OREGON DAILY EMERALD
Opinions expressed on the editorial page are those of the Emerald and do not necessai il\
represent the opinions of the ASUO or the University. Opinions expressed in signed columns
are those of the writer.
CHUCK BEGGS, Editor
KENNETH M. FOBES
Business Manager
MAXINE ELLIOTT
News Editor
BOB CARL
Managing Editor
PHIL SEMAS
Associate Editor
LOUIE ABRAMSON
Advertising Manager
ALLEN BAILEY
Associate Editor
Page 6
University of Oregon, Eugene, Monday, October 25, 1965
Why We Endorse
In tomorrow’s Emerald we will endorse
candidates for the ASUO spring term elec
tions. And we’re sure that there’ll be the
usual objections by some people about those
endorsements. In past years many have
questioned our right to endorse and many
more have wondered why we endorse.
It has been said that as the only news
paper in the University community, it is
our duty to present both sides and that
therefore we shouldn't endorse one candi
date over another.
That argument, of course, can be extend
ed to conclude that we shouldn’t take
stands on anything. We feel that not to
present our viewpoint would be to vacate
our responsibility as a newspaper, monopo
ly or not. Most American newspapers are
monopoly newspapers. But that doesn't stop
them from taking editorial stands and
endorsing candidates.
We also make an effort to present both
sides. We always allow candidates to have
platform statements printed in the Emer
ald. And our letters columns are always
open to any student who wishes to endorse
any candidate, and to the candidates them
selves.
Another argument usually advanced, es
pecially in the fall, is that our endorse
ments carry more weight than they should
with the freshman voters. Freshmen, it is
reasoned, haven’t been in the University
long enough to be able to make voting deci
sions and take the Emerald's word on whom
to vote for.
We are not, of course, the only group
that endorses candidates. Until it disbanded
last week, the Off-Campus Council always
endorsed candidates. This fall the Univer
sity’s Young Republican group will en
dorse. And endorsement by individuals is
common. We often see the names of stu
dent leaders, who criticize us for endorsing
candidates, listed on posters and signs back
ing some candidate.
But we would be the last to dispute that
the Emerald’s endorsements carry more
weight, since we’ve been doing it for a
long time and our endorsements receive
wider circulation than those of others.
If we may indulge in a moment of self
praise, that’s the way we think it should be.
We doubt if there’s a campus group better
qualified to endorse candidates than our
editorial board. We have representatives of
almost all groups, in addition to our editors,
whose job it is to keep on top of campus
news. In other words, we think these peo
ple have a better understanding of campus
issues than any other group here.
If freshmen are going to base their votes
strictly on somebody’s endorsements (and
we doubt if they do), we’d rather have them
listen to our editorial board than anybody
else. We feel that endorsements are a ser
vice, that we are presenting the views of
experts on campus issues in order to have
a better-informed electorate.
And so we will continue to endorse, be
cause we feel it is our responsibility.
/Vw >(_■&»!» ■»
IT5 NOT THE DANGER, MAN —IT'S T HI HAIRCUT.
Letters to the Editor
No Right to Water Fight
Emerald Editor:
I have observed the campaign
of Mr. Fred Long for water
fight rights (and senator at
large) with displeasure. It seems
a wave of emotional furor has
been developing amongst the
campus (! reek s over recent
Emerald editorials. Heroicly,
Mr. Long has decided to place
his hastily-constructed water
fight platform at the crest of
this wave, and ride it to an
election victory.
Mr Long seems to think that
the Emerald editorial stafT has
no facts to hack up its recent
accusations that certain Greek
organizations have been violat
ing the Student Conduct Code.
If the Emerald has no such
facts, allow me to contribute a
few:
About a week ago, while driv
Two Views of the Viet Nam Demonstrations
Protests May
Lengthen the War
Editor’s Note: Scott Bartlett is a former college editor now
a University student. In this column he comments on the Viet
Nam demonstrations held last weekend.
By SCOTT BABTLETT
Very few individuals could fail to be moved by the often sense
less carnage that has been characteristic of the war in Viet Nam.
The attempts to malign the protest movement with the indis
criminate brand of “Communist” must be considered unfortunate
because they obscure the issues and strive to make illegitimate
an irrefutably legitimate exercise of the Constitutionally guaranteed
freedom of speech.
Further, the decision of the Utah draft boards to “take a hard
look” at any student draft deferments given to anti-Viet Nam
demonstrators clearly shows their blatent disrespect for this
freedom.
Still, no one could conceivably say that the most recent protests
were representative of the public or university majority. Hardly.
Judging numerically, including Berkeley and Ann Arbor, and
from the co-existent and equally vehement counter-protestants,
the protests represented a decided, but vocal, minority, while mis
representing the majority.
Tass’s printing that “the mass action of Americans against the
United States aggression in Viet Nam seems to have seriously
worried official Washington,” is a simple distortion of overall
American sentiment.
Hanoi Misled
Far more seriously, as James Reston has pointed out, Communist
officials in Hanoi have been led to feel that anti-war demonstra
tions in the US. will force a vacillating Johnson to withdraw
American forces.
Reston points out also that Hanoi may draw a parallel between
the current crisis and the French conflict during the early 1950’s.
