^dnesday • January 28, 1998
The Battalion
L
ATE OF THE UNION
Public relations
residential scandals fall prey to scrutiny by media, citizens in information age
sm
Beverly
Mireles
columnist
kresident Clinton is ner-
"vous.One cannot blame
hnn.
s a man obsessed with se-
ig a heroic standing in his-
he has a few things to wor-
out. Whitewater,
elgate. Paula Jones. Cam-
n finance violations. The list
inues to grow,
linton, whether he had
hing to do with these
gs or not, will fight their
ishfor the rest of his presi-
;y, doubtfully making “Any publicity is good pub-
'7” the White House motto,
sad state of affairs for the president. Poor Bill
t ask himself every day why the media watches
more closely than Oprah Winfrey watches her
rie intake.
here are many reasons Clinton, or any other
ident, can never escape the scouring gaze of
tia types. Just for Clinton’s sake, here are the
tlights:
lumber one: Timing is everything. Frankly, Bill
ton was just born too late to escape heavy duty
idal. Or the reporting of it, at least. “Tricky Dick”
m ruined it for all politicians with the Watergate
lent. Suddenly, the little faith people had in politi-
s was gone.
rom the moment the story ofWatergate broke,
idward and Bernstein changed the way people
ight of politicians, and the political climate in
iral And it wasn’t just because people liked the
of informants called “Deepthroat.”
lum ber two: Better you than us. From the media’s
/point, it is much easier to say that the president,
ly other high ranking official for that matter, has
made a mockery of his office than it is to admit that
the media has a tendency to make a
mockery of itself.
Basically, a story about fallen offi
cials makes better headlines than
one about declining readership in
newspapers does.
Especially when the supposed
wrong doings have catchy names
like “Travelgate” or “Nanny-
gate.” Perhaps 1
the
There is just something cheap, disgusting and ulti
mately satisfying about a big-haired girl
from Arkansas claiming that the presi
dent has distinguishing marks on his pe
nis. It is very Jerry Springer.
Whitewater, one of the larger scan
dals that has surfaced while Clinton
is in office, is boring com
pared to
most
recent
s< .m -
dal
should
be called
“Fondlegate.” In other words,
reporting on the president re
duces the chance that the
media will have to report
on themselves.
Plus, it is our job to re
port on the lazy bums in
office, good and bad.
Number three: Scan
dals are fun. In the same
way that Puritans secretly
enjoyed and encouraged
witch hunts, Americans
like their televised court
hearings and special pros
ecutors. Most of all, peo
ple love sex scandals.
'Yte:
k
z
the shock value of
Paula Jones.
I mean, the woman
talks about the most
powerful man in the
world’s penis on na
tional television. She
will make the
evening news a lot
quicker than a story
about genocide in
Bosnia or Somalia
or Rwanda, any
day of the week.
It is just public
preference, no
matter what
they claim they
want.
Number four: It is hard to not report the president
getting caught with his pants down — literally. He is
one, two, three times a ladies man.
First it was Gennifer Flowers. That was scandalous,
but the American public got over it because she did
not seem to have any credibility. She could not even
spell “Jennifer” correctly.
Then, Paula Jones. When that broke, people started
paying attention, but with a grain of salt. She did will-
ingly g° to that hotel room in 1991.
Now, two more names surface: Katherine Wil-
ley and Monica Lewinsky. Willey, a White House
part-timer has testified that she was kissed and
fondled by Clinton when she went to see the presi
dent about obtaining a full-time job, a troubling bit
of evidence for the White House. However, Lewin
sky, and her possibly perjured testimony, is by far the
most damaging to Clinton.
Reportedly, Lewinsky admitted to an acquain
tance that she had an affair with Clinton, was told
to lie about it by the president and then testified
under oath that she did not have sexual relations
with Clinton.
If Clinton did tell Lewinsky to lie, he is simply in a
whole lot of trouble. This scandal, more so than any of
the others, has the power to make a lasting and
derogatory impression upon Clinton’s place in Ameri
can politics.
President Clinton should not expect the barrage
of media-exploited scandals to end anytime soon. If
guilty of any wrong doing, he could consider this the
beginning of his punishment. If innocent, he should
realize that having every action reported is in the
job description.
And remember, by running for the office, he asked
for it.
Beverly Mireles is a freshman microbiology major.
ATE OF THE UNION
)ay care tax cut masquerades as triumph for family; misses mark
John
Lemons
columnist
r here is a
monster
loose on
apitol Hill — a
tonster re-
ased by the
Ron adminis-
atfpn. Howev-
there is some-
ling peculiar
bout this mon-
er. While it
ioks friendly, it
ill devour en-
re families.
