Page 2/The Battalion/Wednesday, November 11, 1987
Opinion
An Aggie’s thoughts turn to registratio
Ah,
tion.
registra
r's that time of
the semester
again, when the
schedule books
appear outside
Heaton Hall and
an Aggie’s
thoughts turn to
conflicting section
times, nasty pre
requisites and un
known professors.
year). I’ve put up with three-hour waits
to get through to the new phone regis
tration system (junior year), even if I
didn’t wait in the three-hour lines to call
from me library and the MSC (it was
easier to crack the system from those
phones than from the ones in the
dorms).
I really should be a pro at this by now.
time you got to the Pavilion with them.
By that time the section you wanted had
closed anyway, since your only clue as to
whether a section was open came from
computer enrollment printouts that
were always archaic and had approxi
mately 9,234 x 10 2S rabid students fight
ing for the chance to see if all the aero
bics sections were full yet.
Sue
Krenek
I’ve done this registration thing seven
times now — more if you count summer
sessions. I’ve stood in three-hour lines in
90-degree weather at the Pavilion (sum
mer before my freshman year). I’ve
stood in three-hour lines in 40-degree
weather at the Pavilion (fall of my fresh
man year). I’ve endured three-hour
treks from the Pavilion to the journa
lism department to get signatures
needed for honors classes (sophomore
But somehow registration always
brings out the worst in people, and I’m
no exception. Along with the harried
advisers of my days as an under
classman (when they actually made you
talk to a real live human being about
your schedule), I flinch at the sight of
trial schedule forms, course request
forms, raise limits forms, blocked-stu-
dent-trying-to-get-unblocked forms, ad
infinitum, ad nauseum.
And speaking of P.E., I remember
the days when you had to register for
P.E. 199 and hope for the best. Go to G.
Rollie on the first day of class and wan
der about with the rest of the confused
masses, seeking that elusive aerobics or
venture dynamics class and knowing
that by the time you got to the front of
the line you were going to be stuck with
badminton or folk dancing. It was horri
fying.
over) the number of hours you already
have. Counting (over and over and over
and over) the number of hours you still
need. Panicking when your calculations
show you need 23 hours — including 12
hours of laboratory science, preferably
in graduate-level astrophysics — to
graduate in May. Then realizing that
you inadvertently deleted an entire se
mester. Then going a bit delirious and
thinking how nice it would be if you
really could delete all those academic
faux pas from your record.
actual problem of registering is
the same: what to take.
St
w
The worst were always the add/drop
forms. You remember, the kind you
had to fill out, an adviser had to sign
and that were inevitably outdated by the
And if I thought it was bad as a fresh
man, imagine my dismay at discovering
the special hell they save for you as a se
nior: Degree plans. Degree checks.
Counting (over and over and over and
The nightmare that is registration
never goes away. It only changes its
form so as to trick you into thinking it
might not be so bad. But the guy who
wants to talk about differential equa
tions when you’re stuck in the three-
hour Pavilion line from hell is really the
alter ego of the sadistic “buzz buzz buzz
buzz buzz buzz buzz buzz buzz buzz buzz
. . you get with phone registration.
And even though the way you regis
ter has changed since I’ve been here, the
As a liberal arts major with a bet
free electives, I’ve discovered thejoi
sifting through class options rani
from the obscure to the just plains
Do I take Philosophy of Undent
Photographic Calculus or Economic
Applied Horticultural Psychology?
erature of a Small Region in Norik
ern Zimbabwe from May 1890 to
25, 1966? Or Survey of Off-Track
ting in the Himalayas? Creative Fim
ing T hrough Increased But Hii
Fees? Or Special Topics in Human
uality for Political Deviants (taught
visiting professor Gary Hart)?
The possibilities are limitless. H
again, so is the amount of time la
spend trying to get into the phonerc
tration system.
I’d better start dialing.
Sue Krenek is a senior journalism
jor and opinion page editor hr
Battalion.
Mail Call
Lack of understanding
EDITOR:
James Sexton’s letter criticizing the negative viewpoints on Brian
Frederick’s articles illustrates a total lack of understanding of the issues.
Frederick was not being called a fascist because of his “standard of ethics,”
but because he has been promoting an elitist domination of our Democratic
system by people he deems better than the rest. This, of course, includes
himself. But in our pluralistic society no person or group holds a monopoly
on moral value judgments.
