I Page 4-Sundgy, April 20, 1980-The Michigan Daily 0 1 .r 4F Ur t t 9a I tj Ninet4v Ve.ars ()/* Editorial Freedom Feiffer Vol. XC, No. 160 News Phone: 764-0552 XCAP)fKEWP l . L1 ! ri , C9',zo V,6AR OILg7 -GfRt-. THC WAY 'TH~ WALK;-It SKATE'. Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan Anderson: A challenger to the Republican mainstream IF r PkA4W tom' l T'ASA cw p i K FOR14 TO 7- J AaL17 G r h TA I t16fE I~' pR3M i Aa2 BY THE TIME Michigan's voters cast their primary ballots, John Anderson ,may no longer be actively seeking the Republican nomination. But at the moment, we are safe in calling the Illinoisan by far the most attractive of the GOP possibilities. Anderson has been the subject of much scorn and derision on the part of his GOP opponents for holding positions that fall short of traditional conservative reasoning. To the extent that those accusations are correct - and many of his stances justify them - we applaud Anderson. The congressman first wrested his way into the political spotlight with his "50-50" plan, which would impose a 50- cent tax per gallon of gasoline and simultaneously cut Social Security taxes by 50 per cent. The philosophical thrust of the proposal is at the heart of Anderson's appeal; it would bolster energy conservation, while giving a break to the poor. Anderson's liberalism- on social issues further sets him apart from - and above - his distressing opponents. He is a long-time civil rights advocate. He backs the Equal Rights Amen- dment, and supported the extension of the time limit on its ratification. On abortion, he is pro-choice, and he sup- ports federal funding for women who cannot afford them. He is far more cautious and concerned about the en- vironment than the other Republican candidates are. And who can forget his stand against the New Hampshire gun lobby, alone among the candidates of either party? With regard to leadership qualities - intelligence, tact, depth of thought, and articulateness - Anderson has no Republican peer. Congressman Anderson has aptly been called an anomaly for his many liberal stands on social issues, which loudly clash with other, less attractive elements of his voting record. He comes by his party affiliation honestly, notwithstanding the snide remarks from Ronald Reagan and the others. He supported America's presence in Vietnam virtually to its very end, he voted for the B-1 bomber, he supported the drastic and dangerous Kemp-Roth tax cut bill, and his consistent support for corporate power on labor- management issues is truly appalling. Still, as compared to the frightening demagogue who leads the Republican race, and the pale shadow from Con- necticut who can only mimic the front- runner, Anderson looks like a beacon of hope. If he opts for the independent route, he may yet win our vote in November. TV AQ7 -TM , lk)C - *j) FORtLA.WtTO MLOW F S6~6 A L \y_ V L E On hostilities toward Israel, T 141W w Ken nedy: A champion of the left at, the right time As a citizen of Israel, a democratic, and pro-Western country in a region where there are few democracies and where there is little love for the West, I have been astonished by the never-ending stream of articles (in the Daily and in other Michigan newspapers) vilifying my country. I must admit that I find it difficult to explain both the evident obsession with Israel and the hostility directed against her in a country whose journalists and intellectuals are supoosed to value freedom and liberty. Is this hostility the result of Israel's small size and population? Then why not pick on Singapore or Jamaica? Is our warm climate to blame? Then why not attack Greece or Cyprus? Is it our wicked policies? Well, of course, we are no saints (a country ruled by saints has not yet been established on this earth), but are there no greater sinners? What about the Soviet Union, whose 50 million Moslem subjects are denied their religious rights, whose Christians are so cruelly persecuted, and whose dissenters are put in psychiatric hospitals or in concentration camps (though the mass slaughters of the 1930s and 1940s seems to have come to an end). WHAT ABOUT CHINA, now the darling of the American intelligentsia, which has obliterated Tibet and is a model totalitarian state? Why' not denounce the Turks for oppressing the Kurds, the Egyptians for discriminating against the Copts, the Syrians for their oppression of the Druse, the Vietnamese for expelling their Chinese citizens? What about the British, whose overtly racist policy on immigration keeps out Pakistanis and Indians? The list of wicked nations is almost endless. Why then do Americans pay so much critical attention to Israel, a virbrant democracy (with two legal Communist parties) possessed with the skill and guts to defend herself against a host of enemies, all authoritarian regimes hostile to everything America is said to stand for? I don't know the answer, though in my more pessimistic moods I attribute the swelling hatred of Israel to the old-fashioned but never quite buried views that Jews really shouldn't be allowed to defend themselves, that they really shouldn't be allowed to have a country of their own, and that they, of all the peoples of the earth, are doomed to eternal persecution without recourse to resistance. And what is this if not good old anti-Semitism, which Herzl believed (correctly in my opinion) cannot and will never be eradicated? One has only to glance at the anti-Israeli diatribes emanating from Moscow and from the United Nations to see how eagerly the enemies of the Jewish state draw upon the rich European anti-Semitic tradition. The elders of Zion, once reported to have convened at the ancient Jewish cemetery in Prague, now consult in Tel-Aviv. But nothing else has changed. Whatever the source of the wave of anti- Israeli sentiment, let me make a few points which I hope will illuminate certain aspects of By Ezra Mendelsohn