THE SANDBOX ~ Issue #43 ~ June 27, 1999
            Dedicated to a Diversity of  Opinion,
       Useful Information and Personal Experience

          "I wish I was as cocksure of anything
            as Tom Macaulay is of everything."
             --- Lord Melbourne 1779 - 1848

                         ~~~ ~~~ ~~~

This Issue's Contributors:
Carol Hodgson (66), Rick Maddy (67), 
Joy Stanfield (71), Carolyn Carson (60),
JoAnn Dresser (61), Ron Richards (63), 
Marc Franco (66), David Rivers (65), 
Andrew Eckert (54), Arthur Roberts (48), 
Ray Wells (54), Patricia de la Bretonne (65), 
Stephen Lewis (69), Margaret Hartnett (72), 
Eva Clark (49), Mike Pearson (74), 
John Allen (66), Millie Finch (54)


Subj:   Brain Cells Revitalized
From:   Carol Hodgson Neupert '66

Am enjoying the memories and the revitalization of
 some brain cells I thought were lost.  Thanks to all
 who share their thoughts and memories.  And no, I
 don't always agree with things that are said in the
 Sandbox, but thank God somebody's thinking out
 there.  Just stimulates me and others to review our
 values and priorities.  Keep up the great work.  

-- Carol Hodgson Neupert '66


Subj:   Wants Out
From:   Rich Maddy (67)

First Amendment Rights concerning the Sandbox: You
 mean it's okay to say "**** ***." in here?

[No, it's not -ap]

This went from the Sandstorm trying to get many
 people, like me, saying mundane controversial stuff
 like, "what was with the bottle of my ole man's piss in
 the lead container, or whatever it was, on the front
 porch if it was so safe out there?" Or the subjective
 notion that, "...the mushroom cloud on the high school
 emblem is actually a peace symbol, however peculiar it
 may appear, and contrary to belief, is not an insignia
 from hell.." Or, " I remember FBI agents coming to
 my parents home asking about neighbors during the
 security clearance days."

And because I said this, and it sure wasn't just me,
 people actually wrote to me saying what a pity it was I
 didn't have a good life growing up in Richland. And
 too bad about my "woe is me" problem. An
 unbelievable assumption. Where do people come up
 with this? Having a bad life in Richland had never
 came close to crossing my mind, even when trying to
 conjure up the wickedest of scenario's.

At 50, and not needing this type of stimulation, there is
 little in here of interest to read for me. Almost nothing
 concerning growing up in Richland. Knowing that even
 the wisest of men will be made to look like fools,
 what's the point? I'll stick with making a fool out of
 myself in the Sandstorm.

Please remove me.

Rick Maddy (67)

[As you wish, Rick.  I don't believe, however, that
 anyone around here is fool enough to think of you as a
 fool.  If so, that is that person's problem, not your's
 or ours.  But watch out!  At any moment, when you
 least expect it, an irresistable idea, insight or even a
 current hometown concern may suddenly enter your
 brain that you will want to share right here with
 the rest of your Bomber family.  In any event, (or no
 event at all), your ideas, viewpoints and personal
 experience are always welcome!  -ap]


Subj:   Wants In
From:  JoAnn Dresser Nai-che   

Please add me back on the  mailing list. Thank-you
.   JoAnn (Dresser) Nai-che

[Thanks for asking JoAnn.  Welcome!  -ap]


Subj:   Here's to you Al
From:  Joy Stanfield (71)

Dear Al:

I want to thank you for the SANDBOX.  I especially
 enjoyed the last issue (#42).  You are a very smart
 man.  I 'wanna be' like you when I grow up. (lol)
 I guess because you graduated the year I was born I
 get to feel like a little kid next to you. That's nice
 because sometimes I feel so old.  My age is pushing 50
 and female. Yikes!!!

Thanks again Al,

                            Joy (71)

[Fair lady, you make me blush! -ap]

Subj:    Freedom of Speech
From:   Carolyn (Carson) Renaud (60)

Free Speech.  Yes, Al, free speech is and should be
 valued.  But, you know, it is too bad people cannot
 exercise that free speech without being rude and nasty. 
 I guess there are just people out there who are angry
 and want to let everyone know it.  The good thing? 

 I don't have to expose myself to it and neither does
 anyone else.  That is what the "delete" button is for.

