Page 2/The Battalion/Friday, February 28, 1986
Opinion
Leave me alone; I'm trying
to be fiscally irresponsible
I bought a T-
shirt recently that
sums up my finan
cial status. It re
ads: “I can’t be
overdrawn, 1 still
have checks left.”
Actually, I’m
not so financially
naive that I don’t
know that the
number of checks
I have left has nothing to do with the
amount of money I have left. I’m just so
financially apathetic that I don’t care.
I balanced my checkbook this week
for the f irst time in more than a year. It
was simple. I threw away my old check
book register and waited until I got my
most recent bank statement. I put a
brand new register in my checkbook,
wrote in the amount the bank said I had
and subtracted all the checks I’ve writ
ten that weren’t included in the
statement. See, I know the basic steps.
I came up with a negative balance of
$70.68. Now I can relax because I fi
nally know how much money I don’t
have. Actually, negative $70 isn’t too
bad for someone who’s had a negative
balance of $600 on more than one occa
sion.
I have a condition known as fiscal ir
responsibility. It’s not an uncommon
condition. In fact. I’m not to blame for
this condition because I’m just following
the example set by my country’s leaders.
I spend recklessly until I’m deeply in
debt and then I make radical cuts to
compensate, just like the government
does.
President Reagan spends wildly on
the military and Star Wars and then cuts
deeply into social programs, education
and other unimportant things. I spend
recklessly on dresses from Blooming-
dales and trips to March Gras and then
cut back on food, rent and other unim
portant things.
It’s the same concept. We’re both
dealing in negative numbers. President
Reagan and I. Of course. I’m dealing in
two-, sometimes three-, digit negative
numbers and President Reagan is work
ing with nine- and 10-figure negative
numbers. But it’s all relative. He’s got a
much wider range of choices to cut into
than I do.
But I don’t see anyone threatening to
destroy Reagan’s credit rating or send
him to jail for overspending. I don’t
think it’s fair for creditors to be too hard
on me if I’m occasionally in the red. The
United States has been in the red for
years. And as long as the politicians are
allowed to be fiscally irresponsible, I
should be too. It’s hypocritical for this
government to have a different set of
rules for the government and for the
people.
I’ll balance my checkbook when Rea
gan does. Until then, leave me alone. I
still have a couple hundred checks left.
Michelle Powe is a senior journalism
major and editor for The Battalion.
Michelle
Powe
United Fceture Syndicate
No ethics for achieving fame
G. Gordon Lid-
dy’s least-favorite
airport is Dallas-
Fort Worth , he
tells USA 'Today.
H is favorite air
port clubs are the
ones run by Amer
ican Airlines. His
favorite book on
just ordinary
crime, he tells U.S.
News & World Report, is The Friends
of Eddie Coyle and his recommendation
for a book on special-tactics warfare is
Crossfire. Got any more questions?
Yes! Who is G. Gordon baddy’s favor
ite columnist? It used to be Jack Ander
son who, according to witnesses, he once
set out to kill. Who is his favorite psychi
atrist? It may be the one whose office he
was convicted of burglarizing. What is
his favorite office building? It just could
The Battalion
USPS 045 360
Member of
Texas Press Association
Southwest Journalism Conference
The Battalion Editorial Board
Michelle Powe, Editor
Kay Mallett, Managing Editor
Loren Steffy, Opinion Page Editor
Jerry Oslin, City Editor
Cathie Anderson, News Editor
Travis Tingle, Sports Editor
Editorial Policy
i hc B.million is a non-profit, self-supporting newspa
per operated as a community service to Texas AStXI and
Br\un-College Station.
Opinions expressed in The Battalion are those of the
Editorial Board or the author and do not necessarily rep
resent the opinions of Texas A&.X1 administrators, faculty
or the Board of Regents.
The Battalion also serves as a laboratory newspaper for
students in reporting, editing and photography classes
within the Department of Communications.
The Battalion is published Monday through Friday
during Texas A&X1 regular semesters, except for holiday
and examination periods. .Mail subscriptions are $16.75
per semester, $33.25 per school year and $35 per full
year. Advertising rates furnished on request.
Our address: The Battalion. 216 Reed XlcDonald
Building. Texas A&-X1 University. College Station. 'TX
778-13.
Second class postage paid at College Station. TX 77843.
be the Watergate where his burglary
team was caught.
You get little hint fom either USA
'Today or U.S. News that Liddy is an ad
judicated and unrepentant criminal.
Neither publication pauses so much as
to say that in furtherance of Richard
Nixon’s re-election, and using the cover
of national security, G. Gordon Liddy
did break and enter, burgarize and in
other ways besmirch public office. His
punishment, though, has not necessarily
fit his crime. He was sentenced to 52 1 /2
months in prison and signed to appear
on “Miami Vice.”
