The North Texas Daily (Denton, Tex.), Vol. 71, No. 35, Ed. 1 Thursday, October 29, 1987 Page: 2 of 8
eight pages : ill. ; page 23 x 15 in. Digitized from 35 mm. microfilm.View a full description of this newspaper.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
Commentary
Editorials
Democracy yearns for
voters' quiet voices
Last month Texans joined in the nationwide cele-
bration of the 200th anniversary of the U.S. Consti-
tution. This month Texans have the opportunity to
put the principles and powers created by the Consti-
tution into effect—by going to the polls and casting
their votes next Tuesday in the statewide general
election.
Perhaps the best thing that could result from the
flurry of patriotism surrounding the Constitution’s
birthday party would be an increase in voter turnout
for elections. After all, there’s not much point in having
a democratic system of government if no one bothers
to vote.
A study on "Voting for America,” which was
released last week by the Democratic National Com-
mittee, indicated that in the 1984 presidential election,
only 47 percent of Texans who were eligible to vote
bothered to do so. Texas tied with Arizona as the
fifth worst state in terms of voter turnout.
Texans should be ashamed of this kind of voter
apathy. As one of the largest and most powerful states,
the Texas vote can make an enormous difference in a
national election. It’s no coincidence that Vice President
George Bush makes it well-known that he is a legal
resident of Texas—he wants the vote of his fellow
Texans.
Among the most apathetic voters, according to the
“Voting for America” study, are people of college
age. In 1986 only 15 percent of registered voters ages
18 to 24 cast votes.
In state and local elections, the voter turnout is
traditionally much worse than in national elections.
Frequently, as few as 10 percent of eligible voters go
to the polls for local elections.
Excuses abound. Everybody seems to have a per-
fectly valid reason not to vote—“It’s not a national
election, so it can’t be very important," they say.
Or, “I don’t know anything about the issues or
the candidates. Why bother?” Sometimes it’s, “1
have a million things to do that day, and I really
can’t take the time off from work (or school).”
None of those excuses have much substance when
stacked up against the one reason why everybody who
can vote should run, not walk, to the polls and punch
those ballot buttons—simply because the right to do
so is guaranteed to every citizen by the Constitution.
Voting is easier than ever before. The League of
Women Voters and most members of Congress provide
lists of issues on the ballot, pros and cons for each
issue, and voter registration information. Workers
cannot be penalized for taking time off to vote.
Absentee voting has become less restrictive, and
being out of town the day of the election is no longer
a requirement to vote absentee. Voters can cast an
absentee ballot by going to their county voter regis-
tration office, whether or not they will be out of the
county the day of the election.
Every single election, whether or not the general
populace considers it “important,” affects the lives
of the constituents of that city, county or state. The
people who don’t vote are demonstrating their intentions
just as surely as if they had voted. They are, in effect,
voting by default.
Voting is a privilege that should not be taken lightly.
Not everyone has it, and those who don’t are often
willing to risk a great deal for the privilege of living
in a democratic society. Anyone who doubts the validity
of that statement should have a talk with Andrei
Ustinov, the Russian ballet dancer who defected last
week in Dallas.
And, please, if you don’t vote, don’t gripe about
any problems that might arise from the laws put into
effect by those who do. Apathy is bad enough, but
apathy and arrogance are an especially disgusting
combination—people who aren’t willing to take the
small effort of voicing their opinions at the polls have
absolutely no justification in complaining about the
outcome of any election.
Iran must understand
U.S. military response
The U.S. Navy recently destroyed two Iranian oil
platforms in retaliation for Iran’s missle attack on a
Kuwaiti oil tanker that was U.S. flagged and registered.
This was the third military clash between Iran and
the United States in less than a month. Britain, France
and West Germany have fully supported the United
State’s retalitory actions. British Prime Minister
Margaret Thatcher said that it was a correct, measured
response.
Even members of the U.S. Congress are biparti-
sanly praising President Reagan’s response to Iran's
attack on American-flagged oil carrying vessels.
Many nations worry the gulf will become a mini
war-ground of attacks and counterattacks between the
two countries. However, Secretary of Defense Caspar
Weinberger said the United States is not looking for
further confrontations with Iran, but that any hostile
military actions from Iran will be met with yet stronger
countermeasures.
So far, U.S. responses have been both correct and
well calculated. There have not been any offensive
measures taken by the United States—strictly, defensive
countermeasures.
Kamal Kharrazi, head of the Iranian War Information
Headquarters, was quoted as saying that the United
States will receive a “crushing response for its cri-
minal attack” on the Iranian oil platforms. OK Kamal,
hit us with your best shot, but you just better be
prepared for a stronger dose of your own medicine.
