The Winkler County News (Kermit, Tex.), Vol. 40, No. 62, Ed. 1 Monday, October 18, 1976 Page: 8 of 18
This newspaper is part of the collection entitled: Winkler County Area Newspapers and was provided to The Portal to Texas History by the Winkler County Library.
- Highlighting
- Highlighting On/Off
- Color:
- Adjust Image
- Rotate Left
- Rotate Right
- Brightness, Contrast, etc. (Experimental)
- Cropping Tool
- Download Sizes
- Preview all sizes/dimensions or...
- Download Thumbnail
- Download Small
- Download Medium
- Download Large
- High Resolution Files
- IIIF Image JSON
- IIIF Image URL
- Accessibility
- View Extracted Text
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
The Winkler County News
GOLDEN WEST FREE PRESS. INC
109 S Poplar
Zip Code 79745
Second Class Postage Paid at
Kermit, Texas 79745
KERMIT, TEXAS
Telephone 586 2561
M. M. Donosky......................... Publisher
Bill J. Beckham....... Vice-Pres. and General Manager
Bert Brewer.......................Managing Editor
Robert Wingrove .......................Sports Editor
Johnny Carson.....................Asst. Sports Editor
Jannie Lee..........................Society Editor
Jane Inskeep....................Advertising Manager
R h'6 t iA/ttS....................Circulation Manager
Robert Wingrove................Rress Superjntendent
This newspaper is dedicated to the spirit of civic progress; to the
unification of the townspeople in a common, purpose for the
betterment of our community; to our churches, schools, and
homes that Kermit shall ever be a good place in which tc live and
tear our children. And, above all, honesty, decency, justice,
tolerance, faith in Almighty God -- These shall be our citadel.
Solzhenitsyn
Issue Still Boils
GUEST EDITORIAL
Looking At Right
To Work Through
Our Ourselves
BY REED LARSON
The great art of writing, said Logan Pearsall Smith, is the
art of making people real to themselves with words.
That’s one of the purposes of commentary, to help people
define not only the issues, but 1 to heighten their awareness
of their personal views on the issues.
During this political season, the job of “making people
real to themselves” is especially important. Because the vast
majority of the American people cast their ballots according
to their perception of the issues, and their perception of how
the issues in the abstract will affect them personally.
One of the issues being talked about this year is the Right
to Work: Should states be allowed to enact laws which
prohibit compulsory union membership?
Jimmy Carter has said, “I think Section 14(b) should be
repealed, which would permit theabolition of Right To
Work laws, and if the Congress passes such legislation, I’d be
glad to sign it.” Gerald Ford says he is “vigorously opposed
to the repeal of Section 14 (b) of the Taft-Hartley Act. I
think if a state wishes to have the Right to Work. . . .under
our Constitution this is the right that they ought to be able
to exercise.”
Because Right to Work is sometimes perceived as a
Southern issue, this has led one political commentator,
Jeffrey St. John, to accuse Jimmy Carter of being a
Southerner in name only. In a new book titled “Jimmy
Carter’s Betrayal of The South” (Green Hill, $1.75), St. John
asks, “Who does Carter serve, in fact? The people, as he
claims, or the union bosses and power interests with the
money and influence to win the election?”
A good question for us all.
If we believe the literature produced at George Meany’s
AFL-CIO headquarters in Washington, we would probably all
oppose Right to Work laws. Big Labor’s partyline holds that
Right to Work are a contrivance of the captains of industry
intended to weaken unions and suppresses wages. Right to
Work, the union propagandists say, is the enemy of the
working man.
Yet, a 1976 study by Opinion Research Corporation,
Princeton, N.J., so that 68% of the general public opposes
repeal of Section 14 (b). Of those persons interviewed who
identified themselves as union members, the figure was 62%
against repeal. For persons whose family income was
between $5,000 and $6,999, the figure was 71%. Craftsmen
— 70%; clerical and sales people — 75%. In other words, the
poll showed that the kind of people the AFL-CIO alleges to
represent, the so-called “little people”, are adamantly
opposed to compulsory unionism.
Interestingly, the “little people” may be even more
opposed to compulsory unionism than the heavyweights. A
recent Harvard Univrsity survey of the leaders of industry,
the ^professions, education, the mass media, etc., (identified
as “elite” groups) showed that every group, except one,
thought Big Labor was too big, and too powerful.
According to The Washington Post, “Every elite group
questioned thought the labor unions were one of the most
powerful two or three groups in the country. At the same
time, every elite group but one felt that labor’s influence
should be much less than they perceived it to be;many said
labor should be stripped of any real influence. The one
exception was leaders of big industry. ..”
