Opinion
Kansan
Published daily since 1912
Ann Premer, Editor Jamie Holman, Business manager Gerry Deyle, Managing editor Sara Cropper, Retail sales manager Angie Kuhn, Managing editor Dan Simon, Sales and marketing advisor Tom Eblen, General manager, news adviser Justin Knuff, Technology coordinator
Wednesday, February 24, $199^{\circ}$
RONALD REAGAN SUGGESTED FOR MOUNT RUSHMORE
The Chicago Tribune
Editorial
Student support shouldn't falter during advisory committee's pitch
KU students expressed strong support for bike lanes in Lawrence at a public forum Feb. 16. Clay Comfort, chair of the City Commission's bicycle advisory committee, said the healthy showing was encouraging for bike lane proponents.
The students who attended the meeting and voiced their support deserve congratulations — but not yet.
Because the Feb. 16 meeting was the last forum for public input before the matter heads to the City Commission, supporters of the issue could be tempted to sit back and relax now.
Doing so could be costly.
The city has conducted a study of 11 streets to see where bike lanes are most necessary. There are sections of several streets on the list that border the KU campus: Naismith Drive, Tennessee, Kentucky, Louisiana and 19th
Bike-lane study won't go before city commission until after April elections.
streets. Based on the results of the study and input from the public, the bicycle advisory committee now will form recommendations.
Although the city commission was warming to the idea of bike lanes, the bicycle advisory committee will not present its recommendations until April — after the elections replace three of the five commissioners.
How the new commission will receive the proposal is anybody's guess, making a strong showing of support by the KU student body critical.
Support from students during all
phases of the project is vital, Clay Comfort said. KU students are a major portion of bicyclists within the Lawrence community and should be concerned about where the proposal leads.
But the issue should not concern only those students who ride bikes. Lawrence has a history of accidents with bicycles and motor vehicles, including an accident that killed a bicyclist in September 1997. The difference between having bike lanes and not having them could be the difference between life and death for a student on this campus. Bike lanes are not just a luxury but rather a necessity because of numerous bicyclists on campus and in the community.
KU students already know this. Now they must continue to show their support for and commitment to bike lanes in Lawrence.
Nathan Willis for the editorial board
Feedback
Concealed weapons hinder peaceful society
This is a response to Nathan Wilke's letter in Thursday's University Daily Kansan. As an avid hunter, I am aware of the increase in laws and restrictions pertaining to gun ownership. I have never felt that these laws were designed to suppress my Second Amendment right to own a firearm.
I am against passing any legislation giving citizens the privilege to carry concealed weapons. My reasons include the increase in "road rage" crimes, accidental deaths because of misjudgments, and likelihood of increased accidental deaths in the hands of untrained gun owners.
I feel that many individuals lack the education and patience to own firearms designed to take away a
human's life. I was raised to respect firearms and be cautious when using firearms. It is incorrect to assume that everyone will treat their firearm in the same manner. I already feel safe that I do not need a firearm at my side to function as a free citizen of the United States.
Kata Dee
Kato Dee Lawrence graduate student
and sugarcoat the associations of this man make him an unlikely candidate for a lecture series. The board notes that "Johnson's fear is that by acknowledging positive aspects and contributions of the Nazi regime, people will forget the atrocities." If that is so, then I shall be greatly pleased to attend the Adolf Hitler Lectures Series in Foreign Policy.
This letter is in response to the editorial board's editorial Monday in justification of the Heidegger Lecture Series. The board notes that "Heidegger's affiliation with the Nazi party should neither be ignored nor sugar-coated." The fact that one must ignore
Defending lecture series sugarcoats Nazi link
Possible panel topics could include, "Invasion: How to Do It," or "Genocide: A Useful Tool for Dealing with Opposition, Minorities You Don't Like and Others." This editorial and this series offends me and many others. It should be the purpose of such a series of talks to enlighten, not to cause conflict.
