4A
Thursday, October 24,1996
OPINION
UNIVERSITY DAILY KANSAN
VIEWPOINT
$100 fine may extinguish smoking in public places
A new ordinance in Maryland has many Americans worried that their smoking habits are going to be limited to the privacy of their own homes.
The ordinance has been passed by a seven-member Village Council in Friendship Heights, Md., which is close to Washington, D.C. The measure still has to be passed by the Montgomery County Council. The ordinance states that anyone caught smoking or littering tobacco products in Friendship Heights will be fined $100.
That seems pretty harsh, but many non-smokers will be relieved by this new law. The ordinance was designed to eliminate smoking from public streets, sidewalks and parks in Friendship Heights.
However, this new ordinance seems to contradict itself. Smokers no longer will be able to smoke in public. Think about the word "public." Isn't everyone a part of that? Whether one smokes or not, everyone is considered the public. But if you happen to be addicted to the harmful habit, you are excluded from the same rights as the rest of the non-smoking public.
Mayor Alfred Muller was quoted in an article from The New York Times saying, "There is the extreme position that anybody can do anything, anywhere. The other extreme is that government should regulate what's in the best interest of the community with seat belt laws, alcohol restrictions and motorcycle helmets; in this case, we're trying to persuade people to stop smoking with a little, gentle pressure."
Fortunately, Friendship Heights is a small town of only 5,000 people. However, the village lies on only 32 acres of land, which is made up mostly of high-rise apartment buildings. The next time you go to visit our nation's capital, you should take a detour to Friendship Heights. There you'll see about 2,000 people out on their balconies, dangling cigarettes from their hands.
SARAH PRESTON FOR THE EDITORIAL BOARD
Sports teams' logos, chants degrade cultural heritage
Often one must sift through the political correctness quagmire to separate offensive symbolism or terminology from vacuous arguments against the usage of specific symbols or terms.
Many Native Americans are offended by professional and collegiate sports teams' logos and chants that take important elements of their cultures and devalue them by placing them in the arena of American sports.
Many Native Americans do not feel logos such as those of the Washington Redskins or the Cleveland Indians promote good character representations of their respective cultures. The wide-mouth grin of the Cleveland Indian is the equivalent to the blackface representation of the 1920s that overtly displayed racist stereotypes of African Americans.
In addition, the Washington Redskins' symbol implies that all Native Americans are savages, and the Atlanta Braves' and Florida State Seminoles' tomahawk chop takes a sacred Native-American war ritual and downplays its cultural significance.
These offensive symbols should be altered or banned completely from professional and collegiate sports.
Some say that political correctness is paralyzing our society from expressing itself freely. This may be true, but is the desire to protect one's individual cultural symbols from misuse and degradation considered political correctness? If this is true, then attempts to help people understand the diverse composition of America are just acts of political correctness.
If we cannot understand each other, then we, every resident in this country, will be devoid of a unified culture that is unique to every other country in the world.
NICK ZALLER FOR THE EDITORIAL BOARD
KANSAN STAFF
AMANDA TRAUGHBER
Editor
CRAIG LANG
Managing editor
MATT HOOD
Associate managing editor for design
KIMBERLY CRABTREE
CHARITY JEFFRIES
News editors
DARCI L. McLAIN
SARA ROSE
Public relations directors
Campus  Susanna Löf
Jason Strait
Amy McVey
Editorial  John Collar
Nickolas Kennedy
Features  Adam Ward
Sports  Bill Petulla
Associate sports  Carlyn Foster
Online editor  David L. Teuka
Photo  Rich Devinwil
Graphics  Hugh Neill
Andy Rohrbach
Special sections  Amy McVey
Wire  Debbie Staine
KAREN GERSCH
Business manager
HEALY SMART
Retail sales manager
TOM EBLEN
General manager, news adviser
JAY STEINER
Sales and marketing adviser
JUSTIN KNUFF
Technology coordinator
Business Staff
Campus mgr...Mark Ozmek
Regional mgr...Dennis Haupt
Assistant Retail mgr...Dana Contento
National mgr...Krista Nye
Special Sections mgr...Homestead
Production mgr...Dan Keno
Lisa Quebbman
Marketing director...Eric Johnson
Creative director...Desmond
Rhody Wachter
Mass Impact mgr...Dena Placiotte
Internet migr...Steve Sanger
Congratulations on your new arrival. As someone who hates children and never plans to reproduce, I say congratulations in the true manner of someone who hates children and never plans to reproduce: with a roll of my eyes and a barely contained "whatever."
