Page 3 article text (OCR)
'I Told you to Put It in Reverse!" Saturday, July 6, 1974 Partisan Taint The rising taint of partisanship in the impeachment process is a matter of deep concern to all good citizens, whatever their party affiliation. Unless the partisan sniping and side-choosing can be restrained, this "grand inquest of the nation" may turn out to be a farce which thwarts the public desire for a clean-cut resolution of the issue. That issue is whether President Nixon's conduct in office warrants his being tried in the Senate on charges that he has committed "treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors." This is what the Judiciary Committee's impeachment inquiry, and the forthcoming debate in the House of Representatives, are all about. It is not a partisan matter, however much some may strive to cast it in that mold. Such striving is afoot. Along with it there is some more innocent but nonetheless damaging failure to hew to the bipartisan line. Administration spokesmen have portrayed the committee's investigation as an attempt to "get" the President, and have sought to discredit its findings in advance. This has been going on for some time. In the very recent past Dean Burch, a presidential adviser, said one committee action as to witnesses put him in mind of a lynch mob and Ken W. Clawson, White House director of communications, characterized the inquiry as a "witch hunt." Meanwhile, some committee members have indulged in indiscretions bordering on irresponsibility; some have made their partisan bias plain. And after weeks during which a bipartisan aura prevailed, the committee has begun voting very close to party lines. There has been rancorous debate on-the House floor, touched off by the story that Chairman Peter W. Rodino Jr. has said he thought all 21 of the committee Democrats would vote for impeachment. All this endangers the fairness and impartiality of the proceedings. Moreover, pressures for determination of the issue along partisan lines seem bound to increase. That is deplorable. The constitutional machinery is meant to bring judgment to bear on a president's conduct without regard to which party brought him into office. We believe that the American people will be very much disturbed, and rightly, if Congress allows the impeachment process to degenerate into a partisan cat and dog fight. Health Thyroid Problems Advice Mother Sets Double Standard By Abigail Van Buren DEAR ABBY. I'm a 19-year-old girl who is getting more and more confused about the word "morality." Who decides what is morally right? My parents? Society? The law? Or should I make the decision myself ? My parents are divorced and I live with my mother. She keeps company with a nice enough man, but they go away together for weekends, and I'm sure they do more than hold hands. I don't know why they don't get married. Meanwhile, my mother doesn't want me to stay out too late with my boyfriend. He's in law school, and we can't afford to get married until he graduates. He doesn't see anything wrong in premarital sex. but it iust doesn't seem right to me. I've been able to hold out so far, but why should I? The pill is Religion available, so there is no danger of my getting pregnant. Besides, we love each other, so what's wrong with making love? I'm sure my mom thinks it's okay for her to do what she does, but she'd have a fit if I did it. How come the difference in standards? PUZZLED DEAR PUZZLED: Your mother (like most mothers) regards you as her responsibility, not as a mature young woman who can accept the responsibility for her own actions. If you feel sufficiently mature and competent to set your own standards for your own reasons, do it. Who decides what is "morally ''right"? 'With the help of your learning, examples, experience and conscience Embassy Sales Many Are Shiners President Nixon did not invent the ambassadorial quid pro quo. Nor did any of his recent predecessors. The relationship between ambassadorships and political contributions has been in evidence for a long, long time. The connection does seem to be rather more in evidence lately than in most times past. This impression is reinforced by a Senate Watergate committee report noting that more than $1.8 million came into Nixon re-election coffers from ambassadors. It adds that "six large contributors, who contributed an aggregate of over $3 million, appear to have been actively seeking appointments at the time of their contributions." The report also takes note of the fact that President Nixon, like some other presidents, has publicly rejected the idea of linking appointments to campaign gifts. The President is quoted as having said on Feb. 25, 1973 that he would not appoint anyone not well qualified "apart from his contribution." But, the report adds, "Exactly one year later, his personal attorney and one of his principal fund raisers, Herbert Kalmbach, became the first person in recent times to be convicted for 'selling an ambassadorship.'" Our point is that a bad situation exists, and has to some extent existed also in previous administrations. It is not enough to deplore this state of affairs. Thought should be given to its causes, and to means of curbing the ambassador-contributor relationship. The light of publicity helps, but that does not suffice. Attention also must be paid to two relevant factors. One is the common practice of passing over skilled career diplomats in favor of businessmen and the like who may have little or no diplomatic experience. Another is a fact of life about ambassadorships: in general they require a substantial outlay of personal funds for entertainment, since the government does not make sufficient provision for this. Th'e remedies are implicit in these circumstances. Career diplomats should be sent as our ambassadors except in rare instances. Embassy funds should be beefed up so that one need not be a rich man to meet the entertainment costs of an ambassadorship. These steps would do much to solve the problem. By David Poling For nearly a decade philosophers and theologians have been discussing the problems of evil, guilt and forgiveness. It has usually been done in a classroom setting, and in academic tones that drained the power and hurt and certainly permitted disconnection from individual responsibility. That day is over. And the leader of the recovery of the meaning of sin is Dr. Karl Menninger of Topeka, Kan. Aiming at the Christian community, its pastors, people and pulpits, Dr. Karl puts the issue right on the front row: "I believe there is 'sin' which is expressed in ways which cannot be subsumed under verbal artifacts such as 'crime', 'disease', 'delinquency', 'deviancy'. There IS immorality; there IS unethical behavior; there IS wrongdoing. And I hope to show that there is usefulness in retaining the concept, and indeed the word, SIN, which now shows some signs of returning to public acceptance. I would like to help this trend along.'' His latest work, "Whatever Became of Sin?" (Hawthorne, $7.95) is being studied and quoted and read all over the map. Dr. Karl has always taught that mental health and moral health are identical. His counsel has not only Daily Times Herald 508 North Court Street Carroll, Iowa Daily Except Sundays and Holidays other than Washington's Birthday and Veteran's Day, by the Herald Publishing Company. JAMES W, WILSON, Publisher HOWARD B.WILSON, Editor W. L. REITZ, News Editor JAMES B.WILSON, Vice President, General Manager Entered as second-class matter at the post-office at Carroll, Iowa, under the act of March 2,1897. Member of the Associated Press The Associated Press is entitled exclusively to the use for republication of all the local news printed in. this .newspaper as well as all AP dispatches. Official Paper of County and City Subscription Rates By carrier boy delivery per week $ .60 BY MAIL Carroll County and All Adjoining Counties, where carrier service is not available, per year $20.00 Outside of Carroll and Adjoining Counties in Zones 1 and 2 per year *".00 All Other Mail in the United States, per year' *27.00 shaped the thinking of physicians and the clergy, but that of jurists and law-enforcement personnel as well. His book, "The Crime of Punishment," is basic to prison reform in this century. But getting back to sin: "How often," writes churchgoing Dr. Karl. "Does a modern sermon deal with sin? Sin in general or sin in particular? Has the reader ever heard a sermon, for example, in which cigarette smoking or wildlife destruction or political lying or business dishonesty were dealt with as sins?" Dr. Karl argues that "the church is indeed a place to come for the assurance of forgiveness; but there is a step before that. — and with an eye for consequences — YOU decide. And God bless. DEAR ABBY: I am 55, and recently remarried. She's a terrific woman who is close to my age. My problem is that some of my tactless friends keep reminding my wife that my ex-wife was pencil slim and dressed like a fashion plate. Now my present wife is determined to diet down to skin and bones. I think this is ridiculous. I don't want another skinny woman whose main concern in life is dressing to the nines and keeping her weight down, and who, quite frankly, looked like a prune in the raw. How can I convince mywife that I like the well-padded, : soft cuddly woman she was when I married her? PREFERS A PEACH DEAR PREFERS: Doesn't your wife know all this? If not — tell her. If you do, and she continues