'N
OPINION
I
01
Pge 4 Tuesday, November 10, 1981 The Michigan Daily
Spitting on the College Republicans
Tom Fous didn't want his picture published
along with this column. He's seen his friends
and fellow workers jeered at and spit on and
would rather not set himself up as a familiar
target.
,On the campus that spawned the Students for
a Democratic Society and staged the first anti-
war teach-ins, Tom and his fellow workers are
walking anathemas. They are Republicans.
Howard
. Witt
meeting-about the fresh white faces (there
were no blacks and only a handful of other
minorities) and the expensive preppy clothes.
About the "power network" of the
organization, as described by one of the leaders
("We talk to Deane Baker a lot," he boasted).
About the free tickets to a speech by Robert
Tisch handed out by the director of Viewpoint
Lectures ("See, the benefits of being
Republicans are already rolling in," a leader
clad in-red tie, white shirt, and blue blazer
laughed with the crowd. "Evelyone else has
gotta pay a buck to get in").
But those are all cheap shots-below-the-belt
jabs delivered by a -flaming liberal columnist.
To pick and choose only those incidents that
denigrate these students is to spit on them; I
felt.,owed them something more than that,
however much I disagree with their political
beliefs. So I got together a few days later with
Tom Fous, the president of the new University
of Michigan chapter of the national College
Republican organization.
TOM WAS, TO my surprise, a pleasant and
agreeable man. (What was I expecting-some
jackbooted fascist? So works my knee-jerk
mind.) A junior in the engineering college, he's
been working long hours this term visiting
dorms, pressing the flesh, trying to give the
College Republicans chapter a strong start.
I like Tom Fous. He really wants to make the
viorld a better place and he's trying hard to do
it in the way he thinks best. There aren't too
many students left in these "look out for No. 1"
days who have the courage-or even the in-
terest-to quit grubbing for grades and start
working for something outside themselves.
I like Tom because he thinks for himself.
He's had the sense to scoff at a suggestion from
the College Republican chieftains in
Washington that his group burn a few Soviet
flags in a public demonstration.
HE REJECTS THE extremism of the
Republican Party, shunning its emphasis on
social issues such as prayer in public schools
and abortioi. (That he spent 12 years in Flint
Catholic schools and yet resists the intrusion of
social questions into the political arena speaks
especially well.)
He declines to pass judgement on the
"wasteful" school lunch program-a cherished
target of the Republican budget cutters-until
he has actually examined it for himself. And,
the son of an autoworker, he defends the cause
of labor unions. All in all, not a bad fellow.
I like Tom Fous, and I think he has the best of
intentions. But as we talked, something about
him began to trouble me. He thinks for himself,
all right. But maybe he hasn't thought enough.
About Iran, for instance. Tom thinks the
United States ought to have installed a new
ruler there when the Shah started'to lose
power.
BUT WHAT ABOUT the right of the Iranian
people to have a ruler of;their own choosing? I
asked him.
The United States needed their oil, Tom an-
swered.
How would you feel if some foreign gover-
nment installed a ruler in the United States? I
asked.
They couldn't-we're too strong, Tom said.
So might makes right, according to Tom
Fous. It's okay for the United States to support
dictators like the Shah or Pakistan's Zia
because it serves our interests to do so, Tom
said.
It's okay to try to suppress a popular
revolution in El Salvador because we might not
like the government that could come to power
there. It's okay to base our nuclear weapons in
Europe because we need the protection they af-
ford. We're the United States of America, Tom
said. The leader of the free world. Our interests
come first.
YET HE SQUIRMED a little as I pursued
this argument to its logical conclusion.
So you must be in favor of the Soviet invasion
of Afghanistan, I asserted.
Of course not, Tom answered.
But why not? I pressed. Weren't the Soviets
simply protecting their own interests? In-
stalling a government more to their liking?
Doing exactly what you advocate?
But they're Communists, Tom wavered.
It appeared he had never really consideredS
the implications of his bellicose chauvinism.