Jeff MacNelly/ CHICAGO TRIBUNE
Material girl to endure plight of mere maternals
Dear Madonna.
But enough about me. I'm just glad you've decided to collaborate on the great big stagnant commode known as the Western Civilization gene pool. As always, you've shrewdly spotted an opening in the market: We really needed some good solid bleach-blonde superstar stock, since Deborah Harry never had any children.
I won't waste your time with any tired criticism or stupid jokes about conical nurses bras or your request to be spanked after delivery. Those are false, misguided rumors. I know this, Madonna, because we've been close friends for some time now. I'll never forget how we shared a bottle of Stoli at the wrap party for Desperately Seeking Susan, or how we held each other and cried the day the 1987 Oscar nominations were announced, when we learned that your work in Shanghai Surprise had been egregiously overlooked. And boy, was that a neat trick we pulled last decade: No one has any clue that I'm actually Jellybean Benitez and Junior Vasquez.
But again, enough about me. As I said, I'm just glad you've dropped the thing. By the way, I had that peagreen Prada pantsuit (the one Karl Lagerfeld said made you look like Glo-Worm) that you wore at last year's VH-1 Fashion Awards cut down into diapers. I know, I know,
STAFF COLUMNIST
last year, but the stuff they have at Gap Kids right now is really nasty.
whether you're married or not. It's the ordinary citizens, commonly known as the heart and soul of America, who everyone should really be concerned about. They don't have to answer to Hard Copy, so they consider themselves free to smack their kids around the Winnebago as they fit.
I think that you're going to do just fine, if by sole virtue of the fact that everyone's watching to see if you screw up.
I really think that you're going to be a fantastic mother. Forget the conservative criticism and family values nonsense: A true family begins with unplanned pregnancy,
Everyone's really impressed that you want to raise the baby in a traditional Catholic household. But if you choose to go orthodox on the kid, be careful: As soon as she can take pen and cell phone in hand, you'll be a thinly-velled character in a based-on-a-true-story Tori Spelling movie.
I really am glad you decided to name her Lola, but did you have to upgrade so quickly to Lourdes? It's going to take some early intervention to keep her from developing a God complex. She might take a lot of teasing on the playground, but at least she can tell the little bullies to go to hell with a lot more authority.
I understand you're worried about the child seeing your movies and your Sex book and all that, but don't worry. That's the fantastic thing about the phrase "out of print." By the time she's old enough to understand, all of your projects probably will have disappeared from circulation. Unjustly, of course. Please don't take this the wrong way.
I've seen the previews for *Evita*, and once again, I think it's a matter of you rising above your material. To be honest, I haven't seen so much lip-synching since the VH-1 *American Bandstand* marathon. Why does everyone sing all the time? Everyone knows the best part of Andrew Lloyd Webber's shows (aside from the intermissions, of course) is the dialogue. Also, I don't understand why you've been forever obsessed with Eva Peron. Everyone knows she was just trying to be you.
Anyway, the soundtrack is going well. I'm on trance and jungle remixes of Don't Cry for Me Argentina.
As for future projects: How about an Andrew Lloyd Webber trilogy? You can do Cats, and after that, Starlight Express on Rollerblades.
Well, I'm signing off. Closing thought: Ignore those cynics who accuse you of getting pregnant as part of some grand scheme or career plan. Big deal! Of course it'a a career move. Since when has getting pregnant not been a job?
