North Carolina Newspapers is powered by Chronam.
e Daily Tar Heel
i nee as sup
771 Trr A
83rd Year of Editorial Freedom
All unsigned editorials are the opinion of the editors. Letters and columns represent the opinions of
Founded February 23, 1893
Monday, February 24, 1975
O TT1 Tl n c
The ablest candidate in Wednesday's Student
Government (SG) presidential race is Jamie Ellis. Both
as a campaigner and as president of the Association of
Women Students, she has shown the best combination
of ability, personality and drive so important for high
office. She has also put together the most solid platform. .
And because of these qualities she will be able to
accomplish more for students next year than any of her
four serious rivals.
It almost goes without saying that Ellis is infinitely
superior to the two "joke" candidates also running
against her. Lance Woodring and Bozo Edwards (who
repeatedly denies he is a clown) aren't even amusing
campaigners; they would be even sadder in office. The
old Pitt Dickey promises just aren't funny any more. We
don't need any third-rate comedians who can only pride
themselves on their inexperience as presidents of the
Among the worthwhile candidates, Jerry Askew is as
handsome and outgoing as he would be ineffective once
in office. He seems to have little grasp of basic issues,
prefering instead to discuss uPan-Hel," basketball
tickets and Jubilee. Askew has made a commendable
effort to escape the Greek image but he knows too few
administrators, and too little about real student
problems, to be able to break the stereotype. If this were
1955, he'd be an excellent candidate.
Bill Bates does have first-hand knowledge of student
concerns, and he has run a good old-fashioned,
aggressive campaign, but he seems to be running more
for Student Body treasurer than for president. SG
services should be improved, he's right, but a good
president has to look after more than our pocketbooks.
Far-reaching issues like academic reform and
affirmative action are too low on his list on priorities.
Bates is not broadminded or idealistic enough to be a
Tim Dugan was the Student Body treasurer this year,
a tough post that he haridled well despite inevitable
criticism from the other candidates. He is smart and
experienced, but many of his ideas are poorly thought
out. Campaign promises such as issuing pocket alarms
to all female students and placing lock-card devices on
the doors of all women's dorms sound gimmicky and are
probably unfeasible. These measures are in the gallant
tradition of protecting Southern womanhood, but many
other students' needs are more practical and more
urgent. Dugan particularly lacks vision in the area of
academic reform. He doesn't speak well enough in
meetings and he doesn't seem forceful enough to take
firm command of Student Government.
It is hard not to like Joe Knight since he is so easy-going
and charismatic. Of all the candidates, he could
probably generate the most interest in Student
Government next year if only because of his personality.
But other than "increasing communication," his goals
are surprisingly vague. We know of his broad agreement
with many of the current president's policies, but he has
taken no firm stand on particular student services or
academic reforms. Knight can handle people better than
Marcus Williams can, but voters should be confident of
" his ends as well as his means. -
In addition, Joe Knight is a victim of circumstance
this year. His presidency would start out under the
shadows of William's failures, the Duke disruption, and
the Marbley trial. No matter how diplomatic he is,
Knight is bound to alienate either the Black Student
Movement or conservative whites if he even speaks out:
on the important issue of free speech. A good president
should not be hopelessly and needlessly entangled in
side-issues as soon as he steps in office, especially when
he has little previous notion of which real issues he will
stand up and fight for.
Jamie Ellis, on the other hand, combines the strengths
of her competitors. She both knows administrators and
how to deal with them, she has a strong, realistic
platform, and she has proven her ability to lead students
as head of the thriving AWS. But most important, she
won't have to begin her administration under a cloud.
Ellis is also the only candidate this year who has
managed to be idealistic without being vague. Under her
administration students will see pushes for such specifics
as the extension of drop-add and the proper renovation
of the Pine Room, as well as for broader goals like
affirmative action. She knows what she wants, she can
articulate her feelings, and she is good at convincing
skeptics. Her attractive appearance can often be
deceiving. Ellis thinks well on her feet and she has an
excellent set of priorities, two all-important qualities
when dealing with the Chancellor.
Ellis has a wide acquaintance with students and
student problems, and she is both forceful and
intelligent enough to deal with them effectively. Her
strategies for change are well-planned and show a good
sense of proportion. She is by far the ablest student
leader running this year for president.
The 1975 N. C. General Assembly has
begun consideration of the Equal Rights
Amendment, but a decision may be
several weeks away.
That amendment to the U.S.
Constitution, which has already been
ratified by 34 of the necessary 38 state
legislatures, is now in the House
Committee on Constitutional
Amendments. That committee, chaired
by Rep. Hart well Campbell, has not
scheduled any early action.
The Equal Rights Amendment
(ERA) is as much a symbolic as a
practical act. It represents a formal
position of equality and fairness and the
premise that women should have
exactly what the amendment provides:
"Equality of rights under the law."
Its language contains nothing about
coed bathrooms or a requirement that
all men and women get jobs. Opponents
say that it forces women to provide half
the support for the family, but the
amendment does nothing of the sort.
While it may be only a semantic
difference, the law does not provide for
equality, but equality of rights, e.g., that
the government will treat persons alike,
regardless of their sex.
