Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Oregon daily emerald. (Eugene, Or.) 1920-2012 | View Entire Issue (Jan. 11, 1966)
OREGON DAILY EMERALD Opinions expressed on the editorial page are those of the Emerald and do not necessarily represent the opinions of the ASUO or the University. Opinions expressed m signed columns LOUIE ABRAMSON Business Manager MAXINE ELLIOTT News Editor CHUCK BEC.GS, Editor BOB CARL Managing Editor PHIL SEMAS Associate Editor WILBUR BISHOP, JR. Advertising Manager ALLEN BAILEY Associate Editor Page 6 University of Oregon. Eugene. Tuesday. January 11. 1%« Where’s the Money Coming From? With the University’s $1 million stadium drive at the halfway point and the chairman of the drive predicting that the rest of the contributions will be coming in within a month the time has come for President Flemming to answer a major question about the drive. When he outlined his stadium-financing plan last term he said the $2.1 million need ed to finance the stadium would come from three sources: $1 million from the fund drive. $800,000 from the athletic depart ment's reserves, and S425.000 from other sources and donations.” It’s this $425,000 from “other sources and donations" that bothers us. At the time the plan was announced Flemming was pretty hazy on where this money would be coming from. He talked vaguely about gifts in kind and sources that would go untapped by the fund drive. But when you’ve con ducted a million dollar fund drive that will supposedly tap all alumni and friends of the University, what other donations are left? President Flemming said that once he had the million dollars the rest would come easily. That seems backwards. Once you’ve tapped your resources money usually gets harder to find. There is an alternative open that the pres ident said will be the last alternative. That would be an across-the-board raise in ad mission prices that would include charging students admission for attending football games. There are some things to be said for this. It would only charge those students who are interested in athletics. But as far as we’re concerned it’s not an equitable alternative. It seems unfair to charge students any more for athletic facili ties and activities. We already pay $19.50 a year, payments which have helped consid erably in the build-up of that athletic re serve. (Even Athletic Director Leo Harris, no man to over-emphasize the assistance given his department by student fees, ad mits that $130,000 of that surplus can be attributed to the fees.) We think students have paid enough for the stadium. If the fund drive can’t provide that $425,000 the University should borrow it and pay back the loan from athletic de partment surpluses during the next few years. The athletic department usually makes from $100,000 to $200,000 each year. And its income—part of which is student fees—will be steadier now with the Uni versity’s turn to the Pacific Athletic Con ference. That alternative is much more equitable than charging students to attend games. Telegram to President Encouraging Note A most encouraging development came about at the University over the past week end. A group of about 65 students and fac ulty got together Friday to discuss the cur rent situation in Viet Nam. As a result of this informal seminar the group drafted a telegram to President Johnson, endorsing his cessation of the bombing of North Viet Nam and praising his latest peace objec tives as relayed to the U N. Security Coun cil by U.S. Ambassador Arthur Goldberg. This demonstrates that many persons in the University community, including some who have been critical of the American role in Southeast Asia, believe sincerely in the President’s efforts to end the war. The latest series of peace feelers from this coun try have involved a series of visits to for eign capitals by the highest of high-level U.S. officials. While the President has been criticized for “grandstanding” in this re spect, few Americans can doubt that he is sincerely seeking a peaceful end to conflict. North Viet Nam, of course, has officially denounced all these recent gestures as frau dulent. Ho Chi Minh arrogantly asserts that the peace feelers are only a cover-up for later escalation of the war, all the while realizing that his stubborn refusal to nego tiate will very well lead to just that escala tion. It seems that the United States has bent over backwards to negotiate a settlement in Viet Nam. Thus far we have been talking to deaf ears, at least judging by the official and public replies received. We encourage students and faculty to continue supporting the President’s efforts at peace. This is our hope, for if these ef forts fail we will find ourselves faced with an increasingly nasty war. Berkeley, et. al. The most recent in a string of insanities emanating from Berkeley, Calif., is the following want ad placed in the Daily Cali fornian, the campus newspaper: “WANTED: Unmarried coed with child, or imminent.” Gary Evangelista, the student who placed the ad, said, “I wasn’t too seriously think ing of getting married, but I am pretty worried about my 1-A draft classification and I’m looking into all possibilities.” What’s even more disgusting than the ad itself is that Evangelista got some re plies to it. i* iiis:; . 