I consider myself patriotic. But patriotism does not mean that I must
tolerate the undermining of my civil rights and those of the rest of the world
in order to allow a pompous few to perpetuate their exploitation of the less
fortunate.
The person that has no guts is the one who feels that he must
unreasonably threaten the lives of the rest of the world in order to keep his
own. Instead of really understanding what is happening in this world, Sexton
— like many — chooses to remain ignorant and resort to flag-waving, biblical
distortion and violence. If that is morality, I wish to have no part of it.
Terry Baumgartner ’88
Women being treated badly
EDITOR:
I agree with Jane Landry about centerpole and the incident at bonfire.
Some Aggies, and many men, forget that their existence would not have been
possible without those women out there. And it is also time that Aggies, as
well as many men, stop using phrases like “those women out there.” Women
and men must understand that they are not on the opposite side of the
perimeter called life.
In order to fully live it must be understood and felt, by these men out
there, that they cannot expect true happiness without a deeper and fuller
understanding of women. From my experience, as a man, it seems women
hardly have been treated like true human beings.
It is not only women but men also who suffer from the existing attitudes
such as the ones about the perimeter and the centerpole. If not for the good
of all women but their own, it is time that each man took a deep breath and
thought about how a woman truly feels, thinks, and is. But they too, must
realize the fault is not all theirs. The society, whatever the word means, has
programmed us in these insanely insane ways. Beyond the immediate
ugliness, which the perimeter incident is just symbolic of, lies great beauty in
us all. And men as well women are to greatly benefit from this opportunity to
write these words. And apologies to all if and when I have been one of “those
men out there.”
Dharam V. Ahluwalia
grad student
We don't need women at bonfire
EDITOR:
After reading Miss Landry’s letter, I got the feeling that she was implying
that the men who work on bonfire are just male chauvinists. According to my
handy dictionary, she is correct. It states that chauvinism is the prejudiced
belief in the superiority of one’s own group. However, my handy dictionary
also defines chauvinism as a fanatical patriotism. Hence, the men who work
on bonfire are bonfire chauvinists - ones who love and defend the spirit and
tradition of bonfire.
But hey, can you blame us? Women cannot produce the amount of labor
that is needed to build bonfire. I have seen the women that Miss Landry
wrote about, the ones “helping” cut down trees at cutting site. Women come
out for half a day and spend the whole time cutting down their “dorm log”
that the men have to go in and carry out. Granted, there are women out there
almost every weekend - riding around in the back of a truck. Gee, thanks for
the help.
Since this is the type of help we get from women and since they want to
help us even more, we had better make bonfire a year-round project. That
might give women enough time to produce the amount of wood required to
build bonfire. So you face the facts, Miss Landry — women are not wanted in
perimeter. You are of no use to us in there.
Paul Schwarz ’88
Letters to the editor should not exceed 300 words in length. The editorial staff reserves the right to edit letters
for style and length, but will make every effort to maintain the author’s intent. Each letter must be signed and
must include the classification, address and telephone number of the writer.
ana w
Am^rv
who wd
bui^*?Criply p'
Stices
the law
*.*.by i
Johm
taking i
eyes mo
other sti
fessor.
hands,
to the <
motions
John i
pairmei
dent in
sor’s t
underst
underst
Many
perfect
classes,
school :
disabilit
Smith
nology
spring
the deal
first par
It ’ s.^£ime we rej^aced
judic^!P>i^j5*1fvism with
judj
interest ♦
con
_V7
“I we
the Dea
says, sp<
his word
After
school ii
in Austi
girls —
years at
stitute f
Earning
in pre-e
him to e
“It’s
says. “A
the prc
sign lan
pretty f;
To c
Our opponents are alread
waging a vicious campaig
of out-and-out truths.
interpn
of class*
“I foi
the Te
sion,” S
ficult w
down. ‘
Smit
of Hy
Weinberger: The end of an era
We reached the
end of an era last
week. I know, peo
ple are always tell
ing you that but
this time, with the
resignation of De-
fenseSecretary
Caspar Wein-
berger, we really
did. After he
leaves office, we
will not look upon
Donald
Kaul
his like again any time soon. At least let’s
hope not.
