n
?dnesday • February 25, 1998
The Battalion
OPINION
TATE OF THE UNION
conomy's boom
aves Clinton
om sex scandal
PERSPECTIVES
Stewart
Patton
columnist
Ihemost recent of Clinton’s sex
scandals has taken a hiatus, and
the public is left wondering ex-
what Clinton and Lewinsky did
le dozens of occasions she visited
ffice following her term as White
seaide. Through the media bash-
nd the renewed questions of
era president’s private life af-
hisjob performance, some mys-
sremain: why did the president’s
oval rating continue to rise even
e scandal unfolded? and why is
candal over when the truth has
— ome out?
re popularity rating has been a device long used by poll-
to supposedly gauge the ebb and flow of the public’s
ion to the president’s effectiveness. It usually consists of
pie, amorphous question along the lines of, “Do you
islike, or have no opinion about how the president is
ing the country?”
e answers to this question do not indicate the public’s
oval or disapproval of any certain policy by the president.
ier, the decision to like or dislike Clinton could be based
mething as mundane as a respondent’s favorable reac-
othe rosy glow of the president’s cheeks in a televised in-
w. A negative reaction could be based on that same part
first lady in the clandestine video showing the swim-
|clad couple dancing on a private beach,
en as the first stories of Clinton’s alleged wrongdoing ,
ewsstands, the presidential popularity rating hit record
band continued to escalate. When these polls were tak-
linton did not have any extraordinary policy victories
|would explain the increase in his rating,
e “standoff” with Iraq remained stagnant with renewed
ts of violence by both sides, and the State of the Union
ess sounded like it was cut and pasted from all of the
it Svious State of the Union Addresses. The economy, how-
is booming, and many Americans are enjoying in-
:ed prosperity and hope for the future,
ericans have long given the president more credit for
omic progress and more blame for economic disaster
is warranted.
rely one man cannot spur a creature as large and un-
ictable as the U.S. economy into action. The French
isopher was correct to write that “bread and circus” are
lent for a contented populous. Americans obviously do
are what the president does as long as there is plenty of
on the table and the Super Bowl on the tube,
e usual life-cycle of a scandal (e.g., O.J. Simpson trial,
a Harding, Rodney King) is that it is born, lingers for a
|e, then culminates in a verdict or in a definitive, accept-
tsion of the truth. In the “Clinterngate” scandal, howev-
e press seemed to believe Ginsburg, Lewinsky’s attor-
when he announced the scandal had run its course,
the scandal really is over and Starr does not pursue legal
iurse against the president, then Clinton would get off
out answering to the American people. Even if Clinton
Lewinsky did not have sex in the Oval Office, Clinton is
itely guilty of something.
leas much admitted guilt in his first released statement
the press caught wind of the allegations. “There is no
oper sexual relationship.” Come on, Mr. President,
ricans know we ain’t smart, but we know verb tense. The
ment looked even worse after white house spokesman
McCurry repeated a dozen times, “I will not character-
ie relationship beyond what is written in the statement.”
he president’s guarded statements show a flawed scan-
[handling strategy. If Clinton was innocent of any wrong-
g, then his first statement should have covered all the
is, “I did not, would not, could not, should not, and will
[do anything with Monica Lewinsky beyond the normal
ident-aide relationship.”
f Clinton was guilty of all or any allegations, he should
emade the same statement. No one is going to accept
«rb-tense loophole if the case goes to court; he would
be in trouble for misleading the public. If he was going
e, he might as well have gone all out.
herefore, Americans love ole’ Billy because the economy
riving, although his own statements show he definitely
something unethical with Lewinsky. The moral of the
y for you presidential hopefuls out there: as long as the
lomy is good, Americans will play the three monkeys
n a little sexual shenanigans come along.
Stewart Patton is a junior sociology major.
Robot armageddon
Humans must strike back to stop technological war
Chris
Huffines
radio producer
I t’s official.
The end is
near. CNN
reported last
week that sci
entists in
Switzerland
managed to
program a ro
bot to learn
from its mis
takes and not
run into boxes.
After this cru
cial step up in artificial intelligence,
the scientists went on to say that ro
bots could be as smart as humans
within 10 years. Within 20 years, they
may be wondering why they should
be putting up with humans, leading to
what CNN, one of the most credible
shows in the news business, called a
“Robot Armageddon.”
This is silly. There will be no Robot Ai -
mageddon. Despite everyone’s best ef
forts, and no matter how much we may
deserve it, robots are not going to destroy
humanity and take over the world.
Right now, and for the next nine
years or more, human beings are
smarter than the robots. Not only that,
but we are programming them. It
would be stupidity of the highest order
(not that mankind hasn’t gotten that
high before) not to program in some
thing like “Love human beings. Serve
human beings. Do not destroy human
beings and take over the world.” Or, we
could do something like rig up explo
sives or run the entire system offWin-
dows ’95 to destroy the humanity
killing, world-conquering robots
before they destroyed us.
