Page 2/The BattalionThursday, April 23, 1987
Opinion
" TirLrr:__r:T7z"jr^_i__zz^-i—-IZL-, ... — . , . . -
Fashion update: Muffy and Suzi are wearing bows
A 1 y ♦ ^-v fr t-v s'* *--v 1 i-v W A. 1 O f\{~\ \ 7 I O * O ^“7 i i _ 1 *
1.
Karl
Pallmeyer
A lot of people
are worried about
their lives being
infiltrated by va
rious ' a 1 i e n and
damaging forces.
Some people are
afraid that com
munists are infil
trating our coun
try. Some people
are afraid that se
cular humanists
are infiltrating our schools. Some peo
ple are afraid that AIDS is infiltrating
our blood supply. Some people are
afraid that fluoride is infiltrating our
water supply. Some people are afraid
that Joe Barton and Jim Bakker are ac
tually the same person. (Ever notice that
they look alike, have ugly wives and al
ways seem to be wanting more money
for dumb causes like Star Wars, Contras
and sending missionaries to California?)
All that aside, there has been an infil
tration on the Texas A&M campus. No,
it’s not teasips or hippies or birds that
crap on the sidewalk. It’s something
worse. It’s something that comes from
the lowest reaches of fashion hell. It’s
the BOWHEADS.
Their distinguishing characteristics
are denim skirls, too much makeup,
mopeds, high-pitched squeals of laugh
ter, silver shoes, silver jewelry, silver
purses and — you can’t miss it — big
ugly bows on their heads.
You see them all over campus and es
pecially in the Blocker Building, where
they attend classes such as BAN A 217,
Accounting 209, Yuppie Science 374
and Husband Finding 403B. If you go
to any trendy place like Zephyrs or the
Rox-Z you won’t be able to throw a Co
rona hottle without hitting at least four
of them and getting beer all over the
Greek letters on their sweatshirts. If
you’re stupid enough to go to a mall,
you’ll see more bowheads per shoe store
than you’ll hear bad songs per hour on a
local radio station.
I have never understood women’s
fashions, but since I like looking at
women, I can’t help but notice what
they’re wearing. I never understood
why women a few years ago felt they
had to wear those gold metal belts that
Wonder Woman used to keep her star-
spangled bloomers from falling down. I
never understood why women felt they
had to take every necklace they owned
and twist them into one big necklace. I
never understood why women felt they
had to wear shoes made out of the same
plastic used in the baskets that burger
joints use to hold french fries and onion
rings.
Today, I don’t understand why some
women feel they have to wear earrings
the size of hubcaps. I don’t understand
why some women feel they have to roll
up the legs of their sweatsuit pants to
just under the knee. I don’t understand
why some women feel they have to carry
a purse that looks like it’s been wrapped
in Reynolds Wrap and is ready to go
into the oven next to the baked pota
toes.
For some reason, silver seems to be in
this year. It’s in the purses, the jewelry,
the bows and the shoes. It’s in every
thing, except for my pocket. Silver jew
elry has never been uncommon,
what’s the deal with silver shoes?
but
Cuffing info America's fufure
Kirsten
Dietz
Guest Columnist
During the
1984 election,
an overwhelm
ing majority of
students on the
Texas A&M campus cast their votes
for President Ronald Reagan. Re
publicans still heavily outnumber
Democrats on this campus. But while
students are supporting Reagan,
Reagan definitely is not supporting
students.
Reagan’s proposed budget for fis
cal year 1988 is considered by the Na
tional Education Association to be the
most anti-education budget to date.
If the administration’s reductions are
enacted, the level of federal educa
tion assistance would be lower than
when Reagan took office six years
ago.
This year, the Department of Edu
cation’s budget is $19.5 billion. Un
less stopped by Congress, the admin
istration will cut $5.5 billion, or 28
percent, from the fiscal year 1988
budget.
The picture is particularly grim for
higher education, as more than half
of the proposed cuts will be in stu
dent assistance programs. Pell Grants
will be cut by $1.2 billion, barring an
estimated 900,000 lower-income stu
dents from the program. The Guar
anteed Student Loan program will be
cut by $ 1.8 billion.
