Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Oregon daily emerald. (Eugene, Or.) 1920-2012 | View Entire Issue (June 19, 1973)
-Outrider Agnew—Defender of the right to judge? By Garry Wills Mr. Agnew spoke, concerning the Ervin Committee, with his normal logic. He said he was not attacking committee investigations as such — and then he raised all the old “liberal” objections to them: lack of adequate restriction, counsel, rebuttal, as measured against trial procedure. He called the hearings a “beauty contest,” in which appearance will count more than evidence, men will succumb to the “Perry Masonish im pact,” and television will become a “vehicle for interjecting the people into the process of judgment.” Now, that is odd. Agnew has posed as a defender of the people’s right to judge. He did not want the President’s appearances mediated to people by instant commentators or liberal know it-alls. Let the people judge for them selves. Nixon, too, has always preferred direct TV coverage to the roundabout transmission of his words through reporters and commentators. He went out of his way to say, in his “last press conference,” that TV kept the newspapers honest by showing the candidate himself in action. But now the people, who know better than the Sevareids and Cronkites, have become idiot types unable to judge for themselves, sent ga-ga by a pretty face, needing guidance from experts and legal advisers. “The indefatigable camera will paint both heroes and villains in lurid and indelible colors before the public’s very eyes.” Once the commentators were at fault. Now it is the camera itself — or the public’s eyes. They distort (“paint”) the facts — for Agnew is claiming that truth cannot emerge from this process. If not, then why does it emerge from President Nixon’s appearances, emerging there so directly that analysis would just blur the evidence of the camera and the public’s eyes? In his famous Des Moines attack on the press, Agnew deplored the TV stations’ right to withhold coverage of events, preventing the people from seeing him, not letting him take his case directly to them. Now he is the one who withholds, interposes himself, tells the people he knows what is best for them, that they can’t be trusted to judge. This entire reversal suggests only one thing, that Agnew, like everyone else on the White House team so far, wants to hide and obstruct. He fears the cameras will reveal, not distort; will photograph, not “paint.” This Watergate speech came out the day after the Washington “Post” printed a long Agnew interview with David Broder. The same reversals and lapses mark speech and interview. In the past, he said no one has elected the commentators, so the people don’t trust them as they do their chosen representatives. Now he claims the commentators are too trusted, “avuncular” regular presences in the living room, while politicians are automatically distrusted as “partisan” spokesmen. So we can’t let the trusted newsmen appear near politicians, or they will undercut the trust in our rulers that, anyway, does not exist! First, the politicians are trustworthy, so we should listen only to them. Then, the commentators are trustworthy, so we should not be allowed to listen to them. The people elect those they distrust; and so, in the name of democracy, they must not listen to those they trust. In all these twisting, self-canceling remarks, only one thing is consistent — hatred of the press. He will hate it for being A today; and for being Anti-A tomorrow; and for being Non-A the next day. Reasons will come and go, and fight with each other, because they never mattered in the first place. They were all so much cover for a reasonless hostility. Copyright, 1973, Universal Press Syndicate Letters Abdullah I didn’t talk with the man — I didn’t have to. I heard. Not so much the words screaming staccatto ill- (and sometimes satirical) logic, as the voice, the high, vibrating wail which strained the vocal cords to occasional breaks, betraying — who knows what? — bits and pieces of discord, abuse, hatred-love crystallized in a vital and engaging tension. I saw, too — the high, lean cheekbones, the smooth cheeks, the eyes hiding behind the shades (on a dark day), the turbaned head thrown back slightly to tilt the fine nose halfway to the sky, as if sniffing at some secret place the mouth on a level helplessly betrayed. But mostly I heard — drawn to the disembodied sounds riding the cool wind, between the blowing leaves under a fall cloud which threatened larger drops than normal — a moment between the moments. And listened — to the specious arguments to settle argument and create come clear as a child’s. (“We don’t agree.” And he, “What color is this leaf?” Silence. “What color is this leaf?” “Brown.” And he, “Yes, brown.”) And once was green and on the tree and now is fallen and on the ground. The chords tremble again, touchstone to our deadly calm — before the storm. Robert E. Emmons, Jr. Graduate, English