Image provided by: Texas A&M University
About The Battalion. (College Station, Tex.) 1893-current | View Entire Issue (Oct. 11, 1999)
he Battalion O PINION Page 11 • Monday, October 11, 1999 Taking <r rhe Body’ shots kntura gives hope to bleak political system !■» JOHN T. BAKER ■phe com ing of X each elec- Tnyear is her- |ded by public Tileries for iange. Unfor- lately, career bliticians who watively take fed and sell fertilizer soon pacify public’s insistence for politi- |limprovement, as the liblic’s unrealistic ipectations allow Moth-talking irs, cheaters [id “yes men” fill civil-ser- int offices. ■merican views, devotion to positional du ties and integrity have captured the nation’s attention. While most politicians allow themselves to be shepherded by popularity ratings, party views and special- interest campaign donations, this former U.S. Navy Seal is intent on doing what is in the best interest of his constituency. lilies experience a ping-pong Kt as the nation’s politics iunce predictably between De- |crat and Republican sides. The United States’ tendency propagate business as usual ill only be thwarted through iw leadership styles and per- •nalities, and to successfully [tain the change a new breed of llitician must be adopted, as idl as tolerated. Fortunately, there are a few rjures in the political spectrum |ho refuse to act like the average ilitician. One such individual is iinnesota Gov. Jesse Ventura, |ho has established himself as a jolitical anomaly by refusing to ed the public empty promissory 1 und bites. Ventura has breathed new life 'to a stagnant status quo politi- P system. Therefore, Americans lould forgive Ventura’s verbal discretions in his recent Play- |oy interview and embrace this American straight-shooter. [ublic focus should be on his tan- P e Performance, not his per- pnal opinions. Ventura’s libertarian political Seeking reelection often takes priority over common sense with politicians. Ventura, however, shows no fear of losing his in cumbency campaign. By not relying on popularity statistics in order to make deci sions, he has freed himself from the enslavement of fluctuating public whims, permitting him to actually enact significant ad vances for Minnesota. The shack les of popularity will not hold “The Body” or restrict his style. His priorities lie with those he serves. The public must understand Ventura’s personal opinions do not necessarily reflect his political stance. An imperfect society will not produce a perfect politician, but at least he possesses the tenacity to not coddle a politically correct public. The accepted practice of buying a politician’s vote with special-in terest campaign donations has burdened the United States politi cal system, as politicians religious ly cast votes for financial gain. By refusing to accept special- interest campaign donations, Ventura has again shown his constituents that he works for their best interests, not the almighty dollar. His election as governor of Minnesota has not stopped him from coaching Champlain High School’s football team, leaving Sundays open for his family and close friends or vocalizing his opinions. He represents the com mon man for the common good. America must learn to accept a sprinkling of the bad with the good. Not all of Ventura’s state ments deserve support, but hy persensitivity should not lead to his political destruction. Mass media tends to devel op its own biased spin on top ics like Ventura’s interview. While most of his statements do not require further analysis to comprehend, his opinion on religion does. Even though organized religion has been the root cause for more mass mur der, war and intolerance than any other histori cal factor, Ventura tips his hat to religion and its appropriate role in communities but denounces those who pervert reli gion to seek fi nancial gain. Ventura was not referring to the neighbor hood church, but instead, he was right ly targeting religious spurs like The Miracle Network, The 700 Club and Jerry Falwell. In golden sanctuaries built on sand, priests, preachers and holy men will mount their attacks against Ventura — but followers hopefully will stop and think before building a gallows. What Gov. Ventu ra lacks in elo quence, subtlety and tact he makes up for in integrity, vi sion, and work ethic. America does not have to agree with every word a politician spouts. Focus should remain on Ventura’s ac tual politics. A politician should not have to tiptoe around each and every issue for fear of politi cal beheading. Ventura is prepared to lose his incumbency race, but is still putting forth a happy smile and new ideas. Minnesota should not throw out this new activist, but rather embrace him and forgive his in ability to swoon the audience with sweet pillow talk. Americans need a strong shot of political moonshine, and Ven tura is an entire jug of fire water. Ventura is undeserving ofelected-official status Wi r hen Jesse Ventu ra was elected governor of Minnesota in November 1998, his popu larity was based on a reaction to “politics as usual.” Ventura was seen by many voters as a refreshing change to the state’s political landscape. But the morning after Minneso ta’s gubernatorial race, many of Ventura’s supporters were sober ing up and wondering just who is under their red, white and blue bedsheets. Ventura’s latest display of the difficult “foot-in-mouth” wrestling maneuver is just the latest in his continuing effort to make a fool of himself. He was quoted in an interview with Playboy GRAPHICS BY ROBERT HYNECEK/The Battalion John T. Baker is a junior agricultural development major. biggest black eyes. Just how Ven tura goes about sinking his career is his prerogative, but what about the 770,000 well-meaning voters who elected him with high hopes of political change? One phrase comes to mind in summing up the embarrassing and difficult position Ventura’s supporters have been put in: It serves them right. In this Frankenstein-like story of bad judgment, the voters of Minneso ta did not create the monster, but they are responsible for putting the monster in the national politi cal spotlight. Ventura’s election was in every sense an experiment gone wrong. A candidate who vows not to say what people want him to say seems like an appealing choice, but one wonders what he is go ing to say. If people elect a sopho- moric former wrestler whose only political background is argu ing his way out of a speeding ticket, they probably do not want him speaking his mind as their representative. The Minnesota voters who showed just how low they could sink by supporting Ventura, de serve the bad press their deci sion has brought them. In defense, thousands of Minnesotans did not vote for Ventura, but the fact there were not enough voters to say “Hey, I have more respect for my state’s gubernatorial office than to elect a tactless, untested wrassler” does not speak well of Minnesota’s population as a whole. Now that