North Carolina Newspapers is powered by Chronam.
CAROLINA JOURNAL April 12, 1967 Page 6
A History-Making Election
Tremendous! That’s the only word which
comes even close to describing the student
turnout at the polls last week.
April 5,6, and 7 will go down in the his
tory of this campus as the three-day period
in which students finally realized the serious
ness of their own affairs at this school.
Not only did they realize, they acted. They
actually did something.
Nearly half the student body, 746 of 1500-
odd, cast a ballot in the election for student
Why this sudden swell of voters when the
normal turnout here is just a tad over 300?
There are several reasons, we believe.
For one thing, the Garner versus Gaither
battle for the presidency of the student body
was the best since the spring of 1964. Both
candidates, for the first time in at least three
years, were campus leaders of proven capa
bility and each commanded a large following.
What’s more, both Garner and Gaither
wanted to win the election so badly they could
think of nothing else. Neither mentioned the
possibility of defeat in any conversation with
us. This type of attitude on the part of two
candidates for the highest student position on
campus is very good. It is just the elixer
needed here. In this case, it is truly too
bad that one of the two had to lose.
Finally, probably the most important factor
in producing the fabulous turnout is that the
candidates made their speeches in the Union
cafeteria. This site for the speeches was
picked in desperation due to the speech by
Dr. Rhine scheduled for the same time in
the Parquet room. However, we feel this
year should set a precedent and that from
now on the candidates will continue to make
their pitches in the cafeteria.
Why? Because many people who would not
ordinarily have attended a session of this
type happened to stumble into involvement
when they looked up from their lunches to
see and hear potential leaders present and
sell themselves. Most of these people would
not have bothered to vote had it not been
In other words, if the students aren’t going
to come to their leaders, their leaders must
come to them. This is what happened this
But irregardless of why the students turned
out in such tremendous numbers, it was great
just to have them exercise their voice in campus
politics. We hope this election wasn’t a fluke.
THE CAROLINA JOURNAL
Published weekly on Wednesday excent during holidays.
ELLISON CLARY, JR„ Editor
Frank Crooks Business Manager
Libby Holshouser Feature Editor
Donna Hughes Sports Editor
Geraldine Ledford Cartoonist
Fred Jordan. . . . . . Photo Editor
Nancy Kohler, Frank Coley Photographers
Staff: Sally Hagood, Paul Boswell, Earleen Mabry, Corny Stilwell,
Frank Caton, Jan Ballard, Patrick McNeely, Bobbe Berry, Carol
Haywood, John Lafferty, Gayle Watts, Kay Watson, Carol Durham,
Louise Napolitano, Larry Keith, and Darlene Helms.
Sure, campaigning will kill you, but Gee.
Little Knowledge Employed^
Editor Appears Idealistic
So human nature prevails again.
It’s so easy to comment on a sub
ject of which we have little know
ledge. In this case we find cam
pus politics as the target, the
Student Party the bull’s-eye. You
express dissatisfaction at the lack
of candidates tor student body
offices, but what may I ask did
you do to encourage students to
run? As the sounding board of
the students, the voice of the
campus, a vital link in student
communication, you have some
responsibility. If you were so
terribly concerned about student
government, why not a word before
You appear to be very ideal
istic, Mr. Editor. You would
like to see two parties hotly di
vided over hot issues with a full
slate of hot candidates for every
office from president to bath
room monitor. Well, brother,
it just isn’t there. And as far
as your attack on SP leaders
goes, you tread a little hard.
Your lack of knowledge of the
situation is again evident. A
handful of hardworking students
did what they could against in
surmountable odds, namely the
lack of academic qualifications
of potential candidates. Had it
not been for this, you would have
had your full slate of candidates.
Maybe I have failed and probably
so, but I did what I could with
the remains that were handed me,
and as I was the only one willing
to assume leadership, there should
not be too much criticism.
If you would just refer to your
miserable publication of March
22nd, you will find my last letter
to the editor, which thoroughly
explains why the situation is as
it is. I wrote it making no
apologies and asking no judgment.
So I would ask in closing, Mr.
Editor, that you stick to your
ads, track pictures, and “Little
Man on Campus” cartoons, and
let the politicians handle the po
Editor’s note; This is the type
of response we hoped to receive
in regard to our last editorial.
Although we question many of the
points Mr. Shuford tries to make
in the above letter, we are happy
to see there is, indeed, a spark
of life left in the Student Party.
In regard to Mr. Shuford’s ques
tion in the first paragraph of his
letter as to why we hadn’t said
“a word before now”, if he will
check the October 26 and Novem
ber 9, 1966 editions of the Journal
he will see that we have tried
to fulfill our re^onsibility in
connection with the Student Party.
Student Is Concerned Over
The Lack Of Campus Leaders
I’m shocked — even stunned.
Maybe this sense oi alarm just
naturally arises near the end of
one’s sophomore year, but I doubt
Will the real leaders of this
school please stand up? Yes, stand
and be counted. Where did this
sudden lack of concern come from?
When did this aparthy arise? Would
you believe that there were nine
posts to be filled in last week’s
elections and only nine candidates
running? Only two officers were
contested. Students, arise. These
officers are going to determine
what, how, when, and why for your
school for the next twelve months.
Don’t you even care? The Student
Party had died, the bold indepen
dents are few, and even the Uni
versity Party is having trouble
finding candidates for the upcoming
class elections. The incum
bents refuse to run again and
othfers are afraid to try some
thing new. To me, the whole sit
uation hints of R-I-N-K-Y D-I-
N-K! Bravo for those of you who
have dared to be nonconformists
and care. If all the load is placed
on the shoulders of the interested
few, then the competent will be
spread too thin to be difficient,
e.xpedient, and energetic. Wliere
wiU it aU lead? I dare not theor
ize. UNC-C “ejq>ects everymanto
do his duty.” How about it, folks?
Gaither Takes Opportunity
To Express Appreciation
I would like to take this op
portunity to express, in print, my
appreciation to the student body
for their interest shown by the
record voter turn-out in the past
Executive Council election. I hope
that this interest is continued, if
not increased, during the upcoming
class elections. The people you
choose to fill these positions on
Joe McCorkle Misquoted In Last
Edition Letters To Editor
your Student Legislature wiU be
charged with the responsibility of
allocating approximately $30,000
of your activity fees. These peo
ple will be your representatives,
your voice in Student Government
and should be chosen with care.
Again I urge you not to let this
opportunity pass without casting
Due to a printer’s error in the
story whichappearedin last week’s
Journal cxi attitudes toward the
projposed draft laws, Joe McCorisle
was quoted as saying, “Doesn’t
make a damn to me as long as
they continue the college defer
ment system.” Mr. McCorkle did
not say this. The quote belongs to
The Journal apologizes to Joe