In his State of the Union address, Pres-
lent Clinton laid out his budget propos-
, Is for the next year. The President’s bud-
3t includes tax breaks for families who
sep children in child care. These tax
rediss are sort of an evil twin of pro fam-
y legislation — they look family friendly,
ut they are not. The Clinton administra-
on should be offering tax credits for
imilies with parents who stay home
ith their children.
Amazingly, the Clinton administra-
on intends to use the tax code to en
courage parents to pay other people to
care for their children.
It is an abuse of a system that is in
tended to generate revenue, not experi
ment with nationwide social engineering.
What is inconceivable about these
proposals is that they ignore the millions
of families who have a parent that stays
home with their children.
These families courageously forego
extra income, because they understand
that the care of a loving parent is always
superior to that of a stranger. They hold a
full-time job, with the title of Mommy or
Daddy, instead of butcher, baker or can
dlestick maker.
This move is consistent with the Clin
ton administration’s skewed view of big
government and child rearing. It is no
surprise that the administration intends
to slip government’s meddling hands
into the family itself.
Furthermore, this proposal begs the
question of how the Clinton’s believe
children should be raised. After all, if you
are Hillary Clinton, you believe “it takes a
village” to raise a child.
By the looks of its proposals, the Clin
ton administration believes it takes a
village, a day-care center or just about
anybody but a child’s own parent, to
raise a child.
Yes, child care is expensive, but not
working is also expensive. Stay-at-home
parents sacrifice income and career to
care for their children. Certainly, these
families could benefit from a tax credit.
Perhaps the most insulting result of
this snub by the Clinton administration,
is the implication that being a home
maker is not a legitimate career choice
for parents.
It is disgusting that by refusing to rec
ognize these parent’s noble and legitimate
career choice, the administration would
belittle their actions. They are actions tak
en in the best interest of children.
During his Jan. 7 press conference an
nouncing these proposals, Clinton said,
“There is no more important job than
raising a child.
There is no more important responsi
bility than to create the conditions and
give people the tools to succeed at raising
their children.”
Indeed, the president claims that gov
ernment should be providing families
with the tools to succeed at child raising,
but he refuses to bolster a whole section
of society who are successfully raising
their children.
In most cases,'keeping children at
home is superior to day care, but day
care can benefit children.
Scott Johnson, an assistant professor
of psychology at Texas A&M, said the
quality of day care depends on several
factors, including the caregiver’s train
ing, turnover of day care staff, the day
care facilities and educational experi
ences provided.
Unfortunately, the quality of day care
in the United States is suspect.
“I think the majority of day care in
this country is not very good,” Johnson
said, “I don’t think anybody is going to
argue with that.”
Clinton’s budget does include some
proposals to improve the quality of child
care. Yet, it is interesting that the adminis
tration would choose to espouse the
virtues of child care rather than promote
stay-at-home parenting. After all, child
advocacy has been the hallmark of the
Clinton’s presidency.
Clinton often claims that he acts “to
protect the children.” It has been his ex
planation for his stances on Internet
pornography, regulating tobacco compa
nies and drug abuse.
Perhaps, the president has drawn
from the “let’s protect the children”
well so many times that it has become
a political reflex — a cheap excuse to
justify any cockeyed idea the Clinton
administration devises.
Encouraging families to use child care
and ignoring stay-at-home parents is not
pro-family legislation. Maybe the coun
try will luck out, and the President’s trou
bles with Monica Lewinsky will cost him
enough credibility to sink this legislation.
Or maybe, Clinton will come to his sens
es and promote stable environments for
raising children.
These days, the Clinton administra
tion is desperately looking for legacy. Will
its legacy be a generation of children
raised by strangers?
John Lemons is an electrical
engineering graduate student.
MAIL CALL
ifety policies lacking
' campus functions
^fter Saturday night, I think that
University needs to take a long
k at its guidelines and policies
special events held by various
ani/ations on campus. Two
versity police officers for a
tee in which over 1,500 people
ended is outrageous.
iThis figure does not include the
or so angry people who were
side unable to get in. The
ice I am referring to took place
1. Rollie White Coliseum Satur-
' night and was part of a confer-
e being held here at Texas A & M
iversity this past weekend.
I do not know what the current
icy is for uniformed police at a
iversity approved function, but
• officers for almost 2,000 peo-
is not a ratio that I would want
to be part of, unfortunately I had
no choice.
The two officers assigned to the
dance... were running (literally)
from one door to the other trying
to control the angry crowd outside
while also keeping an eye on the
1,500 inside the coliseum. Atone
point about 50 or so people from
outside broke open a locked door
and ran into the coliseum.
After two calls to 911, extra uni
versity police arrived followed by a
couple of College Station police.
Needless to say, the dance ended
well before it was scheduled to end.
A party of this size required at
least a dozen police officers, yet
only two were assigned.
