Newspaper Page Text
‘ 4 * The Red and Black • Thursday, October 1, 1992
OPINIONS
|
■ QUOTABLE
"We're moving forward, but at a snail's pace. I don't expect a
quick solution unless someone drops $100 billion in our laps.’
-Mary Cash, head of the University chapter of the 6SEU,
on employee salary adjustments.
i
The Red & Black
Established in 1893 - Incorporated 1980
An independent student newspaper not affiliated with the University of Georgia
Mike McLeod/Editor-in-Chief
Johnathan Bums/Managing Editor
Melody Willis/Opinions Editor
■ EDITORIALS
Dodging candidates
Why is it that every thing we do these days ends up
with our ties to that quagmire known as the Vietnam
War? Right now, Gov. Bill Clinton is trying to dodge the
Republican accusations of dodging the Vietnam draft.
President Bush and his cohorts have said Clinton
isn’t fit to serve as commander in chief because the
Arkansas governor didn’t serve in the war. These
charges focus on the draft notice he received in 1969.
According to his detractors, Clinton had his uncle
manipulate the local draft board in order to get out of
the draft pool.
On the other hand, Clinton said he was lucky to not
get called up to serve. His Rhodes scholarship has often
been quoted as an academic reason for him being over
looked and possibly favored in the draft process.
Bush and the Republican party believe trust and
and believability are the key assets of a president.
Because Clinton hasn’t been forthright in revealing the
truth about his draft situation, they say the Democrat
is unsuitable and unfit to be our next leader.
Get real. This is the same administration that has a
draft dodger of its own as vice president. Dan Quayle
isn’t the only one, either. Several high-level officials in
Bush’s administration didn’t serve in Vietnam.
One thing to remember about Vietnam is its unpop
ularity. By 1969, even President Nixon was looking for
ways to get Americans out of the mess. For Clinton and
Quayle to attempt to stay out of that political and mili
tary quagmire is understandable under the circum
stances.
Bush is just blowing a smoke screen to dodge the
economy issue. That’s understandable. Who would want
to face a country of irate voters sick of the lies and pro
crastination?
Clinton’s draft history isn’t what will qualify him to
be a president. It’s what he can offer the country in our
time of need. Look at the real issues and then you de
cide who you want to run this sinking ship.
Perot’s disappearing act
Today’s supposed to be the day for the Big News on
Ross Perot’s decision to run or not, but we’re still too
busy laughing to pay much attention. We’re sorry, but
the recording on the 1-800 number you’re supposed to
call to urge the Tbxas billionaire and sometime indepen
dent presidential candidate to run is too funny.
It’s amazing how the one-time national darling and
would-be savior of our country is now a buffoon. The
man who would wrestle the deficit to the ground and
break the gridlock of government bureaucracy in our
country now can’t decide a dam thing.
Except not to decide, that is, unless we all fawn
over him.
On the second thought, the recording is not all that
funny - it’s scary. Our Founding Fathers took great
time and care, driven by strong principles, to create a
government that was not an instant, call-in democracy-
not a McGovemment.
Ross Perot may know what the people want right
now, but like most fast-food meals that deliver suste
nance in instants, it’s not really what the people de
serve or truly desire in the long run.
Besides, it’s not leadership. Government should
lead, not cower behind voters’ desires at every juncture.
And judging from his efforts at gauging the people’s
will so far, his vision of McGovemment would be a dis
aster. A nation of millions would feel cheated.
So, just say no to Perot. It was fun flirting with him
over the summer, but we’d all respect ourselves more in
morning after the election if we just forget about Mr.
Wishy-Washy.
STAFF
ADVERTISING. 543-1791
NEWS: 543-1809
Anceta Craa. Shana
i: BMl K«aton. Grey
i, Chad Cottrel. Oamd Pattas.
PfiMHp Davit. Ora| Pichatt. Erie Qant, Wendy
Prybte. Jenifer McLean
Staff: Hubert Kan*. Laura
the exception* of
dunrg aunnwr quarter,
Uravertity of Georgia. 123
paper not affiliated with i
poetaga paid at Athena. Oa Subscription
Historic preservation usurps property rights
I never cease to get a small chuckle and a bit
of indigestion whenever I hear about historical
preservation. I will break it down into compo
nent parts to try and explain what I find so fun
ny and disturbing.
First is the historical part. I can understand
having some interest in a building if it’s well
constructed, suits your needs, comfortable or
nice to look at, but simply because it’s old? What
difference does it make which year a building
was constructed in? People are always scream
ing about the Athens architectural heritage and
all I see is a bunch of drafty, deteriorating, red
brick or greek revival cubes with some orna
mentation and columns slapped on for good
measure. Let’s face it- most of what we are talk
ing about is simply a regurgitation of a previous
architectural style anyway. I also find it hard to
think about the original builders having in
mind that they were making significant contri
butions to our heritage. These people were
building homes, shops and offices for use, not to
embody an stylistic era. Imagine people in the
future...“Gosh we can’t tear down Brumby! It’s
a classic example of late 20th century high-den
sity-coed-minimalist living!" Granted some peo
ple borrowed at liberty from other works or paid
some attention to what style was “in style" at
the time, but who says that this should be glo
rified?
