Good Daves, bad Daves
Hatred of decathlete Dave Johnson leads to Dave research
“Dave Johnson Sucks Ass.”
Frankly, there was no other way
for me to put it. Being any less vague
or lewd in the conveyance of my mes
sage would have ruined my protest
.completely. So as Mr. Runonn led me
down the long corridor that would
eventually collide with the principal’s
office, I promised myself to stand
strong in my miniature T-shirt protest.
“What are you trying to do?”
asked Mr. Runonn.
“Fightin’ the man,” I told him.
“Fighting what man?”
“When the man tries to hold you
down, you gotta fight for what you
believe in,” I reiterated.
I had no idea what I was talking
about. But as we ended our walk and
Mr. Runonn gently nudged me into,
the principal’s office, it didn’t take me
long to figure out what I was going to
say.
Before Mr. Runonn had a ohance
to explain, my principal motioned for
him to leave. I knew better than to try
explaining myself. He would let me
know when he wanted me to speak.
“Son, I’ve got a few questions for
you,” he began. “First of all, who in
the hell is Dave Johnson? Secondly,
why does he ‘suck ass?’And finally,
why in God’s green earth do you have
that nonsensical claptrap written on
your T-shirt?”
l was offended that he was so blind
to my obviously brilliant protest. I had
always considered him to be a smart
man. Regardless, I knew that I owed
him an explanation and that the first
day of school was never a good time to
get suspended. So I talked.
To answer his first question, I told
him that Dave Johnson was an
Olympic decathlete and a burden on
America. That summer, he had single
handedly risen from the gutter to
fame, captured the hearts of millions
of unsuspecting underdog fans and
tom our great nation in two. I told him
of how he used Reebok to undermine
the great Dan O’Brien as well.
“Dan vs. Dave,” “Dave vs. Dan,” it
had been everywhere that summer.
Dave Johnson and Reebok had it set
up perfectly. Reebok made money off
of shoddy merchandise, and Dave
gained notoriety while putting unnec
essary pressure on the previous
favorite, Dan O’Brien, as they battled
to qualify as decathletes at the 1992
Barcelona Olympics. Therefore, as I
attempted to explain to my befuddled
principal, it was no surprise when Dan
choked at the Olympic Trials. The
whole world was against him.
To this day, I’m not really sure
what the best way to go about explain
ing the process of “sucking ass” to
your junior high school principal is.
With Dave Johnson, though, it wasn’t
difficult. (Our younger readers may
want to take note here. 1_
Dave Johnson
sucked for many rea
sons. (I would suppose
that he still does.) He
sucked because of his
premeditated poor per
formance. He raised
America’s hopes high
er than they had ever
been and dropped
them without ever
looking. Secondly, he
sucked because he
made fools out of all
the Dave fanatics that
had been created dur
ing the summer of ;
1992. /
Worst of all, Dave
Johnson sucked f
because, in a display
as blatant as they
come, he showed
America that the underdog
never wins. On his way to
the gold medal in the t
decathlon,
Czechoslovakian Robert
Zmelik spanked Johnson.
Even though Johnson
had been able to make his
way past the heavily
favored O’Brien, he was
still crushed at the actual
Olympics in gj|
Barcelona that sum
mer, and I was left with an ugly T-shirt
that proved I was on his side.
My final task during my visit with
my principal was to explain to him
why I wanted the world to know about
Dave Johnson’s illicit ass sucking. It
was simple. For nearly an entire sum
mer, I had Reebok’s “Dan vs. Dave”
slogan scrawled across my chest. I
knew the shame I felt for doing so
would never go away. I felt that creat
ing my own slogan and telling the
world what I felt of Dave Johnson’s
monumental letdown would be the
one just and true thing left to do.
Somehow, I felt that my principal
liked what I had to say during our visit
on that day. Not only did it break up
the monotony of his usual run-of-the
mill day, but also it showed him that
numbers and sentence structure
weren’t all that filled my mind. And as
he traded me a shirt from the lost and
found for my T-shirt manifesto, I think
I even saw h
him smile.
Nevertheless, I knew that I would
be faced with some sort of punish
ment. That punishment, dealt immedi
ately by my principal, was to research
other men in America named Dave
Johnson and to try and find some
good in them. Although I was a bit
leery at first, I somehow knew the
assignment would be more fulfilling
than automatically accusing them of
sucking ass. It certainly was.
Minnesota Sen. Dave Johnson is a
proud representative from the state’s
40th District. He lives in Bloomington
with his wife, Tracy, and one child.
(The name of the child was not dis
closed. We’ll call him Cromgart.) His
special legislative concerns are crime,
taxes, education and transportation.
Writer and radio host Dave
Johnson is a Colorado-based technol
ogy writer with numerous books and
hundreds of magazine articles to his
credit. He regularly writes for comput
er periodicals, and he’s co-host of
what he claims to be the world’s
hippest computer talk-radio show.
