4
Monday, November 1, 1976
University Daily Kansas
Comment
Opinions on this page reflect the view of only the writer.
Mutt not welcome
Found: Lab and German shepherd for the pup on campus last week. 842-263-9500
A new, uninvited and unwelcomed game moved into Apartment 13 last week.
L-FIE, A 10-week-old pup of mixed breeding, has taken up residence in my two bedroom apartment—much to my surprise.
She was found by the girlfriend of one of our friends in a speech class. The dog walked in and looked lost, so the girl took it home.
But now, because of pet restrictions in her apartment, the kind heart of one of my roommates, and indiscriminate dog owner, lives with my two roommates and me.
Then, last Sunday without warning, L.斐 walked into the apartment. We were stuck with the mutt, and it has irritated me and one of my roommates ever since the other roommate is the dog's pussy. So she has ignored our pleas to get rid of it.
I DIDN'T think the dog was going to be placed with us. I had heard some mention of a dog, but I decided it wasn't any of his business.
I don't like this dog. I like dogs, but his one is nothing but trouble.
BEFORE the letters from dog lovers everywhere start coming in, let me repeat that I like dogs. I raised a pup and I took care of the look of care him until I left for college.
But I strongly think that dogs, especially big ones, were meant to be raised in large houses or the outdoors. Apartments like ours are too small for human beings, let alone a 10-week-old pup.
L-FIE takes a healthy view of life. She likes to chew on Olympia beer cans (we had to take them away because she punched holes in them. She is interested in newspapers (she especially likes to chew on Chuck Woodling columns) and books (she gnawed the corner off a track and field textbook).
She also has to have the largest bowels of any pup I know.
Life scratches on the apartment door when she has an urge to relieve herself, her nose is very red.
IF SOMEONE doesn't make it to the door in time, then our green carpet will do just as well as the grass outside. The door is not fluffy, and the trapped着 barefoot in the apartment.
L'fie will play with an old shoe until she works her way over to the chair. Then, when I'm concentrating on a book I will attack my feet, hands and arms.
She's just teething, her benefactor savs, and she'll grow out of it.
I'm sure that she'll grow out of her bite-everything--moves stage, but I hope that she isn't around long enough for me to see it.
By Carl Young Contributing Writer
have, so it seems, come out of their cloaked chambers long enough to acknowledge that some rules are, in the lingo of the day, anachronistic. Before they are acceptable. After all, times, they are a changin'.
But if times are changing, changing dramatically on all fronts, maybe some aspect of society should remain unaltered. Perhaps the government should continue tradition. U.S. News & World Report this week reported that religion was still alive and well, despite government admonishment, in the world's Communist countries. I wonder whether people question the effects of religious rule on their lives?
A national assembly of Catholic bishops, priests, sisters and午会 meeting in Detroit passed a resolution Oct. 22 urging American bishops to repeal a church law requiring the excommunication of divorced Catholics who remarry.
MAN IS a rational animal, and he has the intellect to govern himself. But when it comes to the church, the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. The church is tested in the preceding centuries give the church a validity beyond our own endorsement. And, for a society that largely acknowledges the importance of religion, it would be fortunate if our last generations were able to preserve many others, into shades of ambivalent gray.
McCarthy merits backers' votes
To the Editor:
The news was probably welcomed by many Catholics who, in recent years, have decried the ruling that denounced second marriages. Disgruntled Catholics have frequently uttered their regret that the law thwarted all opportunity to marry a priest of the church's most treasured sacraments failed.
In recent weeks, I have overheard or participated in numerous conversations in which students, faculty members, and others freely acknowledge that Eugene McCarthy, former senator from Minnesota, and 1968 presidential nominee, party presidential nomination, is the candidate now running who is best prepared to be the President of the United States
HUMAN FRAILTY, they have said, is inescapable. Therefore, the church shouldn't admonish failure. Add a religious aura to the question, they have said, and it seems fitting that the church would support people in their search to share love rather than punish them for it.
1976 NYT SPECIAL FEATURES
But certainly, with all the recent comment about changing church attitudes, news of the resolution wasn't shocking. Considering that bishops themselves called the assembly, in hopes of getting their message across, justice behind Catolic dogma, it wasn't surprising that a resolution of this sort was passed.