Ventura is in office and has done what common sense should have predict ed, what is to happen next? He should have some respect for his position and do one of three things. First, he could shut his mouth and calm every urge to further humiliate himself and those he represents. many to support his next run at political office. Whether he has any good de cision-making skills left after years of being dropped on his head is a tough question. If he does, he should over come the urge to pursue a sec ond term, much in the same way he overcame Rowdy Roddy Piper’s devastating “Highlander Choke Hold” in SummerSlam ’88. As for the electoral pool of Minnesotans, shame on them. They should take the oppor tunity to save face by rejecting Ventura’s likely second cam paign and electing somebody — anybody — who does not refer to the Columbine High School tragedy as an argument in sup port of more handgun conceal- and-carry legislation. Jesse Ventura may have seemed a good alternative to the problems of politics as usual, but the state of politics was nev er so bad to warrant putting an ignorant and uncouth loud mouth into public office. Ventura has brought deserved embarrassment to himself, his office, and his supporters. One can only hope the voters who made a bad mistake last No vember have learned their lesson. Eric Dickens is a junior English major. magazine as saying “organized religion was a sham and a crutch for weak- minded people who need strength in numbers.” Ventura went on to say Tail- hook, the Navy’s 1991 sexual- harassment scandal, was “much ado about nothing.” This from the man who has already said the roads of St. Paul, Minn., were so disorganized only a drunken Irishman could have arranged . them and that if he had to hunt by outdated state laws, than local American Indians should have to go back to using buckskin ca noes. Ventura has made stupid com ment after stupid comment, of fending many constituents and giving himself one of politic’s Second, he could resign, not likely since he does not do what others want. Third, he could at least choose not to run for office again. Even though Re form Party chairman Russell Verney has been critical of Ven tura’s outbursts, there will still be Professor’s lack of respect toward value of life is unacceptable MARK PASSWATERS r here is a long standing rela tionship be- jWeen Republican psidential candidate Pve Forbes and [tnceton University. f rbes - a member of ( e Sc hool’s board of Rstees, has contin- IF a tradition started by his father by Plating millions to their alma mater. 1 However, in the past couple of weeks, es has made an abrupt change in his stionship with Princeton. Forbes has .p.ed until the University dismisses a Tain professor he will not donate Fore money. [The offending professor is Australian- J' 1 Woethics instructor Peter Singer. s viewpoints on the value of hu- jj. n bfe have made him about as popu- UfAttilla the Hun. In fact Singer’s and , 7 s views on the matter would prob- % be eerily similar. M ij! ce Publishing his 1979 book Practi- dr | cs ’ Singer has professed that chil- 'ess than one month old lack hu- tan consciousness. berefore, they should be able to be euthanized if mentally or physically handicapped. Singer has become a leader in the ani mal-rights movement at the expense of the human-rights movement. In another book. Animal Liberation, Singer says the life of a human is no more important than that of an animal. Singer’s pack mentality belief is easily supported for animals, who might imper il their own lives by supporting a weaker member, but it should not apply to hu man beings. With medical advances, handicapped people have the opportuni ty to lead active lives. It is surprising that Princeton, an Ivy League institution with a renowned di vinity school, allows a man who so open ly minimizes the worth of a human being to draw a paycheck. Singer’s beliefs are not only repulsive, but also set a very dangerous precedent. Stephen Drake of the disability group Not Dead Yet said in an Associat ed Press interview that Singer’s views, “provide a convenient ethical frame work for bigotry.” Who is to define “severely handi capped?” If Singer had his way, people would be able to have a child, see if the child came out the way they had hoped and then if not — kill it. Anyone who be lieves all humans have a right to live should be chilled by this concept. Whether Singer intends for his views to lead to extremes is not clear, but spreading such a callous attitude toward human life could very well lead to the ar bitrary elimination of infants behind the excuse of “disabilities.” A professor who minimizes the value of humanity and discounts one's right to exist has no place on the campus of any school. Such an elastic value of human life would be the 21st-century equivalent of drowning baby girls because they are not boys. Deciding to end another hu man’s life based on arbitrary reasons is not acceptable conduct. Singer’s ideas are the most obvious statement of dis crimination in recent years. Nazis performed genetic experi ments in an attempt to get rid of physi cal traits they deemed unacceptable, in cluding things such as long noses, dark hair and obesity. Singer is similarly ad vocating an attempt to change the face of society by getting rid of the “dregs” that might be a hindrance to society. Singer, a man of science, must know the impact of such measures. He would need to look no further than the Princeton campus, where se verely handicapped students have made their lives resoundly successful. These successes disprove Singer’s argument that allowing the handi capped students to live is being done “for the good of the child,” and add to the belief Singer is actually advocating a purified society. Singer, ironically enough, currently is employed at Princeton’s Center for Hu man Values. For someone in this day and age to say there is justification for killing the most innocent thing in the world — a baby — is not only barbaric but animalistic. A professor who minimizes the value of humanity and discounts one’s right to exist has no place on the campus of any school, much less Princeton Uni versity. In an editorial in the Daily Princeton- ian last November, University President Harold Shapiro complimented Singer for his work on “difficult and provoca tive topics [that] challenge long-estab lished ways of thinking.” If Shapiro believes advocating the murder of less fortunate members of society is an acceptable “challenge to long-established ways of thinking,” then Princeton’s alumni should de mand Shapiro be kicked to the same curb as Singer. With the support of the Princeton administration. Singer continues to teach his course, “Questions of Life and Death.” While support for him continues, Princeton should expect more of its alumni to react in the same fashion as Forbes. It is the humane way to react to such a situation. Mark Passwaters is a electrical engineering graduate student.