I guess if a person isn't intelligent enough to articulate
 their opinions on an adult level, they can be just as
 nasty as they want.  I once heard an adage:  Better to
 keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than to 
 open it and remove all doubt."

Have a great day!  

Carol (Carson) Renaud '60 wrote:

"In the future days, which we seek to make secure,
we look forward to a world founded upon four 
essential human freedoms. The first is freedom of
speech and expression--everywhere in the world." 
  ---President Franklin D. Roosevelt.

[Thanks Carol.  Let's ALL have a great day, and many
 more to follow with true appreciation, as we remain
 free to celebrate another anniversary of this great
 nation on July 4, 1999.  May there be many more such
 celebrations in our country's future! Happy Birthday
 to you all! -ap]


Subj:   Joe Ford
From:   Ron Richards ('63)

Joe Ford:

Don't let John Allen get the best of you.  The more
 he writes, the more he hurts his own causes - unless
 he forces people like you to stop participating.  
 Hang in here!

  -- Ron Richards ('63)    


Subj:       Re: Liberal Whine
From:       Marc Franco (66)

 I just can't stand it any more. I usually try not to
 respond to anything John Allen says, because  1) it's
 hopeless, 2) he is so wrapped up in ideology that he
 simply has no room for facts, and 3) I really, really do
 not want to get caught up in a shouting match, which I
 know is going to happen. But I can't stand it any more.
 "Clinton has been unequaled in going after political
 opponents"  well, this is surely true for John, but many
 of the rest of us who try to stay in the middle and
 recognize virtues and faults on both sides will
 remember Lee Atwater, a total political hatchetman
 for George Bush, a good man who could have been a
 good president. Atwater's attacks were so savage on
 political opponents that, later, as he lay dying from a
 brain tumor, he actually called in those opponents to
 make deathbed apologies to the people he had
 wronged. John Allen apparently does not see anything
 wrong with what Atwater was doing (after all,   Atwater 
 was a Republican and therefore cannot be
 wrong {comments like that are meant to parody John-
 they do not truly represent my views in either direction}).

     "If somebody has the impertinence to express
 disgust or revulsion at the behavior of the president
 they helped elect, then that is immediately labeled as
 hate."  No, John, as usual you have missed the point
 completely. I labeled your views as hate because of
 material you have written here in the Sandbox, such as
 the following-

 "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

    You have made numerous comments just like this
 about Clinton- to disagree with him- of course- go for
 it. To make comments like the one above and
 numerous others- well, yes, that seems like hate to me.
 FURTHERMORE, John Allen dared to label me as a
 left- wing extremist liar, because I mentioned in one of
 my letters that there are people in the country who
 truly hate Bill Clinton, and that one of them, John
 Allen, is on this forum.  What makes John's accusation
 truly remarkable is that he has told numerous people,
 including myself, my brother, my parents, and
 numerous friends who were forced to listen to it, that
 he HATES Bill Clinton. John has said this many times.
 John, please explain on this forum, where you made
 the accusation that I am a left- wing extremist liar,
 why any of that applies when all I did was to quote
 something that you have said many times, not to
 mention all the comments like the one above that you
 have sent into the Sandbox.

    Why John thinks that I or anyone else has defended
 Clinton in his actions is also beyond me. I have written
 several times in this forum that I do not approve of
 and condemn Clinton's actions concerning Monica and
 numerous other things. John wrote in his last letter
 that Clinton tried to smear some congressional critic
 by attacking his military record (of which Clinton had
 none). Well, I don't approve of that either. John is
 clearly unaware that both parties do that kind of thing,
 and both parties should be condemned for it, rather
 that picking out only the party you like and
 condemning the other. Wrong is wrong, and I don't
 care who does it.

    The latest thing that has my anger up is the
 revelation that when the Senate tried to shoot down
 the gun control bill a couple of weeks ago (John
 had accused that liberals would try to make a gun
 control bill in the wake of Columbine high school-
 poor John is unaware that 70 % of the country has
 stated a desire for some gun control- you don't have to
 be a liberal to want fewer guns on the streets- but
 John's ideology interferes with such facts), it was
 revealed that 48 of the 50 Republican Senators who
 voted against the bill were receiving money from the
 NRA.  I was wondering of John would comment on
 that, since I know he would have of Democrats had
 been doing that. But, of course, since these were
 Republicans, then it's perfectly ok. John has made no
 comment about it. Those of us who are more
 moderate and centrist would condemn such behavior
 in either party, and both parties DO do it. It's not just
 the Republicans. But it's wrong for both parties.