1
On to preservation, or should I say back
wards. Preservation is the action wing of the
historic movement. What preservation entails
in a social context is if you don’t like what some
one else is doing with their old property, you set
up a system of regulations to prevent them from
changing what they own. Most of these regula
tions concern outside appearance, i.e. paint col
or, new construction, use of traditional materi
als, etc. But, look at the principle: what right do
your neighbors have to tell you what color to
paint your house? What right do they have to
say that you can’t add on a new wing? What is
the point of ownership if you don’t own it?
Personally, if I encountered historical regula
tion trying to be enforced on my property, I
would paint my house black, add a geodesic
wing, turn it into a roller disco, then bulldoze it
and build a skyscraper. Regulations do enough
to prevent affordable and convenient housing,
but to add things on for the sake of some twist
ed semi-nationalistic sense of heritage?
Now, don’t get me wrong. If you like old
homes, fine. Just don’t enforce your tastes on
others. You want it, you pay for it. Don’t make
me bear the cost. This especially goes for all you
government types who insist on using tax mon
ey to mummify pet projects. Now, back to the
point. If renovation is cheaper than new con
struction, fine. If the craftsmanship is unique,
then restore it. If the building looks good, then
buy it. Age is a nonsensical criteria.
Why is historical preservation such a big
deal? Well, as with most things, I think it comes
from a lack of self-esteem, a fanatical desire for
identity. Most people, even in the U.S., don’t
handle change very well. As a consequence,
they get nostalgic sometimes, which isn’t neces
sarily bad if there was something worth re
membering, but in many cases “heritage," just
like “ethnicity," is just an attempt to have an
identity without doing the work yourself. People
don’t like it when you start to threaten their
stagnant identity. You might actually make
them feel insecure. All this coming from an avid
fan of "This Old House."
Todd Fantz is a senior still looking for a major.
Young wrong about Clinton’s
qualifications for presidency
■ FORUM
■ The Red and Black welcomes letters to the editor and prints them in the Forum
column as space permits. All letters are subject to editing for length, style and IF
belous material. Letters should be typed and double-spaced, and they must in
clude the name, address and daytime telephone number of the writer. Please also
include student classification, major and other appropriate identification. Names
may be omitted with a valid reason upon request Send letters by U.S. mail or
bring them in person to The Red and Black's offices at 123 North Jackson Street
Athens, Georgia 30601.
I don’t know exactly what
Douglas Young’s problem with Bill
Clinton is. Perhaps Young is a
Republican mole. Perhaps he
doubts anything good can come
from Arkansas. Perhaps “Slick
Willie” is just too cute an epithet to
resist. Perhaps he is overcome with
anger that anyone could dare de
part from politically-correct liberal
dogma, win the Democratic presi
dential nomination with the great
est percentage of primary votes in
history and come to the brink of
general election victory. Or per
haps he is simply a disappointed
Perotista. Whatever Young’s prob
lem, it seems to have fatally cloud
ed his judgment and reasoning.
After nicely detailing George
Bush’s many shortcomings in his
Sept. 21 column, he inexplicably
concludes in his Sept. 28 piece that
Clinton can only be worse and
gives us an endorsement of Bush,
whom he admits is an overrated
do-little president ill-equipped to
deal with this desperate time.
Young’s indictment of Clinton
seems to boil down to two small is
sues (his record in Arkansas and
inexperience in foreign policy) and
one big one (“a long record of de
ceit"). I examine each in turn.
First, the Arkansas record.
Whatever the economic record of
Clinton in Arkansas might be (and
it is probably as good as any
Arkansas governor’s could ever be),
it’s at least as good as that of Bush
in the U.S. at large. As for the for
eign policy issue, Young’s confi
dence this week in Bush’s experi
ence seems a bit of a surprise after
his criticism last week of the pres
ident’s record in international af
fairs. Remember Bush’s refusal to
aid the struggling democracies of
the former Soviet Bloc, his inflated
defense budgets, his squandered
victories in Panama and Iracj and
his outdated Cuba policy? Clinton
is an intelligent, educated man
with a degree in Foreign Service
from Georgetown, and he has sur
rounded himself with competent
foreign policy advisers. Anyone
who listens to his campaign
speeches on the issue will realize
that he is no neophyte. And by the
way, doesn’t the experience of the
last four years disprove Young’s
brazen assertion “any president
can run domestic affairs": Can’t all
of us who have lost friends and rel
atives to AIDS, breast cancer and
the cruel and incompetent working
of our health care system, testify
that domestic policy, too, “can kill
us"?
But all this, of course, is prelim
inary to Young’s real criticism of
Clinton. It is, we are told, the trust
issue that disqualifies the
Democrat nominee from the office
he seeks. Witness the draft thing,
the pot thing, the adultery thing,
etc., and we have in Clinton “the
most nakedly political prostitute to
emerge as a presidential nominee
in my lifetime.” Richard Nixon can
sleep easily.
