Archive [January 1999]

Indoor Recreation

The White House is in a mess and it is time to restore order. No, I’m not talking about the most ethical Administration in American history. I’m referencing a new report by the U.S. National Park Service unveiling a $300 million renovation plan, complete with underground entertainment facilities.

“As a home the White House has a number of shortcomings,” the plan reads, “Within its relentless formality, no indoor recreation space exists where members of the first family can relax at the end of a hectic day.”

Ahem.

The report continues: “Closets, corridors and driveways overflow with furniture and equipment, as though the staff were having a tag sale. No modern hotel would put up with such chaos.”

I kid you not. You are forgiven if you immediately think of the indoor recreation space this President has discovered in the corridor off the Oval Office.

First, Blame the Parents

Dr. Christine Williams of the American Health Foundation in Valhalla, N.Y., claims to have discovered that anti-smoking campaigns aimed at schoolchildren come too late; the message should target children as young as three. She interviewed 500 preschool children from poor families in New York, most black or Hispanic. She says the results put the burden on parents. “Living with a smoker in the family, especially a mother, greatly increases the chances a child will plan to smoke when they get bigger,” Williams told a meeting of the American Heart Association. She said parents must quit.

Okay, those are her conclusions. Here is her actual research, according to an AP report. You tell me if this makes any sense:

Williams found that more than two-thirds of the children had a family member who smoked. Sixty-seven percent of the three-year-olds said they planned to smoke, while only 25 percent of the five-year-olds did.

In other words, as they got older, the kids learned — as they learned many other things in life — that smoking is bad. “If you survey a group of first-grade children, none of them is going to smoke,” she said. This is good, no?

Not good enough for Ms. Williams. She suspects that “they may just be parroting socially acceptable attitudes.” She explains that “as they got older and more socialized and realized that smoking is not a socially acceptable thing to do, they would stop saying they planned to smoke when they got older,” she said.

So tell me again why three-year-olds need an anti-tobacco campaign?

Williams says more studies are needed. Either that, or Williams should find something else to do.

SIGN SAGA

For Carol Schuyten’s 42nd birthday, she asked her husband and six kids for a big piece of plywood and paint. They made a family project out of painting “IMPEACH CLINTON!” in huge letters; she put the sign in her front yard on election day. In early December, Richard A. Herweyer, Grattan Township Supervisor, wrote her: “Even though your sign is of a political nature, it is not in connection with a current national, state, or local election … Your sign does distract from the natural beauty of the township … and must be removed within ten (10) days.” Otherwise Schuyten would be liable for prosecution and a fine. After Conservative News Service did a report on the “illegal” sign, I read it on air — as evidence that, despite what we were being told by the pundits, people did care. After my broadcast, local radio, tv and newspaper stories rallied community support for Schuyten. At the next township meeting, Schuyten received permission to keep her sign — and an apology from Herweyer. Schuyten observes: “I really stood on the First Amendment of the Constitution. In a personal way, I felt the power of that document. I saw how critical the Constitution is for us little people who have no other recourse and in that sense, I saw what tragic damage would be done if Bill Clinton is allowed to basically shred this document by not being called into account for his actions.” As we go to press, Schuyten has decided to replace the word “Impeach “ with “Convict.”

Clinton’s kind of town

Playwright Eve Ensler thinks the current Washington, D.C. discussion of the definition of sexual relations — thanks to Bill Clinton — is a beautiful thing. She says the whole Monica story means that “maybe we don’t have to be so worried” about sex anymore: “Sex is so precious.”

The Washington Post reports that Ms. Ensler’s belief is based on enthusiastic audience reaction to her one-woman show, “The Vagina Monologues.”

Few of you would be surprised, I think, that The Post discovered a bunch of Clintonites at a recent performance: “I thought it was very clever, brilliant,” said Lanny Davis; “that play is unspinnable.” Rhoda Glickman, deputy chief of staff to Housing Secretary Andrew Cuomo (and wife of Agriculture Secretary Dan Glickman): “Fantastic.” Other playgoers included deputy White House counsel Cheryl Mills; deputy budget director Sylvia Mathews; Karen Skelton, deputy presidential assistant for political affairs; and Democratic National Committee Treasurer Carol Pensky.

“People went crazy. There were a lot of young women at my … shows, and they were right into it … Washington is a good town for vaginas,” Ensler concludes. No comment.