Kansan staff
Tom Moore Lawrence senior
Ryan Koerner ... Editorial
Jeremy Doherty ... Associate editorial
Aaron Marvin ... News
Laura Roddy ... News
Melissa Ngo ... News
Aaron Knopf ... Online
Erin Thompson ... Sports
Marc Sheforgen ... Associate sports
Chris Fickett ... Campus
Sarah Hale ... Campus
T.R. Miller ... Features
Steph Brewer ... Associate features
Augustus Anthony Piazza ... Photo
Chris Dye ... Design, graphics
Carl Kaminski ... Wire
Carolyn Mollett ... Special sections
Laura Veazey ... News clerk
News editors
Advertising managers
Matt Lopez . . . Special sections
Jennifer Patch . . . Campus
Micah Kaftiz . . . Regional
Jon Schlitt . . . National
Tyler Cook . . . Marketing
Shannon Curran . . PR/Intern manager
Christa Estep . . Production
Steven Prince . . Production
Chris Corley . . Creative
Jason Hannah . Classified
Corinne Buffmire . Zone
Shauntae Blue . Zone
Brandi Byram . Zone
Brian Allers . Zone
Justin Allen . Zone
Broaden your mind: Today's quote
"The passion to get ahead is sometimes born of the fear lest we be left behind."
How to submit letters and quest columns
Letters: Should be double-spaced typed and fewer than 200 words. Letters must include the author's signature, name, address and telephone number plus class and home-town if a University student. Faculty or staff must identify their positions.
—Eric Hoffer
Guest columns: Should be double-
spaced typed with fewer than 700 words. The writer must be willing to be photographed for the column to run.
All letters and guest columns should be submitted to the Kansan newsroom, 111 Staufer-Flint Hall. The Kansan reserves the right to edit, cut to length or reject all submissions. For any questions, call Ryan Kaemer or Jeremy Dearby at 864-4924.
If you have general questions or comments,
e-mail the page staff (opinion@kansan.com)
or call 864-4924.
Society's intolerance not often remembered
Ilamet the tone the debate on how to best educate minority students in the United States is taking. Whenever the issue comes up, many people tend to dismiss it as "racial
Perspective
preference." That is what Andrew Marino did in his Feb. 15 column published in The University Daily Kansan.
Marino complains about "the inordinate amount of whining coming from the Pacific coast" where, through Proposition 209, the citizens of California forced the University of California, Berkeley to stop granting "preferential treatment on the basis of race in its admissions process." Because the citizens of Cali
Donato
Fhunsu
opinion@kansan.com
forma made the decision by vote, Marino implies, the decision is right, and we cry babies should stop whining.
But I refuse to stop whining because the lack of historical perspective in our political discourse disturbs me. "Racial preference" is what we call the effort to affirm those members of our society who, even though they have helped build this country, have been practically invisible.
When, in 1776, the "Declaration of Independence" stated that "all men were created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights," this certainly did not include Blacks. This was racial preference, literally, but who were the Blacks to complain about it? After all, every Black was worth only three-fifths of a Caucasian.
In 1789, when the Constitution stated, "We the people of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice," it certainly did not mean "We, the Blacks also," and justice was not for us.
When, in 1791, the First Amendment articulated "the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances," the right was not for us Blacks and certainly not for our grievances.
The 13th Amendment in 1865 abolished slavery. In 1868, the 14th Amendment gave us Blacks the right to be citizens of the United States, and the 15th Amendment gave us the right to vote in 1870. But did we actually vote? And what about education? Were not all these truths supposed to be self-evident since 1776? And are we crybables because we point out injustices?
We tend to forget that not so long ago, it was illegal to educate Blacks, and when Blacks finally could be educated, it was illegal for them to share schools with their Caucasian countrymen.
The racial discrimination laws that kept us separate and unequal were laws of this land, and they have seriously wounded our national soul. Unless you blind yourself to the social reality,
you know that the playing field in the United States is not level. We cannot move forward and "form a more perfect Union," now that all of us finally are people of the United States, unless we all are imbued with this common historical legacy. Scoring high on a multiple-choice U.S. history test won't do it.
What would do it then? How can we go from where we have been and where we are now to where we should be?
First, we have to observe the historical perspective. Whenever I study U.S. history, I actually am ashamed and disgusted. I wonder how the people who inhabited the land of the free and the home of the brave could be so selfish and mean. And let's not fool ourselves. This selfish and mean attitude has not necessarily disappeared. Borrow my skin, and you'll find out.
Second, we have to acknowledge that the situation we have inherited is very complex. Sustained racial prejudice and discrimination do create a mess in any society. Caucasians in the United States still are the majority, and the majority rule, especially if insensitive to the problems of the minorities, may be legal, but not necessarily right, ethical or wise.
Third, let us be motivated by love and compassion. The problems of the under representation of minorities in education and key positions in our society are not necessarily the problems of minorities alone; it is the problem of us all. Insisting on keeping the competitive advantage our background has given us may be the best for us as isolated individuals, but not necessarily the best for us as a society.
