Opinion
Kansan
Published daily since 1912
Ann Premer, Editor Jamie Holman, Business manager Gerry Doyle, Managing editor Sara Cropper, Retail sales manager Angie Kuhn, Managing editor Dan Simon, Sales and marketing adviser Tom Eblen, General manager, news advisor Justin Knupp, Technology coordinator
Friday, January 22,1999
W. David Keith / KANSAN
Editorials
Annual presidential address fails to provide concrete details, ideas
Once again this year, the American public was treated to the showy media circus called the State of the Union. After yet another rambling list of unrealistic promises, the format of this yearly speech needs to be re-evaluated and revised.
With the exception of the first two presidents, the State of the Union was not given until the 20th century. Lyndon Johnson moved his speech to prime-time television to reach the most viewers. At that time, the speech began changing into the spectacle it is today. The entrance of the President into the House has become a political "right of passage."
Besides the extravagant pageentry of the speech, the substance itself has become increasingly impractical. What began as a rather dry summary of activities and accomplishments has turned into a list of possibilities. Since the Reagan administration, every cabinet member could count on at least one of their projects being mentioned in this plan for the future.
The State of the Union Address has become another overhyped fluff piece.
The main problem with the "laundry list" approach is the lack of details supplied to the lawmakers and the public. Cost, personnel, funding and, in most cases, a description of the program itself is omitted from the speech. The feasibility of implementing all of the possibilities is
non-existent.
In recent years, the State of the Union has become a star-studded gala where guest stars serve to emphasize points made during the speech. If you happen to be opposed to the President, you also are opposed to these role models. For example, if we do not support President Clinton, consequently we are against Sammy Sosa being congratulated for his flood relief efforts. Although Soma and Rosa Parks are models, this is not the time to capitalize on their popularity.
All presidents must from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union. In the past couple decades, the media has transformed the speech into a spectacle filled with pageantry, celebrities and non-substantive ideas. We, as the ultimate lawmakers, deserve more.
Tara Kelly for the editorial board
State of Union doesn't deserve flak
Debating specific issues presented in a State of the Union Address is one thing, but nitpicking the focus of the address is a waste of time.
But there are constant themes that have run through different presidents' State of the Union Addresses. Many presidents do three things: Look back at moments that occurred during the past year, discuss the state of the country (deficits, interest rates, etc.) and inform Congress and U.S. citizens of
There is no book outlining what a president must say during the State of the Union. Each president has given the address his own personality. And presidents have used the speech as an opportunity to focus on enormous issues facing the country, such as President Bush did during the Gulf War.
Clinton's address delivered what it was supposed to: review, situation, agenda.
president's agenda for the coming year.
Clinton's speech this week did that.
By introducing people in the audience,
something many presidents have done,
such as Sammy Sosa and the wives of
officials who died when shots were
fired in the capital, the President asked
people to reminisce. The President also
talked of the state of the economy and
suggested that citizens examine that
state of the country. And throughout
the speech, Clinton informed Congress
and the American people of his upcoming
agenda.
This editorial is not necessarily supporting what the president said, but merely pointing out that Clinton's speech was not that different from other State of the Union Addresses.
Sadly, the State of the Union is one of the few times many Americans watch the president speak. In many ways, the speech is often broad so the president can let Americans know what is in store for the future, while he knows he has them watching.
The State of the Union is not a perfect address, and eyebrows should be raised because Clinton didn't mention his impeachment.
But anyone who believes the speech is too broad or entails too much pomp and circumstance misunderstands why the speech exists.
Spencer Duncan, dissenting
Kansan staff
News editors
Ryan Koerner ... Editorial
Jeremy Doherty ... Associate Editorial
Aaron Marvin ... News
Laura Roddy ... News
Melissa Ngo ... News
Aaron Knopf ... Online
Erin Thompson ... Sports
Marc Sheforgen ... Associate sports
Chris Fickett ... Campus
Sarah Hale ... Campus
T.R. Miller ... Features
Steph Brewer ... Associate features
Augustus Anthony Piazza ... Photo
Chris Dye ... Design, graphics
Carl Kaminski ... Wire
Carolyn Mollett ... Special sections
Laura Veazey ... news clerk
Advertising managers
Matt Lopez . . . Special Sections
Jennifer Patch . . . Campus
Micah Kaffitz . . . Regional
Jon Schlitt . . National
Tyler Cook . . Marketing
Shannon Curran . PR/ Intern manager
Christa Estep . Production
Steven Prince . Production
Chris Corley . Creative
Jason Hannah . Classified
Corinne Bufmire . Zone
Shauntae Blue . Zone
Brandi Byram . Zone
Brian Allers . Zone
Justin Allen . Zone
Broaden your mind: Today's quote
"The future is like heaven — everyone exalts it, but no one wants to go there now." — James Baldwin
now." —James Baldwin
Letters: Should be double-spaced typed and fewer than 200 words. Letters must include the author's signature, name, address and telephone number plus class and home-town if a University student. Faculty or staff must identify their positions.
