4 Wednesday, October 27,1976 University Daily Kansan Comment Opinions on this page reflect the view of only the writer. Booze smelled out During the last week one of the more commendable cases of investigation has been conducted by the attorney general, James A. Alcoholic Beverage Control Division. The investigation started when Atty Gn. Curt Schneider sent a memo to remind state Benning that betting on sporting events is illegal in Kansas. Bennett responded by sending a memo to state officials asking them not to wager on such events as the World Series "so that the fears of the attorney general may be quieted, and so that his efforts and his attention may be directed toward other pressing matters." Schneider called Bennett's reminder "sarcastic" and ordered an investigation of state officials' activities during and after sporting events. His reactive snoping led the attorney general to ask the governor where he had been on the afternoon of the KU-Oklahoma game. Now there would have been no way for Schneider to have found out about the illegal cash bar in the Lawrence Elks Club if Bennett hadn't been foolish enough to fall for the old "remind them about the betting law" trick. The funny thing is that the KU law school fell for another attorney general Martin Dickinson, dean of the law school, had assumed that a 1975 assistant attorney general's decision that stated that booze could be served at private gatherings in clubs if the liquor company was in the club member was still lawful. SORRY, Schneider said. I've decided it's illegal. What could Dickinson say? He thought that a 1975 opinion was good enough. Apparently he didn't know that Kansas liquor laws change from attorney general ruling to attorney general ruling. Fortunately, Bennett, Dickinson and Chancellor Archie Dykes (who was also at the reception) won't be fined for breaking a liquor law. The blame will fall where it should— on those deceptive Elks who were trying to corrupt the governor, the chancellor and law school alumni. You deserve a Pulitzer Prize for your investigation, Curt. Contributing Writer Administrators at the University of Kansas should take the cue from service organizations and social clubs across the nation who, this week, are operating spook houses to raise money for their worthwhile projects. Halloween in Strong Hall Surely, experience has taught administrators that it's like trick-or-treating with a wet paper sack to try to get money out of the state legislature for long-range KU projects. So why not try their own little fund raiser? What better way to get money from a small KU publicity and, at the same time, take in a little cash? If every KU student attended and paid $1, administrates could count their profits in the neighborhood of $23,000. I can see it now. Clyde Walker, athletic director, would readily volunteer to coach the spook house staff. The remainder of the week, he could administrators to meet on the intramural fields to go through practice drills. REALLY, the University, can ill afford to bypass its made-to-order spook house we, in daylight hours, call strong Hall. Why, a few quick hours of work each evening this week could save you time and house of horrors could really appreciate by the weekend. Because he would be such a Carter questions remain One week to go, and the time has come in this presidential campaign to lift the fog, and to take a slow, sober look at the road ahead. Do we know what kind of person would the gentleman take us? It isn't so necessary to ask these questions about Gerald Ford. The past two years have given us time to size up his faults and his virtues. We know the set of his mind. On specific issues he has faced. We have his state papers, we have his veto messages. If Ford wins, we know exactly what to expect. It adds up to fog. Carter declared his candidacy Dec. 12, 1974. Nearly two years have passed. The gentleman remains an enigma. If he has any consistent political philosophy, it IT IS entirely different with Carter. True, we have a stack of his position papers; we have books by and about him; we have a thick file of speeches, interviews, transcripts, and the like. We have his record for four years as governor of Georgia, but he has not been president of the United States, and it isn't the same thing at all. hasn't emerged. If My own conviction is that he has none. On every substantive political issue of our time, he has plopped on the liberal side but this is computerized politician. I caretaily calculated, Carter is a careful, calculating man. James J. Kilpatrick (c) 1976 Washington Star Syndicate, Inc. Entirely too much of this campaign has been pursued in a misty. It is all very well to talk of decency, compassion and love, but it is humbug to assert that Carter has more of these qualities than Ford. One recalls Carter's instant reaction in the 1950s when she knew he of the FBI director's impropriety was what he read in the papers, he had a hair-trigger answer: Fire him! The gentleman has the instincts of a charmant in him. WHEN WE get away from decency, compassion and love, we plunge into a deeper fog. It is hard to imagine being more interested in the most general way, what his ideas are on tax reform. About all Carter tells us that the present tax code—a tax code contrived largely by his own party—is a disgrace to the human race. On specific tax proposals, he has wandered all over the map. It is the same story in matters affecting the economy. We know he wants certain standby powers to impose price and revenue on everything else, nothing. He wants to politicize the Federal Reserve Board through a "cooperative" chairman amenable to his wishes. Carter dwells upon the unemployment by creating a system that doesn't seem so concerned about the risk of inflation. But in his position paper, he is yes and no, hot and cold; he says all the ritual things about private property