"I'm no pusher, you junkie ! ... And besides,. I only sell them in wholesale lots !" Seventy-nine years of editorial freedom Edited and managed by students of the University of Michigan 420 Maynard St., Ann Arbor, Mich News Phone: 764-0552 Editorils printed in The Michigan Daily express the individual opinions of staff writers or the editors. This must be noted in all reprints. THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 6, 1969 NIGHT EDITOR: JUDY SARASOHN Lindsay gets by-- with a little help EW YORK MAYOR John V. Lindsay's impressive victory Tuesday ended a full year of campaigning featuring color- ful personalities who created political masterpieces and political disasters with equal skill. Since New Yorkers were de- ied the appetizing opportunity to vote for Norman Mailer for their Mayor, the problem of choosing between Republican- Conservative John Marchi, regular Dem- ocrat Mario Procaccino, and encumbent liberal Lindsay caused a great d e a 1 of vacillation. The "true Republicans"--the conserva- tive ones---felt their usual paranoia about how their point of view somehow never gets represented in New York City. This feeling, added to Lindsay's general city- wide unpopularity, gave the conservatives very good reason to hope for a rennais- sance of true Republicanism within the city's (and state's) party It was a n 1 y mildly surprising, therefore, when Wil- liam F. Buckley's dearest friend f r o m Staten Island, John J. Marchi, captured his party's nomination over Lindsay by a scant five thousand votes. Marchi was then promptly endorsed by the Conser- vative Party. FOR ONE FULL YEAR, since the disas- trous handling of the teachers' strike, everyone, Republicans and Democrats, said Lindsay had to go. It vas reported that if an election had been held at the beginning of 1909, in the midst of the school crisis, Lindsay would have receiv- ed less than twenty per cent of the city's popular vote. That "Lindsay is a louse" was, in fact, the only thing New Yorkers could agree on at that point. And the Re- publicans then made it clear to the Mayor that lie was without major party support. So when the Republicans conceded the election by nominating Marchi, the Dem- ocrats had their clear opportunity. Sur- veyors of New York politics provide us with the lopsided statistic that Democrats outnumber Republicans s e v e n to two. With this heavy an advantage numerical- ly, and with such easy competition pro- vided by the Republicans, and with an encumbent who could claim only the Lib- eral Party candidacy (which some say he railroaded) how could any Democrat lose? THE FIRST REASON is that the N e w York C i t y Democratic Party simply does not exist. The Democrats claim the support of the Blacks, most of the Jews, and most of the Irish in the party's ranks, and this accounts for the seven to two margin. B u t it is immediately obvious that the alliance here implied is precar- ious at best, and non-existent at worst. Particularly in times of racial tension, exemplified by the school crisis of 1968- 69, party label means nothing. New York- ers vote "ethnic lines," and would have done so had the election been held six or eight months ago. This explains in part why Democrats sometimes lose in New York City. rJHE SECOND REASON the Democrats lost was because there were too many running in the primary who w e r e too close together ideologically. T h e rank- and-file had to choose between Wagner, Badillo, Scheuer, Mailer and Procaccino. T h e first three candidates represented merely different shades of the same lib- eral line, and their simultaneous candi- dacy managed to render the party's lib- eral support impotent. Although Mailer was probably the best man, not being a regular Democrat and all, he finished a poor fourth, which leaves Mario Angelo Procaccino to capture thirty-two per cent of his party in the primary, and hence to claim its nomination. He is the third and biggest reason why the Democrats lost. Rather than kick a dead horse, suffice it to say that, armed with an insurmount- able lead over John Lindsay and John Marchi, Mario Procaccino managed one of the worst campaigns in American his- tory. His verbal blunders rank with Ag- new's best, and his whole campaign ma- chine smacked of crass amateurism (which is excusable, even lovable in an amateur, but pathetic for a machine pol- 1tician). INALLY, there is John Lindsay, Liberal candidate, controversial, unpopular. His campaign was designed to unite the majority of both major parties in New York City (the "vocal" majority, a n d with the help of Procaccino he did this. The more Procaccino bad-mouthed Lindsay, and peddled his "law-and-ord- er" doctrine, the more endorsements Lindsay got: from black groups, f r o m Herman Badillo, and most importantly, from the group which had been so disen- chanted with the Mayor, the Jews. The Mayor-elect owes his opponents a word o~f thanks. ---LEE MITGANG m.. c. p :m.i i iFi::. ... m.x8:r..v.