"What this country needs is a little bran in its diet. For years, the world has been torn up by constipated rich people. I want to wipe out constipation in the United States."
So are Eddie Collins and Ernest Whitford.
Election diet needs added bulk
Staff Writer
Laughable. Not a chance in heaven to win. And that's the way it's set up. Concentrated efforts by the Republican and Democratic parties, the League of Women Voters, the Court and the media allow a choice between two candidates—but no more.
You haven't heard? Not surprising. With the names of Jimmy Carter and Gerald Ford, how could you know?
By BILL SNIFFEN
Lar Daly is running for President this year.
AND WHAT a choice we have this year. Fewer than half of the 140 million eligible to vote may do so, the lowest percentage in American political history.
DALY IS making his seventh bid for the presidency. Collins wants more nuity. Whitford's appeal is an anticontest plank:
And why should they? They know that the presidential race is decided by no matter which of the two principal candidates is elected, the nation's problems will not get worse. At best, they won't get worse.
Eugene McCarthy, the 60-year-old former senior from Minnesota, presents a force that has taken over the Carter and Ford camps.
McCarthy has had to go it alone. Unlike Carter and Ford, McCarthy was denied access to
BUT THERE aren't just two candidates for President this year; there are, by a mid-October count. 174.
Recall, if you will, candidate Paul Trent's historical statement on tax loopholes:
VET THERE is one name, among the 174, which will appear on the ballots of 29 states. A name faw are laughing at.
That statement is probably enough to send both peanut farmer and President alike into spasms of laughter.
Mary Ann Daugherty Contributing Writer
"Rather than eliminate tax loopholes," he stated, "we should all learn to use them."
All of this, I suppose, is notable. Catholic leaders
the back of the closet and replaced by short skirts and skimpy veils. Church leaders interpret their laws less restrictively now, as noted by the increasing number of dissolutionaments and annulments they grant. Many clergy members now affirm their right to marry, and a few have even gone so far as to affirm the right to their own homosexual relationships. And, of course, questions concerning birth control and abortion, once unheard, of have stirred heated controversy.
Church should remain stable
THE 27,000 petition signatures he gathered in Michigan were ruled invalid by a Michigan court that said his name on the ballot would encourage "the clogging of its election machinery." Vermont law required a justice of the peace to witness a court order against McCarthy faced similarly obnoxious problems in Iowa and West Virginia.
And yet, he's still there. Pollsters estimate he will win 2 to 12 per cent of the popular vote. A Louis Harris-ABC poll estimated he'd get six per cent.
federal campaign funds—$21.8 million worth. Unlike Carter and Ford, McCarthy was denied by the Supreme Court and the League of Women Voters an appearance in the "Great Debates." And, because he is running as an independent candidate, he fight inane, narrow-minded state campaigns just to get his name on the ballot—also unlike Carter and Ford.
Why shouldn't the church examine its principles and their effects? In a time when virtually every group, from the local PTA to the national leadership of the NAACP, is probing American society, it seems indeed, a healthy place for us to live, it seems that the Catholic Church would take up the crusade.
AND TAKE it up they have. The long black babbys nuts used to wear have been releasable to
Therein lies a catch.
Political analysts predict that if McCarthy takes six per cent, give or take a percentage or two, he will virtually hand the election to Ford. But he scores in the upper ranges of the pollsters estimates—and takes the chance to show the election to the House Representatives, giving that Democratic-controlled body the power to elect—who else? Carter.
Other Democrats, concerned about Carter's political stands, might attempt to draft another bill. All hall must break loose.
Maybe.
Is McCarthy a spoiler?
"HOW CAN YOU spill this election when there's nothing to spoil," he has said. Carter is the "ultimate compromise" to McCarthy, and no different in political belief from Ford.
Funny—that's what the 70 million voters who won't vote Nov. 2 have been saving.
come January 1977. Yet, many of these same persons (in the past) have reluctant to vote for McCarthy. Nov. 2 for fear that (1) he cannot win, or (2) a voter in his county is a vote for Ford (or Carter).
Although I am realistic enough to admit that McCarthy has little chance for gaining the necessary majority of electoral votes next Tuesday, he may deny such a majority to both of the other serious candidates, thus throwing the decision into doubt and representing. Such a result, I agree, is a healthy exercise for the constitutional procedures of our republic.
