Click THE SANDBOX number to go to that issue. Use your browser's back button to return here. THE SANDBOX Archive ~ 1998 OCT, 1998 ~ #1, #2, #3, #4 NOV, 1998 ~ #5, #6, #7, #8, #9, #10 DEC, 1998 ~ #11, #12, #13, #14, #15, #16, #17, #18 ******************************************** ******************************************** The SANDBOX - Petty Gripes and Cat Fights - Issue #One 10/12/98 Where The Never-Ending Richland Bomber Spirit Expresses Itself! The SANDBOX TABLE OF INGREDIENTS: PART 1: The SANDBOX Beckons YOU! (Welcome to THE SANDBOX - The Why, the What and the Who For.) PART 2: Eager Anticipation Expressed (Or Not). (Bombers' Comments prior to the Inaugural Appearance SANDBOX #1) PART 3: SHORT DIALOGUES AND FEATURED SANDBOX ORATORS PART 4: SO WHAT DO YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT? ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ PART 1: the SANDBOX Beckons YOU (Welcome to THE SANDBOX - The Why, the What and the Who For.) To introduce you to This, The Very First Edition of the SANDBOX, let's hear how The SANDBOX Idea originated and why it was proposed. Our first speaker today is Bomber Bob Mattson (64), Rmat683939@aol.com. (Applause.) Go ahead Bob. "Mr. Sandbox, I want to express my gratitude to you who carry the standard for the freespeech and sucker punches alumni who are waiting in the wings. My thoughts in offering this format was to ease any hardship or harassment of our friends, Maren and Gary, for keeping the Sandstorm as a walk down memory lane, or was that George Washington way? Maren found that some of my rambling IM's had some insights to the focus problem of a censorship of input from 800+ readers of the sandstorm. So, the Sandbox." "Were we blind sided by science? Can we find honor and peace in the wearing of civilian clothes and our parents did? What about that study giving clams Prozac to insure their happiness? The trap has been set, sit back and wait." "Al, I have been a shop steward for the teamsters for 16 years and I know how it feels to be put in the middle of things, and not have the resources to accommodate everyone's wants and desires, so everyone's off the hook but you, friend. So, with that out of the way, why did they think it necessary to drop the second A bomb so soon after the first one? Is that where the ol' one-two punch originated?" ---Bob ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~@~@~@~@~@~@~@~@~@~@~@~@~@~@~@~@~@~@~@~@~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ PART 2: Eager Anticipation Expressed (Or Not). Bomber comments prior to the Inaugural Appearance of SANDBOX #1 From: Don Ehinger, Class of 54 & 55 email@example.com (Donald M Ehinger) Al, I think your Sandbox idea is a great one and look forward to some healthy and lively discussion of some of the controversial current events. I kind of prefer the Bill Maher/Politically Incorrect approach. It helps keep things in perspective and not too personal. I appreciate that this is going to require some time on your part, and would like to thankyou for taking the initiative and sharing your time. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From: Norma (Loescher) Boswell firstname.lastname@example.org You have surely whetted the interest of certain Bombers! I will await the first SANDBOX eagerly. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From: John Northover ('59) mailto:email@example.com Al, Thanks for taking on a rather large task. I would like to be on the list just to watch the sand and fur fly ... maybe we will have a 'CATFIGHT'!!! ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Patty de la Bretonne, (‘65), BrassEar@aol.com wrote: I take issue with the idea that the sandbox is "petty gripes and catfights." I do not feel that concerns for health and welfare, emotional and physical are petty. Some people responded in what might be perceived as petty ways, but any of my personal concerns raised regarding such issues as censorship were raised in a very serious and concerned manner. Do not assume people bring up what could be termed "political issues" just for the sake of a good argument, or catfight'! I am concerned with justice, and equal rights and free speech under the law. These are not issues I raise or respond to lightly, as I really usually do everything I can to avoid conflict--I don't do it well. But in some cases I feel I must speak up. Thank you. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Richard Anderson, firstname.lastname@example.org wrote: I NEED on this list! Have any issues gone out yet? If so resend to me if possible. Golly! This seems a bit imperious; how about "pretty, PRETTY!, please"? Ciao! Rick ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ John Bradley (65), email@example.com wrote: DO NOT NEED TO HEAR ABOUT POLITICAL PROBLEMS HERE, HAVE ENOUGH OF THEM IN THE DAILY LIFE IN THE DC AREA. THANKS FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO EXPRESS. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ firstname.lastname@example.org (Councilmember Barbara Williamson) says: Yaaaaah for the "SandBox"......!! ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~@~@~@~@~@~@~@~@~@~@~@~@~@~@~@~@~@~@~@~@~@ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ PART 3: SHORT DIALOGUES AND FEATURED SANDBOX ORATORS On 10/8/98 11:06:17 AM PST, Gary Twedt, email@example.com writes: "Not interested in any more downers in this lifetime, The Sandbox is a great idea. Hope all the flaming liberals and intellectuals enjoy each other." On 10/8/98 11:06:17 AM PST, Al Parker, Adamstreet@alo.com Responds to Gary: Thanks for your valuable contribution to The SANDBOX, Gary. I am not interested in any more "downers" in my lifetime, either. As the designated "Sandman," I hope not only to give all the "flaming liberals and intellectuals" and Gary Twedt a convenient place to "vent," and share concerns. I am dedicated also to keeping the whole process from becoming a "downer" by throwing a little sand of my own from time to time in order to keep this vehicle as entertaining as possible and funnier than anything you will ever see on CNN. The Sandman Sez: If we can't learn to laugh at ourselves, who will ever want to cry with us? On 10/9/98 7:50:38 AM PST Gary Replies: Right-on Al, I like your perspective ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ speech...speech...speeech...speech...speech...speech... ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ FEATURED SANDBOX SPEAKERS OF THE DAY: Speaker #1 JOHN NORTHOVER firstname.lastname@example.org Excerpted from John's letter to: Bob DeGraw (66) Bob, Great comments ... in particular the reference to the symbols of death and destruction' that have been made by yourself and others in this dynamic virtual real chain letter. The words: 'symbols of death and destruction' struck a cord [f=sharp??] .. what ever, those words started me thinking ... symbol, an image that represents some real [or imaginary] thing or a convenient concept that is recognized as the real thing. It is much easier to carry around a symbol. Symbols are easier to understand. They are tied to images in our mind. I think those symbols really represent POWER!! We humans understand power. In order to survive in this world we need POWER. We need the ability to be free from other influence(s) that would deter us from seeking our own view and choice of life in this world. We want to do what we want to do ... We want freedom. We want peace. We have the strength to impose DEATH and DESTRUCTION on anyone, anywhere in the world. As do others on us. It is a choice. We chose freedom, which we have and we are still working on peace. Others chose to enslave. Our world is filled with opposites. Life - Death, Peace - War, Freedom - Enslavement, ... in our present world unfortunately we need both. Someday we will not. Having the power to chose to use the ultimate act: DEATH and DESTRUCTION ... or use the threat of DEATH and DESTRUCTION and have the ability to deliver that concept to someone or some other entity, they will listen. They will be hesitant in trying to bend us to their ways. We have canned 'DEATH and DESTRUCTION'. That is power in a can and that symbol is a bomb or a mushroom cloud [I wonder if mushrooms like our choice of symbols]. We had used it as a vehicle to end a world war. I am not going to get into whether it was 'right' or 'wrong' ... that choice has been made by most of us, as evidenced in the responses in the Sandstorm. There has not been another world war since. There have been 'police actions' one which is still on going [Korea] and the other a great second place finish in the Far East War Games [Viet Nam]...to name a few. We are moving toward a more peaceful world. We use those symbols for the rest of the world to note. Those symbols are so much more than 'death and destruction'. They are symbols of a strong nation. They let the world know that we mean business. They let the world know that we have the resolve to go our way. Without them we would be speaking... what language??? Look on the other side of the coin...is that a symbol of 'POWER' or 'DEATH AND DESTRUCTION' that you see? No, when we look on the other side of the coin we see PEACE and FREEDOM!!!!! It all depends upon whether you see your martini glass, half full or half empty. It depends upon whether or not there is one olive or two. Just remember that the cost of freedom is death in a can. Yours in perpetual amazement, John (59) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ FEATURED SPEAKER #2 Irene de la Bretonne Hays email@example.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Notice the comment by Billie Finch Gregg speaking of girls' basketball: "Dumb that we couldn't cross the center line. What do you think?" This is a parallel kind of question to the one I asked about the bomb/mushroom cloud, but it is even LESS related to Bomber memories than the bomb/mushroom cloud logo or Japanese internment/racism. The sexist rules for basketball existed everywhere; they were not unique to Richland. The logo/mascot for RHS was/is unique to Richland. The memories of fear and loathing of Japanese that resulted in the internment and racist revision of history were/are embedded in the unique Richland experience. (I do think we have completed our discussion -- for now -- of those two topics and we did quite well; the sky did not fall. And of course, I am not objecting to Millie's question; it is a perfectly reasonable question -- rife with politics and wild disagreement.) So Maren, you have chosen to be a censor and your ability to do it well is based on your personal political filters or depth of sensitivity to political issues--or lack of it. I suppose you could include/exclude comments based on your own intuition of the intent of the comment, but that is also a pretty shaky position. Memories and history itself tell us that won't work--unless you are a true psychic. And, yes, what I have just said could be called a "political" comment--and a particularly American one at that! -Irene de la Bretonne Hays ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~@~@~@~@~@~@~@~@~@~@~@~@~@~@~@~@~@~@~@~@~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ PART 4: SO WHAT DO YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT? Did any of the comments in this issue of The SANDBOX strike a cord, or discord with you? Do you want to talk back? Do you have something to add? What we talk about here, Fellow Bombers, is entirely up to you. In the SANDBOX, you may argue passionately, satirically, or hysterically on almost any subject without interruption unless you go way beyond 200 words, say something a little too prurient, or rudely curse. You can admonish, cajole, or joke. You can try to poke holes in someone else's views, if you wish. Whether hilarious or serious, IF WHAT YOU HAVE TO SAY IS WORTH SAYING ANYWHERE, I T'S WELL WORTH SAYING HERE! Is something really bugging you today? Did something funny happen at work you'd like to share? Tell us about it. Does it trouble you that the kids in your neighborhood might come knocking on your door October 31 wearing little blue dresses, dark wigs,berets, and bearing cigars? Tell us why that bothers you. Tell us in 200 words or less if you can, or with up to 400 words if you must. And oh, yes, what do you think about giving Prozac to clams? Did we really need to drop that second atomic bomb on Japan? The SANDBOX is HERE for YOU, so tell us what YOU think! Adamstreet@aol.com is YOUR ADDRESS for SPEAKING OUT! How often The SANDBOX comes to a screen near YOU Depends ENTIRELY ON How OFTEN I hear from YOU. So Step Right Up, Partner. YOU are in the SANDBOX next! -Al Parker (53) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ speak out... speak out... speak out... speak out... spout off!... ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ -01- *************************************** *************************************** ******************************************** Welcome to THE SANDBOX Issue #2 ~ October 15, 1998 Wherever we have been, Whatever we have done, Wherever we are now, Whatever we've become, We are the Richland Bombers, And Bombers are second to none! The Col-Hi ~ RHS Spirit Lives On! The SANDBOX is an Interactive Forum for the Personal Expression of Ideas, Interests, and Mutual Concerns by Columbia High School (AKA Richland High School), Richland Washington, Alumni. We are the children of a city that buiilt a bomb that ended a war. We had hopes and dreams then. We have hopes and dreams now. We are The Richland Bombers. Our spirit lives on! Bombers Everywhere: We'd love to hear you express yourself. Whether what you have to say today is funny, thought provoking, a cause for concern, or the sharing of an experience that is expecially meaningful to you, There's Plenty of Room in the SANDBOX for YOU! Please output your input to Al Parker, Adamstreet@aol.com. YOU'LL be in the SANDBOX next! ============================================== Re: THE SANDBOX ~ #1 ~ 10/13/98 From: firstname.lastname@example.org (James Moran) As a former bomber and a Historian, I believe this exchange of ideas and thoughts is healthy. It is because we can do this, which saves our country from becoming a Bosnia. In short, Thomas Jefferson said "Debate is the cornerstone of democracy." Also, when I was in college, I invited a member of the Montana Militia, (MOM), to my school for a debate on their policies and beliefs. The day before the debate, the school told me the MOM would not be allowed to speak at the forum. I called the state attorney general and threatened to sue to have the MOM speak. I did not agree with the MOM, but I do agree with the Constitution that all Americans have the right to speak, and the right to free assembly. Keep up the great work- -Jim Moran class of 86-87 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Symbols and names From: email@example.com (Terrance K. Liechty) Al, About the bomb and bombers. I was watching a Disney movie on TV the other night. It took place in New Mexico I think, where it was actually filmed, I don't know but the hero's child played on a High School B-ball team that was called the "Bombers". If it is good enough for Disney then it certainly is appropriate for RHS. Terry Liechty (64) mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Second Bomb From: email@example.com (Robert Shipp) In response to Bob Mattson's query as to whether it was necessary to drop the second (Nagasaki) A-bomb on Japan, the answer as I understand it is "yes and no." I don't recall the source of the following information, so I can't swear by it, but I remember reading somewhere that Japan was ready to surrender after Hiroshima. Since they didn't have any diplomatic relations with the U.S.,the Japanese asked the Soviet Union to sue for peace. Stalin, realizing that Japan was now defeated, didn't bother to pass the message on to us. Instead, he waited a few days, then declared war on Japan so he could share in the spoils. (The USSR did get some territory, even though they never fired a shot against the Japanese.) The U.S. took Japan's silence as a refusal to surrender and bombed Nagasaki to convince Japan that they would be destroyed if they didn't surrender. Right or wrong, it worked. Japan abandoned their attempt to try to negotiate a peace settlement through the Russians and surrendered. So the answer is, "Yes, it was necessary because we thought Japan was determined to fight on in spite of Hiroshima," but "No, it would not have been necessary if it had not been for Stalin's treachery." ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: too bad From: firstname.lastname@example.org (bob degraw) To Al and all, First a short story. I was on a tour bus with my family going through Denali National Park here in Alaska. The trip is magnificent. The tallest Mountain in North America, ( Mt McKinley), the animals, (bear, sheep, caribou, moose) the vista's. Literally millions of visitors come every year to see this grand sight. On this particular trip there was a lady from back East on our bus. She started complaining the minute we were on the bus. The bus was too small. It was too bumpy. There were too many bugs. She couldn't see very well from her seat. She did all of this complaining to the bus driver in a loud voice so that all of us on the bus could hear her. After about an hour on the bus we stopped for a bathroom/stretch break. The lady got off and went to one of the portable outhouse's. She looked in and immediatly turned away. There was NO WAY she was going to go into that filthy latrine. So we got to hear about that and other petty complaints for the next hour. Finally, at our next stop, the bus driver told this lady that if she wanted she could get off and wait for a bus traveling back to the visitor center. She did just that. As we pulled away from the rest area, the driver announced that we had lost one of our passengers. The entire bus let out a loud cheer and clapped their hands. I'm pretty sure this lady hadn't seen a thing on this trip. She was too buzy letting evryone know how terrible things were. And while I was glad she got off the bus, I also felt sorry for this lady.I find it too bad that you have decided to have this sandbox. People can lways find something to complain about. Some people have such pathetic lives that all they do is dwell on things that were embedded on them in the past. In this day and age, you can find some high level study that supports every point of view, a report that says just about everything does or does not cause cancer, every joke offends someone, everbody is discriminated against in some way, every decision or statement that involves gender is sexist and the list goes on. On the other hand, if people just got a grip and dealt with their lives in a positive way and not try to change the world to fit their own, usually fairly narrow, point of view, then I think the world would be a little nicer place. So in my fairly narrow point of view... If some sniveling, mean nothing, irrelevant complaint, fell in the Internet forrest, and there was no Sandbox, would it make a sound? You can keep me on the list for a couple of issue's. I am not one to say something and not listen to those that wish to disagree. But then I would like my name removed from the Sandbox. Bob DeGraw (66) It would be TOO BAD if you decided to hop off this bus too soon, Bob. The views are becoming ever more awsome with each passing mile. The quality of Bomber responses to The SANDBOX, in fact, has led us to remove "Petty Gripes and Cat Fights" as a part of the SANDBOX name. We may need your help to keep this forum energized in a way that benefits, entertains and empowers all of us. The Bomber Spirit Lives! I hope you can give me a personal tour of Denali National Park some day. Sounds wonderful! And I won't complain about the latrine! -Al ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Re: THE SANDBOX ~ #1 ~ 10/13/98 What a neat idea, the Sandbox. I have no sand to throw or any political issues to raise, but wanted to say continued good luck to Maren and good luck to you Al. Hope to see you again soon. -Vera (Smith) Robbins (Goldi13@aol.com) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From: email@example.com (Peggy Main) I think the "Sandbox" is a great idea! I got a couple of yuk's out of this first issue, but may I say I don't think it is appropriate to personally attack people's opinions or actions. This publication is supposed to be fun - I thought Irene de la Bretonne Hays' comments were totally over the top. -Peggy (White) Main (65) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Received: from firstname.lastname@example.org Al, Good job introducing the Sandbox! You've set the tone for what could be an interesting, enlightening, and downright fun experience. Thanks! Irene de la Bretonne Hays ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Earl Bennett ('63) email@example.com Never received any awards for poetry (nor grades worth talking about), but I wrote this for a ?junior? English assignment to create a sonnet. I know it meets the technical criteria of iambic pentameter and the specific number of lines and rhyme scheme (one skill I can claim), but the thoughts were heartfelt if not artistic in expression: When God, to watch, sits on a golden branch Of which the tree is called deceitfully A mushroom; there, on land that once was ranch It grows, conceived of men so cunningly To kill - why says He then "Repent - forgiv'n?" To sinful man, whose heart .................. I find My heart a carbon copy of mankind. 36 years have buried a few lines beyond immediate recall. What I have remembered suffices for the point I hope to make, that we are all capable of the most atrocious acts imaginable, or unimaginable, apart from submission to and assimilation of God's goodness. John Northover, I do not accept that we are moving toward a more peaceful world. The minions of Slobodan Milosevich and Saddam Hussein, not to mention the thousands of Hutus who massacred thousands of Tutsis and hundreds or thousands of "doctors," sworn to protect life, who continue to slaughter millions of unborn babies - all demonstrate that mankind is no more innately good and peaceful and loving today than a thousand or four thousand years ago. We mask it better. We believe we understand human nature better, and claim the understanding and the actions we take on the basis of the understanding as evidence of good coming to the fore. However, I believe in so doing we deceive ourselves. I have no academic grounding in psychology and almost none in social science, but it seems most likely to me that when people do good apart from the goodness that God offers us, it is because of knowing the consequences of not doing so and fearing those consequences. When we don't steal, it's because we know that criminal science is advanced and, when properly staffed and funded, capable of catching and imprisoning us. When we control our anger, it is because there might be a much bigger brother nearby who will shred us to mincemeat if we vent our rage upon the targets of our frustrations. On the flip side, we recognize the desirability of being treated fairly and kindly and hope that, if we act that way, someone will reciprocate for us. Education and experience have taught us that many people are willing to put away selfishness or hatred because the hope of longevity and a pain-free life are improved when larger numbers of people adopt that approach to living. But none achieve full suppression of the sin nature that we all share, and even after turning to Jesus we still stumble from the "lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes and the pride of life" (I John 2:16, KJV). I fear what I know I am capable of doing, or not doing when I should, because I understand something of what God expects of me and wants for me. I learn more daily, but will never understand all in this life. I think I am far beyond the 200 words, but the future remains, should the Lord tarry. I am a born-again Christian, and if you want good explanations of what that means beyond the Bible itself, I recommend MERE CHRISTIANITY by C.S. Lewis and EVIDENCE THAT DEMANDS A VERDICT by Josh McDowell as starting points. If you go the Bible, you must take all of it in order to really understand the parts. Later. ecb3 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From: Norma (Loescher) Boswell, firstname.lastname@example.org Dear Sandman, The inaugural edition of the SANDBOX just arrived in my box. You have chosen some good starters. Your question about little Lewinsky goblins on our front porches on October 31 may push a few buttons. I, for instance, signed an email petition for censure rather than impeachment a few days ago. I agree with the petitioners: let's move on to the greater problems our country faces and call closure on the immoral sex life of President Clinton. The British-American magazine The Economist says, "Monicagate is closer to Britain's Dianagate than to Watergate." In Watergate the President ordered a C.I.A.-assisted burglary and illegal wiretapping. He had the F.B.I investigate newsmen. There was a cover-up with bribery of witnesses. Watergate was impeachable because of its political nature. As Alexander Hamilton said in the years of our founding, impeachable offenses "relate chiefly to injuries done immediately to the society itself." Lying under oath demonstrates miserable morals and is a bad example for the youth of our country, but it is not impeachable. Censure will do the job. Norma Loescher Boswell, Class of '53 email@example.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Your thoughts seem well constructed, Norma and to the point. I would be interested in hearing feedback from some of legal professionals out there about the following. What would be the likely legal consequences to an ordinary citizen if found guilty of the 15 or so allegedly impeachable offenses the President has "accused of" so far? Also, I am interested in what some of you think about 60% or so of Americans wanting the "jury" to render a decision, as it were, before the investigation is complete, before the "trial" begins. (Should justice be withheld just because we are all getting tired of hearing about all of this "cat fighting?") In addition, there seems to be almost a nationwide concensus that it is pretty much OK to lie under oath in a court of law about sex because it is a "natural thing" to do in order to save embarrassment to you, and other(s), and to protect your family. If a person committed murder, wouldn't it also be a "natural thing" to want to save embarrassment to yourself, and others involved, and stay out of jail (or the lethal injection lounge), in order to protect and provide for your family? Many people would lie under such pressure. But should the legal consequences of such a felony, if discovered, be set aside just because you are "doing what comes natural?" One thing we surely don't need is a break down in the integrity of our court system. Let's not join the accelerating trend of other nations who are rapidly succombing to anarchy and all the deadly consequences of the breakdown of justice and government. -ap ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Driving Privilages and Age From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Jinnie Stephens) (1958) Please bear with me on an issue that greatly troubles me. I am speaking of aged parents. Mine happen to be 85 and 80. At what point do driving privileges cease to be something that they should have. I remember 'Uncle Dick' handed over his keys in his mid eighties but it broke his heart. He told me that it was the most hurtful thing in his life as he was giving up his last bit of real independence! Both of my parents are very independent people. They pride themselves on not relying on others for most everything. While they have not had any serious driving incidents they are becoming extremely frail and my Dad has some serious health issues that could potentially cause him to have an accident. I know this isn't political but it is an issue that a lot of us must face. Any feedback appreciated. -Jinnie Stephens ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Sandbox From: email@example.com (mike cook) Please add me to your list. Thank you. Mike Cook ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From: Rick Maddy USMC/Ret (med.)/0311 1st Div 3/5 Kilo Co (1968) firstname.lastname@example.org (tye) Wow, it has been over FIFTY YEARS since we have made a mushroom cloud in someone's front yard, but wars have gone on. Wait... there is a police action or two in there, too. So, I thought I would start out on a cheery note with a poem. A poem about my experience with the police action called Vietnam. Here I was a Richland, Washington boy, certainly not from the ghetto's of Detroit, New York, or Chicago; not from the blue North, or the gray South, but a Pacific Northwesterner, in the Marines, and dumped out in some shithole that I to this day do not know the reason why. If anybody knows why, let me know. In Vietnam I found out what it had been, 130 something years earlier, for a soldier from the South, who had participated in their great loss during the War of Northern Aggression (Civil War to the folks in the North) and to come back home to an ungrateful nation. [And having a booby-trap almost blow off both my arms and fill my ass, and every where a flak jacket and helmet wasn't, with shrapnel was just a little added bonus to the melee.] And I must say here, it really did feel like a war, and not one of those "Police Action" things. Enough said, Now on with my poem, that I leave with all Col Hi Bomber's that served their time in hell and would again tomorrow. Does anybody ever see those rare treats, the Goliath Moth, anymore? And where did those diving, bug eating, Nighthawks go? Gawd, I loved those guys. WELCOME HOME Young and restless, so many different places Be a Marine, see the world, a multitude of faces Freeways and flyways, boot camp, I'm taken aback I've waited a long time to hear "Semper Fi, Mac" Black, white, all the races - boys - the all-American Come one, come all, let's help our fellow man There is trouble, let's go and be a big brother We're off to kill, to hell with love of one another The hippies back home are carrying signs If you're in uniform, you're out of line Abbie's back home burnin' the flag - political tool We're putting another boy in a body bag - political fool They say we are killing babies: God, how come? By the people, for the people, they call us scum NO! NO! We're just dying in the mud: that's all Khe Sanh, the Mekong, Hill 881: patriots standing tall Home again. Survivor's guilt. No justice for the dead A little sleep here, some there, no comfort in the head Screaming inside, looking for release. Please come out! We never lost a battle, only the war: defeated no doubt Twenty years later I hear applauding and "Hurray" Your parades and "WELCOME HOME" - too late I say Be proud? Because in battle I lived and did not fall? Just welcome those on that cold, black granite Wall Rick Maddy USMC/Ret (med.)/0311 1st Div 3/5 Kilo Co (1968) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: THE MEANING OF PEACE Reply-to: (Norma Loescher Boswell) I was cleaning my email inbox and found this item from Maren, which struck me as an excellent rationale for the existence of The SANDBOX. Its tone is serious rather than the light touch you will confer, but it may serve. The Meaning of Peace -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- There once was a King who offered a prize to the artist who would paint the best picture of peace. Many artists tried. The King looked at all the pictures, but there were only two he really liked and he had to choose between them. One picture was of a calm lake. The lake was a perfect mirror for the peaceful towering mountains surrounding it. Overhead was a blue sky with fluffy white clouds. All who saw this picture thought that it was a perfect picture of peace. The other picture had mountains too. But these were rugged and bare. Above was an angry sky from which rain fell, and in which lightening played. Down the side of the mountain tumbled a foaming waterfall. This did not look peaceful at all. But when the King looked, he saw behind the waterfall a tiny bush growing in a crack in the rock. In the bush a mother bird had built her nest. There, in the midst of the rush of angry water, sat the mother bird on her nest........... perfect peace. Which picture do you think won the prize? The King chose the second picture. Do you know why? "Because," explained the King, "peace does not mean to be in a place where there is no noise, trouble, or hard work. Peace means to be in the midst of all those things and still be calm in your heart. That is the real meaning of peace." ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SO WHAT DO YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT NEXT? Did any of the comments in this issue of The SANDBOX strike a cord, or discord with you? Do you want to talk back? Do you have something to add? What we talk about here, Fellow Bombers, is entirely up to you. In the SANDBOX, you may argue passionately, satirically, or hysterically on almost any subject without interruption unless you go way beyond 200 words, say something a little too prurient, or rudely curse. You can admonish, cajole, or joke. You can try to poke holes in someone else's views, if you wish. Whether hilarious or serious, IF WHAT YOU HAVE TO SAY IS WORTH SAYING ANYWHERE, I T'S WELL WORTH SAYING HERE! Adamstreet@aol.com is YOUR ADDRESS for SPEAKING OUT! How often The SANDBOX comes to a screen near YOU Depends ENTIRELY ON How OFTEN I hear from YOU. So Step Right Up, Partner. YOU are in the SANDBOX next! -Al Parker (53) Send your impressions and expressions to: Adamstreet@aol.com. -2- *************************************** *************************************** ******************************************** Like tiny grains of SAND, we are scattered all over the world, even as we gather here! Welcome to THE SANDBOX Issue #3 ~ October 17, 1998 ============================================== Today's Honorary SANDBOX Subtitle Is:THE ONLINE SPUDNUT SHOP Acknowledging the many hours of conversation and bonding that has continued over the years between so many of us in Richland's legendary Spudnut Shop. Most of us can't get to The Spudnut Shop every day, but we can always meet right here! ------------------------------------------------------- If you would like to offer an idea for a one-time or rotating SANDBOX Subtitle, send your suggestions To: Adamstreet@aol.com Subject: Subtitle ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ From: Barbara Chandler, BCHANBCJR@aol.com Thank you for a forum to spout off, to go within, to speak out, to get out those things that we all have in our hearts and sometimes don't have that "someone" to speak them to. I have been very moved by this, our second, edition and vote to keep it working, moving, in our lives. Thank you all for your contributions. I am listening and learning. Also, I would like to suggest that all who can, visit the Vietnam memorial in DC. It is the most beautiful memorial I have ever visited. Not any of my close relatives or friends died in Vietnam, but to see and read the names, to see and read the letters that people leave there is a heart rendering experience and one it is very important to have. Take Care, Barbara Chandler. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ From: MEHINGE@gcpud.org (Marcia Ehinger) Thank you. ---------- You're welcome! ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Subj: Why we dropped the [second] bomb. From: Ray Stein (64) Reply-to: email@example.com After reading Robert Shipp's contribution about whether the U.S. should have dropped a second bomb on Nagasaki, I remembered something I read about events surrounding the decision to drop the first bomb. This information is from "The Blunder Book" by M. Hirsh Goldberg. "The Japanese were upset about Truman's call for unconditional surrender, so they decided to forego responding for the present to the unconditional surrender terms, hoping further diplomatic moves might bring about the negotiated peace they desired. In their statement to the world press they used the word "mokusatsu," which can mean (1) to ignore, or (2) to refrain from comment. The Japanese translator mistakenly used the first meaning and wrote that Japan would "ignore" the demand for unconditional surrender. American leaders were incensed that Japan would "ignore" their unconditional surrender terms. Although the mistranslation was not the only cause of the increasing friction of the time, it spurred an escalation of tension between the U.S. and Japan. Less than two weeks later, on 8/6/45, the U.S. dropped the atomic bomb on Hiroshima." (The above is condensed from the book) -Ray Stein ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ From: Steve Carson (58) SteveNitro@aol.com The arguments about the symbols we used on our school rings and publications seem tame by today's standards. We were proud of the role Richland played in ending the Second World War and, for us, the mushroom cloud symbolized the saving of the lives that would have been lost in a protracted campaign to take the Japanese Mainland. The Bombers of later generations, being more "Sensitive" and not understanding our era, are free to do what they want with the exception of changing our history. Does anyone remember the "strike" in 57 or 58 as we rebelled against the administration because they wouldn't let us wear Bermuda shorts. Serious stuff. Steve Carson (58) ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ From: Barbara Seslar Brackenbush '60 firstname.lastname@example.org (Brackenbush) Al Parker: I am not a legal type but I want to thank you for your response regarding the Monicagate (Billgate?) issue. I think it was well said. Jinnie Stephens: On aging parents driving - my parents are 78 and my father has had to give up driving and my mother drives a little but prefers to leave the driving to someone else. Fortunately, my sister is usually available which really helps the situation. In fact, there are three of us sisters who are willing to respond when they need something. I was amazed that your parents are still able to drive at 80 and 85! I still have a grandmother living at 95 but she could in no way drive (in fact, she neverdid learn). You must come from very good stock! :) Barbara Seslar Brackenbush 1960, Richland ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Subject: Driving Privileges From: Mina Jo Gerry Payson (68) email@example.com In Reply to Jinnie Stevens re driving privileges: We in the "sandwich generation" with senior parents and children still at home know exactly where you are coming from. My own mother is 70 and I have refused to be a passenger when she is driving for at least the last 10 years. In her case, I think she is overly defensive in her approach to the road, plus she learned to drive an automatic with one foot on the gas and one on the brake. That makes for interesting trips. It is the worst thing you can ask of a senior, to give up their keys. Our parents were raised not to be a burden on anyone, even their children, who are willing to take on the task. In the desire to remain independent, they loose sight of common sense. There is no answer to this problem. There is no exact time when a person is no longer fit to drive. It varies from person to person along with health and mental faculties. My neighbor, at about 82, took a driving test three times before he passed and is still in possession of his license at 85. But how do you tell someone that they areno longer allowed to have the freedom to come and go? I wish there was an easy answer. [Mrs. John Dam, of Richland, when I knew her, probably in her late 80's, had some limitations, but was "licensed" to drive during daylight hours within the city limits. That enabled her to run errands, go to the doctor and get items like groceries on her own. -ap ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Subj: Dupus Boomer From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Mike Bradley) '56 Hi everyone. If anyone knows where I could get a copy of the Dupus Boomer book I would certainly appreciate it. For the younger set, Dupus Boomer was a cartoon character that appeared in either the Columbia Basin News or the Tri-City Herald which depicted humorous happenings in our fair town. The book was compiled from all of these cartoons. -Mike Bradley [Seems like the son of the Dupus Artist and Author was in my class at Col-Hi... trying to remember his name. I certainly remember enjoying those great cartoons, myself, many of them involving the roofs being blown off of prefab houses by the infamous "termination" Richland-Hanford winds. --ap] ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >From Joe Largé, JosephDan@aol.com To: email@example.com Dear Rick: I enjoyed your poem. It is very thought provoking. I was one of those people that ended up with mixed emotions -being for the war and yet also against. Although I hated the war, I felt that the soldier was the victim, having being let down by a government that was attempting to walk a tightrope of appeasement and not willing to get it done and over! We suffered the same things in Korea, and the soldier suffered. In my opinion, you did not receive a "hero's welcome" because we were all victims in some respect of that war. We were all injured in some way. We all sat around licking our wounds. I regret heartily that you didn't have a hero's welcome when you returned. I can't help - now - but look upon the Vietnam Vet with a sense of deep respect, both for being the one in the front-line and for also having to endure the hell that you came home to, not to mention the whole issue of Agent Orange and those who have to endure a Government that won't even support you in this! For all that happened there, The Vietnam Vet is one that should be held in Honor. -Joe Largé JosephDan@AOL.com ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Subj: Robin Cody Book From: RMat683939 What's in the sand? Find out in a wonderful book by Robin Cody called; Voyage of a Summer Sun. The entire book is worth the reading, but chapter 11 lands him in the Hanford reaches to the class reunion of the Bombers of the class of 70, at the Shilo Inn. In his book, he canoes from high in the Canadian Rockies and follows the currents of the mighty Columbia, even noses into the Yakima a bit. So, get it in your local library, if they don't have, they can get. Bombed Bob 64 Al Parker asks Bob: Was Cody a member of the class of 70, or did he just "float in" and crash the party? Bob answers: No, he isn't a Bomber, just floated into the Hanford reaches, mentioned the wildlife, warning signs posted along the shores, and meeting some outspoken people in a complex culture of a strange community. My daughter's class at Portland State is using the book in their studies. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Vern Blanchette Class of 64, firstname.lastname@example.org writes: Okay, whose idea was it to name the place where ex- Bombers express their opinions after the device used to allow cats to ... ah... well... take care of their needs? Was that a sly attempt to cast an opinion about our opinions? How about we change the name to the "Target". (Bombers drop their ideas on 'target'... get it??) Until then I have only one thing to say... meyowwwwww! As for my opinion, I think you guys are all aliens disguised as Richland Bombers and you are trying to mess with my mind. You remind me of the man driving down the road at 55 mph when a chicken zoomed by him. He followed it down a farm road into a barnyard where stood anotherfarmer. "Did you see that really fast chicken?" the man asked. "Yup."the farmer replied. That's one of the three legged chickens my wife and I bred in order to get more drumsticks." The man complemented thefarmer on his success and then asked "Do the drumsticks taste good?" The farmer quickly replied... "Can't tell. Haven't been able to catch one yet." Well, I'm off to catch a three legged chicken. Our Loving Father's peace to you all and may all your opinions be "on target". Vern Blanchette Class of 64 (the best!) Hey, Vern... 1. Wattayamean, "you guys?' Aren't you one of us? 2. The SANDBOX is not a Cat Box. The Sand In The Box is Us and I sure don't want your cats doing Either Number on me. 3.. May all your cats hit the right "targets" in your house. (Cats can be bombers, too!) 4. Only those of us who have no belly buttons are aliens who have flown to this planet from outer space. The rest of us are walk-ons. 5. You just stole my favorite chicken joke. 6. Loved ya in "Vern Goes to Summer Camp!" (Know what I mean, Vern?) Just joking! 