4
Wednesday, July 27, 1994
OPINION
UNIVERSITY DAILY KANSAN
---
VIEWPOINT
August 2 primary calls informed voters to act
The editorial page has offered criticism, critique and analysis of what's wrong. Today instead of problems, it presents the path to a possible solution: Vote in the August 2 primary.
All U. S. citizens are endowed with the right to vote. This right allows the people to directly influence the workings of government and change what they view as wrong.
The ballot will include the contests for governor, attorney general, secretary of state, state treasurer and insurance commissioner. Voters will also have a chance to vote for both a U.S. and state representative.
The August 2 primary provides Kansas voters with such an opportunity.
The significance of this primary transcends the individual candidates running for office. Several important issues have emerged during the campaign including crime, casino gambling and school financing.
The choice of a candidate carries with it that candidate's views on a multitude of pressing issues.
It is the responsibility of voting-age citizens to be familiar with the candidates and the issues and then make an informed choice.
The right to criticize the government is guaranteed, but words have a limit to their power.
This paper receives countless letters criticizing the government. The editorial page has also hosted similarly negative editorials.
The upcoming primary and the subsequent general election provide an opportunity for voters to back up their words with action.
MATT HOOD FOR THE EDITORIAL BOARD
Fox network lets greed hinder moral decision
In a case of "no guts, no gayness," the Fox Broadcasting Co. has let money dictate their morality.
In light of nervous advertisers threatening to pull their commercials, the network decided to cut a scene of a homosexual couple kissing on "Melrose Place."
The network's executives said they stood to lose $1 million if they aired the scene of character Matt Fielding kissing his partner after their first date.
But Fox officials have misread the real bottom line. Their decision actually translates to losing the faith of a savvy television audience expecting a more inclusive, realistic portrayal of the world.
Sandy Grushow, the network's programming chief, said it came down to a business decision.
In truth, this decision is better labeled as homophobic and hypocritical.
If this were a heterosexual couple kissing, no protest would have been heard. Indeed, consider how the airwaves are filled each night with incidents much more explicit than a simple good-night kiss.
ABC, for example, allowed Mariel Hemingway to bare all in "Civil Wars" and then left little to the imagination in the scene of a man and woman having sex on "NYPD Blue."
Apparently, these standards do not hold up in the face of homophobic paranoia.
A clear precedent has been set by the television industry: Network TV can show more explicit, realistic portraits of relationships.
But Fox has greatly narrowed this interpretation by excluding even the most innocuous of homosexual acts. By not airing the kissing scene, the network's executives have proven they will only pay lip service to showing true diversity on TV.
DAVID STEWART FOR THE EDITORIAL BOARD
KANSAN STAFF
DAVID STEWART
Editor
JUDITH STANDLEY Business manager
KATIE GREENWALD Managing editor
TOM EBLEN General manager, news adviser
SHELLY McCONNELL Director of client services
JEANNE HINES Sales and marketing adviser
CATHERINE ELLSWORTH Systems coordinator
Editors
Campus ... Roberta Johnson
        Susan White
Editorial ... Matt Hood
Photo ... Martin Altteaden
Graphics ... Dave Campbell
Copy Chief ... Kathy Paton
Business Staff
Regional zone mgr ... J.J. Cook
Production mgr ... Emily Gibson
Classified mgr .. Heather Nishau
Retail zong mgr .. Jantie Froelgen
Letters should be typed, double-spaced and fewer than 200 words. They must include the writer's signature, name, address and telephone number. Writers affiliated with the University of Texas at Austin are required to use a standard font.
Guest columns should be typed, double-spaced and fewer than 700 words. The writer will be photographed.
The Kansan reserves the right to reject or edit letters, guest columns and cartoons. They can be mailed or brought to the Kansan newsroom, 111 Stauffer-Flint Hall.
Political commercials in Kansas need truth-in-advertising lesson
Like a bad plumbing leak, the slow trickle of political advertisements on local television stations has become a flood during the past few days. With primaries just around the corner, candidates for Kansas public office have cranked out their 15-second bits of sage political wit and wisdom, sandwiched in among the used car dealers and soft drink ads.
Ever since Lyndon Johnson scored a political touchdown in 1964, with his famous ad depicting a nuclear explosion and implying that his opponent had an itchy trigger finger, television commercials have been a regular feature of American political life. We ought to be used to them by now. But for some reason, this latest batch from Kansas' political wannabes seems even more annoying than usual.
Some candidates are politicians who want to look angry. The best way to do this is with a macho crimefighter commercial. Jim Slattery played up his recent endorsement by the Kansas Fraternal Order of Police and offered free copies of the "Slattery Crime Plan." Attorney general candidate Marvin Barkis ran a spot in which he
voiced his desire to get tough on crime and tauted his "action plan" for putting criminals behind bars.
other candidates want to look angry at politicians. Congressional hopeful Joe Hume emphasized his outsider status. "I'm not a lawyer or a politician," he declared. "And I'm angry!" So is Joan Wagnon who is running for governor on a let's-dis-the-federal-government platform. Wagnon says
Richard Schodorf, another attorney general candidate, outdid them all with a slick ad showing a man in a prison jumpsmits picking up garbage along a Kansas road followed by a stern voice intoning, "Richard Schodorf—a name criminals won't forget."
she "doesn't want somebody from Washington telling us how to run our health care system." She blasts federal officials for their timidity and selfishness and invokes our state's frontier heritage by drawing that "in Kansas we don't do things that way."
Wagnon's fellow gubernatorial candidates are no better. Gene Bicknell lectures his listeners on the evil ways of politicians like they were a viral infection. Jim Slatterry rails against bureaucrats, and Bill Graves tells us he's the only thing standing between Kansas and a regressive tax increase.