What is going on here? It is true, of
course, that Liddy has paid his debt to
society and that he is free, under the
laws he used to flout, to make a living
anyway he can. But to USA Today and
U.S. News, he is nothing but a celebrity.
When the former published a special
section on airports, Liddy was just one
of the famous it turned to: OJ. Simpson
loathes O’Hare. Ann Landers likes it be
cause it means she’s home. That’s the
way Nancy Kissinger feels about New
York’s John F. Kennedy. And Dr. Ben
jamin Spock has a soft spot in what
Liddy would say is his bleeding heart for
the airport in Kansas Gity. Each and ev
ery one of these people is given a title:
sportscaster, columnist, pediatrician,
“wife of Henry Kissinger,” and, for
Liddy, author. Yes, author.
Long ago someone observed that
American life is turning into a parody of
a television talk show — a chat with a
nuclear physicist, and actress, a volun
teer at a hospice and a Nazi war crimi
nal. Each gets a mug of coffee and each
gets to call one another by his or her
First name — “What a nice suit, Fritz.”
They are all equally famous, and fame
after all, is what counts. It hardly mat
ters anymore how you got there. What
only matters is that you are famous.
Gordon Liddy is the personification
of that ethic — a barometer of the na
tion’s hypocrisy. Mothers rail against
obscenity in rock lyrics, but don’t even
think about Liddy appearing on “Miami
Vice.” The president’s guardian of mor
ality, Edwin Meese III, deputizes a
posse to investigate the effects of por
nography on everything from children
to green plants, but doesn’t ask the same
kids what lesson they draw fom the life
and times of Gordon Liddy. (The only
thing sillier than Meese’s mission is the
press asking a president who once
played opposite a monkey what he
thinks of his son appearing on television
in his underwear.)
If L.iddy had stolen cash he would
never have been heard of again. We do
not forgive crimes against property. But
crimes against the Constitution are a
different matter. That is politics and
politics, we obviously think, is some sort
of joke. The real joke, though, is that
Liddy himself knew better. For his poli
tics, he was willing to steal, to burglarize,
to plant recording devices and, accord
ing to witnesses, to kill or be killed — al
though that may have been nothing but
talk. At any rate, Liddy’s politics was to
rob you of yours.
A nation needs its scoundrels if only
to remind it that it stands for something.
Scoundrels personify a society’s values
— what is permissible, what is not and
what line can not be crossed. Liddy, who
crossed many of them, would be the
perfect scoundrel — the lawyer with
contempt for the law, the public official
who betrays the public trust, the man
who, in his own little way, made the
world worse for being in it.
But the demand for celebrities triv
ializes both the good and the bad — the
baby doctor and the crook from Water
gate. OJ. Simpson hates O’Hare and
Tony Randall says he can’t tell one air
port from another. Singer Dionne War
wick thinks “New Edition” may win a
Grammy, Author Gordon Liddy has
two crime books to recommend and Idi
Amin, we may presume, has an unlisted
number. He could be an author too.
Richard Cohen is a columnist for the
Washington Post Writers Group.
Richard
Cohen
Mail Call
Let tc l s to the id it m sin mid tint r\< red U to , n ds in let n’t ll I lie editorial Staff reel
tii’ht in edit lettets Ini st\le .md length hut util in.ike even effort tO nuintlW thtltlk |
intent. Each letter must be signed anti must include the address and telephonem
the writer.
Cynthia Gay — devil’s advocate?
EDITOR:
I was appalled when I read Cynthia Gay’s article of Feb. l/.Peth
she was merely playing devil’s advocate to Guest Columnist LoraSe
preceding article praising the manned space program and its need;
continuation in face of the recent shuttle disaster, but 1 don’t think sol
article has that strident tone of protest that only the ignorant andi
formed can summon up.
Te>
pill
Kg'- s
flnive
|coun(i
Jtrollei
Isavs,
Jgom'
lexpen
| the ot
[fe<
I I Ik
| dink"
;cani|>
spend
Isawl
Gay focuses repeatedly <ui the price the simtt!<• pu>gi,mi ik!:j
the American people. She quoutes a Figure of $1-1 billion; accurate.‘
, ‘ ‘ , I ■ . ° , , [I 511
as it goes, but certainly nothing to become overly upset about,e$pe_® et(
when viewed in light of the fact that the United States easily spendsfoBlhi
billion a year on defense alone. ; Texas
Bear in mind the fact that aforementioned $1-1 billion wasspenton
period of 15 years. This averages out to a little less than $1 billionavcii
lot of money, yes. but we knew that we were in tor an expensiveundt®
ing when we began the shuttle program. She also mentions “theura
fortable Figure of $1.2 billion — the price of the Challenger." Noon
tar y Figure is loo high a price to pay for the profitable advanceim;
human knowledge — and certainly much more profitable knowkdj
gained from the reactions o! human bcm>_;x ib.m I u im the dn <• li
vations ol robots and computers. If you must find some overspendir.;^K n
true overspending — to rage about, then direct vour attention toHardfcl iis
flagrant overindulgence of the U.S. Department of Defense. Ited S
The fact of the matter is, man simply must enter space. It’s gecera m
little crowded at home. And while the loss of life during the endeavor 1#
be regretted, it is also to be expected. Every new frontier is dangerousaB’^
many people have died on the ones that once existed here on Earth-:B ,sa
ress
New World, the seas, and the polar ice caps.
