- G’eeky garb --
.
truth or make-up? While in the Math and Computer building this week for a midterm, I noticed a sign posted that read something like, “Math nerds unite! We can’t take Linda Frufn’s book sitting at our terminals!” For those of you that missed the recent book review, Frum has jusi published a guide to Canadian universities, and Waterloo seems to rate as one of.the geekiest. Well, since taking a look at the guide, I’ve conducted some of my own on-campus research. Certain that the typical garb on campus does not include flood pants and poIyester shirts as Frum reported, I’ve been observing people’s clothes fopseveral weeks now. Frum was right when she said sweats were popular on campus, but even after I started stopping people to measure the length of their pants compared to their leg length, I just didn’t find that many pairs of floods. However I did get some students asking me if I*would go out with them because they didn’t know when they’d ever .see another UW woman to ask out. Others just hit me with their black vinyl briefcases, muttering that I was going to make them miss their interview. As for polyester shirts, they must be hidden under the numerous velour shirts and fake fur vests I‘saw people wearing. Either that or stuffed in the backs of everyone’s closets with their flood pants, hidden after.they read Frum’s remarks. Why Frum didn’t mention “jeans” under her typic4 garb list is beyond me. Pre-faded, flotiered, bleached, stonewash, rockwash, I acidwash, and neverwash denim is everywhere. I bet most students just don’t feel right if they heed over to camjpus without wearing at least one piece of denim clothing. Just as long as they have something in polyester to mismatch.
Dve’s reDoH a svnomis A’bfief look ai our of Ccpnservatives’ woes Fleur
Macqueen
d,islikes
Barring any further opinions of true value from Imprint staffers. this week, we present the first eyer (and possibly last] edition of It’s Production Night - We Hate Everything.The following is q list of a number of groovy gripes from those behind the scenes at #your favourite paper: .r . .-
-
Dancercise video?. There’s no rhyme for orange. Raving heterosexuals How come no more ashtrays outside the CC doors? We need ahlace to put our butts.’ Why do good-looking women travel in packs?. . . it’s getting scary.> Women who like men with class. . Street mimes. Small furry animals when there’s no tape in the house. * Filling space iri Imprint. Christmas. David Letterman’s ‘teeth . . . Paul Schaeffer’s anything. Sef without partners. _ Inventing the news. fw Educational TV. ’ The weather in this fucking city. Happy ducks. Decaffeinated coffee Empty beer fridges Couples who talk baby talk. Linda Frum, for being’s0 right. 0 \ You ,and your vegetables. Wimpy pickles I . . Pickled wimps. Pink ties. Yellow hats. ’ Potato chips crushed on journey from top of vending machine. Fat totirists with ‘rolls of puffy white flesh. An Oktoberfest queen who comes from Ceorbia. Mystery graphics in the “Arts” section. _ Dumb ads that don’t fit anywhere. Anything to do with cats. l
Thanks
we feel better
now,
lmprtnt is the studsnt newspaper at the University of Waterloo. It is an editorially independent newspaper pzrblishedby m& Publications, Waterloo, a corporation without shaxe capiw. lmprbt is a member of the Ontaxio CommunityNewspaper Assoctition (OCNA). Imprint publishes every second EMday
during
re$ulaz tqms. & l&e, Room N2L 3Gl. lm@‘ixxt
n
-
-
the
Spring
tarm
and
every
Fdday
dnring
Mail should bc addressed toJnqrint, 140, University of Waterloo, Waterloo,
the
Campus Ontario,
Auditor General Kenneth Dye’s annual report is both good and bad news for the Canada’s Conservative government. While the 1987 report;zl;‘eleased this week, contains th’e usual assortment of horror stories about federal spending ($7.5 million for I bullets that won’t, shoot straight, $5.*milli?n to the West Edmontog;Mall), it does find the government is gaining some control over its spknding. This somewhat rosy finding is dftiet, howe ver, by Dye’s conclusion that “there is no political will” within the government to implement a better financial management policy. This, in a nutshell, is the problem plaguing &ian Mulroney’s party. The Progressive Conservatives won an overwhelming majority of seats in the 1984 election on a promise of change, change from the tired-politics of a worn-out Liberal government. Yet, almost from daylone, the Tories have shown they lack the initiative and will to follow-up on their. election platform. The Canadian public, liking what they had heard in the campaign, voted en masse for tbe Tories, only to discover they’d bought a pig in a poke. Despite having been pointed in the right direction by the public, the PCs refused to follow the rout& preferring instead to wallow in indecision. Once in power, they proceeded to do just what they had lambasted the Liberals for: make questionable--h
-I--
-
EditorialBoard Bditor-in4abf ‘Ani8tmt lditor mm/Par+prslr
8porli8Eui~rm ArtmEUita’8 PhotosditaFl
mserPes
the right
to screen,
edit and refuse
political appointments,. increase trade deal with the U.S. and the regional disparities, and pay too Meech Lake constitutional much attention to lobby groups amendments - truly two major outside the public’s interest. issues. The effort put into both When Canadians found their projects, along with the ensuing government unresponsfve to media covesage and public detheir demands, public sentiment bate, has caused many other imquickly turned against the party portant federal issues. to be - a situation apparent to all but ignored. The government contin: the Tories, who were somewhat ually touts these achievements perplexed 62th the swift change (despite their dubious nature) as in fortunes. if the two are compensation foi Dye’s latest -report hits the all its other shortcomings. Conservatives in their most vulnerable spot: finances. Just The proposed changes to drug patent legislation, for example, three years ago, the PCs were promising controlled spending, have received far less attention than is merited simply because balanced budgets, and complete accountability. Today, we have of the magnitude of these two deals, especially the free trade none of these, although some positive measures liave been agreement. On the patent issue, enacted. That this situation exthe government is giving into the ists is due solely to the governpowerful multinational drug , ment’s lack of desire. The Tories companies’ lobby, at the average have both the power and the consumer’s expense, but we hear precious little real debate. means to deliver the goods, yet’ II . \ . like the postoffice (a Grown corporation, no less), they continuAlready seen as unconcerned ally fall short of the goal. with the public’s opinions (witIf the party is to restore its ness the vote on capital punishsagging popularity, it must take ment, and the wimpy treatment immediate steps to do what it’ of striking postal workers)’ the promised in “84, even though Tories have to move quickly if such a move will undoubtedly they are to halt their downward elicit instant protests from the slide (now in third place, at their vocal minority - both left and present pace the PCs may find right. It is such intere? groups themselves falling behind the .(be they the business lobby or - Rhinoceros Party). the socialist lobby) that often “There is no political will,” end-up influencing government says Dye. At least one person on policy, while the wants of the the government payroll know of majority go largely unheeded. what he speaks. The Conservatives have made a great fuss over both the free Steve Kannon
mallsor
steveKkw3.w -Bm=
ulm3
Mike Maraw, chriaWodskau,JohnZ~~ Jm Cash, w
o*mll
Jon
Sadl&r Rehage
adver-
tisin.g* imprint
-*
~
favourite t
m
ISSN 07067380
, .
.
. 4
-iaarxma$ylr muammMaM&r -m-
-mm=wfim
MasyJeddry
JanetLamm &ma
Done
Ted Grie8bach Andrea, Luxon
,