally exclusive. I don’t think that
anyone would advocate abortion as
the best thing to do in most circum
stances. Many women have chosen
to have their babies. Making this
conscious decision to love and
protect their child is part of the
process of becoming a responsible
and caring parent. Let’s not try to
choose for them.
Kohl Is a senior biology major and a
Dally Nebraskan columnist
O.J.’s trials become
America’s troubles
Matt Woody
If you’re like me, your
television was one of the
three million or so that were tuned
into the BET network last Wednes
day night.
It was, of course, O.J.
Simpson’s first interview since he
was acquitted of charges of
killing his ex-wife and her friend,
Ronald Goldman.
Forget “Friends” and “ER.”
This news junkie had his own
must-see TV.
The interview, conducted by
Black Entertainment Television
anchor Ed Gordon, provided little
surprise. Simpson maintained his
complete innocence, talked about
his readjustment to life on the
outside and expressed anger
toward the media, which he said
misrepresented nearly everything
about the trial and his life since.
But what caught me off guard
was nothing from that hour-long
interview, but something that was
revealed in the days leading up to
and following it.
Once again, OJ. Simpson
showed just how wide the racial
divide is in America.
As the trial carried on, polls
showed that one-half to two
thirds of blacks believed Simpson
innocent of the murders, while as
little as 25 percent of the white
population thought the same.
Last week, much of white
America collectively snickered
when it learned Simpson’s
interview would be on BET. “The
black channel” would go easy on
Simpson, so the thinking went.
I nearly was ashamed to be
_1.
WllllC.
Thankfully, BET’s Gordon put
any such notions to rest with a
serious interview, complete with
hardball questions. Simpson may
nrit have answered some of the
tough ones, telling viewers to buy
his video, but it didn’t stop
Gordon from asking Simpson if
he committed the murders, just
what he was doing to find the real
killers and, repeatedly, exactly
what he was doing just before
limo driver Allan Park arrived at
his Brentwood home.
After the interview, TV talk
shows were again abuzz with talk
of Simpson. One white audience
member on CNN’s “America’s
Talking” was quite disturbed that
the interview took place on BET
and not on NBC or CNN or some
other network that she must have
believed to be more legitimate. In
the discussion, this audience
member said, “I’m not a racist,”
adding that she thought O. J. was
innocent, as if the two were
mutually exclusive.
“Apparently, if a white
man is convicted of
violently beating a
black, he can earn a
living how he wants.
But if a black is
acquitted of killing two
whites, then all bets are
off.”
Regardless, most of the whites
who were skeptical of the
interview do believe Simpson
killed his ex-wife and Ronald
Goldman. They cling to an
equally racist notion that the
mostly black jury found Simpson
not guilty because he was black
or to send some message to the
Los Angeles authorities.
If race is such a factor, why
then didn’t the two whites on the
panel insist on convicting
Simpson, thereby deadlocking the
jury?
That brings up even more
questions and “logic” that have
no place in 1996 America.
Once thing is certain—we
must take notice of the gap
between blacks and whites.
Blacks in America have a far
different view of police than do
whites. Being cognizant of this
fact — had I been a juror — I
would have needed a flawless
case from prosecutors to keep me
from finding reasonable doubt.
And when one of the lead
detectives on the case was a flat
out racist who talked of how easy
it would be to plant evidence,
that’s far from flawless.
In the eyes of the law,
Simpson is an innocent man. He
deserves a chance to get on with
his life, whether people want to
give him one or not.
As Simpson said the other
night, people didn’t raise a fuss
when Stacey Koon, one of the
LAPD officers who beat Rodney
King, received millions of dollars
for writing a book.
Apparently, if a white man is
convicted of violently beating a
black, he can earn a living how he
wants. But if a black is acquitted
of killing two whites, then all bets
are off.
That’s how it looks when one
uses the same thinking that
floated around so freely last
week.
Maybe whites are bothered,
perhaps only subconsciously, that
the victims were white and
Simpson, the supposed killer, is
black.
The whole situation is trou
bling. But this country can’t heal
and begin to close the racial
divide until Simpson is allowed to
get on with his life and provide
for his children.
Woody is a senior news-editorial ma
jor and a guest columnist
I -And I don
I see peop
& skinned tc —
1 coats/... -nka \
ppfaid )
jflcfapM ~ J
■ ciJI -^