Oregon Daily Emerald
Tuesday, November 22, 2005
NEWS STAFF
(541)346-5511
PARKER HOWEIX
EDITOR IN CHIEF
S HAORA BEESLEY
MANAGING EDITOR
MECHANN M. CUNIFF
IARED PABEN
NEWS EDITORS
EVA SYLWESTER
SENIOR NEWS REPORTER
KEIXY BROWN
KATY GAGNON
CHRISTOPHER HAGAN
BRITTNI MCCLENAHAN
NICHOLAS WILBUR
NEWS REPORTERS
|OE BAILEY
EMILY SMITH
PART-TIME NEWS REPORTERS
SHAWN MILLER
SPORTS EDITOR
SCOTT |. ADAMS
LUKE ANDREWS
JEFFREY DRANSFELDT
SPORTS REPORTERS
AMYUCHTY
PULSE EDITOR
TREVOR DAVIS
KRISTEN GERHARD
ANDREW MCCOLLUM
PULSE REPORTERS
AILEE SLATER
COMMENTARY EDITOR
GABEBRADLEY
JESSICA DERLETH
ARMY FETH
COLUMNISTS
TIM BO BOSKY
PHOTO EDITOR
NICOLE BARKER
SENIOR PHOTOGRAPHER
KATE HORTON
ZANE RTTT
PHOTOGRAPHERS
JONAH SCHROGIN
DESIGN EDITOR
MOLLY BEDFORD
OSSIE BLADINE
SARAH DAVIS
KERI SPANGLER
DESIGNERS
CHRIS TODD
GRAPHIC ARTIST
AARON DUCHATEAU
ILLUSTRATOR
DAWN HELZER
REBECCA TAYLOR
COPY CHIEFS
JENNY DORNER
BRYN IANSSON
JOSH NORRIS
JENNA ROHRBACHER
MATT TIFFANY
COPYEDITORS
STEVEN NEUMAN
ONLINE/SUPPLEMENTS EDITOR
TIMOTHY ROBINSON
WEBMASTER
BUSINESS
(541)346-5511
|UDY RIEDI,
GENERAL MANAGER
KATHY CARBONE
BUSINESS MANAGER
IAUNA DEGIUSTI
RECEPTIONIST
JILL ATKINSON
LUKE BELLOTTI
RYAN JOHNSON
SEBASTIAN STORLORZ
NICKVICINO
DISTRIBUTION
ADVERTISING
(541) 346-3712
MELISSA GUST
ADVERTISING DIRECTOR
MIA LEIDELMF.YER
SALES MANAGER
KELLEE KAUFTHEIL
JOHN KELLY
LINDSEY FERGUSON
WINTER GIBBS
KATE HIRONAKA
DESI MCCORMICK
STEPHEN MILLER
KATHRYN O'SHEA-EVANS
CODY WILSON
SALES REPRESENTATIVES
BONA LEE
AD ASSISTANT
CLASSIFIED
(541)3464343
TRINASHANAMAN
CLASSIFIED MANAGER
LISA CLARK
AN DO
AMANDA KANTOR
KERI SPANGLER
KATIE STRINGER
CLASSIFIED ADVERTISING
ASSOCIATES
PRODUCTION
(541)3464381
MICHELE ROSS
PRODUCTION MANAGER
KIRA PARK
PRODUCTION COORDINATOR
JAMIE ACKERMAN
CAITLIN MCCURDY
ERIN MCKENZIE
JONAH SCHROGIN
TERRY STRONG
DESIGNERS
The Oregon Daily Emerald is pub
lished daily Monday through Fri
day during the school year by the
Oregon Daily Emerald Publishing
Co. Inc., at the University of Ore
gon, Eugene, Ore. The Emerald
operates independently of the
University with offices in Suite
300 of the Erb Memonal Union
The Emerald is private property.
Unlawful removal or use of
papers is prosecutable by law.
■ In my opinion
Yots call this a protest?
Monday’s Emerald had a picture
of a war protester wearing a big, stu
pid-looking grin on his face as he
was led away by the Eugene Police
Department to be charged with crim
inal trespassing (“Nonviolent Iraq
War protesters arrested on University
campus,” ODE, Nov. 21). This fellow
was one of seven people arrested at
a protest outside the University’s
Military Science building on Friday
morning. Four more from the same
group were arrested at another
demonstration later that day.