I found more tender spots as I continued
probing. He's afraid of the possibility of
nuclear war, but favors the U.S. arms
buildup-he believes the United States can win
a new arms race and gain nuclear superiority.
And he's opposed to the Equal Rights Amen-
dment because he doesn't want to see women in
combat.
NO, I DON'T believe Tom Fous has. reallyO
thought about many of these issues. And that's
where I fault him. Indeed, that's where I fault
the 150 students who showed up for the College
Republicans meeting. I don't believe many of
them have truly considered what it is they are
supporting. Conservatism and Republicanism
are philosophies for the old, the rich, the.
powerful, the greedy. They have nothing to of-
fer students or young people, let alone the poor
or the afflicted.
Or maybe I'm wrong. Maybe those 150 young
Republicans know exactly what it is they are
supporting. Maybe they're so caught up in the
worship of money and exploitation that they're
agog with the glitter and sparkle of the Reagan
administration.
In which case, maybe I should have spit on
them when I had the chance.
Witt's column appears every Tuesday.
'And they are no'longer content to hide in the
background, to mumble their opinions, to
surrender the Diag to the anti-nukes and the
pro-ERAs. They're mobilizing to fight.
And their ranks are swelling. Some 150
students packed a large room in the Union last
Wednesday night for the first organizational
meeting of- the College Republicans. There
weren't enough membership cards to sign
them alrup.
I COULD TELL you all about that:
Edited and managed by students at The University of Michigan
Feiffer.
I w
Vol. XCII, No. 53
420 Maynard St.
Ann Arbor, MI 48109
Editorials represent a majority opinion of the Daily's Editorial Board
ar2 t 01J-
AMPr(vF
VESI7' E4.. ..
SHOW ca)
First Amen
THE SUPREME Court 'ruling
restricting the ability of states and
localities to close theaters and stores
displaying sexually explicit materials
is a victory - albeit a limited one'- for
the expansion of the protections of the
First Amendment.
At issue was a. Washington state
statute that allowed communities in
that state and the state itself to close
adult bookstores and theaters before
obtaining a court ruling stating that
the materials being offered for sale
were obscene. The court upheld, by a 6
to 3 margin, a U.S. Court of Appeals
decision which saw the Washington
law as an unconstitutional "prior
restraint" on free speech.
The ruling itself is limited in scope.
Strictly speaking, the ruling applies
only to certain sections of a Washington
state law which the court judged to be
unenforceable. Further, broad public
nuisance laws similar to the.
Washington law are fairly rare; ac-
cording to briefs filed in the!
Washington case, only Idaho has a
similar statute on the books.
The ruling's usefulness in protecting
American's First Amendment rights
may also be limited by the very nature
of the question that, was decided. The
ruling leaves intact the notion that the
government may legitimately restrict
I £oATCHW 'C7 a GtUES-
SY5&xWok) e c1OC
fxmses
TNT" sefl
dment rights
the sale of material it judges to be "ob-
scene;" the ruling applied only to the
method by which governmental
authorities may restrict such
material's circulation.
Nevertheless, the ruling may have
some significant impact. It. will free
adult bookstore and theater owners
from the fear of being forced out of
business for selling material which is
not obscene by the government's stan-
dards.
In addition, the ruling may prove
helpful in defending bookstores and
theaters from the often devastating at-
tacks from the Moral Majority and its
allied groups.
The court's decision will allow
bookstores and theaters to continue
operating until they are actually found
to be violating a law. The decision may
thus substantially weaken the ability of
fundamentalist religious groups to im-
pose their own moral code on the
stocks carried by such establishments.
The First Amendment should apply
to all materials - no matter how
disgusting some members of certain
religious cults may find them.
In as much as the ruling may help
promote this principle, the court's
decision may pave the way for a more
liberal and judicious application of the
protections of the First Amendment.
!
M'j I!
i q9N
I
I
HoVsEHot.2 p5r'
Z ")A1hp 4MR FO PAWI
131 AC (At,
AM6W 13i 6X
A MOL$ t~
L"fl
li I II7
I' '
*I
i
LETTERS TO THEl
DAILY:
Space program important
Daily 's bad'taste'
To the Daily:
Your editorial cartoon, of
November 3 was absolutely
terrible.
