4
Monday, September 16, 1974
University Daily Kansan
THE UNIVERSITY DAILY KANSAN
SPECIAL FOCUS
CALL COMMAND let date COMMAND Date
* = COMMAND the current date
CALL COMMAND date RETURN
*FORGET IT."
'Golden Rule' helps Nixon
"Do unto former Presidents what you hope your successor will do unto you."
It is the rule that lets former presidents rake in a lot of gold once they leave office.
That was a nice little gesture worth about $2 million to Nixon. Add it to Ford's request that Congress appropriate $850,000 to help Nixon in his 'transition to private life' and you get the power to take control of many psychiatrists to help him get over the mental and emotional anxiety that supposedly has been plaguing him.
President Ford knelt down to this commandment in the part of his deal with Richard Nixon that was somewhat obscured by the explosion of national outrage over his blanket pardon for his actions, which we don't yet know and may never be told.
Ford agreed that Nixon eventually could take from the White House as his own personal property the papers, records and tapes relating to his years as president.
"The Emperor is dead. Long live the President."
Ford's action regarding these White House papers was the opening act of the White House rule of gold. Why should Ford moss with an age-old system designed to keep the millions on one he leaves office?
Nixon not worth further uproar
Lyndon B. Johnson was so very solicited of Dwight D. Eisenhower, briefing him on key decisions mainly to insure that the American criticized a major Johnson move, such as his wading deeper into a Vietnam war. And Johnson took care that no one trampled on the perquisites and enjoyed and had great rich by.
That might just as well be a graffiti scribbled on the walls of the White House by the first President to grace the premises, for it is a sort of 11th commandment. The president obeyed because every incumbent knows it is the most famous of rules.
And when Richard Nixon came along, according to Nixon, Johnson gave him a very special welcome to the world's most exclusive club. The ex-President told the new President how to give away his papers and payed paying taxes
Then Ford shocked us all. He pardoned Nixon, the man on top, the man ultimately responsible for the crimes of his subordinates. The vice president gave a public opinion overwhelmingly against a pardon.
Thus, the nation, virtually with a single voice, welcomed the departure of Richard Nixon's Imperial Presidency and hailed the arrival of home-folk Gerald Ford. At last the machinations of Nixon were behind us. Now we had an honest President, one who didn't yet made an inoperable statement. Gone were the click and polish of professional image-building; gone were the sneers and arrogance of the manipulator. In their place came President Ford with all the candor and unsophistication of a clumsy puppy. The change in style gave the nation hone.
Ford said in his pardoning statement that, according to guidelines set by the Supreme Court, it would be years before Nixon could receive a fair trial anywhere in this country. During the delay and the long trial, Ford said, "... ugly passions would again be aroused, our people would again be polarized in their opinions, and the credibility of our free institutions of government would again be challenged at home and abroad."
The question, then, is whether this small man, this Nixon, is worth that trouble. He is not. The issue raised by Watergate and the Nixon Presidency has been resolved. Americans have proved that presidents are accountable. The precedent is set. Nixon's co-conspirators, both in business and in the government, will receive speedy trials and, the courts willing, justice. That is what our Constitution provides for. What, if it doesn't subpoenaed a in a Watergate trial scheduled to start this month, he will be liable for perjury, and he won't be able to hide behind the Fifth Amendment, because his testimony can't incriminate him because he has been pardoned.
Ford pardoned Nixon to end the tragedy that has torn our nation. But instead of pulling us together, the pardon itself has become a source of bitter conflict. Yet there is no appealing Ford's decision. No court can overrule a pardon. Only the people can call Ford to account. Let's give Ford what he wants. Let's forget Nixon. What is the alternative? Impeach Ford?
-Jack McNeely Contributing Writer
Jack McNeely
Thus Nixon became solicitous of Johnson, taking care not to criticize him personally—never question his views or right to profit from documents recording his years in the White House.
Nixon's press conferences, who can doubt that he will tell a great story? But librarians and book reviewers may have one hell of a time deciding whether to classify it as fiction or non-fiction.
This whole presidential papers business is an outrage. It
By Carl Rowan
solicitous in regard to Nixon, and seemingly oblivious that Nixon left office to prevent Congress from voting officially for his bid to the first President deserving to be thrown out of office.
Ford has worked out a deal in which Nixon will still get his gold. Agent Irving Lazar (who spent three hours with Nixon recently and saw that Nixon was so close to a breakdown that a sudden blanket pardon by Ford was required to save him) is now boasting that Nixon is going to tell one of the great stories of all time and make two million bucks.
