100%

Scanned image of the page. Keyboard directions: use + to zoom in, - to zoom out, arrow keys to pan inside the viewer.

Page Options

Download this Issue

Share

Something wrong?

Something wrong with this page? Report problem.

Rights / Permissions

This collection, digitized in collaboration with the Michigan Daily and the Board for Student Publications, contains materials that are protected by copyright law. Access to these materials is provided for non-profit educational and research purposes. If you use an item from this collection, it is your responsibility to consider the work's copyright status and obtain any required permission.

October 19, 1993 - Image 4

Resource type:
Text
Publication:
The Michigan Daily, 1993-10-19

Disclaimer: Computer generated plain text may have errors. Read more about this.

4 - The Michigan Daily -Tuesday, October 19, 1993

E £idligaU alu

420 Maynard
Ann Arbor, MI 48109

JosH DuBow
Editor in Chief

Edited and managedS G ST
by students at the SAM GOODSTEN
University of Michigan FLINT J. WAINESS
Acting Editorial Page Editors
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.

Housing homeless youths
Congressional priorities remain in the gutter

A

Q ARE! OUC6ONN
N :
pus
L

A LET My FRIEND PLAY

'p V r
l)3

OR NOT?

0

H eadlines about reduced national spending, lim-
ited federal aid and denied or diminished
stimulus packages are not hard to find in newspa-
pers today. Usually, these headlines seem foreign
to students at the University. But the effects of
these spending cuts can now be felt here in Ann
Arbor.
Last Friday, Miller House, a facility for home-
less teens, was forced to shut its doors to young
men and women looking for a bed to sleep in. Just
a few weeks ago, the staff was informed that the
$120,000 federal grant they were promised no
longer exists. This action is indicative of the dan-
gerous shift in congressional priorities that results
from a skewed system of campaign financing that
has taken the power away from the people and
given it to big business and special interest groups.
While funding for the Superconducting
SuperCollider in Texas remains intact, while count-
less dollars continue to head towards the develop-
ment of a space station, children - the future of
our nation - are increasingly being ignored.
Many of the programs Miller House offers will
still function, at least on a reduced level. But the six
beds that gave homeless teens a place to sleep will
no longer be there, and twenty-four hour supervi-
sion won't be available. Previously, teens could
live at the house itself for six months-where they
would receive counseling, attend workshops and
skilled training around the clock. Now, after being

placed in alternative housing such as the YMCA or
foster homes, teens can still access these programs,
but on a more limited basis. The staff was fortunate
that they were able to place the residents of the
house elsewhere on such short notice, but, unfor-
tunately, teens looking for help in the future will
simply be left out in the cold.
The idea behind Miller House is to train and
prepare homeless youths for independence. They
are taught everything from nutrition to how to
balance a checkbook, in the hopes that they will
eventually lead healthy, stable lives - and won't
show up in another shelter down the road. By
cutting their funds, the federal government has
increased the likelyhood of spending more on
them in the future. Without help, homeless teens
turn into homeless adults. And that's a problem
that is not only morally troublesome, but also
becomes an economic burden in the future. Pre-
vention not only saves lives, it saves money.
Ironically, while the federal government can't
keep track of its funds or find room to help out a
bunch of kids, private organizations are able to
more reliably fill in some of the gaps. The staff at
Miller House is now actively pursuing grants from
other, private foundations. As one worker ex-
plained, "If you get a grant from one of these
foundations, you know the money's there."
Wouldn't it be nice if we could count on our own
elected officials in the same manner?

40

Not all vegetarians are hippies

My uncle laughed as he flipped
the burgers on the grill. "What do
you mean, you .
don't eat red
meat?" he asked
me. "You won't
eat a hamburger
with the rest of
us?"
My Uncle Bud
didn't mean this
as a slight (yes, I E
really do have an PEN
Uncle Bud - Jean Twenge
true to bordering on "military intel-
ligence" - I went back to eating
poultry and fish. "Red meat," in
case you're wondering why I got
such a laugh out of the lady in Texas,
is defined not by its color but by
being the meat of a mammal.) Even
though those Little Caesar's "Meat
Lovers Pizza" commercials are gone
(they bust in on a bunch of hippies
and chase them around the room
with a pepperoni pizza), vegetar-
ians still encounter a great deal of
prejudice. Even in a liberal Univer-
sity community like Ann Arbor, mis-
understandings still abound.
Last Friday, for instance, the
Daily quoted a nurse who warned
vegetarians of the dangers of pro-
tein malnutrition. "If you like your
hormones, you might want to learn
it," she said. "I've seen women who
have so little estrogen that they have

