The Skyline Newspaper

Cartoon: Created and Designed by Jonathan Smith, Sul Ross Senior

This Willie Nelson does Everything but Encores

Steve Lang
News and Publications

Critics worldwide swoon over my original line of corduroy evening wear." -- Hugh Gallagher

One evening, while watching football practice, Zach Gideon, Sul Ross scholar and dominating defensive end, asked me:

"Where do you get the ideas for your column? Do you just look in the dictionary, pull out a word and write about it?"

I replied that the two main sources were life experiences I have witnessed or heard about, and the fact that I took a nasty fall in gym class in fifth grade.

Ever since landing hard on the back of my head, my mental orbit resembles the path of Pluto compared to the rest of the societal solar system.

Zach favored me with a knowing glance. His silent acknowledgment gave me the reassurance that he possesses the basic tools for success after college: most notably, separating wheat from chaff, so to speak.

Lately, I had been running out of ideas, despite attending a class reunion, three Colorado Rockies games, and a Norwegian troll festival this past summer.

In the nick of time, my sister rescued me.

"You may want to write about Willie Nelson," she suggested during a Sunday phone call.

"I have. Willie gave us that great concert in the Gallego Center a couple of Valentine's Days ago and emphasizes the right to bare arms, remember?"

"Not that Willie Nelson. This Willie Nelson; the one who bought Billy Carter's pickup truck and drove it down to the car show in Plains (Ga., the Carter family hometown)," Mary emphasized. "I will scan his business card and send it to you tomorrow."

This Willie Nelson, of Calabash, N.C., a self-proclaimed Seeker of Peace, offers more credentials than a post-doctoral researcher tracking the annual flight of Monarch butterflies or monitoring milkshake consumption in Milwaukee.

Being curious, I e-mailed the following:

Dear Willie "Seeker of Peace" Nelson,

My sister e-mailed me a scan of your business card. Needless to say, you have some rather fascinating credentials on your card. Since I write a general column for our university newspaper, expanding young minds is one of my objectives.

Would you mind e-mailing me back and expound on some of your attributes? Since the Willie Nelson of Texas is the troubadour of song and always expresses the right to bare arms, I would like to include some of your talents as well. Thank you for your attention in this matter.

Based on his card, Willie S.O.P. (Seeker of Peace) Nelson emerges as one of the more intriguing characters since Hugh Gallagher, who once responded to the following question:

In order for the admissions staff of our college to get to know you, the applicant, better, we ask that you answer the following question: are there any significant experiences you have had, or accomplishments you have realized, that have helped to define you as a person?

"I am a dynamic figure, often seen scaling walls and crushing ice. I have been known to remodel train stations on my lunch breaks, making them more efficient in the area of heat retention. I translate ethnic slurs for Cuban refugees, I write award-winning operas, I manage time efficiently. Occasionally, I tread water for three days in a row.

"I woo women with my sensuous and godlike trombone playing, I can pilot bicycles up severe inclines with unflagging speed, and I cook Thirty-Minute Brownies in twenty minutes. I am an expert in stucco, a veteran in love, and an outlaw in Peru....

"....But I have not yet gone to college."

I am not certain if Willie S.O.P. Nelson has yet gone to college, either. But, one may ask, is higher education necessary for a self-proclaimed "world class trainer, rodeo cowboy, soldier of fortune, champion of the oppressed, international lover, casual hero, working girl's friend and all-around good guy"?

By going to college, how would Willie have time to (according to the card): fight wars, breed bears, tame tigers, remove warts, track cougars, determine the sex of chickens, predict scores, quash uprisings, neuter alligators, empty bars, appeal taxes, settle lawsuits, stop dogfights, start catfights, strip furniture, verify computers and organize cockfights?

While I await Willie's response, I can only speculate on his ability to fulfill these objectives....

...by delegating, I'm guessing.

Steve Lang delegates a little authority, since he has as little as anyone.

It's Sad Thing to Watch a Dog Get Old

By David Johnson
Skyline contributer

It's a sad thing to watch anyone of any species get old but a dog most especially because it happens so fast. You and I will get old; birds, trees, and rocks will get old and disappear just like everything else in this imperfect world, but it seems like in most cases, it happens so slow or to something so inexpressive that the change isn't very dramatic. Old age comes hard to people, but at least there's usually 20 years of decline to give the chance for a graceful landing.

With a dog, one moment it's a puppy, the next its in the full flower of life, and one more after that, it's grayed, sagging, and whining as it limps over to you when you call it.

An exaggeration, certainly, but when you're talking about something whose full life is around 15 years, that's not much of one.

The loyalty of dogs makes it worse. The fact that they still want to do and act as they did when they were young makes it worse. They still love you and want to perform for you as they did before, but their bodies fail the demands of their hearts. Five years before, their bodies were the physical expression of all the joy and devotion in this world. Now, they're just old. If life were fair, dogs would never get old, just eat, run, mate, and be happy forever.

Maybe it's sad because it's watching what's going to happen to you and everyone you know, except accelerated.

Or maybe dogs don't actually get old. Maybe they just gradually transcend all things petty and temporal and leave behind a shell for those of us who can't. Maybe good dogs never die.

And they're all good dogs.

A Modest Clarification on "Immigration"

Last week, an article appeared titled, "A Modest Proposal on Immigrants" intended to ring of Irish satirist Jonathan Swift's famous piece, "A Modest Proposal," which suggests Irish babies be sold by their parents as food for wealthy Englishmen to relieve the poverty of Ireland.