Looking back at some of
is an ongoing ripoff that got locked into the cement of the office prevented theference for the office prevented theference from challenging this business of departing presidents loading their pockets with canned goods and other items.
on his $200,000-a-year salary.
And now Ford is super-
when? Is there no way, under our system, to stop this copy business in which the new President stuffs his
Could anything make more sense?
predecessor's wallet in slavering expectation that his successor will do the same for him? 1921 Field Enterprises, Inc.
DAMMIT, THIS IS THE HOUSE DETECTIVE
... YOU GOT A WOMAN IN THERE?'
Sen. Sam Ervin, D-N.C., made a cogent observation the other day: "When a public tax payer makes official records salary makes official records paid for by the taxpayers on paper paid for by the taxpayers, those records in good condition belong to the government."
To the Editor:
Double standard for amnesty
But who bells the cat—and
President Ford's decision to give full and absolute pardons to Nixon and the other Watergate criminals and to give more conditional amnesty to the draft evaders and deserters, the lawyers and politicians involved in the Watergate conspiracy knew that what they were doing was wrong, whereas the draft resisters thought they were doing the right thing.
Now, people who think what they have done was right are apt to do the same thing again if it were not a similar situation. Therefore, these people must be punished to show them that they can't get away with doing the right thing. So if someone does something some to be a double standard of justice is actually the inevitable result of a carefully reasoned and necessary distinction between the two types of offenses.
Of course, it may be necessary for the government or charitable members of the public to pay for all of this, because the draft evaders and deserters are not rich men. But I think that they should be made to suffer, too. We should teach
Besides, ex-President Nixon has suffered enough because of his resignation and forced him to resign. So what I propose is this:
We should force all of the draft resisters and deserters to quit their jobs and retire on pensions of $60,000 a year. Furthermore, they should all be impeached, or at least competent, to take over the Committee, and made to pay any back taxes they owe. And we should not allow any of them to return to the Army.
Brands of burgers burgeoning
I guess hamburger stand operators want to join the lawyers, economists and other businessmen in arguing. But for the average Joe, it can be very confusing. Here's what happened to me recently when I went to a new Lawrenze thought would be a quick meal.
"May I help you, sir?," a
Remember when hamburgers were hamburgers? Now we big Mac. Big the Quarter-Pounder Bib Honey, Sandy Junior and on up.
By STEVEN LEWIS Contributing Writer
"We have Big Bruiser, Uncle Fred, Cousin Freddie and Little Bruiser."
young waitress asked from behind the counter.
The waitress took a small card from her pocket and began
"Yes, I'd like a hamburger, french fries and a chocolate malt."
"What kind do you have?"
"What kind of hamburger dc
KANSAN
comment
reading to me, "Big Brisuer
weights two pounds and contains
four hamburger patties,
cheese and banana
slices."
"What's the difference?"
"Uncle Fred contains two
“charcoal-broiled hamburger
paties spiced with steak sauce
instead of catup and mustard.
It contains one
charcoal-broiled patty with
steak sauce."
"On Little Bruiser we leave out the banana slices," she continued.
"What about the other side of the family?"
"If you don't mind, I think I'll
"Banana slices?"
you want?" she asked.
have an ordinary hamburger," I replied.
"Well, why don't you just make a Cousin Freddie without the steak sauce."
"I'm sorry, sir, but our sandwiches are shipped to us pre-cooked and pre-assembled."
"I'm sorry, sir, but I don't think I know what you mean."
"I'm sorry sir, but we don't sell anything like that."
"Then give me a Cousin Freddie, but scrape off the
"I want a hamburger. I know—a hamburger patty, onion, pickle, catsup and mustard between two buns!"
steak sauce and put mustard and catsup on instead."
"Okay, sir, but that'll cost you 20 cents extra."
them a lesson they will never forget; that Justice never strikes twice in the same place.
I'd been given enough hints. I took my hunger and scampered away.
"Hey, little buddy," some big guy standing in line behind me yelled, "leave the nice lady alone. Miss, if that little runt is bothering you, I'll toss him out of on here his nose."
"That's ridiculous!"
The blame isn't on the "in inevitable town & gown conflict," but on the bar owners who are too greedy to install adequate restrooms and on our students who are inconsiderate enough to so regularly disturb the peace of their peers.
"Look, sir, you're holding up the line. Either order what's on the menu or I'll have to call the manager for them and be for being a public nuisance."
Tim Short Pittsburgh law student
Bars blamed To the Editor:
Birmingham, Ala., senior
The landlords were complaining on behalf of their harried tenants—who are students. The landlords aren't personally affected; we, your fellow students, are the complaining & injured parties. We are the ones who noise. We are the ones who are robbed. We are the victims of rape.
