I OPINION u_ _ , - _ .-.. -, rage 4 Sunday, November 9, 1980 (The Michigan Daily 4 The Democratic burden lifted by a landslide Call me a cruel bastard; maybe I deserve it. But some sinister streak within me is glad and relieved that Ronald Reagan and those droves of scowling reactionaries around him will be mtining the country-or trying to-January 20. b Frankly, these last four years have been a Wrden. The nation has been sinking into a malaise," all right, just as Jimmy told us. But ottr sour mood was not developed in spite of our fearless leader's best efforts-it was because of them. Andeach of us who faithfully went off to tle polling booths in November, '76, and pulled 1O0 liquity /14 By Joshua Peck the '.ever for that then-mysterious Georgian bears part of the responsibility for four years of embarrassment that followed. IN MY CASE, there is even more reason for sheepishness than for the average unshakable Democrat. Sure, I made a token effort at making, Mo Udall the Democratic nominee-a little canvassing and phone calling-but once James Earl became the man of the hour, I dutifully fell in line. I persuaded myself, and then other potential Eugene McCarthy voters, that Jimmy was. really part of the liberal tradition, that he could be counted on to act in the faith of his Democratic predecessors as president (except for LBJ's bombing runs in Vietnam), that a Carter, presidency might be able to put the eight preceding years of Nixon/Ford "leader- ship" to shame. Hee hee. 1976. I remember going to sleep on the night after a busy Election Day feeling elated by the day's events. I'd spent the morning on the phone from Democratic headquarters (George Sallade's State Street law office, actually), calling registered Democrats and finding that, yes, virtually all of them planned to get to the polls to vote for our boy if they hadn't already. THAT AFTERNOON and into the evening, I'd been walking around Ypsilanti canvassing for Carter. I had discovered that it was no myth about Ann Arbor's neighboring community: Ninety percent of the people I met really did say "y'all" and "y'hear." Neither was the fustian about Southern hospitality a falsehood. I was offered a shot of bourbon or rye at every third or fourth stopping place, a few of which I forced down. Best of all, these people were Democrats. Growing up in a particularly liberal corner of suburbia, I had started to believe that the stereotypes were all wrong; that the Democratic party and liberalism were really for the affluent, not for the so-called New Deal coalition after all. Yet here I was with people who earned legs than half what my parents did, ate different food, spoke an almost unin- telligible version of our allegedly mutual language, and who worshipped a God I regar- ded as a superstitious invention. The Hatfields, McCoys, and I turned out to share a faith after all. We believed in what the party offered, and we were going to put it to work for our collec- tive good. The dream has been dismantled. I won't say no faith in the liberal approach remains; Tuesday's vote is better read as a rebuke to one specific man than as a condemnation of the philosophy of the mainstream of his party. But certainly the electorate has grown suspicious of the promises and of the compassion of the Democratic liberal wing. WHEN I CAST my "protest vote" for Barry Commoner last week, I was one member of the eight-odd percent of the electorate that rejec- ted the cream of the major-party crops. When I first made my voting intentions clear, I was subjected to much of the usual shrill derision heaped on third party or independent adheren- ts: "A vote for Commoner is a vote for Reagan," went the mantra this time. Last time, the names were McCarthy and Ford, before that (and on the other side of the political spectrum) they were Wallace and Humphrey. The chant is a lot of garbage, and elitist gar- bage at that. People don't vote for a sure loser because they think they can put him in office. Nor do they vote for him just to teach the major candidates a lesson. They vote for him because he is saying something they believe, or because he sees the world in a way no other candidate grasps. The media played into that game of warning against Anderson, Commoner, and Clark votes a little too willingly. They started pointing to states that Carter would "surely" carry if not for a heavy Anderson vote, suggesting that any voter whose first choice was Anderson would have Carter as his second choice. NOT SO. The polls-which the media eviden- tly only watch closely when it suits their pur- pose-clearly indicated that 35-40 percent of Anderson's supporters would be pulling the lever for Reagan as a second choice. With a near-balance among his- supporters, Ander- son's reputation as a "spoiler" would seem to have been misplaced. But what's a little distor- tion when you're having fun? I was particularly irked by the "Vote for Commoner equals a vote for Reagan", chant because I nearly succumbed to it. While most of the surveys indicated Michigan was leaning to Reagan, it still seemed possible