6. Thanks for joining the fun! 7. Alright, people... any more chicken jokes, anyone? Or duck jokes? Or pig jokes? Or thirsty rope jokes? Counter attack! But please, keep your jokes under 200 words! -ap ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Creede Lambard writes: Ann McCue Hewett mentioned places we've lived that were pretty high up onthe list of where the bombs would fall. Some days it seems like that could be pretty much anywhere in the West. I lived for several years in the Billings, Montana area. Someone once told me that the big rail yards just west of Billings were on the list for obvious reasons (disrupting transportation). Seattle of course is no doubt marked because of the Boeing plants. I also lived in Austin, Texas for several years but don't remember there being much in Austin in the way of defense industries, except maybe for the microprocessor fabrication plants. The Houston area and its refineries would certainly have been hit. Actually, though, come to think of it the Austin area might have gotten a disproportionate amount of protection because Lady Byrd Johnson lives there! Hard to say. -- Creede ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Don Ehinger (55) Couple of thoughts and opinions on the bomb topic I went into the navy in Jan of 55 and went almost immediately to Japan for a 2-year tour. One of the first things I saw upon arriving at the naval base in Yokosuka was a hollowed out mountain. Insidethe mountain was a huge industrial complex with machine shops, staging areas and bunkers. When I arrived in Sasebo, where I was to be stationed, one of the first things Isaw were concrete bunkers, built into the hillsides and positioned defend against invasion either from the beaches or roadways. As time went on I had opportunity to hike into the countryside and the here again the hills were honeycombed with a maze of tunnels where people could fight and defend their position. The hills between Sasebo and Nagasaki hadmany bunker and storage areas that would have been suicide to try to capture, and there was no way around them. After living as a gai jin in that country, at that time, I have no doubt that hundreds of thousands of lives would have been lost had we sent troops to invade. Not that they were bad or evil people, it was for them, a matter of defending their homes and country. It has been my experience that cultures in that part of the world are very homogenous and nationalistic andwould defend their country to the end. Just as we would. One of my coworkers, who had been to Japanese language school, and I would ometimes take a weekend and visit some of the rural villages had occasion to spend a weekend in a small fishing village, not far from Nagasaki. In small villages there were usually one or two residences, that had room enough and would provide lodging for visitors. In this village the local Inn, was owned by a man that also owned several fishing boats, and had been the captain of a destroyer escort vessel during the war. We spent two nights there with he and his wife. Over some sake and orange vodka (ughhhh!) we had some interesting discussions of what might have been, if the war had ended differently. One of the things he said, that I have always remembered, when discussions of the bomb come up, is that the Japanese people had fared much better than they had expected, and much better than Americans would have if the war had gone the other way. We watched the Sumo championship matches at the local stand bar, who had the only TV in the village, got totally smashed and came away with a better understanding of what might have been if it hadn't been for the bomb. I've seen what the bomb did to Nagasaki and Hiroshima, the sand and dirt melted to glass, and imprints left by bodies. Even though it was more than 10 years after it happened and most of the debris had been cleaned up, it is something you will never forget after having seen it. At that time there were research hospitals at Nagasaki and Hiroshima where studies were being conducted on the patients suffering from long term effects of the bombs. I had opportunity to observe some of the patients when one of the ships I was stationed on made a goodwill stop at Nagasaki. The ship was opened to visitors, and a bus load of patients from the hospital came to tour the ship. Many of those people suffered from cancer and carried the scars and disfigurements resulting from injuries suffered during the blast. I remember one elderly man that was standing up on the bow looking at anchor windlass and the huge links in the anchor chain. When he turned, one side of his face was missing and there were large areas of skin that appeared to be covered with thick layers of burn scar tissue. Really not a very pleasant sight. While it was a terrible thing to do, I have no doubt that it saved hundreds of thousands of lives, on both sides. I'm all for getting rid of such weapons, but.... as long as there are the Sadam Husseins and the Slobodan Milosovich's of the world, I want to be sure that they have gotten rid of theirs before we get rid of ours. And that, I think, is a sad commentary on human nature. As for the bomber and mushroom cloud logo's let it be a reminder for how it might have been and the way it is today. You're alive, I'm alive, we have it much better than our parents, and while the world isn't perfect it's better than it used to be. I wish every American could spend some time in a foreign country. It's enlightening. It seems like every country suffers from bad leadership from time to time. We are fortunate that ours has been better than most. And that's a whole discussion in itself. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ From: SLBURBAGE@aol.com My husband works in the plywood industry and we have been trying to think of some ways to earn more money for our retirement. Thanks to all of you I now have an idea. Steve can get me plywood at cost and I can make a bunch ofsoapboxes. I will paint them green with a gold "RHS." If you order one, I will also paint the year you graduated on another side. As soon as I can comeup with a fair price, I'll let you all know. To Bob DeGraw -I didn't know my sister had taken a trip to Alaska but it sure sounds like her!! ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Art Hughes, email@example.com writes: Subj: Censure It may be news to some people that there is no legal provision for anything called censure for alleged crimes. The only legal options open to Congress are either nothing or impeachment proceedings. Censure is just a neat idea for ignoring the real facts of felony charges. What most people forget isthat the act of having relations with a subordinate that you have managerial authority over, consensual or not, is considered sexual harassment under federal law and any corporate executive having such relations can be sued or fired for this infraction. Many, in fact, are fired for this every year when something goes wrong in their little inappropriate relations." -Tom Hughes, Class of 56 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Gene Gower, firstname.lastname@example.org writes: The message from Bob Degraw sounded just like the lady that he described on the bus. Bob... LIGHTEN UP! Gene Gower ('82) ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Subj: Censure is the last thing Mr. Clinton needs. From: email@example.com (Tony Sharpe) Al, Great reply to the "Clinton Apologist" remarks of your classmate Norma. Censure is the last thing that Mr. Clinton needs. What America needs is for Mr. Clinton to show the same respect that Richard Nixon had for the office of the Presidency had and resign!! But alas, I do not believe he has the courage to do so, because he has not demonstrated that he is one to accept responsibility for his actions.The simple fact is that our President committed A CRIME when he lied under oath about his sexual affair, n the oval office, with a twenty-one year old intern. It is irrelevant that the lie took place in a Civil Lawsuit deposition. This affair and the cover up that followed only reveal the worst elements of Mr. Clinton's public and private character, reckless and irresponsible private behavior, habitual lying, and abuse of power. This man has defiled the "Office of the Presidency of the United States." What he has done DOES constitute injury to society itself as Alexander Hamilton wrote. The character of our President matters just as much as the economy. No one is above the Law, and the President must play by the rules. Adultery is a big deal, it shouldn't be commonplace, and yes I will hold my President to a higher standard! It is not okay to lie under oath under any circumstance I refuse to accept any Apologist argument that defines Americans down. I will not accept a lower common denominator of leadership than the American Presidency requires. As William Bennett writes: "These arguments about Mr. Clinton's current problems represent an assault on American ideals, and they must no take root in American Soil." Do us all a favor "Say Goodnight," Bill. Tony Sharpe ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ From: "Dan G. Day"
Organization: Chemical Professionals, Inc. Re: Clinton's future. I would hope that he receives the same treatment as the LA police officer (Mark Ferman) who was convicted of perjury and fired for his denial that he had ever used the "N" word. Not likely to rise to the level of embarrassment that Monica has caused Bill. Bill committed a greater offense and had a greater reason to lie. Ferman's little lie was sufficient to be prosecuted as perjury becausehe embarrassed his department. (Read that Politically motivatedprosecution.) Clinton should suffer the same fate. Dan Day(62) P.S. As for his actions causing immediate harm to the Nation, IT HAS! ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Bombers, Please Note: If you have sent something that hasn't appeared in The SANDBOX yet, look for it appear in another Issue in just a few days. Your participation has been so great that some of your valued opinions, ideas and thoughts are still waiting in the hopper to be entered into a future edition soon. Because of YOUR tremendous response and the number of submissions coming in every day, I may need to return items over 400 words in length and ask you to condense them for us. I hope this doesn't happen often because I would rather spend my time "spreading" your good words than "counting" them! Thanks for your consideration and help! Also, if you have sent several separate comments in at once, I may spread them out over several issues of The SANDBOX. Enjoy life! -Al Parker ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ SO WHAT DO YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT NEXT? Did any of the comments in this issue of The SANDBOX strike a cord, or discord with you? Do you want to talk back? Do you have something to add? What we talk about here, Fellow Bombers, is entirely up to you. In the SANDBOX, you may argue passionately, satirically, or hysterically on almost any subject without interruption unless you go way beyond 200 words, say something a little too prurient, or rudely curse. You can admonish, cajole, or joke. You can try to poke holes in someone else's views, if you wish. Whether hilarious or serious, IF WHAT YOU HAVE TO SAY IS WORTH SAYING ANYWHERE, IT'S WELL WORTH SAYING HERE! Adamstreet@aol.com is YOUR ADDRESS for SPEAKING OUT! How often The SANDBOX comes to a screen near YOU Depends ENTIRELY ON How OFTEN I hear from YOU. So Step Right Up, Partner. YOU are in the SANDBOX next! -Al Parker (53) Send Your Impressions and Expressions to: Adamstreet@aol.com. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Want to be Inspired? Check this site out: http://www.empowerment-now.com/inspiration/motivators/ -3- *************************************** *************************************** ******************************************** The RICHLAND ALUMNI SANDBOX Issue #4 ~ October 30 1998 Point & Counterpoint / Humor / Free Advice We are the children of a city that built a bomb that ended a war. We are the Richland Bombers, graduates of Columbia / Richland High School, Richland Washington, USA. We shared hopes and dreams then. We share hopes and dreams now. And we have some concerns. Though scattered as drifting sand throughout the world, we are gathered together Today In THE SANDBOX, in order to express and share some hopes, some dreams, some humor, and all manner of current concerns. The Bomber Spirit Lives! ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ PLEASE NOTE: BECAUSE OF THE LARGE NUMBER OF YOUR CONTRIBUTIONS, NOT ALL ITEMS ORIGINALLY SCHEDULED FOR THIS ISSUE OF THE SANDBOX WERE ABLE TO BE INCLUDED THIS TIME. ISSUE #5, EXPECTED TO BE READY IN ABOUT TWO DAYS WILL CARRY THE REMAINDER. After you receive Issue #5, Please let me know if something you have sent has not appeared yet. Thanks. Al Parker. Adamstreet@aol.com ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Patty Stordahl, Patty@exhibitd.com writes: Hats off to all the volunteers for this project. I think it will prove very interesting. I really love lively debates & appreciate how others share their views. I think that this will open a lot of peoples eyes to new ways of rethinking old problems. Maybe together we can solve some of the issues at hand. Thanks & I will be reading this one for sure. Probably participating as I am an activist in my own right. I think it is called a soap box queen. This will also bring out the real thinkers & the correct information. Anxious in Seattle Patty Stordahl ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Subj: The bomb Date: 10/18/98 5:06:51 PM PST From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Teresa Morgan) (Class of 73) RE: Don Ehinger (55) Couple of thoughts and opinions on the bomb topic Many good points you made. I keep having to remind certain friends of mine who haven't grown up with some of the same influences that to completely understand history re: the why's we did what we did not by hindsight, but by the state of mind and the state of reality at that time. Many men women and children DID commit suicide rather than face being captured by the our soldiers. All those tiny little islands in the Pacific that took so many thousands of American lives to gain control of a few square miles shouldn't be forgotten. The culture is different. To them it was an honor to die for country and emperor. Our society values life itself. How many men would have armed their women and children with whatever implement is available rather than give up a bit of ground and regroup and attack. It would have been a blood bath, trying to take the Japanese mainland. Keep in mind, too, that more people were killed in the fire bombing of Dresden than in both Atomic blasts. True, many people were affected by the radiation illness of their parents before they were conceived. Many died after months of radiation sickness. Dying from untreated burn wounds is no picnic either. War is rotten, no matter how you look at it. We didn't start that horrible war. But how much more unfair is it to our soldiers totell them that their lives are less valuable than Japanese lives, because we don't want to use a weapon we think might be inhumane, even though we know it will end the war sooner. One other thing: folks have been insisting that we apologize for using the bomb. After all, THEY apologized for pearl harbor. The two are entirell different. Their attack was in time of peace during a time of active negotiations. We even warned them ahead of time. Entirely different, sez me. ---Teresa Cook Morgan, whose dad was on his way to his second tour of duty in the Pacific after a "vacation" in Germany and France ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Talking Point: Does a lack of concern regarding character imply a lack of character? Talking Point: How many of our fathers would have died without The Bomb; how many of their children not been born? From: email@example.com (Rodney C. Brewer) RE: Clinton. He has no Character. If you voted for him, or support him today, you either don't know what the word means, couldn't care lessand/or have no character yourself. RE: The Bomb(s). If we don't drop the bomb, my Dad goes in to Japan, with a few others, to end the war on the ground, and probably doesn't return. You'll never get me to apologize for doing everything possible to win that war. Rod Brewer ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Alan Sargent firstname.lastname@example.org writes" Many have commented how unique it was too grow up in Richland. I agree! But, as I look back on it I am struck by just how jaded my view may have been. I loved my childhood surrounded by good friends, neighborhood parties, great hunting and fishing, never having to lock the house or car and always feeling safe and secure. I sometimes wish my grandchildren had the same luxury. But in many ways (my own fault) I was woefully prepared for real life. I never questioned the lack of blacks in Richland, then along came the Brown brothers and showed us a new exciting brand of Basketball. Magically their family now lived in Richland. After graduation I attended UW and was not prepared for such a huge school. I was in a lecture with more students than my graduating class and I knew no one. I ran and joined the Air Force and was promptly sent to Texas. I saw my first "Colored Only" doorways, restrooms etc. I truly did not know that existed! To this day I continue to learn just how naive and uninformed I allowed myself to be. Oh well, you live and learn. ================================================ I was quite naive myself about "racial matters" in the 50's and 60's, Alan. In 1956, while stationed at Francis E. Warren Air Force Base in Cheyenne Wyoming, I saw for the first time a lot of businesses with signs in windows and doors that said, "No Negroes Allowed. I had believed that kind of thing was only going on "down south." When I checked into a downtown hotel one time, just to get off the base for a night, an Hispanic was checking in just ahead of me. The manager eyed him suspiciously and asked, You are not trying to sneak any niggers in here are you?" He replied, "What? No. Of course not. You are insulting me, lady." A couple of years after graduating from the Air Force in 1960, one of my AF buddies, a black man named Carl Jordan, came to Richland to visit and stay with me for a few days. Some people in Richland expressed "admiration" at my "courage" for letting a black man stay in my house. When Carl was in the AF he was a programmer-operator for UNIVAC, one of the first really big computers used in the late 50's by the Air Material Command. At the time of his visit, Carl had a high paying job with Boeing in Seattle. One of the saddest things to him about racial prejudice as he expressed it to me then was how his black friends in "the old neighborhood" looked down on him and scorned him for trying to look like "Whitey" by being so successful. -Al Parker After Thought: There is something else I just remembered that Carl said to me during that visit with me, just about 36 years ago. He knew about my interest in writing and suggested that maybe someday I could get involved in some kind of "forum" type venue that would include feedback from others and an exchange of ideas, insights and experience. Thanks, Carl. What a cool idea! ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ From: email@example.com (Earl Bennett) Responding to previous comments by Joe Large' Right on! While I qualify as a Vietnam era vet (USAF, '65-'69), the closest I got to that conflict was the island of Crete, in the middle of the Mediterranean. The closest I came to combat was walking the fences of Iraklion Air Station on Crete with a 45 on my hip (no ammo -not designed to make one confident) on the night watch after the Prince of Greece and his wife were forced to flee the country and we weren't too sure how good US relations would be with the new government. In theory the local police were supposed to take care of any disturbances before they got to us, but I would not have blamed them much had they been reluctant to side with us against their own countrymen. Anyway, I shared a house with other vets in Seattle '70-'73, all students at UW. One of them was an Army radioman in Vietnam, and in the three or so years I knew him I watched him struggle with his attitudes, starting from rabid pro-administration/pro-war, then slowly starting to mellow and realize the administration wasn't handling things too well and the military appeared to be misrepresenting a few facts. A thinking soldier has a bit of a quandary to deal with. On the one hand, the only reasonable approach to preparing for combat is to instill instant, unquestioning obedience in all military personnel. There has never been a war where either party had the luxury of being able to explain the legitimacy and rationale of every action to all participants. Yet afterwards, we find that some of the decisions imposed upon us were not only ill advised, but indefensible in light of all the facts..... This could ramble on for a long time - Al, how can we treat serious topics seriously in 200 words? Anyway, we owe a lot to those who were willing serve their country, even when it wasn't socially acceptable to do so. I feel privileged to have been able to serve in some small measure. Later. ecb3 ================================================= Thanks for sharing your valuable experiences and personal insights, Earl. Regarding the suggested word limits of 200 - 400 words: The SANDBOX is intended to be a Free Speech Forum, so let's see how we can do without mandating word lengths, at least for now. What you said here, as an example, was done quite effectively without any wasting of words at all, in my view. I would just remind everyone that keeping your responses as short and to the point as possible while still saying all you feel you need say on any given subject will usually have the most POWERFUL IMPACT and INTEREST to all who are reading your comments. We can often achieve this fairly easily by reading our "first draft" and seeing which words or phrases we can eliminate or change for greater effect. Don't worry about being professional journalists, though, folks. This is a "family forum," not 60 Minutes or Meet The Press. I have already noted, however, that the quality and depth of Richland Alumni contributions to The RICHLAND ALUMNI SANDBOX often exceeds some of the stuff I've seen offered by participants on many TV Forums, so KEEP IT UP, EVERYONE! And Remember: If what you have to say is worth saying anywhere, it's well worth saying here! So tell us about your concerns, your feelings, your hopes your dreams; things that bother you; things that give you hope. Or respond to something someone else has said. -Al Parker Send What YOU HAVE TO SAY Today to: Adamstreet@aol.com ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Leo Bustad, aflbb@UAA.ALASKA.EDU writes: How long would the president of Stanford remain in office after a similar non-sexual encounter with someone like Ms. C. Clinton? How 'bout the commanding officer of West Point, were he to have a similar affair with a first year cadet and then lie to the Joint Chiefs? Just wondering how parents with young kids explain this to their children. Leo Bustad, Class of 64 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Subj: Senior drivers Date: 10/19/98 10:32:26 PM PST From: CPAWolf@compuserve.com (Fran Wolf) To Jinnie Stephens: My father-in-law will be 90 on November 28, 1998 - this year. He is extremely anxious about taking his next drivers license test. His eyes are good, but he requires a walker to get around. In July of this year he went out and bought a brand new car. The last trip my husband took with his father and mother, father-in-law insisted he was going to drive part way. When he wasn't speeding over 85 (no joke) m.p.h. he must have gotten bored and fell asleep at the wheel. This only happens on the highways, in-town he's pretty good. I could save him some anxiety - I've already called the Dept. of Licensing - he won't be getting another license. On my brother Tom's behalf; HI to Robert Ship ( say HI to Debby for me) and Vernon Blanchette. -Fran (Teeple) Wolf ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ BeegByte, a loyal Bomber Sympathizer and Friend, is our guest today. Although attending Richland schools in his early years, Lee barely missed becoming a Bomber by the unfortunate accident of moving with his parents to another city before he could enroll at Col-Hi. In his heart, however, he has never been far away and has always been a Bomber Fan and Athletic Supporter as you will see in his letter below. Just perused the third edition of the SANDBOX and enjoyed it immensely. I was hoping to see some witty conversation from some of my childhood friends, but alas…there was none. Today's edition, 10/17/98, of the Tri-City Herald (that dirty yellow sheet) had a bold headline on the front of the sports section, Proclaiming "UNBEATEN PASCO KEEPS RICHLAND WINLESS." And to rub salt in the wound they had a huge full color picture of Pasco running with the football. It is apparent that winning is more important to Pasco than showing some compassion for a team that has only known shame and humiliation this season. Pasco is roughly half the size of Richland; this just shows the world how a few callous people can trample on the feelings of many. I am going to have the Columbia River rerouted to the west side of Richland and Kennewick thus leaving the Pasco waterfront high and dry. Until that happens, tollgates will soon be placed on the three bridges linking the towns; only Pasco residents will have to pay the toll. We are also arranging with Rand-McNalley to strike the name Pasco from their maps of Washington State. It is the duty of all Bombers and supporters to boycott the Pasco textile mills, the automobile assembly plants, and the cough drop stand on 3rd street. Until Pasco comes to its senses I remain yours truly…Lee Johnson ------------------------------------------------------- Stay tuned for more of the ongoing drama, "For Whom the Bridge Tolls" and the ever-burning question on everybody's mind, "Will The Spudnut Shop Validate Toll Bridge tickets?" ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ VOTE NO ON PROPOSITION YES ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Radioactive Ants, Flies and Gnats Reported at Hanford. The radioactive ants, flies, and gnats at Hanford are not a joke; they are real. The news media across the state and nation have reported this. Irene Hays =============================================== Do you think Irene is joking? Well, see for yourself! You can learn more about the above reported phenomenon by referring to the following sites selected from the Top Ten matches to the Web Search: [Hanford and Radioactive and Flies] using AOL NetFind. The Glowing Insects of Hanford Bug Spreading Radiation? The Glowing Insects of Hanford & “Any contamination outside a controlled radiation area is unacceptable.” — Robert Shoup The Associated Press R I C H L A N D, Wash., Oct. 7 - It sounds like the plot of a 1950s horror film: Bugs may be spreading radiation at the Hanford nuclear reservation. Thirteen spots on the former nuclear weapons... http://www.abcnews.com/sections/science/DailyNews/radioactiv... Aug. 30, 1997: Scientists' keen eyes find new micromoths at Hanford Other sources: This story was published Aug. 30, 1997 By JOHN STANG Herald staff writer Birds do it. Bees do it. Even teensy-weensy little moths do it. This is a story of sex and science. It's all about how scientists have found out Hanford is home to nine previously undiscovered species of micromoths. http://www.tri-cityherald.com/DOE/1997/aug44.html Insects may be spreading radioactive contamination at Hanford Insects may be spreading radioactive contamination at Hanford 6.26 a.m. RICHLAND, Wash. (AP) — It sounds like the plot of a 1950s horror film: Bugs may be spreading radiation at the Hanford nuclear reservation. http://www.foxnews.com/news/wires2/1008/n_ap_1008_115.sml UPDATE ON CONTAMINATION SPREADS GENERAL DELIVERY MESSAGE October 7, 1998 TO: All FDH and Subcontractor Company Employees FROM: Bob Shoup, vice president, Environment, Safety and Health, FDH, AND Bob Frix, president and general manager, DynCorp Tri-Cities Services http://www.hanford.gov/safety/conspread/announcements/100798... seattletimes.com: WSU scientist finds new species at Hanford WSU scientist finds new species at Hanford: With occasional help, WSU scientist Richard Zack has collected more than 40,000 insects in the largest entomological survey in state history. (seattletimes.com) http://www.seattletimes.com/news/health-science/html98/altbu... CONTAMINATION SPREAD OUTSIDE OF CONTROLLED AREAS GENERAL DELIVERY MESSAGE October 8, 1998 All FDH and Subcontractor Employees Bob Shoup, vice president, Environment, Safety, Health, and Quality, FDH, and Bob Frix, president and general manager, DynCorp Tri-Cities Services http://www.hanford.gov/safety/conspread/announcements/100898... EXCLUSIVE SANDBOX QUESTIONS OF THE DAY: What kind of threats might these radioactive little critters pose to the public at large? Will the gov. go after them with a can of Raid or another billion or so of your tax dollars? Will radiation induced mutations spawn new and exotic generations of bugs? ------------------------------------------------------- bugs flies ants bugs flies ants bugs flies ants bugs flies angst ------------------------------------------------------- ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Subj: Re: Peggy Main Date: 10/21/98 11:36:23 AM PST From: Patty@exhibitd.com (Patty Stordahl) Dear Peggy & all. This is after all the sand box. What cats usually leave behind can be found here & a lot of it. From my understanding this was developed for the more, let's say "intense" group. I hope that if I respond & someone has read my feelings whether they are a bit extreme, respect my input no matter how strong as I intend to respect others. Fun, fluffy, & memory shaking is on the other channel. This one is for strong debate & personal views no matter how direct or misguided, mine included. Let's have a great time getting to know the deeper side of the bombers & the great people we have all become. I am ready. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Send your impressions and expressions to: Adamstreet@aol.com. If what you have to say is worth saying any where, it's well worth saying here! ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Note: After Issue #5, If you sent something in and it hasn't shown up in The SANDBOX yet please re-send if you still have a copy. No one's contribution has been left out intentionally, but there could have been some items inadvertently lost during the orgnanization process. -4- *************************************** *************************************** ******************************************** Welcome to The Richland Alumni SANDBOX Issue #5 ~ November 8, 1998 Submit your Vet's Day Thoughts and Memories for a special edition of THE SANDBOX to be published November 11. =============================================== To help all of us feel more at home regardless of where in the world we are today, here is Richland's current Weather Outlook: SUNDAY MORNING, 11/8: mostly cloudy with a chance for rain mainly in the morning. Highs in the mid and upper 40s. West wind 10 to 20 mph. SUNDAY NIGHT 11/8: Partly cloudy. Lows 25 to 30. MONDAY 11/8: cloudy. Highs near 50. West wind 10 to 20 mph. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Subject: Lewinkski From: Joe Large' Dear Sandbox, Just wanted to paraphrase some comments my wife made about this whole thing. She read for a while, the "Starr" Report and saw this: 1. The president had been asked if he had ever had Sex, with Monica Lewinsky. In his comment, he had said "No" due to the fact that he had never had "Intercourse" with her. The interpretation of "having sex" apparently involved intercourse. So, in that interpretation his answer would have been correct. He had not had "sex" with her. Who in their right mind (Monica) would hold on to a stained dress for months and months, especially if you had been the willing, consenting 2nd party!? 2. Which one of us, when caught in an act of "Immorality" such as what the president was caught in, wouldn't want to somehow attempt to save their marriage and their position instead of seeing their life instantly go down the tube. What he did was wrong, but I can understand his desire to not see his marriage end in a shambles. The best thing he could have done was to stay away from the little bedhopping, power-hungry tramp: she had vowed that she would "sleep her way to the top"! I, too, vote for censure. If we convicted the President for having "sex," we'd also have to convict John F. Kennedy for bedding down Marilyn Monroe, J. Edgar Hoover for being a transvestite and cross- dresser, and Franklin D. for having an affair. There would also be a lot of other people in power who would be convicted, i.e., Teddy Kennedy for one. Bad personal choices are not necessarily a crime. Lying can be, but not in this case, at least not in the regards of Impeachment. I doubt that this could be compared to an act of Treason. Do you? Joe Largé ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From: firstname.lastname@example.org (James M. Vache) Subj: IMPEACHMENT? Hi, all. I can't resist a few comments about impeachment, having just "played" Henry Hyde in a mock Judiciary Committee hearing here at my school. I was a close watcher of the Nixon matter, and have followed the current controversy from the perspective of one who teaches American politics, criminal law and constitutional law. I must say that my personal opinion waivers back and forth. But, besides that, I would like to point out a few issues that in my judgment need clarification. First, the meaning of the term "...Treason, Bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors" is not entirely clear from the historical record. Perhaps the best careful exposition of the meaning and intent of the Founders is found in Raoul Berger's book, Impeachment. The book was written just before the Nixon matter broke and explores quite carefully the historical origins of the term, as well as devoting short chapters to several impeachment proceedings, including that of Pres. A. Johnson. As a lawyer, I would take a common interpretive approach, and say that "high crimes and misdemeanors"must be of a like kind to Treason and Bribery given the word "other" in the phrase. You may recall that one of the charges laid on Pres. Nixon was that he violated criminal laws associated with income tax evasion. The House committee did not send that one forward to the House, in part, I thin because there was considerable doubt about whether criminal tax evasion was a H C or M. Second, it is accurate to say that the standards for impeachment are (mostly) political, but since so far the House Committee and Judge Starr seem to be focused on the alleged crimes of the President, one would think that some judgment should be made as to whether "crimes" as defined by the Federal criminal code were committed by the President or more properly whether such crimes could be proved beyond a reasonable doubt. From what I have seen of the evidence, which is admittedly not a complete look, this is far from clear. It is the reason, I think, why the preliminary report of the Committee Counsel suggests that instead of bribery, a lesser crime of lying under oath is what is at issue. Similar problems of proof would come up in proving obstruction, etc. Again this is not to say that the House must find criminal behavior to impeach, but rather to say that if the premise is that the President committed crimes, then we ought be fairly careful in reaching that conclusion. Of course, the House could impeach without finding such crimes. It certainly did so in the case of A. Johnson, as well as several federal judges. It could also decide not to impeach even if there was clear evidence of criminal behavior. The interesting question to me is how far we are going to import criminal law standards into the impeachment process. The introduction of the Special Prosecutor suggests that there has been attempt to channel the impeachment process by criminal law standards, but I think that is a mistake. (I have thought from the beginning that the case upholding the law was badly decided). On the other hand, if an impeachment becomes purely a partisan political excercise, as it did with A. Johnson, then we are at peril of turning to a Parliamentary form of government, certainly not what the Founders anticipated! Another thing I am interested in is the tendency, not seen here yet, but common in our paper at least, to conclude that if anyone even slightly defends Pres. Clinton, that person is a moral pariah. It seems to me that one could quite appropriately conclude that the whole set up has been a fairly partisan political process in the guise of a legal one, and that if that is so, even tho. the Pres. is a cad, a bounder, etc., it is not appropriate to impeach. Also, I think that those who claim that if a boss did this, s/he would be fired immediately have not read the Title VII cases that I have read... Though the behavior is morally indefensible, it is probably legally defensible. I don't mean to suggest that a person who had consensual intimate relations with a subordinate could not be fired, but rather that firing that person would not fall into the realm, necessarily, of being compelled by the law. Once again, I think there is a confusion between the legal and the moral. Not all immoral behavior is punishable by legal action, thank goodness, or we would all be in jail. Well, maybe not some of the CK kids I went to school with.... This week end I was reading a fabulous analysis of the Iran-Contra affair, fairly balanced, written by a journalist with the London Economist. It reminded me that the whole issue of expecting "moral leadership" from the President is quite problematic, particularly in an age where there are no secrets. How many of us have changed our minds about Wilson, FDR, Ike, JFK based on revisionist analyses of their disordered private lives? And, if we want moral paragons in the White House, we had better be sure to strike Harding, among others from the rolls entirely, to name just one. Part of the problem here is being consistent when the rules of the game have changed dramatically. Pres. CLinton's biggest political mistake was his hubris in not recognizing this to be the case. Thanks for letting me play in the Sandbox....I have been tempted to jump in on a few other issues, and may yet do so. I am interested eventually in talking about the classism that pervaded Richland in the good old days....Jim Vache , '64. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From: Ron Richards, G1A1S1@aol.com To: Rod Brewer: Right On, Rod! When you can't attack Clinton on his policies, attack him on his character. When you can't argue the issues with Clinton's supporters, just attack their character, too. It's real mature, Rod, and its bound to prevail all the time. Ron Richards ('63) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From: email@example.com (Marguerite (Groff) Tompkins) RE: Elderly with driving licenses - My first entry to the Sandbox - Normally, I'm not into controversy, but this is something I feel very strong about. However, I need to explain why I feel so strong, even though I'm nearing the age when I may or may not have driving difficulty. I only hope when the time comes that I'm willing to do what I'm suggesting be done for others. During the last several years of my mom's life she had severe dementia. She continued to drive far beyond when she should. I knew her driving was atrocious, but there was nothing I could do about it. It wasn't until she had an at-fault accident that I found it was her 3rd.. Within a span of 18 months, she had a total of 5 at-fault accidents, the last one totaling her car and a young teenager had minor injuries. My then she was 80. I went to the Department of Licensing and told them about it and begged them to recall her license. The man I talked to said something about the strong senior citizen lobby and how they couldn't take her license that easily. My question was what would they do with a younger person who had 5 at fault accidents in an 18 month period. He couldn't answer me. Mom's insurance company was canceling her insurance; the cancel date was 3 days after the she totaled her car. With her dementia she was in total denial about the number of accidents (she couldn't remember most of them) and always blamed the last one on the kids in the pickup she rear-ended. She even bought another vehicle (without my knowledge) and was able to get insurance (very expensive). In the meantime, I talked to the Richland Police Department and they promised to do something. Mom's doctor even sent a letter to the state, telling them of her dementia and her inability to drive, citing the accidents she had caused. Eventually mother received a letter from the state saying they were doing "random" testing of licensed drivers and she was to come in and take the written and driving tests. I was not aware of this. She tried the written test 3 times without passing - then gave up. Shortly after that she moved into a Senior Retirement home and she allowed me to sell her van. She was 81 before the state finally sent a letter asking her to send them her license. By that time I was basically in charge of her life and received her mail. I had the license and mailed it to them. But I was angry. My mother changed lanes without looking - she ran stop signs -she pulled out in front of people - she was a terrible driver. As a result of dealing with my mother, I believe strongly that all states should have mandatory retesting of all senior citizens, starting at age 70 or 75. If I'm still driving at that age, I wouldn't mind being tested. Sometimes we aren't aware of our own driving problems. My mom sure wasn't, despite the accidents. They were always "the other person's fault." If I think I'm a good driver, then I shouldn't be afraid to prove it to the state. An additional argument for testing the elderly, there was the accident in the Tri-Cities - Easter Day, 1997, that killed a young boy and left his mom and sister with lasting injuries and emotional scars. An elderly man, driving the wrong direction on a 4 lane divided highway. Then just recently the elderly women that pulled out in front of a van - injuring several people. This isn't just local -it's happening all over the country. I just thank God that mom finally stopped driving before she killed someone. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From: firstname.lastname@example.org (JIM PERRY...) To: Adamstreet@aol.com Hi to all Bomber's, in a study we have been doing and as I look back over my years, we all grew up knowing, the pledge of allegiance to the republic for which we stand, yet somehow we have all slipped into letting our Government tell us we are a democracy, which stands for mob rule. Borrowed a 1828 Webster's Dictionary, which does explain the difference. We had several lawyers from our class and some judges too, but appears they too followed mob rule than to stand up for what we all should still believe in. Of course now with the laws the way they are we can be arrested for not being politically correct, isn't that a hoot from our growing up years. Thank you for listening. Eva (Clark) Perry - Jim & Eva ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: HELP SOUGHT IN RESTORING WEAPONS SKILLS From: RMat683939@aol.com (Bombed Bob, class of '64) Well, the call goes out. I can't remember just how to fix the spring held wooden clothes pin strike anywhere wooden match shooter anymore. I tried to remember last week over at a friend's house to impress the boys, but I failed to pull it off. I took one side out and reversed it upside down, it looked good but wouldn't cock. I must call upon other gray matter deposits. There must be someone out there that can refresh my memory and get me in the spotlight again. Bombed Bob 64 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ TALKING POINT: Should the Mushroom Cloud Go Away? From: Jenny Loper Buchanan (87) mailto:email@example.com Comments from a Bomber Guest Book: I've heard a vicious rumor that there's an anti-cloud sentiment going around. Does anyone know if it is true that the school is getting rid of anything involving the mushroom cloud? Please let me know if you've heard anything - any thoughts on a protest/petition? PROUD OF THE CLOUD Class of '87 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ IN THE ISSUES JUST AHEAD: (Remember... the more you send in, the more often you will receive opinions, ideas, and interesting comments from other Bombers all over the world!) ============================================ ISSUE #6, planned for Nov. 11: Your Comments or Ex- periences that make Vetran's Day meaningful (or not) to you. Is Veteran's Day a worthwhile American Holiday? Why? ISSUE #7: Anything you want to talk about PLUS a review of an Article by Historian Richard Pierard, Col- Hi Classs of '52, published in Christian History Magazine. Dr. Pierard, Professor of History at Indiana State University, takes a personal look at the beginning of the atomic era and Christians' involvement in it. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SEE YOU NEXT TIME. TALK TO US! WE'RE LISTENING! mail your comments to: Al Parker, Adamstreet@aol.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ -5- *************************************** *************************************** ******************************************** THE RICHLAND ALUMNI SANDBOX Issue #6 ~ SPECIAL VETERANS DAY ISSUE NOV 11 1998 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From: Gary Horton (59) mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org Accounts of our (Bomber) lives from past communications brings forth many memories of days past. One I would like to share with you because I'm reminded of this experience many times throughout each year, especially Memorial and Veterans Day. As mentioned, we all have days we remember where we were, the time of day, etc., when an event in our lives happens, i.e., Kennedy's assassination, the first moon landing, Mount St. Helens, for those of you who lived down wind from the eruptions, plus many others. I remember being out in my front yard, we lived on Farrell Lane in a "B" house at the end of the cul-de- sac, Farrell Lane had an abundance of Sycamore trees and most of the leaves blown from the March winds would end up in my front yard. It was early March, a nice sunny day, I was raking leaves when Richland's finest drove up, got out accompanied by an Army officer, they headed for the next door neighbor's house, when the wife of Danny Neth (57) stepped out on the porch they handed her a telegram informing her of her husbands death. It's a moment in time that has forever changed my life. Prior to that point in time I had not understood nor appreciated the sacrifices made for us (U.S.). Looking back, youthfully thinking most of us were ten feet tall and bullet proof, we would probably live forever. Danny, one of the first Bombers to be killed in Viet Nam and others weren't so fortunate. I give thanks to all you Bomber Veterans and my utmost appreciation to those who lost their lives defending our country. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From: email@example.com (Bob Rector) You know, I have not written to Rick Maddy yet, but need to send a real message. Rick has offered much to our history and memories, and is a Viet Nam War Vet, in a wheelchair. I do not believe he has ever mentioned it, nor have I heard any complaints. *he only joked that he did not have a job. I Need to say thank you (thank you Very Much) to Rick, and remind him that we, or at least I, have not forgotten. He mentioned the loss of Dan Wagoner in Viet Nam. Dan's mother had come to work at Western Sintering to earn money for college upon his return. That dream never came to pass. She put together Dan's letters and it's published, "Letter's from Nam." So, I'm just feeling a bit thoughtful tonight. Special thanks to some special Bombers. Rick, I owe you a few beers. Just where in the hell south of Olympia, are you? Bob Rector, '62 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Veteran's Day From: Donald Winston Class of '63 Reply-to: firstname.lastname@example.org For people of my generation, one only has to spend a quiet evening at The Wall (a sacred place in my opinion) to realize that Veteran's Day, if viewed as a day to honor our Veterans and not as a day for the latest pre- Christmas sales, is completely relevant. Don Winston ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Vet's Day From: Mari "Leona Eckert" Leahy '65 Me12147@aol.com Nov.11 was always a special day for us school kids, as we always got it off. For many years I thought we were getting it off because it was my brother Don's, birthday! Happy Birthday, Don Eckert '64 ......love ya bro. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Proud to Honor All Bombers Who Served >From Shirley Collings Haskins '66 Mailto:email@example.com As Veteran's Day approaches I would like to say that we are proud to honor all Bombers who served our country. Our prayers are offered for the families who lost a loved one in death, especially the families of Mark Black and Kerry Love. Both Mark and Kerry were with the class of 1966. God bless, Shirley Collings Haskins '66 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Let's Remember All Veterans From: Patti (Snider) Miller (class of 1965). Mail To: TME391@aol.com Hi Al Parker and Bomber friends. Is Veterans Day a worthwhile holiday? Why? Yes, it is a worthwhile holiday for the reason to remember all who fought and died for us in each of the wars (some they don't call wars, but they were as far as I am concerned). From the class of 1966 Mark Black died so young in Viet Nam. I belong to the church he and his family went to, Richland Lutheran Church (corner of Van Giesen and Stevens) where the Mark Black Memorial Fund was set up and is still in effect to this day. My daughter, April Miller (class of 1992) was very fortunate to have received this scholarship and attended Eastern Washington State University and graduated in 1996. She was very proud to receive the Mark Black Scholarship, as I told her about Mark and how he died. My brother, Mike Snider (class of 1962) was in the Air Force and stationed in Thailand during Viet Nam, my husband was in the Navy during Viet Nam and on a ship, I had a cousin from Tacoma who was a paramedic in Viet Nam, and also anyone remember Roy "Mack" Brand (class of 64)? In Viet Nam he lost a leg (I see him when he comes through my checkstand at Albertsons' on Lee blvd.) memories of Viet Nam really come back when I see him. He is as nice as ever kind of shy, but I get him to say a few words; these were just some of the lucky ones who didn't die in the war, but have a lot of scars. My Dad was in the Navy in World War II, and was lucky enough to come home. I feel we should think of all veterans who made it through the war and the ones who did not. I am proud that all of them fought for our country. Needless to say, Veterans Day brings back a lot of memories. Several years ago a Viet Nam Memorial was built and dedicated with all the tri-city veterans names on it and is located on the Kennewick side of the Ed Hendler bridge (used to be the Pasco/Kennewick bridge), I remember the day it was dedicated to this day. My husband and I were there and you just get choked up. At Einans' Cemetery (off the by-pass highway) they still have the parade of flags and a special ceremony with the guns salute and that gets me choked up too, even now. As far as I am concerned every veteran who is working should have that as a paid holiday to honor them. Let's remember all veterans on Veterans Day. Thank you for listening Patti (Snider) Miller (class of 1965) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Veteran's Day From: Carol Wiley-Wooley (63) Reply To: Rowein@aol.com I grew up in a home where respect for veterans was taught. I am sure that it was due to my parents experiences during WW II. As a result I was aware of some elementary facts about remembering those who had served in their country. However I think it all became really a big deal when my boyfriend quit high school and went into the Navy. (total understatement) As the 60's happened, I was more interested and aware of what was on the news about Vietnam and how many people I knew were in some way involved. One day I woke up and was a Navy wife with a small child and one on the way, and a husband in Vietnam. Life was strange and frightening. The war was on TV in the newspapers and friends and neighbors were talking about it everyday. Bizarre thing I remember clearly....You could get a letter faster from a Vietnam combat zone than from a relative in the states... It seemed like all the people around me were applauding my husband for "serving his country"... No one where I was had any negative comments about our country sending my classmates and cousins to Vietnam. I really didn't come into contact with any "guys who had been there" until my husband returned from Vietnam and we moved to California. He was still on active duty. As I became a part of the military community I met a lot of "vets" and their families. Funniest thing, they didn't think they were heroes...They had a number of different feelings. Some guys wouldn't talk about it, others talked at length about buddies they had become friends with and a lot of silly fun. There were others who left buddies behind, both alive and dead and felt guilty for leaving. I observed first hand, the National Guard and the tanks in Berkley. I saw people throw tomatoes and eggs at soldiers returning from overseas. I saw the young men at the Oakland Naval Hospital, that had lost their legs and arms. One of the most difficult experiences I've ever had in my life, was walking into an elevator that had three young guys in wheelchairs with no legs. That was a long ride down to the lobby..They were my age and could have been the guys I went to school with...This was really confusing to an over protected girl who grew up in Richland... I made it my business to get involved. I joined an organization called VIVA. It was one of those that passed around petitions for people to sign to send to the Vietnamese government, demanding better treatment of our POWs. I listened to anyone who would talk about Vietnam and came to some conclusions that were not real popular with my husband's C.O. I was the president of the enlisted wives club and I talked to the other wives and encouraged them to look beyond the surface stuff that was on the news.One of my friends from California gave his life for "freedom"....whose I don't know. But his nineteen year old wife and his little baby girl didn't understand and I don't think they ever will. As the years have gone by I have continued to care about my own generation and the bill of goods that they were sold by "our fearless leaders in the other Washington"... Finally, after a lot of years of advocating I was privileged to meet Col. Ray Merritt USAF, Ret. He was the guest speaker at a Vietnam Veterans of America meeting here in Bremerton. He spoke to a room full of vets for over an hour. No one moved, coughed or made a remark. His talk was spellbinding. When he apologized for talking so long all the guys told him that he had not talked too long and they wanted to hear more. He made reference to the fact that the petitions from VIVA had, in fact caused the Vietnamese to afford better treatment to him and those with him in the Hanoi Hilton. (he was there 7 years). I was so amazed to hear him mention that organization, which I had belonged to so long ago. It gave me a renewed conviction to keep on doing whatever I can do to help my generation who gave "their best" for whatever reason. Over the past 14 years in Bremerton, I have done Crisis Intervention with Vietnam Vets and their families. It has been a really rewarding experience for me. I have talked to literally hundreds of guys, just like you that I went to school with. In some cases I have been able to help, sometimes just by listening. On this Veteran's Day, I will remember with respect all of those who have served their country, overseas or at home and to all the Vietnam Vets, late as it is- "Welcome Home"...and thanks. Carol Wiley-Wooley ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Fields of red From: 0311 Bob Mattson USMC Reply to: RMat683939@aol.com Nothing seemed to matter. The sack, still on the ground. Never to move, lay, waiting for choppers, that couldn't land. Pop a yellow smoke, and so did they, no, it didn't, it wasn't me. Two days, then three, it wasn't me. A swarm of choppers filled the sky, Heueys guarding Chinooks, like a wing of honkers in an autumn sky, wings set, guiding by. Death, standing by the sack, waiting. Where was the comfort in knowing? I was to say it, and weep, for me, for my sorrow. The gunny plucked one from the sky, we laid the sack at the feet of some new meat, a green lieutenant squawked at me as I left, he and his chicks, mother to his own ass. Fuck that shit I hissed, not recognizing the command, it wasn't me, God help me but I hated him for his breach of silence. A grunt had come aboard. The newness of them. The colors, not yet faded by the Nam, lit up like neon, much more than I could ever tell. But they saw me. I see the shadows in step, the parades are for those who will always be, for as long as there will be a day of tribute to those that did what was asked. A day like mine, when the shadows are in step, everyday, in step with them. Always Faithful. 0311 Bob Mattson USMC ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ LISTED BELOW ARE A NUMBER OF WEBSITES RELEVANT TO REMEMBERING AND HONORING OUR VETERANS. To access any of these sites, copy and paste the web address into you web browser and hit "return." THE WALL: http://grunt.space.swri.edu/thewall.htm This gallery contains pictures and stories of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial in Washington D.C. Known simply as "The Wall," this monument is one of the most visited sites in the city of Washington. Here are five of the pictures from Larry Powell's book, "Hunger of the Heart: A Communion at the Wall." VIETNAM VETERANS HOME PAGE Officially Opened on Veteran's Day, November 11, 1994 http://grunt.space.swri.edu/index.htm The Vietnam Veteran's Memorial-This is the official National Park Service page for The Wall. Friends of the Vietnam Veteran's Memorial Homepage - This site provides services of interest to veterans and their families at no charge. "In Touch" is a locator service which connects the families, friends and fellow veterans of those listed on the Wall. http://www.ojc.org/gunny/links/memorial.htm Lost and Found: This section is a World Wide Web Vietnam Veteran Location Service. The purpose of this section is to help other Veterans and friends of Vietnam Veterans locate Veterans and others who served in Vietnam during the war years. http://grunt.space.swri.edu/lostfnd.htm UAW Onlline Vietnam Veterans Memorial in Washington, D.C. Designed by Maya Ying Lin, the dark reflective slab contains the names of Americans who lost their lives fighting in Vietnam from 1959 to 1975. Listen to music and search for names and information about everyone named on The Wall. http://www.uaw.org/special/memdaylinks.html Air Force Memorial: A salute to the Millions who have served. Join us in making the Air Force Memorial a reality. Arlington National Cemetery Official site. "Our Nation's Most Sacred Shrine." Arlington National Cemetery: Unofficial site. "Where Valor Proudly Sleeps." http://funnelweb.utcc.utk.edu/~dmdragon/memorial.html Korean Veterans Memorial DC Pages / Memorial Day / Memorials / Korean War Vets Memorial Location: 900 Ohio Drive, S.W. Dedicated to the returning veterans of the Korean War, the first Americans not to receive a heroes' welcome. http://dcpages.com/Memorial/korean.html Korean War Veterans' Memorial Homepage They went not for conquest and not for gain, but only to protect the anguished and the innocent. They suffered greatly and by their heroism in a thousand forgotten battles they added a luster to the codes we hold most dear: duty, honor, country, fidelity, bravery, integrity. . . . http://www.nps.gov/kwvm/index2.htm WWII Memorial Planned. Gifts are being sought to create a memorial on the UW campus in Seattle honoring students, faculty, staff and alumni who fought and died in World War II. The Classes of 1944, 1945 and 1946 have taken the lead in establishing a World War II Memorial fund. http://www2.cac.washington.edu/alumni/columns/june96/memoria Personal Legacy: The Healing of a Nation AN EXHIBITION OF OBJECTS LEFT AT THE VIETNAM VETERANS MEMORIAL A joint exhibition of the National Museum of American History Smithsonian Institution and National Park Service Department of the Interior. http://photo2.si.edu/legacy/legacy.html WORLD WAR II MEMORIAL (AFL-CIO Executive Council Statement 10/14/98) More than 50 years after the end of World War II, our nation is now building a national memorial to recognize the courage and sacrifices made by a generation of Americans who served their country overseas and on the home front, united in a bond of common purpose to win the war that changed the course of human history. http://www.aflcio.org/estatements/oct98/memorial.htm NPF Guide, Korean War Veterans Memorial Korean War Veterans Memorial Washington, DC Designed to memorialize the veterans of the "Forgotten War," the Memorial pays tribute to the men and women who served in Korea (1950- 53) when the Cold War got hot. http://www.nationalparks.org/guide/parks/korean-war-v-1719.htm Washington State World War II Memorial Installation in progress This memorial is inspired by themes from the first stanza of Katherine Lee Bates' song "America the Beautiful."Elements of the memorial are representative of "O Beautiful for spacious skies...amber waves of grain...purple mountains majesties...above the fruited plain...from sea to shining sea."The memorial honors all those in Washington State who... http://leginfo.leg.wa.gov/www/admin/legis/vetmemrl/ww2mem.htm Washington DC Monuments and Memorials Just southeast of the Lincoln Memorial stands the Korean War Memorial, dedicated July 27, 1995. The memorial features 19 statues in a field, symbolizing a squad on patrol on the Korean peninsula, as well a granite wall with the images of thousands of servicemen and servicewomen etched on it. http://www.his.com/~matson/monument.htm ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ -6- *************************************** *************************************** ******************************************** The Richland Alumni SANDBOX Issue #7 ~ November 13, 1998 From: Byron Logman (56) ByronL@aol.com Been reading most of the Sandstorm and Sandbox regularly. So far as I've checked the net, these are the only high school alumni "memory lane" and forum that I've come across. Though I have lived officially in Richland since 1950, most of my schooling was a boarding school near Kenmore, WA. Since I attended the last half of my senior year at Col Hi--and graduated in 1956-- I do consider myself also a full Bomber! Ran across the attached the other day...another insight to the Hanford era. This is a great work in progress!!! Byron Logman (56). ============================================== The article Byron refers to is an article by Dr. Richard V. Pierard published in HISTORY TODAY entitled, CHRISTIANS MAKE THE FIRST BOMB. The article begins with the author's 1944 memories as an almost-10-year old making an arduous trek in an aging family car from Chicago to the arid, bleak and windswept barren reaches of the Richland-Hanford environs. Pierard then goes on to describe in vivid detail the early housing arrangements, and the senses of mystery that surrounded this super secret government project, the sudden population influx and other interesting details as seen through a 10-year-old's eyes. He also describes some of the downsides resulting from the project, and perhaps we could say, the enigma of Christians unwittingly building a bomb that could become ultimately so vastly destructive to mankind. Since many of the details of Richard Pierard's early views of the Hanford and Richland scene were similar to those related by many Col-Hi grads in the cyber pages of the online Alumni Sandstorm I had to wonder if he might also have become a Col-Hi graduate. I did remember a Dick Pierard from my class of '53 years. So via the World Wide Web, I visited Indiana State University where Dr. Richard Pierard is a Professor of History. Indeed, via an exchange of E-mails and a cordial phone conversation between Maren Smyth and Pierard's wife, Charlene, another Col-Hi graduate was found and added to the Alumni Sandstorm and Sandbox list! I enjoyed reading Dick Pierard's article very much and wish that it could in some way be made available to all of you in it's entirety. There is a point of view to be considered. Some will agree with that point of view. Some will not. There is also a lot of interesting detail and historical reference that I consider to be of value and informative. Some libraries may have the magazine and/or article available. Although I am not aware of the exact publication date, it was copyrighted in 1995. Published in CHRISTIAN HISTORY Magazine. Many libraries have access to a vast number of publications via computer links with printout availability for personal use. Most city and college librarians will be happy to help you with the search. -ap ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The following message is not from a Richland graduate, but the subject is something that could concern all of us so I am offering it as a possible item for discussion or individual action. -ap Subj: DON'T Let Them Tax The Internet!!! From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Thomas W. Brown) Tell everyone you know about this.... There's a movement afoot to slap a tax on all of us users of the Internet. This would be done by adding extra charges to your local telephone bill for using the Internet. We don't have much time....you must act now and get your opinion to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) email addresses that follow.... Maybe if we all swamp them with e-mail it may make a difference. We have won before so don't think your email can't make a difference....it Can! Chairman - email@example.com Commissioner - firstname.lastname@example.org Commissioner - email@example.com Commissioner - firstname.lastname@example.org Commissioner - email@example.com Send an email today telling them you don't want to be taxed to use the Internet. Thomas W. Brown ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Senior Driving From: Pam Ehinge Nassen (Class of 67) Reply To: firstname.lastname@example.org (Jerry D. Nassen) Hi, this is my first time in the Sandbox, but I just had to reply to Marguerite's comment about the elderly driving. I too hope when the time comes for me to quit or give up my driving, I will know it or listen to others who tell me it's time. This is a very big problem, that our government does not seem to acknowledge. I'm no politician and I'm very ignorant when it comes to the laws and whatnots. But someone out there should know how we could get a petition started to have retesting a mandatory thing at the age of 70-75. Lets face it none of us are spring chickens any more and our time is coming near too. Just my two cents on the old age drivers! Pam Ehinge Nassen ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: senior drivers From: email@example.com (John Fletcher) (Class of '64) John Fletcher wrote: Marguerite (Groff) Tompkins sure brought up a nonpolitical (I think) subject I can comment on. My Mom and my wife's Grandfather would not give up driving. My Mom was paying hundreds of dollars a month for insurance, because of repeated fender benders. Becky's granddad just drove at 30 miles an hour and didn't seem to hit anyone. We probably can't get all the seniors (anyone class of 63 and before!) who no longer possess the capacity to drive safely to give up their licenses. I saw a 20/20 show on the problem in Florida, and it was unbelievable. The message I get from witnessing senior citizens is: we baby boomers need to take inventory now and start learning how to grow old gracefully. What we will lose is our independence. Let's nurture the relationships of those near us so that we can help them and more importantly learn to ask for and accept help when we need it. I am generally passive and not a do- gooder, but when someone asks me for help, it doesn't occur to me to not offer assistance. I think most of us are like that. If we are jerks now, we will become worse jerks. It's time for us to mellow and simply be kind. Perhaps we won't be unsafe senior drivers and will turn in our licenses when the time comes. John Fletcher '64 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: It's About Character From: Rod Brewer (Class of '65) Mail To: firstname.lastname@example.org (Rodney C. Brewer) To: Ron Richards Gee, Ron, Sorry I upset you, but you are right. This whole sordid affair is not about policies or issues, it's about character, and in the case of your indefensible Bill Clinton, the lack thereof. -Rod ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Observations and Opinions on Sandbox #5 From: email@example.com (Dick Epler) (Class of '52) After many years, I may finally be at an age where I can offer general opinions (about things I know nothing about) with some conviction. Just a couple of months ago, for the first time in my life, I even wrote a "Letter to the Editor" of our local newspaper, and now here I am contributing to THE SANDBOX --which seems to be a pretty tough group. When I was younger, I had all the answers and wondered why my parents "didn't get it." Later I became too busy to form opinions, but fortunately it didn't matter. In the interim, TV news became dominate (the 4th branch of Government) and provided me with more than enough opinion. Sadly, little of it made sense to me and I resisted internalizing much of it. Later, in the late '80s, however, I discovered the Internet and was surprised to find there are a number of independent thinkers, all over the world, whose reasoned analysis appealed to what I intuitively knew was correct. Hurray! I was not alone! Regarding opinions expressed in THE SANDBOX, #5, however, I'd like to offer mostly observations, along with just a few opinions. For Joe Large' regarding Clinton's indiscretions: While I agree with you that most people read the Starr report primarily for the sex part, a more careful reading would reveal that Starr's case is *not* about sex. It's about perjury, lying, and abuse of power which, if decided to be valid, should be a little easier to judge. Unlike most people faced with irrefutable evidence, Clinton has never to admitted to any of the allegations against him. Starr's report indicates that if Clinton would just have admitted to lying under oath, he would *not* have found it necessary to present any of the sexual stuff. As Starr wrote: "The details are crucial to an informed evaluation of the testimony ... [because] the President's defense to many of the allegations is based on a close parsing of the definitions that were used to describe his conduct." What we probably need to recognize is that Clinton is an extremely aggressive liar -- which is not to be confused with the sort of lying most of us do to spare the feelings of a friend. As Bob Kerry of Nebraska (a democrat), said in the campaign of '92: "Bill Clinton is an unusually good liar." Well, that's putting it mildly. In any case, I would think most of us are susceptible to believing "very aggressive" liars, especially if they are POTUS (President of the United States). Hence the need for the details, to show discrepancies between Clinton's testimony and fact (unchallenged by Clinton). Congress doesn't need Clinton's admission to "prove" perjury in the face of unchallenged fact. Clinton's perjury to avoid indictment in the Paula Jones case, is a no-brainer, but I doubt Congress is interested, because, as many have stated, the impeachment process is more political than substance. On the other hand, Starr's strategy probably made sense to most reasoned thinkers, but obviously he neglected to consider the powerful impact of SEX on the rest of us. As a typical male, I have to agree -- it's very hard to get sex off the brain. But when I do, I wonder about the long term consequences of selective justice, where we penalize some but not others for identical crimes. Worse, I worry that, when it comes to lying, and certain other operational aspects, Clinton will become the poster child of all aspiring politicians. ************************** For Jim Vache regarding the Impeachment process: I enjoyed parts of your analysis. Since you teach constitutional law, I'm assuming you're more interested in truth than in a defense strategy which seeks to parse statements for alternative word meanings, which is why I have the following questions/observations: 1. Regarding grounds for impeachment, rather than trying to parse the statement "... Treason, Bribery, or *other* high Crimes and Misdemeanors" for the significance of "other," I have to say it's more intuitively satisfying to go with the grounds provided in the Rodino report (which cited Raoul Berger extensively). As you no doubt know, this report analyzed some 400 years of impeachable offenses going back into our English heritage. Rodino listed six categories as grounds for HC&M: a) corruption, b) abuse of official power, c) neglect of duty, d) betrayal of trust, e) encroachment of Parliament's [Congress'] prerogatives, and f) misapplication of funds. From this, It would seem that while an impeachable act for a public official need not be a crime, it does need to be particular kind of conduct -- which has nothing to do with policy differences. Further, the Federalist Papers (Alexander Hamilton), seems to reinforce this view. Question: Does Gonzaga [University Law School] do much with the Federalist Papers in constitutional law? Incidentally, it seems many of Clinton's EOs (Executive Orders) would fall into category e: encroachment of Congress' prerogatives, but obviously the Republican leadership is not interested in pursuing it. Perhaps they look forward to "encroaching on Congress' prerogatives" when their turn comes. 2. Regarding dropping the "tax evasion" charge against Nixon, it's hard for me to believe that could not be thought of as a suitable HC&M. One of Berger and Rodino's Abuse of Power examples cites the Earl of Oxford as being charged with "... greatly diminishing the revenues of the crown and subjecting the people of England to greves [sic] taxes." Rather, I suspect Nixon's tax evasion charge was dropped primarily because, under our present system, it would likely require proof of intent to defraud in a criminal court *before* Congress could consider it for impeachment. That would take a long time and be very hard to prove. Incidentally, it's been reported that most serious scholars, including Leon Jaworski, believe Nixon would have survived impeachment in the House (not enough evidence). It seems Nixon resigned primarily because the Press made his government ineffective, which is still one of the greatest victories for the 4th branch of Government. 3. (Last comment). Many of your comments confused me in the sense that they dealt more with nonlegal issues than with substantial legal principles. As far as I can tell, there's no justification in presenting any impeachment arguments based purely on sex, morality or even criminal law. Impeachment is *not* a criminal law issue, it *is* a constitutional law issue and one which I contend is reasonably well defined in spite of the general confusion among the populace. In addition, criminal law procedure does *not* apply to impeachment proceedings in the House. As I understand the process, the House impeaches for bad conduct, but the Senate is where the trial (penalty) phase is held. At that point the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court acts as a referee (as do all judges in our legal system). But even then, no penalty is mandated. If one is desired, however, the only penalty available is removal from office (no censure!) and this requires a 2/3s vote (67 out of 100 senators I believe). I don't believe anyone thinks this would happen to Clinton. Bottom line: The house could justifiably impeach Clinton just for lying under oath -- but he *would* stay in office. My opinion, however, is that the House won't impeach. The Republican leadership is just not there. ************************* For Ron Richards regarding Clinton's Policies vs. his Character: Constitutional law dictates (in this country) that policy can *never* be an issue for impeachment (as they were in England ... where they often executed the offender). Only bad conduct (a byproduct of bad character), and then only while in office, can be considered legitimate issues for impeachment. That's because trust in those who hold public office is critical to our way of life. I doubt many Clinton insiders really trust him (the real reason Monica kept the dress), any more than the Mafiosi trust their don. These people are in it for the power, but they know the rules. When required, they know they're expected to take the fall for their leader. Most of the men have adhered to this, the capo's honor code, but not the women. I think only Susan McDougal took the fall (possibly for a presidential pardon), but then I don't believe she was sexually involved with Bill so that's a little different. I must say, I regret the comparison of Clinton's operation with the Mafiosi, but it seems appropriate. Clinton's use of his lieutenants to advance his agenda any way possible (generally involving work that is clearly illegal), along with his extensive intimidation of non-FOBs (using private detectives, IRS, FBI, and various legal procedures), along with the rewarding of those in prison who do take the fall, is remarkably similar to Mafiosi's operation and code of honor (the omerta). You might say other Presidents have done some of these things, but clearly none have not been as organized, nor as aggressive, nor have their excesses been nearly as extensive. Clinton is truly unique! ************************ For Marguerite (Groff) Tompkins regarding licensing elderly drivers: I agree with your views for licensing elderly drivers, but I would expand it to include almost everyone. I've contended for many years that most accidents could be prevented if all machine operators (including auto drivers) simply strove for professionalism -- not only on the job, but in our private pursuits as well. I've been told the reason we don't is that we've come to believe the automobile is an integral part of our "pursuit of life, liberty and happiness." With so many accidents, however, maybe it's time to rethink this view. I've known "professional" drivers in their 90's (some of my relatives) who function quite well with NO accidents. And I'm talking about driving cross-country as well as in town. Sometime I should write the story of Tacoma Sam who was a centurion when he bought a motor home and toured the country with his 3rd wife. I believe he was featured on the Johnny Carson show when he was 112. On the other hand, I've known "causal" drivers in all decades who've had an unusual number of "casual accidents." I'm convinced there are many more drivers out there who shouldn't be licensed than just the elderly. By professionalism, I don't mean defensive driving (generally presented as a cookbook/rules approach). Rather I mean someone who constantly strives to learn, and to be better at operating their vehicle in all environments! This might mean giving up talking on the car phone, and listening to loud music with earphones. Specifically, good drivers understand the capabilities of their vehicle, all the various environments provided by weather and time of day, as well as their own capabilities and physical limitations. Every once in a while, all this knowledge must be instantly integrated into an appropriate action given a special situation presented by other drivers on the road. In the absence of advance preparation, most people simply have accidents ... and thus require seat belts and multiple airbags to be "safe." ******************* For EVA CLARK PERRY, regarding being a Republic vs. a Democracy: Good observation, Eva. We're supposed to be a Republic and not a Democracy (like France). The confusion comes, I think, when we confuse the democratic process used to elect our representatives with our form of government. That process is rather like being a manager and hiring good people to do a defined job. But you don't want to micromanage your people, or you'll wind up with chaos. Ideally, you want your people to do their job with a minimum of interference. Which is to say, it's a mistake to justify bad decisions by the use of polling data? The most polls can tell one is whether your message, however wrong, is getting across. While I would like to carry this analogy further by saying it's best to fire your representatives if they're not doing a good job, it doesn't often work that way in politics. Professional politicians are very ingenious at finding ways to maintain power -- primarily by using the power of the office to buy the votes that count (maybe 35% of the total). And this is why we need "national term limits" -- for the rest of us. Sorry for the long message, but I was on a roll and it all seemed important. Most will find it hard to agree with much of what I write, but at least I've given the subject extensive thought. Given my past history, however, it'll be next August before I do this again. But thanks for this opportunity. -Dick Epler (52) firstname.lastname@example.org ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Monica From: Sherry Dupuy Mail To: Granshery@aol.com Responding to Joe Large' who asked: "Who in their right mind (Monica) would hold on to a stained dress for months and months, especially if you had been the willing, consenting 2nd party!?" Sherry Dupuy Responds: Joe, On the shallow end of comments made....Monica was a groupie as in rock groupies who save things like this and worse from their idols....young and dumb. Sherry Dupuy ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: RE: Help sought in restoring weapons skills From: ChrisB@cadwell.com (Chris Bolkan) (Class of '72) Notch the spring radius on the clothespin with a pocket knife. This will form a ledge for the spring to catch when cocked. Remember to secure both clothespin halves with a rubber band to form the barrel of the gun. The gun is cocked with yet another clothes pin half. The stick match projectile is inserted into the barrel match head first so it will ignite when the gun is fired. Hope this helps. Have you showed them match and foil rockets? ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: If he won't serve, how can he lead? From: JaniceMcCurdy@prodigy.net (Janice McCurdy) I have to jump in here with my feelings about President Clinton. His morals are his own business, and what he does in bed with anyone is also his own business. Lying shows his character as well as his dealings in the past as a governor. I of course didn't vote for him when he ran for office the first time. I feel if he draft dodges and won't serve his country... why should he lead it ??? -Janice McCurdy ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: More Veterans Day Thoughts From: Wanda (Wittebort) Shukay (Class of '53) Reply To: email@example.com (Wanda Shukay) I've printed off all the web sites [Veteran Memorial Web Sites listed in the Veterans Day Issue, Sandbox #6] and hope to get time to visit them on the net. Well, here I am in the Nations Capital and I'm not visiting Arlington Cemetery today, but I do on and off during the year, and the Viet Nam Memorial, etc. My memories go back to 1942 in Pittsburgh PA, selling poppies on the corner for vets, collecting foil wrappers for the war, etc. Having some of my 8 uncles serving in WWII, my grandma having flags in her windows with stars for each son serving. They all came back and lived good lives only 3 remain and only one that did serve. The two oldest 90 this year and 89, were too old or had disabilities and couldn't serve. I then remember end of war - I was living in Lake Arrowhead CA and there was quite a celebration in the Village. I then remember at school in Richland when Korean war took off and a lot of our friends were either called up or volunteered. I remember some of them coming back to finish school - can't remember their names. I could go on and on, but I have some work to do now, even tho a holiday, brought work home. Is that an ethic we learned in Richland? The "work ethic"? Best to you, Wanda ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: More Veterans Day Thoughts From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Earl Bennett) (Class of '63) Currently on my annual reserve duty, I've been too busy to get a note in on time for the Veteran's Day issue, but I got a little time off today, and if I don't MAKE the time for it, shame on me. Today I want to honor all who have sacrificed something, anything, in service to their country. Let me start with my father, Earl Charles Bennett, II, who flew P38s in the South Pacific during WWII. I never did get him to talk much about those experiences. He died two years ago, and we cherish all the memories of this rock-solid, God-fearing man who understood and imparted to us the concepts of duty, honor, and service. He sacrificed the first three years of his marriage - I was the immediate result of his return. Dad and I never knew Earl Charles Bennett, who died in France in WWI a few months after Dad, his first child, was born. We still have some postcards from him, and the telegrams arranging shipment home for burial. Grandma remarried and four of her additional six children are still with us. Uncle Alden Oyen served in the Army, as did Uncle Newell and late Uncle Dean. My wife's father, William Barton, served in the Army Medical Corps in Europe during WWII. Her stepfather, Charles Shore, served in the Navy after the war. I went to the Vietnam Veteran's Memorial - THE WALL - and twice traced the name of Mark Black, who gave his life in service to our country. He was three years younger than me and attended Richland Lutheran Church, as I did. One tracing I kept, the other I sent back to the Church. I had heard about the fund that was set up in his name, and was pleased to see the note from Patti Snider Miller about the fund continuing. I never thought much about the sacrifices of military duty, especially for the families left behind, until eight years ago. My four years in the Air Force, while technically making me a Vietnam era veteran, was primarily a very rewarding time, doing interesting work with a new language (Arabic) that I found challenging and fascinating. I walked the fences of Iraklion Air Station on Crete with a .45 on my hip (unloaded, no ammo - can you believe it?) after the Prince and Princess of Greece were forced to abdicate and we were not too sure how the new government would relate to the U.S. Even then I was only vaguely aware that my life could be on the line. As a Navy Reserve officer I was asked in February of 1991 if I wanted to go to Saudi Arabia to work with the document exploitation team processing captured documents. All of a sudden, asking my wife, Barneata, how she felt about it, I realized this was not just another interesting trip. There had been a SCUD missile shortly before that had killed and wounded a lot of Army Reserve and National Guard soldiers a few miles from where I would be working. They had committed to serve, just like me. They had no choice about going, whereas I was asked. Here I was, anxious to do some interesting work, asking my wife how she felt about me going to a war zone. She acquiesced, but not without serious trepidation. I love her deeply and honor her here before you all for her sacrifice in agreeing to my departure - for I would not have gone if she had said she couldn't handle it. My time there was very rewarding and led to other fascinating opportunities later, while she took on sole responsibility for our home and the issues of everyday life, with no guaranteed termination date. When I got back, I made her a medal bar (Southwest Asia Service Medal and National Defense Service Medal) to put on her desk at work in honor of her contribution to Operation DESERT STORM. I received the following recently in a broadcast email, don't remember from whom. Medals are nice, but not everyone gets them who deserves them. Thank you, friends and colleagues, for your service and sacrifices. ecb3 VETERANS DAY Some veterans bear visible signs of their service: A missing limb, a jagged scar, a certain look in the eye. Others may carry the evidence inside them: a pin holding a bone together, a piece of shrapnel in the leg or perhaps another sort of inner steel: the soul's ally forged in the refinery of adversity. Except in parades, however, the men and women who have kept America safe wear no badge or emblem. You can't tell a veteran just by looking. Who is a veteran? He is the cop on the beat who spent six months in Saudi Arabia sweating two gallons a day making sure the armored personnel carriers didn't run out of fuel. She - or he - is the one who prevented ethnic cleansing, inhumane treatment, starvation, and gave life, hope and liberty to the peoples of Zimbabwe, Rwanda, Bosnia and Haiti. He is the barroom loudmouth, dumber than five wooden planks, whose overgrown frat-boy behavior is outweighed a hundred times in the cosmic scales by four hours of exquisite bravery near the 38th parallel. She is the nurse who fought against futility and went to sleep sobbing every night for two solid years in Da Nang. He is the POW who went away one person and came back another - or didn't come back AT ALL. He is the Quantico drill instructor who has never seen combat - but has saved countless lives by turning slouchy, no- account rednecks and gang members into Marines, and teaching them to watch each other's backs. He is the carrier pilot landing on a rolling, pitching, heaving flight deck during a rain squall in the pitch- black night of the Tonkin Gulf. He is the parade-riding Legionnaire who pins on his ribbons and medals with a prosthetic hand. She is the career quartermaster (Army Supply Corps) who watches the ribbons and medals pass her by without complaining of the long hours, impossible requests, or thanklessness of those she keeps warm, fed, and supplied with the equipment needed to survive and return to their families. He is the Army Ranger who humps endless miles of burning sand for three days with no sleep or food and very little water to designate targets for laser guided bombs or swims through a disease infested swamp and crawls over poisonous snakes under the cover of darkness to conduct intelligence on a foreign government hostile to our own and our cherished way of life. He is the three anonymous heroes in The Tomb Of The Unknowns, whose presence at the Arlington National Cemetery must forever preserve the memory of all the anonymous heroes whose valor dies unrecognized with them on the battlefield or in the ocean's sunless deep. He is the old man bagging groceries at the supermarket - palsied now and aggravatingly slow - who helped liberate a Nazi death camp and who wishes all day long that his wife was still alive to hold him when the nightmares come. They are ordinary and yet extraordinary human beings - people who offered some of their life's most vital years in the service of their country, and who sacrificed their ambitions so their fellow countrymen would not have to sacrifice their own. They are soldiers and saviors and swords against the darkness, and they are nothing more than the finest, greatest testimony on behalf of the finest, greatest nation ever known. So remember, each time you see someone who has served our country, just lean over and say "Thank You." That's all most people need, and in most cases it will mean more than any medals they could have been awarded or were awarded. Two little words that mean a lot: "THANK YOU" ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ THANK YOU FOR ALL YOUR CONTRIBUTIONS TO THIS ISSUE OF THE SANDBOX: KEEP THEM COMING! Sandbox # 8 will feature comments from Daniel Gire, John Allen, Tom Matthews, John Wingfield, Joseph Dan, Rob Teats, Irene Gostnel Goodnite and others, perhaps you! Send your ideas, comments and replies to: Al Parker at: Adamstreet@aol.com See you next time! ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ -7- *************************************** *************************************** ******************************************** The Richland Alumni SANDBOX Issue #8 ~ November 14, 1998 Bombers talking to Bombers- "...*in notes, by distance made more sweet..." *phrase borrowed from William Collins, 1721 - 1759 in his "The Passions, an Ode for Music." ============================================== Subj: Three Special Veterans Remembered From: Irene Gostnell Goodnight e-mail: email@example.com (Irene Goodnight) To: Adamstreet@aol.com Re: Veteran's Day (Belated thoughts......) Not having any close relatives or friends who are war veterans, I am left with the realization that there are three guys who have played a great part in my life, who are veterans, and were able to take what they got from the experience and turn it into something beautiful. Three former bandleaders of mine. The first, Andy DePaul, living in California, played bass and sang with a raspy voice, and made everyone laugh with his witty comments from every bar stage. He had the shakes from shell shock so bad that I always wondered how he repaired and built the instruments he did as income for his small family. He loved music and his family and people, and he had been a field cook in Viet Nam. He also set us up with gigs at some Army bases along the coast. I learned how to stand up to a club owner who tried to stiff the band's paycheck from Andy. In later years I would use that lesson...... After him was Bob McComb, ex-marine, who also played bass, sang lead, and made people laugh. He got us gigs at Camp Pendleton in Southern California. His band was my first "on the road" band, and I traveled to places I never would have seen in those days, including the Grand Canyon. The band would live as "locals," not tourists, thereby making friends with people we worked with at the club, who would turn us on to, and host us at local flavor events. Bob's organizational abilities were awesome. And later in Oregon was Gary Battles, bandleader who bought a bus, had it painted and designated it as the Band Bus for our travels north and south. He played mean rhythm guitar, wrote great songs, and sang with his heart up front. He could charm a snake, and his big smile and jokes got everyone going, but sometimes these were replaced by very sad or very wild behavior. That part gave him a lot of trouble. He had seen combat and the worst war had to offer, I believe, and had escaped physical wounds, but the mental and emotional ones were evident over and over again. So these are the veterans I honor, (though I do not honor the wars that used them. But that's another column, one I'm not ready to write yet....) These three men shared vision, going out and getting things done, not being afraid to go for it, and best of all, shining out to people. There are so many people who were touched by their bands, and particularly by these guys who turned their WAR experience into something so positive it surely made even Spirit laugh with pleasure to see them sing........ Thanks so much, Andy, and Bob, and Gary, wherever you are now. From Irene Smith Gostnell Goodnight ('59) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: About Veterans From: From Joe Largé Mail To: JosephDan@aol.com Thank you, All, for your comments about Veterans Day and Vietnam Vets! What a thought provoker, what a message, filled with reasons to be thankful for! What was it that Lincoln said: "Yet in a greater sense, we cannot dedicate, we cannot consecrate, we cannot hallow this ground. Those brave men who died here have hallowed this ground far above our poor powers to add or detract... " The Holy Water poured out was their blood! -from all wars! Joe ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Responses to Vet Related URLs From: Cyndy Brooks Cowman) (Class of '68) e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org I want to thank Bob Mattson for the *URLs concerning our Veterans. I posted some of them on a message board that I frequent and had 2 responses. One long letter stating that parents should not send their children to war, etc... And, another from a Vet., simply thanking me for the URLs. Controversial subject. I respect and in some cases love (my nephew and brother in law) for choosing the military. But, if there was to be another conflict like the one in Vietnam, or police action, like the one in Korea or declared war, like WWII I am not so sure I would want any of my loved ones to be involved and Canada sounds like a good place to live. However, all of those who have and are serving deserve our respect and recognition. Note: *URLs were supplied via editorial net surfing, not by Bob Mattson. However, his, and other inspiring contributions to the special Veterans Issue of The SANDBOX compelled me to find and share those sites. -ap Subj: Should we release all now imprisoned for lying under oath about sex? From: email@example.com (Cyndy Brooks Cowman) About Clinton. There are approximately 115 people in prison for lying under oath concerning sex. Shall we set them free? Clinton has done OK with our country I guess, but when it comes to personal matters he lies. But, these lies effect the view I have of him and I can't listen or look at his face anymore. So there :) Cyndy (68) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Address Request From: firstname.lastname@example.org (W. Kenneth Wright) To: ADAMSTREET@aol.com Al, Read the submission from Byron Logman (56), re: Dr. Richard V. Pierard's article "Christians Make the First Bomb". Would like to contact him via Email, could you send me his address? Thanks Kenny Kenny Wright Locke Computer Center a man who likes to play with mice Health Sciences is a man whose mind you can easily entice UW Box 357170 University of Washington Seattle, WA 98195-7170 if opportunity doesn't knock...build a door (206) 543-9275 ******************************************************* Dr. Pierard's Email address is: email@example.com ******************************************************** A partial review of Richard Pierard's article appeared in Issue #7 of The SANDBOX. In a future SANDBOX I plan to offer for your consideration and discussion some of the problems to which he reffers that have been associated with Hanford projects and products through the years. Thank you all for your great contributionsto this, as well as past and future editions of The Richland Alumni SANDBOX! Keep them coming! TALK TO US. WE'RE LISTENING! Reply To: Adamstreet@aol.com -Al Parker ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Violations of Trust From: Daniel Gire (Class of '83) E-mail: Daniel.Gire@PSS.Boeing.com To: Joe Large', Subject: Lewinski Joe, I read your note with great interest and would like to add a few points of my own, respectfully. I think you're getting the issues confused. Bill Clinton's actions violated two trusts: The first being moral - having "sexual relations" (whatever THAT means) with someone other than his wife (married partner). The second, legal - lying under oath to a Grand Jury. Perjury. A Felony Offense. We could spend all day debating Bill's carefully "word-smithed" answers, and whether there was entrapment used to catch him, but how many separate instances of "entrapment" does it take to equal a lie??? He didn't just lie to the Grand Jury, Joe. He lied to his family, his staff, his party, and to every one of us - the American public. It wasn't just a little "white" lie, was it? He was bluffing, lying to the bitter end, until his bluff was called. By then it was too late, though, Perjury had been committed not once, but SEVERAL times, and over a long period of time. One final question... What do we tell the children? Dan Gire ('83) P.S. - if anyone sees my father-in-law, Ken Johnson ('65), around Richland, say Hi to him for me. He's a great guy... ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subject: The More Things Change..... From: John M. Allen Mail to: firstname.lastname@example.org Over the last several years, and in particular since the first of this year, I have been intrigued to observe how, AS A SOCIETY, we have changed our behavior so imperceptibly since the year before, or the day after, we graduated from high school. This summer in Portland, Oregon, we had a situation where the student body president of Grant High School decided it would be worthwhile summer employment if he and a handful of his classmates would engage in the armed robbery of several convenience stores around town. While the identity of the perpetrators DID escape the Portland Police for several weeks, it was eventually revealed that their identity did NOT escape many Grant High students, most of whom were not involved in the robberies. These students knew the truth of what was going on but the student body president was an EXTREMELY popular kid and an effective leader (from the standpoint of getting people to follow and believe in him), and the students who knew about his activities, somehow rationalized not holding the boy's feet to the fire for his felonious behavior. Does any of this begin to sound vaguely familiar? It should. The truth is, whether we like it or not, within the greater society there will normally be precious few leaders. The vast majority will be quite content to remain lemmings. One of the most (formally) educated graduates of RHS Class of '66 has, over the past few years, taken great relish in pointing out to me that he is in "the mainstream of American political thought" and that I ........... well, I'm somewhere else. Beyond the fact that "the mainstream of American political thought" has itself become a tired, "herd mentality" phrase, this individual is, in reality, saying how proud he is to be a part of that herd. I worry about pride like this, and when you warn your children (and grandchildren) about "peer pressure," remember that it is nothing more than the fear of not being a member of the herd. So now, as a society, we are faced with the dilemma that like some other societies in history, we have by any REASONABLE standard, made a really bad choice in a leader. Unfortunately, like those students at Portland's Grant High School, we have to date chosen to accept a plethora of sorry rationalizations rather than hold this man's feet to the fire for HIS felonious behavior. We are told by Bill Clinton's legal lackeys at ALL levels (even in the SANDBOX), that his behavior does not rise to the level of "High Crimes and Misdemeanors." Personally, I find it impossible to argue that there are two more crucial factors to the survival of any democracy than the Nuclear Family and the Rule of Law. But Clinton, with his behavior and his lying about it, has assaulted both of these institutions to their very core. Moreover, having been caught like a rat in a spotlight during a Saturday night's sport at the local dump, he has sent forth his lesser rats to offer the American people the most pitiful of justifications for retaining his services. We are told for example, that there is somehow a correlation between Clinton's long history of philandering and Franklin Roosevelt's "wheelchair romance" with Lucy Mercer; a decades long friend of the Roosevelt family. And in the face of absolutely no evidence beyond innuendo, the same argument is made about Dwight Eisenhower and his WW II aide, Kay Summersby. Fellow citizens, THIS is what is meant by "defining deviancy down." That is, when a man can't measure up to acceptable standards, he attempts by ALL MEANS AVAILABLE to bring everyone else down to his personal hellhole in the gutter. Those "means" include, but are not limited to, repeating lies loudly and frequently enough that the herd eventually accepts them as truth. And finally we are told by the virtuous likes of Geraldo Rivera and other fallen lawyers, that "this is all about sex," when everyone knows it is perfectly acceptable in our country to lie UNDER OATH to a Federal Grand Jury, so long as the lie is about sex. Interestingly enough, we have yet to see a single lawyer reciting this mantra, who has also had the personal courage to introduce legislation codifying the proposition that it is OK for the president to lie under oath about sex (providing of course, that he is a POPULAR president). But this IS the very soul of Bill Clinton; divide and conquer. Who will argue that Clinton, shamefully, and by himself, divided the American people with his escapades, his arrogance, and his complete lack of personal honor. Personal honor, after all, is defined by what we do when no one is looking; and we now know for certain what Bill Clinton has been doing when he thought no one was looking. Until recently, I have allowed myself to be pretty discouraged by the swollen herd which is so willing, even eager to be deceived by the "popular guy" rather than confront the unfortunate choice it has made; not once but two times. However, I am now heartened by the unusually high number of leaders I see who are unwilling to have this sociopath spit in their face and then tell them it's just raining. I encourage those of you who are still in the herd to buck up and shed your politically correct aversion to being "judgmental." Have a little faith in your country which was well and specifically designed by its founders to withstand the loss of any one "leader." This great nation has weathered far greater losses in the past, and we and our precious mutual funds can certainly weather the loss of Bill Clinton. John M. Allen Class of '66 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Older Driver Testing From: Tom Matthews (Class of '67) e-mail: email@example.com I agree with Marguerite Tompkins about State of Washington Department of Licensing procedures with the elderly. There definitely needs to be some procedure based on medical checks or notification by relatives. The problem is that there are those who continue to drive safely into their 80's, and it is possible that some dysfunctional relative might try to stop a person from driving for other than safety reasons. I was totally surprised when my Father, in his late 80's, was able to renew his drivers license without any testing other than the usual eye test. He has no car and no longer wants to drive but likes to have the license for identification. I'm wondering if he will be able to renew again now that he is in his 90's (without telling them he just wants identification). Tom Matthews (57) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Lies, Secrets and Toxic Waste From: John Wingfield (Class of '66) Reply-to: firstname.lastname@example.org I want to say I appreciate Jim Vache's lesson on impeachment and the presidency. For these past weeks and months I have listened to and read other people's commentaries and criticisms and Jim's is one of the most intelligent insights from a legal perspective I have received. What has bothered me, upon hearing people complain about the President not telling the truth about an affair is that we have been lied to for decades by Presidents while they have been under the oath of office. We were lied to about American Indians being savages and less that human. We were lied to about slavery being morally acceptable. We were lied to about women not being capable of voting. We were lied to about the Japanese needing to be rounded up and put in prison camps. We were lied to about Black people being inferior. We were lied to about the Red Scare during the McCarthy Era. We were lied to about Viet Nam and the "Domino Theory," by JFK, LBJ and RMN. Not that they were giving us false information, but they were giving us only partial and/or propagandized information. President Clinton has not killed anyone, has not started any war and has not committed us to a policy or direction of our country that would lead to unlimited debt and economic or military turmoil. He made a stupid mistake, but he has been the first president to admit it. (I know Jimmy Carter admitted lusting in his heart.) Another thing that has bothered me about the national debate has been all those individuals who have tried to seize the moral high ground. Certainly Jesus' admonition "He who is without sin cast the first stone" has been ignored or twisted to the heights of WWF Wrestling standards. And remember, there are sins (mistakes) of commission and omission. I must say that I have enjoyed the many comments and stories of neighbors about my home town and days gone by. But for me it has been tempered by the awareness that the idilic childhood that I enjoyed with a Father Know's Best environment all happened on top of a secret that has led to the largest toxic waste depository in the world. Was that secret, in the name of national security and patriotism healthy and the best thing for us and our nation? Who knows. But now it is up to us to pick up the pieces and clean up the mess and make the best of it in our lives and in our world. It is our world and we are responsible for it. Peace, John Wingfield ('66) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Joe Largé (68) wrote: Dear Eva Clark Perry, DEMOCRATIC: Government by the People vs: REPUBLICAN: Government through Representation Joe Largé (68) JosephDan@AOL.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Re: Fwd: Alumni Sandstorm ~ 11/9/98 Date: 11/11/98 3:10:16 PM PST From: Rob Teats (Class of '70) Mail To: PARUMC@aol.com In light of the recent elections my thoughts went back to one peculiar political event that I attended with Ray Nelson ('70). This was our senior year and as the Student Body President I was interested in politics. Ray and I somehow were invited over to a meeting of the Young Americans For Freedom chapter in Richland. I am fairly certain we met at Loren Sharp's (70) home. I discovered that evening that the Young Americans For Freedom was the youth division of the John Birch Society. I remember there being about fifteen high school kids, most of them wearing their green and gold bomber jackets, and some adult from the John Birch "headquarters." We saw a political movie and heard a presentation. I was stunned by what I heard. First of all President Dwight Eisenhower was a stooge of the communists and so was our current President Richard Nixon. They were both under the spell of the United Nations which was a front for the communists. Then we heard how the Supreme Court was controlled by "Reds" and how they were destroying White Man's America. They were selling our country to the "coons," their term for African Americans. By now I was really beginning to feel uncomfortable. The presentation went on to conclude that we needed to win the Vietnam War and that the generals needed to use nuclear bombs in order to get rid of the "Reds" in Hanoi. Further, they said it was essential that we unilaterally drop H-bombs on Communist China, because they were by far worse than the Russians, since they were the "yellow menace." There were some other comments about fluoridation being a communist plot and some other really way out ideas. Ray and I were totally freaked out. We knew that we were never going back to one of those meetings. A few weeks later, one of the more thuggish looking members of the group cornered me and asked why I had come to their meeting and insinuated that maybe I was a spy. I assured him, that the Young Americans For Freedom just wasn't my thing and so what was he going to do, beat me up? Anyway nothing further ever came of it, and thank God no one has dropped any H-bombs! I still wonder if any of those kids grew up and still have such a paranoid, extreme politics of hate? -Rob Teats (70) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Affordable Internet Access Crucial From: email@example.com (Tom Hemphill) (Class of '62) Hello Sandbox Playmates: I didn't think that I would ever jump into this sandbox, but the issue of the FCC and potential taxes or any other fees for Internet access concerns me. My prime concern is keeping the cost of internet access low so that senior citizen and children would be encouraged to communicate and take advantage of educational opportunities. So I did send the following letter, via email, to the FCC Chair and Commissioners: Dear FCC Chairman and Commissioners, I am opposed to any action, taxes included, that could discourage the use of the Internet by children and senior citizens. I am 54 years old and my wife is 53. We have four grandchildren ages 3 to 10, and more on the way. We have several close family members in their 70s and 80s. Because of the Internet and email, we are now communicating weekly, and sometimes daily, with our family members, some of which are more than two thousand miles away. We have been able to re-kindle our relationships and many old friendships, because of email. We are also very aware that here in the United States, the most powerful country in the world, many of our children are not getting the education that is needed to ensure the world status of our nation. Affordable access to the Internet is of paramount importance to the educational development of our youth. Any action that will increase the cost of the Internet for communication and education, will most certainly have a very negative impact on our senior citizens and our youth. Communication is crucial to keep our families emotionally healthy. Education of our young people is most important for the future of our country. Please consider all of the negative consequences that will result from a tax or any other action that may increase the cost of Internet access. Sincerely, Tom Hemphill Friday Harbor, Washington ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subject: Are Drug Users Putting Needles in Telephone Coin Returns? From: Al Parker, Adamstreet@aol.com I have seen two separate warnings regarding this come over the Internet so far, and seen one E-mail dismissing the warning as a bit far fetched. I'll just paste in some of what I've seen and let you decide for yourselves to whence you want to let your fingers do the walking, "A very good friend of mine is in an EMT certification course. There is something new happening that everyone should be aware of. Drug users are now taking their used needles and putting them into the coin return slots in public telephones. People who are putting their fingers in to recover coins or just to check if anyone left change, are getting stuck by these needles and infected with hepatitis, HIV, and other diseases. This message is posted to make everyone aware of this danger. Be aware! The change isn't worth it!" "P.S. - This information came straight from phone company workers, through the EMT instructor. This did NOT come from a hearsay urban legend source." THE FOLLOWING CAME FROM ANOTHER INTERNET SOURCE: "A friend of mine who is a anesthetist wrote me back and said: 'Speaking as someone who works with all sizes of needles, daily, there is no size that could be concealed in the coin return slot of a telephone. Most (not all) people who get HIV, get it from UNPROTECTED SEX and sharing drug needles. As far as I know, there has never been a documented case of a health care worker getting HIV from work activities. And we get stuck with used needles quite a few times during our careers....'" AND FROM ANOTHER E-MAIL ON THE SAME SUBJECT: "Sometimes I wonder where people get these warnings from. However, it did make sense to me about the chance of needles being in those slots. Just today I made a phone call and when I hung up, I put my fingers in the slot! Sure glad there were no needles." ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Keep the Bomb! From: Joe Large' Mail To: JosephDan@aol.com Dear Jenny Loper Buchanan, I'm for keeping the Bomb! Not that I'm in love with Nuclear War and have a appearance like that of *Dr. Strangelove (which, by the way, was a character patterned after Edward Teller), but that it was a part of our history that brought the war with Japan to an end. If we were looking for a mascot at this current time and RHS had never had one, I would probably choose something like - "The Rattlers", or "The Scorpions", more keeping in-line with the "Desert" motif. [Note: According to Historian Richard Pierard, Col-Hi-'52), the original Col-Hi teams sported a Beaver as their logo. Do some of you remember a few beavers in some of the irrigation ditches around Richland years ago?-ed.] However, Richland will always be known by that bit of history along with Oak Ridge, Tenn. and Los Alamos, NM. Because of the Nuclear Bomb, we also have things such as Nuclear Medicine, Carbon Testing, Chemotherapy, just to name a few. However, I CAN'T see Richland High Students called by: "The Chemotherapists"! It JUST doesn't have the same ring! Don't you think? Carefully I state my claim, HUMBLY PROUD to be a Bomber! Joe Largé (68) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: firstname.lastname@example.org? From: Joe Large' Mail To: JosephDan@aol.com To: Marguerite (Groff) Tompkins, Here, Here! I agree wholeheartedly with what you said about the suggested Mandatory post-70 Year testing. My dad FINALLY stopped driving around 84 or so. As it was, it was a frightening experience to be in the car with him when he was driving. Fortunately, he would always have me drive him around when he went places. My cousins and sisters would come away with white knuckles whenever he drove, a pretty good feat being that our skin color is a good shade of olive. Joe Largé (68) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Due Process and Bermuda Shorts From: email@example.com (Irene Goodnight) ('59) To: Steve Carson Yes, Steve, I do remember the big Bermuda shorts issue at Col. Hi. I've thought of it many a time and used it as a measurement of where we've come from, (or to?) in the last 40 years. Those were definitely important practice issues for us. Seeing you guys argue and debate the "authorities" for your "rights" seemed kind of scary to me then, but it made sense and probably served as precedent in other later issues for us. The importance of due process, wherever possible, and as long as possible (which can hold some kind of order) vs. revolution (which can cause great fear) was well demonstrated..... -Irene Smith Gostnell Goodnight ('59) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Observations and Opinions on Sandbox #5 From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Ray Wells) (Class of '54) I agree with Dick Epler's comments in Sandstorm #7, save one. According to Ken Hamblin, Bill Clinton had a 10 year affair with Susan McDougal with the full knowledge and permission of her husband. According to the Today show and it's counterpart in the evening, there are 110 Americans in prison, right now, for lying under oath. They interviewed 3 women, two in prison, and one confined to her home by electronic surveillance device, who are where they are because they lied about sex under oath. One of these women, a psychiatrist, has been forbidden to practice her profession again. We are supposed to have equal justice for all so why is Clinton exempt? A president who is above the law is a despot. -Ray Wells ('54) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Talking Points From: Joe Large' Mail to: JosephDan@aol.com Just some suggestions, (should people be running out of things to fight over): How about topics like: Christian Bashing, Fact or Myth! (I'm a born-again Christian). Do you really think that Christians are attempting to force their beliefs on the non-christian world - especially in the light that the Christians are forced to be happy and accept the beliefs of the non- christian world. (That ought to bring out the steam in some people's ears). [I respect your claim, Joe, of being "Born Again." To some Christians, however, becoming "born again" is a process that begins with "impregnation" (in a spiritual sense), by God's Holy Spirit via Baptism. Directly paralleling the mortal model we are given to begin with, a spiritual gestation period follows, with all due care and nurturing, culminating ultimately, in a spiritual resurrection, (or rebirth) from a corruptible mortal human into an incorruptible and immortal member of the very family of God. -ap] ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ More Possible Subjects for Discussion Suggested by Joe Large': Should we really be allowing our kids to sleep with someone when their 18 years of age (or younger), or should we be promoting sexual abstinence in an attempt to sway our kids away from the idea that Sex is a Teenager Contact Sport. Don't get me wrong -I Love Sex! I wouldn't have been here without it! OR: Whatever! Joe continues, "I could get SHOT just for suggesting these things! Anyway, just thought I'd throw a tire iron into the works. For as you know, you can open any door if you only have the key! lololol!" [And, as Kenny Wright says above, "If opportunity doesn't knock, build a door!" -ap.] Then Joe signs off as, "Joe Largé (68) - alias: The Pot Stirrer .... Which, he says, brings to mind another issue.... But the issue isn't described. So, I guess that means the next topic to be discussed is Entirely Up to YOU! SO LET'S HEAR FROM YOU TODAY TALK TO US WE'RE LISTENING! -8- *************************************** *************************************** ******************************************** The Richland Alumni SANDBOX Issue #9 ~ November 21, 1998 BOMBERS TALKING TO BOMBERS -- From all Around The World! The Free and Informed Expression of Opinions and Ideas of Columbia / Richland High School Alumni, Richland, Washington, USA "Quot homines tot sententiae: suo' quoique mos." (There are as many opinions as there are people: each has his own correct way.) --Terence c. 190-159 B.C. ================================================ Subj: Innovative teaching prepared us and encouraged us to THINK and PARTICIPATE in the Free and Informed Expression of Opinions and Ideas. Such as: The pros and cons of portraying the Mushroom Cloud as one of our School's Symbols. From: Rhonda Miller Williams (Class of 78) mailto:Rjlaughin@aol.com Jim Deatherage has been mentioned often; he also was a fairly new teacher when I had him for English my senior year (1977-78). I don't think I've ever talked to anyone who was in one of his classes that didn't come away with some excellent memories: daily journaling, interesting reading and class exercises, being allowed to study outside if the weather was particularly fine and, maybe most importantly, an atmosphere that allowed and encouraged the free expression of a truly wide range of ideas. His promoting the continued discussion surrounding retaining the mushroom cloud logo is exactly in keeping with his character as I remember it, one of strong convictions and no fear of speaking out, even when his opinion is not popular. Though I don't agree with him, he certainly presents a clear, well thought out argument. I'm all for spirited debate of the issue, whether you believe the mushroom cloud should stay or go. Whatever your point of view, it's reasonable to expect you should be informed and intelligent enough to defend it. I took the "Free to Be" class from Ms. Hayes around that time also, probably my junior year (1976-77). It was a very different type of class from the traditional (occasionally boring!) English classes offered at the time. She, too, was an innovative teacher, emphasizing the thinking process as being at least as important as the "answer." I always enjoyed teachers who weren't afraid to let their students actually THINK!! ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Location - Location - Location! From: (Barbara Seslar Brackenbush (Class of 1960) e-mail: email@example.com (Brackenbush) Someone mentioned "...and what he (the president) does in bed with anyone is also his own business." Just a reminder, it was in the Oval Office. That is what bothers me. I think it is very helpful to be able to talk about things. Thanks for the "Sandbox." Barbara ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: No Wallflowers or Dummies In This Town! From: Margaret A. Hartnett (72) e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org (A modern hotel in a timeless town) My, oh, my, they didn't raise a bunch of wallflowers or dummies in A-City now did they? I am beginning to think that Sunday perusal of the SANDBOX is a better contact sport than football! Where to begin, there were so many topics, I think I'll take one that maybe wasn't intended as one in John Allen's (66) contribution. John, you almost had me and I couldn't agree more with you vis a vis "herd mentality" because I have been so far out of the "mainstream" for so long that it looks like alien territory to me, but I have to take exception with you on the case of the 2 most important factors in saving democracy. Rule of Law, you bet, but are you really sure you want to give the nuclear family that much credit? I am wondering where that puts me in the scheme of things. You see my parents both died when I was in my mid twenties, my siblings and I was followed very different paths, which isn't to say we are alienated from one another but we aren't n close proximity to one another, physically, politically, spiritually. Furthermore, I am not able to have children. So, is there no role for me in this society? I run a business, pay tons of taxes, employ people, engage in hospice work and other run of the mill charitable activities, but I guess since I can't take the kids home to see the folks this Christmas, I am undermining the safety and sanctity of society. Thanks for letting me know. And since you brought up gutters and other hellholes in which we may find ourselves, I always remember Oscar Wilde's view from there: "All of us are in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars." Re: Veterans' Day-- I appreciated all of the heartfelt and well written tributes. I find it hard not to feel profoundly sad and seriously angry whenever the subject of Viet Nam comes up. My closest and most profound contact with veterans of that conflict came through counseling, crisis intervention and as part of teams of veterans and anti-war activists that visited high schools in Oregon to discuss the war, the opposition to the war and mandatory draft registration. It was a lively group to say the least. One of the areas that we discussed amongst ourselves but doesn't get covered much was how veterans, who had been sent to help stop the communist spread in SE Asia, felt when Nixon went to China. No one I knew believed that was about anything but future economic relations. I certainly saw a lot of anger and frustration on the part of vets who were recently home, had left friends still there and the President was having tea with Mao. Did that bother anyone else? Re: Rob Teats (70) Thanks for the memories and the cautionary tale. How can you doubt that those young people, or at least their counterparts, grew up with paranoid, hate-oriented world view, gays don't get tied up to freeze in Wyoming nor African-Americans drug behind cars in Texas as acts of love. I was in Scotland when that last event occurred, try explaining American ehavior/sensibility in light of that sort of event, it ain't easy. And that isn't an America-bashing sentiment, we don't have the corner on the market of hate acts. Someone much wiser, once told me to stop trying to understand such behavior, it defies comprehension beyond acknowledging that evil exists. Re: Joe's Suggested Topics: Christian Bashing Wow, what a new twist, from where I have found myself in the past it appears to me that Christians are pretty practiced in being the basher not the bashee! I live in AZ and our governor Jane Hull decided that she should decree next week Bible Week. That is totally inappropriate, she candidly replied that she was responding to the requests of Christian groups and Bible publishers, enlighten me if I am blind here, but I get a bit nervous when I see my governor granting special consideration to specific religious groups and their economic interests. I wonder when we'll see Koran Week. Those of us who feel a greater deal of security with a greater degree of separation of church and state, acknowledge the Christian hegemony that exists but don't expect us to nourish it. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Sandbox Fodder From: Dave McAdie (79) e-mail: email@example.com (David McAdie) To: Fellow Bombers, Everywhere! Re: Seniors and driving Reading all this information about seniors driving reminded me of a very funny thing I once read; "When I Die I want to go like my grandfather, Peacefully in his sleep, Not kicking and screaming Like the passengers in his car" My parents are both approaching 70 and have everything intact, so they keep telling me :) They drive thousands of miles a year doing what they love to do. I only hope I recognize the signs of trouble before it is too late. Re: Veterans Day. I grew up in an era that did not require my service (I only had to register). I will always believe that, no matter the circumstance, if you are required to put your life in harms way in defense of your country, you deserve nothing but the highest amount of respect. It does not matter that the war or "conflict" is shrouded in political deceit - that is the last thing on your mind with shrapnel flying. I salute you all! Hey Joe Large', was your Pot Stirrer comment a veiled attempt at a heated discussion on our states' latest initiative that legalizes the "Wacky Tobaccy" for medicinal purposes. I think I feel chronic backpain coming up..................... Dave McAdie firstname.lastname@example.org ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Special Veteran's Issue From: Heather Pedlar e-mail: email@example.com (Heather Pedlar) Thank you for this special issue. I do not read this as much as I read the Sandstorm, but it was quite moving for me. My father served in Vietnam for about 1 year before I was born, and I forget how important it is to recognize it sometimes. This was a great reminder! ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Freedom From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Jinnie Stephens) While I personally think inventions like seat belts and helmets are good, I don't think they should be a law. A recommendation certainly but not something for the government to be involved in. Unfortunately we did not object when it became law to wear helmets. Nor did we object when it became mandatory to wear seat belts. Nor when cigarettes became such an issue that they could not be advertised at sport events or on the air. Plus the price being raised to include a 'sin tax' (what about alcohol, fast food, etc.)? Then mandatory air bags. And the list goes on. While all good ideas with good reasons and results I believe these things should be our choice. But alas, they were decided by the government which continues to regulate the way we live our lives. Now our over worked police have to watch for smokers that our government decided were too young. Again trying to curb young smokers is good but this is an issue that a family can and should handle. To quote Jeff Jacoby who writes for the Boston Globe "Do you think the lifestyle police will stop goose-stepping when they get to something you do care about?" We appear to be giving up our freedom piece by piece. Every day there are new rules and regulations that have nothing to do with running the government. When do we say stop? We have minds, we can think. Recommendations are great. But give us back our freedom of choices. To further quote Mr. Jacob "eternal vigilance is the price of liberty. Not because liberty is easy to shatter. But because it can be softened and dismantled with the acquiescence Of the men and women from whom it is being stolen. Many Americans no longer understand this, which is why the government now dictates everything from the words that may appear on wine labels to the volume of water toilets may flush." I urge you all to think about this and write your local and state political figures. Let them know enough is enough. Next they will tax the Internet or God forbid "the government should subsidize the sale of healthy food, increase the cost on non- nutritional foods through taxes and regulate food advertising to discourage unhealthy practices." Who knows, if the government stays out of our personal lives maybe taxes won't continue to escalate.... --Jinnie Stephens ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Another Bomber Found From: David G Wittenbrock e-mail: D_S_Wittenbrock@compuserve.com I just wanted to say thanks for adding my name to the Sandstorm list. And to the McMurray Street gang that supplied you my e-mail address. I have to admit that my initial reaction was: Oh-God not more e-mail. I get enough at work to satisfy my e-mail cravings. I sometimes find the weight of the e-mail pouring out of the computer at work a little overwhelming. However, after ignoring the Sandstorm for a week or so I started reading it and am really enjoying the memories and even some of the political commentary [in The SANDBOX]. And my one thought on the political commentary is; I wonder if we and our legislators may have lost the vision of why we send people to Washington? It is fun and easy to follow the sex, lies, and games that are being played. But shouldn't we get back to the business of governing the country and leading the world? Dave Wittenbrock ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Drive or aim From: Driver Bob e-mail: RMat683939@aol.com Here in *Oyrgun there's a retesting of drivers. Older drivers do not face the loss of the of the last freedom until there is a problem, it seems. The death and damage ratio is higher with them because of age. But then, the spokesman for the DMV states that age isn't the real problem. Often, older drivers seem to be able to remain calmer and make educated decisions when in traffic. The other side is that age can be a spaced out adventure like Mr. Magoo's "A Trip To The Store." And, Mr. Magoo is out there. So is Nick Nimrod waiting to get cut off and empty his 9 mm red rider. What's my point? Only that there has to be a point of no ramps, off or on. Many older folks are taking a nomadic adventure, selling the house, kids are grown and don't come to visit, off and meeting new friends and going new places in a big 35 foot land yacht. Cool. Wouldn't mind doing that myself. The only thing is that I'll be ready to do that in another 15 years or so. Hummmmmm. Insurance premiums don't seem to be a deterrent. It would be a burden only on the pocket book. Who is up to taking the last freedom? Where's the decision to be made? At home, the one I would prefer. The enforceable power lays in the ability of the DMV to pull the plug on the senior drivers via a battery of tests that will convince the drivers themselves that everyone is in harms way. But not a video game test, maybe pinball huh? Driver Bob 64 [Note: *Oyrgun is a western U.S. state located just below Warshington -ed.] ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Columbia River Beavers plus Advice for Republicans From: G1A1S1@aol.com To: Joe Large': There used to be quite a few beavers in the Columbia River. They would build their homes along the bank and not even attempt to dam the river (God created the Army Corps of Engineers). There was a rather big beaver home on the Richland bank across from the First Island. I suppose that before the dams were built there were far more beavers. Perhaps this had something to do with the choice of the former mascot of Richland High School. To Rod Brewer: I don't know where you got the idea that your arguments upset me. I thought I was very complimentary. And I believed your arguments would prevail every time. I guess the November 3rd election proved me wrong in that regard. But the Republicans shouldn't let that deter them. They should keep on attacking Clinton all they can. It's great for Starr to show the House Judiciary Committee evidence concerning Kathleen Willey. That will give Henry Hyde more of the gratification that he is looking for and will bring back recollections of his old times. It's also great for Starr to bring 15 more criminal charges against Webster Hubble. Heck, because Webster was a friend of Bill's he probably deserved to have 45 more criminal charges brought against him, not just 15. The Republicans just have to keep this up. It won't fail them again. It is really what they need to do to beat the Gore/Clinton ticket in the year 2000. In the meantime, it will really help solve the problems faced by our country and the world. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Repentance: A Prerequisite for Forgiveness From: Patty Stordahl e-mail: Patty@exhibitd.com Regarding Cyndy (68) Cyndy you couldn't be more correct. How many of the wives out there would forgive & forget their mate for habitual affairs & habitual deliberate bare face lies year after year? Not only to you as the wife but to your children? No one with an ounce of confidence in them say that they would be that great a martyr. To what gain & evolution of womanhood would it lead. Should we all say poor baby, he wasn't understood? Poor baby, she was just such a conniving fox that he couldn't resist & honor his vows, nor his position, nor his daughter's feelings, what type of abuse in marriage is Hillary setting Chelsea for anyway? Internal integrity is & should be demanded in all people regardless of their position. I know how I felt when I found my husband cheating with a judges daughter & the response I got from that Benson County Judge regarding his daughters conduct. It was pro close your eyes & forgive. Sorry. I have way to much going for me to close my eyes to someone who can take a vow before God & witnesses & then deceive & plan & connive their way to secret affairs. Even God himself in the scriptures commanded that the guilty party was to be punished by stoning them to death & the innocent party was then free to get on with their life. Forgiveness is a virtue but there comes a time it is no longer a virtue, it is a weakness. Hillary shows either lack of character & self esteem or she is just as power hungry to be the "PRESIDENT'S" wife & doesn't give a rats _ _ _ about the sanctity of marriage vows. Acceptable in man's eyes or not. What woman out there is so weak that the $$ & prestige her husband hands out would cause her to sell out to her heart & to the common good of women every where. This farce of a man has been & still is a coward. Without Congress & the House, nothing that Hillary started & Bill put his signature to would have ever been accomplished. Remember out there- only weak women would side with a snake or maybe it makes you all feel better about your own cheating husbands or your self righteous religious experience to turn the other cheek. Even Jesus who taught us to forgive said that the requirements to receive true forgiveness was a contrite heart & broken spirit. He said. "Go & sin no more." Not, "Go & sin with someone else." There can be no forgiveness if there is no repentance. I am not a religious person but I am in awe of what I deem to be my creator. I also stepped out of an adulterous marriage with 4 small children & walked through tremendous hardship to retain my integrity so that I could instill strength of character in my children, You break your word & every one suffers but you can all be winners if you chose to be. My girls & my boys know that they don't have to accept less than the best & less than 100% honesty. I could go on for a very long time but I won't. I remain unmarried to this day as I work in the traveling sales circle & I have yet to meet with or hear of a married man who hasn't tried or successfully scored while on the road. Women, believe me, even the sweetest salesman slips off his wedding band when 500 miles away from home. I am in the Trade show industry business. Do your husbands, or for that matter, do your wives attend these business functions? Better hire a detective. That is, unless you are like Hillary the 1st lady Ostrich. PS. I do date & enjoy the company of men. They are fabulous creatures if you don't try to own them. I never ask if they are married nor do I ask for a phone number. I feel that a married man should not be trying to take me dancing & dining & whatever else he may have on his mind. Unfortunately I usually find out the majority of men I am asked out by are married with a strong religious background. Breathe, ladies, I do not sleep with them, but that is my choice, as they are all willing. Sad but TRUE. I vote impeachment. Implied deceit is the same as deceit in my book. No, I didn't vote for him. I saw through him when he first came to bat. Patty Stordahl ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ HAVE A WONDERFUL WEEK - Happy Thanks Giving! ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ -9- *************************************** *************************************** ******************************************** The Richland Alumni SANDBOX Issue #10 ~ November 30, 1998 BOMBERS TALKING TO BOMBERS -- All Around The World! The Free and Informed Expression of Opinions and Ideas of Columbia /Richland High School Alumni, Richland, Washington, USA "He who cheats with an oath acknowledges that he is afraid of his enemy, but that he thinks little of God." -Plutarch A.D. c.50-c. ================================================ Members of the Bomber Family Appearing Today: David Rivers, Ray Wells, Bob Mathews, Arthur Roberts, Kathy Alder, Irene Smith Goodnight, and Rick Maddy. You have opinions and ideas too, so let's hear from you soon! Send your opinions, responses and ideas to: Adamstreet@aol.com (Al Parker) We're waiting to hear from you! ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Thanks for Vet's Day Issue From: email@example.com (Kathleen Wersen Alder) ~~~ Just wanted to say thanks to everyone who sent entries about Veteran's Day. My son and I both had the day off from school and work and it was helpful to be remembering the Vets we know. I found reading the entries to be very meaningful that day, as well as being reminded about what the honor was that day. Thanks a lot. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Freedoms From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Irene Goodnight) Right On, Jinnie Stephens! My family knows well how I have railed against losing my freedoms of choices of seat belt or no seat belt, et.al. I have taken a lot of flack from friends on the subject. Guess you might say it's one of my favorite old soapboxes....... In fact, just before opening my email today, I was on the phone with my sister, saying I have decided to put money into expensive repairs on my car (with 132,000 miles on it), just because the alternative is buying a new car or even a used one with all the bells and whistles on it that I don't want, and the highly offensive AIRBAG system for sure! I don't need someone else to tell me how (and force me, by law!) to "protect" myself if I have taken the responsibility to 1) live as impeccably as possible, accepting events that happen as meaningful for whatever reason (my job to figure it out) and; 2) care for my spiritual development to where I KNOW I am already protected. No need for pesky man-made devices peddled by brain-washing, consumerism-, greed- and fear-oriented agents of commerce and government! Of course, on a given day, when I just have that feeling, I can choose to wear that seat belt, but that's my choice. Should still be. We can stop giving up our rights and freedoms any time we realize hey are insidiously being slipped away from us. Usually under guise of fear: ".......statistics show.... more deaths.......not wearing seat belts......" Which statistics? Whose study? Well, the only serious carwreck I was ever in, rolled the car, my two daughters were actually thrown out, car was totaled - long before seat belts were installed in cars. Guess what? No one was hurt! That lesson still sticks, and my sure knowing that it wasn't anyone's time to go just then. Clear then, clear now. Think about it. We must learn to recognize fear, and identify it when it is being used to get us to give over our personal power to - ? To whom? Jinnie, I'll re-quote your quote, because it well shows how we need to learn to think: quoting Mr. Jacob of the Boston Globe: "Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty. Not because liberty is easy to shatter. But because it can be softened and dismantled with the acquiescence of the men and women from whom it is being stolen." I'd better get off the soapbox (oops - er, out of the Sandbox) now so someone else can get in..... -Irene Smith Goodnight ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: The Case For Presidential Chaperones From: Ray Wells ('54) email: email@example.com I have to wonder if Bill is going to reach over to pick up the red phone while he is having sex in the oval office. I also have to wonder if he might be influenced by an offer of sexual favors from someone or some country that is trying to influence his decision in their favor. People with a background like his are prime targets for bribes and blackmail. Leaving him in office unless he is always chaperoned, is risky. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Some Get Caught / History is History / The Cloud From: David Rivers (65) MailTo: NeverTowed@aol.com (David Rivers) Gee, guys, what's all the debate? If a guy commits perjury...and gets caught...there goes the ball game...if he doesn't get caught... it's the old tree falling... If there's no one to hear it...When we were kids we weren't supposed to drink...most of us did...some got caught, some didn't. The ones that got caught...got in Trouble!!! It's kind of the way it goes. It doesn't make the guy who got caught more culpable...just makes him the unlucky guy that got caught...but he doesn't get off because the others didn't get caught. At least it's better than when we were kids...I had a teacher over at Spaulding in 5th grade...she used to hit us with a rubber hose. Most of the time we didn't do anything to get hit. A lot of the kids wanted to turn her in. I was sure one of them. As decent citizens, Craig Davis and I decided it was our civic duty to save the rest of the kids from this lady (I assume we were usually the hittees)... my mom wouldn't help us... she said for every time we didn't deserve it... there were probably 10 we got away with that we should have been hit. So I guess ol' mom would have whacked his pee pee at the first mention of [related] wrong doing. I for one would hate to see the mushroom cloud go. Not so much for the hideous way it ended the war, but more for the symbol of what brought us all together in the first place. For most of us, our folks were only in Richland for one reason. My dad was the only survivor of an accident out there that killed the other two in the room and scarred him for life. They weren't there to make milkshakes.. they were there to make the bomb...it is a fact...not a myth or a folk legend...just a fact that contributes to history as it was...There are some things we just can't change absent fahrenheit 451. There was a civil war. There was a Hitler. There were Indian wars. At a point in time, the Japanese were our enemies and the bomb resulted from that war. We can't make that go away by changing the high school logo. The cloud symbolizes the underpinnings of the Richland most of us grew up in. I remember the celebration and the fake bomb in the vacant lot around where Bromley's place is now (2bits)...that left a huge crater we used to play in after the show...that was back in '58 and Keeney still hangs out there! All part of history. When I came home from Vietnam, I wanted to put that behind me... I thought I had till they built that monument in Washington. I hated that thing...too little, too late for me...but it wasn't mine to hate or like or anything else...it was for the lost and their families...for Bill Dowd and Mark Black and all the other kids from all the classes that didn't come back...it happened...it really did. I was very angry when the Pres opened up Vietnam for trade...very angry...but that was then...this is now....I was surprised, however, when the Beaver's mom went there on Freaking vacation! The list goes on and on. I was one of the very few American Indian kids to grow up in Richland back then...in fact, when my dad first went to Hanford, he couldn't drink at the community house bar... really...but the Indians lost and there came a time we had to get over it and get on. That doesn't mean we don't celebrate our haritage, but you can't kiss some boo boos and make them well. They were... we cannot change that. If we keep rewriting history to accomodate everyones' feelings, we'll have no history...The whole country will be like Las Vegas...just tear it all down every 10 years and build new. The cloud is where we all came from. Those of us born in Richland, especially back then, have no reason to be ashamed of what our folks did there. It was... and we should be very proud of what they accomplished. Never thought I would participate in the Sandbox... Never say Never! David Rivers ('65) PS: Rodney... what ever you said to spark people off... way to go! ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Rick Maddy) ('67) To: Bob Rector Just came across this. Thanks Bob. I just want to say that there were a lot of Vietnam Vets that did not get hit with boobytraps. I think the word came from the British meaning "fool's trap." So, basically speaking, I was a fool, foolishly fooled, and there is not much glory in that. Also, I want you to know that what's left of me is NOT in a wheelchair. Close, but no cigar. RM 67 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From: email@example.com (Rick Maddy) To: Patti (Snider) Miller (class of 1965) Re: anyone remember Roy "Mack" Brand (64) In the early 70's I had the pleasure of hanging out with Mack, Godwin (65?), and Gary Nelson (67) for a couple of days of heavy suds and smoke, just prior to Mack's spectacular crash in his new car - I believe it was one of those hemi-powered Dodges or Plymouth's. Mack had almost finished his tour in Vietnam and going out just one more time in the field, loses his leg and an arm to the cause. During these two days I came to realize how fortunate I was. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: You can't judge a bottle by its label From: RMat683939 (Bob Mattson) (64) Well, I still have a bunch of Olympia beer labels with the four dots on them and have treasured them over the years. And after a 24 year marriage ended, I showed my date one and Duh! They used to work, right? Oh, and Reffer Maddness inspired me to play the piano, I mean that guy really enjoyed it, and I don't think he ever took a lesson in his life. Bombed Bob 64 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subject: Seat Belts From: Arthur Roberts ('49) To Jinnie Stevens. If I remember correctly, you said you think seat belts are a good idea, but you are against mandatory seat belt laws. I can sympathize with your feelings to a certain degree. Our freedoms, it seems, are constantly being eroded in too many ways. However, It is my understanding that half of the kids killed in automobile accidents in the United States last year were not using seat belts at the time of their accidents. So, is it a good idea to legally require adult drivers to be sure that underage occupants are buckled in? This includes responsible adult parents, guardians and soccer moms taking others kids, as well as their own, to and from the game. Also, do you feel insurance companies, whose claim costs are covered by premiums paid both by you and and me and all of our complying neighbors should be allowed to reduce benefits to claimants who have chosen not to use their seat belts? Should tax payers and medical service users such like you and I and our more responsible neighbors be forced to pick up the difference between what insurance pays and does not pay for those whose injuries or deaths become greater, or more frequent because they chose to "exercise their "inalienable rights" to refrain from "buckling up? Well, I look at it this way. When people hurt, I'll always want to help in whatever way I can. But I wish non-belting folks would think of their neighbors, too, as well as themselves, saving everyone a share of pain and economic grief. A good friend of mine was stopped at an intersection one day, waiting for the light to change. No seat belt. A car hit him from behind. His face and the windshield essentially tore each other apart. The cost to him and his family after many plastic and other surgeries to try to remedy bodily and facial ldamage: inestimable pain and suffering. Whether the family escaped bankruptcy or not, and had to go on welfare, after their limited insurance did it's part, I really don't know. Cost to the tax payers: Posibly 300 grand or more. (Medical costs were cheaper, then.) If there had been a seat belt law then, and he'd obeyed it... Well, I guess I wouldn't be writing this now. All of us are involved together in an interrelated community of friends, family and neighbors. Everybody suffers in one way or another, as an integral part of the aggregate when accidents happen and seat belts are not used. When we do choose to use them, we all stay collectively healthier and the economic strain on our insurance premiums, our taxes, our family income, our morbitity and mortality becomes dramatically less as well. I certainly agree that our own personal choices should not be interfered with as long as no one else is hurt by the choices we make. But when it comes to whether we use our seat belts or not, that old familiar saying, "No man is an island," leaps to the forefront of my mind! For the kids' sake, for our family's sake, for our neighbors' sake, for the sake of us all, maybe there ought to be a law. -Arthur Roberts PS If anyone is interested in taking a look at a few studies on the value of seat belts, you might want to check these out: CTF Selected References: Prevention of Motor VehichleAccident Injuries http://www.ctfphc.org/References/Ch44bib.htm From there you will find links regarding morbidity and mortality with/without seat belts as well as reports about accidents involving older drivers and accidents involving alcohol and other impairments. Below is a sampling of the links to studies as shown on that site: 9. Newman RJ: A prospective evaluation of the protective effect of car seatbelts. J Trauma 1986; 26(6): 561-564 10. Orsay EM, Turnbull TL, Dunne M, et al: Prospective study of the effect of safety belts on morbidity and health care costs in motor vehicle accidents. JAMA 1988; 260: 3598-3603 11. Viano DC: Limits and challenges of crash protection. 1988; 20(6): 421-429 12. Margolis LH, Wagenaar AC, Liu W, et al: The effects of a mandatory child restraint law on injuries requiring hospitalization. Am J Dis Child 1988; 142: 1099-1103 13. Chenier TC, Evans L: Motorcyclist fatalities and the repeal of mandatory helmet wearing laws. 14. Kelly RB: Effect of a brief physician intervention on seat belt use. J Fam Pract 1987; 24: 630-632 15. Reisinger KS, Williams AF, Wells JK, et al: Effect of pediatricians' counselling on infant restraint use. Pediatrics 1981; 67: 201-206 16. Macknin ML, Gustafson C, Gassman J, et al: Office education by pediatricians to increase seat belt use. Am J Dis Child 1987; 141:1305-1307 ~ In closing, I am tempted to say, "God helps those who buckle themselves in." But who am I to put words in God's own mouth? A. R. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Send SANDBOX entries to: Al Parker ~~ ADAMSTREET@aol.com -10- *************************************** *************************************** ******************************************** The Richland Alumni SANDBOX Issue #11 ~ December 6, 1998 ============================================== Col-Hi / RHS alumni appearing in The SANDBOX today: Patty Snider Miller, Rod Brewer, Wanda Wittebort Shukay, Curtis Russell, Joe Largé, Patty Eckert Weyers, Ray Wells, Tony Tellier, Bob Mattson and David Sherrard. Send your opinions, responses and ideas to: Adamstreet@aol.com (Al Parker) We're waiting to hear from you! Please include your First, Maiden, Last Name and Class Year. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "If all mankind minus one, were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person, then he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind." ---John Stewart Mill 1806-1873. ============================================== Subject: Buckle Up With Pride From: Patty (Eckert) Weyers (68) Reply to: firstname.lastname@example.org To: Arthur Roberts and Jinnie Stephens Well written also; yet another side very well taken, and I can see I have to believe you Arthur Roberts on this. We here now in Montana have experienced 'our decision making powers' to remain responsible citizens by still maintaining a rate of travel even though we have been given a green light to drive at any rate of speed we so want, (during the day, provided weather is permitting). Besides our insurance companies and our driving records concerned, I feel it is beyond our own likes to avoid the obvious ramifications to ignore or 'feel the freedom' to not be a responsible driver. And that goes for the speed limits we give ourselves; the times we use our high beams; the times we reach to change the radio station or light a cigarette (yuk!!) as well as buckle up or drive with our windows down or wear a helmet... All very clear to be "risks" when we chose to ignore all the tons of statistics of causes of accidents and deaths recorded in our country's history. (All there for anyone to take into account for the viewing on those sites you also furnished). Road rage and our right to carry arms are some freedoms/and seat belts as well as an open speed limit should still be termed a responsibility for our safety. As Arthur you say, the safety of our passengers and the families waiting at home and the other drivers on the road or even the pedestrians that bless our streets; All are affected by our decision making. I will quote you, no man is an island," which clearly says it all. So I have to agree with Arthur Roberts here, Jinnie Stephens, =Chose to leave off your seat belt and open yourself up and others for a lack of concern or use of the knowledge given out just for the reading on fatalities and broken families and higher insurance rates for just such an attitude. Freedom still has to be deemed with boundaries/responsibilities. It should go beyond the level of being termed in our minds as the law, but the right thing to do for ourselves and for all. If this is still perhaps a hard choice to make when feeling the need to flex some freedom and ignore the law on seat belt use for the mere feel of freedom across ones lap; drive straight to the Richland Life Care Center on your next visit to Richland, and visit a young man of perhaps 21 yrs of age now, but since the age of 18 he has lived in an iron lung type life support system and will remain there for the rest of his life, if he had worn his seat belt his chances for some type of life beyond this would of been possible the experts claim, after viewing the accident. (paralyzed from the neck down). He could be our own son or brother or husband. Does it take this to happen inside a family (our family), to make all of us see the wiseness of wearing our seat belts and not feel we are being infringed upon for our lack of making that choice ourselves? I am not in allegiance for much more of our freedom of choices being taken from us by our government and the laws, but this has to fall into the category of common sense, so please 'Buckle up America' with Pride. Patty (Eckert) Weyers (68) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Website To Check Out From: email@example.com (Ray Wells) (Class of '54) Please check out the following web-site: www.judicialwatch.org This has to due with a lawsuit that was filed by Larry Clayman, Chairman of "Judicial Watch," on November 24, against the Clintons, various White House staff and others, alleging the transferring of critical missile guidance technology from the USA to China (Chinagate) in return for illegal contributions to the Democrat campaign funds. If true, this is much worse than the Ken Star stuff. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From: Tony Tellier (57) Reply to: Tony_Tellier@compuserve.com Subject: To Buckle or Not to Buckle, Is That a Question? In reference to the following comment seen in an earlier issue of The Sandbox: [Quote: "The only serious carwreck I was ever in, rolled the car, my two daughters were actually thrown out, car was totaled - long before seat belts were installed in cars. Guess what? No one was hurt! That lesson still sticks, and my sure knowing that it wasn't anyone's time to go just then." Unquote] All I can say is that you're one lucky sucker. Or, rather, the kids are. Getting "thrown clear" is an ill- founded construct. Based on blind chance. I have read about sky-divers who have survived a chute failure but I would never count on that. There are plenty of one-off lucky breaks but the wise person would never pass up the chance to be sorta safe. Like strapping and wearing a helmet while motorcycle riding. Getting thrown from a car can result in hitting something else REAL HARD or getting rolled on by the car ... since both the vehicle and the passengers tend to be traveling in the direction, the chance exists that something heavy may be right behind or on top. Of course, your idea of rolling the car may be different than my impression of over 100 miles an hour, pitch- polling and endo-ing, shedding doors, hoods, glass, wheels and body panels. TT In Yuma ('57) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Seatbelt Knucklehead From: RMat683939@aol.com (Bob Mattson) (64) To start with, I have been in a few crashes, not my fault, other than driving among those who aren't as fortunate as I am, in regard to being cool to what's going on around me. Check this out. I have a friend that walks the red iron. Now, this guy is walking around in real nose bleed hights, slapping iron girders together like a kid with a construction set for Christmas. OSHA, a state run safety overseer, makes sure that everything is in compliance with the strictest codes of Occupational Safety on all job sites in Oregon. When he is twenty stories up, pulling ropes to align sixty foot beams, he wears a safety harness, which must always be attached to whatever. If he is caught without his safety gear in top shape, and being used in the proper manner, all hell breaks loose. He could be kicked off the job, and the firm could face a healthy fine as well. But he refuses to wear a seat belt while in his car and has been cited twice for his non compliance with the state law. Well, there's my case. I escaped serious injury because I did wear it, he accepts it in the work place for job regulations. But he doesn't get the connection for his own protection, and feels as though his tickets are a badge of defiance. He too sees his personal freedom being taken from him. All I can say to this is that he's lucky in that he makes good wages. - Driver Bob ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From: TME391@aol.com (Patti Snider Miller (65)) To: NeverTowed@aol.com (David Rivers (65)) Re: Some Get Caught/History is History/The Cloud Your writing was excellent on all three subjects, I couldn't have said it better. I am proud to be from the class of 1965!! ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Reply to David Rivers From: Rodney C. Brewer ReplyTo: firstname.lastname@example.org Welcome to the sand box. Now I remember why I liked you so much at Spalding. -Rod ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From: Wanda (Wittebort) Shukay (53) ReplyTo: Wanda Shukay@aol.com It's hard for me to address any of the messages received in this "Sandbox." I just lost my best friend "Barbara Foster," age 68 because she was afraid of Doctors or afraid of knowing she might have something "wrong." I have watched her deteriorate over the past 7 years. She had a silent stroke "seizure" was 911'd and after two weeks in the hospital was told of artery blockage of 80 percent in the neck and 100 per cent in two heart arteries. But, the open heart surgery and neck surgery would give her another 40 years. She, "scared to death" had the surgery. Six surgeons and a wonderful staff of cardiac nurses on Wednesday - day before Thanksgiving. Doctor called - was the most difficult heart by-pass surgery they had ever done -her arteries were the most diseased they had ever seen. She lived "on max medication and help" until her heart stopped 2am, Sat 28 Nov. That call was one I never wanted to receive. Barbara Foster was one of the kindest friends and sister anyone could wish for. "I miss her so much." Yes, after all the tests, we could have convinced her to come home and not do it, but if we had, she could have had a massive stroke and been an invalid for the last of her days. Yes, we could have not called 911 and "maybe" she would have been here for a little longer. We don't know. We only know she is in a better place. (I hate that last sentence). I feel the better place was here with the ones that loved her. Driving issue: No, she shouldn't have been driving. She could have had a stroke and not only killed herself, but others. But, she was a very capable driver. What I'm getting to is, we all must make decisions based on individual cases. Barbara chose the surgery hoping for a better quality of life. She chose a living will to ensure "no one" kept her living as a veggie (as she put it). Our loved ones cannot always make the right decisions and we need to be there for them and do all we can to encourage them to: seek preventative medicine, enjoy each day of their life, make sure they look to death and prepare for it. Love to all of you. Wanda Shukay ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: What's happening to the cloud? From: email@example.com (Curtis B Russell) (Class of 98) I'm from the class of '98, and I was wondering what's happening to the mushroom cloud? It is slowly being phased out of Bomber life without one word to any of the students. I understand that it's extremely controversial, especially in this day and age, but still - it's such a powerful symbol. What can beat a mushroom cloud? A lion? A brave? I wouldn't even mind so much that it's being taken away if the students were involved in the decision. The school is beginning to put the bomber plane on EVERYTHING. I wouldn't be surprised to see the tile cloud taken out of the gym in the next couple years. I think serious consideration should be made involving the students and the community as a whole before the cloud is taken away. Our mascot is a matter of national recognition - it's on display in the Smithsonian, for crying out loud. I'm proud of our mascot and would hate to see it changed. -Curtis Russell ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From JosephDan@aol.com (JoeLarge') (68) Dear David Rivers, Concerning: "We can't change what was, we just have to go on from here:" Here! Here! By-the-way, what tribe? My lineage includes Whiterock Ute and Jicarilla Apache. Joe Largé (68) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Underground Newspaper From: David Sherrard '(71) ReplyTo: Desherrard@aol.com Interesting to hear Rob Teat's (12/4) memories of underground newspapers. That must have been a golden age of free spirited journalism. I don't recall what Grant Ranlett called his underground rag. I remember Ray Nelson, some other folks (who's faces I can visualize but whose names escape me), and I (with technical assistance from Patti Norton's mother) put out a couple of issues of "The Goods" in 1970. I think we also put out a few in '71. One of my fondest memories was interviewing Principal Nash about his reaction to a (then famous) piece entitled "Student as Nigger." (Speaking of acceptable language.) I recall that Mr. Nash handled that rather challenging question with some measure of good humor. The confiscations during distribution added to the sense of adventure. I also remember, Rob, a disputation we had (on some weighty subject) while standing on the bollards of the parking lot down at Howard Amon Park. (Or was it just me who was standing on the pedestal in a (vain) attempt to give my argument more stature.) Ah, those were the days. - David Sherrard '(71) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ DO YOU REMEMBER: Coonskin caps, Hula Hoops and Pop-It necklaces? "Cat" "dig" and "hip"? Bomb shelters in the backyard? Sock hops at the gym? Burma Shave wisdom on the highways? Liz, Eddie and Debbie? Donna, Margaret and Harriet? Fabian, Frankie Avalon and Bobby Darin? Kookie, Clarabelle and Hoss? Silver, Trigger and Nellybelle? If so, or even if not, you might really enjoy checking this website out: TheFifties http://www.fiftiesweb.com/fifties.htm REMEMBER This Also: WHENEVER YOU'VE GOT SOMETHING ON YOUR MIND, OR ON YOUR CHEST, AND YOU NEED TO GET IT OFF, YOU CAN ALWAYS TALK TO US. WE'RE "HEAR FOR YOU!" ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Send your stuff to: Adamstreet@aol.com We want to hear from YOU! -Al Parker New Ideas - Old Ideas - Your Ideas - Opinons and Response -11- *************************************** *************************************** ******************************************** Sand can be scattered, Sand can be gathered, Sand can be melted- To make a mirror of ourselves. Welcome To: THE SANDBOX Issue #12 ~ December 13, 1998 ============================================= Col-Hi / RHS alumni or spouses Participating in The SANDBOX today: Mike Franco, Fred G. Ranlett, Dick Epler, Jinnie Stephens, Jenny (Loper) Buchanan, Arthur Roberts, Jim House, Hal Burger, Hank Oviatt, Jim Blackwood, Chuck Monasmith. Classes Represented: 1948, 1970, 1969, 1952, 1958, 1987, 1968, 1963, 1962, 1974, 1964, 1965. ===================================== From: Mike Franco (70) ReplyTo: Bmbr70@aol.com To: Rob Teats, Crigler, other 70 era Bombers.... Interesting to hear some of the "Bomber social / political issues" of the time come bubbling up, underground papers, etc. I am a little disappointed that we haven't heard any "straights - bentz" history. Remember this division we "endured" between two pretty distinct groups of us? And how things really never came to true confrontation, but when we all decided to meet head on ...we did it the right way: The Staights-Bentz Football Game !!! I would like to hear memories of all this. Also, Rob Teats....the Bomber name/symbol controversy resulted in votes, publicity, etc., during our senior year (as I recall). Was this the first time these issues really surfaced? Also, who out there remembers our "sit-ins ." I remember no-sit in was complete without a visit from "the Shell Answer Man" and other great social spokesmen of the time. I think we put social awareness back about 5 decades!!! I remember my idea of being socially oppressed was that not ALL Richland kids had our own ski boats (many of us had to double up with those more fortunate !!!) and that my family could not afford a pool service and (unlike others) had to vacuum our own swimming pool !!! (tongue firmly in cheek, kinda). Oh yea....during the great Caesar Chavez farm worker inspired boycotts of grapes, lettuce, etc., of the late 60's - early 70's did anyone ACTUALLY forego their Zip's Salad Burger even once !?!?!? Very best wishes to ALL TRUE BOMBERS Mike Franco (70) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Underground papers From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Fred G. "Grant" Ranlett - 69er) To: Desherrard@aol.com (David Sherrard) Hello David Sherrard. Don't you remember "The Goods" planning sessions that both you and I were at? I think both our memories have gotten a little hazy after all these years. Sorry for not having given you credit for your contributions. Ann Norton, Patty Norton's mom was a co-writer. I remember she did a film review of "Easy Rider." Ray Nelson and I got the idea to publish "The Goods" after "The Nitro Express" was met with such opposition. Ray and I were looking to a paper that wasn't quite so obnoxious. Later, Grant Ranlett Fred G. Ranlett (email@example.com) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subject: Seat Belt Perspective From: Dick Epler (52) ReplyTo: firstname.lastname@example.org Reading the spirited opinions of Bombers on the seat belt issue provides hope that the day is near when we’ll be able lump this particular issue into the ever growing class of Federally mandated practices, so that we can gain enough perspective to make some intelligent decisions. The real issue of seat belts is not whether they are good (of course they are); and it’s not whether government should be involved in some manner either. Rather it’s whether wearing them should require the force of the Federal government for compliance. The fact that there is so much disagreement in the Sandstorm is a clear indication that something's wrong with this picture. I suspect the problem revolves around the fundamental question of what government should do. Generally speaking, most of us fall into one of two belief groups. Those who are fairly self-reliant want as little government as possible, while the other seeks the comfort and protection of government to "level the playing field." It's both a security and a competitive issue. The question many ask is: “who's going to protect us from the bad guys, AKA "over-achiever competitive types." Logically, you either have to become competitive yourself, or you have to lobby government to weaken your competition for you. And by competition, I'm also referring to such things as sex, race, and religion. Self-reliant doer types tend to trust the process whereby decisions are made by individuals, generally based on self-interest, which, in the aggregate, works to benefit the whole of society. In which case, a small, non-intrusive government is best. The security- conscious, however, tend to focus more on the needs of society than those of the individual. Such people feel that society-based decisions are so "right" that they advocate dragging all others screaming and kicking into the better world they envision. In which case, a strong central government is best. The “small government is best” scenario tends to favor a productive society. Further, the activities of busy people produce the self-correcting behavior of common interest, which builds trust, so that the need for lots of laws are minimized, and are reserved primarily for gross behavior. Local police and courts dominate the legal scene, and justice is both predictable and swift. Per the Constitution, the role of the Federal government is reserved primarily for international and interstate matters. A government that allows people to pursue their own self-interest tends to produce a general feeling of satisfaction and well being among the governed. The “large government is best” scenario tends to produce bureaucracy as a necessary component to central planning. Lots of laws and lots of police are required to force compliance from the ever-diminishing productive segment. Local police and courts are reduced to agents of the central politburo. The frustration of inconsistent goals tends to drive the people crazy, which in turn leads to increased drug and alcohol abuse. For several generations now, but particularly in the Clinton years, the United States has been gravitating to the large government scenario. As a result, we are seeing, more and more, societal problems unheard of in past years. Drug and substance abuse are more prevalent than ever. Our public schools are a disgrace. And there's no doubt that we continuing to drive each other crazy big time (going “Postal,” road rage, etc.). When pressed, our politicians generally explain their failure to “unanticipated” consequences, where the solution is always more taxpayer money. But we are a resilient lot, and so we cope. We like to tell ourselves we’re making progress, but in our quiet moments, we find it difficult to ignore the nagging suspicion that such a pervasive government could make it all go away with the stroke of a pen. And so, as things continue to deteriorate, at some point, any people will rebel and unpredictable changes will be forced, much the same as in the USSR today. This is, no doubt, the main reason behind governments desire to disarm the American people. Of course, that's likely to take generations as well, but the process is alive and well … in spite of our Constitution. Maybe the government envisioned by our founding forefathers was best after all: most issues decided locally, with only a few specifically enumerated issues decided on the national level. The influence of the Federal government on local level would be specifically restricted to minimizing impediments to self-directed progress. The point here is not that seat belts would be decided on the local level; rather it’s that the issue would never come up in such an environment. Seat belts would be used because they are a good idea; airbags would not. All products would have to stand on their own merit in a free market. In this environment, the influence of the insurance industry would be minimal, as the idea of insuring against failure is a non sequitur (accidents are not inevitable). Assuming we would still need productive people, late-term-abortions- for-convenience would never even be considered. I suspect that both the Internet and School Choice will be the primary agents of change in this process, as both empower people to make self-directed choices based on what they intuitively know is right. --Dick Epler (52) email@example.