(Hey, Ronnie, how about blasting Iran’s installations
of Chinese-supplied Silkworm missiles, which were
used to attack the two oil tankers, next?)
It is unfortunate that a small Third World nation
such as Iran needs to be shown by superior military
might that aggressive actions will simply not be
tolerated.
The U.S. countermeasures are also commendable
for the considerations afforded to the value of a human
life. The decision makers gave the soldiers operating
the targeted area time and opportunity to leave. Navy
warships radioed the platforms to tell them they would
begin firing in 20 minutes and evacuation was advised.
Clearly, innocent civilian lives was not the object of
the counteraction.
The Navy also forewarned merchant ships in the
area to stay clear—considerations Iran would doubtless
have thought unnecessary.
Weinberger said the oil platforms’ removal will
“contribute significantly to the safety of the U.S.
forces in the area,” and that’s exactly what it should
do. Targets should be calculated military targets that
will reduce the potential and opportunity of needless,
pointless violence.
If Iran started the attacks on the Kuwaiti oil ships
because the wanted to prevent any form of sustenance
to their longtime enemy Iraq (Kuwait is sympathetic
to Iraq), it has now turned into the measures of an
extremist nation. The Iranian government well under-
stands the tactic of uniting citizens against a common
enemy, an age-old trick used to keep the people’s
minds from the grievances against their own country.
The North Texas Daily
Page 2 Thursday, October 29, 1987
WELLLL.,.
I JUST THINK
IT IS TERRIBLE
WHAT PReS
$o-AnI0 So
IS doin',
Big busts not necessarily better
What’s all the fuss about big busts?
Personally, I prefer small breasts. If you marry someone
with small breasts, you can expect them to appear
reasonably the same after 20 years or so. But if you
marry someone with big breasts, you will probably wind
up looking at a caricature of the chest you married 20
years ago.
Does any body part have more nicknames than breasts
do? We’re talking hundreds here: jugs, bust, bosom,
etc. Bodacious Ta-tas was even the name of a movie, I
think.
Here’s an amazing, little known fact about breasts I
read somewhere that if all the breast implants done in
California each year were stacked on top of each other,
the pile would be higher than the Empire State Building.
That is a lot of silicone. I wonder how much of that
pile appears on our television screens each year. I’ll bet
there are enough bogus breasts on TV to rival the pile
made by the national debt in $1 bills.
The entertainment value of breasts in the United States
must be high when compared to the rest of the world.
Where else are at least 10 big budget pictures released
every summer that rely entirely on nude breasts for the
film’s success? What other reason would movies like
“Hardbodies,” “Hardbodies II,” "Porky’s” and
“Porky’s II” make millions if not because dozens of
young, nubile women bared their chests for the teens in
the audience?
I can just imagine an agent sitting in his office and
interviewing a hopeful young girl from the Midwest.
“Honey, you’ve got a great future in Hollywood,"
he says. “I’ve got the perfect picture for your talent,
but first you need to go visit a doctor friend of mine
who will make you even more talented babe, I swear.”
1 feel sorry for women with large breasts. They have
to wear those huge contraptions advertised by Jane Russell
for “full-figure girls.” Those things aren’t bras; they’re
hammocks. Who needs a space shuttle? We could fire a
satellite into orbit with the superstrength elastic in a
full-figure bra.
I can’t imagine going through life with a couple of
“D” cups strapped to my chest (though apparently
many women will pay dearly for the opportunity.) You
O Jay
Johnson
couldn’t play most sports, unless you wanted to spend
the last 40 years of your life looking like a picture out
of National Geographic magazine.
Even an everyday occurrence like having a conversation
can become an embarrassing ordeal. Imagine talking to
someone who could not take his eyes off of your chest.
Or, if he has a modicum of tact, someone who scratches
his head and looks down only every five seconds or so.
Talking to women with big breasts can be very
intimidating. They stare at your eyes, waiting for you to
make the fatal mistake of glancing down. When the
temptation finally overcomes you and you steal a glance,
they get this look on their faces that says, “1 knew you
were like all the rest of those small-minded boys.”
But flat-chested women are so neurotic about their
breasts. It’s probably because they had brothers like me
who made jokes about their underdeveloped chests.
(For you other sexists, here are a couple of my favorites:
If you had breast cancer, they would have to drill to
find it. Or ... it looks like you have anorexia of the
chest!)
Those days are past, however, and I have learned the
value of small breasts. For example, women with small
breasts will never have to worry about cleavage wrinkle.
Cleavage wrinkle is that nasty wrinkle women acquire
between their breasts from sleeping on their sides every
night.
Women with small breasts try hurder, too. They don’t
take it for granted that every male within sight is looking
at them.
Another advantage for women with small breasts is...
