'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 .