The SANDBOX 
                  Issue #61 April 26, 2000
           Ideas - Opinion - Personal Experience
                 sandbox@richlandbombers.com

                               ~ ~ ~

         "I'll love you dear, I'll love you
                Till China and Africa meet,
         And the river jumps over the mountain
                And the salmon sing in the street."

       From: As I Walked Out One Evening
          By W. H. Aulden (1907 - 1973)

                           ~`~`~`~`~`

Look Who's Talking Today:

     "Each year the fish arrive, looking as though
 they had swum the whole ride in the luggage
 compartment of a greyhound bus."

                        - Bob Mattson (64)

     "...most Americans ...  would rather watch
 something more important and more relevant to
 their lives, like their daily fix of "General Hospital"
 or some hour-long MSNBC puff piece on such 
 historical heavyweights as Kathy Lee Gifford or
 Britney Spears."

                         - John Allen (66)


     "The Sandbox allows me a glimpse into the
 minds of fellow Bombers in a way I never had. It
 is certainly interesting to see the diversity in
 thought which has emerged from such a 
 close-knit community."

                       - Gene Trosper (85)

                                 ~ ~ ~

     "I am always interested when somebody
 simply ascribes everything evil to a single person,
 and will admit nothing good about that same
 person."

                     - Marc Franco (66)

                            ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 

         The SANDBOX, Issue 61, Salutes: 
                     The Class of `61
  
http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Garden/5385/
Go there for E-mail addresses, Class Roster,
News, Class Pictures, Reunion News and
Pictures, Great Links.  
Site Administrator: Jay Siegel, jasiegel_61@yahoo.com.

                             ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Here's more of what we're talking about today:

Subj:   Wind, Salmon and Renewable Power
From: Bob Mattson (64)  
Rmat683939@aol.com

I just had to mention that in my billing statement
 this month was a flier from Portland General
 Electric. 

 "Wind and salmon, renewable power.  Nearly
 2,000 customers have enrolled in PGE's Clean
 Wind and Salmon-friendly power.*tm. Our
 customers are supporting  wind. Our
 shareholders spent over 2 million in 1999 to
 support the extra cost of wind resources
 generated from the Vansycle Ridge facility in
 Northeastern Oregon. PGE is also working with
 the BPA  to provide new wind sources  our clean
 wind program. Investigating several sites to
 assure minimal environmental impacts. Perhaps a
 new wind project will be announced later this
 year." 

I live in the lowest canyon of clear creek. It does
 flow from a foothill, Goat Mountain, 4000 feet
 above me. Each year the fish arrive, looking as
 though they had swum the whole ride in the luggage
 compartment of a greyhound bus. Simply put, I
 spent six minutes sleeping through my radio
 alarm this morning, plugged in and trying spawn.

                         - Tuna Bob -
         
                              ~`~`~

Subj: A NATION TURNING INTO TIN MEN
From: John Allen (66)
Reply-to: miles2go@cheerful.com

Portland, Oregon, 14 April 2000

In The Wizard of Oz, the Tin Man spent his time
 searching for that which he did not have - a
 HEART.  If one is to believe recent national
 public opinion polls and the comments from
 "man on the street" interviews concerning the
 Elian Gonzalez case, the majority of our country
 has somehow during the last 30 years, managed
 to lose the same vital organ for which the Tin
 Man was searching.  It is truly difficult to watch
 a once great nation who knew what it was to the
 world, instead become hardened with what
 passes for blasť sophistication.   I can't count the  
 number of people I have heard make the same
 comment of, "I'm tired of hearing about it."  To
 that I say, "Poor America!"   How horrible things
 must be for us that we should be plagued by a
 problem not curable with the click of a mouse or
 a remote control.  How forgetfully ignorant we
 have become that we can't be bothered for more
 than a day or two, listening to the plight of a six
 year old child who literally watched his mother
 make the ultimate sacrifice to deliver him from
 the clutches of Fidel Castro.  We used to know
 that Castro's Communism is not the rough moral
 equivalent of our Democracy, and that Fidel
 himself is no less a ruthless criminal than Adolf
 Hitler, Joseph Stalin, Sadaam Hussein, or Pol
 Pot.  But no longer!  That America has largely
 disappeared.

Ordinarily in a case like this, my sympathies
 would be for the rights of the surviving parent. 
 But when that parent, either by choice or by
 force, lives in a country which has
 constitutionally declared the non-existence of
 parental rights, not to mention individual
 HUMAN rights, then he cannot be deprived of
 that which his country will not even recognize. 
 Assuming they have even considered it, I wonder
 what Americans think will happen to this child if
 and when he is returned to Fidel - a man
 provably guilty of the outright murder of many
 children.  Now that Elian has tasted some of

 him to spread the good word to his little friends. 
 Given that, what methods do people think will be
 used to convince little Elian to keep his mouth
 shut - behavior generally foreign to most six
 year-old boys.  The answer these days is, most
 Americans don't CARE what techniques will be
 used, just so they don't have to hear about this
 little boy for one second longer.  They would
 rather watch something more important and
 more relevant to their lives, like their daily fix of
 "General Hospital" or some hour-long MSNBC
 puff piece on such historical heavyweights as
 Kathy Lee Gifford or Britney Spears.