facial hair."
As we say in Texas, this is
horsepucky. According to a doctor
contact of mine, it would take
malnuitrition on the order of Soma-
lia to lead to an effect like this.
Second, the sex hormones are de-
rived from cholesterol, not protein
(which is why the reproductive bi-
ology professor I TA'd for always
said, in his great German accent,
"Dis is why cholesterol is not to-
tally bad fors you.")
More likely what we're seeing
here is what statisticians call com-
pounding. These vegetarian women,
close to the earth as they are, prob-
ably just don't go to the trouble that
the rest of us do to wax away our
facial hair.
Actually this is a stereotype I've
been trying to fight for awhile -
somehow people have the notion
that you have to be a hippie, on
drugs, or both to be a vegetarian.
There's not a one-to-one correspon-
dence here. For instance, Shaggy
and Scooby certainly weren't veg-
etarians ("They must've been on
drugs," one friend of mine always
says. "Cuz, man, they always had
the munchies! And they kept seeing
things ...") But seriously, I've seen
the most radical of modern-day hip-
pies chowing on bratwurst, and on
the other side, I'm not close to hip-
pie or even grunge (though I did

One more time
Clinton continues to fight for oppressive military policy

O n October 8th, the Pentagon temporarily sus-
pended its new "don't ask, don't tell, don't
pursue" policy in light of a ruling of the Federal
district court in Los Angeles. The court decision,
which was in response to the Navy's discharge of
openly gay sailor Keith Meinhold, stated that the
Defense Deptartment could not "take any actions
whatsoever against gay or lesbian service mem-
bers, or prospective service members, that in any
way affects, impedes, interferes with, or influences
their military status.. . based upon their sexual
orientation" What this amounts to is a full, albeit
temporary, reversal of the military's ban on homo-
sexuals. However, in a curious move that directly
contradicts the progressive campaign platform
Clinton presented, the Clinton Administration be-
gan preceedings in court to have the decision
overturned.
It wasn't that long ago that Gov. Bill Clinton
vowed to overturn the oppressive military ban if he
were elected. When he reached office, he opened
up the issue with Congress and the military, but
compromised in the end with the "don't ask, don't
tell" policy. With the Federal court ruling, it would
seem that the President has the oportunity to get
what he wants. Why is he fighting the decision?
Senior administration officials were quoted
as saying that the President is "standing by the
policy he and the Defense Department have en-
dorsed." However, with the current court ruling,
President Clinton gets the policy he originally
wanted and publicly doesn't have to take the heat
for it. This leads us to the question: What does the
President truly want? It would seem that he is

satisfied in taking the blame from both the military
and civil rights groups for sticking by his "don't
ask, don't tell" policy, which neither group was
particularly fond of.
Some have suggested that the President would
lose support from Congress and military leaders if
he did not stick to his compromise. With many
controversial issues coming up for debate in Con-
gress (health care reform and NAFTA being the
most prominent) and the unpopular military de-
ployments in Somalia, President Clinton needs all
the help he can get. As well, many expect the
military ban issue to go all the way to the Supreme
Court. It could be suggested that the President may
want this issue to go to the Supreme Court, antici-
pating that the military ban will be unilaterally
struck down as unconstitutional. But it would be
extremely naive to expect the reactionary Rehnquist
court to engage in any sort of judicial activism or
to cast its vote against oppression.
Unfortunately, Clinton continues to hide be-
hind a quilt of compromise. He continues to cater
to the archaic attitudes of southern Democrats like
Sam Nunn (D-Ga.), who support keeping the ban.
By doing so, the administration is not only ignor-
ing its own commisioned study by the conserva-
tive Rand Corp., which reported that ending the
ban would have absolutely no effect on troop
cohesion. And it's not only mirroring the bankrupt
arguments put forth years ago by individuals that
wanted the armed forces to remain segregated. But
it's doing something much worse. It's setting aside
the courage of its convictions, something candi-
date Clinton never would have done.

Bradley and Hardaway
can play ball
To the Daily:
In response to Ken Sugiura's
column ("Making Big Bucks With a
Straw and a Penny 10/11/93), I
have one thing to say: He
obviously does not watch college
basketball outside of the Big Ten
conference, and if he does, your
writer is not paying much attention.
In his column Mr. Sugiura stated
that NBA draftees Shawn Bradley
from BYU and Anfernee Hardaway
from Memphis State were
"unknown commodities. He
emphasized the fact that Bradley
could pass for a pipe cleaner" or
double as "a bendy straw." Only
once did Mr. Sugiura mention the
fact that Shawn Bradley was 7'6".
Let me repeat that SEVEN-FOOT-
SIX. Never in the history of the
NBA has a player of this stature
been drafted. Mr. Sugiura also
mentioned that Bradley's collegiate
competition and abilities were
questionable. Let's look at this
logically. Shawn Bradley did not
fall out of the sky and into the 1993
NBA draft. In his freshman year at
BYU, Bradley proved to the
country that he possessed
coordination and last spring in pre-
draft mini-camps he proved to the
NBA that he could play. Even
Michigan's own Chris Webber
commented on Bradley's superior
talent after competing against him
last spring. Imagine yourself as the
76ers in the 1993 NBA draft. Chris