everywhere every street. We don't know. Letters Policy Letters to the editor are welcomed but should be typewritten, double-spaced and no longer than 400 words. All letters are edited and may be condensed according to space limitations and the editor's judgment. Letters should include a KJ student's name provide their academic standing and hometown; faculty must provide their position; others must provide their address. TO BE sure, the gentleman's campaign has its clear and lucid patches. On his first afternoon in office, he would pardon the draft evaders. He would sign a bill abolishing state right-to-work laws. He would create a new of a consumer Advocacy Agency—this being the same gentleman who on other occasions would reduce the federal bureaucracy. Last week he was hot for immediate action on his plan for comprehensive, mandatory national health insurance. The plan is to increase the social security increase in Social Security taxes—this from a gentleman who wouldn't increase taxes on working families. With the exception of national defense, where he seems to have settled on a 85- to 74-billion cut, Carter supports the expansion of every significant area of federal spending: education, health, welfare, consumerism, business regulation. His promises in these fields are general, unspecify, yet unmistakable. He wants you to submit a balanced budget by 1980. We can depend on that; he wouldn't lie to us. Trust me. IF FORD had done a truly wretched job—if our country were bogged down in war or crippled by terrible depression, we might have a sinister figure—perhaps a would readily agree to travel Carter's misty road. But a week bounce, when the meaning of this election must be settled finally, my guess is that the voters will want the family, famous nexicing path they know. My guess is: Ford. executive vice chancellor and part-time microbiology buff, would play the part of a mad scientist intent upon cloning a fly intelligent enough to monitor classroom cheating. good sport, the administrators would reward him by letting him choose the position he wished to play in the spook house. He would. no doubt, be a little nervous with the pipe organ, hoping to get better reviews than his counterpart at Royals Stadium. Promptly at midnight, students would begin arriving The crowd would instantly be distracted by the mournful groans of Kala Stroup, dean of the University. Smith, acting dean of women, Mary Ann Daugherty Contributing Writer FROM THERE, patrons would visit Frankenstein's chamber, where Max Lucas, University energy car, would electromagnetic-trash - burning microwave- lightening rod. Breathless, but feeling a good deal more energetic, the tour would move to the cloning chamber, where Del Shankel, The two would have volunteered to play the roles of the chained women held behind bars. Mild-mannered Donald Alderson, dean of men, would be their evil captor, fendiishly chuckling as he pretended to whip the helpless madens. NO SPOOK house would be complete without a witch, and Frank Burge, director of the Kansas Union, might eagerly oblige. Dutifully, Burge would haul his popcorn wagon from the front yard to Strong. As thick-seekers passed him, he would fill their hands with traditional spook house goodies, such as peeled grapes, Of course, the administrators would have to ascertain that all patrons were treated fairly, none getting more goodies than the next. Bonnie Ritter, director of the Office of Affirmative Action would provide the needed service Dressed in a black suit, she would imitate the antics of the shrieking madwoman while constantly keeping an eye on the concession area. wet noodles and chicken livers kept cool in his wagon. GL. DYCK, dean of admissions and records, might want to operate the torture chamber. Gullillows, spiked beds, quartering tables and Chinese water torture simulating enrollment would be among the concocted displays. Students could request to be housed in the classrooms did well, Dyck could note their performance in their university records. Dracula would be played by none other than Rick von Ende, executive secretary, who knows that Dracula will be a dangerous time, must keep a lid on them. Somewhere nearby, Ron Calgaard, vice chancellor for academic affairs, would entertain guests as the central figure in a scene depicting the horrors of modern education. Calgaard would allow himself to be placed between two gigantic machines, and him with red tape and fling old computer discs as the crowds filed by. NO DOUBT, the administrators would want an assessment of how they'd pleased their audience. Maynard Shelley, professor of psychology, would probably be asked to do some sort of survey at the spook house exit to it, the jewel in which patrons were satisfied, the results were a representative of the division of continuing education would suggest that they go through again. To be a guaranteed success, the administrators would have to do some thinking about recruiting a recruitment of patrons to their church one would expect, Chancellor Archie Dykes, the University's chief recruiter, would dress up as the headless horsenand an adorned man in a tuxedo, Lawrence inviting all to come partake in the good clean fun. 1976 NYT SPECIAL FEATURES Political nomenclature controlled By our standards, putting Chiang Miao, Chao Tse-tung's old lady, in the slammer would be like locking up Martha Washington. If you speak Chinese, what's happening there probably makes perfectly good sense. It makes none to occidentals of the American stripe, but while the reporting on the affair shes no problems with what is occurring in Peking it reveals the unconscious biases of our mass media. THERE CAN be no other way to explain the description of Chiang Ching and her crow as "leftist leaders." What is a leftist leader in a nation where everything down to the last safety pin is nationalized and is the property of