OmgDn Dailu
EMERALD
J«rTAt '
The Oregon Daily Emerald is published five days a week during the school year
except examination and vacation periods, by the Student Publications Board of the Univer
sity of Oregon. Entered as second class matter at the post office, Eugene, Oregon. Sub
scription rates: $5 per school year; $2 a term.
Opinions expressed on the editorial pages are those of the writer and do not pretend to
represent the opinions of the ASUO or of the University. Unsigned editorials arc written
hv the editor; initiated editorials by the associate editors.
Neuberger, Our Choice
Next Tuesday Oregon voters will go to the polls to par
ticipate in that biennial phenomenon—a national election. The
Oregon election this year is of unusual interest, because the
voters have a real choice to make in the election of a United
States senator.
The state's ingrown Republicanism has offered the voter
very little to choose from in past years. The Democrats, until
this year, have failed to nominate anyone who could be con
sidered a serious contender. The Republican incumbent has
usually won, merely because he was the incumbent.
The senatorial race this year is different. Richard L. Neu
berger, the Democratic nominee, is as well known at least
as his opponent, Senator Guy Cordon, Republican incum
bent.
Republican tactics in past elections have been clearly
aimed at election of the incumbent without dwelling to any
extent on the issues at stake. We note with dismay the dis
couraging tendency in the Oregon Republican party to follow
these same tactics in the present election.
Republicans don't say much about Cordon’s record of voting
for the Bricker amendment and against NATO. We are told
merely that he is a Republican, admittedly a conservative
Republican, and that Oregon is a Republican state, so Cordon
should be re-elected. Eisenhower is a Republican and needs
members of his own party to carry through his program, we
are told. The fact that the president is a liberal Republican
and can and has carried through his program with liberal
support from both parties is conveniently glossed over by
Cordon supporters.
Oregon voters have furthermore been warned by GOP
partisans that the election of Neuberger would be a disgrace
to the fine conservative reputation of our fair state. They
have compared Neuberger with Senator Wayne Morse, (a
comparison we fail to interpret as entirely derogatory)
saying Oregon could not survive such a combination in
the US Senate.
Wayne Morse is not up for re-election this year. Outside
of the fact he is campaigning for Neuberger, he is not an issue
in this campaign. Neuberger should be judged on his own
merits, not on the basis of a comparison with our junior
. senator.
Is Neuberger really too radical to represent Oregon? We
think not. However, we do not fully endorse all of his actions
and ideas. He does come closer to our concept- of progressive,
liberal government than his conservative opponent.
Voters actually should not have too difficult a time in
making up their minds about the senatorial election. Lib
erals of both parties, tired of an inmovable Oregon delega
• tion to Congress will vote for Neuberger; conservatives of
both parties, afraid of any change, can be expected to vote
for the retention of Cordon as senator.
The choice can be as simple as this. We think Oregon needs
a change, which can be brought about by the election of
Richard L. Neuberger to the US Senate.
f
Survey of Lit
1
“Are you reading ahead in the assignment again?”
! Letters to the Editor
ai
The Case Closes
Emerald Kditor:
1 had no intention of enter
ing into the nonsense about
my morals, planning to let it
die a natural death like other
university gossip; however, the
editorial comments on Mr. Mc
C&rroll's letter were just a
little too much to take in a
prone position. Mr. Gardner
has for some reason chosen to
avoid "Just the Facts" and
has printed a good deal of in
correct information (gossip)
about the Jensen Case. I feel
a little like Dreyfus. This let
ter is my side of the story
which previously has been ne
glected.
1 petitioned for the job of
assembly director because it Is
something that I have been
very interested In doing since
entering the University. I
think it is a fine way to spread
good will to the high schools
and other colleges, when prop
erly handled. That was my
only reason for petitioning. I
have no interest in polities on
the campus and if I had known
the position was a political one
I would never have petitioned.
I wanted to present a good
show—this is the sole Intent
of the performer. I was ap
pointed to this position, much
to my pleasure, by a vote of
14 to S.
The following week I set
about putting a show together.
It was to be, as I had prom
ised the senate at my inter
view. a show with no vulgarity.