As I look at the picture of the pro
tester being led away, 1 can’t figure
out what he’s grinning about be
cause this has got to be one of the
lamest little protests I’ve ever heard
of. In a community with more than
190,000 people, this protest had a
grand total of about 50. Of those, 11
volunteered to commit a crime as a
publicity stunt to bring attention to
their little tea party.
I’m a huge fan of the First Amend
ment. I think it’s great that people
are allowed to express all sorts of
ideas in all sorts of ways. Having
said that, I’m going to use my First
Amendment right to discuss just
why this protest registers an 11 out
of 10 on my lame-o-meter.
First, the message of this protest
was poorly planned. By protesting
first in front of an ROTC building and
then later in front of a military re
cruiting station, these protesters
were a world away from the policy
makers who actually make the deci
sions they’re protesting. ROTC cadets
do not make policy decisions — they
don’t decide when and where to go
to war. ROTC cadets are merely col
lege students who are training their
bodies and minds in order to serve
their country when the time comes.
Ever since the disgraceful displays
of the Vietnam era, the cardinal rule
of war protesting has been to protest
GABE BRADLEY
THE WRITING ON THE WALL
the policy decisions, not the troops.
By protesting in front of these facili
ties, though, the protesters have bro
ken that rule. They’re no longer
protesting a decision made by a
group of politicians in Washington;
they’re protesting the decisions
made by the brave men and women
who choose the defense of freedom
as their profession.
While there are many Americans
who disagree with our nation’s cur
rent foreign entanglements, there are
hardly any who think the finest
among us should be discouraged
from enlisting or seeking commis
sioning in our armed forces. These
protesters are putting out a muddled
message that simply will not
resonate with many Americans.
This brings me to my second point
about the lameness of Friday’s
protest: The melodramatic rhetoric
was laughably out of proportion to
the actual effect of the protest. “It
was time to take a stronger stand —
this does make a statement to the
public about what we’re willing
to risk,” protester Karla Cohen told
the Emerald.
What the community sees is that
a group of people too small to fill a
school bus were willing to stand in
the cold for a couple of hours on a
weekday morning. I’ve put more ef
fort than that into getting tickets to a
football game.
Moreover, 11 retirees and college
kids were willing give up their lunch
hour in order to get a small citation.
Big deal. I’ve seen bigger police
crackdowns targeted at a handful of
freshmen carrying a case of Mike’s
Hard Lemonade.
This protest was barely a ripple in
the ocean, but those involved talk
about it like Ghandi himself made
the fliers.
Protest organizer Peter Chabarek
was quoted as saying, “We are open
ly breaking the law in order to bring
attention to the much greater injus
tice of the Iraq war.” What bunk.
The bottom line is the stakes are
just too small in this protest. This is
not like the civil rights movement,
where there was an absolute right or
wrong being debated. The civil
rights movement was led by philoso
phers and a minister who were fight
ing for a fundamental and absolute
sense of justice — trying to preserve
the God-given dignity in every per
son that some people were trying to
steal. That was a high-stakes moral
issue that shook a whole country to
its core. It was an epic and historic
struggle that continues to this day.
So you’ll forgive me if I laugh at
the Michael Moore book club when
it tries to use the same tactics and
rhetoric to tell a group of young
people that they disagree with their
career choices.
This protest was not anti-war; it
was anti-military. And if there had
been any significant support at all
for such a demonstration, it would
be sad. However, the “little protest
that couldn’t” had so few people and
such a small effect that it’s just plain
funny to me. I look at the picture of
the protester grinning while he’s led
away. It seems to me that the joke is
on him.
gbradley@ dailyemerald, com
■ Guest commentary
Duck football game security and
fan behavior need an upgrade
My father had bought me football
season tickets to my alma mater,
Oregon State University. To recipro
cate his kindness, I paid an exorbi
tantly high price for a pair of Civil
War tickets. This would be my
father’s first trip to Autzen Stadium,
and it was my chance to say
thank you.
We came dressed in orange and
black, knowing it would be a hostile
crowd. But this was in all good fun,
right? It was just a football game.
What ensued from the kick off
was constant barrage of harassment
from multiple Duck fans. Three dif
ferent fans were actively trying to
pick fights with myself and my 60
year-old dad.
At halftime, two Duck fans just
couldn’t handle the fact two Beaver
fans were in their presence. They got
in my face and both sucker punched
me, once in the back of the head. In
the ensuing melee the security came
down and broke up the fight, but
that was it. No warnings. No inves
tigation. The only proactive thing se
curity did was throw my dad’s OSU
hat in the garbage.
