4
Thursday, December 3, 1992
OPINION
UNIVERSITY DAILY KANSAN
IN OUR OPINION
Boycott may be weapon against new Colorado law
Last month, the state of Colorado voted into law Amendment 2, which prohibits the state and its cities from enacting gay rights legislation. In response many groups, including many in the entertainment industry, have threatened to boycott Colorado unless the amendment is repealed.
Because Colorado has a strong tourism industry, a boycott would be an effective means to express disapproval of Amendment 2.
One disadvantage to a boycott is that it would affect big cities and resort towns the most. Some of these cities, like Denver, Boulder and Aspen, already had gay rights legislation on the books and did not support the amendment.
But many gay groups and gay rights advocates in Colorado have voiced support for a boycott. They argue that although the boycott would be detrimental to some who oppose the amendment, it may be the only way to get Amendment 2 repealed.
They have compared a Colorado boycott to the 1956 bus boycotts in Montgomery, Ala., adding that history had proved that economic sanctions frequently preceded change in laws.
And unfortunately, the gay rights groups are probably right. All too often, people are unwilling to change their beliefs or actions until they feel financial effects.
If a boycott is the only way to get Amendment 2 repealed, then it is time for Colorado tourists to hang up their skis.
JULIE WASSON OF THE EDITORIAL BOARD.
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
Marching band deserves to go to Aloha Bowl
For the past decade, the rallying cry for the Kansas football program has been "waiting 'til next year." Now next year is this year, and the beloved Jayhawks are headed for the Aloha Bowl. However, one group of people closely associated with the football program must again "wait 'til next year."
While the idea of spending the holidays at home appeals to most people, the Marching Jayhawks feel they should be spending their vacation in Hawaii. Although the entire band must attempt to come to grips with end of the season, the Color Guard will have the most difficult time. Unlike the cheerleaders and Crimson Girls, who are having portions of their squads flown to Hawaii, Color Guard members wishing to go to the Aloha Bowl must pay their own airfare since they are not included in the pean ticket.
For 90 percent of the Marching Jayhawks, the season is over and they will be allowed to spend the holidays in much the same manner as they have for the past decade, at home with family and friends.
Since the Jayhawks' last bowl game, the University has continued to field a top-notch marching band, while its football team was hardly worthy of playing on the same field. The most vivid memory I have of the Marching Jay-hawks is the Oklahoma game, televised (years ago) by ABC, which I attended with my father and brother. By the end of the third quarter, most of the alumni, students and even Sooner fans had left, leaving only the band. And they continued to play, in a futile attempt to inspire the football team.
And as I walked up the hill toward our car, I looked back. It was as if the band was playing for an empty stadium. Now Mr. Hadi says "It's for the people who made this thing happen," and I think to myself, "If it had not have been for the band, there would have been nobody in the stadium on those Saturdays during the '80s."
Since this was the Marching Jay-hawks' centennial season, its members had hoped they would be allowed the opportunity to attend a bowl game as a way of capping off the season, but this is not the case.
It has been reported that Chip Hillary said he did not wish for his college career to end with him on the sidelines. Well Chip, you are lucky. Most of the senior Marching Jayhawks ended their careers playing "Home on the Range" to an empty Memorial Stadium after a Jayhawk loss.
Mr. Foster, all the Marching Jaya-
hawks and the Color Guard, thank you for the memories, the marching, and the music.
Brent Getty
Ottawa Senior
Ottawa Senior
Even presidents' pets deserve some privacy
Which would probably prompt the daughter to ask: "The right to know what?"
And that is a difficult question to answer, unless you are a journalism professor and spend your days thinking about such weighty matters, which I'm not.
But as I understand the modern rules of journalism, a public figure forits all rights to privacy. The creed of today's enterprise journalism is:
Bill Clinton is angry because the press has been bothering his daughter's cat. The animal has been lured into camera range with catnip, held aloft by a TV person, surrounded by photographers and subjected to other indignities.
And they did this despite warnings from the President-elect that the cat was off-limits.
So a strongly wounded statement was issued by Clinton's spokesperson, who said: "The photographers don't have the common decency to leave a little girl's cat alone."
Clinton's anger is understandable. He is a father, and what is he to say when his daughtercries "Daddy, why is that man holding Socks up in the air? And why are those other men poking cameras in Socks' eyes?"
I suppose he could answer: "I know, child, it is a terrible thing. But I am now the President-elect of the greatest nation on Earth. That makes me a public figure and you are the President-elect's daughter. So you are a public figure. And Socks is the President-elect's daughter's cat. As such, Socks has become a public figure. And the public has the right to know about public figures."
And is Socks the sort of cat that likes to sneak out at night to roam and seek the company of cats of the opposite sex, which then leads to all sorts of loud yowling and moaning. In other words, is socks the promiscuous sort? This falls under the public's right to know based on the Gary Hart Precedent.
I'm sure Sam Donaldson would say these are all legitimate areas of inquiry, and he would race Dan Rather to the litter box for the answers.
But as much as I respect the public's right to know, even when it doesn't want to, I think Clinton's anger is justified.
In this case, the cat was grabbed and held aloft. And that could set a dangerous precedent.
If the cat, as a public creature, can be held aloft by a TV person, who is next? Will some enterprising reporter decide to grab Hillary Clinton, hoist her in the air, and say "Whoopsie" for the benefit of the viewing audience?
