EDITORIAL
Brand’s veto shows
board’s real power
University President Myles Brand just passed up a
key chance to put his money where his anti-discrim
inatory mouth is.
The I Ml Board of Directors unanimously voted
Wednesday to ban military recruiters from the building
!m uuse of their nonconipliom.e with University rules
prohibiting sexual orientation discrimination
At .. press conference on Friday. Brand announced,
lu.s veto of the decision, giving the OK tor the recruiters
to return
The president has long sup {sorted equal opportutn
ty it the University but his recent action clouds a good
deal of hope he inav have instilled
One can understand the position he w-.as in Should
tie h.ive upheld the board's decision. the I niversits
would has e txron the first i oilege m the nation to enact
a ban on mditarv recruiters Uonsidering he'<t u'st -Iks
,.iy:nno to the darling of our government and its pa
trio' .iiiv .ndot (rotated
;tc i., •• |i: .. ■. d W i Jlj id
i i doubt < <itch Mime
neat. I'h.e's « scary
plat e to be
Urn1 reason the
president gave was that
he wanted to protect
the rights ot those stu
iients wishing to meet
with militai\ re< miters.
Fhts appears consistent
with hut support for
equal representation on
< .unpus until one takes
a deeper iti Hv sup
porting student rights
to ,ti i ess ot military re
Myles Brand
<:ru»tei\s wno are suojer.t to uiscriminaiors laws, me
rights of "sexually alternative" students wanting equal
chanc e tor military entrance arc crossed
The veto was no surprise — it was the safest alter
native especially considering Brand's belief that "uni
versities should not be instruments for political trans
formation " Translation: When in doubt, go with the
status quo
I Diversities always have been and always will be
the instruments of change They arc where new ideas
and perspec lives .ire formed and empowered — unless
those that run the institutions don't support such inno
vative thinking.
Brand's dismissal of the student-faculty board's
unanimous decision makes one wonder about his com
mitment to student involvement in the resolution of is
sues that affect them.
for a while, it appeared the president and board
were on the same side regarding this issue When push
came to shove, however, the big guy won hands
down — enough to make the board appear as nothing
more than an administrative token and tool.
Unfortunately, when it came down to such a group
wedding any sort power in this situation. Brand’s veto
showed just how much power they had: not much.
The board did a lot for this issue by bringing it to
the state's attention It used all its power to do so. test
ing the limits all the way, and it should be commended
for that.
The students at this university need to be heard via
representative groups like the EMU board. These
groups ail as vehicles for the collective student voice
and need to be treated with respect — not a hand slap
by University administration.
It's by working together with mutual consideration
that resolutions satisfactory to all sides can be found
JUST A MEANINGLESS^
&LOC> OE TISSUE. J
m
m\
LETTERS
Missed mark
V. iti :-inn >1 : f >1 >/:. ()i l 1 i
about Attorney Giin*f4l Dave
Sn»?11i:n.1 v<■.' ■ ri-icn! advice to
the Oregon Oovernnusnt Lthics
I 1 >nn:i!v-.H ;. ■ the mark
Ns Irohninaver made very
Seat. hr has thi obligation, as
tin' stata of Oregon's chief
lourtsel, to protect the Lthtcs
Commission front tin- posstbil
its ul lawsuits tor sanation of
; ivi 1 tights of Stun Long ami
other Stair Action Insurance
Fund i orporation exei ulives
Such an outcome could result
from the commission's contin
ued at lion oil complaints that
the Department of Justice hail
.ciliated were without legal
merit
Your com Inslon that I rofin
maver pimped so uic ilv to
atif a personal friend is also un
founded Frchnill a V e r also
made it clear that ins mlervon
lion in curreii only after an in
vestlgallull or the threat ol one
had lingered lor over five
m ritlis sn spite o! the Depart
ment of (ustli e's early advu e to
tile l oinmtssion that there oas
no legal basis for the com
plaints
The Kittles Commission is
i■■ ar v vulnerable here for
!,!:■■ tging persona' and proles
. mu' reputations and tor dam
aging SAIF ( i rporatiunA ahili
II to i onipete in the market
place I'hev and the citizens of
Oregon should he grafefu, tor
tin- . im- .inti counsel (if the
[:.•-( general, who hus an
•■vempiurv understanding of the
constitutional issues raised by
unfounded complaints de
signed to chill fret! speech
K.ithei ini- Keene
-sAll I\i-i utivi* \ ii •• President
for I ii I <-1 nal A flail s
Future mistakes
A response to the letters sub
mitted by Brendan K Briggs
s 111)1. Oct 2 H I and Mike
kokkeler f ()1 H: t )i t go)
firs! o' all Mr Briggs these
so i a 1 led revisnmists and
do-gooders" aren't condemn
fng Columbus and ins igno
rin'. e. they are objecting to the
Siil in is represented .n the
history books
Briggs, as a history major,
you should in* familiar with Co
lumbus and Ins exploits Unfor
tunately , y ou ris not
True, Columbus was looking
lor riches However, because he
did not find any, he took the
nest most valuable commodl
t\ the native inhabitants
and enslaved them And yes,
Mr Briggs, Ini sure you. out ot
your /ealousness. would pro
i eed to rajie maim and enslave
the indigenous cultures ,is Co
lumbus did And you would
I ertainlv have every right to!
Kokkeler. another history
hull, ilairns the Europeans
brought "diversity' to the
Ameru as Nice yy.ird i I..,. e
expel Kill V (luril I. 111!.!- win1!
"diversity" has ■! positive
nit-.inm|4 Htt k \% itti your defi
nition we hav .1 reason
i UM-' s for committing any atria
it v to nnn-Ang.i . aImres, i ■ tk
past an i future
Alleged" genocide ' 1 sup
pose written docunumts in
even Spaniards tlieinse 1 ves
(Bartolnmu .ie L,is ( as,is. Alva:
Nunc/. Hemail ( fortes and evei
Columbus) aren't proof enough
(.entlemen, v es w e must 1 n •
in the present U e should fi :
give events of the past Hut VVt
stum Id never forget lor the un
derstanding id such events can
help us Irum 111.iking simile'
mistakes in the future
lames Mi Nu hulas
}<>ti 1 nalism Spanish
Fear
Kevent 1 v a friend defined
homophobia to us tis a fear of
one's own sexuality Obviously
people vs hu are comfortahh
vs ith their own sex ua 111 v
whether thev l>e heterosexual,
bisexual, or homosexual
would have no tear ol peoph
sharing publicly their sexua,
orientation
People vsfio fear recruitment
should spend more time care
tiilly examining 'lieir ovs n sev
utility
Amy Joslin
Spender de Millr
CUR iST'AAS
Decorations
ALRtAtV
T'S -vO^SE
rHAM VOO
THI^H
7^’W jX*