| OCR Text |
Show Page THE HERALD, Provo, Utah, 6 Sunday, February 28, 1988 Opinions The Herald, its readers, syndicated columnists and cartoonists discuss the issues. lift Herald comment Space program flying around in outer space The government's confusing decisions regarding exploration of the heavens has left the United States floating in outer space. As the estimated cost of building a manned space station keeps rising the amount of money the government is willing to spend keeps getting cut. All this in the face of a scientific community growing increasingly skeptical of the project's usefulness. This year the allotment is not much more than half of what the National Aeronautics and Space Administration had said was the minimum needed to make the pro- gram worthwhile. That's a prescription for failure, no matter who's right about the project's value. Unfortunately, the Reagan administration's newest space proannounced a few gram strategy days ago after long study and much internal fighting continues on the same unchartered course. Refusing either to fish or cut bait, the administration proposes to spend $1 billion on the space station next year again, about half what NASA had said it needed even as it acknowledges that the nation's commercial and scientific needs for the foreseeable future would be better served by a much smaller and cheaper unmanned "industrial space facility," which is now under development by a private corporation. The new administration policy calls for NASA both to proceed with the big sapce station and to encourage and partially finance the smaller private effort, even though the chances of both being adequately funded in the coming years are virtually nil. tight-budg- NASA et officials, unfortunately, have pronounced themselves satis- - ifed with this compromise. NASA Chief James C. Fletcher applauded the administration's commitment "for the first time ever" to manned exploration of the moon and Mars in the next century, despite the fact that the administration is proposing no timetable and hardly any expenditures for that purpose. It's akin to planning an exciting family trip to Europe without saving any money to get there. A showdown would have been better than this compromise, no matter what the results. NASA's scientific mission already has been sadly undermined by the need to do all the military work it unrealisti-call- y promised to handle in its last round of policy compromises. With respect to the space shuttle, too, NASA and the Reagan administration are refusing to confront reality. The new policy does not contemplate scaling back NASA's plans for getting the shuttle operating again on a grand scale, even as it calls for private industry to and NASA and other develop a government agencies to use new, more efficient unmanned launch capability. Enthralled as ever with the notion of "privatization," the administration seems to think that by getting private industry to enter the fray, it can avoid making any hard choices itself. This means NASA and the public will either be stuck with expensive white elephants, while private concerns gain control over the nation's working capability in space, or both government and private efforts in space will be starved for funds and attention. With apologies to Robert Frost, "Two roads diverged in a yellow wood," and the government took both of them. Feedback Wagman's column is not accurate Editor, Herald: In my opinion Robert Wagman's column (Feb. 17) did not support the headline "Candidate Pat Robertson tries to rewrite his personal history." The part that I want to take issue with its Wagman's interpretation of the conversation between Tom Bro-kaand Pat Robertson. I watched this on television and heard Brokaw's insinuating remarks that triggered Robertson's reply. Brokaw prefaced his comments with k inference that the Robertson had received "inspiration" at other times in his life, and wanted to know if this was one of those times. Quoting from Wagman's article, Tom Brokaw "referred to Robertson as a television evangelist, and asked him whether God advised him on political questions." According to Wagman's article, Robertson responded, "I'd like to point out to you, if you don't mind, I think it's the last time that I want to be called a television evangelist. I'm a religious broadcaster. I really believe that henceforth the religious bigotry that the question of yours implies is going to be a dead issue. I w tongue-in-chee- don't like it. I'm running as a serious candidate. The next day, in Minnesota, as reported by Wagman, another reporter asked a similar question of Rob- ertson. "How would you like to be referred to as the janitor of your station?" Robertson said. "I'm a broadcaster, I'm a commercial, professional, religious broadcaster. If you want to be accurate, call me a religious broadcaster." On television that night I saw the religious bigotry of Tom Brokaw cut to smithereens, and I applauded Rob- ertson's retort that turned Brokaw's words against him. Wake up, America. Stop listening to the quotes and misquotes and learn the facts for yourselves. Pat Robertson was right and Tom Brokaw was wrong. I do not agree with Mr. Wagman's assessment of what he saw. He did not understnd what Mr. Robertson was trying to get across. The rest of his article sounds to me like it has about as much validity as the first part. None. But it's a free country judge for yourselves. John F. Diamond (Universal Writers Inc.) Orem Having children a personal decision Editor, Herald: I am writing in response to a letter by Henry S. Brock. His point was that people who have less children than him (five) or those who delay their families are selfish. Those who have more than the average are admirable. He said people who put off having children or have small families make him sick. He puts down families with two working spouses for consuming more than those with more children. On the other hand he praised himself for producing more future workers who will support the social security system in the future. should not My response is that it with small be of interest to anyone make Mr. families whether they to nothing is There not. Rrork sirk or be ashamed of if a couple decides to limit their families to only as many as they can afford. It is a personal decision and none of anybody's business if some couple choose to have no children at all. Also, choosing to have children so as to produce future workers is not an especially loving reason to give birth. Mr. Brock seems to be very bitter about his own children and the burdens they bring. He seems jealous of those who have less children and more discretionary income. Maybe he should examine his own reasons for having children before he judges those whose life's may be different from his own. Nancy Carter Orem KIS H lfe wt&M&Wm