Never trust again Now as we all know, (Now, if you didn’t already read it in Harpers in the Fall) Richard is as his minister told Kurt Vonnegut after the Benediction at the Republican un, that is — Realtors — Convention (Realtors not, certainly, of ficially — yet perhaps, yes, more ac curately Um Hum, yes) in Miami, an swerable to God and the People, only to God first, thus, our Great Leader is also the representative of the Living God on this area of the Planet. You may have seen Him on T.V. or the now Dead Life Magazine, toasting the other represent atives. With this firmly in your already packed and probably if you are an average American — carefully programmed mind — recall with me the Speech of Acceptance of the Blame for Watergate — (... Or was it the responsibility, I never did get that straight?!!) Richard the Truth, The Light, and the Way says of Watergate on T.V. next to his pretty pieces of stickcloth and Bust of Lincoln and picture of His cute family behind Him: “Both of our Great Parties have been equally guilty of this in the past. ...” So you know? . . . WE’VE GOT SOME GREAT PARTIES in this Land — Don’t WE? Or is it your Idea of a Great Party where the guests or people involved are subjected to having their purses, coats, belongings thoughtlessly stolen, or searched — even their doctor’s offices broken into — All in the Name of Good Order and the Security of the Whole People’s Land and in its behalf — and nearly everyone ends up getting bugged? Well, it is true that as Walt Whitman once wrote: “As evil too is Great.” Lo, and Richard Said in His wonderous Tongue: “Consider the Good People — the Pure White Lilies of my Public Service Fields — they knowingly cooperate with evil doings — yet I find them blameless as they are as Billy The Graham has said unto you — of Good Pure Hearts — For such as these have met my High Standards of Public Service.” Oh, All Power to Richard’s High Stan dards of Public Service. . . . (and more Trust? . . .) All Praises to the Good Pure White Lilies of Richard’s Public Service Field. And He spake in His wonderous tongue out of Both sides of His mouth of the Great Elephant Head WHO Never Forgets — with His arms outstretched in His original sign of the two fingered dove signal and with the graceful sweep of His arms motioned the Wave of The Future: to US: “Peace . . .” and to His aides: BOMB ’EM.” To US: “Free Worldom” and to His aides: “Emprison ’em.” May the possibly necessary craziness (perhaps the burning out and cleansing up mellowing up of the Psychotic con sciousness of each of US) of the 60’s escape you sooner or later Forever. And like the Average American, I too can seriously still Love and Forgive Him for He says He didn’t know what his most trusted and worthy Servants were doing — Love and forgive perhaps — even positively — Yes — Never TRUST again though. As Mohandas K. Gandhi said once: “Truth is God.” Tell me there’s not the possibility of a White House Chapter of Satan’s Legions. Peace and Bombs, Fellow Crea tureci tizens, Frank M. Ordinary Mammal Stereotyped prejudices (An open letter to John Mighell— Political Science.) Dear John: I certainly hope the best for you in your political future. With your blatantly narrow-minded and spiteful point of view, you are a natural for some high office— just like the offices we’ve been hearing about over national television the last few mornings. You may be justified in pointing out that fraternities tend to consume more spirits than the average group. But so what? Who doesn’t enjoy a good time? The point of the Sigma Nu—Bring “roofer” is to raise money for the recycling center. And while your “friend” is sitting on the roof, his buddy is out canvassing local businesses for contributions. My frame of reference may be way off, but your “friend’s” participation in the “roofer” seems to be a more worthwhile endeavor than dreaming up sardonic letters to publicly justify one’s stereotyped prejudices of another’s living arrangements. Let it be, Peter Yoakum Senior, Political Science 751E. 16th Bubble gumit After reading the childish letter to the editor by Mr. Parrish and some other zero, I .felt obliged to make a short comment. The students are not interested in participating in personal vendettas born out of ignorance and your mental hang-ups over losing to your apartment neighbor, Mr. Leo, in the ASUO spring election. If you had an ounce of intelligence in that isolated little head of yours, you would see what a fool you’re making out of yourself by being self-appointed “Chairman of the Committee to Recall Leo-Bamett.” I’m sure if you look hard enough you will find a place in this world yet. In short, don’t bother students with your garbage. Find another way of getting your name in the Emerald. One suggestion might be stacking a hundred pieces of bubble gum on your nose and walking down campus — I’m sure someone will notice you. Pat McMahon Junior Speech-Poli. Sci HELP! I'M ABOUT TO BE RESCUED BY SIR SPIRO!'