So why IS the Clinton Administration giving the
 bum's rush to young Elian?  Very simply, despite
 his phony, "never let 'em see you sweat" facade,
 Bill Clinton is so exorcised about his likely
 write-up in history books he will live long 
 enough to read, he is making every conceivable
 last ditch effort to accomplish something which
 will win him the Nobel Peace Prize and maybe
 rescue him from the cutting room floor of US
 Presidents.  With most of his other foreign policy
 initiatives undergoing rapid deterioration
 (Northern Ireland, Kosovo, and Haiti to name a
 few), he believes he can gain a rapprochement
 with Castro and normalize relations between our
 two countries before the 22nd Amendment
 gives HIM a boot similar to the one he is trying
 to give little Elian.  Despite comments from
 attorney Greg Craig, Bubba's thinly veiled
 mouthpiece in the matter, the only actual law
 involved in this whole proceeding is the Cuban
 Refugee Adjustment Act of 1966.  This is a law
 which, under normal circumstances, would give
 the little boy unquestioned asylum from Castro. 
 It is only his age and the very sacrifice of his
 mother which gives the US government any
 discretion in the way it INTERPRETS this law.  
 However, "interpretation" of law is, usually, a
 matter for the judicial branch, not political hacks. 
 The Adjustment Act is a law with which Clinton
 has already played political games by "executive
 order" limitations.  Is it really a big surprise
 that this President is not at all concerned with the
 thousands of ILLEGAL Mexican immigrants
 who can be counted on to vote Democrat when
 given their US citizenship immediately prior to
 general elections, while simultaneously limiting
 the LEGAL immigration of Cubans whose
 history predicts they will almost certainly vote
 Republican.  Nevertheless, attorney Craig who,
 along with his patron, has recently found a new
 appreciation for the "Rule of Law," has also
 begun to pontificate about the violations of law
 committed by the Miami relatives of the boy. 
 Not surprisingly, he never mentions exactly
 WHICH law that is (OR if his most recent
 definition of the "Rule of Law" includes telling
 the TRUTH, the WHOLE truth, and NOTHING
 BUT the truth when testifying under oath in
 a US court).   Really, how dare a shill like Craig
 criticize Elian's relatives for trying to ensure for
 him the God-given rights which are denied him in
 Cuba!  Instead, Craig and most of the liberal
 media in this country are doing their dead level
 best to make sure that the Cuban American
 community of South Florida is demonized as
 "crazy, hot-blooded Latinos, full of unreasoning
 hatred for Fidel Castro and prone to violence."  
 Perhaps each of us should seek out a Jewish
 American and tell him or her that it's time to get
 over Adolph Hitler and the holocaust, and simply
 "move on."   I mean, really, aren't we all just a
 little tired of hearing about that ancient history,
 too?  Sadly, I'm afraid that also merits a "yes"
 answer in today's America.

Finally, for those few who have wondered what
 Clinton was doing with his time and his Rhodes
 Scholarship at Oxford University and in the
 Soviet Union (clue, it wasn't studying OR
 graduating), ask yourself why nearly every
 Clinton tax measure is aimed at redistributing the
 wealth created by individual Americans so that,
 rather than "equality of opportunity," this
 country will eventually stand for "equality of
 outcome" (however pitiful that outcome will be).
 And why did Clinton fully support the embargo
 against the extreme RIGHT-wing repression in
 South Africa, and yet does NOT now support
 the continued embargo against the extreme
 LEFT-wing repression in Castro's Cuba?

But let's not allow these bothersome details to
 interrupt our long political snooze or begin to
 regenerate our national "heart."  The Tin
 Man was surely a fool; little Elian is simply "in
 the way;" and, at the end of the day, it's really
 "all about Bill," isn't it?

                    ---John Allen (`66)

                               ~`~`~

Subj:   Thank You For The Sandbox
From:   Gene Trosper
Reply-to:gtrosper@ez2.net
To: sandbox@richlandbombers.com

I'd really like to say "thank you" for such an
 interesting e-publication: The Sandbox.

It's good to know what former Bombers think,
 feel and believe with regard to current events and
 politics. Going to RHS, I was caught up in sports,
 music, partying and all the usual teenage
 diversions from adult life. Politics seemed so far
 away, so boring. I never really got to know how
 my friends and classmates felt about the world at
 large. The Sandbox allows me a glimpse into the
 minds of fellow Bombers in a way I never had. It
 is certainly interesting to see the diversity in
 thought which has emerged from such a  close-knit
 community. What makes it even more
 interesting is that Richland has always been
 pretty much a "government town."