One positive sign is the relative scarcity of attack ads. The lone exception is insurance commissioner candidate Doug Norman. His cheesy commercial portraying a man sweeping up dollar bills in the state capital rotunda—a clumsy way of accusing his opponent of consorting with insurance lobbyists—is tabloid politics at its worst.
Unfortunately, we'll probably see more of this sort of thing after the primaries when the stakes are higher, tempers are shorter and campaign managers trot out attack ads the way a general would call in an air strike.
For now, Stormin' Norman seems to be the only candidate desperate enough to try such tactics this early in the campaign season.
The problem with all of these commercials is their contrived, superficial quality. One can almost see the bevy of consultants and pollsters standing just offstage, waving the latest voter demographic study and admonishing the candidates to look angry, tough, and above all, nonpolitical.
It is one of the absurdities of modern politics that we are confronted by candidates who claim not to be politicians, but who want us to make them politicians. Then they can do nonpolitical things in political institutions, only to be assaulted during the next election by new nonpoliticians who accuse them of being too political Strange.
If chronic voter disaffection and apathy still seem like mysteries to you, just tune in to your local Kansas television station and watch the commercials. Then change the channel.
Brian Dirk is a Conway, Ark., graduate student in history.
Comet inspires appreciation of life
There's nothing like natural disaster to put life into perspective. When something disastrous happens to somebody else, we may sympathize with the injured party, but we also feel relieved that we were not on the receiving end of misfortune. This attitude has been expressed recently in America's fascination with the comet Shoemaker-Levy 9 and its destructive effects on Jupiter.
Professional astronomers, physicists and amateur planet-watchers swarmed to the nearest telescope to view the impact of the comet pieces on a planet that, gratefully, was not their own.
But what if we, Earthlings, were the ones who were belted with a comet? The possibility of Earth's destruction is usually viewed as merely science fiction. "That won't happen in my lifetime," seems to be a widespread feeling.
If the comet had done what most other quiet, benign comets do, simply moseying through space, Shoemaker-
When each new fragment of the comet slammed into Jupiter, onlookers were fascinated with the explosions and the "black eyes" that resulted on the face of the distant planet.
Levy 9 would only be discussed in astronomy journals. But recent events raise questions about the longevity of our own planet and what would happen if a comet struck Earth.
Because we have the technology to foresee a comet on a collision course with Earth long before impact would occur, there would be plenty of time for alarm and preparation. Scientists would scramble to find a solution, which may or may not be successful, considering the difference between scientists' predictions and what actually happened when the comet struck Jupiter.
Scientists expected to see white clouds of water after the collisions instead of the huge, black blemishes
that resulted. So far, the composition of the black spots is unknown. This is rather discomforting in a world that boasts incredible technology and understanding of the universe and everything contained within.
Think about this fictional scenario: A huge comet is expected to collide with Earth in two years. IF scientists have calculated everything down to the last detail correctly, the comet should strike with nuclear-like force the area where the United States now exists. No one wants to stick around in this hemisphere because their safety is not ensured. Scientists suggest evacuating all Americans, Latin Americans, and Canadians.
Would our neighbors on the other side of the planet graciously take us in, looking beyond any of our actions that may have slighted them? Or if they did not offer to shelter Americans, Latin Americans and Canadians, would we attempt to subdue them and take over their lands for our own purposes?
Or would Earth's natural balance be so shaken that human life and/or other forms of life would cease to exist? Perhaps, if the force of the collision were strong enough, Earth real
ly would be flat after all, as in anti-
quated folklore. Ships sailing through
the seas would just fall off the edge if
the captains were careless.
We are so certain that the sun will rise tomorrow, we will have air to breathe, food and water and light to see by. But no one can guarantee any of those things.
That is not to say that everyone should live in fear of what may happen, because there is equal chance such an event may NOT happen.
Jupiter its misfortune provides us with at least a few positive thoughts
1) Finals really aren't as bad as they seem. After all, a huge comet could be headed straight for Earth. We could be leaving behind all of our possessions, getting lost from family and friends and fearing for our lives.
2) Given the unpredictability of nature, we should take advantage of every day. Relax, do what you love and live life the way you want.
This provides the perfect pretext to enjoy the little bit of summer we have left before fall classes begin.
Amanda Traugher is an Overland Park sophomore in Journalism.
INTERNATIONAL PERSPECTIVE
Mideast peace talks boom at many levels
In a sense, the Israeli-Jordanian rapprochement represents the easier part of the Middle East problem, although it is inextricably tied up with the Palestinians achieving the framework for an independent
Judging by the talks being pursued at different venues in the Middle East, the region's problems have never been so vigorously addressed at the same time.
Palestinian entity. The latter involves the dismantling of settlements on occupied land and the Rabin government's willingness and ability to do so.
The crucial issue that remains to be resolved is that of Israeli occupation of the Golan Heights. There has been some movement on this score, particularly through Israeli Foreign Minister Shimon Peres' public acknowledgment of Syrian sovereignty over the Heights. The difficult questions of the extent and
time frame of Israeli withdrawal still have to be sorted out.
If Israel is prepared to accept a realistic time frame for withdrawal, the other aspects of the problem will be easier to resolve. It is
4
Since Syria will not accept anything less than full Israeli withdrawal from the Heights, the question really boils down to the time frame and linking it with credible guarantees — such as receiving support through the stationing of foreign, perhaps American, troops.
really a chicken-and-egg argument to declare, as the Israelis do, that agreement on withdrawal should come with full diplomatic relationships between the two countries. Once other negotiating tracks are cleared and the issue of Israeli occupation is resolved, normalization of relations will be a matter of time.
Khalecel Jimes Dubai, United Arab Emirates