Moreover, Marino's assertion that "the SAT is an objective test that tends to predict student performance in college better than subjective measures like grades, interviews or recommendations," is naive. Multiple-choice exams are appealing for test makers and teachers because these tests can be graded by machines and thus save time.
However, as a teacher, if all I did were to give SAT-like tests to my students, I wonder what kind of people I would be helping to educate. The tests of real life in a multicultural society such as ours are not necessarily the objective multiple-choice type. Things are much more complex than that.
Finally, should we rejoice that "the number of students who choose not to indicate their ethnicity rose 300 percent from the year before?" Marino sees this as "good news in a society aspiring to colorblindness." I see it as a dangerous blindness to color when, in our society, color, race and ethnicity still matter, and Marino himself proves this when he complains about the "preférential treatment on the basis of race" given to minority students.
Until, we eliminate color in our hearts, not just on paper, no litany of statistics should beguile us.
Fhunsu is a Lawrence graduate student in journalism.
Charlie Brown and friends model bad relationships
Anyone who has lived in a civilized country, and by civilized country I stretch that term to its fullest extent by including nations such as France, has
by including nations suc spent most of his or her
spent most of his or her life bombarded by products from Charles Schultz's *Peanuts*. This comic strip's characters have been made into every possible type of merchandise. *Peanuts* products range from the most reasonable, such as the Charlie Brown Pez dispenser, to the most obscure, such as the Lucy Home Pregnancy Test. (Don't let that surprise pregnancy shock you as someone pulling the football away before you can kick it shocks you)
Nick Bartkoski opinion@ kansan.com
The other day, I found a *Peanuts* item that made me ill. A friend and I were rooting through the half-price Valentine's candy and there I saw *Peanuts* Valentines.
I'm sure most people wouldn't feel the same righteous rage that I did, but I see the strip itself as an ongoing textbook on messed-up relationships.
Look at Lucy and Schroeder or Sally and Linus. I mention both of these couples in the same breath because they're essentially the same relationship. Both relationships include women lusting after men that avoid the relationship issue. Schroeder hides behind his arts background, while Linus hides behind his blanket and his Peter Pan complex.
I can't really defend Lucy, because she is the quintessential gold-digger. She lusts after Schroeder only because of what he could provide for her.
Sally, at least, comes closer to feelings of legitimate romance. She loves an older man, yet sees his conflicting self. He is both the most thoughtful of the group and the most unwilling to grow up, as demonstrated by his refusal to give up his blanket or to stop believing in the Great Pumpkin.
Sally acknowledges her limited ability to appease the adult side of Linus. She encourages him to cling to childhood. Calling him her Sweet Baboo, Sally attempts to communicate with his childishness. Still, Sally refuses
The little red-haired girl's presence resonates throughout the strip, even on days when she's not in it. When Chuck's trying to win a ball game, he's trying to win it for her. When he's seeking acceptance from the group, he's really only seeking acceptance from her. His love of her wakes him up in the morning and lulls him to sleep at night.
The problem is that he admires from afar. Throw away, it's Your First Kiss, Charlie Brown, where he actually interacts with her. Charlie Brown cannot bring himself to make his move. He makes well-laid plans, but ultimately he's too nervous to carry them out. He's happy just to love her from a distance, undiscovered, because to tell her would be too dangerous. It could open him up to a life-destrucing hurt.
Is Charlie Brown's love destructive? Yes, but it's a love I can totally support. There's a magic in admiring from afar. The distance can be within a classroom, or the walk from Fraser Hall to Lindley Hall, or across national borders. The thought of that special person possibly reciprocating your feelings can move mountains. It's a safe feeling, too. Admiring from afar protects you from rejection, but it limits you from truly living.
Snoopy's life also exemplifies horrific relationships. For the most part, Snoopy enjoys his time as an unattached dog of leisure. But when he slips into the role of World War I flying ace, he falls for any pair of eyes staring at him through his mug of root beer. This repression in civilian life and acting out in times of war cannot be healthy, especially at his age. After all, one human year does equal seven dog years.
Still, just because I have as messed-up relationships as the *Peanuts* characters doesn't mean I want something such as "I love you, but I'll be darned if I'll tell you" on any Valentines I send out.
And how can one discuss messed-up relationships in *Peanuts* without discussing Charlie Brown's relationship with the little red-haired girl? In fact, I find it hard to discuss the strip at all without mentioning it.
to see that until Linus grows up, he never will appreciate what he has in her. This self-destructive love is not likely to end well.
Bartkoski is a Basehor senior in journalism and English.