Perhaps growing up in a government town has
 contributed to my political and philosophical
 development from apolitical nothingness to
 libertarianism and a fervent interest in everything
 political. I can definitely point to the fact that my
 grandfather (the man who raised me), who was a
 fire department captain at Hanford's 300 area,
 was sent to Kadlec Hospital numerous times
 for radiation exposure. Having him die in '81
 from massive cancer (lungs, brain, etc.) after
 being given a clean bill of heath by a company
 doctor just before retirement really made me
 think, but I soon filed it away somewhere in my
 gray matter, only to resurface as an adult.

Again, thanks. I look forward to all the great stuff
 published in the Sandbox. It's encouraging and
 inspiring to read the wit and wisdom of those
 from my former hometown.

--Gene Trosper. class of `85 
   (well...woulda been, If I hadn't transferred 
                 in my junior year!)

                              ~ ~ ~

Portland, Oregon, 14 April 2000
Subj:    reply to Ray Wells
From:    Marc Franco (66)
Reply-to: mfranco@sttl.uswest.net 

I was extremely interested in Ray Wells letter
 about Bill Clinton. I am always interested when
 somebody simply ascribes everything evil to a
 single person, and will admit nothing good about
 that same person. John Allen has done this often-
 I mention John because Ray did-  but up until
 now, most people have had a more  balanced
 response to Bill Clinton, whether they like him or
 dislike him. Let's examine Ray's questions and try
 to answer them.  First off, Ray would like
 someone to analyze why people don't recognize
 that the present good economy was set in motion
 before Clinton entered office. (I'm paraphrasing a
 little, but I do believe my paraphrase does match
 Ray's intent.) Actually, Ray, I think most people
 are perfectly aware that the present good
 economy was set in motion well before Clinton
 entered office. I would say that it was actually
 set in motion by the Reagan administration.
 Even though we have been deeply in debt since
 then,  we seem to live through it and it would be
 difficult to deny that Reagan really got this
 going. But this kind of thing is always true. All
 presidents build on the achievements and the
 conditions set by their predecessors. Nobody
 comes in a total vacuum. But your apparent
 attempt to deny that Clinton deserves ANY
 credit for this economy is, I believe total folly.
 Sure, the groundwork was in place when Clinton
 arrived. And yes- Alan Greenspan absolutely
 deserves tons of credit. But to deny that
 Clinton's economic team has been excellent,
 including Robert Rubin (I hope I have the name
 right)- [You've got it right -ed.] widely
 considered one of the best Treasury secretaries
 the nation has had in years- detracts from
 your credibility. Just because you don't care for
 Clinton does not mean everything he does is
 wrong.

     Next point- You ask why Clinton still gets
 such high approval ratings.  Part of that started
 after the disastrous impeachment attempt, which
 many people recognized was blatantly political.
 Clinton's polls rose quite sharply during that
 time. However, I am a little surprised that you
 seem to be unaware that Presidents's approval
 ratings are ALWAYS high as long as the
 economy is good. This was been true over and
 over again. If the economy were bad, then so
 would be Clinton's ratings. The economy is
 good- therefore, Clinton is healthy. Real simple.

    You mention the disastrous foreign policy-
 there are certainly things you may not like about
 his foreign policy- I for one would like to see
 him be tougher with North Korea. However-
 disastrous? Worse than that of other Presidents,
 such as Reagan, Bush, or Jimmy Carter? Perhaps
 you can explain what has been disastrous, rather
 than simply something you don't like? And why
 do you think it has been particularly worse than
 any other President?

            The other problems you mention are
 certainly serious problems. However, since you
 don't want to give credit to Clinton for the
 good economy, because it really started before
 he entered office, I am somewhat surprised to
 see you attempt to give him credit for all of these
 serious problems. Are you seriously claiming that
 they all started with Clinton? If they started
 before Clinton, why do you give Clinton the
 credit? You didn't do that with the economy. I
 do absolutely agree with you about failure to
 enforce current gun laws. It makes me sick to
 think of what people get away with, when it's
 even illegal. But I am extremely unaware that
 earlier administrations did any better or different.
 I didn't think that ANYBODY had enforced the
 current laws. Maybe you could explain why you
 think that earlier administrations had enforced
 gun laws better than the present one. Perhaps
 you could explain why the decline of public
 education began only with Bill Clinton, as you
 are implying, and that earlier administrations
 somehow did a better job of protecting public
 education? I am simply unaware of how much
 better things were with previous administrations,
 but maybe I am stupid.  Since you clearly despise
 Clinton quite a bit, I should possibly make clear
 that I am not defending Clinton a bit in my above
 letter. What I am protesting against is the
 imbalance of your letter- saying that all bad
 things are because of Clinton, and all good things
 must have started before he came into office.
 Other than the Monica affair, Clinton does not
 seem to have been any better or worse than most
 other presidents.

                        Marc Franco (66)

                                - 61 -