The Battalion
OPINION
Wednesday, September 12,1990
Opinion Page Editor Ellen Hobbs 845-33 Wedn
Congress fails to deal with budget deficit
Almost lost amid the daily media
frenzy over Iraq is the fact that
congressional leaders are once again
failing to do anything about the federal
budget deficit. I know everyone
(including myself) is sick of hearing
about this topic (we of the TV
generation are sick of anything after 50
minutes), but I’d like to try to arouse
another 10 minutes of interest or so.
The United States government has
been in the red since before I became
aware of things political (about 20 years
ago). I have spent two decades watching
politicians lie, cheat, steal, squirm and
switch positions on this issue; let me
review it.
In the 1970’s, it was the responsible
Republicans who argued for a balanced
budget and the bleeding-heart
spendthrift Democrats who said that
budget deficits were “good for the
economy” and “irrelevant;” while
Republicans made made noble noises
about fiscal restraint and the
inadvisability of creating a welfare state.
In 1980, the Republicans got their
birthday wish: Suddenly they were in
control of both the presidency and the
Senate, and in a position to do
Jeff
Farmer
Columnist
something about that horrible deficit.
So what did they do? They CUT
TAXES AND RAISED SPENDING!
Oh, they covered it with a bunch of
economic bullstuff and talk of an evil
empire, blah, blah, blah. In fact, it
turned out that the Republicans didn’t
mean any of that garbage about fiscal
responsibility at all; they just didn’t like
the people whose votes the Democrats
were buying.
So instead of supporting teachers,
social workers, and welfare bureaucrats
they started channeling the tax bucks to
aerospace engineers, defense
companies, HUD contractors and S&L
owners. To make sure the middle class
stayed on board they cut some taxes and
maintained Social Security benefits.
And as soon as the Republicans started
spending, who do you think got that
old-time fiscally responsible religion?
The Democrats. Sure.
So please excuse me if I start
laughing hysterically when Ted
Kennedy talks about solving deficit
problems. Or Phil Graham, or George
Bush, or George Mitchell, or any of
their ilk. I have listened to these
politicians prevaricate on TV for too
many years to start believing any of the
crap they are now spewing in my
direction.
The only thing I am prepared to
believe is a balanced budget this year.
Not in five years (or 100 years, which is
what they mean when they say five).But
I’m not holding my breath.
If I seem bitter and cynical, well, I
am. But in my saner moments I realize
that it’s not fundamentally their fault. I
know these people don’t get to
Washington by magic. The blame rests
with the voters: you and me. The sad
but simple truth is that Americans have
become greedy and stupid. I say greedy
because we want something for nothing
and stupid because we believe the
people who promise it to us.
In 1980, Ronald Reagan promised to
cut taxes, raise military spending, and
balance the budget (which was already
bleeding). He won easily. The budget
deficit soared, as anyone who paid
attention in seventh grade math class
could have predicted. He was then re
elected in 1984 over a man who
promised to fix the problem by raising
taxes. The American people still believe
in Santa Claus. Touching.
The only thing I am
prepared to believe is a
balanced budget this year.
Not in five years (or 100
years, which is what they
mean when they say
five).But I’m not holding my
breath.
This budget stuff goes on today: A
candidate for State Senate (our district)
recently promised to vote against any
tax increase unless it will directly benefit
A&M.The man is campaigning to go to
Austin to steal for us. I can’t think of
anything sleazier.
Our grandparents’ generation was
neither greedy nor stupid; they worked
problem‘I
hard to make life better for us. Our
parents’ generation is at least notstui
they voted themselves more Sodal
Security benefits than they paid for
before turning it over to us. We,
however, have been borrowing
enormous sums to spend on planes,t
and VCR’s. So don’t ask why Japaru;
soon own the west coast or why thedi
repossessing your car sounds like
Helmut Kohl.
Now you know why I won’t buyam
y SEA
if The E
Festiv
Juddhi:
bars of
trange
■ape
D] I Kore.
media hype or political b.s. about son lh e lan
“historic agreement” at the “budgei
summit.” That’s why I won’t givemv
vote to any incumbent who hasn’tvi
“no” on every unbalanced budget,?
increase in the debt ceiling, every
spending resolution in excess of
revenue; and I will vote for no
challenger unless they promise todo
just that. That’s w hy I support
Libertarians (who stand for balanced
budgets, among other good things),
it’s why I wrote this article.
I don’t think we will wake upintiib
a landsc
|eep, n;
A lan
inflicts
ast as r
Altho
foreign
Korea,
J. t i 1 1 1 i fX V- >V111 111 Ullil o
to stave off disaster, but I hope we dal
sincerely hope we do. Bi \ r
Jeff Farmer is a graduate student u.
mathematics.
NAACP’s ban of UT statues
merely avoids real problems
An ancient Haitian proverb states that igno
rance doesn’t kill you, but it makes you sweat a
lot. University of Texas civil rights leaders must
be perspiring profusely after their latest play
for media attention.