Well, I can’t seem to come up with more than two
reasons why small breasts are better. Maybe big ones
aren’t so bad after all.
Christmassfication phenomena begins , gets , grows bigger
Once again Halloween is upon us. I guess I
should be looking forward to this weekend but
I’m not. Don’t get me wrong I love going to
parties and having a good time on Halloween
night. It’s what follows after Halloween that
gives me the “willies.”
I’m not talking about All Saints Day, Veterans
Day or Thanksgiving. I’m talking about torture
—not just cruel torture, but inhuman torture.
Yes folks, I’m talking about the Christmas
season.
"What?” you say. “How can you equate
that joyous holiday with torture?” Well, I’ll
tell you. It starts something like this:
By the end of next week stores will begin to
put up their Christmas diplays. You see, they
have been secretly receiving them since mid-
July—paitiently waiting for the proper moment
to commence commercial assault.
SOON THE SHELVES of stores will be
filled with Christmas cards, Christmas candies,
Christmas decorations, Christmas goods on sale,
artificial Christmas trees, real Christmas trees
(sold outside), Christmas turkey. And if that’s
not enough, plenty of store clerks paid on
commission with plenty of Christmas gift ideas
, - - \ Steve
iVi Hadeler
In addtion: the crowded malls, crowded
parking lots and crowded stores all filled with
people whose minds are crowded with worry
over the number of shopping days left until
Christmas.
I guess the only people I really feel sorry
for in all this are the Santas. Those who don
the Claus attire will probably put up with more
rotten kids than "juvie hall” can hold and
get paid a lot less than the guards.
It’s no wonder liquor sales increase at this
time of year. Some sociologists say its because
alcohol is a social lubricant and people tend to
spend more time together being social at this
time of year. I think it's the only way that
some people cope with a world gone “yule-
happy.”
Once the commercial nutlets are going full
throttle, a phenomenon I call "audio-Christ-
massification” takes place on the radio. It
doesn’t matter what station you may choose to
listen to. There is nothing you can do, you
can’t escape it and there is literally no where
you can hide: the Christmas songs will find
you.
It will start small, a carol here a version of
Frosty the Snowman there, but before you know
it, every Christmas song known in the English
speaking world will be broadcast every hour
on the hour on every station on the radio.
THERE WILL BE Bruce Springsteen singing
“Santa Claus is Coming to Town,” John
Lennon singing “Merry Christmas,” and if
you’re a country music fan there are bound to
be versions of Christmas songs done by Alabama
or George Strait.
And if you don’t like rock or country there
is always a steady supply of Christmas song
renditions by Perry Como or the Mitch Miller
Singers. But then again, if you would prefer
that, you’re already too far gone.
Speaking of Perry Como that brings me to
the other dreaded phenomenon of the yuletide
season, “tele-Christmassification. If you’re
smart you’ll unplug your television and lock it
away until the second week of January.
If you don’t you’re likely to be subjected to
“Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer,” "Ru-
dolph’s Shiney New Year,” “Santa Claus is
Coming to Town,”—the video—“A Year
Without A Christmas,” “Frosty the Snow-
man,” “It’s a Wonderful Life,” various
versions of “A Christmas Carol,” and a
gross gaggle of goofball celebrity Christmas
specials. In addition, the shows that appear
year-round on the tube will have their own
sickening Christmas episode.
RUMOR HAS IT that Eugene Hasenfus was
subjected to 250 consecutive hours of television
Christmas specials when he refused to answer
questions posed by his Sandinista captors. Maybe
the Nicaraguans are a bigger threat to the free
world than previously thought?
But to get serious for a moment, Christmas
is a celebration of love, not a love of celebration
I realize it’s still a bit far off in the future, but
then again, if I waited until that time to say
this, I might not be heard even in a “Silent
Night,” (sorry bad pun).
For those who still care about things like
that, I hope the “over-commercialization” of
Christmas doesn’t interfere with your enjoyment
of the season. For the rest of you I say, have
yourself a marketed little Christmas.
The North Texas Dally
71st Year Denton, Texas
North Texas State University
Southwestern Journalism Congress
LAURA DOWLEARN, editor
RICHARD AIKEN, advertising manager
Letters from readers are welcome. They
should be concise, logical, and typed or
neatly handwritten. Letters are subject to
editing for space and libel. Letters must
be signed, and should include an address
and telephone number.
Comments about advertisements in The
Daily should be directed to the advertising
manager at 565-2851,
t
f
/
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.
Dowlearn, Laura. The North Texas Daily (Denton, Tex.), Vol. 71, No. 35, Ed. 1 Thursday, October 29, 1987, newspaper, October 29, 1987; Denton, Texas. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth560775/m1/2/: accessed July 17, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu.; crediting UNT Libraries Special Collections.