• Format
  • Publications (documents)
• Type
  • Text
• Source institution
  • Western Carolina University
• Identifier
  • HL_WesternCarolinian_1988-09-08_Vol54_No04_04

Voices The Western Carolinian Page 4 Thursday, September 8,1988 Martha McAfee Editor Write It !!H As your new editor, I would like to encourage you to give your opinions. This page will be strictly devoted to "Letters to the Editor" and columns sent in or columns written by our own staff members. We will try to get involved in on the action. We will accept opinion columns, letters , or rebuttals. From time to time, I will try and answer your letters and enlighten you with an elaborate column; however, don't expect a weekly column from me. I want you to be the ones who address the issues. Here is your chance to speak out on all those trivial things you may have on your mind (either bad or good). For the most part, I can relate to several everyday problems. I don't eat in the cafeteria anymore since I'm a com muter, but I do understand your dead-end complaints on the quality of food. I can very well relate to the parking situation since I've been late to class twice because I couldn't find a space. If you want to get political—fine. Write it in!! I'm voting for George Bush, and I doubt you could change my mind. If you are an optimist, then great. It would be nice to hear something positive every once in a while. Just write it!! Please try not to attack a person, but instead a particular issue. We reserve the right to withhold pure slander!! I'm looking forward to hearing from you. Editorially Yours, Martha McAfee Randy Rice and the Pavlovian theory by Edward Watson News Editor Ah, what an honor, I thought , to be qualified to live in the new Walker co-ed living/learning center. Nice furniture, monthly continental breakfast and parties, magazine subscriptions, and, above all, women! These were the luxuries of co-ed living. What Mr. Rice and the Honors Program failed to mention were the frequent fire drills at 2:45 in the morning. I hate to rock the boat when I'm a passenger on a luxury cruiser, but how are the Honors students supposed to get a good night's sleep? Are these wonderful nighttime excursions some twisted study of sleep deprivation? Perhaps Mr. Rice is in cohorts with the psychology department's study of the correlation between amount of sleep and a student's QPR. Or, are the alarms a Pavlovian conditioning of "ring bell, watch students get out of dorm?" All Mr. Rice, or his subordinates, have accomplished is to anger the Walker residents. To capture the feelings of Walker residents, perhaps we should post a notice stating: "Life's a bitch and then we have a fire drill." I wonder if Mr. Rice would enjoy being woken every time Scott or Walker dorms have a fire drill? Other than these drills, the program is a total success, in my opinion, and is working marvelously. I have all the best wishes in the world for the program to continue and expand, giving a greater enjoyment and pride to being a part of the co-ed living/learning center. Granted, safety is important, but the fire detection system should be corrected or replaced. If not, maybe the Honor residents should be moved to Reynolds dorm so they can get some sleep and quiet study time. ...And A Few Words Concerning Jesse Helms If out-of-state students aren't aware, North Carolina is "privileged" to have Jesse Helms as one of our Senators. You may wonder why I put sarcastic emphasis on "privileged." The honorable Senator Helms has received such "compliments" as "a McCarthy of the 80s" and Time magazine refers to him as the "scourge of the Senate." Just what makes this "scourge" tick? In a quest for knowledge, I have come across the facts. Helm's roots are found in the town os Monroe, a small city south-east of Charlotte, where he grew up a strong conservative. Schools were segregated and flowers were placed on the graves of the Confederate war dead annually. Fighting Southern Democratic tradition, Jesse Helms became the first North Carolina GOP Senator of this century. Since taking office, Senator Helms has engaged in many acts of personal gain, revenge, and down right stupidity. He has been known to vote against legislature he actually supports in order to "inflict damage" on the Congress. Last November he voted against Defense Secretary nominee Frank Carlucci, the vote squeaked by 91 to 1. A month later he opposed a major education bill, arguing that the Federal Government should not fund state schools. The bill passed 97 to 1. In an effort to stall the passing of the Reagan-Gorbachev Intermediate-Range Nuclear Freeze Treaty (INF Treaty), Helms questioned Gorbachev's authority to sign. And although he insists he is not a racist - remember, he once hired a black press aide - he was the only "nay" vote on the Martin Luther King Jr. national holiday. Helm's continues to believe King was a Communist and "a man of tasteless immorality." Yes, all these events are true and documented!! But do not fear North Carolina, a natural phenomenon occurs every 60 seconds that insures Mr. Helms will remain in office. Round Three: by Terry L. Housman Many returning students will recall my last article on the subject of cafeteria food, "The Great Cafeteria Taste Test." In that article I made it evident that I, and many others also, were not satisfied with the quality of food being served in the cafeterias here at Western. This still remains my opinion, and the opinion of many others. We, as a student body, must take the first steps to remedy the situation, and now is the time to start. As a result of my article last spring I was asked by John C. McCracken, Director of Food Services, to come and talk with him about my displeasure