How to submit letters and guest columns
Guest columns: Should be double-
spaced typed with fewer than 700 words. The writer must be willing to be photographed for the column to run.
All letters and guest columns should be submitted to the Kansan newsroom, 111 Staufer-Flint Hall. The Kansan reserves the right to edit, cut to length or reject all submissions.
For any questions, call Ryan Koerner or Jeromy Doerhoff at 864-4924.
I may have general questions or comments,
e-mail the page staff (opinion@kansan.com)
or call 864-4924.
Clinton tells audience what it wants to hear
Perspective
Like millions of Americans around the world, I made a big, buttery bowl of popcorn and sat down to watch the president's State of the Union address Tuesday night. I'm not
sure exactly why i tuned in,
it was probably just to see if
Ted Kennedy was drunk, but
I watched the whole thing.
First, he introduced two guests, the widows of the officers killed in the Capitol Hill shootings. Next, he moved on to a new plan to invest excess Social Security money to allow for more money in the future. He then talked about the need for an improved education system, followed by the need to ensure equal payment for men and women. He made promises to designate more effort into finding cures for diseases, such as cancer. Somewhere along the way he let us know that child labor is wrong. Are you sure?
ABC had a sort of pre-game coverage. As Peter Jennings fumbled for titles and descriptions, the camera eyed both cheery Democrats and stern Republicans, all with we'll-do-better-next-time expressions on their faces. They shook hands rapidly as they promenaded down a very *Price* is *Rightesue* red carpet. I desperately scanned the screen for Joan Rivers to appear, E! mike in hand, — criticizing various congressmen's suits and Hillary's ankles — but to no avail. This thing was like the Oscars, but with more comedy and fewer Fondas.
Jenny Oakson
opinion @ kansan.com
But to the real meat of the production: the actual speech. Because the president was in a sticky situation, he certainly was not going to make statements that were too harsh — like, "Social Security will not exist in 2019, so for a better future, let's kill the old people!" He had interesting points, but it was all about the presentation.
I can't believe people buy this. After every statement of the obvious he made, there was a quasistanding ovation. If the only applause came from Democrats, there was a lot, and it took tons of time. It was like a bad laugh track or low-budget community college commercial — you just wanted to fast forward.
Every ingredient was there: the red, white and blue; Vice President Gore, looking very androgynous and very much like a Muppet, and the Jets vs. Sharks bipartisan angst. The real-deal Republicans demonstrated their respect for Clinton as he walked in, because they're old and still think being the president means something extraordinary. But, they never stood or clapped again. Who are these guys? Gosh, you big, bad senators sure made your point by giving Clinton the cold shoulder. Obviously, Clinton doesn't need unanimous approval in Washington. He seems to get the presidential perks without it.
The 10 billion close-ups of Hillary were definitely needed. Come on, if she was seriously ticked off, she would have shown it when Bill first got nabbed (circa Jen Flowers). Either she is a
cyborg, or their marriage included a signed contract in which they solemnly swore not to have any emotional attachments until the mini-series deal came along.
For extra support, Hill was strategically placed next to Sammy Sosa. Why not just have network affiliates add an animated superhero? McGwire must have been booked. This must have been specifically for the dumb American males — "Hey if Sammy likes 'em, so do I Need another beer."
I guess the president didn't feel like outlining realistic problems for America or possible solutions.
Oakson is an Overland Park senior in journalism.
He just wanted a pep rally
Beware: Robots robbing humans of their creativity
You snicker at this tale, and you quickly dismiss it as silly preconceptions of a crazed man.
Imagine a planet ruled by robots. Imagine the Earth controlled by steel giants with steel iron fists. In this world, humans have become obsolete, and we must return to the caves we evolved from.