However, while federal assistance
is being cut, Secretary of Education
William Bennett admits that the cost
of college has risen 85 percent faster
than the inflation rate in the last five
years.
So where can college students turn
if the federal government is not will
ing to help? Additional state support
is not an option in many states, in
cluding Texas, as we discovered the
hard way when higher education
budgets were cut as the price of oil
plummeted.
As a solution, Bennett advocates a
shift from student grants to student
loans because, he says, “The person
who benefits from higher education
should pay the cost.” Realistically,
this alternative is unworkable. Recent
studies show that the prospect of be
coming increasingly indebted dis
courages low income and minority
students from seeking post-second
ary education.
Too often students are seen as
whining abptit the cost of higher edu
cation. But they are not the only ones
who oppose these slights by the fed
eral government. A recent Washing
ton Post-ABC News Poll shows that
46 percent of the American people
thought federal spending for student
aid should be increased, 39 percent
thought it should remain at its cur
rent level and 14 percent Said it
should be decreased.
Is all the fuss worth it? Why should
we care if disadvantaged or minority
students cannot afford extra school
ing? The most important reason is
that a college education nearly dou
bles an incnvidual’s earning power,
allowing them to contribute more to
the nation’s economic system, instead
of depending on it. This is something
the administration should under
stand;
The increasing importance of edu
cation after high school is further
stressed by a Carnegie Foundation
panel of leading educators and in
dustrialists. After a lengthy study, the
panel concluded: “Twelve years of
formal schooling will increasingly be
insufficient for our citizens. In the
future, almost everyone will need
some form of post-high school educa
tion if they are to remain empow
ered, economically productive, and
civically prepared.” - . ,
Worse than Reagan’s desire to cut
funding is that Bennett does not pro
test these proposed cuts. Instead, de
spite the strong support for contin
ued higher education funding, he
says it is “not my style” to object to the
figures from the Office of Manage
ment and Budget. He seems to pride
himself on never asking for increases
on education department accounts.
As secretary of education, Ben
nett’s job is to work in the best inter
ests of the nation’s education system
and its students. As president of the
country, Reagan should be con
cerned with the same thing. Both
would do well to remember that, in
the long run, it’s not how much an
education costs, Jbut what it’s worth.
Kirsten Dietz is a senior journalism
major and a congressional intern in
Washington D.C.
The Battalion
(USPS 045 360)
Member of
Texas Press Association
Southwest Journalism Conference
The Battalion Editorial Board
Loren Steffy, Editor
Marybeth Rohsner, Managing Editor
Mike Sullivan, Opinion Page Editor
Jens Koepke, City Editor
Jeanne Isenberg, Sue Krenek, News Editors
Homer Jacobs, Sports Editor
Tom Ownbey, Photo Editor
Editorial Policy
The Battalion is a non-profit, self-supporting newspaper oper
ated as a community service to Texas A&M and Bryan-College Sta
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 furnished on re
quest.
Our address: The Battalion, 216 Reed McDonald, Texas A&M
University, College Station, TX 77843-4 111.
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
77843-4111.
I saw a commercial for Marilyn Mon
roe shoes on TV the other day. I guess
many women admire Marilyn Monroe’s
movies and would like to wear shoes as
sociated with her. But where did the sil
ver shoes corfie from? Was there some
movie hero who wore silver shoes? I
can’t think of one except for the Tin
Woodsman in “The Wizard of Oz.”
What possessed hundreds of suppos
edly intelligent college women to wear
the same type of bows that they used to
wear to Sunday school when they were
nine years old? Are those shiny black-
patten-leather shoes also going to make
a comeback? How about training bras?
All kidding aside, the bows are useful.
I have compiled a list of five uses for
bows and bowheads.
1. Kites: It used to be fun to take your
date out to a park and fly a kite. Now, if
you’re dating a bowhead, you don’t have
to buy a kite. Just tie a string to your
date and watch her fly.
2. Airfoils: The type of women who
wear bows were not always called bow
heads. They used to be called airheads
in the days before bows. The bows help
make these women more aerodynamic.