to pay more attention to your tactless friends than she does to you, you have bigger problems than you think. DEAR ABBY: After 50 years of marriage, I lost my mate. Although we never were blessed with children, we had many nieces and nephews who always addressed us as "Uncle Herman and Aunt Minnie." I recently married a lovely woman who had been a friend of the family's for many years. (She lost her mate, too.) Now I find that my nieces and nephews address us as "Uncle Herman and Bertha." I don't mind being called "Hey you," but I think it's disrespectful of them to address my wife as "Bertha." What do you think?" SAME OLD UNCLE HERMAN DEAR UNC: I think you should tell your nieces and nephews that you'll gladly answer to "a monkey's uncle," but you'd appreicate it if they would call your wife "Aunt Bertha." BERRY'S WORLD © 1974 by NEA, Inc. "Gentlemen, why aren't WE making obscene profits like the oil companies?" By Lawrence E. Lamb, M.D DEAR DR. LAMB — I have a problem with low thyroid and hope you can answer a few of my questions. Is a low thyroid the same as a thyroid desease? I have taken one Synthroid 0.1 mg. tablet daily for more than three years. The doctor took me off the medication for eight weeks more than a year ago. By the end of this time my arms hurt a lot and I was gaining weight which disappeared as soon as I was put back on medication. What causes this weight gain? Will a thyroid deficiency turn into heart trouble if one has it for a long time, or what problems can it cause as one grows older? Right now my thyroid is about normal, yet I am very short of energy and cannot hurry when I do anything. A medical exam came up with nothing else wrong. Is this normal for a person with thyroid trouble, or should I have more examinations? DEAR READER - Anything that represents an impairment of the normal function of the body or any part of the body is a disease. Low thyroid (technically called hypothyroid) disease is classified as a metabolic disease. It is correctly diagnosed whenever your thyroid gland is not producing enough thyroid hormone. There are a lot of people on thyroid medicines who don't need them. When you give a normal person thyroid medicine his own gland quits producing so much hormone, so the total available will end up being about right. This is great because it means that a lot of people won't be poisoned with too much thyroid. But, when you" take a normal person off thyroid it may take some time for the normal thyroid to resume its full function. Meanwhile the person has symptoms of a low thyroid. Viewpoint I don't know whether that is true in your case or not. You can't tell without seeing all the various tests, and even then it is sometimes impossible without waiting to find out how the gland will function. That is probably why your doctor had you off for a full eight weeks. Weight gain from low thyroid is a direct result of eating more calories than your body uses. The problem, though, is the body just isn't using a normal amount of calories. All the energy system is slowed down. Theoretically you could avoid weight gain by not eating so many calories, but it would be a real effort and would not correct the basic problem. So, it is better to correct the low thyroid problem and eat normally. Because people with low thyroid conditions tend to have high levels of fatty-cholesterol particles, they also tend to develop deposits in the arteries and heart disease. This will not happen, though, if you simply replace the thyroid you need with medicine. Even when the thyroid function is very low, a person may not show the heart trouble, because they use so little energy that the heart doesn't have to work very much and doesn't have any trouble meeting the body's needs. There are many causes of fatigue. Low thyroid is only one and is seldom the real cause. Most fatigue problems are related to life situations. But, you have to be sure there isn't something else, such as anemia. I would guess that your doctor's examination of your thyroid function has been adequate to find anything serious that needs correction other than a review of your life situations that may be causing this response. Be the First One . . . Bv Tom Tiede WASHINGTON — (NEA) — They are calling the President Johnny Atomseed now. And while he plants the globe with nuclear reactors, there is talk the human race may reap disaster. Besides the obvious worry that an Egypt or an Israel might, as India, turn the sprouts of peaceful pursuit into the foliage of war, there is perhaps an even greater risk: as atomic materials spread in the world, so do the chances of their diversion. It is not science fiction to imagine someone soon, someone such as the Palestine guerrillas, stealing the