How can you exercise such bad
taste? The cartoon is absolutely
abhorrent. How can you derive
any humor from this cartoon?
I see no humor in the situation
portrayed -in the cartoon. The-
cartoon emphasizes the terrible
numbness of heart people have in
regard to the drowning of these
individuals.
Do you not feel anything for the
plight of the Haitian refugees? It
seems your understanding of the
Haitian refugee situation is
minimal if existent at all. You
would not print such a cartoon if
you fully understood the crisis
with which these particular in-
dividuals are faced.
They flee from a country where
they are constantly oppressed by
a military dictatorship to a coun-
try about which theya have heard
many good things. One of these
things is that in the United States
freedom is a right of all citizens.
The drowning deaths of these
Haitians is certainly not an
isolated incident. It happens all
the time. They risk their lives by
attempting to get here in battered
old boats that are often badly,
overloaded.
I'm furious because I see no at-
tempt on your part to understand
the desperate situation that these
people are in. Where is the humor
in the cartoon? I can only feel
sadness. They lost their lives
trying to reach a place where
they might live free of econothic,
political, and social oppression. I
feel pity for those who laugh at
this cartoon.
I hope that in the future you will
be more careful and more sen-
sitive when choosing what
editorial cartoons are to be
published in your papers.
-Rubin Mauricio
November 3
{
To the Daily:
I'd like to take issue with the
Daily's editorial of November 3,
"Tomorrow's Shuttle,". that im-
plies the space shuttle is solely
for the generals in the Pentagon
to cram full of weapons for the
death and destruction of the
human race.
The U.S. Space Program is not
pouring billions into the military
exploitation of space. NASA's
budget is only about $6 billion out
of a national budget of $660
billion. This expenditure amounts
to less than one half to one per-
cent out of GNP. The direct
military applications of a
Halley's comet flyby or the
, Voyagr project escape me.
Before the statement is made,
"what counts most is what the
generals in the Pentagon want;
what counts is what has the most.
destructive potential," a list of
the experiments to be carried out
during the second shuttle mission
should be examined.' Two ex-
periments use radar and infrared
sensors to map portions of the
earth's surface for potential
energy and mineral resources.
Two other experiments use ad-
ditional sensors to map
vegetation types on land and
algae and fish concentrations in
the ocean. Another experiment is
designed to test the feasibility of,
developing a satellite storm
warning system by measuring
lightning flashes. Another pallet
on this mission is part of the
European Spacelab. Finally,
astronauts Engle and Truly will
tend 72 dwarf sunflower plants in
CPI change
an effort to determine the op-
timum amount of water plants
need to grow in zero-g. Pleas
explain the "destructive poten-
tial" or direct 'military ap-
plications in these 72 dwarf sun-
flower plants.
How can it "be argued that
committing resources in this en-
deavor is unwise?" The space
program has already returned.$4
to $6 (a conservative estimate)
for each dollar invested i
economic benefits to this nation
and the world. No social program
can boast that type of return.
Already such practical ap-
plications as ,Comsat, Earth
Resources Locating satellites,
pollution detecting satellites and
much computer technology have
come directly from the space
program. In order to place
equipment is space, engineering
advances in efficiency,
miniaturization, and overal
reliability had to be made that
otherwise would have been slow
in coming. These advances have
been applied to the public in
countless ways, boosting out
economy.
Unquestionably, the human
condition has been improved sin-
ce the Middle Ages, much of this
improvement due to technolqgy
stemming from basic scientifi
research. So if the editors of the
Daily are so concerned with
human welfare, how can you ad-
vocate the dismantling of: a
project that exists in a large part
simply as a tool to aid basic
scientific research?
-Mike Miller
Nov.5
beneficiaL
/.;:_
{ ,..
.. !! 4
I1 ,
j
l
..
r.
I
+t
t " ..
r i
s; a,::.
,,
4"
-771
.