COfYlTflERCIALIZffTOM 1 0FSMCEUA5A 0 Automobile bureaucrats really know how to drive home a point "But then they tell me that if I have any trouble taking an old manual out of my glove compartment and putting the new one in, and if the dealer can't do it for me, I should call Michigan. "And if that doesn't get my old manual out and the new one in, I should call the federal government." It does seem like a lengthy set of instructions for something even I could handle on my own. "Tell me, are those people crazy?". I told him I'd try to get his question answered, although I didn't think I should phrase it that way to General Motors. As a longtime collector of rare bureaucratic masterpieces, I would like to share a recent find. This is a fine and unusual piece of art because it combines the skills of the corporate bureaucrat with those of the federal government bureaucrat. It is a letter recently sent by the Buick division of General Motors to the owners of some of their cars. "Dear Buick Owner: "This notice is sent to you in accordance with the requirements of the National Traffic and Motor Vehi- cle Safety Act. "Reason for Recall: "General Motors has determined that some 1988 LeSabres fail to conform to Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 209 which covers seat belt assembly usage. "The owner's manual information did not include instructions on the proper usage of the rear seat safety belt systems. "What We Will Do: "To correct this omission, new Owner's Manuals will be provided for each vehicle involved. "What You Should Do: "Please place the provided new Owner's Manual in your vehicle's 'glove box' and discard the old manual or take it to your dealer for installation, at no charge to you. "Instructions for this service have been sent to your Buick dealer. The time to install the new Owner's Manual is approximately five (5) minutes. "Presentation of the provided Owner's Manual and this letter to your dealer will assist him in promptly making the necessary correction if you decide to seek the dealer's assistance. "Your Buick equipped to obtain dealer is best parts and provide service to ensure your vehicle is corrected as promptly as possible. However, if he does not remedy this condition on that date, or within five (5) days, we recommend you contact the Buick Customer Assistant De- - Mike Royko Tribune Media Services Inc. A partment, Flint Home Office ... "After contacting your dealer and the Buick Home Office, if you are still not satisfied that we have done our best to remedy this condition without charge within a reasonable time, you may wish to write the Administrator, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400 7th St., S.W., Washington, D.C. ..." A friend of mine, who owns one of the Buicks, received his letter and snowed it to me. He said: . "When it came in the mail, I sat down and read this thing three times before I realized what they were talking about. "They're telling me to take the old manual and to throw it away, right?" That's what it sounds like to me. "And they're telling me to put the new manual in the glove compart- ment." It appears so. "But they're also telling me that if I want to, I can get into my car and drive to the Buick dealer, go to the service department, and show them the letter. "Then the service department will take my old manual out of the glove compartment and put my new manual in the glove compartment." Yes, in five minutes, although I would think a skilled technician could trim a few seconds off that. for the company explained that there was spokesman grumpily about nothing foolish or the letter. "According to our legal department, there is a certain wording that has to be used for any safety-relate- d item. It is required by federal regulalong-wind- ed tions." Even when all you want to tell somebody is that, hey, here's a new owner's manual. Please put it in your glove compartment and throw the old one away. "Yes, our legal department believed we should use the proper wording." I called the federal agency in the Washington and they agreed car owners had to be told exactly what to do with the old and new manuals and given the option of having the dealer do it for them. It is the law. When I passed this information along to my friend, the Buick owner, he said: "I can't believe that Buick and the government think people are. so stupid they can't put an owner's; manual in their own glove compart- ment." ; I agreed. But just to be sure, I decided to call a Buick agency. I chose one at random and asked an employee of the service department" if anyone had come in to have their ; manuals serviced. : He said: "Only two." On the scent to solving this mystery First off, let me assure you I am not a stranger to odors. I have grown up with children, for crying out loud, who wore gym shoes that could wilt an artificial ficus tree. That is why when I opened the refrigerator door last week and the smell sent me staggering to a vent over the stove to suck in fresh air, I didn't panic. I'm a professional and r the first thing a professional does is to identify the odor. My first guess was that someone had interfered with the ripening cycle of my leftovers. In keeping with my policy to bury no garbage before its time, I shuffle the leftovers around from shelf to shelf each day and when they land on the bottom shelf behind the jar of apple butter which has not been opened in three years, it is time to prepare them for burial. home-make- Erm a Bombeck Q-t- ip I whipped open the door again, held my breath and checked. That was not the case. Next, I moved on to the garden variety of nostril-basher- s: unwrapped feta cheese, sour milk, aging broccochicken or hamburgli, over-thawe- d er, and unsealed sauerkraut. "Put crumDled neWSD3nPr fin oirorr shelf." I did that too. It smelled. and go around every "Take a crevice with vinegar and don't forget to remove the drain pan and clean it." I did all of that. I still passed I checked. They were all intact. I got out the book of hints and read the following: "Place a bowl of dried coffee grounds on the shelf. I did that. It smelled. ' Make a paste of and spread it baking soda and water the of inside refrigeraall over the tor." I did that. It smelled. "Take wash cloth and wrap vanilla beans in it or saturate it with extract" I did that. It still smelled. out. Yesterday, I eased open the door" , and the smell was gone. I had my husband walked into the kitchen, opened the refrigerator door and closed it quickly. "Good Lord ' won!-Later- what's that smell?" "What does it smell like?" I asked. "Like coffee grounds, vinegar, vanilla and old newspapers." I handed him the book and said' "I'm down to No. 8. What's the w.x ' suggestion?" "Sell the refrigerator," lie road. That's ridiculous. We'll just wear ski masks until all of this blows over. " |