NCAA tournament since its
formation. Hardaway has been the
star of this conference over the past
two years. With this size of a
forward, and the quickness of a
guard, "Penny" possesses basketball
instincts and court awareness that
cannot be taught in practice drills.
Like Bradley, Hardaway has also
proven himself to scouts in mini-
camps and against the Dream Team
(the best of the NBA). Orlando, a
team on the rise, envisioned
Hardaway at guard and Shaq
underneath on draft day. Why
wouldn't you give Anfernee
Hardaway a long-term deal with
,those prospects?
On a personal not to Mr.
Sugiura: I would not advise you to
enter the 1994 draft. It takes talent,
skill and much hard work to achieve
the level of an NBA lottery pick.
Also, for the future, please do a
little more research before
slamming the achievements of
players.
JENNIFER LAY
LSA junior
the folly of Fascism
To the Daily:
After reading Jody Marshall's
letter of 9/28, it became obvious
that she understands politics about
as well as she understands history
--in other words, not very well. She
invokes the eternally useful specter
of Hitler without considering the
associated history. Many left-wing
groups in Germany during
Nazism's rise, most notably the
Communist Party,thought they

almost run over a group of them on
State and Thayer the other day.)
Things are getting a little better
for vegetarians. The alternative
"vegetarian meal" at events still
translates to "a plate of side dishes,"
but many restaurants are beginning
to offer salads andschicken sand-
wiches. Six years ago when I first
gave up red meat, Arby's offered
nothing but beef, McDonalds had
only just introduced Chicken
McNuggets, and no one had ever
heard of ground turkey or "turkey
bologna." Salads were rabbit food,
and people would have laughed if
you'd said that McDonalds would
soon put salads on their menu.
Within the last few years, how-
ever, the medical community finally
realized that Americans are so over-
weight and unhealthy because we
eat so much high-fat red meat (as I
used to say in third grade, "Well,
duh!") More and more people are
realizing the benefits of eating less
meat, and misunderstandings are
fewer and farther between.
My mother, who at first went
ballistic that I wasn't. eating her
cooking, now makes the same dishes
with ground turkey. And my uncle
who laughed at me for not eating his
hamburgers? He had a heart attack
two years ago. This summer, we ate
our chicken sandwiches together -
hot off the grill.
supposedly defends human rights to
take. But I suppose Marshall would
agree that the ends justifies the
means.
There can be no doubt that the
actions of the federal government in
regard to such issues as abortion
and womens' rights are much more
important than that of fascist
groups. However, the AACDARR
cannot physically attack the
members of the government whom
they dislike. In its need for an easier
target, the AACDARR has decided
to use the fascist movements as a
substitute in their need for an
enemy that is easy to hate, and
which simultaneously enables them
to release their anger in ineffectual
public displays of violence. This
exploitation of a scapegoat is
comparable to the Nazis' own anti-
Semitic policies which arose when
a comfortable villain was needed.
Marshall's letteris peppered
with examples that make this
desperate search for enemies clear.
The USA Nationalist Party is
accused of crimes against various
groups across the country merely
because Marshall believes that all
people holding similarviews must
be collectively guilty. She claims
that the AACDARR is providing
"self-defense for those who are
their targets." Have any members of
the Auburn, New York organization
personally attacked her? Self-
defense is exactly that, not violence
in the name of anyone whom you
decide needs your protection. Of
course, Marshall's statement that
fascists are "white middle-class

college Roundup
Banning books is counterproductive

The young, in days gone by, were
allowed to develop their minds with
the help of books. These books shaped
cl ildhoods.
Books like "A Light In the Attic,"
b} Shel Siverstein, was one book that
most children ached for when it came
time for birthdays or bedtimes. Not
only could Siverstein put a smile on
a 9-year-old face, but he showed that
the little things in life were sometimes
most important. "The Catcher in the
Rye," by J.D. Salinger was definitely
one of those books that would never

Books Week was a couple of weeks
ago, but certainly bears reflection.
All over the Unites States, these
books and many others have been
banned for reasons that seem ridicu-
lous. For example, "A Light in the
Attic" was banned in 1989 by a South
Adams Ind., school because it was
seen as "very vile," and was restricted
in Duval County, Fla., schools be-
cause "it features a person whose
behind has been stung by a bee." It
seems that to a 9-or 10-year-old this
wouldn't seem too disturbing, but

have the same chance their prede-
cessors did. Books like these are
there to help kids grow and realize
that not all of life is simple and
perfect; the books are there to teach
a lesson. So why are they being
banned? That answer is up to the
school boards. Unfortunately, some
adults believe that one bad word or
one bad situation could ruin a child's
learning.
but is this right? Sometimes the
bad things that happen in books are
what teach the child the best les-

Back to Top

© 2021 Regents of the University of Michigan