My dad and I, wanting to watch
the last moments of Beaver season,
went back to our seats after halftime.
Numerous Duck fans came by to
check on my dad and me. They all
said, “Not all Duck fans have that lit
tle class.” Yet as the game deteriorat
ed into a rout, the surrounding Duck
fans continued to hurl a constant
barrage of insults and profanities at
the two of us. My father, having had
enough, turned to me and asked if
we could leave.
I know that not all Duck fans are
that bad. It was heartening to have a
group of total strangers come up and
check on us. But the overall culture
in the section we were sitting in was
to ignore the actions of the local
bullies. Compounding the problem
was the total incompetence and
ineptitude of the University of
Oregon security.
I really went to the game hoping
to have a good time with my dad.
Instead, I ended up with a concus
sion, and we both had the worst
sporting experience of our lives. I’m
sure not all Beaver fans had such a
dismal time at the game, but I would
recommend that until Autzen
Stadium significantly upgrades its
security no visiting team fan attend
a game there.
Josh Balloch lives in Salem.
OREGON DAILY EMERALD LETTERS POLICY
Letters to the editor and guest commentaries are encouraged, and should be sent to letters@dailyemerald.com or submitted at the Oregon Daily Emerald office, EMU Suite 300, Electronic
submissions are preferred. Letters are limited to 250 words, and guest commentaries to 550 words. Authors are limited to one submission per calendar month. Submissions should
include phone number and address for verification. The Emerald reserves the right to edit for space, grammar and style. Guest submissions are published at the discretion of the Emerald.
■ Editorial
University
must protect
and defend
faculty
When a professor decides to publish as an aca
demic and as a representative member of this
University, he or she does so with the expectation
that such rigorous participation is expected and
protected. After all, there is the old faculty saying
that professors must “publish or perish.” Sadly,
at this institution, it might be better deemed
“publish and perish.”
When University law professor Merle Weiner
referenced a court case in an article published last
year, she found herself facing a defamation law
suit from someone mentioned in her article. Be
cause the University would not aid Weiner in the
case, she had to seek private council.
Although Weiner said the University would not
defend her because writing the article was not di
rectly related to her job, such scholarly work
should be protected. The University’s faculty
handbook explicitly promises to defend and aid
professors against charges brought against them
within the normal line of duty, and this article
should qualify for those protections.
She also presented the Emerald with an e-mail
from University General Counsel Melinda Grier,
in which Grier suggests Weiner remove the refer
ence to the plaintiff from her article. As Weiner
argues, removing information from her article
would cheapen it.
The University’s cowardice in the face of litiga
tion is disgraceful. Publishing is one of the key
tenants of academic life. Unfortunately, in the
present day, so is going to court. We believe that
publishing an article that regards one’s chosen
discipline is well within the reasonable bound
aries of one’s role as a University faculty employ
ee. We urge the University Senate to take action to
protect faculty members who are working to en
hance our reputation as a research university.
Judge's conservatism conflicts
with needed objectivity
As Judge Samuel Alito’s January judiciary
committee questioning slowly approaches, some
Americans may begin to take it for granted that
he will be appointed to the Supreme Court. He
may well be appointed as a justice unless some
one from the Democratic party can stand up and
rightly attack Alito for his laundry list of unap
pealing characteristics.
Samuel Alito believes that women should be
required to notify their spouses before having an
abortion; he has written praise of himself for con
tributing to cases that argued “the Constitution
does not protect a right to an abortion.” We have
no guarantees that he would honor the precedent
set by Roe v. Wade if appointed.
Alito once wrote in a job application, “I am
and always have been a conservative.” Judges are
not supposed to have views that put them on ei
ther side of the party line. Judges are expected to
fairly apply the constitution to real world situa
tions, and political or religious viewpoints should
never be a factor in judicial decision making. Ali
to’s personal definition of his own political lean
ings makes the judge unfit for the Supreme Court.
Alito is, like Miers, an old friend of President
Bush. Alito might have more judicial experience
than Miers, but hiring your friends to run the
country is still not a good idea. The fact that
words such as “cronyism” have entered our lexi
con to describe Bush’s recent appointments be
trays the foolishness of this move.
This week, Sen. Ken Salazar, a Democrat from
Colorado, said in an interview that there is still a
small chance that Democrats might filibuster the
Alito hearing. Comparing Judge Alito to the what
a Supreme Court judge should be, it is apparent
that a filibuster may be the best choice.