The African-American population of our
nation is beset by a multitude of dire problems.
Drug addiction is appallingly prevalent, black
on black crime is epidemic, murder rates
among young black men approach genocidal
numbers, and the number of single parent
households continues to skyrocket. 1 he
NAAGP’s solution? Ban statues, of course.
Austin NAACP president Gary Bledsoe
called last week for the removal of four statues
of Confederate war heroes from the University
of Texas campus after a statue of Confederate
leader Jefferson Davis was vandalized.
The 9 1 /2-foot-tall statue of Davis was spray
painted with the slogans “Stop Racism” and
“Am I a Hero”. Given the apparent tendency
of UT students in the past to spray paint stat
ues at A&M, this defacement should come as
no surprise, however it has rekindled calls for
the statue’s removal by minority groups an
gered by the racial conflicts which have beset
thair campus in recent months.
After two racially motivated incidents at UT
fraternity houses last spring provoked con
frontations between university officials and mi
nority leaders, several constructive solutions to
the racial problems on campus were suggested.
Moves to increase cultural diversity in the fac
ulty, curriculum, and student body were called
for and a sensible plan to educate students and
ease racial tensions was undertaken.
The NAACP call to have the statues re
moved is simply a self-serving non-solution in
tended to call attention to themselves while
going about the business of ignoring the real
problems in the African-American community.
Bledsoe said,“Jefferson Davis has no more
connection (with the university) than Abraham
Lincoln, but there is no statue of Abraham Lin
coln. That’s very telling to me.”
This “telling” point appears much more
oblique when it is noted that Bledsoe petitioned
and gained approval from University President
William Cunningham to add a statue of slain
civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr. to the
campus.
King’s connection with the university? The
same as Davis’. He was an historic figure who
played a significant part in shaping our nation,
as did Davis, Lee, Jackson, etc. ... Instead of re
membering historic figures — all figures —
Bledsoe and the NAACP want to selectively
Larry
' Wm
Cox
l”'
Columnist
rearrange and edit those parts of history which
they f ind offensive or unfit.
As a Southerner and descendant of Confed
erate soldiers, I find these attempts to take
away part of my heritage tremendously insult
ing and dangerous to an educated nation. Born
of ignorance and a desire to obfuscate any un
derstanding of the historical significance of the
Confederacy to our nation’s development,
these attacks on Southern history should be
soundly rebuked at every opportunity —
whether they come from the NAACP or the
KKK’s blasphemous abuse of the Confederate
battle flag.
Bledsoe said he has long found statues of
Confederate leaders offensive because they
suggest the school endorses Confederate prin
ciples.
What are these horrid principles? In 1865,
the men of my great-great-great grandfather’s
regiment in South Carolina composed a resolu
tion which stated that, “The war in which we
are engaged is a war of self-defense; that in the
beginning, nearly four years ago, we took up
arms in defense of the right to govern our
selves, and to protect our country from inva
sion, our homes from desolation, and our wives
and children from insult and outrage.” Scan
dalous!
Bledsoe chooses to recall the six percent of
Southerners who were slave owners. I choose
to honor all those who fought and died for
what they believed in.
If ignorance wins out in Austin, as it usually
does, I propose a trade —their four statues in
exchange for the atrocious “Planned for the
Future” statue which sat outside the MSC.
They deserve it. Besides, Texas A&M does
have a connection with Jeff Davis — he was of
fered the school presidency in the late 1800’s.
I hope we have enough pride in our past and
our history as a Southern institution to behave
differently from our Austin brethren. Besides,
even in Aggie math four for one is a heckuva
deal.
Larry Cox is a graduate student in range sci
ence.
kggies must make effor
appreciate each otheij^
• » S' 4- 1 1 ♦ 1'4 » ** m ' S t 1 ^ 1 1 t »■» I'V 1 1 ♦ I !
As happens each fall, there
have been a rash of emotional
letters concerning ‘exclusionary*
organizations. I would like to
step back for a moment and take
a less emotional look at the issues
which surfaced in these letters.
The first letter I read was
written by Mrs. John Paul
Johnson, who criticized
sororities for hurting their
prospective pledges’ feelings by
judging them on certain criteria.
A rebuttal followed from Amy
Bening defending sorority
selection processes. Finally, two
letters were submitted which
criticized Ms. Bening's points
and prejudices. There was also
an unrelated column which
proposed that fraternities should
once again lose their University
recognition.
Though I could spend a great
deal of time analyzing each
letter’s strengths and
weaknesses, I do not plan to do
so. Instead, I would like to
address the issue of respect. It
seems that each of the authors
cared about what the other
authors thought, or at least were
concerned that the opposition’s
arguments would sway other
Aggies. No one dropped down
to the level of reminding anyone
that Highway 6 runs both ways.
As Gwynne Ellen Ash pointed
out in her rebuttal to Ms.