I was pleased with the talent
that was showing interest in
the production and becoming
even more enthused as things
began to take shape. On Wed
nesday, a week after my ap
pointment, Mr. Summers
stopped me on campus and
said he would like to talk to
me some time during the day.
i. agrueu. wnen I met mm
later in the day he informed
me that some of the senators
had questioned my right to the
position on the grounds of
previous performances on cam
pus. I was, to say the least,
taken aback. Summers further
stated that it had been sug
gested he ask for my resigna
tion, but he was not going to
do that. He requested that I
appear before the senate and
clear myself of the charges.
I thanked him for the opportu
nity to do this, being a little
numbed by it all.
The charges made against
me were: (1) The fact that
I was not to be allowed as a
Master of Ceremonies at cam
pus functions and (2) In a
takeoff on the pas de deux
from Swan Lake, that Phil
Lewis and I have done, there
is a piece of business where
Lewis grabs my chest and then
runs downstage and informs
the audience I am wearing
falsies. This dance was per
formed at the Frosh assembly
this fall. I explained to the sen
ate when I appeared before
them on that fateful Thursday
night that the reason for the
first charge was that I was
just a very bad M. C. This is
something that I have been
aware of since my sophomore
year in high school and have
only taken M. C. jobs when
begged to do so and in a weak
moment said "yes.” I can say
with a clear conscience that
I have never told off-color
jokes when acting as an M. C.
The second charge was quite
true and I do not consider it
immoral, vulgar, obscene, or
any of those other lovely
terms. I felt I was performing
before an adult audience and
the act was not out of place.
I could never have done this
for a high school audience.
Mr. Gardner, in his discus
sion of the case, made it seem
as though I charged forth,
sword in hand, into the senate
meeting and proceeded to as
sault each senator. I was re
quested to appear. Why did I
resign at this meeting? First,
because I had given my word
to the senate, in a gentleman’s
agreement, that there would
be no vulgarity in the show.
They wore to have k chance to j
view the production before
anyone else saw it and at that
time make their correct iona.
I have been raised to believe
that a persan’s word is a bind
ing thing. I had given my word
and if that was not good
enough for the ASUO they
ahould find someone that they
are able to trust. My second
reason was that I was sure this
would oidy be the first of many
appearances I would have to
make before the senate to ex
plain my every move. Thirdly,
a committee was organized to
control me without my knowl
edge. I agreed with the plan
drawn up, but would like to
know about these things as I
had some ideas on the subject.
Fourth and foremost, the
charge Against me were so
very childish and labored that
it was evident that someone
wanted me out of the position
very badly and if it meant
that much for a student body
officer to impress his will on
others, I will not spoil his fun.
After I resigned from the
position I discovered the fol
lowing very Interesting facts.
On the Tuesday after my ap
pointment Mark Tapsrot, the
other petitioner who hud been
promised the Job by Hummers,
received a phone call from a
senator telling him that he
could have the position as they
hud found sufficient e\ idence
with which to “hang" me. Also
it was told me that during my
first interview with the senate
Mr. Hummers mimicked my
gestures and made a large
point of the time limit on the
Interview. He did neither of
these things during Mr. Tap
scot’s interview.
On the evening of my resig
nation an Emerald reporter,
in search of a scoop, cornered
me and took down all this in
formation plus information
from Mr. Tapscot. ThiH same
reporter was all "fired up” to
have the story of the year.
This story was lost somewhere
in the Theta Chi house.
I would like to ask just two
questions. Why is all of this
fuss being made over so triv
ial a matter as my resigna
tion? Who started the “get
Jensen campaign"? Perhaps
Mr. DuShane could give us
some answers.
Please let this be the end
of the Jensen case. Far too
much time and space have been
wasted on it now. The world
Is far too busy a place to spend
time on Jensen cases. 1 do not
mind being a space filler, but
I am sure there are lietter
things to write about. Thank
you very much for all of the
ink anil paper and for spelling
my name correctly so many
times, but as far as the Jen
sen ease is concerned, let this
be THE END.