My fellow humans, do not be so quick to judge for you have welcomed the robots into the fold, and it is up to you to defeat their evil presence.
You see, we unknowingly have accepted them into our world, needing their warmth, wanting their assistance, and the time has come to denounce the electronic demons or all will end, and our blue world will become a ball of iron, spitting steam and pain upon our saggy, pale skin.
W. David Keith
joining kaaan.com
The robots started out simple. They transferred their artificial intelligence synapses into mound devices such as radios.
opinion@kansan.com
Do you wear a pager upon your waist? If so, you have a small tech probe that pulsates and beeps and controls every aspect of your life. Almost like a cattle prod, zapping you when you least expect it, telling you where to go, what to do. This is only one of the ways the robots will corner us into extinction.
The robots are everywhere — watching, waiting and wanting. Perhaps even at this moment a robot is hanging from your key chain and assisting you in locking your jeep doors. You have not used your hands to lock your jeep for a long while. You have depended upon your robot to do the work for you, and that is just what they want. The robots are rendering the human obsolete.
Have you ever seen the tall, blinking towers standing out in country fields? They stand like silent giants supposedly transferring television signals from satellites, but that is just what the robots want you to think. They are the robots'
Norecol shavers and coffee machines. They were created by man and have weeded their way into our society since the turn of the century, and only now have they reached the culmination of their great scheme.
tools for sending out mind-controlling brain waves across the land, turning the beings that created them into zombies and rap music listeners — draining their love for living and erasing their love for freedom. Where have the great American heroes gone, you ask? They are surfers of a naughty land called the Internet.
We have let the robots into our homes, in our television. We let them entertain our children with such fine programming as Family Ties and The Commish. The robots watched as we made ourselves into slaves to the TV Guide. We became brainwashed by Seinfeld and Friends. Truly the work of a devil made of wires and buttons.
We all smiled when we got nice, gentle family computers. Oh, a glorious device that lets us type stories about butterflies and play games called "Oregon Trail." What did I do before you came along?
Instead of spending time running in the back yard with the pet hamster, little Billy stares into the black screen, pointing and clicking and clicking and pointing. The intricate circuits send electrode vibrations through his young hands, slowly melting away the core of his brain. A life of running through fields of wheat is supplanted with Web sites with explicit erotic western scapes and horses wearing lingerie. Couldn't we see the truth? Couldn't we see what we were letting the robots do?
Smash the robotic dream that we have let sweep our planet.
We have been lied to. The threat will not come from above; we have created the threat. Do not let the cries of humanity be drowned out by the laughter of laptops or the screaming pulsations of a blinking red lights. Stop aiding them in their quest for domination. The robots are no fools. They have tricked our soft, fleshy race into being pawns in their sick game of chess.
Destroy the synthoid creations of man that wish to watch us wither and shrivel into the void. If we do not act now, our smallest children will be converted into silicon form at the cold hands of a computerized cable. The robots will infiltrate our factories, office spaces and learning institutions, taking the place of men and women, boys and girls.
We are doomed.
Keith is an Overland Park sophomore in film and illustration.
Feedback
Early bar closing comforts students
Timothy Burger, writing for the editorial board, dismissed the Oread Neighborhood Association complaints about neighborhood bars.
He claimed that there couldn't be a clear link between the bars and illegal parking, littering and noise.
I have lived at the Sunflower House Student Co-op for more than a year now. For months, a neighborhood bar has been required to close at midnight. It is the general consensus at my house that there was a significantly higher number of people urinating and puking on our lawn when the bars were allowed to say open until 2 a.m. When the bars close, a flood of drunk patrons march home yelling and singing. This is less likely to disturb sleeping students at midnight.
Parking troubles are clearly related to these establishments. The bars have no available parking for their customers.
Before I received a parking space at my residence, I had to park blocks away from my home on weekend evenings. To say there is no link between the bars and illegal parking
and other disturbances is ridiculous.
Burger argues that the public nuisance law should be enforced on an individual basis. In that case, the police would have to be posted outside of the bars nightly. It is ridiculous to demand such a waste of resources when changing the bars' hours could solve many of these problems. Yes, I knew that I was moving into a neighborhood near bars, but the bar owners knew that they were establishing businesses in a residential area.
Jennifer Curry
Lenoxa junior