Cedar Rapids Gazette, July 8, 1974, Page 6

Publication: Cedar Rapids Gazette July 8, 1974

Cedar Rapids Gazette (Newspaper) - July 8, 1974, Cedar Rapids, Iowa (th? Caitif l\npi(U Editorial Page ‘We’re getting 40 winks to the gallon Monday, July 8, 1974 DST reducible TRUE TO predictions, last winter’s fuel-saving venture into Daylight Saving time produced a very small fuel saving that cannot be accurately gauged, according to commendably candid word last month from the U.S. transportation department. The upshot was a recommendation that instead of running for the full two years ordained from its inception last January, Daylight time be trimmed down to an eight-month run omitting winter’s darkest period. That makes more sense, in terms of value from the effort, than an all-year run involving times of heavy inconvenience for most people. The DOT study indicated an imprecise and unmeasurable energy saving of under I percent from last winter’s experience with DST. It also found that Daylight time had no significant effect on traffic safety, crime, agriculture, labor or recreation. Again, no great surprise. The enterprise was largely psychological, cosmetic and symbolic all the way. Recent pressure to get rid of it completely and go back to summer-only normal DST has come from some who felt the darkness-danger to school children in winter overrode all other considerations in the system. Despite reports of some fatalities in Florida early in the going, nationwide figures do not bear out that hazard in the size foreseen: In fact, a traffic-ac-cident fatality decline among pedestrians and school-age kids reportedly turned up this year against the record shown in 1973 without DST. The cause-effect relationship remains obscure. The transportation department’s cutback suggestion calls for Daylight time to run from October’s last Sunday to the last one in February. Mid-November to mid-February on Standard time would make about the same sense, still getting a degree of benefit without the strongest advantages. But as a compromise between complete removal of DST’s energy-saving extension and complete retention of its year-round unproductiveness, the eight-month answer is supportable. Congress should arrange a suitable adjustment before the dark-day seasons strike again. Visibility at safety’s ? Motorists who often travel Iowa’s interstate highway system probably have noticed a change in the color of paint used to edge the left side of the roadway next to the median strip. White, the traditional edging color, is giving away to reflec-torized yellow on the left side only. White is still the color being used to edge the right side of the road. As a good many motorists have had to learn unhappily, the worst time for a first exposure to the new yellow color is during a downpour that makes it almost impossible to see. A check with the state highway commission brings word that the left-edge yellow line is in keeping with national interstate standards that have been adopted by the federal highway administration (FUA). Reason: Yellow is the caution color. A broken yellow line in the center of a two-way highway means “be careful’’ and a solid yellow center line means “no passing zone.’’ A white edge line on the right means “safety’’ so long as you stay near and on the left of it. Highway commission officials do not argue for a minute that yellow is easier than white to see and to follow at night or during heavy rain or in the fog. But, they say, there is a tendency to think of oneself as being safe with white, even if the line is on the left edge of the interstate, in close proximity to the median strip — which can be deceiving under adverse weather conditions. Hence the change in color to left edge yellow, they say, on grounds a little visibility is sacrificed for a great deal more safety. They have the tests to prove what they’re espousing. How can anyone refute them — other than to say it’s an eerie feeling when one can’t see the yellow edge in bad weather? This could be due, of course, to the fact that reflectorized beads in the yellow paint wear out or get scraped off by snow plows or autos with studded snow tires. When that happens in the wintertime it is impossible to refresh the reflectorization with a new paint job; paint must be applied only in favorable weather. Commission officials say every effort is being made to make reflectorized yellow paint more durable and to keep it more visible. Let’s hope that effort is successful, lest over the long haul white-edge-line safety turns out to have been sacrificed along with white-edge-line visibility in the process of standardization. Nontronsferoble cool Lost in translation? By Jim Fiebig TUERK IS an old Mexican saying that, when many people are confronted bv a common danger, the fear is less because it dissipates among the group. (This is also known as “the consolation of dummies”) While it is a fine old saying, it does not apply as accurately to nervous Americans as it does to the easygoing Mexicans. I offer a recent incident aboard a commercial flight from