What the two have in common, other than their titles, is that they are both satires and say literally something other than what their actual meaning is.

Satire is a literary composition in verse or prose in which human folly and vice are held up to scorn, derision, and ridicule. More directly, it is using words to say something other than their literal meaning for some greater purpose.

In the case of the proposal on immigration, what was literally said in these pages was that all Hispanics should be deported and a barrier erected along the entire U.S.-Mexico border to prevent any re-immigration, ever.

If not as ludicrous and offensive as cannibalization of infant children, it should be near to it.

Many people at the university misunderstood the point that the target of our piece was not in fact Hispanics, Mexicans, or even illegal immigrants, but xenophobic people who hide behind strict legalism to justify their dislike of demographically significant people speaking another language or having another culture.

We apologize to those who were offended or misinterpreted our intent, but if the article is read again in its entirety with the above words in mind, it is clear that the article was not meant to be taken literally.

Sincerely,

Skyline editorial board

Red, Blue, and Green

By David Johnson
Skyline Contributor

I think many people, journalists at least, would like to believe that news is supposed to be an unbiased, accurate medium of gathering and reporting information to common citizens who otherwise would have no idea what's going on. Yet, these same people and many of the average citizens you'll find on the street would then say that today the news is biased.

How it's biased depends on who you ask. Rush Limbaugh, for example, will charge that there is a liberal media bias, even while having the largest radio reach in the country. Meanwhile, you have CNN, MSNBC and programs like "The Daily Show" or "The Colbert Report" charging that Fox News makes the media have a conservative bias.

The answer, of course, is that they're both right. There is both a liberal and conservative media bias, depending on where you look and what you consider "biased." However, it's also true that there's never been a time when media was not biased, or at the very least inaccurate.

Going back to the beginning of America, newspapers had a stated affiliation with some political agenda and everything was written or reprinted to further it. Was it done with more skill and sophistication than modern pundits? Sometimes. Sometimes it was just unabashed mudslinging. But it was never apolitical, even in pretense.

Later on we saw yellow journalism, sensationalism for the sake of selling a product. This was usually still done to promote some kind of political point or bring about social change, but clearly increasing the circulation was as big an impetus as anything.

Now, let's move up to the modern age that seems to have the qualities of both. Fox News is a Republican mouthpiece, and CNN has no problem over-hyping a story about a single missing (attractive) girl on a slow news day to the point that it becomes something seemingly crucial to the national consciousness. And yet, both have the exact same bias: money.

Any time you think that Fox News is right wing and Rupert Murdoch a hardcore conservative, just look at some of Fox's other programming: "The Simpsons," "Family Guy," and "American Dad." None of them miss any opportunity to satirize Republicans and President Bush in particular. But Rupert Murdoch is the same guy who owns a station broadcasting Republican propaganda on another station, right?

What Fox News and "The Simpsons" have in common is that they're both very profitable. Lots of people watch, albeit for different reasons. But all of those shows are on the air because they make money for their owners.

Murdoch isn't going let an unprofitable show stay on, no matter how good it is (RIP "Titus," "Firefly," etc.) or how much it's in step with his political views.

Fox News exists because there was a large demographic of patriotic conservatives who were being ignored by the more left-leaning CNN, and as soon as it came on the air, Fox News was able to tap into that once neglected viewership.

This kind of revolution, and obviously 9/11, forced other channels to include more conservative shows in their own programming. Not because they ideologically wanted to, but because they realized that was where the audience had shifted.

Why were so few questions asked in the lead-up to the invasion of Iraq? Not because there was a vast sinister conspiracy, but because we didn't want to hear them. We were patriotic; if the media hadn't followed suit we wouldn't have staid tuned for the commercial break.

If you remember Don Imus's Women's National Basketball Championship team hullabaloo, it wasn't that he said something terribly offensive that got him fired, it was that he started losing his ad support. You could be a racially intolerant, homophobic misogynist, and if you could make someone money, you'd be on the air.

Red state, blue state, it's all about the state of green in your pocket and how much more you can bring in as profit. Some people might find this disconcerting, but it's also reassuring.

What better protection is there from partisan control of the news than corporate greed and popular fickleness?

Tattoos and Body Piercings

Nurse John Hughes
Guest Columnist

An old sailor whose skin memorialized a ship he'd served on only briefly, along with images of dancing hula girls and the names of women long forgotten, was quoted as saying, "That was before I knew the meaning of the word permanent."

The decision to be tattooed often followed rounds at a local bar.

Body piercing is also not new or novel, but another old maritime custom of dubious merit.

In recent decades, tattoos and piercings have been integrated into more mainstream society; the mark of the adventurous seafarer now almost banal. For anyone determined to break the skin barrier, there is the very real risk of infection.

This could be the development of bacterial cellulitis resulting in scarring. Even worse is the potential of acquiring a blood borne virus such as Hepatitis B or HIV, which is permanent.

What can individuals do to help reduce any associated risk? Learn about who is doing the work, their credentials, and their sanitary practices.

Since tattoos and piercings start out as open wounds, keep the area clean and dry for several days or until granulation is established. Use an antimicrobial ointment if moisturizer is recommended for a healing tattoo. A blood test can detect whether an individual has been exposed to a life-threatening viral pathogen.

By following precautions, a person can enjoy a lifetime reflecting on the word permanent.