< . ::.. :...:... i{k:a~ x..e3 Violence i D.C. ........x ........._ ....:. ,:s . E as ille r x. .: .: AS NOV. 15 approaches, it becomes increasingly apparent that the Nixon administration is not about to tolerate a non-violent demon- stration against the continuing slaughter in Vietnam. The one thing the President does not want is a repeat performance of last month's model protests. Several million respectable citizens picketing, reading lists of war dead and ringing church bells are not the proper enemies for a Republican President to face. It is necessary to his own political future that Nixon somehow make sure that the television-watching public once again becomes used to thinking of all anti-war demonstrators as disreputable long- haired troublemakers. THE ANSWER is violence, pure and simple. The President's strategy - borrowed from Mayor Daley for the duration - is merely to define the parameters of the Mobilization's march in such a way as to make police violence inevitable. Since to the Silent Majority the police are always right, Nixon will then be able to cry appealingly to his public that everything would really be all right if it wasn't for the peace freaks. And judging from what the Silent Majority is supposed to think about the Democratic Convention violence in Chicago, the strategy will work. THE NECESSARY first step toward creating a violent situation in Washington next week has already been carried out. Tuesday, the Justice Department announced that it would not permit marchers on Pennsylvania Avenue November 15, but would restrict them to the Mall which runs from the Capitol to the Washing- ton Monument. This action has the effect of prohibiting the march from coming within two blocks of the White House, despite the fact that the war the New Mobilization wants to protest was initiated and has been carried out almost exclusively by the executive branch of the govern- ment. Like the Chicago city officials prior to the Democratic National Convention, the powers that be in Washington seem perfectly willing to let the marchers protest the war to their hearts' content-but not in the presence of the people they seek to influence. AND LIKE the Chicago government, the Justice Department is using violence as an excuse to provoke violence, denying valid parade permits out of an unreasonable fear that the demonstrators will pro- voke violence either by themselves or by inciting the inhabitants of the ghetto adjacent to the line of march, and by enforcing the law against ut~lawful assembly in a manner calculated to provoke defensive violence against the police by members of the crowd. The Walker Report of the Chicago riots reads like a scenario for what is happening in Washington today: "The city, fearful that the 'leaders' would not be able to control their followers, attempted to discourage an inundation of demonstrators by not granting permits for marchers and rallies and by making it quite clear that the 'law' would be enforced .. . "Most of those intending to join the major protest demonstra- tions . . . did not plan aggressive acts of physical provocation against the authorities .. . "It was the clearing of the demonstrators from Lincoln Park that led directly to the violence: symbolically, it expressed the city's op- position to the protesters; literally, it forced the protesters into con- frontation with police .. THAT THE NIXON administration holds direct responsibility for the denial of the Pennsylvania Ave. parade permit is apparent from the fact that it is the Justice Department and not the city government which is handling the permit negotiations in the first place. The Mobe originally applied to Mayor Walter E. Washington-a presidential appointee caried over from the Johnson administration- for the appropriate permits. It was the city government, then headed by a team of three commissioners, which handled the permits for the October, 1967, Pentagon March, the 1965 Vietnam March, and the 1963 civil rights March on Washington: This tim. however, the federal government has stepped in, in the person of Deputy Atty. Gen. Richard C: Kleindienst and his various assistants. IT IS OBVIOUS that someone in the administration has decided that this one is too big for the local fiefdom to handle. Policy dictates that the march must degenerate into'violence, and only the President's lackeys can be counted on to handle such a delicate assignment. So when the concerned masses descend on the nation's capital next week, they should come prepared to protect themselves against vio- lence. TheC