Hermosillo, Mexico, to Tucson, Ari/ About five minutes after takeoff, the engines changed tune, the plane entered a shallow dive and we made a 180-degree turn I know little of navigation, but I do know that turning ISO degrees sends one back to his starting point. Sure enough The stewardess came on the horn to announce in Spanish that we were returning to the airport “because of the weather.” The Mexican passengers nodded in understanding and calmly went back to their newspapers. I. the American, looked suspiciously out the window and correctly decided the weather was perfect. Sure enough. The pilot came on the horn next. “Attention,” he said. “For your information, we are returning to Hermosillo because of technical problems.” I knew it! The stewardess had invented the weather story to protect us from the horrible truth. One of the wings was falling off. There was a time bomb on board. We were on fire. Dear God, I was going to die in a foreign language! I, the dying American, looked to the Mexican passengers for confirmation of my fear. Sure enough. They were still reading their newspapers. Three minutes later, after a rough landing arid a long roll down the runway, the pilot came on again and confessed that we had lost one of our two engines in flight. The Mexican passengers nodded in understanding and nonchalantly filed into the terminal to await repairs Almost, it suddenly occurred to me, as if they had been through all this before. Unless one is a Mexican, old Mexican sayings are of little consolation in a crisis. Generol Features Corporation Jim Fiebig Esteem in U.N. up, but not confidence t r / ~t 1 f" 7 % \ \ \ By Louis Harris The Harris Survey THE AMERICAN people regard the United Nations as a “worthwhile” organization, but they feel it still has some way to go before it w ill prove itself a really effective force for world peace. A substantial 76 percent of the public agree with the characterization that the U N. is “worthwhile,” but the world organization receives negative marks, 47-46 percent, on “working for peace.” Recently, the Harris Survey conducted a comprehensive survey of public opinion on the United Nations, and found that backing for the U.N. has risen from its low point in 1970, when a majority, 56 percent, gave it a negative job rating. In a number of areas, the U N. is viewed as being a positive force by the American public: • By 73-14 percent, Americans agree that the U N. “provides a forum for open, honest discussion between nations.” The concept of bringing countries together to talk out differences is widely felt to be a healthy process. • By 65-17 percent, they also feel that the U.N. is “helping the poor countries develop their economies.” Such aid to underdeveloped nations on the part of the U N. has always been popular with the American people. • By 64-22 percent, they credit the History ’s vivid precedent Censure: ‘Elegant alternative’ By William F. Buckley, jr. CONGRESSMAN John Rhodes of Arizona is quoted as saying that the censure of President Nixon would be the “worst of two worlds,” and liberal Democrats are echoing that sentiment with such fervor as to betray the fact that it has become a real political possibility. I confess that I am surprised by Mr. Rhodes’ position. But then he is. after all, the Republican floor leader in the house of representatives. Perhaps, as such, he is taking the position that there shall be nothing on the record critical of President Nixon, thus performing the function of the coach, who, at half time, declaims to his team that the fact they are behind 26-0 has no bearing on their prospective victory. Mr. Rhodes should be saying more interesting things than that; and perhaps he is, privately. Because, as I say, the bitter-enders who wake up in the morning and dream of meeting Richard Nixon at Appomattox, are having nothing of it. Mr. Tom Wicker is so exercised at the thought of merely censuring Nixon that he is driven to historical solecisms. “For Mr. Nixon,” — Mr. Wicker writes — “censure might be acceptable if he wanted nothing more than bo cling to office — as sometimes seems to be his goal, but it could hardly be a satisfactory outcome for a man who has steadfastly protested his innocence of wrongdoing, and whose penchant for ‘firsts’ could hardly include ‘first President’ to be censured.” It is more accurately said that Mr. Wicker is apparently the last public commentator in America to discover that another American President was indeed censured. It was Andrew Jackson, in 1834, and on the assumption that there might be a few W ickers around, I devoted two columns to the subject a year ago. People’s forumMoral path To the Editor: Having read Joann Briggman’s defense (Forum, July 2) of our President s actions by compiaring him with former Presidents, I ani reminded of my childhood I well remember when my dad either caught me in the act or would hear of a wrongdoing, he always got “to the seat of the problem.” While on the w;iy to what he considered just punishment. I. acting as my own defense lawyer, would plead, “But. Daddy, the other kids do it ” I always received the same reply: “I don’t care what the other kid1- do You are not going to because it is wrong ” I never understood what a wine man he was until I raised my children I heard their excuses and repeated the same words I had heard from my dad. Hopefully, they will Im* repeat!