The Kanas in an editorial Sept. 6, claimed that the troubles around the 'Hawk and 'Wheel bars were an example of "Town vs. Gown;" you are mistaken.
Facts wrong
Valerie Voigt
As a reader who recognizes the influence of the University Daily Kansan on campus, I feel compelled to respond to the editorial concerning Sen. Bob Dole in Wednesday's issue. My writer, Steve Lewis made an astounding Bschwaldian humor, the basis for his comment is almost nonexistent.
To the Editor:
His fictional association between Sen. Dole and John Mitchell is most amazing. It is common knowledge that Sen. Dole has given his support to Erichman and others held distrust another in deep mutual distrust and dislike. More importantly, Sen. Dole was cleared by the committee beyond any shadow of a doubt of any involvement in CREEP's illegal activities, and, in fact, resigned his Republican membership rather than have anything to do with the lawbreakers.
Secondly, Lewis "reports" a statement to the effect that Sen. Dole has never introduced a candidate who may differ, but I feel that the bill, among others introduced by Sen. Dole, that granted 18-year-olds the right to vote is of interest to the vote. Perhaps Lewis does
The fact that Dole has spent more for his campaign than Dr.
Roy is true, but it is important to note that Dole's figures are for a 17-month period while Roy's tautilabate for only six months.
In general, Lewis has shown himself to be either greatly uniformed or possibly unconcerned about the facts in the present Senatorial election. I implore the Kanan to shoulder its journalistic responsibilities it has undertaken, materials based on facts, rather than faulty or wishful imaginations.
In addition, Roy's expenditures are quickly reaching Dole's levels in less than half the amount of words, he' s catching up in quick.
Pat Hughes Lawrence sophomore
Writer reacts To the Editor.
This letter is in response to the accusations made by Chuck Sack and Ward Harkaway about "Movie Profit Paramount."
My immediate reaction was to say that the idea may have been Pauline Kael's but the writing was mine. However, that isn't true. The idea isn't Kael's. The idea first occurred when I reviewed Robert Altman. (I hope Sack remembers; he was there at the time.) Altman was unhappy with the producers
weren't promoting his film "Thieves Like Us."
Secondly, this summer an interview appeared in New Times magazine in which Francis Ford Coppola accused the director of "The Conversation." He cited "The Godfather" as being a chief cause of mass advertising in the film industry. I don't consider Coppola an unhappy event even if Sack and Harvarky do.
In addition, if I was to give special credit to Kael, whose article was excellent, she would be forced to give credit to John Simon, Vincent Canby and Hollis Alpert, who wrote similar articles. Alpert's article is amazingly similar to Kael's.
Mi her the M
F f
To the accusation of inferior writing, I plead guilty. However, it is my first paragraph of their letter, Sack and Harkavy I used inappropriate examples and in the third they said I used appropriate examples. But perhaps they forgot to proofread.
I can't deny that my article was watered down, but Sack and Harkavy should know that if they are working on an article of the dimensions of Kael's in the University Daily Kansan. However, card-stacking has always been an art in writing letters to the editor.
m.
die.
Hos
Kenn Louden Entertainment Editor
20 ye
Liber
An All-American college newspaper
THE UNIVERSITY DAILY KANSAN
Kansan Telephone Numbers
Newroom—UN 4-4810
Business Office—UN 4-4358
Published at the University of Kansas weekdays during the semester year except holidays and excursions. Address: Lawrence, KA, 66515. Subscriptions by mail are $8. Subscription费 $13. a $13 semester, passed through the student activity
Mi Mrs. Mrs. ne-
Accommodations, goods, services and employment of a student who is disabled or has a learning disability (except special education) required by the Student Senate for the following:
Editor
Eric Meyer
Associate Editor Campus Editor
Jeffrey Stinson Jill Wills
Copy Chiefs
Cotton Carl Burger Miller
Copy Chiefs
Carol Gwinn and Bunny Miller
Associate Campus Editor Linda
Jinken Kindel
Mark Mitchell and
Roy Zellman
Ray Zellman
National Editor
Boy Zellman
Assignments Editor
Debbie Gump
Entertainment Editor
Kenn Lozen
Kenn Lozen
Business Manager
Steve Hougan
Steve Hughen
Advertising Manager  Assistant Business Manager
Alice Retter
Dave Breese
Classified Manager
National Advertising Manager
Assistant Advertising Manager
Assistant Classified Manager
News Adviser Susanne Shaw
Gail Johnson
Deb Daniels
Debbie Debe
Steve Brownbeck
Terry Kafka
Business Adviser Mel Adams