the problem. The state of Israel w4s brought into being by the Zionist movement, which was one form of Jewish nationalism and which was born in Europe in the late nineteenth century. Zionists disagreed on many things, but they all believed that there was no future for Diaspora Jewry. They believed that the only way Jews could protect themselves against anti-Jewish violence, and preserve their own rich, autonomous culture, was within the framework of their own independent country, to be established in the land of Israel (Erets Yisrael in Hebrew, Palestine in English). IN THEIR ANALYSIS they were in basic agreement with other national movements then emerging in Europe: those of the Poles, Ukrainians, Czechs, Slovaks, Rumanians, Serbs, Greeks, etc. All of these movements, argued that in a world conspicuously lacking in international brotherhood, mutual love, and absolute toleration, nations were obliged to take their destiny into their own hands and protect themselves against both violence and coercive assimilation. And can anyone'doubt, in light of the Jewish experience between world wars in Eastern Europe, during World War II, in the modern Middle East, and today in the Soviet Union (and tomorrow in Argentina, perhaps, or Quebec) that the Zionists were right? It is worthwhile to remind the Jewish readers of the Daily, whose admirable youthful idealism leads them to scorn the "Jewish establishment" and identify with the "third world," that not long ago the majority of the Jews of Europe and of the Middle East were a poverty-stricken, humiliated, and oppressed people, subject to brutal assault and to discrimination of every kind. They were, in short, an oppressed minority, and Zionism was their national liberation movement. The best, the most courageous, and most self-sacrificing of them (including my father, who lived through the horrors of the revolution and civil war in the Ukraine and went to Jerusalem in 1921), went to Palestine and devoted themselves to building roads, draining swamps, and creating a society in which they could be masters of their fate. I am far from believing that all their dreams have come true. But I do believe that they were heroes, men and women in whom all Jews (and not only Jews) should take pride. Israel today is a troubled and divided country, but it is a country where Jews can live, if not in complete security, at least in the certain knowledge that they can defend themselves and raise their children as Jews. And that is something. NOW I AM well aware of the fact that Israel has neither solved the "Jewish question" nor normalized the Jewish condition. I am equally well aware of the fact that the Palestinian Arabs regard Zionism and Israel with hostility. I believe that the Palestinians should live in an Arab country, and not under a 'Jewish rule. And if they are willing to accept the partition of Palestine (and I mean all of Palestine, including Jordan) into two countries, one Jewish, the other Arab, then let them open negotiations with Israel in the same spirit that has guided Sadat. Egypt, after all, got back all of Sina (including invaluable oil reserves and regions such as Yamit, where Israeli settlements had been established). There is no doubt that the Palestinians, if led by a Palestinian Sadat, will come out as well. If the Palestinians want to encourage the more hawkish elements in Israel to continue their policy of settlements in the West Bank (which I believe is misguided) let them continue to say "no, no, never." I doubt if the results will be much different from those obtained in 1948 or 1967. However, neither America. nor anyon else has the right to insist that Israel accept Palestine Liberation Organization (PLOY state on the West Bank. The PLO, after all, is an organization dedicated to the annihilation of Israel as a Jewish state. Would America, negotiate with an organization dedicated tg her destruction, let alone allow such an. organization to establish a hostile, armed state on her border? Let us recall John Kennedy's much applauded reaction to the Cuban missile crisis, remembering too that Havana is much further from Washington. than East Jerusalem from West Jerusalem. And even if some people cherish the illusion that the establishment of a PLO state would bring stability to the Middle East, diminish Soviet influence, and keep the oil flowing, such illusions cannot serve as the basis for a rational policy. FINALLY, I WANT to enter a plea for de- mystifying the Israeli-Arab dispute. Israel is a state like all others (although I happen to think it is better than most). It has its good people and its bad, its good leaders and it* bad ones. Yes, it has' relations with Soutfi Africa, but are there not black states in Africa and Arab states as well that have such relations? Israel makes mistakes, but as we approach her 32nd year of independence I do not doubt that she is here to stay. We live in a topsy-turvy world, in which black civil rights leaders-pupils of Martin Luther King-can sing "We Shall Overcome" with Yasir Arafat, the leader of an organization which takes pride in murderin children, and in which all principles a. forgotten in a mad effort to appease the Soviet Union and keep the oil flowing. In this kind of world who can blame Israel for wanting tg remain strong and able to defend herself? Who can blame her for not wanting to be a second Czechoslovakia? Americans, and not only Jewish Americans,.should applaud her determination to survive and flourish. Ezra Mendelsohn is a senior lecturer at Hebrew University, currently here on sabbatical as ti visiting associate professor of history. THE DAILY strongly supports Sen. Edward Kennedy of Massachu- setts for the Democratic party nomination. Kennedy has served 18 honorable years in the Senate, and presents an excellent alternative to the dismal prospect of another four years of inept management under incumbernt President Jimmy Carter.