Weinberger was the chief architect of
the most expensive, least productive
“defensive buildup” in our history. He
never met a weapons system he didn’t
like; the B-l bomber, the MX missile,
the Trident submarine, the super-car
rier, the Strategic Defense Initiative, he
was for them all. Money was no object to
“Cap the Knife,” a nickname he picked
up while Richard Nixon’s budget direc
tor and one his later career rendered ri
diculous.
He spent money on weapons until he
had broken the bank, then he spent on
credit. In the name of constructing a
credible defense he and his boss
brought this country to the brink of an
economic ruin that, ironically, has
materially weakened our ability to de
fend ourselves. They acted without
thought to the link between military and
economic strength. All of which would
have been bad enough had he delivered
on his promise to make us stronger in a
narrow military sense, but he didn’t.
There is a problem with his wondrous
weapons; they don’t work very well. He
would never admit it, of course, but the
fact is that while defense spending dur
ing his stewardship jumped from $181
billion to $274 billion, our military es
tablishment remains mired in incompe
tence and interservice rivalries. Look at
the record:
Our invasion of Grenada in 1983 was
a botch, successful only because it could
not fail, given the weakness of our op
ponents. Our bombing of Lebanon in
that same year was a disaster, leading to
the murder of our Marines there. The
raid on Libya, a country that was soon to
lose a war to Chad, was a lumbering suc
cess, but one that seemed to strain our
logistical resources to the breaking
point. When one of our warships in the
Gulf was bombed and badly damaged
by a stray Iraqi plane, we failed to court-
martial the captain of the ship because
of what the process would reveal about
the ineptitude of our naval high com
mand. And when we sent our Navy into
the Persian Gulf, our warships wound
up cowering behind the oil tankers we
were there to protect because we didn’t
have any modern mine-sweepers in our
600-ship navy.
He came into office crying “was
fraud and abuse” and sought to cure!
situation by throwing huge sums
money at the wastrels, frauds and ah
ers. It didn’t work. In a well-run adw
istration Weinberger would have b*
fired by now; instead, he leaves a hero
Weinberger’s great trick was his a!
ity to scare a spineless Congress into
ing the Pentagon money by yellif
“The Russians are coming! The R
sians are coming!” That well has be;
running dry recently, but he drew 5 '
of water out of it in his time.
It was Weinberger’s apparent diet
that the Russians could be deterf
from aggression by the sheer weight
the money we spent on arms. ForjT
how well we spent it or on what, thevo
fact that we were willing to conuj
enormous sums to weapons was a to!
of our resolve. That we kept coming
short in the real world conflicts that?
posed themselves on us didn’t seem
matter much.
Predictable, then, he always opposi
vitn ■
any arms control agreements with
Soviet Union. His military philosop :
was as direct and simple as the econoU
philosophy of the great turn-of-the-cf
tury labor leader, Samuel Gompt :
“More.”
In any case, Congress is a harder 1
these days. The times, they are a-ch»
gin’. Thank God.
Copyright 1987, Tribune Media Services, Inc
BLOOM COUNTY
by BerKe Breathe*
The Battalion
(USPS 045 360)
Editorial Policy
T/ie Battalion is a non-profit, self-supporting newspaper oper-
“ \&M and Br
Jryan-College Sta-
Member of
Texas Press Association
Southwest Journalism Conference
The Battalion Editorial Board
Rodney Rather, Editor
Sue Krenek, Managing Editor
John Jarvis, Opinion Page Editor
Sondra Pickard, City Editor
Karen Kroesche, News Editor
Loyd Brumfield, Sports Editor
Curtis Culberson, Photo Editor
ated as a community service to Texas A&:M
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 77843-4111.
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.
mo.. PO YOU THINK
THAT THE R€Ptf\C6-
MENT PENGUIN
PUKING THE
STRIKE PIP A
&6TTER JOB
THEN COE ?
/
Ut
OLLfE
PUNT ?
C'MON...
rue hebkp
THAT He ms
-VERY EFFECTIVE"
IN THE ROLE...
YOU'RE
HE tS VERY
POLITICALLY
ASTUTE,
ISN'T HE T
HEY/
50 ARE
YOU/
00 ON...GIVE
mom fWthF'
SOCKS/
"SUCKE.
GOOP!