T ricky Dicky Sho w By MAR'IY SINGER Daily Guta' V rter Y FELLOW AMERICANS. Hi. You all know why I've got to in a k e this damned speech - the pressure's on. Moratori- uns, protests, hell, I've got to keep those kids out of Washington. Also. I don't want you Sil- ent Guys out there thinking that I'm screwing up .If you all bear with me you'll see how I can make everyone happy. First, a joke. They agreed on a table for the Paris talks. Now that I've captured your interest let me tell you a story. Ho Chi Minh was a bad man. In fact, he's so bad that we decided to stop the free elections in 1956. It was necessary to protect the fundamental principles of democracy. Besides. Ho would have won . Not only that, but the man wrote nasty let- ters. I wo rit read it to you, but just take my word for it. After all, he was a nationalist, I mean, Communist. And Jesus, are those guys un- reasonable. We've initiated a bombing halt and troop withdrawal and they have not responded, ex- cept that casualties are down to their lowest point in three years. Okay. Do you all under- stand why the U.S. is in Vietnam and why uni- lateral (leescalation should inot come immediate- LIET'S siE:. Oh yes, the mothers. M e r' r y Christmas. I've got. 60,000 boys coming back in time for the holidays (this is the tear-jerker)-. Warm up the apple pie and bring out the bands 'Mine eyes have seen the glory. . And you cynics. I'm not a politician. I could have made it easy on myself and pulled out, that would have been a popular decision Hey, you people who read in Newsweek that 55 per cent of the people think we belong in Viet Nam, for- get it., I'm taking the rough road Also, I could use the war as a political issue. I could talk about the previous administration and the previous administration's mistakes, but I don't. Even if it is Johnson's wai'r I almost forgot, I've even got a line for the instant replay cameras (pay special attention to my smile --- the face lifts are really working). Are you ready? "The previous administration was marked by Americanization of the war. This administration is marked by Vietnamization of the war." Boy, are we great. OH I)AMN, the liberals and the kids. Well. first here's something for you Pavlovian Liberals ithank you, Stewart Alsopi. John Kennedy said we would not give up in Vietnam. Okay, drool. Finally, let me talk to you masochistic, effete corps of impudent snobs. I mean kids. Shut up! stay home, forget the protests. I appreciate your idealism r underlined about seventy times) but not when I want you to die. Really, when we've got a stupid war to fight is that any time to star't thinking?> Ge. S. L. A. MrPshl f8ades away N TELEVISIONLAND the word is in- nocuous. Successful television is built u p o n a formula that keeps intellectual content, controversy, and unorthodoxy in the clo- set. The sterility and vapidity of televis- ion programs is designed so as not to de- tract from the commercials or provoke anyone's displeasure with the advertisers. Witness the cancellation of the Smoth- ers Brothers show last spring. CBS decid- ed that their mild political comment was too controversial, Network officials con- cluded that it was necessary to protect the public - and the sponsors -- from such "offensive" happenings as Joan Baez dedicating a song to her husband, who is in prison for refusing military ser- vice. UT THE intellectual wasteland of tele- vision does not stop at the so-called entertainment shows, Look at the news programs. Except perhaps for David Brinkley, television newscasters are sin- gularly bland, well-choreographed, a n d unprovokingly "objective." Of course, we can look back to the coverage of the po- lice riot in Chicago during the Democratic - - Convention and recall television's finest hour. But we can also be assured that the network chieftains will not let that hap- pen again. Just the other day, Detroit television station WWJ discharged its news analyst S, L. A. Marshall for reasons it would not disclose. Marshall, the stern retired gen- eral who would drop in on the six o'clock local news report a couple times a week, said that he w a s released because his views were unpopular ('EN. MARSHALL is a syndicated col- umnist and author, the writer of the stirring Pork Chop Hill. He is well known for his fiery blasts against ROTC critics and his recent opposition to the Mora- torium. But it is highly unlikely that sta- tion WWJ, which is owned by the ultra- conservative Detroit News, c o u1d find these views objectionable But, of course, there are the advertisers to think about, It boils down to a question of s t y 1 e. Marshall's views would not be unpopular if he would, as station manager Don De- Groot reportedly advised him, "h a m it up." Sonny Elliot's