Image provided by: University of Nebraska-Lincoln Libraries, Lincoln, NE
About The daily Nebraskan. ([Lincoln, Neb.) 1901-current | View Entire Issue (Feb. 17, 1997)
EDITOR Doug Kouma OPINION EDITOR Anthony Nguyen EDITORIAL BOARD Paula Lavigne Joshua Gillin Jessica Kenne<fy Jeff Randall Erin Gibson Guest VIEW Civic failing Lack of attention paid to the Oval Office From the Independent Florida Alligator GAINESVILLE, Fla. (U-WIRE) — There’s another development in the Whitewater case, but chances are very few Americans even know or care enough to be interested. To bring everyone up to speed, James McDougal — one of President Clinton’s close friends and up to this point, one of his staunchest defenders in the Whitewater investigation—has decided to recant testimony from his criminal trial last year and has tried to implicate Clinton for an illegal loan. To Clinton and those close to Whitewater, McDougal’s change of heart might be important, or it might be insig nificant. It may have no effect on the Whitewater investigation. And it’s a safe bet that most people will pay little attention to McDougal’s actions or be able to proficiently explain the basics of the investigation. Regardless of whether Clinton is guilty of any of the allegations in Whitewater, people should pay more than passing atten tion to the story. It’s an important story, one that bears noticing by more people than just members of the national press. Clinton is the leader of this country. If he is involved in something that may put his ethics in question, it should be the obli gation of eveiy citizen to be as informed as possible of the developments. While the investigation probably will not have any kind of bearing on Clinton’s presidency — since election time already has come and gone — a little more atten tion by our nation’s citizens could have made the difference in who was sworn in at January’s inauguration ceremony. Look at what happened in another Washington scandal. The Wateigate scan dal of the Nixon presidency opened the eyes of many to the importance of keeping close watch on the Oval Office and stressed the reasons why even the president is not above reproach. Had people paid more attention to the Wateigate stories before the 1972 election, the nation might not have had to suffer the embarrassment of the scandal or watch its leader resign in shame. By resisting the uige to turn the page to the advice columns and comic strips ev ery time some mention of presidential poli tics is made, Nixon may not have been re elected. We’re not questioning Clinton’s ethics, nor drawing any real comparisons between Nixon and Clinton. We’re not im plying that Clinton has committed any wrongdoing. However, we do believe that his actions could tell volumes about how he performs as president. When the people choose to ignore these actions, they have ceased per forming their duties as citizens. Editorial Policy Unsigned editorials are the opinions of the Spring 1997 Daily Nebraskan. They do not necessarily reflect the views of the Univer sity of Nebraska-Lincoln, its employees, its student body or the University of Nebraska Board of Regents, A column is solely the opinion of its author. The Board of Regents serves as publisher of the Daily Nebraskan; policy is set by the Daily Nebraskan Edito rial Board. The UNL Publications Board, established by the regents, supervises the production of the paper According to policy set by the regents, responsibility for the edi torial content of the newspaper lies solely in die hands of its student employees. Letter Policy The Daily Nebraskan welcomes brief let ters to die editor and guest columns, but does not guarantee their publication. The Daily Nebraskan retains the right to edit or reject any material submitted. Sub mitted material becomes the property of the Daily Nebraskan and cannot be re turned. Anonymous submissions will not be published. Those who submit letters must identify themselves by name, year in school, major and/or group affilia tion, if any. Submit material to: Daily Nebraskan, 34 Nebraska Union, 1400 R St Lincoln, Neb. 68588-0448. E-anil: letters@unlinfaunl.edu. Mehsling’s VIEW Guest VIEW Single ‘X’ rated Cleavage, guns not enough to save movies that ‘suck hard9 ANN ARBOR, Mich. (U-WIRE) —“Picking out a rental movie can be a Herculean task, even for the brightest couple.”