Newsroom: (541) 346-5511
Suite 300, Erb Memorial Union
P.O. Box 3159, Eugene, OR 97403
E-mail: editor@dailyemerald.com
Online: www.dailyemerald.com
Wednesday, April 28,2004
Oregon Daily Emerald
COMMENTARY
Editor in Chief:
Brad Schmidt
Managing Editor:
Jan Tobias Montry
Editorial Editor:
Travis Willse
BOiXORIAL.
Inaccurate
negative ads
only alienate,
annoy voters
With the negative presidential ad campaign bombard
ing American televisions, it's clear the election year is
bound for yet another round of candidates evading the is
sues.
The climax of the ad spree is the Bush administration's
incessant allegation that Sen. John Kerry is "flip-flopping"
on the issues. At a recent Westminster College speech, Vice
President Dick Cheney outlined these points by, naturally,
taking Kerr/s statements completely out of context.
But, oh my, a quick glance at Cheney's voting record
doesn't exactly do him justice. For instance, did you know
Cheney voted against the Head Start program while he was
a congressman in 1988, but during the 2000 election went
on record pledging his support for the program, according
to http://www.issues2000.org?
And, what's this? In an Aug. 30, 2000 speech to the
Southern Center for International Relations in Atlanta, Ch
eney stressed the importance of President George W. Bush
renewing trust between the military and the Bush adminis
tration. But in 2002, Bush pushed to deny health benefits
for 164,000 veterans, according to the Washington Post.
In the Westminster speech, Cheney criticized Kerry for vot
ing to end certain weapons programs in the U.S. military dur
ing Kerry's 20-year Senate career. But Cheney, in a 1993 budg
et proposal he made as Secretary of Defense to George H. W.
Bush, sought to terminate certain programs, including the
Midgetman missile program and advanced cruise missile
program. In fact, Cheney's plan was to cut $50 billion from
defense from 1993-1998.
But wait! Cheney recently told Fox News Channel's Brit
Hume that "what we're concerned about, what I'm con
cerned about, is (Kerry's) record in the United States Sen
ate, where he clearly has over the years adopted a series of
positions that indicate a desire to cut the defense budget,
to cut the intelligence budget, to eliminate many major
weapons programs."
Also, let s not iorget tnat some or me very weapons sys
tems Cheney sought to disarm in 1993 appear on the Re
publican National Committee's list of weapons they argue
Kerry was wrong in trying to cut, according to
http://www.fair.org.
The paramount example that critics say proves Kerry's
tendency to "flip-flop," however, stems from Kerry's procla
mation that he "actually voted for the $87 billion before I
voted against it." Kerry is referring to a bill to dedicate $87
billion to the Afghanistan and Iraq military efforts.
But it seems those critics are leaving out a vital part of that
statement: The context. According to The Washington Post
Kerry said in the same speech that he would support the $87
billion if Bush's tax cuts were dropped. Since they were not
dropped, however, Kerry later chose to oppose the bill.
A kind of fuzzy logic can be found in the Republican Par
ty7 s charges that Kerry is on a crusade against the military.
Republicans accuse Kerry of voting against weapons sys
tems as though he cast several individual votes against each
individual system. But in reality the weapons systems mo
tions were all part of one big Pentagon appropriations bill
in 1991, which Kerry opposed, according to www.fair.org.
So, Kerry's alleged 20-year mission to topple the U.S. mili
tary and render the country defenseless against the evils of
the world was actually just one vote.
Speaking of opposing defense measures, Bush resisted
the creation of a department dedicated to American securi
ty before the Department of Homeland Security was estab
lished, according to The Washington Post. So, in theory, the
newest Kerry anti-Bush ad could feature Bush saying, "I ac
tually opposed the Department of Homeland Security —
before I supported it! *
The moral of this murky story is that very few politicians
in this country have completely noble motivations. Politics
being as they are, oftentimes a legislator or public servant
will support something at one point and then oppose it lat
er for political reasons, or vice versa. Cheney did it with ed
ucation and defense. Kerry did it with defense and un
doubtedly many other things. Focusing an entire campaign
on these factors is ridiculous, deceptive and a perfect exam
ple of why the American people are so sick and tired of car
ing at all.
The un-American smokeout
Smokers unite!
The University Health Center's Cam
pus Advisory Board has launched an
anti-tobacco crusade to stop Erb Essen
tials, the EMU convenience store, from
selling cigarettes and to extend the no
smoking area around campus buildings
to 50 feet.
"The ultimate (goal) for campuses is to
have a totally smoke-free campus where
there is no smoking on campus grounds,"
said Paula Staight, the Health Center's di
rector of health information. Staight called
the advisory board's current campaign
"baby steps" and said the University may
be 10 or 20 years away from totally ban
ning smoking on campus.
Who appointed the advisory board to
be the anti-tobacco police? College stu
dents — or the vast majority of them —
are adults, and should be permitted to
smoke on campus.
Smoking is smelly, addictive, harmful
to your health and just plain stupid, but
if students want to smoke, the powers
that be should let them.
Eliminating tobacco sales at Erb Essen
tials will not make anybody quit smok
ing. It will just annoy students who have
to go off campus to buy their cigarettes
and eliminate a source of revenue for the
EMU, which is due for major renovation
and needs all the money it can get.
The fact that Erb Essentials sells cigarettes
does not constitute a University endorse
ment of smoking. It merely recognizes that
22 percent of University students smoke, ac
cording to a Health Center survey, and many
of them like to have a convenient place to
buy their cigarettes.
Moving smokers farther away from
buildings is a good idea. But if the Uni
versity is going to push smokers out into
the rain, they should build shelters
where students can smoke and stay dry.
The stigma smokers face these days is
extraordinary. They can't walk down the
street without getting disapproving
glares, not to mention the nagging they
continually receive from family and
friends imploring them to quit.
Chuck Slothower
Taking issue
Non-smokers often like to say they
have a right not to breathe second-hand
smoke. It's funny, but I can't seem to find
that one anywhere in the Constitution.
Smoking in public places is not merely
a campus issue. Local governments from
Eugene to New York City have enacted
smoking bans. Miraculously, Lexington,
Ky., passed its own smoking ban in July,
the Southern equivalent to Idaho ban
ning potatoes.
What is happening to smokers in the
United States exemplifies the so-called
tyranny of the majority that Alexis De
Tocqueville wrote about more than a
hundred years ago. The danger of
democracy, De Tocqueville wrote, is that
the majority can impinge on the rights of
the minority.
The parallels are clear. Smokers make
up a minority of the voting population,
so non-smokers can screw them over by
restricting smoking.
The anti-smoking movement is yet an
other example of modern Americans
valuing safety over liberty, an inversion
of the values espoused by the founders of
our country.
From smoking bans to bicycle helmet
laws, people think they have a duty to
save others from themselves. I say, if
someone wants to make poor decisions
that could be detrimental to their health,
that's their business.
The Health Center should be applaud
ed for providing nicotine gum and
patches for students who want to quit
smoking, but there is a difference be
tween helping smokers who seek help
and restricting the rights of those who
don't. The attitude of Staight and her al
lies is well-intentioned, but simultane
ously matemalistic and condescending.
EMU staff will explain to the EMU
Board of Directors the financial impact
of what will happen should Erb Essen
tials cease selling tobacco. The meeting
is today at 4 p.m. in the EMU Board
Room and represents an excellent oppor
tunity for students on either side of the
issue to voice their opinions.
Contact the columnist
at chuckslothower@dailyemerald.com.
His opinions do not necessarily
represent those of the Emerald.