In case that’s not enough, it would
be easy to make sure humans had a
monopoly on things the robots need
ed to survive, or at the very least the
things that would make their little
electronic lives miserable. Like elec
tricity. Super-intelligent robots
should, if any sense of reason still ex
ists, use a lot of power. If you turn off
the power, sure, it’ll be hard to mi
crowave burritos for a few days, but
the robots will all stop working as
their batteries run down. And then it
will be very difficult for them to kill us
all and take over the world.
If shutting off the power doesn’t ap
peal to someone, there’s always nuclear
weapons. The Electromagnetic Pulse
(EMP) off a nuclear warhead puts off
enough radiation to, at a couple of
miles, see right through one’s arm and
at distances of several hundred miles,
fry any and all electronics without
harming people. Robots are electronic.
And no one is dumb enough to give
nuclear weapons to the only other be
ings who would be able to rationalize
using them. Meaning we humans will
have a monopoly.
Finally, people are smarter. We’ll
probably always be smarter. Super-intel
ligent robots may be able to come to a
logical conclusion to destroy humanity,
, i
ii Jlmm
&
but only human beings can come to that
same conclusion while simultaneously
delivering the mail or driving a cab. De
spite robots’ super intelligence, they will
not have professional wrestling, high
speed pizza delivery, or football. We will
be totally incomprehensible to the ro
bots, and they will know that, no matter
how logically and carefully they plan to
destroy us, it only takes one lunatic hu
man to ruin it all. Or those meddling
kids and their talking dog.
Super-intelligent robots may be the
next generation of technology. But there
is no reason to believe this advance in
technology will lead to the destruction
of humanity as we know it.
Chris Hujfines is a sophomore
speech communications major.
CAMPUS CONNECTION
Aggie sayings promote image of stupidity
...
John
Lemons
columnist
A s the old saying goes,
kids say the darndest
things. Well, if that is
so, then Aggies say the
dumbest things.
If there is one thing
common to all Aggies, it is
their knack for coming up
with genuinely stupid
phrases and then repeat
ing them endlessly. What
is far more embarrassing,
though, is we treasure
these statements. We say
them with reverence. We even print them on
T-shirts to be sported in public.
The time has come for Aggies to reevaluate
the often silly, frequently illogical and some
times asinine statements that are the lingo of
Texas A&M University.
Of course, any study of the dumb things Ag
gies say starts with the dumbest Aggie phrase of
them all — “Fhghway 6 runs both ways.” It is a
phrase so painfully obvious, one might as well
point out the sky is blue or Sully looks a lot like
Lenin.
Yes, Highway 6 runs both ways, it is a high
way. If it did not, it would be most inconvenient
to get around town. As an example, let us imag
ine Highway 6 runs in one direction, say north.
If one were traveling on the highway and hap
pened to miss the last exit into College Station,
one would have to circumnavigate the entire
world just to get back to school. That task alone
would make our hypothetical driver late for his
8 a.m. class.
Stupid phrases in Aggieland are not limited
to descriptions of the local roads. The Corps of
Cadets has their fair share of dumb sayings. The
Corps, for example, sometimes identifies itself
as the “heartbeat of Aggieland.” Meanwhile, the
Aggie Band often claims to be the “pulse of Ag
gieland.”
Apparently, the Corps has discovered some
type of circulatory system within A&M. Well, if
that is true, why stop at merely being the “heart
beat” or the “pulse” of Aggieland.
I say the Corps is the platelets of the blood
of the pulse of the spirit of the heartbeat of Ag
gieland. Without them, Aggies would cease to
bleed maroon, and merely bleed to death. All
this talk about A&M’s circulatory system does
bring up one question, though. Who is the fat
ty plaque on the arteries of Aggieland? I’m
placing my bets on Parking, Traffic and Trans
portation Services.
Unfortunately, this silliness does not limit it
self to the Corps. Many Aggies who build Bonfire
are fond of spouting off the phrase “see ya when
it burns” to students who do not approve of their
Bonfire-building ways. For those of you who
have been on the receiving end of this master
piece, here is its only logical response — “Good
luck, you’ll be so drunk at the Bonfire that you’ll
have trouble making out the 55 foot-tall mass of
burning wood, much less finding me.”
Alas, ridiculous phrases are not the private
domain of students. A&M’s administration in
dulges in them, too. Consider, Dr. J. Malon
Southerland’s “Chat and Chew” program.
Every couple of weeks, Southerland, the Vice
President for Student Affairs, shows up some
where on campus with cookies and punch to
talk with students.
It is admirable program, but it has one fatal
flaw. Surely, somebody has told Southerland it is
impolite to talk with one’s mouth full. Perhaps
the program should have been call “Chat or
Chew.” But, “Chat and Chew”? Why that is just
plain gross.
Imagine this hypothetical scene from a “Chat
and Chew.”
Student: “Hi, Dr. Southerland. I’m Joe Aggie.
There’s something about A&M that’s been wor
rying me lately.”
Southerland: “Nice to meet you Joe, what’s
the problem?”
Student notices Southerland is chewing on a
chocolate chip cookie while chatting.