The final “good” Dave Johnson I
researched was Charles “David”
Johnson. He grew up in Ottawa, 111.,
and graduated from the University of
Illinois. He received a Ph.D. at Boston
University and now works in Austin.
Texas, in image processing.
As I already stated, my research
assignment was quite fulfilling. It
helped me to realize the Dave Johnson
of the 1992 Olympics in Barcelona
did not exemplify the overall character
of the Dave Johnsons that this country
has to offer. Among these fine men
stand a senator, a doctor and a writer.
“Besides these three great men,
are there any other Dave Johnsons in
this country who will be successful
in life?” you may ask. Probably
not. But if you happen to
stumble across one, I’d
be more than happy
to hear from you.
Scott Eastman/ DN
Chris Gustafson is a sophomore agricultural economics major. Lucas Christian Stock is a freshman English major. They are Daily Nebraskan columnists.
The Austria dilemma
Democratic election of far-right party calls for diplomatic caution
When Jeoig Haider’s Freedom
Party came to power in Austria’s gov
ernment recently, just about all of the
European Union wait baserk.
Understandably so - Haider’s far
right party is opposed to immigration
and over-involvement in the EU. He
also has made comments that compli
mented certain aspects of Hitter’s
regime, specifically on the Nazi
party’s labor policies and on the stead
fastness of the WafFen SS.
The Freedom Party’s ascension,
therefore, is seen as a sign of neo
Nazism, and the EU has responded
quickly and without compromise,
freezing its diplomatic relations with
Austria. Similarly, Israel has recalled
its ambassador, and the United States
has called back its own ambassador
for consultation.
These moves are unfair to Austria,
in a way. Haider’s party was given its
power by a vote; the people have cho
sen their leaders, and they should not
be punished for choosing contrary to
our wishes. Xenophobic or not, a
democracy is a democracy, and we
really can’t punish a people for hold
ing to its ideals.
However, something must be
done. Western society has taken a
strong stance against Nazism, and we
must stand by our ideals as well. We
must not sit by idly and pretend that
the rise of neo-Nazi thought doesn’t
concern us.
France, for example, has a right
wing constituency it fears would be
emboldened by the acceptance of
Austria’s new government Most EU
member nations likewise fear a conti
nent-wide encouragement of neo-Nafci
idealism. So it is appropriate for us to
make our concerns known.
The United States has taken a
good, cautious stance. It has not cut
off diplomatic relations. Calling an
ambassador back for consultation
implies, after all, that the ambassador
will return eventually.
In contrast, the EU has gone over
board. Belgium has suggested that
Austria be expelled for its actions.
What actions? The free democratic
election of a generally out-of-favor
man?
Nadine Stossner, president of the
American Civil Liberties Union, said
it best:
“To protect democracy and human
rights, the Europeans have adopted the
very authoritarian methods that they
say they are acting to forestall.” (The
New York Times, Feb 4,2000)
Further, the EU’s actions send a
disturbing message to other countries
seeking membership in the Union.
Turkey recognizes this move as a clear
message: The EU endeavors to inter
fere with the internal actions of its
sovereign, member nations. This is
hardly an enticing image for Turkey.
And all of this is directed against a
man whose main repulsion factor
comes from a few less-than-hateful
comments he made about the Nazi
party, for which Haider has since apol
ogized. Accusations that Haider’s
It is only fair that the EU give the
Freedom Party a chance to prove itself
rather than punish it for hypothetical
futures.
party is racist and xenophobic are not
necessarily unfounded; however, the
same accusations can be made of
nearly every conservative party with
out the implication of neo-Nazi senti
ment.
Haider may very well be a racist,
and his party may very well have mali
cious aims. Evidence to this end, how
ever, is lacking. It is only fair that the
EU give the Freedom Party a chance
to prove itself, rather than punish it for
hypothetical futures.
But suppose the Freedom Party is
neo-Nazi. Is it really in anyone’s best
interest to isolate it? Isolating Austria
and imposing sanctions does for the
Freedom Party the same thing it does
for Castro supporters and those who
support Saddam Hussein: It gives
them something to be angry about.
Indeed, this anger is exactly what
Hitler used to fuel the most horrific
war in recent memory. Hitler would
have been nothing if he could not
channel the anger of Germans about
the Treaty of Versailles against his
opponents.
As the adage goes, keep your
friends close and your enemies closer.
We should remain vigilant in our rela
tions with Austria, but cutting off
diplomacy would be the wrong thing
to do. Already, the Freedom Party is
enjoying a surge in popularity, as citi
zens object to the treatment of the EU.
Fortunately, the United States has
taken this careful stance. The EU
needs to follow in its lead and resume
diplomatic relations before the far
right faction of Austria’s new govern
ment becomes too powerful.
Jake Glazeski is a senior music and math major and a Daily Nebraskan columnist.