- It seems that the biggest issue of the Democratic campaign to-date has been that of Kennedy's character, as reflected in public concern about the Chappaquiddick incident. The question of character, though, would seem to be resolved by the simple facts of his voting record during his tenure in the Senate. With few exceptions, Kennedy has stuck to a liberal, socially- conscious line of action, even as it has become tougher and tougher for a. legislator to vote progressively. Carter's rhetoric and the nation's Cold War paranoia have engendered a hawkish, pro-draft registration mood from coast to coast; Kennedy has stood against it. Economic problems have bred a tight-fisted, socially regressive attitude toward blacks and other minorities over the nation; Kennedy has remained committed to socially progressive ideas and legislation. The courage the senator has displayed in consistently pressing leftward as political forces attempt to push him toward the right would seem to lay to rest the issue of his integrity. The clamor over Chappaquiddick has obscured the issue that we believe ought to be the focus of the Democratic campaign: Carter's overwhelming incompetence and poor judgment in so many matters, foreign and domestic, over his 39 months in office. Carter injected a refreshing and needed note into the 1976 campaign with a call for including human rights considerations in America's dealings overseas. Why, then, only a few years later, was he embracing President Park of South Korea, Shah Riza Pahlavi of Iran, and Anastasio Somoza of Nicaragua as friends and allies? J Domestically, the-victim of Carter's ineptitude has been the very quality of American life. After viciously attacking his predecessor for allowing a 4.8 per cent inflation rate to prevail nationwide, Carter has quadrupled that figure. Unemployment is on the rise. Big business is being forced to shut down plants. The nation has no unified energy program. The economy appears to be headed for a recession. Surely, the time has come to give another Democrat a chance. We cannot call Edward Kennedy a perfect candidate. His recommendations for wage and price controls might only lead to more problems, and his proposed largesse with welfare monies might prove to be too extreme for the '80s. Furthermore, we have serious problems with Senate Bill 1722, a revision of the federal criminal code which Kennedy sponsored as chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee. The lengthy, comprehensive bill has some good provisions that would streamline the judicial process, but also quite a few that can only be described as repressive and contrary to the spirit (and perhaps the letter) of the Bill of Rights. But Kennedy's shortcomings are trifles on a scale with Carter's. He has compromised his principles orily on a few bills in the Senate, while Carter has completely revised his politics to conform to political pressure, draft registration and all. It would be deeply antithetical to America's best interests to leave the reigns of power in the Georgian's hands any longer. 'Popers Q: Gay men often use "pop- few drinks pers" (amyl nitrite) during sex. A: You Are these devices safe? recent rel A: Amyl nitrite is a drug in of studies vapor form (not a device) that is relationsh prescribed for persons with sumption angina chest pains associated tack or with coronary heart disease. It heart dise relieves the pains by relaxing One suc smooth muscles. by Harva It is also used by some persons, sity resea both hetero- and homosexuals, to a Novem achieve an extra "flush" during Journal of orgasm. This flush is a sensation Associatio of warmth from the opening of alcohol the blood vessels. Also, blood pressure is lowered. Possible side effects of amyl nitrite are headache, nausea, dizziness, fainting, rapid heart rate, nervousness,paleness, and a cold sweat. More severe reac- tions can occur, especially with larger doses, or in combination married m . +I.--A-.._-^-,_-1n nronarv ' give orgasmic, rush ... w s every day?- have probably heard ports on national news that found an inverse ip between alcohol con- and having a heart at- dying from coronary aase. h study was conducted rd and Boston Univer- rchers and published in ber, 1979 issue of the 4 the American Medical on. They examined the consumption of 568 coronary heart disease. The most surprising finding, however, was that the non-drinkers were a significantly greater risk than those who consumed moderate amountsof alcohol.I Another study conducted at Kaiser-Permanente Medical Plans in northern California showed drinkers have fewer heart attacks than abstainers, and the heaviest drinkers to have the fewest heart attacks of all. However, the researchers were quick to point out that the heavy that the adverse effects of alcohql should be considered whe making a decision whether an how much alcohol to consum4. These effects include its potential to aggravate otherqmedical con- ditions such as epilepsy, diabetes, and pre-existing cardio- vascular disease; its potential to harm the developing fetus; apd its association with violence and accidents, particularly automo- bile accidents. More research is needed t determine exactly the relatior ships between alcohol and heart disease and to sort out sother medical, lifestyle, and per- sonality factors. But the recent studies do provide a reasonable amount of assurance ' to those persons who have abstained from alcohol only because they fear harmful effects on the haa.., hof nnh l .n nrl Health Service Handbook nen who had died from hart disease and the drinkers were the likeliest to be hospitalized for other reasons. ............... . ..,... sx.....,,"x,...,.,...,..v:.::v.:sw.., ... _ _ ".v .:a.:,o-xsaaach:::..akxckx":wacawxm. uwr.^trxw. zef. tews' .':'+xav.r;4ua ca :.:e+..,xtc ;.: rhvwc;r.+:axtx"xaiz+c:' : ahnz:.kY:ktR::'\+htik .. S{. 'ti S.:y.'# ::: # :"'.:iv}:ti. ".S+st