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Seat belts - Arthur Roberts From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Jinnie Stephens) To: Arthur Roberts Please notice I took the time to spell your name correctly. Another pet peeve of mine, but that is for another column. I do not disagree with a lot of what you say. My point, and seat belts were only one example, is that our government was not meant to police so many aspects of our lives. The political folks need to stick to running the government and not our lives. Might even find it would save some tax dollars if government would stick to what it was originally set up for. I personally choose to wear seat belts and I have chosen to teach my family to do the same. Notice the words choose and chosen. That is what freedom is -choices! Anyone with a bit of common sense and/or intelligence can access the pros and cons of recommendations and maybe even come up with the same conclusions that 'they' demand. With our busy lives it is often easier to let someone else do the thinking and thus the deciding. I respect that you have 'chosen' to go along with the dictates of government and not feel that you are having your choices limited. I chose to think for myself and came up with the same conclusion basically that you did by command. The point is that more and more we are being told how we will live. Our choices are dwindling daily. Yes, they may be small concessions but they are adding up to a bigger and bigger loss in freedom of choices. Thanks to you and to Irene Goodnight for your thoughts. I always enjoy hearing other folks' thoughts and opinions. Now and than I even find myself changing my beliefs - but not this time. Arthur, you have certainly researched the subject of seat belts and I am sure I would agree with a lot of what they say. But again my point is not seat belts - it is the right to choose for myself and my family! Jinnie Stephens (58) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: mushroom cloud From: Jenny (Loper) Buchanan, class of 1987 MailTo: email@example.com To Curtis Russel, '98: Since you graduated recently, maybe you have more information on what is being done with the cloud. Was there ever any vote or opinion poll taken of the students as to whether or not the cloud was still wanted I've been hearing talk of the school completely getting rid of it, but slowly, apparently, so no one will notice. If anyone has any ideas or more information on what is being done, share it! Maybe a petition could be started to help save it. PROUD OF THE CLOUD!!!! Jenny (Loper) Buchanan, class of 1987 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Re: The Symbol From: firstname.lastname@example.org Daniel Henry wrote: (68) To Curtis B. Russell. The only way to preserve what you feel is important is to fight for it. Talk to your friends, get involved. If you don't feel that you are getting anywhere, call in the old farts. Coming from the 60's we're used to fightin for it. Seriously, the whole country will change without any mention to anyone if we don't pay attention. So stand up for what you believe. I love the mushroom symbol even if some people take it the wrong way. Dan Henry, class of 68. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subject: Symbols, Choices and Changing Times From: Arthur Roberts Mail To: Fluffdry@hotmail.com I think most of us think of the cloud symbol with a sense of pride, first of all... simply because it was our school symbol, (one of them), wherever we went. It was our banner, our icon. It represented us. It went with us to football games and basketball games, as well as to all other sports and other competitive and performance events. It represented our school spirit, our enthusiasm, our desire to be and to be seen as competent, competitive, striving for excellence. We didn't always think, on the surface, of The Cloud as representing something so horribly destructive as what The Bomb had already proved itself to be. When we did think of it as representing such a powerful force though, most of us thought of it as a wonderfully positive force, a product of our town, something that ended a horrible war, saving in the balance, millions of lives, allowed our surviving loved ones to come back home and bring our families back together again. We thought of that as something to be very proud and grateful for as well. Many of us, I know, thanked God that we were able to develop and use that bomb before the enemy did. Yes, it is a terrible shame that so many were killed all at once by The Bomb. But the perception was, the war had to be stopped with all the destructive power we could muster in order to save millions more who would have died, had the war kept going on. The bomb, that horrible bomb, accomplished an end to that war. Let us all be thankful at this moment in time that our children, grand children and great grand children have inherited the blessings of a free and independent America and were not born and raised in some city in Iraq, for instance, whose school icon might well be considered to be a giant drum of Eboli, Anthrax, Bubonic, Seran Gas, Small Pox, or some other deadly airborne plague. Maybe we'll be induced to use The Bomb again, in an effort to save us from the distribution of those plagues into our very cities and homes. You know, part of the irony of all wars, past, present and future is this: I really believe if we, as a nation, were to totally place our faith and trust in God, choosing of our own free will to walk as He prescribes, we would never have to fight another war... But until then..... See Deut. 30:19 and beyond. It's all about choices. -Arthur Roberts ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Answer to a Quiz From: Jim House (63) Mail To: JCHOUSE32@aol.com I think I have the answer to Rod Brewer's (65) clever quiz regarding Steve Dale. I am vaguely familiar with the biography of the great American hero ahead of him. He overcame a difficult childhood to eventually excel at a prestigious university. A student deferment allowed him to avoid the draft during the Viet Nam war. His charisma and charm inspired enormous support across the nation. Publicly he was supportive of women's causes (although we eventually learned his private actions seemed to exhibit total disrespect or hate for women). Then, after he reached the pinnacle of his vocation he was accused of some indiscretions in the privacy of his own house. The accusations, and his denials, were followed by proceedings of overzealous investigators and prosecutors who some said were so politically motivated that they overstated their case. We had to endure daily summaries of the proceedings on TV and listen to pundits debate the seriousness of his indiscretion for more than a year. Finally, even though many Americans seemed outraged, a poll of randomly selected citizens concluded (12-0) he had committed no crimes (nor impeachable offenses). Ultimately he made a financial settlement that acknowledged he had been a bad husband and father so he is now free to go about his business. Gee, I'm confused. Was Steve a tailback at USC or Vice President? Jim House (63) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Seatbelts From: Hal Burger (62) MailTo: email@example.com (Hal Burger) (62) To all: The following was taken from the Bend (Or) Bulletin on Monday, December 7, 1998. "Two men die in highway wreck. WARM SPRINGS-- Two Warm Springs men were killed and another was injured early this morning in an accident that sent their vehicle rolling several times over an embankment along Highway 26 near milepost 106. Oregon State Police say Jordan J. Pratt, 20, and his front seat passenger, Clifford Pamerien, 19, both of Warm Springs, died at the scene. The men were not wearing their seat belts and were thrown from the vehicle. "A third man, Jonas A. Miller, 19, also of Warm Springs, was wearing his seat belt and walked away with minor injuries. Police say Pratt was driving a 1997 Volkswagen Jetta westbound around 1:30 a.m. when he struck a concrete barrier causing the vehicle to roll several times. "Oregon State police, Warm Springs Police Department and the Jefferson County Sheriff's Office are investigating the accident." Seat belts save lives. A statistic that has been proven over and over again. Maybe not everyone but enough to warrant there use. If an individual as a driver chooses not to use them it is still there responsibility to insure their passengers do. Its called responsibility. Regards and Bomber cheers Hal Burger (62) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Christy Lynn Hubbard Oviatt (74) From: Hank Oviatt MailTo: firstname.lastname@example.org (Hank and Christy Oviatt) OK folks. I get all these messages on my computer but haven't heard a thing about my dear wife. Does anyone have any good stories on Christy Hubbard (Her dad, Vic Hubbard was a chem teacher)? Some good dirt that I can use in time of need would be interesting. Carolyn Burnam (Polentz), I know you've got some. Lets hear 'em!! -Hank Oviatt (Bomber Spousal contribution) [Better buy your wife some flowers, Hank! -ap] ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Straight Into The Fog From: Jim Blackwood (64) MailTo: email@example.com Riding up Swift (actually -- not the metaphor mentioned by R. Stein) one A.M., late 50's, Gramps at the wheel: Gramps: Damn fog, can't see where we're goin. Me: Pretty bad. The fog is thicker, the cars that pass going the other way are not clear. Gramps: Haven't seen it like this much. Me: Getting worse. Can't see anything outside the cab, not even shadows. Gramps: Hell, we'd better pull over, can't see the damned road. Me: Can't get much worse than this. Gramps: Roll down that side window, tell me where the curb is. Rolling down the window I notice it's not foggy out the side, just the front. Out the side it's cold and clear. Startles me, so I don't roll it down all the way. Gramps is still pulling over, says: How are we? I reach over, turn on the wipers and defrost and the fog lifts out front, too. Nowadays driving up Swift (this time the metaphor), I notice that older drivers are usually only dangerous because they're living at a different pace and seeing things differently. Cute little ole guy this evening pulling out, like in a tank, real slow, just crossing the lanes, looking straight ahead, going 20 when traffic's doin 45, everyone stopping quickly to avoid him -- a little like braking for a rabbit or cat, or something that nobody wants to see hurt. Anyway the point is, where's all the misfits, lunatics and nitwits from band class? Drop me an email. firstname.lastname@example.org ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subject: Belts and Freedom From: Chuck Monasmisth (65) MailTo: email@example.com I've been reading with very little interest the discourses on personal freedoms and seat belts. Now there is an oxymoron! How many of the personal freedom fighters did I just loose? Personal freedoms are an issue that is reflected in a much larger topic than seat belts. Seat belts are a method of personal survival. The two are not related. I am a passionate patriot. I will risk my life for my freedom, but I will do it fighting for my freedom, not by ignoring my personal survival. Come on now get a grip on reality. I race sports cars because it's fun and a good way to keep from having any money in the bank. We drivers espouse several witticisms. Wear a helmet that reflects how much you value your head. My helmet is a carbon fiber/kevlar composite. Very expensive. Next saying: Do away with air bags and lap belts, all vehicle occupants should wear a five point harness. They work better than air bags. I can personally testify to that! Turn six at Portland, OR and turn one at Mission BC. (Both concrete walls at 100mph+) I will support almost any political action that will decrease government involvement and increase my personal responsibility for my own well being. (Didn't you ever really listen to Mr. Blankenship!) But, I'll not ignore a life saving device to do it! Come on now all of you personal freedom activists, put your energies in a more sane issue. You'll then have my support! Chuck Monasmith ~~~ CMM ~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ That's it for this issue of The Sandbox, folks Share your opinions, your feelings, your ideas with all of us! -12- *************************************** *************************************** ******************************************** Welcome To: THE SANDBOX Issue #13 ~ December 15, 1998 ============================================= Col-Hi / RHS alumni or spouses Participating in The SANDBOX today: John Allen, Glenna Hammer Moulthrop, Jinnie Eckert Stephens, David Rivers, Tony Tellier, Kelly Weil Austin, Cheryl Simpson Whitaker, Dick Pierard. Classes Represented: 1966, 1958, 1965, 1957, 1981, 1957, 1966, 1964, 1952. ============================================= Subj: Replace the Mushroom Cloud? From: Ghammerm@aol.com (Glenna Hammer Moulthrop (66)) Replace the mushroom cloud? You've got to be kidding! It is plain ignorance that leads people to think it should be dropped. We aren't using it to celebrate lives lost due to bombings and any real Bomber knows this. It's a symbol, strictly a symbol. What shall we replace it with? A Brave? A Lion? A Dog? Gee, those are original! The mushroom cloud distinguishes us from all other High Schools, let's face it, just like the mushroom cloud we Bomber Alumni ARE different from all other kids from other High Schools! We are the RICHLAND BOMBERS!!!! And proud of it! -Glenna Hammer Moulthrop ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Dick Epler (52)-Sandbox #12 From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Jinnie Eckert Stephens) (58) Thank you for your very insightful words. I personally think you said it all and very well I might add. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Seatbelts and Murder From: Nevertowed@aol.com (David Rivers) Here I go again, sticking my two cents worth in the Sandbox. In '63, my folks were coming back from the Elks club in whatever town it was in (Kenn. or Pasco)...anyway, as they took one of the ramps, something rolled in front of their car. It was one of those yellow concrete poles that divided the ramp from the highway. Naturally they hit it and it did some front end damage to their car.. more importantly was the car on its side at the bottom of the ramp with the door open and the man (Johnny Goggins) lying beside the car. He had been ejected into the pavement head first so all my dad could do was cover him. Goggins did not have seatbelts. They weren't standard in his year car. When I got home later that night, I was met by my dad. (Oh crap...what Have I done now!). He slapped down $20.00 and told me to go someplace (he named the place) I think it was near Tasty Freeze and get seatbelts installed in my car. It had to be serious...my dad was giving me more money than he'd ever given me in my life! He was a believer and I am a believer, having survived a few rollovers back in my drinking days. That was a personal choice by my dad to wear them and the local authority telling me to wear them. So far so good. I don't know if I used them or not back then. However, seat belts somehow appeared in cars...not as an option, but as a mandated cost to the consumer. How did that happen? Who made that decision? Not the consumer. So you say the "Gubment done it"...but how did the gubment decide for me that I had to have this device in my car.. I can choose most of the extra stuff in my car...Later, for a while at least, the gubment would tell me that my seatbelt would have to lash out at me and grab me whether I wanted it to or not...it would tell me I had to drive with my lights on without doing a thing...it would tell me lots of stuff. It would tell my State what to mandate on its highways, as well....but how did the gubment do that? A law? Congress shall pass no law that abridges my right to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness...so it couldn't be a law...the Commerce Clause allows congress to pass such a law? Pshaaww...Okay, I guess we can live with that....You say The feds are now prosecuting murder? But murder is a local offense.. You say the feds are saying no prayer in the classrooms? But Education is a local decision left to the various states to determine! You say that I can't see that movie because some people don't want to see it? You say my kids can't make a book report on that book because some people don't want their kids to read that book? You say you want a chip in my TV because Mrs. Jones has to work and can't keep her kids from watching that show without it? You say the lady living in the Apartment complex whose little girl was snatched wants to sue because she thought "someone" else would be watching out the windows of their apartments to make sure her kid was safe? You say the people in the HUD housing lost their home because they were "mislead" into believing they could afford to live there by the low move-in cost...you say they didn't realize it wasn't an "entitlement" to live in a house ...they didn't understand about mortgages? You say it isn't the war department...its the department of defense... you say the mushroom cloud offended someone and it just disappeared? You say the Bombers are now the Pixies... There was a delicate balance to be maintained between the feds, the states, the counties, the towns and the individuals occupying those towns. I am responsible to my neighbor to refrain from imposing my "freedoms" upon his. I do not dictate my morals to him. The town is to maintain order among the folks...the county among the towns and the state among the counties and the feds among the states and with other countries. Somewhere...most say during the depression, there appeared to some, a temporary national need...then it wasn't temporary...then it wasn't a need ... it just was and is. Its not about seatbelts. Its about the balance of power between local and national. It's all out of balance. There are no lines. Kidnapping became a federal offense over a single child...it was awful but a local crime...until one incident tipped another side of the scale. We have all learned the hard lesson that the gubment do lie to the people. My favorite line from the movie Armageddon is: "They'd like to know who really killed Kennedy." Wouldn't we all. We can't tell the difference between national security and some guys sex life. National security is what "they" say it is. And you want "them" to tell you to wear a seatbelt? David J. Rivers ('65) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From: Tony_Tellier@compuserve.com (Anthony Tellier) Re: comments by Dick Epler in Sandbox #7 "I suspect that both the Internet and School Choice will be the primary agents of change in this process, as both empower people to make self-directed choices based on what they intuitively know is right." Dick: Your discussion (of which I have pasted a portion so that we can tell of which I refer) was very well thought out and presented. I wish that I had the wherewithal to have made those thoughts come across so well on (electronic) paper. Tony Tellier ('57) ~ Yuma, AZ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Seat Belts From: email@example.com (Kelly Weil Austin) (81) In reference to Chuck Monasmith's entry in the 12/13/98 Sandbox regarding seat belts, I, too, agree with you. My husband also is an avid race car driver. He has not "hit the wall" going 100+ mph, but he has spun his car on Laguna Seca raceway, as well as driven very safely on Portland International Raceway. I thank God for seat belts, in race cars, and in our personal vehicles. If I may interject an interesting note.... Since my husband is an avid car enthusiast, he has subscribed to Autoweek magazine. In one past issue (I'm not sure which one), there was an article about seat belts, specifically for cars built in Europe and importing into the U.S. The article stated that in high performance European cars, 5- and 6-point harnesses are standard equipment. When those automakers import their cars to this country, our "seat-belt" laws/regulations require them to replace these more secure seatbelts with the type of seat belts that we, as Americans, are typically used to, the lap/shoulder belts, which may save lives, but not as securely as the 5 or 6-point harnesses. God forbid you ask a woman in a business suit or dress to strap herself into a car using a 5-point harness -how unlady-like! Which would you rather be? Fashionable and lady-like or DEAD? I'm in favor of restraint systems that hold us securely in place. Even my son's car seat holds him more safely in our car than the seat belts that secure my husband and me. I feel that until we, as responsible individuals, decide to take our survival seriously, there will always be those who would choose to have the government make those decisions for us. Our forefathers didn't come to this country to have government choose for them. They came to establish a country where they could escape the tyranny of those who would choose unwisely, and allow their decisions to adversely affect entire nations. They came to establish a country where we would have the freedom to pursue life, liberty, happiness, and to worship as each individual sees fit. You cannot pursue these things if you leave it up to the government to choose for you. I choose personal responsibility! Kelly Weil-Austin (Class of '81) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: "Got a $10.00 Head? From: Tony_Tellier@compuserve.com (57) Responding to Chuck Monasmith in Issue #12 who said: "I race sports cars because it's fun and a good way to keep from having any money in the bank. We drivers espouse several witticisms. Wear a helmet that reflects how much you value your head. My helmet is a carbon fiber/kevlar composite. Very expensive. Next saying: Do away with air bags and lap belts, all vehicle occupants should wear a five point harness." Chuck: 10-4 on that. Remember the Bell Helmets ad? "Got a $10 head? Then wear a $10 helmet." I race off-road cars and have been upside and everyside down. No harm, no foul .. just 5-points. The auto industry does not want scare people into thinking that an accident is even possible. Same with the commercial airlines ... I'd rather be inside a steel cocoon when we are tumbling and smashing and crashing. If others do not wish to use belts, hey, OK. That's freedom. Just don't tell me that belts are not best. Tony Tellier ('57) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: THREE QUESTIONS (Just to Stir the Pot a Little More) From: firstname.lastname@example.org (John M. Allen) (66) Dear SANDBOX, 1. If people are so concerned about what happens to Bubba's backside, where are all the hippie protesters and their placards on the eve of his possible impeachment? Of course, by the time you read this, I guess we'll know if he has been extended membership in the very exclusive Andrew Johnson Club. 2. If Clinton mouthpieces and defenders are correct in claiming that where he did or didn't touch Monica is no better than a "he said/she said" argument, how is it that Bubba didn't perjure himself when he testified that he was never alone with the little homewrecker? Just so you libs don't have to stretch your powers of logic too far; only if there WERE witnesses to the "improper activity" he has almost admitted to, could he truthfully claim he was never alone with her. 3. By the time this appears, will Bubba have told us yet again that he is really, really, seriously, no foolin', honest to God (?), cross his cheatin' heart, SORRY??? Will the Holy Land have given him a character transplant? ---John Allen ('66) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Petition for Censure From: email@example.com (Cheryl Simpson Whitaker (64)) Cheryl Simpson Whitaker relayed the following: Countdown to the impeachment vote From: "Browning, Jane" Dear MoveOn Petitioners, I know you're furious -- and maybe a little sad for our country. I am. The only cure for this feeling is action. Over this weekend, email may be the best way to reach Congress. As outlined on our webpage, an email version of your petition has been automatically sent to your representative. But you can do more. We've set up a special group email address to make it easy to forward a note to swing votes. The email address is: firstname.lastname@example.org If you send a letter to this address, we will automatically bounce it to three dozen Members of Congress on our swing list -- the ones who have email. You can see our swing member list at http://www.moveon.org/swingvotes.htm Compose an email and send it to "email@example.com" -- there is a sample letter at the bottom of this message. You will feel better, and it could make a real difference. We have one week left before a House vote on impeachment. We can turn this around. The three day call-a-thon we promoted this last Wednesday through Friday delivered 94,659 anti-impeachment calls through the 1-877-TO-MOVEON number. This isn't counting tens of thousands of direct calls made by our members. The phones on Capitol Hill are ringing off the hook. The Capitol Hill switchboard has been incredibly busy. And swing members are listening. A staff member from Speaker Elect Bob Livingston's office told me they've been swamped with pro-censure calls in the last three days - - that's us, folks. And as censure becomes the key issue in impeachment discussions, our efforts and message have received great media attention, both local and national. Because of the overwhelming success of the toll-free campaign, another organization, People For the American Way, has agreed to fund the toll-free line until the House convenes. THE 1-877-TO-MOVEON NUMBER WILL REMAIN LIVE THROUGH NEXT WEDNESDAY. [12/16] The call campaign will begin again on Monday. [12/14] ... You can find instructions at http://www.moveon.org/actions.htm And as we begin the final countdown to the House vote, moveon.org has posted a live simulcast of all the comments entered in the petition drive -- all 150,000. Giving four seconds per comment, this simulcast will take an entire week to play all the comments -- from now until the House vote. If you have a Java enabled browser you can view the simulcast at: http://www.moveon.org/thepeople.htm These comments are great. They speak volumes on the diversity of our backgrounds, yet unity of our message and purpose. -Wes. SAMPLE EMAIL TO ALL SWING VOTES -- REMEMBER: Short personal messages are best To: firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: Don't impeach -- censure and move on As a leading member of the House, I ask you to show leadership and openly support the option of censure over impeachment. I am deeply concerned that a trial in the Senate will continue to divide our country. At a time of global economic uncertainly and international challenges, we must unite. We have better work to do as a nation. It's time for healing. It's time for true statesmen to lead the way. Sincerely, Wes Boyd. http://www.moveon.org/swingvotes.htm ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Brother Wants to Get Plugged In From: email@example.com (Dick Pierard) (52) Howdy, My brother Burt Pierard ('59) would like to get plugged into this empire of Bomber chat lists. Could one of you industrious guys/gals take care of this? His address is BPierard98@aol.com Many thanks for your maintenance of an amazing enterprise. --- Dick Pierard '52 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ [Editorial Note: How many of you Bomber guys and gals out there still have brothers and sisters, or other kinfolk, and other Bomber friends, who are not yet "plugged in" to the online Bomber Scene? How many previously not on line will, in just a couple of weeks, be plugging in new computers, perhaps for the first time in their lives? Help them know the great fun of communicating with Bomber brethren worldwide, sharing memories, voicing opinions and ideas, visiting the Websites, reacquainting with old friends and gaining new ones, and in general, just KEEPING THAT LEGENDARY BOMBER SPIRIT ALIVE! Start asking around. LET YOUR PEOPLE KNOW! Tell every Bomber you know, every bomber you talk to on the telephone, send a card to, meet on the street, send a letter or an e-mail to, about this "amazing enterprise," as Dick Pierard refers to it. "If you tell them, they will come!" -ap ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ That's it for this issue of The Sandbox, folks Share your opinions, your feelings, your ideas with all of us! -13- *************************************** *************************************** ******************************************** Welcome To: THE SANDBOX Issue #14 ~ December 17, 1998 ============================================= Col-Hi / RHS Alumni or Alumni Mothers Participating in The SANDBOX today: Patty Eckert Weyers, Viola Parker, John Northover, Steve Carson, Dick Epler, Mari Eckert Leahy, Mina Jo Gerry Payson, Mary Collins Burbage, Ray Wells, Patty Stordahl. Class Years Represented: 1953, 1968, 1959, 1958, 1952, 1965, 1968, 1963, 1954, 1972. ============================================= HISTORICAL REFERENCE POINT: Dec 16, 1998: President Clinton orders Bomber Strikes On Iraq. Impeachment Hearings Are Delayed. Dec. 17: Bombing and bombasting continues. =============================================== Subj: Helmet Usage From: Patty Eckert (68) (Thank You Al Parker for your time and energy in getting this site open and going and thriving! Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!) I too want to say I was most impressed with the SandBox #12 issue from Dick Epler and Arthur Roberts, very interesting reading. Also, in #13's issue, the 5-6 point harness standard equipment in European cars and for race car drivers, I learned from those articles on the advantages of them verses our standard belts, lap and shoulder style. Thank you David Rivers & Kelly Weil- Austin. Its a shame our U. S. of A. isn't also equipping our vehicles with those harness styled belts to save our lives. I personally would love to have a mandatory helmet law (in all states) for All Bicycle Riders. (and motorcycle riders). A safety course written and designed to educate and clearly show why having that "option or choice" NOT Available any longer for the riders. Unprotected heads verses safety helmets worn by law if need be to enforce the lack of helmet wearers. If there were more education on these safety aids in our schools right up there with sex education and protection advantages from first grade clear up through twelfth grades to insure its instilled in our children's growth. The amount of head injuries and disabled Americans would lessen in our country as would senseless deaths. I recall now having a name (fellow Bomber) in the Sand Storm 12/14 issue; a beautiful woman who was close to my older sisters growing up, becoming a young mother and riding her son's bike one day and that ride ended with the loss of her life..... This issue should be strictly taught as importantly as vaccinations and immunizations laws in this country? How many of us would want to have a child or friend injured in the head and disabled the rest of their lives, never to be the same again? Where are our priorities? A law was made and enforced to take prayer out of our schools, (which I don't believe should ever have happened!), (puh leeese!!!) the prayer was taken out like it was an act of bodily harm in our schools, for the so called betterment of our children's rights, so why isn't a law or mandatory education classes in our children's curriculum created just as importantly on this safety issue? To me its as important as our law and responsibility of seat belt wearing! Patty Eckert Weyers (68) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Northover Does Makeover of Censure Petition From: firstname.lastname@example.org (john northover) FROM email@example.com [John Northover '59] In Response to: The Petition for Censure Appeal I have modified the email [suggested format that the petitioners want sent to congressional members] ... to reflect what should happen: For those that want the scum-bag out of office please send this to as many of those spine-less panjandrums that you can. Send this to all your friends, we cannot stand by and allow this moral-dwarf to remain in office!! ************ MODIFIED version ***************** To: EMAILADDRESS OF YOUR CONGRESS[WO]MAN Subject: Impeach -- Kick his ass out now!!! As a leading member of the House, I ask you to show leadership and consideration to the law that is meant for all [wo]men I believe we are a strong people and will be able to survive this impeachment. Our forefathers saw into the future and realized that something like this would happen. The process is there, the deeds and actions taken by this president make it necessary for you to take the necessary action of casting your vote for IMPEACHMENT! All those that have served, given their lives and worked for FREEDOM and LIBERTY will have worked for naught if you fail to vote for IMPEACHMENT!!!! If we do not do what is RIGHT, our children, our grandchildren and all man kind will suffer forever. LIBERTY, JUSTICE and EQUALITY will not be able to look our children in the eye. Our lives will be cheapened. It's time for IMPEACHMENT. It's time for true statesmen to lead the way. Do not become a member of the morally bankrupt individuals in this nation that would over look the seriousness of these charges. Sincerely, (Your Name), ... protector of peace, freedom and right is might!!!! ************ MODIFIED version ***************** I thank you for your time and effort. john northover '59 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Lying to a Grand Jury Means Jail Time From: Steve Carson (58) MailTo: SteveNitro@aol.com In Chicago three (former) Northwestern students have been convicted of lying to the Grand Jury. They are awaiting sentencing which looks like it will be 2-5 years in prison. The lie? These former football players lied to the GJ about betting on their own teams games. It's just a game (sex). How do we justify giving Mr. Clinton a pass on such a serious issue. He took an Oath, he repeatedly violated his Oath and continues to plead that he didn't. Video tape, phone tapes, compelling evidence compiled by the special prosecutor and his own "partial" admissions belie his position. If we are to be a country of laws, we must follow them for everyone. Mr. Clinton has destroyed his own credibility. The House of Representatives must do their duty given the evidence. He will have an opportunity to defend himself in the Senate. Personally I don't think it will be good for the country in the short term to remove him from office but sometimes doing the right thing is uncomfortable. On a lighter note, If the Senate does elect Censure (which only that body can), the penalty should include a fine and grounding. Take Air Force One away from him. --- Steve Carson (58) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Impeachment vs. Censure From: Dick Epler (52) MailTo: firstname.lastname@example.org (Richard Epler) Those who know me realize that my main political interest when discussing controversial issues is in minimizing sources of mischief. Accordingly, I'm primarily interested in promoting clear thinking, meaning that our conclusions need to be traceable back to foundation documents or to first principles. I'm a registered Democrat but lately I find myself voting Republican. I find most Democrats to be likable, fun-loving types; while I find most Republicans to be relatively humorless, and overly serious." When "caught with their pants down," we tend to forgive the former, while prosecuting the latter --because we know Republicans know better! Few would disagree, I think, that given the same circumstances, a Republican President would have resigned by April 1998, and indeed, we, as a Nation, would have "moved on." Along with Cheryl Simpson Whitaker (64), I'm interested in moving on. But in Clinton's case, the only way I know to do that, while minimizing obvious sources of mischief, is to transmit the clear message to Clinton that we, as a Nation, are prepared to follow the Constitution. This is not a complicated issue. Censure is clearly unconstitutional. To preserve a separation of powers, it's unconstitutional for one Branch to censure another. Each branch can censure their own, but not those of another branch. If censure is important, then Congress needs to go through the amendment process, which would provide the appropriate focus. What is really interesting here, is that censure is Clinton's preferred solution ... and that should tell you something. One last thing. This morning's news reports that Clinton is getting ready to attack Iraq which will necessarily require a postponement of the impeachment vote. I hate to be overly suspicious, but this seems to be just a timing thing. There is no clear and present danger from Iraq. We are not being attacked and no one is currently being threatened by Iraq. It's as if Clinton is using Iraq as a trump card -- as a weapon to delay congressional impeachment. This seems to be another clear abuse of power (impeachable). Accordingly, I would advocate sending the following letter to the swingvotes list: To: email@example.com Subject: Your Oath of Office to uphold the Constitution As a leading member of the House, I ask you to show leadership by openly announcing your intention to support the Constitution of the United States by voting to send Articles of Impeachment to the Senate. I am deeply concerned that any attempt by one branch of Government to censure another is a clear violation of the Constitution’s separation-of-powers doctrine. Each branch of Government MUST remain independent of the other, taking their authority and direction only from the Constitution. At this time, a House or Senate Censure of the President for improper use of the Executive Office is unconstitutional, and even more so when driven by the Executive Branch. If you still feel strongly about censure, you should propose an amendment to change the Constitution. For our future survival, there is NEVER any more important work for any branch of our Government than to uphold our Constitution... which you have taken an oath to do. Sincerely, Richard J. Epler IMPORTANT: To insure your message gets sent, it might be better to go to the swingvotes web page (http://www.moveon.org/swingvotes.htm) to get their email list of Congressmen and use that. I've tried, but the site has been too busy. --Dick & Lynn Epler firstname.lastname@example.org ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Keep the Cloud From: email@example.com (Mari Eckert Leahy (65)) Totally agree that the Mushroom Cloud needs to STAY. It is as unique as the students that have used it for all these years as their logo. It doesn't reflect death and destruction, but the end of such! Bet there isn't another school in the country like ours was and is. We ARE one of a kind, and I for one, am very proud to have the Mushroom Cloud as our symbol. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Christmas Music in Schools From: Mina Jo Gerry Payson (68) MailTo: firstname.lastname@example.org It is the time of year for me to get onto my favorite soapbox and sound off about Christmas music in schools. Each year at this time I read an article in the paper or hear a story on the news about how a school is dealing with Christmas Carols. Case in point: Last week a story about a school in Oregon that has traditionally ended its holiday program with the singing of "Silent Night." Teachers had gone out of their way to include as many cultural beliefs as possible in the annual program. Still there were complaints about the religious nature of the closing song. Finally, cooler heads prevailed and "Silent Night was allowed as representative of the Christian culture. As a musician, I am aware of the high place that religious music occupies in western culture. If not for the church, we would have little in our musical heritage from the earliest times. Even our most highly revered composers spent most of their careers writing church music. The three Bs are a good example. Bach, Beethoven and Brahms all wrote brilliant hymns, oratorios and masses. I respect other peoples' beliefs. As I tell my students, that is why we live in America, to have the choice. What I resent is the father who wanted alternative lesson plans for his child, because of their beliefs, when I was teaching over 200 other students each week and making plans for four different grade and ability levels. A student told me that he was told by parents not to participate in singing Chanukah songs since they weren't Jewish. How can our children learn to respect the beliefs of others if they cannot experience some of their culture? I have to chuckle when the most requested song on free choice day is "Children, Go Where I Send Thee," a spiritual. It has ten verses. What a good song to sing to help memorizing skills. One year, all my 3rd graders could sing the verses in correct order without even opening the book! Learning to sign "Silent Night" or to sing it in German are two great ways to introduce kids to other languages. Besides, sign language is a learning tool for those who are not hearing impaired-- another memory builder. Maybe there are other things we could substitute and granted I only allow Carols after Dec. 1 (I get tired of hearing the limited selection in the music texts), but why can't tolerance go both ways? I go out of my way not to insult other people. So don't insult me. ---Mina Jo Gerry Payson ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj We Are The Government From: email@example.com (Mary Collins Burbage (63)) In response to the discussions about government intervention in our lives (i.e., seatbelts). I would like to remind you that WE are the government. We elect those that represent us in the state legislature and in congress. It would be interesting to know how many have actively campaigned for candidates who share the same political philosophy they do. Have your doorbelled for your candidate? Urged friends and family to vote for your candidate? Donated time or money to the campaign? And most importantly, did you vote? Too many people complain about the way government is but think they are powerless to change it. We do have the power but we must use it and not count on someone else to do it for us. ---Mary Collins Burbage (63) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: What Impeachment Means From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Ray Wells) (54) Impeachment of Bill Clinton would essentially be a Constitutionally appropriate censure by the House (a rose by any other name is still a rose). Everyone I have questioned believes that impeachment means removal from office, a recent poll of the American people revealed the same thing. Au contraire! Impeachment is the equivalent of indictment. Impeachment merely instructs the Senate to hold a trial of Bill Clinton to see if the articles of impeachment are true and viable reasons to remove Bill from office. Since Bill (unfortunately) has more support in the Senate than in the house, Bill will probably survive a Senate trial. ---Ray Wells ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Re: The Constitution and The Law, Today and Tomorrow From: Viola Parker (Bomber Mom ~ Mother of a '53 grad) c/o Adamstreet@aol.com If the law and the constitution mean anything today or tomorrow, we must impeach President Clinton for lying under oath and for his indecent behavior. The most serious behavior was desecrating the sanctity of the oval office with his sexual misuse of that office. Some people say that we should let President Clinton stay in office because the economy is so good. We must realize that it is the Congress, not the President, that has made the good economy that we have today. President Clinton is in deep deep trouble. An apology, that he tried to avoid, was too little, and too late. He finally admitted that he had sinned. He sinned against himself, his wife, his daughter, the American people, the office of the President, but most of all, he sinned against the law of the constitution. An impeachable offense. It does not matter, so much, of what he lied about, but does matter, very much, that he lied under oath. The President cannot be above the law, any more than you or I can be above the law. The President should not be allowed to resign, he must be impeached, in order to enforce and uphold the law and the constitution. Morality is at stake here, all the way from being a draft dodger and many other scandals and sexcapades in Arkansas, then onto other scandals, misuse of the oval office because of his sex problems, on government property and on government time. These are unforgiveable and disgraceful abuses of the oval office, and surely is very much an impeachable offense. I other jobs in the country, a person behaving this way would be fired, and that is just what we must do, get him out of office as soon as possible. What a horrible example President Clinton is for our people, especially for our young people, who could feel that if it is O.K. for the President of our country to get by with "living and acting that way then it must be O.K. for me also." With our President as an example to live by, it is no wonder that we have so much crime in our country today. I will not vote for anyone, in upcoming elections, who will not vote for IMPEACHMENT NOW. -Viola Parker ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ANNOUNCING A NEW SANDBOX FEATURE: "WHAT BOMBERS ARE DOING NOW" Updates on the Who The Why The When And Where of Bombers Everywhere and Anywhere Subj: Patty Stordahl changes address, enjoys her career, wants you to know she's still around. From: DZIGNRITE@aol.com (Patty Stordahl) (72) Not going far. Just invested some real bucks into a home design computer with lots of bells & whistles so that I could work even harder for my clients. I still am at exhibit Design Consultants, Inc. Seattle WA but that is just a home base. I live on lots of leashes, pager, cell phone, a lap top & now home computer. Next step is a computer chip in my brain that makes me think of you prior to you even knowing it? I love what I do. It takes me far away from home a lot but that is OK I will be going to the UK to complete a project for a very large company. Have one going to Brussels, Paris, Heidleburg, 3 to Mexico, & one to do a circuit in Asia. That is just part of my 99 schedule I have many days I will be all over the US. Actually my favorite place to travel. I speak the language but have to get serious about my romance languages. 99 means tighten up on my Spanish, Italian, French & what ever else comes my way. But I really love the crude rude good old American English. No language quite like it. I am by far not a master of any language but I am working on the get-by version of them all. One of my partners is going to teach me his native tongue Icelandic this coming year also. Hope my brain can keep them separate. Thanks for the best wishes I will need them. I am going to be a busy girl. Love & Holiday wishes to all in 98 You can send this out to every one if you have room. I would hate for people to think that I am going away from Washington for any permanent stay. Not at least for 3-4 more years Lord willing. By then I want to start my very own consulting firm & find my place as a National Trade show trainer. Patty Stordahl (72) alumna ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ -14- *************************************** *************************************** ******************************************** THE SANDBOX Issue #15 ~ December 19, 1998 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Col-Hi / RHS Alumni and Classes Participating in The SANDBOX today: Dick Epler (1952), Rich Henderson (1962), Marc Franco(1970), Lee Johnson, Jim Hamilton, (1963), Ray Wells (1954), Cheryl Moran Fleming (1966), Arthur Roberts, (Whenever). You will also find two poems, with virtually the same name, each approaching the events of our day in a somewhat different way. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ HISTORICAL REFERENCE: December 18, 1998: Clinton Impeachment Debate Begins in The U.S. House of Representatives. Bombing of Iraq Continues. December 19: Vote Expected on four Articles of Impeachment. ============================================== Subj: Impeachment And Our Ability to Communicate From: Dick Epler (52) (email@example.com) Recent private communications from Cheryl Simpson- Whitaker (64), and Ray Wells (54) have given me new insight into the current impeachment debate. It occurs to me, as I read the thoughts of reasonable people (all Bombers), that to many, the Constitution and rule of law is passe' -- that the principle of relativism and multiculturalism is what's important these days. The law is whatever we, as a people, want it to be ... which is why the polls are so important. When the liberals say the Republicans just don't get it -- they're right! But the reverse is also true when conservatives say the same about Democrats. I'm suggesting that what many are referring to as "partisanship" is nothing of the sort, but rather is a symptom of a major communication problem in this country. It's as if the two groups are from different worlds with entirely different cultures. Each use the same words to mean entirely different things, that to one makes perfect sense, but to the other is total gibberish. Communication, it seems, is effective only within the groups but not between the groups. And so ... it seems, we're losing our ability to communicate as a nation. The result is the beginning of real hatred of the one for the other ... hatred that, in my opinion, is unjustified as both have honest motives. Both are concerned about the direction of our nation, and sincerely want to make it better as they visualize it. The problem is that the meaning of the words used by liberals are derived primarily from "the emotion of the moment," while conservatives continue to depend on the same dictionary they used in high school or college for meaning. To understand what liberals are saying conservatives need to throw away their dictionaries and instead try to understand the emotion of liberals ... and that's hard! It's not unlike asking men to understand women. Both are hard, but the conservatives (and men) need to try. On the other side, I would hope that liberals could agree that while emotion is useful for the establishment of goals, it needs to be set aside during the process of implementation (rule of law stuff). I would suggest it's quite possible to solve this problem on the local level. Once we can admit to the problem, all we have to do is to agree on a dictionary, a culture, and the meaning and purpose of law. That's not unlike what was done 150 years ago. And then we simply ask our local schools to implement a self- consistent curriculum that produces the desired result. Currently a significant number of our educators seem to have forgotten that the purpose of language is communication, and that the purpose of law is an ordered society. By teaching "relativism and multiculturalism" we are effectively destroying our foundations, and thereby sowing the seeds for conflict much as now exists in Northern Ireland, old Yugoslavia, and, of course, the Holy Land. I can't believe anyone really wants that. We can say that the impeachment process of Bill Clinton is all about power, and certainty there's some of that, but it's also a harbinger of things to come. We, as a nation, need to be careful. We need to consider the consequences on future generations of our current rhetoric and political decisions. Both our rhetoric and our decisions need to reflect the irrefutable principles that have made our nation great. If our votes, and the polls, and the petitions, are important then this is another way we can make a difference as individuals. -- Dick Epler (52) firstname.lastname@example.org ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: The Night Before Impeachment From: email@example.com (Richard Henderson) (62) T'was the night before impeachment and all through the House; nary a member was sleeping, not even their office computer mouse. The four articles were hanging o'er the House chamber with care; Clinton, knowing his presidency would soon be decided there.. When out of the media there arose such a clatter; all the Capitol was a buzz with the latest rumors and chatter. T'was it the White House? T'was it the media? No one would confess; must be another FBI file to stir up a mess. Names were leaked and stories abounded; no accuracy, no sources, upon which it could be founded. This was the stage that now had been set; the names, the reputations that members would protest or protect. So this is the story of how it must be; the House, the Constitution, and the truth that will keep America free. --- Rich Henderson Class of '62 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Republican president resignation From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Marc Franco) (70) Dick Epler made a remarkable observation that "Few would disagree, I think, that given the same circumstances, a Republican President would have resigned by April 1998, and indeed, we, as a Nation, would have "moved on." I would love to know how he arrived at this truly unusual conclusion. The only two presidents of recent memory who have had anything to resign about are Richard Nixon, who never did resign, even with all the tapes, etc. until after the smoking gun was found and the impeachment hearings had voted in favor of impeachment- exactly where we are now as I write this, and Ronald Reagan, mixed up with the Iran- Contra affair. I believe he did not resign either, even though his administration claimed the record for most employees indicted. I think most people would admit that Watergate was far more serious than this tawdry affair is, although I know at least one person who disagrees with that, and the Iran- Contra affair would seem to be at least as serious. Nixon did not resign, even under the weight of far more serious evidence, until he absolutely had to, and nobody else has EVER resigned. I would like to ask why anybody thinks that a Republican president is more likely to resign than Clinton. I see no evidence of that as yet. As long as I'm here, I might as well add one more thing. I have been somehwat bemused by the total hypocrisy of the Republicans in this mess. I'm ot talking about the obvious hypocrisies that seemingly half of the Republican party has had affairs of their own. I'm probably exaggerating a little, but I'm sure everybody knows what I'm talking about. The fact is that most people are aware that the real issue is that Clinton lied under oath. Nobody can, or should, forgive him for that. My bemusement concerns the reactions of Republicans in general during the Iran- Contra affair when Oliver North lied under oath to the Congress, and was promptly hailed as a hero by no less than Henry Hyde, present chairman of the Judiciary committee, and by numerous other high- ranking Republicans. later, when Newt Gingrich lied in his testimonies a few years ago to the Congress, he was promptly re- elected as Speaker. Seemingly, to the Republicans, lying under oath is only a crime if you disagree with it. I do not intend to be partisan, because I tend to vote independent, but I think that the evidence is there. In reality, everybody who lies under oath is guilty, and should be punished. ---Marc Franco ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Panjandrums From: Lee Johnson (BeegByte@aol.com) In Reference to: Northover Does Makeover of Censure Petition (as seen in Sandbox #14) which was sent by email@example.com (john northover) which is quoted, in part, within the brackets below: ["I have modified the email [suggested format that the petitioners want sent to congressional members] ... to reflect what should happen: For those that want the scum-bag out of office please send this to as many of those spine-less PANJANDRUMS that you can."] AL: You must be distracted by something. You are not going to let the word PANJANDRUMS slide by without comment are you? Take care...Lee Al Responds: Glad you called this to our attention, Lee: So I looked the word up: And what a spiffy word it is! According to my trusty Funk and Wagnals Standard Desk Dictionary, a Panjandrum is: a mock title for an official of exaggerated importance or great pretensions. [Coined by Samuel Foote, 1720-1777, English dramatist and actor.] Would you say then, Lee, that there's been a lot of panjandrumony going on lately, in high places? I'm not saying there is or is not, mind you, just asking if you think there is. We may have to give Mr. Northover the "Cool Word of the Month Award" for using "Panjandrum" in a sentence so effectively. Then you should get the "Cool Special Investigator Award" for calling that word to the attention of all who might have glossed over it without appreciating the full intrinsic value of its nuansic essence. The plaques are in the mail! -Al Parker ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Dick Epler's Message in Sandbox #14 Also: An Invitation to Hear Bill Clinton Sing From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Ray Wells) (54) Dick Epler's message is right on -- worth re-reading several times. BTW, If anyone would be interested in receiving an email ".wav" (audio) attachment of Bill Clinton voicing his confession to music in very graphic, humorous terms, send your email request to: email@example.com and I will email it free of charge. Ray Wells (54) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Impeachment From: CHERYL MORAN FLEMING (66). Mail To: firstname.lastname@example.org After reading all the entries regarding the Impeachment Hearings, it warms my Bomber Heart and renews faith in our process, that so many fellow Bombers agree on Impeachment and removal of office as the only solution. Today's Spokesman Review announced the Special White House Christmas Show, and said Vice President Gore and his wife, Tipper, will replace Bill and Hilary in their display of the decorations at the White House. This small announcement confirms in my mind of the power loss of our president. Even if he is not found guilty and removed, there are those of us who already look at him as a non-credible leader. He would do himself, his family and the entire country a huge favor by voluntarily leaving quickly and quietly. Thanks for your HUGE EFFORTS in providing us the Sandbox. It's been very educational. ---CHERYL MORAN FLEMING (66) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Musings on a Saturday Morning From: Jim Hamilton (email@example.com) While Christmas always conjures up all kinds of memories, this year I've had a new "Ghost of Christmas Past." With the television impacted with all kinds of overblown rhetoric, to the point that nothing else seems to be coming out, I've given thought to individuals I've known of Honesty, Integrity, and High Moral Purpose. For several Christmas Vacations and summers, I had the opportunity to be a clerk at Dawson Richards. I think back to these times with Grover Dawson as some of the more enjoyable working experiences of my life. Grover, while as complex as a person can be, could always look you straight in the eye and give you the time and council you or he thought was necessary. A true Icon, and one of the last TV Dads, Grover was passionately devoted to his family and community. One of the driving reasons for our great memories of growing up in Richland, was Grover and men like him. Much later in life, on a trip to Louisiana, I first heard a term that now reminds me of Grover's philosophy toward family, friends, community and business. No, not "Let the good times roll," but he would have given that some consideration. But, Lagniappe, "Something Extra." The world is a much better place because of Grover Dawson. It's been quite a few years since he was taken from us, and I think of him often. Thank you Grover, for being my friend. ---Jim Hamilton ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subject: 'Twas The Night Before Impeachment From: Arthur Roberts (firstname.lastname@example.org) 'Twas the night before Impeachment And All Through the House, The Impeachers were saying, "The Pres' is a louse." "Just let him be censured," The others did cry, Fine him a mill, And let the bombs fly! The votes were then counted, Before they were cast, Like stockings they hung, In the chambers so vast. The nation had heard, Refrains of regret, But admitting of lies? You'd better not bet. But when all had been said, And all had been done, Regardless what remedy Should really have won, The results would just be Only one battle done, In a war not won, By anyone. ~~Arthur Roberts ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ANNOUNCING A NEW SANDBOX FEATURE: "WHAT BOMBERS ARE DOING NOW" Updates on the Who The Why The When And Where of Bombers Everywhere and Anywhere ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ That's it for this issue of The Sandbox, folks. Share your opinions, Your Feelings, Your Ideas and News About YOU with all of us! ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ -15- *************************************** *************************************** ******************************************** THE SANDBOX Issue #16 ~ December 21, 1998 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Col-Hi / RHS Alumni and Participating in The SANDBOX Today: Bob Rector (62), Tony Sharpe (63), John M. Allen (66), Teresa Cook Morgan (73), Dick Epler (52), JosephDan (68), Richard Wight (52), Ray Wells (54), Lee Johnson (54), Ray Stein (64) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Historical Reference: Sat, December 19, 1998, President Clinton Impeached, Bombing of Iraq halted pending evaluation of mission's success. Mon, Dec 21, Stocks soar. Techs rally to new records. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Thank you for collecting the thoughts. From: email@example.com (Bob Rector) (62) To: ADAMSTREET@aol.com (Al Parker) (53) Have enjoyed the banter in the box. "None of us is as smart as all of us," 'cept maybe the lady who thought seat belts were a Communist plot. Keep up the good work. -Rector '62 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: And So did yo MAMA From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Tony Sharpe) (63) To: ADAMSTREET@aol.com Right on Dick! Your observations in the Dec 19 Sandbox issue as to the difference in language between Republicans (conservatives) and Democrats (liberals) were right at the heart of the problem. One need look no further than Mr. Franco's comments that followed. We see the classic Democrat defense in "and so did your mother." I don't recall any evidence that Ollie lied, and by the way was he under oath before a Grand Jury? If Richard Nixon only resigned after the "smoking gun" of his own tapes, why didn't ol' Willie do the same after the salvo of the Blue Dress. O that's right he didn't inhale, or was it exhale or "EJ" something. Richard Nixon used the power of his office to cover-up a break in at the Demo. Natl. HQ. Mr. Clinton used the power of his office to cover up an affair with a 21 year old gaga intern in The Oval Office on MY TIME, and then perjured himself in front of a Grand Jury. "Mr. Clinton, were you ever alone with Ms. Lewensky in the Oval Office" Bill- duh I don't recall ever being alone. Get Real! Any man will tell you that he would remember every sordid moment of encounters like that. The only thing that I can figure, Dick, is that being a liberal must automatically qualify one for the never have to admit I done wrong club. The man (Wm. Jefferson Clinton) has immense political savvy and charisma, but absolutely no integrity. PS Mark, It's OK To admit you're a democrat, but don't say you're not partisan after laying out the patented Democrat apologist line. There are only 10 people I am reasonably sure that are truly "Independent," and they are the 5 Republicans that voted "No" and the 5 Democrats that voted "Yes." Come on Ron R. I'm sure you're just itchin' to say something on this. Tony Sharpe, Class of 63 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: How Smart Is He, Anyway? (for the SANDBOX) From: email@example.com (John M. Allen) (66) Bill Clinton possesses at least one faculty that is truly spectacular and NOBODY disputes it. He has a near photographic memory. It certainly is an enviable quality to have and plenty of people inside the beltway do envy it. Most of them are the political pundits who tell us how bright a guy he is. BUT IS HE? I say this is a situation where these pundits (who are no more lacking in ego than the pols they cover) are saying To themselves, "How DOES he remember all ten of my children's ages? I'm a smart guy and their FATHER. I can't do that; how does HE do that? He must be an unbelievably smart guy. Gee, I wish I were that smart." I suggest they are mistaking his fantastic memory for true intelligence, and the reason I say that is because without exception, every one of these pundits (even the most liberal of the liberal lap dogs like Al Hunt and Eleanor Clift) have also accused Clinton of being "terminally indecisive." They say that he can and does sit and discuss the minutia of policy ad nausium, but when it's time for the rubber to meet the road, he simply can't make up his mind. And even when he does occasionally make a decision,he then very often waffles on that decision. SO, if a chief executive possesses the memory qualities of a Bill Clinton but can't make a decision with the knowledge he has acquired, what good is that memory except to impress the majority of society which doesn't have its equal? He graduated from Georgetown and Yale Law during the Vietnam War when both schools were using a Pass/Fail system to avoid sending students to the draft, and when he arrived at the one school which actually kept track of his academic progress (that would be Oxford where he "sort of" attended on his Rhodes Scholarship) Clinton failed to graduate. When confronted with this fact during the '92 election, he claimed that many Rhodes Scholars were caught up in protesting the War and the graduation rates in that time window were much lower. The real truth (as opposed to the Clinton truth) is that his Oxford class graduated the same 80% of Rhodes Scholars it normally does - war or no war. The point of all this is that I fail to understand why libs are making such a stink about keeping this guy around. Certainly no one in their right mind is going to claim that the man possesses even a modicum of common sense, and his recently departed Press Secretary, Mike McCurry, is telling BBC television audiences about his considerable doubts concerning Clinton's fitness to hold the Office of President; pointing to the alarming recklessness of his personality. Do the Democratic Party and libs in general want to waste their political capital defending a reckless, terminally indecisive president who possesses a tendency to lie when telling the truth would literally be much easier, absolutely NO common sense, but has an excellent memory? Does he really make the "feel good" party feel THAT good when he flips the political bird at the Supreme Court, the judiciary in general, the House of Representatives, AND, not least of all, the American people? But Clinton does possess one other amazing quality which, more than any other, has kept him in office. As Democratic Senator Bob Kerry from Nebraska said in an interview after the '92 election, "Bill Clinton is an exceptionally good liar. You know that, exceptionally good!" ---John Allen ('66) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Out of Touch? From: Teresa Cook Morgan (73) firstname.lastname@example.org I guess I've been sheltered living in Richland for a large part of my life having moved here with my family and then following my engineer husband around the country where he works in nuclear plants. One of the advantages of being a writer of fiction is that I can write anywhere. I was stunned, however, when I began to hear from editors as I submitted one of my books. A little background. The book dealt with a woman returning to her government built home town where her grandfather and his brothers had founded an engineering consulting company, now headed by her father. The town was, of course, Richland, and the mystery dealt with the selling of classified documents from the 1940's to 1977. Almost without exception, the editors loved the plot, characters, conflict and crafting. Not an editor would touch it. Too controversial. They couldn't take a risk in the present market. The book didn't push nuclear power or nuclear weapons. It was just the subject matter that was being pirated. My question: Am I so sheltered, so out of touch that I never realized that the mere mention of the existance of the Manhatten Project and its role in ending a horrible war is horrendously offensive to the majority of people in our country? Obviously, I am. Come on, the content of the stories we choose to read boggles my mind. And on occasion renders me so frightened I'm afraid To sleep. Has anyone else come across this depth of offense at what our parents and grandparents worked so hard on to save this country? I knew that there were some that insisted we should apologize for dropping the bomb. I knew that nuclear power evokes a lot of heated debate. But I never knew our Manhatten Project was so WIDELY offensive. I realize editors are a wary lot. They have to worry about what will sell and make their company bucks. I'm not offended. Really. I'm just stunned that I was so out of touch with what the rest of the country may think. Thoughts anyone? Teresa Morgan ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Seatbelts and Safety From: Dick Epler (52) email@example.com Be careful what you wish for because you just might get it … and then some. More “safety” laws mandating the use of various products are generally not the answer. The best safety device we have is still between our ears. Having said that, however, some of the products discussed in the SANDBOX do more to confuse the safety issue than help. For example, when discussing 5 and 6- point restraint systems along with Kevlar helmets, I think we need to keep in mind what these things are for. They're for surviving hi-impact crashes involving high performance vehicles. While we’re at it, we should also consider the use of engineered tubular-steel crash cages that break away from the rest of the vehicle at 60 to 100G forces. And we mustn't forget the use of special fire protective clothing (Nomex and the PBI/Lenzing blends). After the impact, the biggest danger to life is fire. And yes, with the proper equipment, Princess Diana could have survived. Flying single-engine jets teaches that. Also the activities of my oldest son teaches that. He’s a professional race car driver. His current specialty is the ear splitting, nitro-fueled funny cars. Jim Epler was the first funny car driver to go over 300 mph from a standing start in the quarter mile. But he’s raced almost everything from motorcycles to the alcohol-fueled limited hydros. I have a shelf of videos of his more spectacular crashes. It’s amazing what you can walk away from … so long as you use the proper equipment. What we need to recognize here, however, is that none of this has anything to do with being safe. It has to do with pushing the limits of both yourself and your high performance vehicle. We’re talking about survival under extremely hazardous conditions. Use of the word “safe” in this context is not helpful. Real safety is having a X2 or X3 margin, considering your skills, your vehicle and the environment (which also includes the speed-limit laws of the land). ALL cars manufactured for use in the U.S., in the last 5 years or so, have at least a X2 margin. There is no good reason for an average driver to have an accident with a recent model car in the U.S. But many do … mostly because they’re simply not focused on their driving and because they’ve never learned how to recover from common driving situations. And so, seat belts become important. Having Government involved in the research and design of seat belts could be a good idea. Having Government mandate the use of seat belts is not. Mandating seat belts tends to give many a false sense of security, and accidents go up, even though expensive hospital stays go down. Its a rather perverse psychology that increases the accident rate up with the introduction of each new Government mandated “safety” device. Could it be that lowering the accident rate is not the Government's primary objective? I've read in the SANDBOX where some think the insurance industry is driving the seat belt thing. They're partly right. It’s more a loose consortium consisting of insurance, medical, auto and Government entities. It’s to the advantage of all these entities to manage the accident rate in this country. What is desired is a reasonable increase each year in the accident rate with little or no increase to any long-term hospital stay. We don’t want any double or quad paraplegics … very expensive. We DO want “safety systems” that either kill people outright (or at least within 30 days) or result in costs that are within the insurance industry’s carefully calculated limits. Understand what’s at stake. If the nation’s accident rate decreased by 5% for two or more years in a row, a major growth industry would be in real trouble. We'd have lots of insurance claims adjusters, underwriters, emergency room, and auto body repair people out of work (but the number of Government regulators would probably increase). New car buying would probably take a nosedive. There’s lots of economic reasons to want the accident rate to increase each year. After all, a percentage of your pocketbook has already been included in the balance sheets of each. *************** I feel compelled to discuss one last related thing: the “list mentality” of well meaning people. Many activists in search of a cause have a list mentality. This is where you’re given a list, generally prioritized using statistics, of things the Government wants to control. As an example, a partial list for automobile safety might read: 1) Seat belts; 2) Air bags; 3) ABS brake systems; 4) AWD systems; 5) Child restraints; 5) Helmets for all passengers; 6) SUVs vs. compacts; and 7) center-mounted vs. side-mounted gas tanks. The activist’s objective is to proceed through the list by organizing and building support as necessary to get as many laws passed as possible. Now, a mandated law is generally very expensive to the industry, but activists always justify the cost on the basis of saving lives. Are lives saved? Well, when you're managing a list of many items, its very hard to know which of the many was really effective. More important, however, is the effect of transferring responsibility for personal safety from the individual to the Government, which invariably leads to more accidents along with a possible increase in net deaths as well. Nevertheless there is a way to quantify the issue using the principle of acceptable risk. The idea is to establish an economic threshold (cost) below which the risks to people in not mandating a particular safety program is acceptable. We would be asked, for example, whether the risk to sub-compacts in allowing SUVs on the road is acceptable given the cost to industry To shift production, and to SUV owners who would be required to switch to full-size trucks to preserve their desired margin of safety. Most activists, however, are well meaning people. But for those who make these lists (lobbyists and the bureaucracy), and for those who supply the statistics, (academians for hire), the initial profit potential is predictable and quite large, as each item on the list involves a product guaranteed by the Government To have little or no competition. Of course, the profit becomes less as time goes on … at a point when it no longer matters. To many activists, being able to cross items off the list provides the illusion of progress. The problem, however, is that the “list mentality” relies on using the force of Government as a consumer buying incentive. In so doing, it distorts the free market and results in the misallocation of scarce resources. Worse, each item on the list takes on a life of its own and never goes away even after more effective solutions are found. The common element in both these discussions is simply this (from Watergate): “… if you want the truth, you must follow the money.” Anyone want to apply this principle to the Desert Fox Military Operation? ***************** Back to the future. In a different world, safety would be a matter of teaching people “how to become experts at making mistakes.” By that I mean the ability to make mistakes that are easy to correct and that tend to avoid catastrophe. These days, it is popular to shield our children from making mistakes of any kind, thereby postponing a very important part of their development. We teach them, in the schools, to never attempt anything they’re not qualified to do. Call an expert (licensed by the government, of course) … don’t do it yourself. I suppose this is a consequence of our liability laws, but it is an unnatural expectation with dangerous consequences. Much better to teach our children how to make mistakes. It wasn’t always this way. When most of us were growing up, we roamed far and wide using our natural curiosity, experimenting and freely discovering the world. Remarkably, there were fewer problems than today. For the most part, no-one ever knew about our “mistakes.” Reading the Sandstorm reinforces this as we can read any number of stories where the writer seems to wonder how they ever lived to grow up. I would suggest their parents (and the environment) subtly taught them the practice of making easy-to-correct mistakes. On a larger scale, we as a nation were capable of some pretty amazing things. Consider that, in the days of Will Rogers, the Corps of Engineers commissioned DuPont to build Hanford, (HEW) under a simple one sentence contract: "... to build a secret weapon." Understand, this was a thing that had never been done before and mistakes were expected. Nevertheless, for a cost of $349.32 million, in a period of just 22 months (Apr 43 - Feb 45), DuPont built three nuclear reactors (B, D & F), three separation plants (200 T, D, and F), the 300 Area Labs, 64 single shell tanks, and the town of Richland complete with 4300 homes, associated schools, stores and administration buildings. As I recall, at the peak, there were over 50,000 employees involved in this effort, yet the safety was remarkably good. Over this period, I believe there were 11 deaths, 7 when a water tower collapsed, and 4 when two locomotives collided. So whatya think? Anyone believe we could we do this today? Dick Epler firstname.lastname@example.org ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Joseph Dan Loves the way Mina Jo Paysons thinks. From: JosephDan@aol.com (68) To: Mina Jo Paysons Dear Mina, Concerning Christmas Carols in school: I LOVE THE WAY YOU THINK!!!!! By the way, Merry Christmas to you, yours and all the other Bombers out there!!! Joe (Large) (68) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Impeachment et al From: Richard Wight (52) email@example.com In reading the last couple issues re impeachment and "conservatives vs. liberals," "dems vs repubs" etc., I end up feeling sick, demoralized, frustrated, angry. In the political spectrum I suppose I've labeled myself "Republican" over the years, but I'm certainly somewhere to the left of Genghis Khan. And I've paid my dues in public service, which gives me license To have my say. I feel strongly this way: Humans are flawed ... all of us. But most people who ascend to positions of high responsibility (as opposed to high power, such as wealth) learn to live up to the standards of the position, to take the responsibilities very seriously, and to be leaders in word and DEED (if not in thought)! Clinton has failed to do that. So did Nixon. Both of them apparently thought their power gave them privilege to abuse the law, both moral and constitutional. I have some experience in these matters on a personal level, and I know that a flawed man can exercise control of his weaknesses and shortcomings in the pursuit of performing his duties and responsibilities as a leader. Clinton obviously does not meet that standard. I want him out of the leadership of my country, just as I wanted Nixon out when I understood what he had condoned and tried to conceal. Nixon apparently finally understood his error and resigned. Clinton reads the polls and says "I'm staying." The defenders of Clinton don't seem to care much about idealism, about moral standards, about the law. If that ends up being partisan, then a pox on the democrats (or liberal or independents or republicans) who support him. They are the ones who may succeed in keeping him in office. Other societies have been down the same road, with the same brand of leadership. They ain't around. I fear for us as a nation. Richard Wight '52 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: There is more to Clinton than meets the eye. From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Ray Wells) (54) This morning as I was watching one of the four liberal networks (ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN), the following announcement was made: "Former presidents Carter and Ford are recommending censure of Bill Clinton to the senate vis-a-vis removing him from office." Later I tuned into FOX news and got the rest of the announcement that the liberal network conveniently forgot to mention: "Former presidents Carter and Ford are recommending censure of Bill Clinton to the senate vis-a-vis removing him from office if he admits he lied to the American Public and to the Grand Jury" Most of the news we hear is composed of misleading half truths (spin). Is it any wonder the polls are claiming support for Clinton? If you still feel William Jefferson Clinton is the president for you, then I suggest you visit the following web sites: http://www.zpub.com/un/un-bc-body.html http://www.fm-net.com/subrosa/deaths.html http://www.judicialwatch.org If you need to see the humor in all this then you will enjoy this website. http://www.startpage.com/html/monica.html ---Ray Wells ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ [To get to any web address, copy it and paste it into your favorite web browser (depending on the browser setup, you can paste it into the address field at the top of the browser window, or go to the browser File menu, select the Open Location command and paste it there). ] ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: 5 Kinds of Democrats From: BeegByte@aol.com (Lee Johnson) (54) I would like to applaud Dick Eppler...he has pegged the liberal faction to a tee. This group have taken over the Democrat Party and have run it into the ground. The party is now largely made up of: 1. The gimme gimme people (non-producers) 2. Liberals 3. Liberal Socialists 4. Liberal Socialist Extremists 5. Splinter groups looking for a home. And for some reason they can not seem to deal with truth, fairness and justice. ---Lee Johnson ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Cougars and Huskies From: email@example.com (Ray Stein) (64) To: Kenny Wright, Bill Compton and other unfortunate Huskies I write this for my Bomber-Husky friends who have given us Cougars such a hard time this year. Twas Christmas '98 and all over the Palouse, Not a creature was stirring, no footballs were loose. Cougars were resting, some in their beds With visions of a Rose Bowl, still in their heads. But in the Pacific, Huskies were abuzz, A meaningless Bowl game, Oahu it twas. Now about this same time, Santa was ready For his Christmas deliveries, in his sleigh so steady. When he flew over Hawaii, he said,"sakes alive, That looks like the Huskies, but they were 6 and 5?" Now Santa wears red, but not for the fashion. His clothes are all crimson 'cause COUGS are his passion! When he looked down and saw purple and yellow, "Down with the Dogs!", cried this jolly old fellow. So the plan he devised, you wouldn't have believed, His reindeer had eaten, but hadn't relieved. He circled his sleigh and steered it in low. When they were over the Dogs, his reindeer let go. The sound and debris made such a clatter, That Lambright looked up to see what was the matter. The brown stuff did fall on Huard, on Hooker, On Dalan, on Pharms, on Hairston, on Looker. It hit thousands of Huskies, surely no fewer, It rained from the sky, this Christmas manure. As Santa flew off on this bright Christmas Day, People who were there heard this jolly man say, "Merry Christmas to you and to you and to you, Down with the Huskies! Forever WAZZU!" Merry Christmas! -Ray Stein (64) --------------------------------------- -16- *************************************** *************************************** ******************************************** THE SANDBOX Issue #17 ~ December 23, 1998 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Col-Hi / RHS Alumni and Participating in The SANDBOX Today: Ron Richards (63), William L. Porter, Marc Franco (66), Gary Behymer, John M. Allen (66), Darwin Perkins (69), Tony Tellier (57), Richard Epler) (52). ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Top News Story: First Cold Wave Of Season Rolls Across U.S. Richland Weather Today: "Mostly sunny and continued cold. Highs 15 to 20. Light and variable wind. Tonight: Increasing clouds by morning. Cold with lows 10 to 15. Light and variable winds. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From: G1A1S1@aol.com Ron Richards (63) Subj: Re- Tony Sharpe Remarks I can't really add much to what you're saying, Tony Sharpe. Just keep it up! Since November 3rd, the score is 2 Republicans, 0 Democrats. Can you name the Republicans? Do you know who is winning? ---Ron Richards ('63), Marc Franco) (66), ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: RE: And so did yo mama From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Marc Franco) (66) Tony Sharpe made several sharp comments (no pun intended) about a letter I wrote, and I would like to reply. An earlier writer had made the comment that most people would agree that a Republican president would have resigned by now, given similar circumstances. I replied to that letter by stating that there is no evidence of any kind that a Republican president would resign at all. Nixon didn't resign until after there was absolute tons of evidence against him, along with the tapes, and the Judiciary committee had voted the Articles of Impeachment. Unlike the case today, there was no doubt in Nixon's case that the Senate would have convicted him. Thus, he resigned. I also said that Reagan was guilty in the Iran- Contra affair, but did not resign. My point was, then, why would anybody think that a Republican president would have resigned any faster than Clinton, since none of them had done it yet. Mr. Sharpe responded to these comments by saying that I was using the classic Democrat apologist line and the classic Democrat defense. WHAT defense, Mr. Sharpe? I don't recall making any defense at all for Clinton. I thought that I had said quite clearly (but obviously not clearly enough) that Clinton lied, we all know he lied, and that nobody should forgive him for that. It is not clear to me how that ranks as a defense of Bill Clinton. Possibly you could explain that. I did continue to say that the Republicans are hypocrites in this case because when Oliver North lied to the Congress, he was hailed as a hero. Mr. Sharpe, you said that you remember no evidence that Oliver North lied. Well, North himself stated that sometimes lies are necessary (I do not remember the exact wording at this point ten or 12 years later), his secretary Fawn something or other said that sometimes lies are necessary so that people do not find out things that they are not supposed to find out,. and Henry Hyde himself said that not all lies should be considered equal. You seemed to think it important that Clinton lied under oath (well, it IS important, actually. ) However, I'm pretty sure that when people testify before Congress, they must also take an oath of some sort. I may be wrong on that, and maybe somebody can correct me. I do know that it is not normally considered good, except by the Republicans in this case, to lie before Congress. Was there evidence? Well, yes, there was- and the comments of North, Fawn, and Henry Hyde would certainly indicate that, yes, North lied- making him a hero, because he had done all his illegal activities in service of his country. I'd like to ask you a question, Mr. Sharpe. IF North did lie before Congress, as most people are aware that he did- would you agree then that the Republicans were hypocritical, as I claimed? We don't need to argue about whether or not he did lie- but IF he lied, are the Republicans now hypocrites? Finally, you scoffed when I said that I vote independent, and basically said I was a closet Democrat. I am quite glad you corrected me on that. I had had the naive idea that just because I routinely vote for both Democrats and Republicans, depending on the candidate, that meant that I was independent. I do appreciate your setting me straight on that. In reality, it must be that if anybody dares to find blame on both sides, instead of just on one side, in this mess, then he must be Democrat. Marc Franco ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Re: Impeachment, what its done for me. From: William L. Porter Mail To: William.Porter2@PSS.Boeing.com At my level, nothing has changed with the impeachment of the president on two counts. Even if he is removed or left in office, nothing has changed. Not even my confidence in our system of government has changed. The poor need feed, the homless still need shelter. My day to day life has not changed. I am not walking around in an outrage at any group of people. I am not trying to out manure, I mean manuever, someone elses argument to justify my position. I am aware of the situation from the newspapers, TV and radio, but I have not read the complete text of the Jones trial, the grand jury, or even contemplated the legal definitions to see if a line has been crossed. Even if I had studied all this in depth, what would it matter. I accepted the decision of ballot for our representation in the House and the Senate. Constitutionally these are the people who must make the decisions, first on the legality, and 2nd on whether any acts reach the level of removing the president from office! Even if you have read and studied all the documents, your analysis is not of consequence to the decision. You can debate the system of justice and its viability, but as far as guilt or innocence, that is not your decision. It is our duly elected representatives and how they interpret the laws and the constitution. You can voice your outrage at the actions of an individual and you can also tell the facts you know. You can let it affect your life, if you want. You can let it diminish or bolster your faith in the system. But as soon as people start inserting irrelevant crap into the discussion, I start to question the person blabbering, not the process or even the president. The question is not 'what does this tell our children', the question is not 'the character of the president', the question is not 'whether the confidence of a constituent has been shaken'. I'll trust the checks and balances of the system, over any concocted half logic pronounced by another person. My opinion is, there are a lot more helpful things we all can spend our time, energy and emotions on. Sometimes I get the image of a bunch of people sitting on hill over looking a tragic accident in progress, discussing the merits of the accident and whose at fault, while the victims get no assistance. It isn't because of Bill Clinton's sexual activities that a child is dying of cancer, but it is our fault if the people who are working on the cure become distracted by us. I'm not saying ignore the whole proceedings, but at least I try to keep it from creating rancor or confusion and try to place my emotional energy to productive use. Now, I must go deal with the guilt from spending the time writing this note, instead of actually doing something directly productive. I shall now turn my attention to doing the dishes. William L. Porter 965-6999 MS 6M-FE "The right to suffer is one of the joys of a free economy" -Howard Pyle, aide to Pres. Eisenhower ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Re: e-thepeople From: Gary Behymer Try this site.... e-thepeople http://www.e-thepeople.com [Ed. Note: e-thepeople introduces their site as "your channel for action and discussion about the issues that concern you most." This free, nonpartisan service is the fastest, essiest way to be heard by any one of 140,00 local, state, and federal officials serving 7,000 towns and cities across America."] So there you are. Another place to go, another way of letting people who are in positions to make changes know how you feel about things. Maybe you can make a difference in your city, your county, you state. Maybe this is another vehichle through which you can help to build a better, more positively interactive America. We just ask one thing, please, while you are doing that. Please CC copies to Adamstreet@aol.com for publication in The SANDBOX, TOO! Make you impact really count! -Al Parker] ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: THE MASTERS OF PARTISANSHIP From: email@example.com (John M. Allen) (66) Since the beginning of this long Jones vs. Clinton/Lewinsky nightmare, liberals have been screaming bloody murder that Conservatives are acting with pure partisanship and, as a result, the whole process is unfair, illegitimate, a conspiracy, a coup d'etat and blah, blah, blah. During the impeachment vote last Saturday, 28 Republicans voted "no" on Article II and 81 Republicans voted "no" on Article IV. These numbers equate to 12% and 36%, respectively, of their membership's vote on those two articles. HOWEVER, no more than 5 Democrats voted FOR any article of impeachment. Given the overwhelming evidence in this case that the President lied under oath, it is simply not credible that a pitiful 2% of Dems could have voted a "conscience" which said the President was not guilty of the offenses specified in the articles. This lack of credibility is most clearly demonstrated by the language in the Democrat-sponsored (read that, "White House sponsored & written") censure measure where the President was called every negative thing under the sun except the one thing the text, taken in its entirety, cried out for; "guilty of impeachable offenses." This kind of hypocrisy reminds me of one particular conversation I had with my favorite liberal Bomber Alum. If I had a nickel for every time he has used some combination of the words "right wing" and "extreme," I would be truly wealthy. But one day I proposed to him that if there WERE such things as right wing extremists, by definition there must ALSO be left wing extremists, and I challenged him to name five liberals who would fit that category. It was truly humorous to watch him stutter and stammer as he failed to name even one. Surprise, surprise. (I might add that this conversation occurred BEFORE January 21, 1998.) Behavior like this goes a long way toward pointing out the true political problem we are currently suffering through. The truth is that ONLY within the last three weeks, have the Republicans in the House of Representatives learned to accept the fact that they have been in charge of the House for almost four years. The Democrats haven't even come close to accepting that they HAVEN'T been in charge for that same period. If the Dems lose this impeachment and removal battle, they will have lost the last of the three institutions they controlled when Clinton took office, and that prospect is something even a "Lewinsky Party" would have a difficult time swallowing. So this is a life and death political struggle for the libs, and the fire is fueled by their basic belief that only the Democrat Party truly cares about America and Americans. In general, they believe that Conservatives are, at their core, wealthy, uncaring, essentially evil people who want to starve young children (remember the school lunch debate) and do all the other unspeakable things Democrats have fabricated in their never-ending attempts to demonize the opposition. And if Conservatives don't happen to be wealthy, then they must surely be the worst of all things; devout Christians. In this contorted view of the political world, you need to understand that "evil" and "devout Christian" are most often NOT mutually exclusive terms. Somehow, I can't avoid believing that if 89% of inside the beltway reporters didn't vote Democrat, press coverage of these Democrat themes would be significantly different and consequently their acceptance by the American public would be significantly reduced. But that's really a whole 'nother submission to the SANDBOX. John Allen ('66) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Conservatives and Liberals Don't Think The Same From: Darwin Perkins (69) Reply To: firstname.lastname@example.org Just another note on the discrepancy of thought between liberal & conservative views... It appears to me that when conservatives argue it's about right vs wrong. There is a 'right' for each situation, likewise, there is also a 'wrong' for the situation. When liberals argue it appears to be good vs evil argument, where libs are declared as good and all else is evil. That means that any action, right or wrong, that supports 'good' is, by definition, 'good'. Project those thought processes on the current democrat/republican debates and their arguments become much clearer. For the democrats, the fact that Clinton may have lied is not the issue. He's overwhelmingly popular, he's at the head of the party and the country. Anything that supports and continues his presidency is 'good'. For the republicans, the fact that Clinton may have lied is the central issue. No one, including the President, can or should be allowed to willfully break the law without accountability. This also means that the possibility of convergence on a solution is near zero. --Darwin Perkins (69) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Re: Manhatten Project From: Tony_Tellier@compuserve.com (Tony TELLIER) (57) But I never knew our Manhatten Project was so WIDELY offensive. ?????? Not that I have ever heard ... lived in Conn., Ohio, Phx, ... most people figure that it was war and was was waged. Period. No tears. No problem. Tony Tellier (57) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: YAC - yet another contribution From: email@example.com (Richard Epler) (52) To: Al Parker You know, it's funny. All my life, I've been able to ignore newspapers and talk show hosts. But for some reason, I find it hard to ignore the SANDBOX. *sigh* See the following: Re: The Crimes of Nixon and Other Republicans Fm: Dick Epler (52) For: Marc Franco (66) I hope this is not a mistake, Marc, but since we both consider ourselves to be non-partisan, and are both Bombers (reasonable people), I'll try to respond to some of the issues your raised in SANDSTORM #15. You should know that some of your concerns, Marc, are shared by Cheryl Simpson-Whitaker (64), so I consider you to be in good company. I learned some things from Cheryl. I hope to learn from you as well. You asked about my assertion that, under the same circumstances, a Republican President would have resigned early. The reason is deceptively simple: what Clinton did violates the core beliefs of most Republicans. Key members of the Republican Party would have forced the issue, even though Democrats might have supported such a president, much as Clinton is now supporting Livingston. Most Republicans tend to be doers. As such, they feel strongly about the rule of law and about those in responsibility flaunting immoral behavior. No organization can function effectively when such behavior is condoned. Just think about your own work environment to visualize how such behavior by your boss might affect you and the rest of your organization. I’m sure you see the problem. Core Democrats, on the other hand, tend to have a lawyer mentality. Typically they are NOT doers. The media tells us that core of the Democratic party is Hollywood (think Alec Baldwin), the New York intellectuals (think Alan Dershowitz, Harvard Law Prof.), and black America (think Jesse Jackson). These people tend to use the worst of the legal profession's machinations to go after all those who "don't support the right policy." They have continued to distort the historical record regarding both Nixon and Reagan. These days, it’s hard to find anyone that admits to voting for Nixon, but in 1972 he won in one of the greatest landslide victories in history. Recent scholars such as Ann Coulter have gone back to study the original documents and have provided a little more balanced account along lines that I remember: First of all, Nixon really wasn't a bad guy. He may not have been all that likable, but he wasn't evil. Contrary to popular opinion, Nixon didn't know about or approve of the Watergate break-in. He didn't even know the people who were involved. The tapes have Nixon referring to the break-in as "it was so dumb -- tying it to us is an insult to our intelligence." Later, however, after he discovered the burglars were hired by the Committee to Re-Elect the President, he got himself in trouble by trying to cover-up their actions. Near the end of July 1974, the Rodino committee drafted three articles of impeachment. By today's standards, only two would be considered impeachable: Lying to the American people (on TV, but not under oath), and obstruction of justice when he tried to invoke an executive privilege to not release the tapes. The third article charged that Nixon allowed one part of the investigation to be delayed for two weeks – certainly not an impeachable offense today. Most agree it was the tapes that brought Nixon down. And it was the House Republicans who forced Nixon to release transcripts of the tapes, right after the Saturday Night Massacre, by refusing to oppose impeachment until he did. That was nine months before the Supreme Court ruled against executive privilege and the audio tapes were finally released. Most of Rodino's report, assisted by Hillary Rodham and Bernie Nussbaum, was written before the final tapes were available. The report concentrated on the actions of Nixon's subordinates, arguing that Nixon "condoned, acquiesced- in, or failed to prevent" their illegal acts. In contrast, none of the Articles of Impeachment against Clinton target the illegal actions of his subordinates. Nor should they. Although I must say, no President should be able to hire an endless stream of questionable characters (those unable to get a security clearance) to do illegal work, and then claim he knows nothing about their misbehavior. Regarding Reagan, you may be right that his administration has the record for the most indictments. I could believe that. My, how the Democrats hated Reagan's policies. But the Clinton administration surely has the record for the most convictions. Generally, Republicans don't like to indict unless they have a clear legal basis to convict. This is a big problem for Clinton now, even in the Senate. Having principle and law on your side can be quite compelling. A major concern of many, however, is the seeming hypocrisy of the Republicans in calling Clinton immoral. A few things: First, the Republicans who believe our President should be more moral than Larry Flint, are the so-called Christian Right. Other Republicans, who have been "caught with their pants down" are the moderates. No hypocrisy here. The moderate Republicans are little different than the moderate Democrats. Secondly, and more importantly, we need to recognize that even moderate Republicans don't openly flaunt their marital infidelities. This is not unlike Clinton’s don't ask, don't tell policy. But when "outed," these Republicans tend to deal with the problem without resorting to aggressive lying (think wag-your-finger sort of lying). Third, without getting into specifics, Clinton’s extramarital affairs are more involved with "weird sex" than in any meaningful man-woman relationship. This is not a good example for our children. Moreover, we all know this behavior is NOT the same as the examples cited by Democrats of Hyde, Kennedy, Eisenhower, Roosevelt, and Jefferson (don't know about Livingston). Clinton exhibits all the characteristics of a sexual predator (consensual, of course). No one believes that of Hyde, et.al. While I dislike that our children often bear the brunt of the infidelities of their parents, I realize that's just a fact of life these days – people can become temporarily confused or even fall out of love. On the other hand, having our President become the poster child for weird sex is a different thing entirely. When discussing controversial issues, Marc, most of us probably need to be more specific to be clearly understood. I realize I'm often not specific enough. Maybe that's because I depend too much on our common Richland heritage. What I've written today didn't address all your questions and may not have changed your mind but it seemed important to make the effort. But now I'd like something from you. My biggest concern is that we need to find a way to defend the Democratic Party without defending Clinton or his actions. I’m convinced that tearing down past Presidents and/or the Republican Party won’t do it. So how shall we do it? We can’t talk about foreign policy. We might want to talk about the economy, but much of that has been the work of the Republican Congress (it frustrates Republicans that Clinton takes credit for their traditional economic policies). Clinton’s social policy, though laudable in some ways, hasn’t led to any real reduction in the welfare class. We now seem to have a permanent class of “victims” that depend on Government subsistence … and it continues to grow. Right now, we can afford it, but that’s not the point. Better to make people productive and give them back their pride. I voted Democratic for many years. In my view, it wasn’t me that changed, it was my party. Right now, I don’t know how to defend the party of Alan Dershowitz and Larry Flint. Actually, Jesse’s not so bad and Alec is just … well … a little crazy. Marc, if you, or any other Bombers, have an answer I’m sure many like myself would enjoy reading it. I ask only that you are specific and remember that you’re writing for the unemotional right. -- Dick Epler firstname.lastname@example.org ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ -17- *************************************** *************************************** ******************************************** THE SANDBOX Issue #18 ~ December 27, 1998 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Col-Hi / RHS Alumni and Participating in The SANDBOX #18: John Allen (66), Lloyd Swain (66), Ray Wells (54), Marc Franco (66), John Northover (59), Bob Mattson (64), Mike Cook, Rodsoak (67) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: For The Record From: email@example.com (John M. Allen) Contrary to popular liberal opinion, Oliver North was never convicted of, or even charged with, "Lying to Congress." Once again, a little honest research (as opposed to knee-jerk emotionalism) always helps. What's the next "misleading" misconception? ---John Allen ('66) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From: Lloyd Swain (66) Reply To: LSwain6680@aol.com Subj: New Presidential Prerequisite Proposed HEY, I'VE GOT IT! The New Requirement for future presidents of these United States...They must consent to castration prior to taking the oath of office......WOW!..... Think about that for a moment... Oh yea.... can you imagine this happening to a woman if she were president?... I love this country.!!!!!! Lloyd Swain (66) ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ STRAW POLE: Please Vote Yes or No on Lloyd's proposal: All in favor of a Constitutional Amendment to implement the above pre-oath prerequisite, please send your vote, YES or NO, to THE_SANDBOX@hotmail.com. It will be helpful if you put the words "Straw Pole - Yes" or "Straw Pole - No" " in the e-mail Subject Line when you "cast" your vote. If you care to comment beyond just a "yes" or "no," you are welcome to do that, too. Remember--- Every Vote Counts! We will keep and convey a running tally of the results. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: What am I missing? From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Ray Wells) (54) Over the past year I have accumulated the following information related to President William Jefferson Clinton. 1. Arkansas troopers have testified that while Clinton was governor in Arkansas he had the Arkansas State Troopers pimping for him. 2. In addition to Monica, and Flowers who were consenting sexual partners, he has hit on the following unconsenting women: Kathleen Willy, Paula Jones. 3. Prior to testifying on 60 minutes. Kathleen Willy couldn't start her car and drive it to work because her tires had been slashed. When she walked out her front door on her way to the bus stop she saw her pets lying on the sidewalk with their throats slashed. As she was waiting for the bus she was approached by a strange man who said, "How did you like what happened to your tires and your pets? And if you don't shut up about Clinton, the same will happen to the rest of your family." 4. The Judicial Watch Organization has filed suit against Clinton for having approved the transfer of missile guidance technology to Red China in exchange for illegal and huge campaign contributions. The charge: Treason. The result: China now has the technology to guide an ICBM to the U.S.A. 5. Over 100 former acquaintances, associates, and friends of Clinton have died under mysterious circumstances. Among the more prominent, Vince Foster, and Ron brown. 6. Vince Foster's death was ruled a suicide. Ken Star agrees it was a suicide. The facts: Foster was found lying in the middle of a muddy field, yet the bottom of his shoes were clean. The gun was in the wrong hand. The blood from the bullet wound had dripped uphill. His car showed up in the parking lot half an hour after he was found in the field. Hillary had a crew shredding documents in Foster's office while Vince was still lying in the field. 7. Ron Brown was said to have died in a plane crash, yet his autopsy showed a 45 caliber bullet hole in his skull. Ron, by the way, was heavy into the transfer of the missile guidance technology to China. 8. Dick Morris, Clinton's former advisor, has been on CNN and Fox News telling us that Clinton has a squad of secret police, headed up by Cueball Carville, and that Clinton uses this squad to intimidate those who would speak up against Clinton. 9. Persons have refused to testify against Clinton because they feared for their lives. Why do you think Susan McDougal chose prison rather than to testify? 10. At the same time that Clinton is calling for forgiveness, closure and bipartisanship, Carville is telling the press that he is out to get those Republicans who voted for Clinton's impeachment. 11. Alec Baldwin is interviewed on a major TV network and shouts that Henry Hyde and Henry's family ought to be murdered for what Henry has done to Clinton. 12. Robin Williams made the following statement on the Tonight Show, last night: "Impeaching Clinton and allowing him stay in office is a bit like electrocuting someone and leaving them in the chair." Summary: Is Clinton beginning to look more and more like a dictator and less and less like an elected official or have I missed something? At the very least, I'll never watch another Alec Baldwin movie. ---Ray Wells ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Dialogue with Dick Epler From: email@example.com (Marc Franco) (66) I would like to publicly thank Dick Epler for his long response to my criticism of his comment about early resignation of Presidents. I still did not agree with everything he said, but that is not necessary, of course. I think that all any of us wants from anybody is rational, well- reasoned opinions, instead of hysterical name-calling, and then discussion can go from there. Dick, your long letter certainly is rational and well- reasoned, and I thank you for that again. As for the issues you raised- yes, actually I was aware that Nixon did not plan or approve of the Watergate break-in. He was guilty of what happened afterwards, though. Concerning which type of Republican has been caught with his pants down, moderate or extremist- I really don't know. You said they were moderates- I simply have no idea. I might add at this point, though, that I don't doubt for a second that many Democrats are equally guilty of this. It's just that under these exact circumstances that some of the Republicans are being named. Under different circumstances, I have no doubt that some Democrats would be named as well As far as the "weird sex" practiced by Clinton-boy, I couldn't agree more. You named Clinton as a sexual predator. I certainly see no reason to dispute that, either. It's really disheartening. As far as defending the Democratic party goes- in honesty, I see no reason to do that. I actually do favor the moderates of either party- (although Tony Sharpe scoffed at this, I really do consider myself an independent)- I think both parties are necessary for a functioning democracy, and I remember telling one of the most rabid conservatives on this board in 1994 that I welcomed the Republicans taking over the Congress, although I had strong doubts about the Gingrich-led leadership of the party. I think it is important to have the mantle of power pass back and forth between both parties. I don't think it helps anybody to have one party always in power, and the other party always looking in through the window. I mention this bit of personal philosophy by way of explanation that the Democrats will sort things out for themselves, by themselves. There is no question that Richard Nixon did tremendous damage to the Republican Party at that time, and yet, after a few years of Jimmy Carter in office-- (good man, bad President)- the Republicans came back stronger than ever. The Democrats will do this, also, and so will the Republicans in their turn. As far as defending Clinton himself goes- I don't think anybody is. Everybody is horrified at what he did, both the sex part and definitely the lying under oath. But some people are interpreting opposing the impeachment as defending Clinton. Nope- let him twist in the wind. He does not deserve defending. Unfortunately, the people being hurt will be the people of this country. But Watergate went on a lot longer than this mess has, and the country recovered, and we will from this as well. Dick, thank you again for your thoughtful response to my critical comments (hopefully, not too critical) of your earlier comment. ---Marc Franco ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: To Make Your View Known From: John Northover (59) Mail To: firstname.lastname@example.org For those that would like to make their views known to your[our] senators, lowercase by distinct disrespect ... , check this site out ... email addresses. http://www.ojc.org/Webring/senate-email2.htm I would recommend that each one of us take a few minutes to compose a short email to let 'them' know exactly how we feel. Pass the address to others so they may participate in this forum. There are many excellent points that have been made by the SandBox readers. They all would make a difference. Washington for the most part thinks we cannot think for ourselves. Yet, when they do not want to do their duty ... they choose to listen to some inane poll that reflects the lowest common intellectual level possible ... Ignorance [as in lacking information, unlettered, untutored, illiterate, unlearned ... ] by choice!! I ask you how many of those people do you think have read a book in the last year??? In the last decade??? Our nation is experiencing a blight of cultural cognizance that rivals the dark ages. We as a people have reached a low point in our moral standards. Our universities, colleges, high schools, junior high school, middle schools, end schools, ... have about 75% of the students believe that it is OK to CHEAT! One student said "How do you expect me to get 'A's?" ... WHAT?? Where did this attitude come from? [rhetorical question, answer it if you must] After graduation ... these people will be handling your finances, your health, the maintenance of your cars, the building of houses, offices and stadiums. Imagine a worker in the back of a restaurant, the dishes have backed up. The individual cannot keep up with the demand ... Oh ... Well, I will just rinse the big pieces off and put them out in the 'clean' pile of dishes. Or a health worker checking blood samples for ... **you put the malady in here** ... It is time to go home, but there are several more tests to run. Oh ... Wellll, do three and generalize the rest... This is cheating, bending the rules, lying, word- smithing, putting a spin on it, spinning and controlling, a controlled spin. It is logic retrorse at worst! I do not care how many people have 'done' it before. Just think back to your youth. When everyone was 'doing' it, I know your parents said "Would you jump off a bridge just because everyone else was doing it???" I know I thought about doing it a lot and actually did, just because everyone else was doing it. You can call it do-dooo, poo-poo, ca-caa, defication, excrement, fertilizer, a doggie-loggie, droppings, ... anything you want ... it is still SHIT and it stinks!!! "I did not inhale," When smoking, does one have to inhale to complete the act??? Is that not the formal definition that exists in "BLACKS BOOK OF LAW" for smokers? "I did not have sex with that woman ... yatty, yatty, yatty." When sexing... is a passive participant not having sex? "I did not tell a lie," When lying, does one have to be chopping a cherry tree down?? "What is the meaning of 'is'?" When ''ising' it, does one have to swallow this crap??? If 60% is an accurate number of people that believe, [not sure that is the proper word, because if one 'believes' in something, that implies a firm conviction as to the reality or goodness of something...which is not the case here.] That Clinton should be kept in office and only be censured. Then we are only allowing the Washington puss-bubble to build to a larger size. We are now finding that a few of our leaders have gone astray. I am sure that many more will come out of the bedroom to confess in the public market place of forgiveness. They will have to make a hard choice, now that Livingstone has confessed and retired. Yes, this has been going on for a long time ... but that does not make it right. Washington's puss-bubble is reaching major zit size ... it is time to pop the rot and let he who is without a rain coat stand aside. Breaking a promise is lying. Breaking an oath is lying. Lying is lying and no matter what kind of a spin you put on it ... it just makes it hard to pin down. Our nation is heading for a hand basket. We do not have to accept anything less that the ideal, we can always reach for what is perfect. We may not reach it, but as long as we reach in the right direction we cannot reach in the wrong. If we do not strive for perfection, in ten, twenty, or so years, our children and our grandchildren will ask us some very perplexing questions. "Grandparent, Why did you not care enough to keep truth pure and clean? How could you have let truth get so run down?" How are you going to answer that question??? Send an email to your senator and demand [do not ask, remember they are "working?" for us]. Tell them you do not want to answer any hard questions from your grandchildren. Tell them we want to pop the zit now and we can have things cleaned up by the time our children and our grandchildren grow up. Thanks for letting me kick some sand around .... It was fun. Yours in perpetual confusion john '59 ... gee I just noticed, that is almost biblical. I said 'almost' and was kidding!!! ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ [Note: The Sandbox would love to display copies of the letters you folks send to legislators as well as the responses you might get back! -ap] ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Soldiers Christmas From: RMat683939@aol.com (Bobby Mattson (64)) I received this from my cousin, retired Army. Thought the rest of the vets might enjoy these, especially at this time of year. God bless you all and have a Merry Christmas. THE SOLDIERS NIGHT BEFORE CHRISTMAS By Major Bruce W. Lovely (With Apologies to Clement Moore Who First Wrote the Story for His Children in 1822 also credit given to M/Sgt Noah Brazos Ross, a US Army 18th Field Artillery survivor of Utah Beach, France, Luxembourg, Belgium, Battle for the Ardennes, Deutschland; "Daddy's Christmas" (Soldier's Christmas) written as a Bonita, Montague County, Texas, highschool exercise in 1937.) Twas the night before Christmas, he lived all alone, In a one bedroom house made of plaster and stone. I had come down the chimney with presents to give And to see just who in this home did live. I looked all about a strange sight I did see, No tinsel, no presents, not even a tree. No stocking by the fire, just boots filled with sand, On the wall hung pictures of far distant lands. With medals and badges, awards of all kinds A sober thought came through my mind. For this house was different, so dark and dreary, I knew I had found the home of a soldier, once I could see clearly. I heard stories about them, I had to see more So I walked down the hall and pushed open the door. And there he lay sleeping silent alone, Curled up on the floor in his one bedroom home. His face so gentle, his room in such disorder, Not how I pictured a United States soldier. Was this the hero of whom I'd just read? Curled up in his poncho, a floor for his bed? His head was clean shaven, his weathered face tan, I soon understood this was more than a man. For I realized the families that I saw that night Owed their lives to these men who were willing to fight. Soon; round the world, the children would play, And grownups would celebrate on a bright Christmas Day. They all enjoyed freedom each month of the year, Because of soldiers like this one lying here. I couldn't help wonder how many lay alone On a cold Christmas Eve in a land far from home. Just the very thought brought a tear to my eye, I dropped to my knees and started to cry. The soldier awakened and I heard a rough voice, "Santa don't cry, this life is my choice; I fight for freedom, I don't ask for more, My life is my God, my country, my Corps." With that he rolled over and drifted off into sleep I couldn't control it, I continued to weep. I watched him for hours, so silent and still, I noticed he shivered From the cold night's chill So I took off my jacket, the one made of red, And I covered this Soldier From his toes to his head. And I put on his T-shirt of gray and black, With an eagle and an Army patch embroidered on back And although it barely fit me, I began to swell with pride, And for a shining moment, I was United States Army deep inside. I didn't want to leave him on that cold dark night, This guardian of honor so willing to fight. Then the soldier rolled over, whispered with a voice so clean and pure, "Carry on Santa, it's Christmas Day, all is secure." One look at my watch, and I knew he was right, Merry Christmas my friend, and to all a good night! Author's Note: I wrote this poem for Christmas Eve 1993 while assigned to US Forces Korea ---Lt Col Bruce Lovely, USAF. (Printed in the Fort Leavenworth Lamp, 1995) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Bill and the Bull From: Mike Cook Mail To: email@example.com Bill Porter put it all in perspective. Like most of the country, I believe we need to get on with the realities of our country. We can wax eloquently and passionately but Bill C. is staying and the problems remain! Bill C. understands that and the rest of us should too. Way too much time, energy and money has been spent. --Mike Cook ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subject: There Are Airbags and There are Airbags RODSOAK@aol.com (67) says: Please remove me from your list. I've had enough politics by airbags, excuse me, and airbags and seatbelts and helmuts ..... to last me for the rest of my life. I plan to live mine and not sit in front of some sreen and read these "opinions." Seems like everyone has at least two things in common. Got things to do. Bye! Your wish is our command, Rodsoak. Too bad you didn't feel you were able to introduce subjects to The SANDBOX of interest to you, that might have been interesting and beneficial to the rest of us as well. I think we all have a lot more in common than the two things you obliquely refer to here, Rodsoak, especially with our common Bomber heritage. To paraphrase another Bomber's contribution to The SANDBOX, "All of us together are smarter than any one of us alone." You are certainly welcome to come back any time, Rodsoak, even if for just a short visit now and then.. Maybe you will think of something of positive value to all of us that you'll want to share with your fellow Bombers in The SANDBOX at some future time. After all, what you get here depends quite a bit on what you give. --Al Parker, Sandbox Coordinator ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ HOW ABOUT THIS IDEA, FOLKS. As many of you as would care to.. How about sending in THE TOP FIVE NEW TOPIC IDEAS YOU would like to see discussed during the coming year. Even if you don't elaborate on your own suggestions, YOUR ideas could inspire a great response. Here are some items you might want to start talking about right now: 1. YOUR PREDICTIONS FOR THE COMING YEAR. 2. HOW ARE YOU PREPARING FOR Y2K? 3. WHAT IS YOUR TAKE ON THE ONCOMING YEAR 2000 COMPUTER GLITCH? BIG PROBLEM OR SMALL? 4. IS Y2K REALLY A FULL YEAR AWAY OR ARE UNPLEASANT THINGS GOING TO START HAPPENING IN APRIL, 199? 5. GOT SOME BOMBER TRIVIA QUESTIONS TO PROPOSE? 6. DO YOU HAVE A FAVORITE FAMILY MOTTO? 7. WOULD YOU LIKE TO PROPOSE TO SOMEONE IN THE SANDBOX? 8. HAVE YOU READ ANY GOOD BOOKS LATELY YOU WANT TO TELL US ABOUT? 9. SOMETHING FUNNY HAPPEN ON YOUR WAY TO THE CLASS REUNION? 10. SOMETHING SPECIAL YOU LIKE ABOUT YOUR JOB? 11. THE MOST INTERESTING PERSON YOU EVER MET? 12. BEEN KIDNAPPED BY A UFO? (Or know anybody who claims they have?) 13. ANY HOT TIPS ON HOW TO PEEL A HARD BOILED EGG? 14. YOUR MOST EMBARRASSING MOMENT? 15. MAKING MONEY FROM A HOBBY? --- TELL US WHAT YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT --- AND PLEASE REMEMBER THIS: PARTICIPATION IS NINE-TENTHS OF CONVERSATION! IF WE AREN'T TALKING ABOUT THE THINGS YOU ARE INTERESTED IN, WHO ARE YOU GOING TO BLAME? BEST WISHES TO ALL DURING THE COMING YEAR FOR YOUR HOPES, YOUR DREAMS, YOUR VALUES, YOUR PROSPERITY AND GOOD HEALTH, AND FOR EVERYTHING AND EVERYONE YOU HOLD DEAR. --Al Parker ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ANNOUNCING A NEW SANDBOX FEATURE: "WHAT BOMBERS ARE DOING NOW" Updates on the Who The Why The When And Where of Bombers Everywhere and Anywhere ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ That's it for this issue of The Sandbox, folks. Share your opinions, Your Feelings, Your Ideas and News About YOU with all of us! Please include your class year in all contributions. Thanks! Tune in next time for comments from: Tony Sharpe (63), Ray Wells (54) and more! -18- ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø That's it for 1998. ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø Go to JAN and FEB, 1999