Will some sports columnist decide that it isn't enough to declare Mike Ditka hopelessly and homicidally insane and leap upon Ditka's back to see if he will buck like a crazed bull?
No. Touching, grabbing, groping, neck biting and any other physical contact should be off-limits. Even public figures and public cats should be afforded that minimal right to privacy. Of course, if a public figure invites the press to grab and grope, that's a matter of choice. And with public figures like Madonna, you never know.
So an effort should be made to reach a compromise. Clinton should try to understand the needs of the army of photographers and TV creatures who are assigned to follow him, his family, his cat and his flankies There are only so many pictures they can take of him in that goofy jogging outfit, buying a munchy at the local McDonald's.
They should be given the opportunity to occasionally snap pictures of the cat, ask the cat questions and record its pityful meows.
But it should be made clear to them that they are not to touch the cat unless they are invited to do so, which is unlikely. Although an exception might be made for Larry King.
And one small piece of advice for Clinton: Buy the kid a pit bull. Mike Royko is a syndicated columnist with the Chicago Tribune.
MIKE ROYKO
For example, does Socks faithfully use the litter box? Has Socks ever stalked and killed a tweety bird? Or torn the life from a tiny mouse?
COLUMNIST
KANSAN STAFF
INTERNATIONAL PERSPECTIVE
France may pay price for accord
In this case, though, we are talking about a cat. So the question is: Can a cat be a public figure? If so, how much does the public have the right to know about a cat?
The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade accord could produce some $200 billion overall in extra-world trade. France would be among those countries to profit. But the price to pay would be the liquidation of tens of thousands of farms, the accelerated abandonment of the countryside and the loss of strong
Asst. Managing Alimee Brainard
Newn Alexander Bloemhoft
Editorial Stephen Martino
Campus Gayle Osterreich
Sports Shelly Solon
Photo Justin Knupp
Features Cody Holt
Graphics Sean Tevis
"A cameraman in every laundry hamper a reporter under every bed."
ERIC NELSON
Editor
GREG FARMER Managing editor
BILL SKEET, Technology coordinator
TOM EBLEN
General manager, news adviser
Le Figaro Paris
ers, including paying them to produce less.
The beneficiaries: U.S. agricultural exporters assured of a greater part in the market. It's on this central point that U.S. pressure has been felt for six years. And it's there that the European Community has given in, and the lone French can't hold out its illusions much longer.
And the price is even higher when the new European agricultural policy accepted by the French government already promises considerable losses to farmers. This new policy clearly turns its back on the policy conceived and applied in Europe since the 1960s. Instead of helping agriculture with price support, it would help to support farm-
Letters should be typed, double-spaced and fewer than 200 words. They must include the writer's signature, name, address and telephone number. Writers affiliated with the University of Kansas must include class and hometown, or faculty or staff position.
Guest columns should be typed, double-spaced and fewer than 700 words. The writer will be photographed.
The Kansas reserves the right to edit or reedit letters, guest columns and cartoons. They can be mailed or brought to the Kansas newcomer, 111 Staff-First Hall.
parts of the export market. That's too much.
These are modest requests. And I wish everyone would adopt these guidelines immediately. Because my best friend is coming up this weekend, and we're going shopping.
And all stores should be required by law to keep their parking lots free of ice. Who wants to shop after fracturing a limb on the way into the store?
Shopping ranks right up there with tennis and sleeping on my list of preferred recreational activities. I have memories dating back to early childhood of roaming through malls.
Whatever the reason, people keep hitting the stores until Christmas. They shop as if they weren't in the recession they were all screaming about a few months ago. They shop as if their lives and the lives of their families depended on getting just the right gift. They shop as if they were never taunted any sort of manners.
And although I participate in the madness every year, I don't understand why everyone hits the stores on Christmas Day and then if it were the day before Christmas.
Julie Wasson is a Springfield Mo., senior in political science and journal
Now, I lead a fairly laid-back life. I don't like structure and I don't like to plan things unless I have to. I don't like to be governed by superfluous rules and regulations.
STAFF COLUMNIST
Also, stores that play Christmas music should play it at a moderate volume and should have a repertoire of more than three songs.
Stores should be made to follow a few rules, too. For example, stores that are not part of an indoor mall should not be allowed to keep the heat above 70 degrees. Sure, it's nice to warm up a little when you walk in of the cold. But it's not nice to walk into a sauna while wearing a wool coat and mittens.
The weeks between Thanksgiving and Christmas are some of my favorite of the year. The semester is drawing to a close, and the holiday shopping season is in full swing.
But I think we need some type of guidelines for holiday shoppers. The phrase "Running around like a chicken with its head cut off" applies to far too many of these people.
I think people should be required to limit the number of consecutive hours they can spend shopping. Too much time in the stores leads to ugly things like tirades over not being able to find festive green socks adorned with bells and Santa Clauses. People in their right minds wouldn't be looking for these things to begin with.
JULIE WASSON Shopping participants need rules for holidays
Perhaps most importantly, no children younger than 10 should be allowed to go shopping. There's nothing worse than listening to screaming infants or walling, undisciplined toddlers. Only children who understand the threat of disinheritance and are scared by it should be allowed to go shopping. The rest of them should stay home and watch "Sesame Street."
Also, people should not be allowed to be sprayed by more than one perfume salesperson on the same day. I know this is hard to avoid sometimes, as those perfume mongers are out in full force in most department stores. But it's a special kind of torture to have to stand next to an over-scented individual in line.
Grace