    This is an extremely long letter, but like I said
 earlier, I  simply can no longer tolerate John's one-
 sidedness and intolerance. I was bemused a little while
 ago when John tried to say something nice about Bill
 Bradley, a Democrat. However, as painful as that must
 have been for John in his attempt to show his fairness,
 it does not erase the dozens and dozens of comments
 that he has made over the months in this forum and
 elsewhere. In using the "H" word, please do
 understand that I am only quoting what John
 himself has said- John- please try to restrain your
 hatred on this board and elsewhere, because it detracts
 from your credibility. If you don't like Clinton- fine-
 lots of people don't like Clinton. Your hatred goes
 beyond that.

-Marc Franco (66) - moderate liberal (ouch....ouch


Subj:   A weenie is still a weenie.
From:   David Rivers (65)
I find it interesting, that some guys and gals have
 become upset with a certain fellow who has,
 apparently dominated the Sandbox, with tirades and
 lectures.  When we were in school there were groups of
 kids that ran together and pretty much stayed that
 way.  The kids I ran with, I still run with we just don't
 see each other as often.  Once a year now instead of
 once a day.  Over the years our groups have expanded
 in some ways and we've come to know others we
 didn't know very well in school.  Likewise, we have
 dropped some we no longer enjoy.  Some people
 considered cool in school, we may no longer consider
 so.  Some we considered square, we've learned to
 admire and sought the pleasure of their company.  But
 remember, we needn't tolerate intolerance.  Nice thing
 about computers is the delete feature.  Whether it's
 Ballpark or Hebrew National...A weenie is still a

David Rivers (65)


Subj:   Stressful Reading!
From:   Andrew Eckert (54)

I am compelled to add my voice to the growing
 rebellion towards one individual's attempt to seize and
 force this forum into an extreme right wing forum for
 intolerance and hate dispensing.  I have just realized
 that with the past several issues of the Sandbox, I read
 as far as to see who had submissions and promptly
 tapped my delete key when the name John Allen
 appeared.  I as I'm sure many of you, have very little
 capacity left for hearing this constant spewing of hate,
 ridicule, distortions of anything political that Mr. Allen
 does not find conforms with his very narrow, self
 righteous, bigoted views.  Actually I'm feeding him
 just as he would have me do, I will have made Mr.
 Allen's day with this.  I understand that his
 sanctimonious, right wing rantings are his way of
 gaining attention and in his mind, perhaps stature. For
 now he can pontificate on all of my misguided,
 immature, rantings, so enjoy yourself John.

If Mr. Parker would consider rearranging the order,
 placing John Allen at the bottom of the page, much of
 the stress I attribute to his writings, could be avoided
 more easily, and perhaps some of the writers with truly
 enlightening and most thoughtful, at times even
 inspiring, submissions from persons who do not live
 there political agendas may return.  I'll plagiarize a
 writing from Vernon Blanchette Lesson 10.

> "Never let your ego get so close to your position that
 when your position goes, your ego goes with it."

                    Andrew Eckert (54)

Subject  Maybe just a shill?
From:    Arthur Roberts (48)

Surely, "Right Wing Extremists" can't really be as bad
 as Mr. Allen, by example, sometimes makes them out
 to be?  Have you not considered that he might actually
 be a "shill" from the other side just trying to make so-
 called right-wingers look bad?  Or, perhaps it is a
 personal  condition rather than a political position that's
 really  being expressed at times?

I really hate political labels, in any case, which in my
 opinion generally tend to conceal more than they reveal.
 I prefer to measure each issue on it's own merits to the
 best of my ability rather than measuring it against any
 standard of presumed political "catechisms."

I appreciate it most when this forum offers opinions
 and information that is helpful to me in making better
 informed decisions for myself.  I am sure there are
 many more people, (fellow Bomber Alumni),  out
 there who could contribute greatly to this need.

                         - Arthur Roberts -


From:     Ray Wells (54)
Subject:  Freedom of speech

I am against censorship.  Freedom of speech is our
 constitutional right.  Obviously there are limits as to
 what is appropriate.  It is not appropriate to yell
 "FIRE" in a crowded theater, nor is it appropriate to
 use the sandbox forum for character assassination or
 pornographic stories.  Anything that falls short of this
 should be fair game.