the state? You The New York Times makes an effort at defining some of this the Times who are labeled radicals are those who favor reforms in education, the economy. . . . . . . Radicals originally got their alarming reputations because they were can also bear Chang Ching's people called "ideologically motivated" and "radicals" on the radio and television here. Nicbolas Von Hoffman (c) 1974 King Features Syndicate nomenclature. Thus Fox Butterfield, writing from Hong Kong, tells us: "The radicals, a generally young group, came to Mao's revolution because of their backing for Mao's attacks on entrenched power-makers in the party and their support for reforms in education, the use of other things, the reforms bonuses and wage raises for workers, required party officials to spend more time at manual labor and made them work overtime in the countryside after finishing school." At the same time, many other news dispatchs refer to the government or the people that Chiang-Ching is apparently fighting as "moderates," "middle of the roaders," or "pragmatists." Undoubtedly, the American writers新闻记者 are descriptive, and they are descriptive; they describe the unconscious political maps inside our journalists' heads. THE PEOPLE write these dispatches aren't in China; they know so little about the country they couldn't even name the Chinese government or job when the Chairman packed it in a few weeks ago. Therefore the adjectives they use in describing various Chinese political factions are but a small part of our own domestic politics. Thus the moderates are the ones who occupy official positions—those whose opinions are sanctioned by prestigious people and institutions. The rest will all suggest people who are non- dynamic, quiet, stationary, and not given to change. People in people who went to the root of matters, and therefore advocated upheavals. The word still has that connotation, but notice how it is applied to persons advocating far less drastic actions than are accorded up in the word "reform." In the news columns of the Times, radicals and reformers are the same people. THIS KIND of thing isn't deliberate. It probably passes through the hands of the editors and the copy readers untouched because that's how they think. Although they're 'too hard to read', they reformers are radicals, they'll print that very assertion if the words radical and reformer are separated by a clause or two. Along the same lines the people who oppose doing such things as making "party officials . . . spend more time at manual labor" are regarded as pragmatists. Even if this totally Communist, activist society staff, of individually staff of any American news gathering agency could stand living, the Chinese, whom the journalists conceive of as defending a hierarchical social structure, are the ones on whom the favorable word "pragmatics is used." Are the names what we speak in language or the Times," put economic growth and orderly administration above ideological campaigns and revolutionary purity." The practical, moderate and hard-headed folks get results against the wild, impractical, fanatics who would rather spout dreams than grow bread. Whether or not such divisions exist in China they are a perfect paradigm of how our own politics is described to us by our news people. AS A consequence, a premium is given to the politician most able to extrude an unbroken paste of insipid sincerity. The stance for winning the highest approval is immobile, quiet and cotton candy-like. The other night, it was the Wise Seer wrapped in clouds, rebuked Jiminy Peanut for revealing "an instinct for the deliberate insult, the loaded phrase and the broad innuendo." To conduct a campaign without so much as a loaded phrase or an innuendo of broad or narrow words, it was moderate, a middle of the roader suitable for CBS, a perfectly controlled functionary. From Demosthenes through Pitt and Burke all the way down to Harry Truman, the language of democratic debate has been passionate, insulting, inspiring, heavy with disgraceful innoendo, ferociously unfair and majestic. Severeiard—and he but reflects the tastes of millions like him who are terrified of the smell of their own armpits and the voice of their souls—must have been without forensics, without the possibility of expressing a fair bone or freshening vision. At the time the Sevaradic types of this world complain that the debates are dull. The price of being lively is to have a fogged-out Eric or news mopplet like NBC's Jane Paulet call you an ideologue and a radical. Stand pat, stay calm, listen to what happens, and when the voters form circles and dance in the dust, calling for issues like Indians praying for rain, let all leaders evacuate their brains and assume the position of moderation. THE UNIVERSITY DAILY KANSAN Editor Debbie Gorman Published at the University of Kansas date August 15, 2016. Subscribes to *University of Kansas* June and July except Saturday - Sunday and Holiday. Subscribes by mail are $2 a semester or $3 a year outside the county. State student subscriptions are a year outside the county. Debbie Gump Managing Editor Editorial Editor Yael Abouhalak Jim Bates Managing Editor Yat Abadahakhui Canv Editor Jamie Broun Associate Campus Editor Bilal Bidan Sue Blair Chuck Alexander Photo Editor Stef Photographers George Miller, Jeff Koehler Sports Editor Steve Schenfeld Associate Sports Editor Gary Vice Entertainment Editor Alismon Qwien Contributing Editor John Fulker Copy Chiefs Alison Gwien Make-up Editors Greg Hacken Chuck Alexander Chuck Denvorib, Joy Behnk Kevin Business Manager Terry Hannon Assistant Business Manager Carole Rosekoster Advertising Manager Jane Clemente Marketing Manager John McQuinn Classified Manager Sarah McAnnany Assistant Classified Manager Sarah McAnnany Classified Manager Timothy O'Shea News Advisor Publisher Business Advisor Bob Giles David Dary Mel Adams