4
Monday, October 12, 1992
OPINION
UNIVERSITY DAILY KANSAN
WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT COLUMBUS DAY?
"The myth that Columbus discovered America is wrong and should be looked at as a tragic occurrence in so far as all the death that occurred."
Dianne Schnorenberg
Gardner freshman
"Columbus Day is just one of those holidays that is there.I'm impartial to it.It does signify the founding of our country, so I guess it does have significant importance." Molly McEachen
Molly McEachen Kansas City, Kan., freshman
"As a kid I thought it was pretty cool. But when I came here, people started pointing out that it isn't right to celebrate it. I'd rather go to school than celebrate Columbus Day."
Donna Lauth
Ketchican, Alaska freshman,Haskell Indian Junior College
"I don't really care. It doesn't
bother me. It's in the past, and it really has nothing to do with today. I haven't really thought about it."
Manuel Coverpsr
Lodge Grass, Mont., freshman. Haskell Indian Junior College
Compiled by Kansan staff reporter Mark Martin
Photos by Irene Lanier
LETTER TO THE EDITOR
As a somewhat faithful fan of the Jayhawks, I attended the KU/Tulsa football game a couple of weeks ago. The game, the band and the cheerleaders were all great!
Mascot apparel is an embarrassment
That is, until I booked at the Jayhawk mackos' feet. I became quite distressed as I saw the ugliest pair of yellow cowboy boots ever manufactured by the fine state of Texas. (That's where all cowboy boots come from, isn't it?)
In my confusion, I tried to rationalize why the Jayhawk would have on yellow cowboy boots. I admit, I can see the reasoning
behind the color yellow, but what's the deal with the cowboy boots? Is it because nine out of 10 KU students wear cowboy boots? (Not!) Or is that Jayhawk is another name for the common everyday go roper? (Very unlikely.)
So I have come up with a couple of options for the Jayhawk:
Either way, the cowboy boots must go back to Texas or to the Salvation Army.
2. A yellow pair of Converse Chuckie Taylors.
Remember, KU should kick but not fertilizer! Let's leave being cowboys to our friends at OSU.
Keith Farney Oklahoma City, Okla.
KANSAN STAFF
ERIC NELSON
General manager, news adviser
GREG FARMER
TOM EBLEN
BILL SKEET Technology coordinator
SCOTT HANNA
Business manager
BILLLEIBENGOOD
Retail sales manager
JEANNE HINES
Sales and marketing adviser
Managing editor
Assist. Managing Aimee Brainard
News Alexander Blommohot
Editorial Stephen Martino
Campus Gayle Osterberg
Sports Shelly Solon
Photo Justin Knupp
Features Cody Holt
Graphics Sean Teels
Business Staff
Campus sales mgr   Angela Clevenger
Regional sales mgr   Melissa Tilperd
National sales mgr   Brian Wilkes
Co-op sales mgr   Amy Stumbo
Production mgrs   Brad Braen
Marketing director  Kim Claston
Creative director  Abbie Schleier
Creative dirm   Valerie Spicher
Classified mgr  Judith Standley
Letters should be typed, double-spaced and fewer than 200 words. They must include the name of the student. Letters must include the name of the University which must include class and hometown, or faculty or staff position. Guest letters should be typed, double-spaced and fewer than 700 words. The writer will be required to report the request to reedit or edit letters, guest cartoons and cartoons. They can use standard fonts such as Times New Roman or Arial.
Kansan might be liberal, but no sign of the Antichrist
Constructive criticism is great. Without it, we could drift along repeating the same mistakes over and over again.
The most interesting element in the onslaught of letters we receive each day is the diversity of opinions expressed. Last week one reader informed us that we were a prochoice newspaper. Another scolded us for being an anti-abortion publication. Interesting.
For the record, last spring the Kansan wrote several editorials advocating abortion rights. This fall, the paper has delved into the micro-issues of abortion, but we have not contradicted our pro-choice stance.
Yes, it appears our opinions have such an impact that they can mean completely opposite things to different people. Perhaps most intriguing was a recent letter that labeled the Kansan this way: "You are a liberal newspaper, you anti-Christ, prochoice, pro-gay publication."
Now, there's a liberal interpretation of reality. Of course, the same man defined George Bush as a moderate. Yeah, George and Rush Limbaugh.
COMMENTARY
Are we liberal? Perhaps. One of the roles of a newspaper is to seek out and expose social sills — to advocate civil rights and fairness for all people. So, I guess we are pro-gay but also pro-heterosexual, pro-celibate, probisexual and whatever other sexual orientations I may have left out.
DAVID MITCHELL
I had heard the pro-gay and prochoice raps before. They do not bother me because I do not take the liberal tag as an insult. If someone called me a conservative, then I would be hurt.
But when I was informed we were an anti-christ newspaper, I was absolutely shocked. I could not believe it. The Kansan an anti-Christ paper? Personally, I cannot work for such a publication. I took pen in hand and began to write my letter of resignation. But then I realized as a virtuous journalist that it was my duty to seek out the source of this demonic bent. If the Antichrist was in my midst, I would find him and put him in his place — perhaps Oklahoma.
