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.