Editorial
To preserve justice:
Vote no on Bork
The Reagan administration and other supporters of
Judge Robert Bork's nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court
have used two distinct strategies to facilitate his
confirmation.
Initially. Bork's supporters argued that he should be
evaluated on the basis of his qualifications and not opposed
on irrelevant, ideological grounds.
The Reagan administration, however, nominated Bork
for the purpose of advancing the conservative Republican
agenda well after Reagan leaves office. If confirmed. Bork
would be the third conservative justice appointed by Reagan
to the Supreme Court, providing the conservative agenda
with a swing vote for years to come.
As Bork was nominated for ideological purposes, he
should be opposed on ideological grounds regardless of
whether he is qualified to occupy a seat on the Supreme
Court
After the Reagan administration's qualification argu
ment failed, the administration embarked on a disinforma
tion campaign to reflag Bork as a mainstream moderate
The White House, for example, distorted Bork's record
on hirst Amendment cases by claiming, “he would bo a
powerful ally of hirst Amendment values on the Supreme
Court." But Bork would be an ally only toward “political
speech."
Under Bork's narrow interpretation of free speech, he
might deny constitutional protection to speech — such as ar
tistic and literary — that is not explicitly political, scientific
or moral in content; ami he probably would deny protection
to speech that "advocates forcible overthrow of the govern
ment or the violation of any law." such as civil
disobedience.
Furthermore, the campaign to portray Bork as a
moderate has lead to a philosophical discrepancy between
his past academic writings and his current articulated
views. From this discrepancy evolves an inconsistency that
makes it difficult to predict how Bork will deliberate as a
Supreme Court Justice.
Bork's ideological schizophrenia, coupled with his con
servative judiciul activism, translates into a concern with
regard to whether he will seek to overturn the decision of
Roe vs. Wade, the 1973 ruling that outlawed state bans on
abortion.
In testimony before the Senate judiciary Committee last
week. Murk mitigated his views toward Roe vs. Wade as
compared to his 1‘iHl opinion. Bork did not promise he
wouldn't seek to overturn the landmark abortion ruling, hut
instead stated that it is "not worth reconsidering." He did.
however, continue to heavily criticize the constitutional
reasoning behind the decision, especially with regard to a
constitutional right to privacy.
But. in light of Bork's historically strong opposition to
Roe vs. Wade, his assertion that it is “not worth reconsider
ing" may be a rhetorical misrepresentation of his true
beliefs, merely for the purpose of being confirmed. Bork.
whose jurisprudence poses a potential threat to this land
mark ruling, should be unequivocally denied confirmation
to the Supreme Court because he may ignore precedent and
seek to overturn Roe vs. Wade.
Although the administration also has misrepresented
Bork as a strong supporter of civil rights, he has opposed
consistently civil rights issues such as open housing, affir
mative action and the public accommodations bill.
If confirmed to the Supreme Court, Bork, a member of
the "Chicago" school of economics, which holds that
government intervention to promote a competitive economy
is an imprudent form of regulation, would attempt to
eliminate most restrictions on "horizontal mergers" —
mergers that take place between two or more directly com
petitive firms.
These mergers consolidate the market power of an in
dividual firm within an industry, thereby increasing its
monopoly power and enabling it to charge a higher price for
its product. The aggregate result is an unfair redistribution
of wealth from the poor to the rich.
A competitive market where a large number of firms ac
tively compete with one another is one of the nation's best
barriers against economic injustice. And if confirmed,
Bork's anti anti-trust, big-business crusade will threaten the
antitrust laws that guard distributive justice.
When the members of the Senate judiciary Committee
vote Tuesday on the nomination of judge Bork to the
Supreme Court, they should confer to block his confirmation
in order to preserve civil rights and social justice.
Letters
Tolerance
Those University liberals
holding any commitment to ra
tionality should In: embarrassed
at the glaring inconsistencies of
a brochure entitled
"Discrimination" (published
by the Council for "Minority"
•Education).
• Its lead sentence quotes a
sanctimonious f'resident Paul
Olum: "Intolerance has no
place at a university ." Then on
ly a few sentences later, it
logins a hit list of items that
"will not be tolerated."
I ley come un folks, you can't
have it both ways.
This "Discrimination"
brochure is full of logic gaps.
First, it most appropriately con
demns "treating people of color
differently from whites."
Hut then it just blissfully pro
ceeds to push discriminatory
University programs that, in
fact, patronizingly "treat
. people of color differently
from whites;” i.e.:
1) “Council for Minority
Education”
2) “Office of Affirmative
Action"
3) “Free" tuition, and reduc
ed entrance requirements for
"minorities."
last's face reality. All those
self-righteous claims to some
sort of ecumenical "tolerance”
are simply blatant hypocrisy. In
fact, discriminately applied in
tolerance is an appropriate
response of anyone who thinks
deeply enough to form
convictions.