buffoonery is the ideal: uncontroversial and so amusing. On the national level, newscasting de- mands political orthodoxy. After Nixon's cabinet appointments, Jack Newfield was asked to evaluate the n e w President's choices as part of NBC's reaction panel. When Newfield proceeded to explain that he was not exactly impressed by the new array of dour old men, he was cut short, UINDLESS orthodoxy seeks to preserve All the standard caveats learned from years of protesting the war ashould be observed: wear a helmet, heavy shoes, no pierced-ear ear- .rings, and so forth; carry wet rags for your eyes: and leave the dope at home. THERE HAS been for some time now a grtowing sentiment among youth that to smell tear gas, feel Mace, or, ultimately. to be clubbed is a sort of initiation rite all of us need pass through in order to achieve our political manhood. And there are also those among us (including myself) who still believe, despite everything, in peaceful protest, who are going to Wash- ington frightened of what might happen to us, but going nonetheless. The President seems determined to give another quarter million of the concerned the opportunity to be pushed violently out of the more conventional political arena, to give those of us who missed Chicago our chance to join the ranks of the experienced disaffected. No one in the administration or out of it knows how many people .,will come to Washington peaceably to 1rotest the war next week. How -,many will leave determined never to protest anything peacefully again is up to Nixon. L ETI 1ERS IO IHE EDITOR Lone dissenters and idleous crosses 'Io the Editor': TUESDAY I sass something which turned my heait to revolt --and I did revolt. The conse- quences to me were similar to those which have plagued lone dissenters throughout the age. I .as Ii }forcefully restrained from carrying out my revolt, 2 manhandled and slighty injured by a brute of who Doug Harvey would have been proud, 3 i threatened with le~al action, 4 > confronted by lpolier, s lectured to by closed-minded people who accused meof having a closed, tn- t'easoning mind, i put down for trespassing on the rights of the prevailing establishment, andid 7 admonished, with accompanying threats, to repair the damage e>." "Our answer to Nixon is on the Diag!" To me the crossesEsvere hideous and offensive. They represented a crossly disrespectful reaction to Nixon's speech: a reaction which was preplanned and would have been used regardless of the content of that speech. Worst of all, they :aried the message that all 1800 men whose lives the crosses repre- sented had died in vain, not fight- ing for freedom, but as victims of the American democracy. Did this represent the true feelings of these ren? The crosses also offended me on other ways. Too many ways. I BEGAN, therefore, to pull them up and deposit them in trash containers. Soon, however, I was halted by the brute force the goverrnment of South vietnam live up to its bargain with Presi- dent Nixon. I'm not even a real outsider, but a university teaching fellow. The crosses still offend me. AS I WRITE this letter, some- thing else is worrying me more. Why are young people so critical of their elders and yet so unable to act differently themselves? If the rising American generation is no better than the present one; if it uses the same old tactics, ex- cuses, and repressive methods that it has complained so loudly about: ihat hope is there for peace? What final good will come from a march on Washington? -Sylvia Taylor Teaching Fellow Nov. 5 Therefore, for example, your recent article indicating that the Presi- dent had magnanimously liberated students from draft liability and then interviewing duly grateful students, verges on criminal neg- licence. PLEASE, with all due respect, if you can't print draft informa- tion correctly and comprehensive- ly, then don't print anything at all. -R. M. Barron Law '7I1 Nov. 3 f1 (lt f Agnew To the Editor: "IMPUDENT SNOBS," like Vice- President Agnew are real. He and Jews. He warns us of the "in- evitable witch-hunting repression." Who would conduct such repres- sion? WE MUST acknowledge that "arrogant, reckless, inexperienced elements" such as the Vice-Presi- dent and his followers exist with- in out' society. These neo-nazi citi- zens can be a cancer slowly de- stroying our democracy. We can- not assume that our constitution will automatically save us. Our governmental institutions and freedom sare only safe when we have the courage to defend them against would be dictators. Remember Agnew's warning. "Evil cloaked in emotional causes is well disguised and often undis- covered until it is too late." r a m . - -Fn~w 'ENRYt ?1 i FE; E NIS:FN (City V~itnr (iRIX;, Ecd3inr RON LA _1iSSMAN C1Ei[ STEIi f. FA1>