I no longer bother to make contributions to the Alumni
 Sandstorm, and I seldom read it, because Maren Smith
 refused to print the following story:

Concerning Ray Juricich:  We used to wait for him to
 come down the hall, and when he was within hearing
 distance, we would go through this dialog:


 "No, mine don't itch.  Jurs?"

Maren missed the point which was to poke fun at Ray's
 last name, and she, from information supplied by her
 own mind -- not the story, was sure that the point of
 the story was to poke fun at Mr. Juricich's private
 parts -- so she refused to print it.  If I were to
 encounter this type of censorship from the Sandbox,
 I'd stop contributing to it and I'd stop reading it.  Stick
 to your ideals, Al.

                        - Ray Wells (54) -


Subj:   Re: The Sandbox and Free Speech
From:   Patricia de la Bretonne '65

Al, I don't really feel it is necessary for you to censor in
 any way.  It seems on this site as on others of its type,
 if someone is offensive, or just plain stupid, someone
 else will tell her/him so.  I think it's best if we just
 monitor ourselves and each other, particularly since
 this site was set up as an alternative to the arbitrarily
 and whimsically censored Sandstorm.  If this is
 censored and edited, what's the point of having it as an
 alternative site at all?  thanks.

Patricia de la Bretonne '65


Subj:   Feelings and Thoughts 
From:  Stephen Lewis (69)

Having scrolled through the archives, it seems a shame
 that some hard feelings have developed. Certainly,
 people that want a warm and fuzzy place can stay with
 the Sandstorm and people that want to get political
 can hang out in the box. 

However, I am a bit disappointed that there are not
 more Richland-related political issues such as later
 classes'  beloved mushroom cloud, the thyroid study,
 future uses of the Hanford Reach, or controversies
 surrounding the Hanford cleanup. 

[Excuse me for interupting... I would like to see a lot
 more of that, myself, Steve. -ap]

A lot of what I saw in the archives, I can get by tuning
 to 570 AM here on the wet side.

However, the snitching issue did remind me of the
 exact moment when I learned that being a tattletale
 was bad in Mrs. Warren's kindergarten class at

Hello to any of my old friends that are still "in the box."

  Steve Lewis (65)


Subj:   Re: The SANDBOX and Free Speech
From:   Margaret Hartnett (72)
            (A modern hotel in a timeless town)
To:       Al Parker

Al, thanks for sharing your thoughts and concerns
 about Freedom of Speech and how it applies to the
 SANDBOX. Your views and suggestions certainly hit
 a resonant chord with me. I suppose I fall on the side
 of protecting our Freedom of Speech by "whatever
 means necessary", therefore I would vote against any
 form of censorship. One of the things I have learned by
 spending 20 years in the "hospitality" industry is that
 there is no excuse for bad manners but they are out
 there everywhere we look. I for one will miss Mike
 Franco's contributions to the SANDBOX, and not
 wanting to take up "public" space I have told him so
 directly. I am also one of the people that John Allen
 has taken to task in the past. The wounds are healing
 nicely but it makes one less likely to say anything that
 might catch John's attention. Is that John's fault? Not
 really, but it does impact the concept of a free
 exchange of thoughts and opinions. One of my 
 mother's favorite sayings that always comes back to
 me at times like this was, "It takes the same amount of
 energy to be nice as mean". So, maybe John could try
 killing us with kindness for a while. On the other hand,
 you might suggest to our fellow readers that we can
 always scroll right by.

              Margaret Hartnett (72)

[Thanks, Peggy, for suggesting "scroll" as an
 alternative, rather than "delete."  I still think it would
 be great if we could have a big Bomber party at your
 hotel some day!  --ap]


Subj:   Looking Beyond
From:   Eva Clark Perry (49)

Regardless of what all transpires, we are of a fleshly
 nature and self never wants to admit "I" could be
 wrong.  Jesse Penn-Lewis once wrote,  "If you
 discover that you are disappointed in yourself, it is
 simply evidence that self isn't dead".   Surely, we from
 the era of RICHLAND and the war etc.. should have
 reached a point of looking beyond the flesh and to
 what is yet to come.   Really, I am Thankful to be able
 to read and listen to what all are saying and just felt
 that maybe we all ought to look beyond instead of
 letting all these petty things ruin our minds.   Love
 and Prayer.                         
                   Eva Clark Perry (49)


Sub:     We Grow Great By Dreams
From:   Mike Pearson (74)

My Mom sent this:

"We grow great by dreams. 
All big men are dreamers. They see things 
in the soft haze of a spring day or in
the red fire of a long winter's evening. 
Some of us let these great dreams die, 
but others nourish and protect them; 
nurse them through bad days till they 
bring them to the sunshine and light 
which comes always to those who sincerely
hope that their dreams will come true." 