Student: “Blech. Um, no problem. I’ve, um,
got to go.”
What a frightening breach of manners. Emily
Post must be rolling in her grave.
Finally, let us consider the 12th Man Founda
tion, which is a misnomer in itself. After all, if
you put a 12th man on the football field, your
team will get penalized.
This year, the 12th Man Foundation is run
ning its 12th-Mania campaign to promote Aggie
athletics and the Big 12 Conference. The prob
lem is, 12th-Mania is a dumb name.
The only word that I want to see appended to
mania, is wrestle. So, unless the 12th Man Foun
dation plans on running a steel cage death
match between Hulk Hogan and R.C. Slocum,
12th-mania will have to go.
Here is a tip for you, Aggies. When you speak,
it helps to say things that make sense. The day
A&M learns this lesson will be the day that ush
ers in a new era for this school. In the mean
time, we all need to be careful to stop saying
stupid things.
As for those of you who are prone to stupid
statements, well, Highway 6 runs both ways.
John Lemons is an electrical engineering
graduate student.
MAIL CALL
cCorvey’s speech
nores sexual realities
attended Norma McCorvey’s
ech about her conversion to
istianity on Friday night. As oth-
Were, I was disappointed that
identified this conversion as the
Reason for her appearance.
When audience members chai
ned her on her beliefs about
^ion, she stated that “debate”
not her reason for being there.
; r McCorvey attacked Planned
e nthood as “Planned Death,”
young woman asked a legiti
mate question about her efforts to
educate young people about sexu
al responsibility.
I believe anyone who does not
see the value of efforts to prevent
young people from having to choose
abortion or frill-term pregnancy is
short-sighted and naive. Indeed, I
might consider them a part of the
problem, not part of the solution.
McCorvey also reported “no
parents come out of Planned Par
enthood,” and they give you all
manners of contraception.
Who’s to say those who seek as
sistance from Planned Parenthood
only want to become parents?
In an age when abstinence is of
ten not young people’s choice on
sex, Planned Parenthood is to be
congratulated for at least encour
aging responsible sex.
Otherwise, what’s the need
for a Sexual Responsibility Week
at A&M?
I didn’t hear any such encour
agement from McCorvey While
she stated that she’s completely re
versed her position on abortion
and implied that she can no
longer be held accountable for the
deaths of children, McCorvey’s
case changed history; I’d argue for
the better. Making abortion illegal
would jeopardize the lives of
women who would seek abortions
regardless of regulation or creden
tial. As such, the “new and im
proved” McCorvey and other pro
lifers have a long, hard road ahead
of them, because we pro-choicers
won’t go down without a fight. To
McCorvey, I’d also say “you were
right 25 years ago.”
Sonia R. King
graduate student
Inspiring debate not
the point of 'Roe' visit
Frank Stanford’s column on
Feb. 23 illustrated a blatant misun
derstanding as to why Norma Mc
Corvey did not came to speak on
our campus.
Stanford expected an “infor
mative debate” on abortion, but
McCorvey did not come here for
that reason. She did not come
here to argue with more intelli
gent, more articulate college stu
dents. There is a time and place
for such debate and there are
plenty of people on this campus
willing to argue the Pro-Life view
at any lever. Those people who
tried to engage in debate with
McCorvey were out of line.
McCorvey did, however, come
here for a very important reason.
She came to share the experiences
that caused her to change her
stance on abortion.
While working in a Planned Par
enthood Clinic, she became ac
quainted with a young woman
named Ronda Mackey and her 10-
year-old daughter, Emily
Mackey worked next door to the
Planned Parenthood Clinic in the
office of a national pro-life organi
zation. As she got to know the
Mackey’s, she realized that they had
something that she did not have.
Through their loving witness, Mc
Corvey became a Christian in 1994.
Later, McCorvey found out that
while pregnant with Emily Mackey
had considered aborting her. It was
then McCorvey came to the pro
found realization that unborn chil
dren are real people like Emily.
It then became clear to her that all
people deserve protection and there
fore mothers do not have the right to
harm their children during or after
pregnancy. Norma McCorvey came
here to convey this message as best
as she could. Perhaps Stanford
would not have been disappointed
had he looked past rhetorical short
comings and listened to the real
theme of McCorvey’s message.
Timothy Thomason
Class of'98
Chivalry still lives
on Texas A&M campus
I just wanted to inform you
about an incident that occurred on
Friday, Feb. 13. While I was prepar
ing to leave from the parking lot
behind Kyle Field, a student in
formed me that I had a flat tire.
Two freshmen Corps members
were passing by, and they offered
me their assistance.
They replaced my flat with the
spare and would not accept pay
ment. I would like to commend
these two individuals (David from
Dallas and Jay from Las Vegas) for
taking time out of their busy day
to help a stranger in need. Their
act of kindness has proved to me
that chivalry is indeed not dead
here at Texas A&M.
Nicosia Herink
graduate student
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: 1111
Fax: (409) 845-2647
E-mail: batt@unix.tamu.edu
For more details on letter policy, please call 845-3313.