A dance like this should have
been cancelled or postponed until
proper security was available. To
my understanding this was not the
only dance on campus Saturday
night and the other dance also had
inadequate officers and encoun
tered similar problems.
I think that the University
should take a look at its current
policies and not approve such spe
cial events if it is unable to proper
ly staff them with a proportionate
number of officers.
It makes the sponsors look bad
and more importantly it makes
Texas A&M University look bad.
Al Guarnieri
Class of’98
Conference sponsors
owe University apology
On Saturday night, Jan. 24, an
accident occurred at the intersec
tion of FM 2818 and Highway 60.
An apparently inebriated individ
ual had “slammed” into a light
pole, sending the pole into an au
tomobile driven by an elderly cou
ple returning from dinner. Some
friends of mine and I stopped to
help the couple, and also alerted
someone to call the police.
The call was made, and approx
imately ten minutes later, a Brazos
County sheriff stopped to ensure
that an injury did not occur. How
ever, the officer informed us that a
“huge” fight had occurred at Texas
A&M, and that he was needed to
control the “riot.” He said that he
would send the next available offi
cer to the scene. Thirty minutes
later, a College Station police offi
cer arrived to file a report.
I was suddenly curious as to
what kind of riot could have oc
curred at the school that prides it
self on “Howdy” and being an Ag
gie. I found the cause of the riot to
be the Southwestern Black Student
“Leadership” Conference that oc
curred this weekend. I called the
University Police Department,
and they informed me of the
events that took place that night.
Thirty police officers (BPD,
CSPD and UPD), along with six
security guards were required to
control the anarchy that occurred
late that night by individuals un
der the misguided impression
that their actions reflect leader
ship development.
This is not the first time that inci
dents such as these have happened.
Yet, nothing is reported, nothing is
done. One officer I talked to in
formed me that such actions “make
the police force virtually naked” in
all jurisdictions. Is that the message
that A&M wants to send to the sur
rounding community?
As a student, I am appalled at
the apparent apathy toward this
matter by the University and the
organizations which sponsor this
event. Channel 3 reported this
matter on Sunday, but The Battal
ion, by choice or neglect, hasn’t re
ported anything. In my personal
opinion, a sincere written apology
is owed to the community and to
the students by the University and
the organizations responsible for
this “leadership” conference. In re
ality, both parties justify anarchy,
immaturity and illegality.
To the elderly couple who waited
patiently for an officer to arrive, I am
sorry that my school continually
sponsors events in its quest for mul-
ticulturalism that end in riots requir
ing every available officer to subdue.
A school so rich in tradition and
pride should seriously consider an
apology to the students and to the
community. It should also consider
a proposal that regulates the organi
zations that sponsor the event.Ob-
viously, they are not capable of con
trolling the conference. Perhaps
someone else should.
Allen Gardner
Class of’99
Actions displayed do
not display leadership
This letter is in response to the
utter disrespect which I was sub
jected to by students apparently
involved in The Southwestern
Black Student Leadership Confer
ence. On Saturday evening, as I
was driving through campus, traf
fic was disrupted by an apparent
“march” through the streets.
The students involved refused to
allow vehicles to pass, when they did
try to pass, the “marchers” yelled ob
scenities and threats at the drivers.
Subsequently, when even this failed
to bring individual vehicles to a halt,
they proceeded to jump on top of
the “offending” cars in addition to
throwing objects at them.
If this is a leadership conference,
then why would students involved
desire to display such a blatant ex
ample of unruly and indeed illegal
behavior? In my opinion, the best
way to gain the respect necessary to
any successful leader is to extend
respect to those around you. The
behavior that I witnessed illustrat
ed a lack of respect for not only the
occupants of the cars involved, but
also to this University.
In the future, I hope that when
the Multicultural Department de
cides to allow organizations to vis
it our campus and hold their con
ferences here, they will attempt to
ensure that the students involved
are more respectful.
Next time something gets
thrown at me or my vehicle, I
might not be so charitable, as the
conduct which I witnessed was
without a doubt in violation of a
multiplicity of criminal statutes.
Sheri Teinert
Class of’98
Accompanied by 3 signatures.
The Battalion encourages letters to the ed
itor. Letters must be 300 words or less and in
clude the author’s name, class, and phone
number.
The opinion editor reserves the right to edit
letters for length, style, and accuracy. Letters
may be submitted in person at 013 Reed Mc
Donald with a valid student ID. Letters may also
be mailed to:
The Battalion - Mail Call
013 Reed McDonald
Texas A&M University
College Station, TX
77843-1111
Campus Mail: 'IH'I
Fax: (409) 845-2647
E-mail: batt@unix.tamu.edu
For more details on letter policy, please call 845-3313
and direct your question to the opinion editor.