-- Woodrow Wilson

                      Mike Pearson (74)


Subj:      BAIT & SWITCH
From:      John M. Allen (66) ~

A short few years ago, we had a Republican US
 Congressman here in Oregon who had been claiming
 for some time in his personal biography that during his
 military career, he had been a member of US Army
 Special Forces in Korea.   It was eventually revealed
 that there was some question concerning his veracity
 in this regard.   Finally, the hot light of publicity made
 it clear that this individual had been lying through his
 teeth about this AND other things regarding his
 personal and professional life.   He was forced from
 office and another Republican who had formerly
 represented the same district was appointed in his
 place.   Justice was served.

Unfortunately, we are in the process of seeing similar
 behavior pop up again in the Northwest.   
 Representative George R. Nethercutt, Jr., another
 Republican, has managed to come down with a severe
 case of Potomac Fever and apparently plans to renege
 on his solemn promise to serve a maximum of two
 terms as Washington State's Representative from
 the Fifth Congressional District.  Perhaps his original
 pledge was ill-advised (personally, I think a pledge for
 a maximum of 6-8 years would have been more
 reasonable), but HE made that pledge and most
 importantly, he is easily capable of fulfilling it - even
 now.  This is simply a case of he doesn't WANT to
 fulfill his promise.  A man IS no better than his word
 and now we see Nethercutt's word is worth very
 little when it becomes painful to keep it.  This is the
 type of difficult situation where a man's true character
 can best be evaluated and if Nethercutt continues on
 his present course, he should be judged appropriately. 
 I hope that if conservatives in the 5th District have a
 Republican alternative, they will vote for that
 individual (there is still time to find one) and, as a last
 resort, vote for the Democrat challenger.  This kind of
 dishonorable "promise them anything to get elected"
 image is nothing the Republican Party needs to have
 hanging around its neck.  The opposition is good
 enough at making something out of nothing; we don't
 need to be giving them a slam dunk.

---John Allen ('66)


Subj:   New Address / Likes Input
From:  Millie Finch Gregg (54)

I just wanted to notify the Sandbox that  I have a new
 e-mail.  Please change the old to this:  Thank you.  

I like to read your input also.  Have a great day!  

                     Millie Finch Gregg (54)


Errors and Ommisions: Two articles included in Issue
 #42 by Mike Pearson were inadvertently not attributed
 at the top of the page.  If you missed them, you may
 enjoy going back to issue #42 and using your word
 search function to find them by typing "Pearson" into
 your word search field.  If I goofed up anything sent in
 by anyone else, either in that issue, or this, I 
 apologize for that as well.  Thanks.

Thank you for all your comments in this issue.  I hope 
 to see things continue in an ever more productive venue
 involving the free exchange of Ideas, Concerns, even
 Hopes and Dreams.  And it sure wouldn't hurt to have
 a little more Humor injected from time to time.  What
 is going on in your neighborhood that needs airing, or
 weighing out?  What things wonderful are happening?
 What can we do to improve our quality of life?  How 
 can we benefit others?  Everybody's talkin' about the
 weather, but what can we do about it?  Is the human
 race learning anything from history, or are we just
 repeating it?  What  is missing in The SANDBOX that 
 You'd like to see  here?

Here's an exercise you could try: Scan today's
 Newspaper.  Which three topics do you think are the
 most important or life-affecting there?  How would you
 like to influence the outcome of any one of these items
 if you could?  O.K. think about it for a moment.
 Have you thought about it?  OK, then ...SHARZIES!

It's basically up to you folks to make this thing work. 
 What you are willing to contribute is precisely what I
 am able to send out.

Until next time, I remain your faithful servant,

                     Al Parker (53)

May all your hopes and dreams, now and forever, 
    eventually an irrevocably come true!