1 ■. •S>cott d^artiett i iilMHIil Protesters Prove Their Sincerity Editor’s Note: A group of University students and faculty members have begun a drive to send a telegram to President Johnson endorsing his recent efforts for peace in Viet Nam. Scott Bartlett, junior in history, analyzes the endorsement and the Johnson peace offensive. Critics of the critics of the administration’s Viet Nam pol icies have been proven wrong in their forecasts that the stu dent protests would never have significant effect. What better proof than the recent Johnson peace spectacle? This is clear evidence of the President’s respect for his crit ics—people who have been in sisting throughout that the U.S. suspend its bombing. The Oregonian recently wrote an editorial condemning anti war citizens who have voiced distriust over the Madison Ave nue peace effort. The paper went on to infer that those whp doubt Johnson’s sincerity are the real “war hawks.” In one clever position — draped in red, white, and blue —the Oregonian perverted the overall peace hopes of the “peace niks”—a term odious in its own right because it identi fies with “beatnik” and “Viot nik”—those devious people who would subvert the country and hand it over to the “Commies ” The current drive for signa tures on a telegram to Presi dent Johnson which praises his peace efforts is significant proof that many, other than hard-line administration supporters, are (Continued on page 7) UNSIGHTLY bulge L jil, m»j When Oaths Are Bad When They’re Good Kditor’s Not*-: Many of the same people who deerv loyalty oath* for teacher* and others are heavy backers of antidis crimination clauses for frater nities and sororities. Alan May of the Hatchet, student news paper at George Washington University in Washington, 1M'., discusses the "double stand ard." It is always strange how par ties in the political fray tend to use the same tactics which they often officially deplore. "Are you now, or have you ever been a member of an or ganization which advocates the unlawful overthrow of the Unit ed States Government? Have you or do you now advocate the unlawful overthrow of the Unit ed State government? Affirm by oath your loyalty to the United States.” Such questions and affirma tion are anathema to those of liberal persuasion They dutifully claim that such are violative of the guarantees of the Fifth Amendment, and loyalty oaths are fascist with drawals from the principle of innocence until the proof of guilt. They suggest that no citi zen should have to plead or af firm his loyalty, that such is to be presumed in the absence of proof to the contrary. Valid Logic Following this quite valid logic, they have continuously pressed to have such questions and loyalty oaths withdrawn as pre-requisites to office in the federal government, or the re ceipt of National Defense Loans or federal subsidies. However, when it come to the Letters Infirmary Immodesty Emerald Editor: In regard to the recent com plaint by the staff at the new infirmary concerning the open curtains of Hawthorne Hall, a suggestion has been made that the complainers take note of their own “show.” ft appears that the frosted floor-length window in the lava tory has been put in backwards. It is realized that this is no re flection on the modesty of the patients, but it is merely an oversight on the part of the contractors. However, the fact still remains that although the patients cannot see out, the ladies of Hawthorne can cer tainly see in. Remember, “Modesty, when (he) goes, is gone forever.”— Landor. Hawthorne Hall question of discrimination, es pecially among Greek organiza tions at universities, this logic seems to escape many liberals. For it is these same parties who wish to compel all Greek organizations to answer "dis criminations” affidavits and loyalty oaths. “Have you ever or do you now discriminate in member ship on the basis of color, creed, national origin, religion, or sex?" arises as the new inter rogatory, and "We pledge that we do not now, nor will we In the future discriminate on the basis of color, creed, national origin, religion or sex" becomes the new loyalty oath to inte gration. More Oaths Already many schools are re quiring Greek chapters to sign "loyalty oaths” with regard to efforts to eliminate discrimina tion in their respective na tionals (Sex, of course, will have to be eliminated from the oaths, since most fraternities do not take women, and most so rorities will not take men. The list of those who do remains confidential ) This writer would like to make it plain, at this point, that he, too, deplores discrimination based on the enumerated prem ises. Hut what continues to irk this writer is the double stand ards that seem to exist. It just does not seem consistent, re gardless of the worth of one's intentions, to vociferously argue and campaign against affidavits and loyalty oaths when incon sistent with one’s interests, and then turn around and impose one's objectives when it is ad vantageous. “Equally Repugnant" I certainly think it is repug nant to require a citizen to plead his innocence of disloy alty. I think it is equally repug nant to require pleas of inno cence regarding discrimination, or for that matter a plea of innocence on any subject. But fairness and logic are not the characteristics of the ex tremes of either the left or tlm right. (Continued on page 7) Oregon Daily Emerald K;inde Wilmarth, Sports Editor Nomi Borcnsicin, Assistant Managing Editor Larry I^ange, Assistant News Editor Lave Butler, Feature Editor Shota Lhhio, Photo Editor Steve Ditneo, Entertainment Editor Editorial Board: Chuck Bcgga, Bob Carl, Maxine Elliott, Phil Sernas, Alle« Bailey, Pam Bladine, Karen Winn, Clitf Kaufman, Gene Sokol ski, Noiui Borewstein.