4 - The Michigan Daily - Wednesday, September 22, 1993 c1je Litjigw a'1 Sharp as Toa 420 Maynard Ann Arbor, MI 48109 Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan JosH DUJow Editor in Chief ANDREW LEVY Editorial Page Editor TO &0A5 TMPRE SS1 £N S OF t~~YXA 'FROSH P~fZ6ON 'PEa2SPEC1-T I VS SSE5 M ER OWE >.e.:. . 0 i I_ ::.' A x a .a i 3 Unless otherwise noted, unsigned editorials reflect the majority opinion of the Daily editorial board. All other cartoons, articles and letters do not necessarily represent the opinion of the Daily. . --- - r -- , -T'_ ' c o(0 NEW YOWK _-1/ Li VIN(,,AT SOUTH S ZLI K I-SPO2RTS +Food ~~ ONE SNTROOuCES Hl4Map Tit uANDSOFTI ME5 %Il KAOW - .. IF )yJV LOOK AT t-rT T pjaT n44I. f ^ tJ1v ' tn' Ai.SO LL CZN r c; Pt y\l11 IW%_ COFFEE HOUSES SELEM To~~8Rlt, 'THIE L)- M ST u DE- n - Is Exploring the dog-eat-dog mentality By KEN SUGIURA It's a dog-eat-dog world out there. What in heaven's name is that supposed to mean? Sure, it does mean something. Namely, it means that whatever it is that is being described as "dog-eat- dog" - most likely the world, but also places of employment, the classroom (students only) and ponds (frogs only) - is very predatory and altogether competitive. But why dog-eat-dog? I used to have a dog. He (actually, good o1' Vic, may he rest in peace, was an it) ate a whole bunch of things -dog food, bacon and assorted vermin - but never once did I see him eat another dog. Now, I'll be the first to admit, my dog was kind of overweight, and I gave him (it) plenty of freedom, being the progressive pet owner that I am (now there's an oxymoron for all you oxymoron fans - progressive pet owner. Progressives wouldn't own, would they? They would share. Yes, pet sharer, that's what I was. But then again, even though I was sharing, that still doesn't nullify the fact that our dog was owned, so maybe we just co- existed. Whoa, this parenthetical statement is getting just a little too long. So long, in fact, it almost loses its parenthetical nature.), so maybe he did some dog-swallowing while I was elsewhere. But I highly doubt it. Nor, in my two decades on Mama Earth, have I ever laid eyes on any canines ingesting other canines. So what gives? It boggles the mind. Well, it boggles my mind. Long ago, did dogs eat other dogs in idiom- Sugiura is an LSA senior and a member of the Daily Sports staff inspiring fashion, as only dogs can do? And if so, why did they stop? Did the dog-eating dogs come to the realization that dog, prepared in any fashion, simply was not as palatable a meal as their owners' - I mean co-existers' - table scraps? And if dogs ate other dogs, how in the world did their race ever survive? Isn't there something just a little strange here? If this whole dog- eat-dog thing were carried out to the fullest extent, there would just be one dog left at the end, having eaten all the other dogs who had eaten other dogs who had eaten, well, you get the picture. I suppose he or she or it would be top dog, now, wouldn't he or she or it? But anyway, back to my point, or at least, to what I was saying before, because calling it a point really gives it undue and undeserved credit, kind of like calling fish mammals, or the. letter "c" a vowel. At any rate, my non-point was, if dogs were eating dogs, why did they stop? I would reckon it was because they were taught to avoid idioms, just like we humans were in high school. Those dogs are a smart bunch, you know. Except for mine. My dog was not very bright. Boy, the stories I could tell. Like the one time when he scored 650 on his SAT. We gave Vic a hard time for awhile after that, but I think he knew we were just teasing him in fun. But back to dogs-eating-dogs. Let me ask another question. Even if dogs are in fact eating dogs, why should anyone care? Situation: My friend John (not his real name) has just finished his first week at his job at somewhere important. He looks really tired, kind of like he just baled hay. ME: Hey there, John. You look tired. You look like you just... JOHN: Just finished baling hay. That's all I've heard. Baling hay this, baling hay that. Enough with the baling hay. ME: So how was work? JOHN: Mercy, it's crazy. It's a dog-eat-dog world out there. ME: Oh really? You didn't tell me you were a veterinarian. You see? Who cares if dogs are eating dogs? Besides dogs, of course. I would imagine most dogs would be highly interested in this topic; and would likely attend seminars on how to buck this trend. What does that have to do with anything? So what is the point? Here is the point. This country is in dire need of some new idioms (Again with the oxymorons. Idioms, of course, by their very nature are old.) I call upon you, the readership, to think of something to replace the non-serviceable idiom, "dog eat- dog." And here's whatyou can do with your suggestions. Send them along to me, Ken Sugiura, c/o The Michigan Daily, 420 Maynard, Ann Arbor, MI 48109.I have made my own Political Action Committee (PAC) with my Own Acronym (OA). The name is together, we can Rid Ourselves, Once and For all, from dopey idioms (ROOF). I will compile the list and send them along to the U.S. Senate subcommittee on Idiom Replacement. Our group will then receive unheard-of acclaim. Itwillbe our day in the sun. Because, as they say, every dog has his day. Now, don't even get me started with that one. Indiana paper criticizes Union Board Daily ad inserts waste paper To the Daily: This past week has already seen 2 different advertising inserts put into the Daily. I have watched the inevitable result for the past three years, which is that 99% of the ads wind up on the floor. Whether people throw them there, drop them, or they fallout is unimportant- what is important is that all these ads are at best glanced at, then discarded. No one really cares about Ralph Lauren's new clothing line, or how to obtain a Discover card. This information is readily available elsewhere, or could be conveyed just as well in a black-and-white ad inside the Daily itself. The Daily is usually recycled by most people, while these ad inserts are printed up for a life of about 1 second before they begin their trip to the landfill. Not only is this environmentally irresponsible, but it also makes our Here areafew things to consider in lightof (the Indiana University) Union Board'srefusaltohelppay tobring Pat Buchanan to lecture on campus, ap- parently because the former presiden- tial hopeful is too controversial: During the Vietnam War, Union Boardpaid the noted foreign relations expert Jane Fonda to come and talk at IU aboutUnited States involvement in the "conflict." In 1976, Eldridge Cleaver, the formerBlackPanther Partyministerof information, gaveaUnionBoard-spon- snred sneech. By then. of course. he women and liberals, whom he appar- ently believes are interchangable. Skip aheadtolastyear, when Union Board paid Spike Lee $10,000 to, among other things, root against the basketball team and callIU coach Bob Knight aracist. And finally, isnt it Union Board that sponsors Coach Knight's speech to the students every year? Buchanan is controversial, to be sure. He's a demagogue that has said that AIDS is nature's "retribution" on homosexuals and has proposed build- ing a trench along the U.S.-Mexican are, the College Republicans offered to pay a significant portion of the cost this year. So what was the board's reasoning in refusing the College Republicans' petition 7-3-7? "(The College Repub- licans) put us in a lose-lose situation, said seniorboard member Pete Correia. "If we vote no, it's all over the papers. But if we vote yes, we look stupid. Union Board has given substance to complaints from the College Re- publicans and the Young Americans for Freedom, who are always looking for a reason to yell "Discrimination, A FS U I .VA rila i A- TMOSTe-I *# V TQ1 0 H43 F.-I F -TCITSTIT! VISIT