If we look to the Bible as has been suggested, we would see murder on the list of top 10 sins. For all I know, the Antichrist might be lurking around Lawrence somewhere, but I haven't found him on campus.
mother fairly well. I also have no distinguishing scars.
The angry reader reminded me to look to the Bible. I recalled that the Antichrist was foretold to be born of a jackal and to bear the mark of Satan. I began at the top and eliminated myself because I know my biological
Even though I had eliminated the editor from these criteria, I knew that if the Antichrist had infiltrated an entity as powerful as a student newspaper he would hold a position of power. So taking the next logical step, I stormed across the newsroom, ripped off the baseball cap of my managing editor and began to look for the sign of the Devil. Unfortunately, I did not find three sixes. I did not even find dandruff. However, he did give me a dirty look. Though that was rude, he was not quite satanic.
I quickly moved on to the Kansan editor. The blue-eyed, blond boy was easy to eliminate. He's from Nebraska. Besides, I have spoken to his mother before and therefore know he is not a son of a bitch.
Associate editorial editor David Mitchell is a DeSaote major senior in Journalism.
Finally, I was forced to conclude that the Kansan is not an anti-Christ publication. Yes, we did condemn the Rev. Fred Phelps for his "death to fags" rhetoric. But people confused by the entire Phels debate should ask themselves what is more antichrist: sodomy or murder?
QUOTES OF THE WEEK
"As far as I'm concerned, the organization doesn't exist."
— DAVID PAUL, FORMER TREASURER OF THE INACTIVE COLLEGE REPUBLICANS
"This is the most ridiculous thing I've ever been involved in . . . they've never kept in touch with me. And I just kept assuming I was the adviser. I would love to know what I'm advising."
"Our tax dollars are supporting a center for fags in room 423 of the Kansas Union building . . . I don't think my money should be helping support something I find filth."
- ANTH-HOMOSEXUAL ACTIVIST FRED PHELPS ON THE GAY AND LESBIAN SERVICES OF KANSAS. PHELPS APPEARED ON JKHIK'S "THE JOHN BOSS SHOW."
— KENDALL SIMMONS, ADVISER COLLEGE REPUBLICANS
"First, I would like to say I totally disagree with all the
contentions of Rev. Phelps.
Second, I would like to ask him how big his penis is."
—A CALLER TO "THE JOHN BOSS SHOW"
—DAN FITZGERALD, KANSAS CITY, MO., JUNIOR ON THE ON-CAMPUS REGISTRATION DRIVE
"I'm registering again just for my conscience sake. And I hate George Bush."
COMPILED FROM KANSAN STAFF REPORTS THE WEEK OF 10-4-92.
JEFF REYNOLDS
TV-viewing voters must see the real debate issues
Who are we trying to fool?
Everyone can finally relax. George Bush, Bill Clinton and even Ross Perot have all finally started to debate. On Oct. 15 and 18 they will go head to head to head again on national television to argue their opposing visions for the future of this country. Voters will be able to see the candidates stand side by side and thus be able to wade through the rhetoric and make an informed decision based solely on the issues.
Only a small percentage of the population will even watch. And most could not care less about opposing views of the government's role in solving the recession. When the focus moves to macroeconomics, most people will move to the kitchen for another handful of Cheetos. Of the small minority that attempts to comprehend the differing economic philosophies, most will fail. Bush and Clinton weren't Ivy League scholars for nothing.
The end result will be that people will spend the entire debate judging if the candidates look the way we expect them to. Are they confident? Is one of them dominant? These are the types of things that will determine votes. This may be pessimistic, but history indicates this clearly.
In the 1960 Kennedy-Nixon election, image was the determining factor in the presidential debates. Those who listened to that debate on the radio felt Nixon won. Those who saw it on television felt Kennedy won because Kennedy was handsome and tan. Nixon was sick and pale. Kennedy wore make-up. Nixon refused to. When the hot lights began beating down, Nixon started sweating and Kennedy looked cool and relaxed. In the end, Kennedy simply looked more like we wanted our president to look.
In 1980 it was much of the same. Jimmy Carter looked 20 years older than he had in 1976, and Ronald Reagan was his confident, movie star self. In 1984 Reagan was even better. When one of the journalists attempted to press him on his age (73 at the time) his response made the entire audience roar with laughter.
"I will not let you make age an issue in this election," he said very seriously. "I think it is totally unfair of you to try and exploit my opponent's youth and inexperience." It didn't matter that Reagan had completely avoided the issue. He was funny, and we liked it when our president made us laugh.
Take the time to sit down and watch one or two of the debates, and try not to spend the entire time waiting to see who dogs who. If all we respond to are the images and insults we'll end up getting exactly what we deserve. Besides, it's this thought process that has Perot comparing every single issue to either a heap of dung or his crazy aunt in the basement. Needless to say, even Perot's crazy aunt won't be able to get us out of the dung pile our country has slipped into.
The 1988 debates witnessed everybody's favorite political slam. No one remembers any of the issues discussed in the vice presidential debate. The only thing that anyone could talk about was how stupid Dan Quayle looked after Lloyd Bentson's "you're no Jack Kennedy" comment.
Jeff Reynolds is a Hutchinson senior majoring in political science.
501 Bluez
By Moses Smith