What does Right to Work mean to you? To me it means
the freedom to decide for one’s self whether or not to
support a union. To me, it’s as fundamental and
down-to-earth as my own Kansas roots. It’s as real and
personal to me as any principle can ever be.
Page Eight
The Winkler County News, Kermit, Texas
Monday, October 18, 1976
E™"1978 j
-MEMBER-
TEXAS PRESS
IIIIlV©
ASSOCI AT I ON
It is terribly ironic that, in the very year that the United
States celebrates 200 years of freedom, it is divided on the
worth of one of the great moral figures of our time —
Alexander Solzhenitsyn. Perhaps more than any other person
living today, he personifies man’s unquenchable thirst for
freedom, a precious commodity he sees in danger of dying
throughout the world.
As a great Russian novelist and courageous dissident
against the cruel Soviet system, Solzhenitsyn incurred the
wrath of Moscow’s rulers. Given the nature of their
tyrannical system, their enmity toward him is
understandable.
What is not understandable is the enmity that has greeted
him in parts of the West, including, shamefully, America
itself. After Solzhenitsyn was exiled from his beloved
country, he was honored at a banquet in this country last
year. The White House, however, was not represented, owing
in part to a State Department memorandum dated June 26,
1795, and advising against the President’s participation
because the Russians “would probably take White House
participation ... as either a deliberate negative signal or a
sign of administration weakness in the face of domestic
anti-Soviet pressures
There you have it - Henry Kissinger telling Mr. Ford not
to attend the Solzhenitsyn dinner because it would offend
the Soviet Union!
The White House reportedly .has lived to regret that
decision, owing in good measure to the huge public outcry
that greeted the snub. We should qualify that by saying we
thought the White House was sorry for its mistake.
Unfortunately, however, evidence continues to mount that
the Ford Administration continues to regard Solzhenitsyn
not as a man to be praised, but as one to be feared because of
his alleged threat to “detente” and world peace.
Jimmy Carter’s foreign policy advisers take a similar
attitude toward the novelist, and hav£ advised their man not
to raise the issue in speeches or the forthcoming debates with
Mr. Ford.
Has America gone so far down the road of Communist
appeasement that no one in authority dares to oppose such
outrage?
GET OFF MY BACK!
VIRGINIA PAYETTE
Business’ Defective Image
You may not have noticed
it yet, but a lot of businesses
are pushing a new product
these days themselves.
And they’re going about it
the same way they promote
their “new, improved, giant
economy-sized” specials.
With splashy ad
campaigns...bigger miles...
and fatter contributions to
good causes.
What they’re up to is a
massive recall of a defective
image.
They want a chance to
tinker with it a little gadget,
tear out the bribery assembly,
replace a few parts in the
political contribution
housing, and send it back-all
new and shiny and pure.
Never mind the cost.
Business is in big trouble at
the monent-and it doesn’t
need any reminders from
Ralph Nader. The boys in the
Executive Suite can read a
survey as well as anybody
(maybe even better) and
they’re aware that their
public reputation for
morality and honesty is at a
new low.
They don’t have to look
too hard for the reasons,
either. The big flap over
illegal contributions to
Nixon’s 1972 campaign sent
shock waves through every
board room in the nation.
They were still reaching for
the aspirin over that one
when the biggie broke:
world-wide scandal over
corporate bribery and
overseas payoffs to nail down
contracts.
Headlines all over the
place. Hasty resignations.
Talk of jail for white-collar
criminals.
The result is public distrust
of business that rates almost
as high on the charts as public
disgust of Congress. And
everybody knows how high
that is.
Part of it, polltakers point
out, is based on the fact that
consumers have only a vague
idea of how business
operates, what regulations it
has to follow, how it serves
the public and what its
standards are.
All shoppers know is their
feeling that they’re paying
more for stuff that falls apart
faster and that when they
complain they get the
corporate curled lip.
They can’t, it turns out,
even come close to guessing
how much profit business
makes out of every dollar.
Most folks said it was
probably anywhere from 13
cents to 33 cents and
whatever it was, it was too
much. (The actual profit
margin is a nickel.)
A recent poll on the
“honesty and ethical
.American Viewpoints
A man is relieved and
gay when he has put his
heart into his work and
done his best.
Ralph Waldo Emerson
standards” of various
professions gave physicians a
top score of 55; engineers and
professors were next with 48
and 44. (Journalists, much to
everyone’s surprise, came in
fourth with 33).