It is a blot upon our democracy that Eugene McCarthy is prevented by legal maneuverings from participating in this year's presidential debates.
Perhaps, though not so literally, we ought to take branating Ernest Whitford's advice—mice-McCarthy is a healthy animal, and they needed now to help unlog the two-party system's pipes.
be the best candidate—whether they were planning to vote for someone else, or not to vote at all.
If Jimmy Carter is, in fact, deliberately trying to suppress the voice and influence of Eugene McCarthy in this election campaign, then Mr. Carter must muddle through another four years with the unimaginative but basically honest Gerald Ford as our president. Jimmy Carter has the potential being a great President of the United States—he could win if he overcomes energies to overcome unemployment, inflation, poverty, racism, and the arms race. On the other hand, Carter could allow his zeal and ambition to get us into a totally unnecessary and even hypocritical nation not willing to yield to his moral aggressiveness.
Our history books will record how many votes Eugene McCarthy received in 1976. I want that number of votes to be large, and for my vote to be one of them. A vote for Eugene McCarthy is a vote for Eugene McCarthy. The calmer, more responsible America—whether or not he wins.
Gerald E. Mikkelson
Associate Professor
Slavic Languages and Literatures
I hope that my advice will be heeded by everyone who believes Eugene McCarthy to
Gripes clarified To the Editor:
In response to the article on the proposed Haskell Loop roadway planned for East Lawrence, the East Lawrence Citizens For Housing Preservation would like to clarify a few of the objections we have with the project and with the
neighborhood and so there's been little population increase and hence we don't have increased "traffic pressure." The city has to work with trucks going to and from the industrial area to the east and north. But, this wouldn't be a problem if the city would enforce existing ordinances that require residents using residential streets! Trucks should be forced to use the most direct route to their destination. Now, we have trucks using every street in the city to drive drivers' discretion. The city's negligence in enforcing the law
Readers Respond
city's treatment of East Lawrence.
The Kansas story stated we charged that Oblinger-Smith, the consultants who prepared the Environmental Impact Statement, were biased because the firm was named and that of Lawrence." Oblinger-Smith is biased and has an obvious conflict of interest because they have been in the planning of the Haskell Loop almost from its inception. They designed the roadway; naturally they want to write a negative impact statement. The city has awarded Oblinger-Smith numerous contracts for expensive consultant reports. If they owned tractors and equipment, they would award the construction contract for the Loop to Oblinger-Smith!
More than half of the city's Community Development Act money slated for the next three years will be used for acquisition costs in preparation for the roadway construction. This is more than just an "ineffective" use of CD money. It's scandalous and immoral! CD funds are being used to tear down the homes of low- and moderate-income residents, the act was intended to help!
Finally, we want to challenge City Manager Buford Watson's claim that the Loop would take traffic pressure away from the area and would rearrive the neighborhood. It's an older neighborhood. It's an older
is conveniently designed to convince residents that indeed, the Haskell Loop is needed.
The Loop won't "renovate" the area. Some of the 28 homes in the path of the road have already been torn down; 27 homes remain undisturbed and isolation in an industrially zoned area east of the loop. Because they will be non-conforming uses and therefore ineffective for utilization, these homes eventually be torn down for industrial expansion. Other homes left near the Loop will also deteriorate when noise and pollution from the road makes
This is neighborhood preservation?
Susie Hanna
Susie Hanna
Member of the
East Lawrence Citizens
For Housing Preservation
Elk apologizes To the Editor:
In view of recent "extraordinary" publicity concerning a reception for alumni from the school at the Elks Lodge in Lawrence on October 16, 1978, I want to set the record straight as to persons previously assured in news stories and myself.
I previously made some statements to a reporter and these statements were quoted in the newspaper with no explanation of the meaning of my statements. "We'll just have to wait for the ABC opinion. They're the God Almighty over clubs in this
state," was made without much thought as to how this particular statement might sound standing alone. I did, in fact, make the statement with malice aforethought or in a derogatory manner. The fact is the liquor laws in the state of Kansas are enforced by the Alcohol Beverage Control (ABC). The state authority by law to issue citations, conduct hearings and decide the disciplinary action he feels is justified. This duty, which is delegated to the agent, a deputy, and first my knowledge that he has always been a very fair and judicious person.