with the dining hall food on campus. So I set up an appointment, and we talked. The Director and I talked of several things to Conquering the Cafeteria Regime do with food service and the dining halls. Many of the items that other students had let me know about were brought up to Mr. McCracken. The biggest outcry was that of quality. Many students feel that we do not get the highest quality food for our money. Mr McCracken felt that this was untrue. On this subject, he lapsed into a long and lengthy discussion about purchasing food that, although it was understandable, it still did not, and will not raise the quality of the food we are served. I think he was passively portraying the sentiments of the administration on the subject: a lot of talking, and no action. Mr. McCracken did eventually arrive at three basic tenets after about an hour of discussion. First of all, we are getting the highest quality of food for our money; secondly, we have the second lowest boarding fees in the UNC system; and thirdly, the students are afforded the opportunity to serve on menu selection committees and menu review boards which give them avenues of rebuttal. If the students don't use these opportunities, it is their fault- not the university's. I was also informed that the ad ministration had come to the conclusion, after surveying several parents, that the prices and quality of food service here at Western were sufficient in every aspect. I still do not agree. I know some of you realize that the quality of food changes when parents or guests are on campus. This isn't right! It is not fair that we should eat better just because our parents or company are here. It's ridiculous! The parents feel that they are getting their moneys worth when they visit the campus because this is what the university leads them to believe, but it's not true! This is why, as students , you should let your parents know in good, solid, objective collegiate form how wrong they are in thinking that their money is keeping you well fed because it's not! We must get in the decision making process by volunteering, or finding out the people who are working on it, and letting them know how you feel. The ultimate outcome of this will not only depend on us as a whole group, but also each and every individual must have an effect. Become involved! Becom e concerned! Its your health, and your body! Bush Blunders Pointed Out by Curtis Pate When Michael Dukakis spoke to the Democratic convention in Atlanta last July he said," This election is not about ideology, it's about competence." A few weeks ago George Bush agreed that he was at least right about the competence part, though Bush hastened to add that ideology was just as important. After seeing the way Bush handled the nomination of Dan Quayle and the subsequent controversy, I would advise that he stick to ideology. It's still too early to tell how much the Quayle situation will cost Bush in November, but a few more mistakes like that, and he'd better start looking for something to do for the next four years. According to the Bush camp's hastily prepared defense, this issue isn't really an issue but a smear tactic developed by the liberal news media to embarrass him and hurt his chances of winning. That isn't really surprising, Bush has been running against the media nearly as hard, if not harder, than he has been against Dukakis for a long time now. In most cases he's pretty good at it, look at the way he handled Dan Rather back in February. Most people missed an important point in that confrontation, namely the fact that we still don't know where Bush stood on the Iran- Contra scandal. That's the way Bush wants it, let everybody remember that he nailed Rather but forget what it was all about, that's how you win elections. But as a long term strategy for dealing with the press, stonewalling and namecallingjustdon'tcutit. You can fool some of the people all of the time with tactics like that, but if it's your only defense against tough questions you are in lots and lots of trouble. Whether the media is liberal or not is a matter for debate and it's not what I'm discussing right now. Likewise, whether Quayle did anything wrong or anything that should make people doubt his suitability for the office of president is an important question, but as of right now that isn't my point either. What I am saying is that Bush, his staff, Quayle, and whoever else was involved in the decision blew this one, and all the media-bashing in the world isn't going to make it any better. Right or wrong, politics is a game of perception, people vote for what they think they see and most of them don't take the trouble to look into the issues and see what's really going on. To get anywhere in polictics you have to learn how to manipulate that perception to your advantage. What you actually are. really doesn't matter that much, it's what people perceive you as that counts. George Bush knows this perfectly well, he has spent the last eight years with the man who understands this fact better than anyone, Ronald Reagan. Consider some of the things that have happened in the Reagan adminstra- tion. There's the sleaze factor, the Iran-Contra debacle, Lebanon, the deficit, Panama, Nicaragua, the list goes on and on. Could any president in recent memory even have survived all these negative events, let alone remain one of the most popular men in American politics? Not bloody likely. So how can Reagan do it? Because he understands a few basic, if unpleasant, truths about American public opinion. It doesn't matter if Oliver North broke the law and dealt with the Ayatollah, as long as he wears his medals and gets misty-eyed about the Contras. It doesn't matter if you