*d to my grandchildren I sincerely wish our President could have been raised by him Twx> wrongs don't make a right, arid to imply that asking complete honesty from our President should In* refused because of past Presidents’ actions seems incredible At that time, there was much fulmination against Richard Nixon not only on account of Watergate, but on account of the bombing of Cambodia, which the senate was about to forbid him to do. For a while, Mr. Nixon took the position that he had the inherent power to bomb Cambodia But the constitutional question became lost in the shadows of the testimony of John Dean. Andrew Jackson was censured on March 28, 1834, by a vote of 26 to 20, on a motion of Henry Clay. Clay was saying about And- ?w Jackson exactly the same kind of thing Wicker et a1 are saying about Richard Nixon, and by the way they are (in the opinion of this conservative) both correct. Clay, reacting furiously against Jackson’s (a) withdrawing of United States government money from the Bank of the United States, and (b) firing the secretary of the treasury who declined to follow his instructions, uttered the following words: “The eyes and the hopes Insights In a free country there is much clamor with little suffering; in a despotic state there is little complaint but much suffering. Lazare Carnot All I can say now is: Thanks, Dad. I wish there were more like you in our world today. Some may say you were old-fashioned Perhaps you are and were, but we four girls know right from wrong. Mrs. Earl Moore Route 3. Cedar RapidsBystanding To the Editor: I have stood aside and watched while the once greatest, most civilized and most humane nation in history was being converted into a jungle. I have stood aside while the greatest goodwill the world has ever seen, between multiple ethnic groups within one nation, was being deliberately changed int!) suspicion, dissension and hatred. I have stood aside while this “land of the free” and “home of the brave” was being conditioned by traitors to seek peace at any price — even at the price of independence and freedom I have stood aside while our courts encouraged and our press glorified the beasts of crime who have spread riots, vandalism, robbery and murder across our land I have stood aside while our colleges have been taken over by misguided youth with no slightest understanding of the civilization they have inherited or the evil forces by which they have been duped. of the American people are anxiously turned to congress. They feel that they have been deceived and insulted; their confidence abused; their interests betrayed; and their liberties in danger. They see a rapid and alarming concentration of all power in one man s hands. They see that, by the exercise of the positive authority of the executive, and his negative power exerted over congress, the will of one man alone prevails and governs the Republic.” Now Nixon's insistence, as of his famous broadcast of April 30. 1973, wherein he asserted his total innocence, must be examined in the light of what then happened — and Mr. Wicker knows this. Obviously Mr. Nixon did not sufficiently supervise the activities of his subordinates. And Andrew Jackson*, replying to Henry Clay, vindicated Jackson’s firing of the secretary of the treasury in words that superbly frame the existing impasse. ”... it was for the sole purpose of causing all executive officers, from the highest to the lowest, faithfully to perform the services required of them by law that the people of the United States have made (the President) their chief magistrate and the Constitution has clothed him with the entire executive power of the government.” In other words, not only is there a precedent for censuring a President. The facts surrounding that censure are dramatically relevant. True, three years later, the senate voted to expunge the vote of censure; but that is neither here nor there. We do not know what history will be saying about Mr. Nixon three years from now , let alone 103 years from now But censure remains, right now, the elegant alternative to impeachment. Washington Star Syndicate I have stood aside while meretricious scoundrels, using TV, movies, newsstands and all other means, have contrived to bring about a breakdown of morality that is reducing millions of Americans to the level of lower animals. I have stood aside while the three basic human loyalties to God, to country and to family were being destroyed by evil forces which now permeate every segment of American life. I personally believe we are at the point so beautifully described in the apostle Paul’s epistle to the Romans 13 , verse 12: “The night is far spent, the day is at hand; let us therefore cast off the works of darkness and let us put on the armor of light.’’ James Lowell said: “Once to every man and nation comes the moment to decide in the strife of truth with falsehood for the good or evil side.” The communists, not we, have forced upon this world a situation where truly “he who is not with me is against nit," for the sins of omission by ourselves help the enemy as well as do sins of commission. I ani convinced we will accept the responsibility in time. We must decide (or it will surely bt* decided without us and against us) which we wish our children and their children to worship — thi* god of hate (Satan) or the God of love — Jesus Christ, through all the days to in*. Have you joined the John Birch Society? Bill Wright 2985 Fourth avenue, Marion world body with taking “positive steps to keep peace in the Middle East and elsewhere.” Although highly controversial. the U N. has served as a mediating and, at times, occupying force in Middle East peace making: measures. • The proposition that “today’s problems require international action that only the U N. or other international agencies can take” is agreed to by a lopsided 63-18 percent. Clearly, the public would like tit see such international efforts strengt hened, rather than weakened. • However, faith in* the U N. has not grown to the point where any more than a slim 34-33 percent plurality is prepared to say that “the U N. someday will be the primary reason that ‘s words’ get turned into ‘plowshares.’ ” The criticisms leveled at the U N. are also substantial: • By 56-29 percent, a majority of Americans feels that “.the U N. is too much talk and too little action. ” The long debates which have produced neither definitive nor effective action have succeeded in downgrading the U N ’s reputation. • The view that “the U N. wastes too much U.S. money” is also believed by 54-26 percent. Partly this; impression stems from the widely held notion that this country pays a disproportionate share of the U N ’s operating expenses. When it was pointed out to th e cross-section that the U.S. share has dr opped from 33 to 25 percent, a majority (52-32 percent) said they thought this was a fair amount for the U.S. to pay. • By 43-33 percent, Americans feel that the U N. “generally passes ineffective resolutions.” Undoubtedly, the people have in mind a number of resolutions passed by the U N., which condemned or advocated action, but seemingly did not have any force or effective follow-up. • Two criticisms about the U.N. are essentially rejected by the American people. First, by 39-18 percent (wrth a high 43 percent undecided), they dei not accept the charge that “the U N. is pro-Arab and anti-Israel,” a charge stemming from claims by Israel that the U.N. has been unfair to that nation. • By 57-20 percent, they do not go along with the charge that “the U.N. generally works against the interests of the Failed States.” This claim has been made by people who have opposed U.S. involvement in the U N. from the start. Finally, the public was asked whether it wanted to see more or less of five specific U N. activities: * I om going to read off to you a list of activities of the United Nations. For each activity, tell me if you personally would like to see the U N. do mere in that area, do less, or do about the same as iCs doing now. (Read list)" Solving the world food supply problem Setting up peace-keeping forces Solving world s energy problem Helping clean up air and water pollution in the world Providing aid to developing countries About Not More Less same »jre 71    7    16    6 68    5    21    6 68    7    17    8 67    7    19    7 54 15 22    9 It is evident from these results that the American people would like to vest more authority and responsibility in the United Nations. Yet most feel the U N. must learn to do its current job better, especially in keeping peace. The cross-section of 1,503 households was asked: How would you rate the (ob the United Nations is doing in working for peoce in the world — excellent, pretty good, only fair, or poor? * 1974 1970 Good excellent (positive) Only fair poor (negative) Not sure 46    35 47    56 7    9 Although improving its 1971) rating, th* United Nations has not yet turned th' corner in terms of ultimate public con fidence. In an era of disenchantment w it I political institutions generally, however the U N. showing is comparatively good Chicago Tribune New York News SyndicateI sn t it the truth? By Carl Riblet, lr There are countless occasions in a woman’s life when she is superior to the male. Here are three of them: when she first refuses to kiss a boy, when she first consents to kiss a man and when she insists that her husband shave before she will kiss him again. “So she caught him, and kissed him." — Proverbs, VII, I 3 InterOctan Pre« Syndicate Louis Harris ;

  • Andrew Jackson
  • Bill Wright
  • Carl Riblet
  • Earl Moore
  • Henry Clay
  • James Lowell
  • Joann Briggman
  • John Rhodes
  • Louis Harris
  • Richard Nixon
  • Tom Wicker
  • William F. Buckley

Share Page

Publication: Cedar Rapids Gazette

Location: Cedar Rapids, Iowa

Issue Date: July 8, 1974

RealCheck