Business executives were
way down on the list with 19.
They tied with senators.
Consumers-watchers say
this is because people feel
business is dishonest and out
to “get” them by selling
shoddy products at sky-high
prices. The biggest culprits, as
far as the public is concerned,
are automobile and appliance
makers, oil companies and
utilities.
But the public’s really mad
at everybody. From the
neighborhood shopkeeper to
the corner supermarket to the
repairman who never shows
up when he says he will and
never fixes anything right
when he does.
The curious and generally
overlooked thing is that the
customer we are talking
about here is, statiscally, an
employe of one of these
businesses. The products and
services he complains about
are somebody else’s,
naturally, but there would
seem to be an awfully easy
Paul Harvey
Mews
If The United States
‘Went Honest’
The most constructive event of the Bicentennial year is
the publication of a stuffy-sounding volume called “The
Ethical Basis of Economic Freedom.”
It challenges Americans at all economic and social levels
to go strraight.
From here on I’m going to be parapharasing the editor of
this compilation, Ivan Hill of Chapel Hill.
Free Americans are becoming less free every day. This is
the price we pay for misbehavior.
If “free enterprise” dies it will not be because a better
system has been developed, but because this one became
overburdened with dishonesty and laziness.
The real destroyers of capitalism are not outsiders-they
are insiders. They are the free people who don’t deserve to
be.
We don’t need new religions, we don’t need new ethics,
we don’t need a new system; we need only to make honest
the one we have.
And what if the United States “went honest”? The price
we now pay for crime - stealing, embezzlement, shoplifting,
crookedness in almost every area of our economic life -that
price would go down. So much of our overgrown government
has grown up in an effort to put down institutionalized
dishonesty.
If big industries stopped buying foreign business with
dishonest bribes, thus making it “look smart,” our
neighborhood businesses might put a stop to their petty
rip-offs.
This is Ivan Hill’s hope -that honesty can become as
fashionable as dishonesty now is.
A formula as simple as “do unto others” would attract an
improved kind of political candidate...
Would relax the shackles on both industry and labor
Would even ease traffic problems . ..
Hill recommends that when the directors of any great
corporation are considering a person to be chief executive
officer they must examine his spiritual and ethical
qualifications.
The United States does not need a revolution; we‘ve had
our revolution. But the republic born in Philadelphia does
need to be bt>rn again.
The Watergate decade could trigger the catharsis.
And there are encouraging signs: The professions of
medicine and law, journalism and education and government
are conscientiously considering ethical codes for themselves.
That is what this book is about.
Leaders in business, government and education responding
to our erosion of principle, urging upon themselves the old-
fashioned virtues: honesty, forthrightness and fairness.
The time is right.
Perhaps these contemporary Patrick Henrys can
restigmatize dishonesty, reethicalize free enterprise so that it
again deserves to be free.
Both scripture and history inevitably agree: We,
individually and collectively, always eventually get what we
deserve.
We’re going to be honest and free-or dishonest and
policed.
YOU
SAID IT!
(LETTERS FROM
READERS)
fix in there somewhere.
Things have reached the
point where even the U.S.
Chamber of Commerce is
worried. And businessmen are
retooling to restyle their
reputations with better
customer-retailer relations
and more aggressive action
against the real sharpies in
their ranks.
They figure they’d better
do it fast, before the
government moves in to do it
for them.
And so they’re going after
better communication with
the public. Business promises
henceforth to show more
interest in customers and
their complaints, provide
value for the prices they
charge, and tell the truth
about what they sell.
Along with these goals,
they’re hoping to convince us
they’re not realiy such bad
guys in the controversial areas
of product shortages,
pollutions and conservation
of natural resources.
And they’re not going to
break any more laws against
political contributions and
bribery payments. Cross their
hearts.
Fine. And we’ll cross our
fingers.
To the Editor:
Following is the first in
party Principles, or
“permanent beliefs”
adopted as a part of the
Constitution of the
American Party of the
United States, at the
National Committee
meeting in Wichita, May
12-13, 1973:
ARTICLE III PRINCIPLES
“Section I. God Is Our
Foundation. Those
authoring and adopting this
Constitution declare the
American Party to have
been brought into existence
upon the foundation of its
organizers’ belief in
Almighty God and in Jesus
Christ, upon their total
commitment of the whole
counsel of God’s Word, and
upon their determination
that the American Party
shall function, so long as it
shall endure, in conformity
with His will. The American
Party is and shall remain a
political entity which is
essentially
Christian-oriented. It is our
fervent hope that God will
use the American Party to
bless and save our free
Republic.”