have a budget deficit unequalled in our history, as long as you can convince people that that's Congress' fault and that the growth of the economy is your doing alone. What happened is unimportant, it's what people think happened. Once you understand that, life gets a lot easier for a politician. Rather than worry about public opinion, you seize the initiative and make it yourself. That's what Reagan and his people do best, and it got them two terms in the White House. George Bush sat at the feet of the master for eight long years, and until now it seemed he learned his lessons well. He made Bob Dole's anger at his distortions of the record seem like a case of meanness, and Dole lost the nomination. When he went up against Rather he somehow made an anchorman's temper tantrum seem as important an issue as disrespect for the law at the highest level of government and came out ahead. When such bastions of unbiased news as Lyndon LaRouche's people started circu- asking ominous questions about why Dukakis was reluctant to do the same. The press, who presumably overcame their "liberal bias" on this occasion, began making references to a parallel between Dukakis and Thomas Eagleton, who dropped out of the Democratic Vice-Presidential slot in 1972 when his past history of mental illness was revealed. And when Dukakis squelched the rumors, Bush could honestly say that he didn't really think the governor was crazy, just wanted to check. Meanwhile, Dukakis' post-convention lead dwindled. But now, in a stroke of supreme poetic justice, the references to a potential parallel to Eagleton is not Dukakis' mental state, but the possibility of kicking an embarrassment off the ticket, an embarrassment named Dan Quayle. The sin committed here, Right or wrong, politics is a game of perception, people vote for what they see and most of them don't take the trouble to look into the issues and see what's really going on. like most political sins, isn't very serious in the real world. Either Bush's people didn't ask (Bush himself was not in on the questioning, or he might have caught something that glaring), or Quayle covered it up. A simple matter of carelessness, but in a race this close one slip can destroy you. Remember in 1976 when Gerald Ford seemed to think that Poland was not under Soviet domination in the debate with Carter? Or Jimmy Carter's ill- advised reference to his daughter's views on nuclear was four years later? Neither of these lost the election alone, but they did cause substantial damage that might have tipped the scales in a close race. This is the nature of the mistake George Bush has made with the nomination of Dan Quayle, and it is compounded by the way they have handled it. Quayle first acted as though he only had to answer questions he approved of, and when the failure of this approach became painfully obvious he started trying to convince everyone that he was in just as much danger in Indiana as he would have been in Viet Nam. This is not what I would call maintaining credibility. The best defense Bush has been able to come up with so far is that at least Quayle didn't burn the flag and go to Canada. Not only does this almost seem to be damning with faint praise, it also ignores the fact that with his father's money and influence Quayle had no reason to go to Canada. References to arguably similar actions by Dukakis, and the time-honored excuse of "everybody does it" seem of little help here. This is because more than anything else the Republicans have made defense their main concern and their main weapon against the Democrats. If one of their number seems to falter in his devotion to this ideal in any way, especially a proven hawk like Quayle, their position is drastically weakened and their credibility becomes suspect. The most satisfying thing to the Democrats in this situation is that Bush's problems are his own fault. He delayed the choice of a running mate until the convention to build suspense, and then changed his mind to avoid offending those who were waiting for him to decide. He decided to be his own man and made the decision with little consultation with his aides. Having made an issue of the vice- presidential selection, he found himself with a running mate who might alienate the right-wing elements he was supposed to bring in, who weakens the credibility of Bush's references to his own war record, who overshadowed him at his own convention, and who cannot be dropped without risking more damage than has already happened. Bush knows this game, he has played it long and well and there is no sense in trying to rewrite the rules at this late date. All in all, Bush's first action a Reagan's heir- apparent does not bode well for the Republicans, but Dan Quayle may not be a total loss. He's the best thing to happen to the Democratic party in years.

The Western Carolinian is Western Carolina University’s student-run newspaper. The paper was published as the Cullowhee Yodel from 1924 to 1931 before changing its name to The Western Carolinian in 1933.

• Creator
  • Western Carolina University
• Format
  • Publications (documents)
• Type
  • Text
• Date
  • Date original: 1988-09-08
  • Date digitized: 2019-09-05
• Extent
  • Dimension: 22.75" x 14.25"
  • Pages: 14 pages
• Subject - Topic
  • College student newspapers and periodicals
  • Cullowhee (N.C.) -- Newspapers
  • Universities and colleges -- North Carolina -- Cullowhee -- Newspapers
• Location
  • Jackson County (N.C.)
  • Cullowhee (N.C.)
• Source institution
  • Western Carolina University
• Source Collection
  • WCU Students Newspapers Collection
• Identifier
  • HL_WesternCarolinian_1988-09-08_Vol54_No04
• Repository
  • Western Carolina University Hunter Library