Love,
Love,
Herb "Michael Martin" Ritts
Michael Martin is a Lenox sophomore in English and theater and film.
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
Bill Maher's comedy wasn't appropriate for parents' weekend
I had the pleasure of seeing Bill Maher on Saturday night, and I laughed a few times. I have never seen a stand-up act live, and it is funnier than watching one on television. The main reason that I laughed, however, was because I am not a black, Jewish, or homosexual philosophy major.
These and other "titles" that are so graciously used by the public to categorize each of us were continually ridiculed throughout the act.
Lots of things and people were laughed at that night: Mexicans, AIDS patients, Catholics and politicians. However, there was one group in particular that I noticed he never got around to making fun of.
Not only did Maher make several remarks hinting at the fact that he smoked marijuana, but he also spoke highly of mushrooms.
and LSD. I think it is funny that Maher could not think of one single sarcastic remark about rich white kids who do drugs.
Actually, I am Jewish but have never taken a Jewish joke personally, and I laugh when I hear one that is funny. Maher continually checked himself, informing us that it was OK because he liked to kid homosexuals and his father was Jewish.
I know Politically Incorrect is how this man advertises his act. However, this is not what I imagine many students planned to see with their father on their right and mother on their left.
Ninety-five percent of my television viewing is strictly devoted to Comedy Central, and I feel that it is a shame such a man is involved in this wonderfully refreshing, intelligent television channel.
Jacob Sackin Kansas City, Mo., junior
Loss by Dole will represent rejection of WWII values
The margin between President Clinton and Bob Dole is insurmountable. A comeback on the part of Dole would put him in the same league as Lazarus, or at the very least, Harry Truman. The election is finished and now just a formality. The polls point, as they have since the beginning of the race, to another four years of the Clintons. The former Kansas senator truly will
become a private citizen after Nov. 5.
But regardless of the outcome of the contest for the White House, the citizenry has been watching something altogether more important than just a mere presidential election. What we are witnessing is the rejection of an archetype, ar
A young Bob Dole was playing KU basketball for Coach Phog Allen — before Clinton was born — when he was summoned to Europe to stop fascism. After he was injured in combat, Dole overcame the odds that doctors gave him because he wanted to play basketball again, not because he wanted to go to Washington. It is easy, given this frame of reference, to understand why Dole thinks that the Clintons have never sacrificed, never grown up and never done anything real.
invalidation of a set of values.
Bob Dole thinks it takes sacrifice to build a nation because that is his background; Clinton thinks it just takes a bridge. The difference between a nation builder and a bridge salesman is, I think, the difference between Mr. Dole and President Clinton.
The impending defeat of Bob Dole will mark the final passage of what can only be labeled as the American Generation: the waning group of older Americans who shake their heads at the baby boomers and are utterly appalled at the behavior of Generation X.
OUT FROM THE CRACKS
Even though Clinton defeated then-President George Bush in 1992, Clinton's second term will mark the American public's desire to pass the torch completely to the next generation of leaders. Clinton's impending victory simply means that Americans are skipping their chance to decorate the end of the century with an emblem from the past. If we vote for Clinton, we are eschewing the values of the generation that was defined by active citizenship and instead favoring the generation that took the American way of life for granted.
Bob Dole hails from the American Generation. He grew up during the Great Depression, was molded by service in World War II, and then returned stateside to fight the Cold War. Dole's values and his outlook on America are, as he says, unique in all the world.
Would Bob Dole make a better president than Bill Clinton? Perhaps not.
Andy Obermuerke is a Liberal, Kan., Junior in Journalism.
The events from World War II to fighting the Cold War in which Bob Dole played a direct part, were the things that Bill Clinton could only watch on television. Certainly Bill Clinton cannot be faulted for when he was born, but voters should understand that the chasm separating the two men vying for office is generational, not ideological. Dole believes in the country and the flag for which he fought. Clinton, on the other hand, has faith in this country's government, which has given him the right to burn that same flag.
By Jeremy Patnoi