Page 2/The Battalion/Wednesday, Movember 19,1986
Opinion
The Battalion
(USPS 045 360)
Member of
Texas Press Association
Southwest Journalism Conference
The Battalion Editorial Board
Cathie Anderson, Editor
Kirsten Dietz, Managing Editor
Loren Steffy, Opinion Page Editor
Frank Smith, City Editor
Sue Krenek, News Editor
Ken Sury, Sports Editor
newspaper oper-
ryan-College Sta-
Editorial Policy
The Battalion is a non-profit, self-supportinj
ated as a community service to Texas A&M and
tion.
Opinions expressed in The Battalion are those of the editorial
board or the author, and do not necessarily represent the opinions
of Texas A&M 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 Depart
ment of Journalism.
The Battalion is published Monday through Friday during
Texas A&M regular semesters, except for holiday and examination
periods.
Mail subscriptions are $17.44 per semester, $34.62 per school
year and $36.44 per full year. Advertising rates furnisned on re
quest.
Our address: The Battalion, 216 Reed McDonald Building,
Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843.
Second class postage paid at College Station, TX 77843.
POSTMASTER: Send address changes to The Battalion, 216
Reed McDonald, Texas A&M University, College Station TX
77843.
Why just English?
The State Republican Executive Committee’s proposed constitu
tional amendment proclaiming English as the official language of
Texas is a superfluous attempt to state the obvious. The best we can
hope for is that the proposal is ignored. It probably will unneces
sarily agitate the Hispanic community and could inhibit public edu
cation of minorities.
The last thing the amendment-laden Texas Constitution needs is
another highly specialized, meaningless provision tacked on to it.
The last thing Texas taxpayers need is the expense of funding the
amendment process one more time. The last thing Texas lawmakers
need to be concerned with is what language is being spoken where.
In lieu of the recent budget crunches, legislators need to focus on
more pertinent economic matters.
But what would declaring English the official state language ac
complish? It makes about as much sense as an amendment to the
U.S. Constitution declaring apple pie the official national dessert.
Those who prefer speaking English will continue to do so, and those
who feel more confortable using a different tongue are unlikely to
change, amendment or not.
We could, of course, use the amendment to revert to the pre-bil
ingual education days when students were forbidden to speak any
thing other than English on school grounds. However, that would
accomplish nothing other than denying the benefits of public educa
tion to students not yet fluent in English.
The amendment also could be used to prevent voting ballots and
official documents from being printed in both English and Spanish.
The committee claims this would cut down on printing costs. It also
would deprive many Hispanics of their voting privileges.
All of these ramifications of the proposed amendment amount to
little more than discrimination against non-English-speaking Ameri
cans — specifically Hispanics.
So English would be our official language. Big deal. A quick flip
through the encyclopedia reveals essentially the same thing without
going throtlgh the amendment process. Those who aren’t fluent in
English are painfully aware of their handicap. Although old lan
guages may die hard, cultural assimilation — the sheer necessity of
knowing English to live in the United States — wins out. That’s the
point of bilingual education — to help students become comfortable
with English, thereby making the assimilation process easier.
The proposal is the epitome of bureaucratic pomp without pur
pose. The amendment, if actually submitted, wouldn’t be worth the
paper it was printed on, even if the self-appointed guardians of En
glish attempted to save money by having it printed in only one lan
guage.
‘Regan’s Rangers’ attacking
diplomacy with military zeal
Every time So
viet radio switches
to classical music
and a new leader
is installed in the
Kremlin, the op
ed pages of U.S.
newspapers
sprout with essays
by Soviet special-,
ists wondering if
the new boy will be
able to control the
military.
Richard
Cohen
Puff, the tragic drag
The dangers of cigarette smoking are no secret — lung cancer,
mouth cancer, pharynx cancer, esophagus cancer, bladder cancer,
pancreas cancer, laryngeal cancer, emphysema and ultimately death
all have been linked to it. Thursday is the American Cancer Society’s
10th annual Great American Smokeout, when members of Ameri
ca’s dwindling smoking minority are encouraged to lay down their
cancer sticks and breathe freely for 24 hours.