3. Fans: Get two bowheads together
and start them talking — it’s not that
hard to do. The movements of their
heads and bows will start the air circulat
ing in even the most stuffy room. It’s
economical, too.
4. Satellite Dishes: Why spend money
on expensive satellite dishes when you
can just get a bowhead to stand on your
roof. Find a bowhead wearing one of
those huge, silver bows and you’ll be
able to pick up signals from every TV
satellite in orbit. The only trouble is that
bowheads tend to be partial to “Dynas
ty and “General Hospital.”
5. Oral Sex: I have a good use for
bows during oral sex, but leant
any details since this is a family]
per.
Fhe bowheads are here,buttha^
the way fashions change,theywoi,^
here lor long.
Karl Pallmeyer is a journalism^
uate and a columnist for The Batta]| (JS
Mail Call
Whafs to lose?
EDITOR:
We would like to address John Spessard’s short-sighted
and unjustifiably rude letter entitled “Christian Vomit”
(Tuesday’s Battalion).
By experience and investigation, we have found that
the Bible embodies truth. It is for this reason that we
believe in the Bible’s central message: a person’s sin can be
nullified only by accepting Jesus Christ and his death on
the cross. Surely, each of us would admit that we’ve
sinned; Christ’s offer is to forgive that sin — it’s a simple
message.Now, should we reject what we are convinced is
true simply because we can’t explain every facet of the
Bible? Certainly, scientists don’t reject physics, math or
chemistry because they don’t completely understand them.
Regardless of what we don’t understand, we do
understand the Bible’s claim to absolute truth. Therefore,
we accept it. In John 6, Jesus stated that eternal life is
found only through himself. Many who heard this thought
it to be “a difficult statement” to accept and departed.
Jesus then asked his disciples if they wanted to leave also.
Peter’s classic response was, “Lord, to whom shall we go?
You have words of eternal life. And we have believed and
have come to know that you are the holy one of God.”
Our response to the few things we might not
understand is identical. Consider our alternative. Should
we degenerate to that explanation of life we had before we
received Christ as our savior — one which says we exist by
chance and that life lacks ultimate purpose? We should
hardly think so. This is Spessard’s alternative.
Spessard, consider our difference in belief toward the
Bible in the light of eternity. If, for the sake of discussion,
you are right and we are wrong-— then neither you nor we
are any better or worse fbr it. However, if we are right and
it is you who are wrong — we’ll experience the
gloriousness of Heaven and you, sadly enough, will
experience the depths of Hell.
Who is the wise man and who is the fool?
John D. Seldenrust ’87
Rita Ornelas ’87
Jesus the ticket to heaven?
EDITOR:
May I present a mainline Christian perspective for
John Spessard’s consideration? First, 1 am a Catholic.
Second, this is not a definitive reply; 2,000 tears of human
richness and scholarly learning is not condensible.
All mainline Christians believe the Bible must betaken
as a whole. As von know, it does contain some
contradictions, but consider this. II 1 were to pointtoa
constellation, you could either look to the sky, seeingstau
or look at my finger, limiting your perception.The
important question, “To what does the Bible point?"ish 01
answered with the help of serious scripture scholars.
Concerning salvation. God reconciled himself wall
through Jesus. Salvation is a gift, not bought but freely
given to all. Our task is not to limit God’s giving but to
receive and to respond. We respond to God’s love even
time we desire and attempt to do good Neither knowledgt |
of Jesus nor an explicitly expressed faith in him isa
prerequisite for salvation. T he only necessity isourbest
response to God’s love. Indeed, we could imagineour
loving God saving all people.
I invite Spessard to take a hard look at mainline
Christianity. If, after he knows our theology, he maintains
his convictions, I rejoice with him. However, if he doesnoi
seek, he violates his own claims to free thinking by being
selective in the topics he considers. Peace.
Albert Babin ’90
Letters to the editor should not exceed 300 words in length. The
serves the right to edit letters for style and length, but will make evtn '
maintain the author’s intent. Each lettei must be signed and must
sification, address and telephone number of the writer.
WHAT
is THE BIG QUESTION OF THE HUMAN RACE \