Both liberals and conser
vatives are intolerant of many
things One example: Just as
liberals are intolerant of what
they call "discrimination."
conservatives are equally in
tolerant of the sex/race
d e meaning reverse
discrimination policies of “af
firmative action."
Truth is. "tolerance" actually
is directly akin to "indif
ference" and "apathy."
Perhaps the only people who
can truly show unbounded
tolerance are those mindless
couch potatoes whose reading
pursuits tend toward "TV
Guide" and whose intellectual
capacities are taxed by “MTV”
or a Jane Fonda video workout.
Jon Wollander
Eugene
Other side
John Moore's letter of Sept.
.10 recounted his attempt to
retrieve a quarter lost in the ar
cade at the EMU Rec. Center. I
was the cashier on duty at the
time and would like to clear up
a few matters.
To begin with, it is indeed a
new policy of the Rec. Center to
refund quarters lost in broken
machines only at the end of
each week. Though many ar
cade customers have expressed
surprise at this change, the only
problem worthy of mention has
been Mr. Moore himself.
Upon learning that he would
have to wait a week to collect
his 25 cents. Mr. Moore launch
ed into a tornado of insults,
assertations and caricatures,
which, while succeeding to of
fend, lacked verve and wit.
Despite his being a nuisance,
and contrary to what his letter
claimed. I did not threaten him
with arrest (though in
retrospect, the idea seems hard
ly impeachable). 1 did suggest
he return at a later time and
discuss the matter with the Rec.
Center's manager, who was out
of her office.
When this too tailed to calm
him, I asked whether he would
perhaps like to review his
behavior with campus security.
At the very mention, Mr. Moore
vanished.
From there he sought out the
Club Sports director, whose
jurisdiction covers the Rec
Center, and demonstrated to her
what I’d call the "John Moore
Experience." When this too
proved fruitless, he pulled out
all the stops, hence the letter of
Sept. 30.
Daniel Monk-Kowalsky
EMU Kec. (-enter
Letters Policy
The Emerald will attempt to
print all letters containing fair
comment on topics of interest to
the University community
tattlers to the editor must be
limited to 2SO words, typed,
signed and the identification of
the writer must lie verified when
the letter is turned in
Oregon Daily
Emerald
The Oregon Daily Emerald is published Monday
through Friday except during exam week and vacations
by the Oregon Daily Emerald Publishing Co , at the
University of Oregon. Eugene, Oregon 97403
The Emerald operates independently ot the University
with offices on the third floor of the Erb Memorial Union
and is a member of the Associated Press
The Emerald is private properly The unlawful removal
or use of papers is prosecutable by law
General Staff
Advertising Director Susan Thelen
Production Manager Michele Ross
Classified Manager Kelli Mason
Assistant to the Publisher Jean Ownbey
Advertising Sales Teri Boring. Gary Delossa. Tom Leech.
Catherine Lilja. Rick Mart; Laura McKinney. Heather
Mull Joann Nelson. Julie Paul. Barbara Rogers. Scott
Thorkildson. Joan Wildermuth
News and Editorial 8U-SS11
Display Advertising and Business 688-3712
Classified Advertising US-4343
Letter Perfect Graphics 686 SS11
Production 6SS-4381
Circulation 688-S511
Editor
Managing Editor
News Editor
Editorial Page Editors Angela Muni/
Sports Editor
Photo Editor
Graphic Design Editor
Special Issues Editor
Entertainment Sports Segment Editor
Night Editor
Stanley Nelson
Scott Maben
Eden Godbey
Steven Hoenisch
Aaron Knon
Shu Shing Chen
Lorraine Rath
Kelly Kortekaas
H C Hutto
Stanley Nelson
Associate Editors
Community
Higher Education Administration
Student Government Activities
General Assignment Entertainment
Stephen Maher
Michael Drummond
Carolyn Lamberson
Will Hoi ben
Reporters: Craig Harris, Gary Henley. Andrew LaMar, Jett
Morgan, Ingrid Petersen, Cami Swanson. Kelvin Wee
Photographers: Sherlyn Biorkgren Maria Corvallis, Andy
Cripe. Dusty Etzel Derrel Hewitt, John Giustina. Bobbie
Lo. Ross Martin. Andre Ranieri. Dan Wheeler Michael
Wilhelm
Production: Sandra Daller / Ad Coordinator
Kelly Aienandre. Ronwin Nicole Ashton. Virginia Baniaga
Stephanie Orynan. Dolores Ferreo. Shannon Gaither. Lisa
Haggerty. Stephanie Holland, Dierdre Kelly, Eliot Knight.
Jung Lee. Bobbie Lo. James Mason. Angie Muniz. Ted
Shepler Lisa Svanevik. Ingrid White. Kelli Williams.
Serena Williams. X Kang Xie