Bening’s article, everyone needs
to belong. This is true of anyone
regardless of their appearance,
IQ, gender, race, or location of
birth. People derive a sense of
self respect from the feedback
they receive from others. Being
shunned by a group may cause
one to reconsider one’s value
(after the anger passes).
Once accepted into a group,
people naturally take pride in
the group since it reflects their
values. Consequently, a member
of the Corp of Cadets should be
proud to be a CT, a member of a
fraternity or sorority should be
proud to be a Greek, and a
student or former student of
Texas A&M should be proud to
be an Aggie. If one loses respect
for one’s peers, one’s self respect
will likely f ollow.
Another important issue is
that everyone must decide for
themselves what their priorities
are. Very few people (if any) can
be good at everything. We each
have our strengths and
weaknesses. Consequently, we set
goals for ourselves, and try to be
the best people we can be. How
we choose what is ‘best 4 , is usually
a f unction of our upbringing,
peers, and religion. But
certainly, everyone’s goals and
talents are different.
A member of the Corp
of Cadets should be
proud to be a CT, a
member of a fraternity
or sorority should be
proud to be a Greek,
and a student or
former student of
Texas A&M should be
proud to be an Aggie.
In order to strive to do one’s
best, a person must play many
roles. My father uses the analogy
to spokes in a wheel. There
needs to be enough spokes in the
wheel to make it sturdy and
dependable. Thus, a CT may
also be a member of a religious
group, participate in a
professional society, and of
course be a good Ag. Likewise,
greeks, dorm students, and off-
campus students can be good
Ags too. In other words, being a
good Ag by actively participating
in yell practices and so forth is
only one spoke in the wheel.
If we can all learn to respect
others for what they are, and try
to understand what their goals
and talents are, then we may not
be so hasty to criticize them. Not
everyone can win a beauty
pageant, throw a winning pass
lead others to a better outlook
life, advance the state of
technology, or be the hitofa
party. On the other hand,wei
have our own special gifts as
as friends whom appreciateus
If a group (which does noil:
under government regulations
w ishes to choose people based!
the values of the group
members, it seems to methati
has the right to do so. Those^
do not fit into the group would
not be happy in the groupeve:
if they w'ere allowed to
participate. Is it better to tell
people they are not wanted,or
constantly be at odds with then:
Has someone you wanted togo
out with ever repeatedly toldvi
‘maybe 4 instead of tactfully
telling you ‘no 4 ? I personally
prefer to pidl the bandage oft
quickly instead of slowly rippir.
out one hair at a time.
On the other hand, groups
should choose their criteria
carefully so as not to miss out a
the wonderful talents each and
every person has. Open
minded ness and acceptance ot
change are two prerequisitesf((
growth. Groups who do not
choose their acceptance criterii
wisely may find their function!
to be rather drab and superfict
Note that when groups set
criteria which are detrimental 1
society in general, then societv
must act to protect itself from
these organizations. Thus,
organizations which discrimin:
based on race, religion, and
similar criteria should be
shunned.
In conclusion, I hope that
Aggies will continue to care no'
only for their school but also!® I
other Aggies. 'T he only wayto
truly care for others is to tryto
understand them and tolettht.
add their own special qualities!
the essence of Aggieland.
Louis Decker is a Research
Assistant in the Knowledge Bait
Systems Laboratory.
Anyi
Korear
The
odicail;
and cu
dents a
The Battalion
(USPS 045 360)
Member of
Texas Press Association
Southwest Journalism Conference
The Battalion Editorial Board
Cindy McMillian,
Editor
Timm Doolen, Managing Editor
Ellen Hobbs, Opinion Page Editor
Holly Becka, City Editor
Kathy Cox,
Kristin North,
News Editors
Nadja Sabawala,
Sports Editor
Eric Roalson, Art Director
Lisa Ann Robertson,
Lifestyles Editor
Editorial Policy
The Battalion is a non-profit, self-sup
porting newspaper operated as a commu
nity service to Texas A&M and Bryan-
College Station.
Opinions expressed in The Battalion
are those of the editorial board or the au
thor, and do not necessarily represent the
opinions of Texas A&M administrators,
faculty or the Board of Regents.
The Battalion is published Monday
through Friday during Texas A&M regu
lar semesters, except for holiday and ex
amination periods. Newsroom: 845-3313.
Mail subscriptions are $20 per semes
ter, $40 per school year and $50 per full
year: 845-2611. Advertising rates fur
nished on request: 845-2696.
Our address: The Battalion, 230 Reed
McDonald, Texas A&M University, Col
lege Station, TX 77843-1111.
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.
Adventures In Cartooning
... AND THCN SHC
ASHED AC TO KISS
HER. X GOT SCARED
AND WCT MV
PANTS.
SHC STARTED TO \
LAUGH AT ME SO
X CALLED HER A
DOODV' HEAD AND
WENT HOME.
by Don Atkinson Jr>
Jin mu m/h ;JH
Vou CoMPVTSK
fJenDs Ate Sock
Geeksva
mOAlUAl