Without indulging ourselves in Bee
thoven or anything, the time has come
for us to ask the same question about
our leader, Ronald Reagan. Can he con
trol the military?
The answer seems to be no. His Na
tional Security Council seems to be an
outpost of the military, headed by an
admiral, John Poindexter, who suc
ceeded a colonel, Robert McFarlane.
Next in charge when it comes to der-
ring-do is a lieutenant colonel, Oliver
North, Jr., who is the Errol Flynn of the
operation, and above them all is that ex-
Marine by way of Merril Lynch, Donald
Regan.
What they all lack in foreign policy
experience, they make up in chutzpah.
Show them a foreign policy dilemma
and they’ll mistake it for a beach.
The most recent beach hit is, of
course, Iran. In contravention of U.S.
policy, Regan’s Rangers proved that (1)
we would bargain for the release of
American hostages and (2) we are not
neutral in the Iran-Iraq war. With the
cooperation of the Israelis, Regan’s
Rangers have shipped arms to the Irani
ans, managing, it seems, to secure the
freedom of three hostages and, in the
process, putting in peril all Americans
who happen to be in the Middle East.
As for U.S. credibility, it just no
longer exists. What we vowed we would
not do, we simply did.
Ronald Reagan himself always has
had a weakness for the simple, the cine
matic. He likes the bold stroke. He sees
the world with a kind of charming sim
plicity and in this he has been indulged.
The invasion of Grenada, a kind of of
sandlot war, was greeted as so stunning
a success it reinforced the president’s
tendency to ask the calvalry to do what
diplomats should.
The Iran operation is a case in point.
It promised results, it was bold, it was se
cret and — maybe best of all — if it
worked it would bring home the hos
tages just before the congressional elec
tions. So the plan, once dormant, was
brought back to life.
But what now? The credibility of the
United States is in shreds. As with the
Daniloff affair, we said we would not
bargain — and then we did. Through
out the Middle East, terrorists now
know the unit price of an American. He
or she is worth a shipload of tank and
artillery ammunition, some rifles, a cake
in the shape of a key and a Bible. The
actual goods are probably subject to bar
gaining, but not the principle involved.
We will deal.
As in Watergate, a president has es
tablished an entire apparatus to do his
personal bidding. The normal agencies
for the promulgation and execution of
foreign policy have been bypassed. Con
gress was kept in the dark; the State De
partment was told to butt out; the CIA
was shunned.
Col. North and a former National Se
curity director, McFarlane, were dis
patched on secret missions thatwc®*
silly as they were exciting. After Li ^
operaton relied on the wiilingnes: ?
the factions in Iran to keepmuir' s
dictably, one did not. i;^
It hardly takes a conspiracytka
to suggest that Regan’s Rangers' q
also responsible for keeping theCcef J
in Nicaragua armed in the mar
which they had become accustomed-f
ter Congress had ordered otherwk, J
do this, they turned to a net work ci:
mer military men of commendable
communist zeal to do what
merit could not. It raised the
bought the arms — and continueda
that Congress wanted closed don.
the A-Team, Regan’s Rangers hwlic
patience with laws that makenosew
them.
All of Congress is now iiuheha' »
Democrats, including the Senate,
the talk shows, its leaders issuedtk
quired growls, asserting that then
look into this or that. By January,*:
Congress convenes, there will undoc
edly be new polls certifying thepd
dent’s popularity and, if thepasiiw
guide, the Democrats will turntheiif
tention to trade and the public hanf
of drug dealers. The formulation
execution of foreign policy by a 1/-™,-
of movie-stricken presidential aidei'
be forgotten.
But it should not be. The likelite
that Regan’s Rangers did not
themselves to Nicaragua or Iran,
that their activities have beenasbo
less as their imagination—and iff
illegal to boot.
If, as Regan’s Rangers seemtotk
real life is like a movie, Congress#
to respond in kind. I suggest
President’s Men.”