that heavy turnouts in Detroit and student areas might throw the state into the Carter column. I was strongly tempted to turn Tory. But Tuesday morning I was reminded-in a classroom, of all places-of an issue that ought to have been central to this campaign, and that might yet be in some other, saner one. The issue was the United States' history of med- dling in other nations' affairs. This was not the history we learned in high school about the Peace Corps' wonderful, charitable works abroad. Nor did I hear about the miracles American foreign aid dollars have done in the Third World. THE ASPECT of'our national foreign policy that was discussed was the way the gover- nment has almost always treated foreign governments that do not look to be friendly to American business interests. We overthrow them. Guns, torture, rightist totalitarianism; whatever it takes. These are not hidden facts-our adventures in Chile are well-known, our efforts in th rest of Latin America, though more tenuously documented, are perfectly evident. The Anerican inter- ference in Iran, of course, isl the most far= reaching and shameful story of 11. Yet both Carter and Reag n, to varying degrees, parrot the high schoo textbook very sion of history; Washington is a glorious and generous benefactor that bring the rest of the world wealth and independen. Publicly, we wonder why we are losing foreign friends left and right. Privately, we conti ue about our business of alienating ever greater numbers of other peoples. I'll vote for a Democrat again when one faces up to American misdeeds and promises to begin cleaning up our act, Stans$eld Turner be damned. UNLIKE THE many progressive commen- tators who have emerged from Tuesday's punishment screaming franti ally, I find myself bathed in a feeling of r laxation and relief. The nation's lot is not goi g to improve over the next four years, but this time it'll look like their fault. We're not responsible for put- ting Reagan in office; the people of the. American heartland, cities, suburbs, and plains are. They're not evil, these Reagan sup-; porters. They're decent, hard-working, basically honest, and wrong. But how would they ever have found out under a second term of Carter mismanagement? 1984, anyone? Joshua Peck is the co-editor of the Daily's Opinion page. His column appears every Sunday. Editen n tanivt oa l Edited and managed by students at The University of Michigan Feiffer 4 MV165 7-~ Vol. XCI, No. 58 420 Maynard St. Ann Arbor, MI 48109 Editorials represent a majority opinion of the Daily's Editorial Board i x as g ti a the fi by m :X:An pige( abe :Ac sity' drop mien; that hum -So rryinu Univ corn in an driv :Bu tati( che] eard Dc and :the h Purging the poor pigeons IRST THERE was the Baboon On Thursday, the University, under Seven, a group of primates used fire from animal lovers, ordered the ainea pigs in car crash experimen- exterminating company to collect the t the University. Then there was bird corpses and remaining poisoned rat cat, a feline tortured and killed corn, effectively discontinuing the iembers of a local fraternity. pigeon massacre. id now there are the dropping . We- have mixed feelings about this ons, whose pigeon droppings pose pigeon purge. Certainly the killing of alth threat. any animal is abhorrent, and the cording to officials in the Univer- Avitrol caused painful deaths for those s Occupational Safety and En- 200 birds, some of which were seen to nmental Health Office, pigeon walk off the roofs of buildings and )pings present a public health plunge to their deaths. ace because they collect a fungus Yet, the University has a legitimate impairs natural antibodies. in interest in preserving the health of the ans. humans in this community. Pigeons , earlier this week, an exter- are a menace, and disgusting to ating firm under contract to the boot-just take a look at any window versity spread chemical-saturated ledge in the Frieze Building. in favorite pigeon roosting areas Further, the spiked corn was inten- aattempt to disorient the birds and 'ded only to confuse the birds, so e them away. perhaps they might have flown away to it for about 200 pigeons, disorien- East Lansing. The deaths were unin- on turned to death as the tentional. mical-Avitrol-caused pigeon The pigeon problem is no laughing liac arrest. matter. We must all try to think of a ozens of the birds were found dying way to avoid another pigeon pogrom. gasping on the Diag Wednesday, to Maybe we could try little pigeon orror of concerned passersby. Pampers? ffThC 6- L f of r ~ 'IKJ _tT EA - I T tcfcWf6k5iFRsc~ CA - A4RE R 4, 166 J -~ 4 I It-4 bAA u . i! P-Y (9mo n TwMe Conservatism is the answer' THE MILWAUKEE JOURNAL/ -~1 ( YOUR HONORfTHE' DEFENSE WOULD LiKE TO CALL ON TWO WITNE5E5$WO ARE xli The Michigan Daily has long been thought of as a bulwark of liberal student opinion. In that tradition, it bemoaned the results of the national election as a step backward for America. A new shift to rigid conservatism has been effected, it said. The light of liberal ideals is "dimming fast," it said. I