Ho Chi Minh and other leaders were encouraged by the internal
anti-war opposition within France, and this Hanoi propaganda
victory led to the French defeats from 1950 to 1953 and ultimately
to the Dien Bien Phu disaster.
Unmoving
Yet, the possibilities of Johnson’s pulling out of Viet Nam as a
result of internal pressure are non-existent. His April speech at
Johns Hopkins, the lack of any affect on policy caused by the
teach-ins, the military acceleration, and this week’s expressed con
tempt for the lack of wisdom in the Viet Nam protests, hardly
portray a vacillating figure.
(Continued on page 7)
A Viet Nam Protester
Writes to the President
Editor’s Note: The following is a letter written by Mary
Hamilton, a resident assistant in psychology at the University,
to President Johnson concerning the Oct. 16 17 demonstrations
against the war in Viet Nam.
President Johnson:
Last Saturday I participated in a protest demonstration against
your policies in Viet Nam. There at Salem, Oregon, I saw the faces
of those who support you. I heard them “catcall” former Congress
man Charles Porter, and I watched them as they tried to shout
down our speakers, and us, with cries of “Treason!”—“Drop the
bomb!”—“A million troops in Viet Nam!” and "Hooray, hooray for
the U S A !” I saw, too, the hatred that these people felt towards
me and my colleagues because we exercised our rights of free
speech and free assembly. I saw, too, the signs of the Y.A.F.
(Young Americans for Freedom) and those of the Young Republi
cans—the very groups who vehemently opposed your election
while I and others like me were working hard for your defeat of
Goldwater and everything he stood for.
Today I learned that you, too, feel that some kind of “treason,”
of “exploitation by Communists,” or of “misunderstanding” moti
vates me and others who oppose you. You have aligned yourself
with those who fought your election and you have betrayed the
vote that others like myself once gave you. You will never have
that vote again.
If I cannot vote my objections to my country’s actions; if I must
face cries of “treason” and “Communist” when I speak to ratify
my conscience with and by my behavior; if I must fear violence
from my fellows and investigation by my country’s judiciary bodies
because I utilize my right to dissent, then I am not free. And,
then too, I must mourn the loss of my own freedom as much as I
mourn the loss of freedom and self-determination being suffered
by the Vietnamese people by the dictates of my country.
I tell you now, Mr. Johnson, I am no traitor. I am no Communist
nor Communist “dupe.” I am, however, an American who fears
very much for her country and the world. I do not want it said of
me in twenty years (as it is now said of the “silent German”) that
I failed to oppose my country as it carried out crimes against
humanity or that I did not speak out against the fascist elements
which grew stronger in the name of necessary “patriotism.”
Twenty years ago, Adolf Hitler talked of the “iiftcrnational
Jewish conspiracy.” His people remained silent while the “Hitler
Youth” suppressed all opposition to the Nazi goals and while the
S.S. perpetrated their gross crimes against mankind. Today, it is
(Continued on page 7)
inn home from the university,
I had the misfortune to pass a
fraternity house where a water
fight was in progress. I should
have kept my windows rolled
up. Weaving my way through
about six or eight rowdies, try
ing to keep from hitting them,
I was suddenly and deliberately
struck in the face with a blast
from a water compressor. Under
any other circumstances I might
have laughed this off. Under
these circumstances I temporar
ily lost control of my car and
swerved to tin- side of the road.
A car traveling behind me al
most hit the rowdies and al
most rear-ended me. The words
I use to describe this incident
are much better chosen than
those I used at its occurrence.
If Mr. Long thinks this is an
isolated instance, it is not.
Greeks, with whom I have
spoken, have testified to the
fact that other fraternity houses
have been the sources of water
balloons tossed indiscriminately
at passing automobiles.
If someone were now to men
tion the word "Greek” to me,
I could not possibly envision
water fighters in the company
of Plato, Socrates, and Aristotle.
The Emerald is entirely right:
the 1FC has simply got to do
something to improve the image
of Greek organizations.
In closing, a word of advice
for student voters: A vote for
a candidate who campaigns seri
ously on a platform of water
fight rights is not a vote. It is a
water balloon tossed at the
Student Senate. As for Mr.
Long, I sincerely hope he is
headed for a wipeout.
R. Gaines Smith
Junior,
Journalism-English
* * *
Squirming
Finer a h) Editor:
O.K.—We give up. Here is
the letter you have been fishing
for with the editorials on Iho
Greeks and the lovely front page
articles on how we are all dy
ing. Ask the I.M. program how
dead we are, looking at the
grades, ad infinitum.
If you want to see some
squirming from the Greeks, I’m
doing by best, but after three
years of the same old story it’s
getting darn hard to make it
look convincing.
Therefore, consider us
squirmed.
Yours on behalf of a student
body that usually manages to
take the Emerald or leave it.
Fred Ehlers
Jr., Itusincss Admin.
Oregon Daily Emerald
Connie Halverson,
Assistant Advertising Manager
Rande Wijmarth, Sports Editor
Vivian Wilson,
Assistant Managing Editor
Larry Lange, Assistant News Editor
Ralph Krurndieck, Associate News Editor
Dave Butler, Feature Editor