—P.J. O’Rourke. Few things provide more insight into the schism between male and female tastes as movies. Most of the time, gender differences are subdued and subtle: an upraised toilet seat here, a closet full of identical black shoes there. As a species we are pretty good at ignoring the fact that men and women are so fundamentally opposite that not rally is the hetero sexual union a marvel, but a miracle on the order of Tori Spelling’s continuing television career. I feel sorry for women. To them, our taste in films must seem not only repugnant, but bafflingly illogical. My parents have stopped going to the video store together, realizing that an eye-to-eye agreement on a film is nearly impossible across the gender gap. People of our age and experience must find the problem even harder to deal with. So as a public service to all the women of the university (although this will be less useful than my leaving town), I will try to delineate, as clearly as possible, the rules and methods fra understanding what constitutes a good “guy film” and how to reach some kind of truce in the movie wars. No. 1: Ladies, please, realize that every body has stupid tastes. When a guy watches, say, a “Conan” movie, usually he is aware that what he is watching is crap. Crap that he likes, but crap nonetheless. If sent to the video store to select a movie for him and his woman, he will usually know better than to bring home the latest Jean-Claude Van Damme flick lest he find himself in die middle of a U.N. sponsored nookie embargo. This having been said, STOP MAKING US WATCH SACCHA RIN, TEAR-JERKING TREACLES LIKE “FRIED GREEN TOMA TOES” AND “WAITING TO EXHALE.” Please. We know you like it, but, Jesus, we hate it. No. 2: Why guys hate chick flicks. Hmm, this one is a little tough. See, guys like movies that have something interesting. This is a deceptively easy concept. By ‘‘something,” I mean _ interesting character development, good cinematography or an intrigu ing story that probably would never happen in the real world. The whole point of going to the movies is to see things that never happen to you in real life. That’s why they call it entertainment. If I wanted boring, drab, motionless and stupid, I’d stay home. Films like “Mermaids,” “Thelma and Louise” and the aforementioned “Fried Green Tomatoes” consist of an hour-and-a-half pity party that either leaves you feeling like you haven’t seen anything at all or feeling like you should have a sense of guilt over your ownership of a penis. And while we’re on the subject of “Thelma and Louise,” let’s put this one to bed for good. The movie sucks, and sucks hard. 1 don’t buy the line that men hate it because it shows women doing things that men usually do in action movies and that threat ens us. Hogwash. You call that an action movie? One stolen car, one car chase, one blown-up truck and only three deaths (two of which arc not pictured) do not an action movie make. Clint Eastwood after a bottle of bourbon and a handful of Quaaludes could make a more exciting movie. Either make them right, or don’t make them at all. No. 3: Debunking the “shoot ‘em up” myth. There is a fallacy in common circulation that a guy movie must only contain breasts (mere cleavage would be acceptable), guns, blood and casual, meaningless sex. Not true. While all of these things are important, movies with all of these things are typically of the Dolph Lundgren, made-for-Showtime variety and suck almost as hard as “Thelma and Louise.” This is similar to the myth that all women think Robert James Waller * novels are the end-all be-all of seduction and that the sun rises and sets in Brad Pitt’s pants. It’s basically a lot of nonsense propagated by Oprah, Ricki, Sally and that emascu lated yahoo who wrote “Men Are From Mars, Women Are From Venus.” No. 4: The list. The following is a short list of films, actors and direc tors that have a strong command of the guy sensibility: “The Hustler,” “Butch Cassidy and The Sundance Kid,” “Full Metal Jacket,” “Apoca lypse Now,” “The Blues Brothers,” “Shaft,” “Magnum Force,” “Animal House,” “Airplane,” “Caddyshack,” “One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest,” “Robocop,” “Basic Instinct” (we were all 14 once), “Blade Runner,” “Easy Rider,” “The Adventures of Ford Fairlanc,” “Delirious,” “Strange Brew,” Bogart, DeNiro and Pacino (double word score for a movie with both of them), Nicholson, Chan, Wayne, Connery, Palmanteri, pre 1992 Schwartzenegger, Cheech, Chong, Eastwood, Woo and Leone. Fellas, practice guy culture. Our way of life is dying out. — Jam Milter The Michigan Daily