fuels with which to make their own terrible big bomb. There still may be some who doubt the possibility of the backyard A-bomb. Dr. Theodore Taylor, perhaps the, nation's most eminent designer of fission booms, says he occasionally talks with sophisticated physicists who "cling to the notion that a nuclear explosive has to be the product of massive and expensive technology." Yet Taylor says he alone could make a bomb in a basement in two weeks. He knows of schoolchildren who have on paper at least drawn crude but workable facsimiles, and he insists that anyone in any nation, given the fuels and ordinary expertise, could build a one-shot or even start an arsenal. Taylor's opinion, once dismissed as nonsense, is almost a matter of fact today. At least in the United States. He has warned so long and effectively about the gambles of insecure nuclear fuels that the Atomic Energy Commission has been forced to redesign its methods of fuel accountability, storage and — particularly — transportation. Where once commercial plutonium and (highly enriched) uranium was delivered across the nation, in much the same way as household furniture (in common, unguarded carriers), now the thinking is to transport in impenetrable trucks which can be disabled by remote control in case of hijack. The fuel safeguards in America are by no means invulnerable as yet, but Taylor says there is a positive effort of improvement underway. No such optimism, however, can be applied to the international scene. The United States has some 30 agreements with 29 nations concerning atomic exchange and the AEC says there are safeguard strings attached to each contract; in fact, the agreements center largely around accountability of fuels (how much is used and for what) and not physical security. Dr. Taylor says most countries with nuclear reactors have their own ideas on how to protect them and the United States can do very little but suggest. The implications here are a bit atomic in themselves. Taylor estimates it would take only 5 to 10 kilograms of proper fuel to make a crude fission bomb. This much is routinely being shipped in single carriers dozens of times a year in America, and today, every often in the world. If the stuff is not hijacked, or bagged by dishonest handlers, it does not take much imagination to figure out an alternative method of diversion. "Suppose," says Dr. Taylor, "someone captures 100 schoolchildren and then demands 10 kilograms of fuel as ransom," This could be done now in America or France, In the short future, it could be done in places like Egypt or Pakistan. Countries as obscure as Zaire are currently operating and adding to nuclear power plants. As of now in America, the AEC says there has been "no illegal diversion nor any suspicion of illegal diversion" of atomic fuels. The same guarantee does not necessarily hold for other nations. Even today, authorities agree, it is possible that unofficial foreigners are working on internationally pilfered goods. Next week, in other words, some plane hijack may really make headlines. Taylor is only one who views the "peaceful" proliferation of nuclear knowhow as ominous. A growing number of worriers agree with him that unless stringent safeguards are written into all U.S.-foreign nation nuclear contracts, and unless international atomic security is soon redoubled, "I would be opposed to any further nuclear development, for peaceful or any other purpose." Extra Punishment It is difficult to understand the reasoning behind a recent decision by the U.S. Supreme Court upholding a California law that bars felons who have completed their sentences from voting in state and local elections. If the purpose of the penal system is not merely to punish but to rehabilitate lawbreakers and return them to society as useful citizens, denying them one of the most basic rights of citizenship even after they have served their time would seem to defeat that purpose. This is not rehabilitation but a continuation of punishment. We hear much about the dehumanizing aspects of prison life. But the overwhelming majority of inmates in the nation's penal institutions will not be there permanently. There is a constant turnover as men are parolled and others take their places. Unfortunately, many of those entering prison have been there before, and will be there again. This suggests that there is something wrong not only with our prisons but with our postprison treatment of those who have supposedly "paid their debt" to society. In any event, it is hard to see how society would be injured by permitting an ex-convict to cast a ballot for local dogcatcher or mayor or even the judge who sent him up in the first place and, according to the odds, may send him up again.