Oregon’s Bad Boy
John T. Jensen
Convincing Evidence
Emerald Editor:
The attack on Mr. McCar
roll in Monday’s Emerald of
fers convincing evidence that
the editor considers "common
standards of good taste" to be
quite low.
It also offered the campus
proof of Mr. McCarroli’s con
tention that “a person of little
imagination hut a great deal of
zeal, could exaggerate the im
portance of minor things.” Be
cause he wrote a letter ex
pressing dissent from the |K>li
cies of the editor in the Jensen
case, he was subjected to the
accusations that he was fired
as Emerald drama erltlc be
cause he had violated the Em
erald’s standards of good lasts,
and incidentally because he
was a had speller. The editor
also insinuated — sincerely,
since he doubtless believes that
no one could rationally dis
agree with him—that Mr. Mc
Carroll wrote his letter merely
to anger the editor.
The editor said of Mr. Mc
Carroll: “If his intention was
to anger us, we must disap
point him.” In all probability,
Mr. McCarroll is disappointed
not because hi* letter failed
to anger the editor, but rather
, because it did anger the editor.
Muny others are disappointed
alao.
A great many student* are
getting tired of I tie editor’ll
highly personullxed and emo
tional approach to matter*
which sixmId Ih- dealt with in
an ohjeetlve manner. They are
tired of the constant reference
to Senator Morse a* the man
who hold* the Senate record
for tulklng the longeit, ami
they resent yon headlining hint
a* the ’’Talkathon Champ.“ It
I* u great misfortune that Rm
eratd policies are prcnenled in
Hitch a manner while at the
Name time we have on campus
a fine Jotirnalisni school w hlch
Is t ruining many men and
worm'll to seek the real Issues
of controversy und report them
factually and objectively. Vnd
I am sure that In the journal
ism school the editor would
learn that, even on the edi
torial page, there Is an oh
ligation to stick to the real
Issue.
I am mire that the editor'*
distaste for Senator Morse I*
not rooted In the fact that
Senator Mor*e ha* broken the
senate record for continuous
speaking. I am mire that the
editor'* emotional response to
Mr. McCarroll's letter was not
provoked by Mr, McCarroll’s
misspelled words or his "past”
us a drama critic. The editor
is entitled to his likes and dis
liken, but they would b<* both
more persuasive and palatable
if they were presented clearly
and fairly.
Very Sincerely,
William T. IJnktater
AllLampus Vote
Kim ralil Editor:
It ha* come to the attention
of the writer* that Bt-Uy Coed
and Joe College could have
been more aptly named Joe
Whlakers and Betty WhUtker
ino.
We are not concerned with
the result* of the contest,
merely the means by which the
result* were determined. '! he
fact that only those attend
ing the I9.VI W'hUki rino were
allowed to vote constitutes a
eross-seetlon—not of the t’nl
verslty of Oregon—but of the
students attending the 1951
W'hUkerino. Secondly, the ulti
matum that Students must In
present before tt:.'IO In order
to vote presents some prob
lem*. It Is highly improbable
that everyone will be there by
B:SO, especially girls whose
dates call for them at 10:00 or
later. Another thought that
occurs here U this: what about
the girls who didn’t ha\e dates
to rail for them. Anil the other
students who didn’t want to
attend the W'hUkerino, hut did
want to vote.
If the students favored an
all campus vote it would elim
inate these difficulties, and
also indicate that only students
of Oregon would vote. This Is
not to Imply that we dislike
the San Jose State delegates,
among others, yet, can we
justifiably admit the votes of
other schools In our campus
contests.
In the opinion of the writers
—who were at the dance, did
vote, anil are not attempting
to be hypocritical—this toplcf
Is important. It Is Important
not only this year, hut In the
future, not only concerning
this contest, hut others that
are so held.
Thus we advocate the all
campus vote in campus con
tests, so that the decision in
the future will represent the
many and not the few.
Merry Christmas,
Hally Cummins
Pat Beard
Today's Staff
Makeup Editor—Dick Lewis.
Copy Dessk Dorothy Griffith,
Sally Ryan.
News Desk Mary Alice Al
len, Jerry Harrell.
Night Staff- Kathy Morrison.