Copyright 1986, Washington Post Writers^
Scare tactics and statistics have little effect on diehard smoking
addicts. The lure of a nicotine-tainted puff outweighs the threat of a
slow and painful death. But recent studies have found that second
hand smokers — those who must inhale the inconsiderate runoff of
the smoker’s habit — also run a high risk of getting cancer.
Overcoming an addiction is never easy. ACS says that if one in
five smokers kick the habit during the smokeout, the project will be a
success. The first step, of course, it trying to quit. Determination is
the strongest weapon against addiction. No anti-smoking campaign
can be successful unless the smoker is as committed to the internal,
personal struggle as ACS is to the national one.
If you smoke, please try puffing clean air Thursday. If you’re
lucky, you might develop an addiction for it rather than tar and nic
otine. If you can’t stop, keep trying. Remember, diehard smokers
may find dying a lot easier than they thought.
United Fenure Syndic
Mail Call
What about the child?
EDITOR:
I reacted strongly when I read Paul Koch’s letter in
Friday’s Battalion. Although AIDS is stigmatized as being
“the gay plague,” the virus is now known to be carried by
more than two million people, homosexual as well as
heterosexual.
I was struck by the phrase “almost every case was so
easily preventable.” The key word there is “almost.” As
most people know, AIDS can be passed by blood
transfusions as well as sexual contact. What about the child
who is inadvertently given a pint of blood infected with the
AIDS virus? Tests are not infallible. Do we condemn this
child to death because we disagree with others’ lifestyles?
I am happy to see my tax money used to combat such a
terrifying virus as AIDS and any other life-threatening dis-
These people cannot make any behavioral decisions!!)
reduce their risk. They are innocent. Can we just stand
around and watch them die simply because the moralists))
the world feel that AIDS is Mother Nature’s revenge
against homosexuality and promiscuity?
The AIDS epidemic confronts us wth our own sexual
insecurities and vulnerabilities, and we must each deal will
that in our own way. But our humanity alone must make
care and love our first priorities.
Vanessa Paulley ’89
Where does the money go?
John P. Davis ’89
'Innocents' also at risk
EDITOR:
I cannot believe the naivete and misperception
expressed in Paul Koch’s letter in Friday’s Battalion. Koch
said that he could not feel sympathetic toward AIDS
victims because they “play wih fire” and deserve to “get
burned.” He also said that the way to prevent contraction
of AIDS was to practice “restraint” before marriage and
“fidelity” after.
EDITOR:
Over the past three years I have trusted the Memorial
Student Center Bookstore as a good cause and assumed a 11 ,' ?
one had better prices. But this semester I was gravely
disappointed. I found one of my books selling along
University Drive for $26 to $29 — MSC price: $45!
Where does our money go? I want to know how the
MSC “distributes” its money. It claims to be nonprofit,so)
would seem it must produce a huge amount of funds. Ab
auctions and other special events add to the income.
However, as student organization treasurers painfull)
have discovered, the percent of money distributed thatis
needed by organizations this year is way down, around l® ,
to 15 percent of full budget. Try running a club on a 90
percent deficit.
I hope someone at the MSC takes a look at this
situation and gives us some answers.
Paul Svacina ’87
Well, what about the woman on the CBS News special,
“AIDS Hits Home,” who always had been faithful to her
husband, yet she contracted AIDS because he was having
an affair with another man? Or how about someone who is
married to an intravenous-drug user? If that’s not enough,
how about the infant whose mother has AIDS or the
hemophiliac who must depend on a possibly contaminated
blood-clotting factor drawn from an anonymous donor?
Editor’s Note: Bookstore Manager Howard DeHart ^1'
except for operating costs, all money from the bookstore
channeled back to student organizations.
Letters to the editor should not exceed 300 words in length. Theediwff .
staff reserves the right to edit letters for style and length, but wiling
every effort to maintain the author’s intent. Each letter must be sig^'
and must include the classification, address and telephone number oil!
writer.