This is all just plain silly.
Concede, for a moment, that
Clinton has been slick on the draft
and marijuana issues. Concede
that he has waffled on taxes, free
trade and organized labor. (On
abortion, however, Young is in
clear error: Clinton continues to
support parental notification laws,
which is not inconsistent with be
ing pro-choice.) Now ask yourself
honestly, is this not the kind of
wriggling that every politician does
in every election campaign? Bill
Clinton is not perfect, but we have
never had a president who was,
and we never will. Everyone who
expects perfection in politicians
will forever be disappointed.
Silliest of all is Young’s asser
tion that, notwithstanding his
many faults, Bush still has more
personal integrity than his oppo
nent. Anyone who believes this
hasn’t read the president’s lips
lately. And does Young remember
the Iran-contra affair? Has he paid
any attention to Bush’s flip-flop on
abortion? Recall that the president
was staunchly pro-choice until
August 1980, when he became
Reagan’s running mate and appar
ently journeyed the road to
Damascus. Ever since then, Bush
has insisted not merely that he op
poses abortion, but that this oppo
sition is among his most sincerely
held personal beliefs. Fat chance.
Abortion is the most difficult and
contentious moral issue of our
time; one doesn’t simply change
one’s mind on it without explana
tion.
I could go on and point to Bush’s
dishonesty in the current cam
paign, from mischaracterizing
Clinton’s economic plan as neo-
Leninism to his idiotic 128-to-l tax
increase comparison. The point is
that no one can rationally label Bill
Clinton our generation’s most
naked political prostitute. That
honor belongs to George Bush.
Paul Owens
Third year law student
Approve Sunday sales
A proposal known as the
Sunday Alcohol Referendum will
be appearing on the ballot for
Athens/Clarke County residents on
November 3rd. If passed, restau
rants in Athens/Clarke County will
be able to serve alcoholic beverages
on Sunday. The referendum will
apply to all establishments which a
a majority of their profits from the
sale of food (not liquor stores and
bars).
There are several reasons why
Sunday alcohol sales would benefit
Athens/Clarke County residents,
including University of Georgia
students. First of all, it will be good
for the social life in Athens. Many
people, especially students, er\joy
hanging out downtown on
Sundays. Why should a couple or a
group of friends not be able to en
joy some wine or frosty mugs of
beer with their meals just because
it is Sunday?
Further, the increased number
of Sunday socialites will provide
more business in Athens. But, this
referendum will have an even
broader scope. In trying to draw
conventions, Sunday alcohol sales
would be a megor plus for Athens.
Conventions invariably last
throughout the weekend.
Convention leaders can be discour
aged from coming to Athens if cock
tails can’t be served during their
closing festivities. Without Sunday
alcohol sales, these organizations
will shy away from Athens in favor
of more accommodating locations,
taking their business and dollars
with them.
Everyone should register to vote
so they can participate in the polit
ical process. UGA students should
register to vote in Athena/Clarke
County so that they can voice sup
port for proposals that will affect
them during their time in Athens.
Although each student is only here
for about four years, the student
body as a whole will always be
here. UGA students are a perma
nent and important part of Athens
pulation, and their voices should
heard!
Please register to vote in
Athens/Clarke County and voice
your support for the Sunday
Alcohol Referendum. Voter regis
tration tables will be at the Tate
Center Plaza from 10:00 a.m. till
4:00 p.m. from Monday, September
28 through Monday, October 5!
C. David Douglas
Senior, accounting
Racism is two-way street
In a time when racism is at the
forefront of campus news, I’d like
to offer a different slant on the is
sue. The angle I approach this sub
ject with is not one in defense of
whites or an attempt to change the
topic, it’s merely to illustrate that
racism is a two-way street. I’d like
to elaborate on Andy Ashurst’s let
ter by saying blacks should also
check their behavior and attitudes
as it relates to racism.
Ashurst’s letter describes a T-
shirt that delivers a white-biased,
racial slant that is derogatory to
wards blacks and rings of Jim
Crow laws and slavery days. I can’t
speak for Ashurst, but I have seen
T-shirts bearing the slogan “It’s a
black thing- you wouldn't under
stand it." I am a senior now, but as
a sophomore, I was offended by
this blatantly racial clothing.
Maybe the Confederate shirt
Ashurst speaks of is simply a re
buttal to a first-punch thrown by
blacks toward whites. Still, two
wrongs don’t make a right.
Right now, Pi Kappa Phi is in
the spotlight, and rightly so. But
when the pledge manual was writ
ten, maybe the author had just
seen one of the “Black Thing" T-
shirts and had taken offense to it.
Mpybe this shirt molded the indi
vidual’s opinion or left him bitter
towards blacks at a very inoppor
tune time. This, admittedly, is a
far-fetched scenario, but it high
lights the mutual need to be wary
of racism.
As we move towards true equal
ity, we must remember: whites
aren’t the only ones with minds.
Whites aren’t the only ones with
rights. Whites aren’t the only ones
with opinions. Whites aren’t the
only ones guilty of racism.
Richard Noll*
Senior, political acleno*