The two major parties
have given the U.S.
continual wars, no-win wars
such as Korea and Vietnam,
government - created
inflation, deficit spending,
federal guidelines that
control us from the cradle
to the grave and, aid and
comfort to Communist
nations throughout the
world, and today our
pro-Communist leaders
advocate taking from the
haves and give to the have
nots. Because of this
madness we are now under
total government or better
known as Socialism.
Let’s return to sanity by
putting God back into our
national affairs and stand up
for America by supporting
candidates on the American
Party.
Roy F. Cold on
Bristol, New Hampshire
The first thing a new
stenographer types is the
boss.
-Dragline, Youngstown, O.
TURN ONS
DEFINE
EXPLETIVE.
A NINE
LETTER WORD
MEANING A
FOUR LETTER
WORD.
UN Support
Dwindling
by John F. McManus
Belmont, Massachusetts — Happily, there are
fewer and fewer celebrations of United Nations
Day. Instead, more and more Americans are ob-
serving October 24 as the UN Day of Shame.
The reasons for the substitution continue to pile
up. Let us list a few.
Guardian of Tyrannies
About seventy of the 145 UN member-na-
tions are widely known to be governed by dic-
tatorships, military juntas, or other forms of
totalitarianism. Another twenty-five have po-
litical systems that are classified as only partly
free in material available from UN headquar-
ters itself.
The United Nations insists that it is a guard-
ian of the rights of man. Yet as soon as another
gang of pro-Communist thugs gains control of
more real estate and more millions of victims
(Angola and Mozambique being the latest ex-
amples), the UN places its stamp of approval
on the new regime by granting it membership.
The UN might well be known as the guardian
of tyrannies.
Refusal to Condemn Terrorism
Last July, 102 innocent skyjack victims were
rescued in the daring Israeli commando raid into
Uganda. The UN Security Council was promptly
convened at African demand to condemn Israel
and defend Idi Amin of Uganda, who had co-
operated with the skyjackers!
Although the Security Council refused to go
along with those loathsome demands, it then
refused to condemn skyjacking and other acts
of international terrorism. Such a failure on the
part of the “peace organization” ought to open a
great many eyes to what the UN really is.
UNESCO Wants Controlled Press
The United Nations Educational, Scientific,
and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) has been
conducting regional conferences around the
globe to agitate for the creation of a govern-
mental news agency in each nation. At a July
meeting in Costa Rica, the conferees called for
“positive use” of the communications media —
which means that they don’t care for what AP,
UPI, Reuters, and other news agencies report
about them. At another conference in New Del-
hi, India (where Indira Gandhi recently killed
India’s free press), delegates from fifty-eight
countries proposed the creation of a pool of
government-controlled news agencies to supply
official versions of day-to-day events. Obvi-
ously, UNESCO is sponsoring Indira Gandhi’s
type of “freedom of the press” everywhere.
U.S. Pays the Bills
Ninety-two member-nations owe the UN
back dues in excess of $200 million. Under Ar-
ticle 19 of the UN Charter, these nations should
have lost their voting privileges. But none have.
Meanwhile, the United States with its single
vote in the General Assembly is assessed twenty-
five percent of the publicized operating budget,
and contributes as much as seventy-five percent
of the unpublicized costs of special programs.
Among the United States’ fellow UN mem-
bers, each with a similar single vote, are the
following nations: Grenada (133 square miles,
population 105,000); Bahrain (231 square miles,
population 207,000); Sao Tome and Principe
(372 square miles, population" 66,000); Maldives
(115 square miles, population 110,000); and
Seychelles (109 square miles, population
56,000). Little Rhode Island has a larger area
than these five UN member-nations combined
and almost double their population! These tiny
dots on the map are part of the Third World, a
voting bloc called a “tyranny of the majority”
even by UN supporters.
Many more pages could be written on this
subject. But let us conclude by saying: “Get US
out of the United Nations, and get the United
Nations out of the United States.”
© 1976 The John Birch Society Features
The Oil Patch
By Gordon Bankston
o rd°r „
-76
All The Papers Are Saying, The Odessa Oil Show Is
To Be The Biggest And Best Oil Show In The World.
._ _ _
___
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This issue can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Newspaper.
Brewer, Bert. The Winkler County News (Kermit, Tex.), Vol. 40, No. 62, Ed. 1 Monday, October 18, 1976, newspaper, October 18, 1976; Kermit, Texas. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth1009424/m1/8/?q=%22%22~1: accessed July 17, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu.; crediting Winkler County Library.