am a conservative, and I believe what happened last Tuesday is the best thing to hap- pen to America in 40 years. AS A STAUNCH conservative, my basic belief is in government reduction. I strongly support the notion that there is almost nothing done by the federal government, outside of national defense and protection of life, that cannot be better handled by free and private enterprise. The main problem is posed by the federal government, but the. states' intervention in the natural' order of economic and social activity has also become too large. Simply put, much of government has to go. While political analysts correc- tly call Tuesday's Republican sweep a grassroots surge, the grassroots are also reponsible for the liberal mess that caused the problem in the first place. It seems that whenever Americans observe a problem they im- mediately demand that gover- nment do something about it. This liberal mentality unavoidably leads to an expan- sion of the role government plays in our lives. It's past time to reverse the trend. Franklin Roosevelt's brainchild, carried now under Teddy Ken- nedy's banner. Basically, it calls for an expansion of the role government plays in our lives. It is repulsive. The U.S. federal government is now the biggest spending organizationsthe world has ever known. Its spending, combined with that of the state and local. governments, accounts for over 40 percent of the Gross National Product. In 1929 they spent about 10 percent. Still, Kennedy and his cohorts want to expand the bureaucracy into, among other things,a national health insuran- ce company. It will, no doubt, run with the same efficiency as the national post office and Amtrak. KENNEDY ARGUES that national health care will help people. I am not against people helping people in need. I don't think the "simplistic" Republicans are either. I am only against the federal government, or any other government, trying to solve our problems by going in- to business. Look at the Social Security system and its failings. The ideas and the intentions were good and noble, as Kennedy's are now. In practice, though, it has not fulfilled its goals. National health care is doomed to a similar failure. All the good intentions in the world will not make it any more practical. Some optimists say we can clean up government, eliminate By Mark Gindin WITH THIS IN mind, I rejoice in the defeats of Senators McGovern, Church, and Bayh. They are Kennedy clones with the same misguided ambitions and desires to play with and squander other people's money. One attack on conservative ideology, originates in the idea that government is the only means we have to help - the nation's unfortunates, that no one else ,can protect us from our- selves and our greedy tendencies. First, I think it disgusting that anyone would consider himself helpless without government. There are other more beneficial and efficient alternatives .that have never been tried. ALSO, WHEN people want the government to "do something," they do not realize that with every action the government takes, it removes another piece of the collective pie. As the pie gets smaller, the citizens lose out in the long run. Sure, they get "progressive legislation," but with it they get more laws restricting rights, a larger bureaucracy, more taxes, and worst of all, a bigger dependency on Big Brother. Where will it end? It could end where England is, at an almost 90 percent income tax rate and almost total gover- nmental control of industry. Nationalized everything! Whoopee! Or it could end with a Soviet system-total dependence on the It is not against equal rights that I stand, only against the government having any influence one way or the other. The gover- nment attempts are noble, but on the whole, over the course of time, government intervention has not done as much to promote the general welfare as has the profit motive and free enterprise. That is why I gdvocate the very thing the "evil and simplistic" president-elect advocates, the concept of less government. The other two options havetbeen ex- plained. Not very pretty, were they? Americans have finally realized what has been hap- pening for 40 years. The gover- nment has grown, grown, and grown (groan). The money to support it had to come from somewhere, and it came from us. Are we better off as a result? That is the question everybody but the few remaining leftists an- swered with a resounding "no." Federal programs have not produced anything near thei~' cost. People are still poor ahd people are still unemployed and people still suffer under inflation: WHAT DO THE liberal McGoverns, Churches, and O'Reillys "say 'to that? "Let's have a bigger program with more money! Why not! It's frees' Finally, people realized it wasnt free money. Because of theli realization, America will not only survive, it will grow in its neW- found independence. The liberal ideal. has beeni rejected. Yes, a giant step back- wards has been taken-apd it is a EXPERTS ON ILLEGAL BREAK-INS - BON MITCH ELL AND RICH ARD N IXON !1lii ______11 N9111 f11t11URIJuI E1 X\: .