■g*'
Thus far, only 1 1 people who have partic ipated in the manneds[n [at|!
program in the past 25 years — of a cast of hundreds — have died kW
this compare, even percentage-wise, to all those who perished on the.vH a
Frontiers here on Earth? Is this too high a price to pay-At the nil® j
sounding callous and unsvinpathetic. I don’t think so. i e \ p.
To bring out a hackneyed and perhaps overused argument,ifv
get out there first, then someone else will. They might be Germanormt-j t
sian or Chinese, but someone will go into space and thus rise toasffBt ou
dancy on Earth. There’s a lot of rich, unclaimed real estate out therci |tflt '°n
destiny awaits us in sjvace. Robots aren’t men, and can never replat
in any extraterrestrial situation.
H-t
Whiu
To paraphrase the Bible, the meek shall inherit the F.arth. The rest
us will escape to the stars.
Floyd Largent ’88
accompanied by two signatures
Honesty and accuracy essential
EDITOR:
1 have a few questions to ask The Battalion opinion writersuh
recently equated Reed Irvine’s watch dog organization Accuracy in .bi
mia with witch-hunts, McCarthyism, anti-democracy and anti-ireesp
1. Are Truth in Advertising laws examples of McCarthyism?
2. Is the Better Business Bureau involved in witch-hunts?
3. Are consumer advocacy groups anti-democratic because tk\^
“tolerate” bad products along with the good? If we were to follou ilir ]
soning (or*should I say unreason) of these writers we could onlyco®j
the above conclusions. Once again we have been treated to a lot of rW
without supporting evidence. Have these writers done any reseat
what AIA does or what it stands for? Have they read their reporij
doesn’t sound like it. However, we should not be too hard on them- 1 -
are only guilty of following in the footsteps of their professional breM
According to Reed Irvine in his article “Accuracy in Academia: j
and Reality” (published in the Feb. 1 issue of Human Events) all but oitj
the reporters he contacted who had written articles about AIA had-
read AIA's reports or even contacted anyone in AIA's organic
According to Irvine, “that’s how myths about ‘thought police,’‘hiring?
dents as stoolies,’ and running tests for ‘ideological purity’arepK?
gated.”
Neither the media nor academia are sacred, holy institutionsevf^
from criticism. The reactionary and hypocritical resjxmse they havefl
AIA shows they think they are. I can only say 1 wish AIA had been an®
when my economics professor alternately B.S.ed the hours away,orfl
walks, instead of teaching. The class had to guess their way through £
standardized tests and most failed. The crown of it all came when he *1
an hour late for the final exam. Was anything done when this formed
dent comjdained to the academic appeals board? No — he was |
by the sacred institution he belonged to.
AIA is not anti-democratic or against free speech — rather the'-1
jjort these freedoms in dealing with academic complaints similarWl
personal experience I have related. One such instance, they discus#
the above mentioned article, involved an Arizona State student who
removed from the student newspaper after complaining to the Bo#
Regents about one of his professors. Whose free speech rights were 1 *
lated here? I really wonder if you could be “tolerant” in this situation
Honesty and accuracy in the Media and Academia are absolute!)]
sential to a free society. These qualities are the least we should expect"]
even demand — from them. In the fairness and free speech IwouldM
see The Battlion reprint Reed Irvine’s article from Human Events,^
something really radical, interview the man.
Florence Mayes ’83
EDITOR’S NOTE: Glenn Martha’s Wednesday column on AIAsti
basic goals of the organization, which came from its newsletter.
fhe AIA reprinted excerpts of a Battalion article about A&M^'
professor Terry Anderson — without confirming the quotes, orclm
the context in which they were used. Now that the AIA is having top 1111
its cards on the table, its members are trying to cover their tracks. W 1
ecutive director of AIA, Les Csorba, is now claiming that he verify
quotes taken from the October 1984 issue of The Battalion with the
and with the writer of the article. Not true. AIA never received ain't 1
cation from The Battalion about the quotes used. Csorba never event
to anyone on this staff about the article until January 1986
AIA article was published and the damage done.
So much for accuracv.