A letter had previously been received by the KU law school from William Schutte, assistant attorney general, discussing the case. I was gently held under Kansas laws. I was aware of this letter and its contents. Before the reception was held, I assured the officials of the KU law school that the record would be made in accordance with Mr. Schutte's letter, thus legally. The reception was held, in my mind at the time, in this manner. I was interviewed by ABC agents later time and told them the truth. I have been cited to appear before the ABC director for a hearing Nov. 17. I will appear as scheduled. If I did, unintentionally, violate any of the Kan-
I wish to apologize to Gov. Robert F. Bennett, Rep. Larry Winn Jr., U.S. District Judge Winn Jr., of the Corporation Commission Chairman G. T. Van Bebber, Chancellor Archie Dykes, top officials of the KU law school and the third-year law class for the barrassment in attending the reception, having your good names associated in the news,apers with this function and indicating you had com- pleted your service during doing a violation of the law.
If I thought I was in compliance with the law, how could any of you have questioned the judge? He would take full responsibility and at the upcoming hearing I will most assuredly learn of my indications and assure you I am not guilty. Lodge in Lawrence, Kansas.
Chris Kirkwood
Elks Club Manager
Butz' topics come to forefront
Sad but True Dept.: On Sex, Loose Shoes and a Presidential Election
By PAUL JEFFERSON Staff Writer
Just the other day, I ran into an old girlfriend while thinking about double-digit inflation. After several minutes of animated conversation, lying in bed for a long time, she more often, she inquired matter-of-factly, "And how's your sex life?"
After I'd told her that it was as healthy as could be expected, the question made me think about the "sexual revolution," and what it may mean in terms of romantic relationships. What used to be called love is now sex.
SEB EXB an overriding concern in our society, whether it's used to sell toothpaste or found in the lustful hearts of
People want to know about sex before they inquire about anything (anyone) else you may be doing. I can think of no other reason than being strangers, will sit around sans clothing, discussing their lamented libidos and calling the situation a sensitivity group. Heady subjects like wars and rape should get as much attention.
presidential candidates. It is definitely a leading attention-getter, whether people do it, they do it, watch it or write about it.
Questions about sexual experiences are asked often, even more than questions about anyone else's physical or emotional welfare. That may or may not say something about the way people relate to each other.
I HARDLY long for a return to the Puritanical days, but
"I'll admit it straight out. I really didn't understand Earl Butz's remark about "... loose shoes. . . ."
What I found disturbing was how to react to a government official's remark that slandered him. He was the race of which I a member.
... and into a voting booth
Nov. 2, I was talking recently with my Uncle Arthur about the upcoming election.
Should I get rid of my platyform shoes? Maybe going to an unheated restroom would help. I had worn the shoes though I had been branded with a scarlet letter, or as though a neon sign glared on my head drawing undertention. I felt uncomfortable and walk right out of my shoes.
"Nope," he said. "I'm for Nobody."
Then he showed me a picture of Nobody. It was blank.
"Aw, come on," I said. "You must be for somebody."
Forrest (he never could get my name right), I'm supporting Nobody for President."
"SURE." I said.
"But Art," I said, "there's nobody there."
Nobody was sitting in it. "Here are some pictures of him addressing the crowd."
"I know," he said. "Wanna see some pictures of a rally for Nobody?"
"Here's some pictures of him arriving in his motorcade."
I looked at the shots of Nobody's motorcade. A battered sports car was pictured on the sidewalk, with a bunting-festoned wooden chair mounted on the trunk.
I LOOKED at the pictures Uncle Art thrust into my hands.
Nobody was sitting on the stage, on which banners hung that read, "Nobody loves the poor," and, "Nobody will lower your taxes" and "Nobody can stop inflation."
On the lectern a pair of plastic windup teeth chattered into the microphone.
"He even knows where Eastern Europe is," Art chimed.
"Be serious, Uncle Art. You know that Nobody can't win in this election. Who do you really want?" Suresh not McCarthy? "Why?"
"Well, Forrest, I think my man has as good a chance as anybody." Art said. "Remember, in the last election, 40 per cent of the eligible vote turned for Nobody, yes he may get eve more votes."
I don't know whether to call this Sad but True, or Making Things Up.