Thus, if after a divorce, a woman has
a better job: tlan:
something which many states now don't
provide for V.? ': '. -: :
Discriminatory provisions in welfare,
social security and social insurance laws
would be eliminated, as would unfair
employment laws Protective labor
laws; which were'passed in the early 20th i
century to protect wpmeja. arejnowused ?
against -womenV Although Uhe Civili
Rights Act now bans discrimination in
employment, that act exists at the will of
Congress, something that a basic human
right should not have to rely on.
It is true that under a draft, the
amendment would put women on an
equal basis with men; In any; case the
prospect of women in the army front
lines might keep us out of future wars
Also we have a volunteer army, with
no foreseeable prospect of a draft.
The ERA won't change .private,
relationships between men and women; ;
the ERA directly affects -. only , the
conduct of governments;
Persistent patterns of sex
discrimination still exist in political,
social, economic and cultural life. We
need a statement such as the ERA as a
national commitment to equality for all.
North Carolina laws are better than
many other states, since we, being a
business-dominated state, passed little
of the so-called protective labor laws
and liberal social legislation. But laws
such as "the Alcoholic Beverage Control
Board shall be composed of three men"
can still be found in the statute books.
You and I as citizens can have an
effect on General Assembly
consideration of the ERA. Letters to
state legislators saying you want the
ERA ratified are sorely needed. If you
are from in-state but outside Chapel
Hill, write to your home legislator
giving your home address.
It is most important to write to
members of the Constitutional
Amendments Committee. Letters to
Hart well Campbell, J.P. Huskins,
Bobby Rogers and Kitchin Josey, all in
care of the Legislative Building,
Raleigh, N.C. 2761 1, should be
everyone's first priority. If you can send
a few Utters this week stating your
position on ERA, and asking for swift
action, it can make a big difference in
Gerry Cohen is a UNC law student
and a member of the Chapel Hill Board
On fancy footwork
and sinking ships
-Meet the Candidates," the sign read. So I went and met the candidates. But only
70 other people went to meet the would-be editors of the Daily Tar Heel, and most
of those 70 were scribbling notes for journalism newswriting classes. Therefore, I
thought you might like to meet the candidates vicariously.
Sure, you've probably already met some of them. They're easy to spot on campus:
they're the ones who are friendly and smiling even on rainy days. If you live in a
dorm, they may have already come by to pay a personal visit. But you get the best,
Tom Wright kicked off the period of eight-minute platform statements. He told
the audience not to expect a polished speech, and sure enough, he didn't deliver one.
He blew much of his eight minutes verbally lashing the other candidates, although
he disavowed a penchant for personal attacks. His style was soft-spoken (he said he
had a sore throat or something) and informal.
UNC's golden boy debater was up next, and the contrast was a shocking blow to
" theSudienceviCole Campbell assumed -a
podium, and delivered a painfully earnest speech. Polished? Yes. Distinctive? No.
He did use some very nice stage movements, occasionally strolling from behind the
podium to jab some important point home with his forefinger. Campbell was on a
rhetorical streak and had to be gently nudged away from the podium by
After Campbell, this year's co-editor candidates launched into a verbal blitz.
Forced to jam two speeches into one eight-minute time period, Don Baer and
Harriet Sugar talked faster than Lily Tomlin doing her "Susie Sorority" bit. They
finished early. The high point of their address was a bold defense of the "co-editor
issue." Sugar and Baer proved how well they can work together in a well
choreographed shuffle from podium to chair, as they attempted to fill up their
Barnie Day gave a pretty traditional speech. He worked wonders with the
metaphor, taking the term, editorship, quite literally. With promises of a "tight
ship' and smooth sailing, he seemed to be rjunhing for a nautical, rather than
journalistic, position. Like Tom Wright, he is not a practiced public speaker, and it
Elliot Warnock spoke last, duplicating the staccato, machinegun-style delivery of
earlier speakers. He also came up with some interesting figures of speech. "Jce cream
has no bones," he stated confidently. It tied in with a point he was mating, I think.
Warnock's flowery, eloquent speech ironically included a few jabs at political
But wait a minute. I've written a whole column without mentioning any issues or
qualifications of the candidates. Well, I'm sure you'll pardon the oversight. After
all, those students who vote will probably vote for whoever makes the best first
impression on them. And I've given you impressions.
Or you might select your next editor on the basis of endorsements that are usually
motivated by personality and political considerations. In either case, experience,
ability and qualifications will undoubtedly take the back seat, where such minor
considerations traditionally belong.
Letters to the editors
ane review spoils m
To the editors:
Gee whiz, fellas. How could you let that
story about Lois Lane get into a fine paper
like the DTtP. Perry White would never let
such mudslinging into fas Daily Planet. I
hate to think what would happen to your
Features Editor if I had told Clark Kent
about that story. But don't worry, I haven't
Lois is not a. middle-aged woman. She
does not have a baritone voice. How dare
you tempt Superman's wrath by printing big
fibs like those about his girlfriend?
I'm proud to say that 1 was the first one to
stand up when Lois walked out on stage. 1
was the last one to sit down too. When 1 saw
the Lois Lane, 1 got a kinda mushy squishy
feeling in my stomach. All I could say was
"Glorioski!" Was she ever good-looking.
1 sat with my peepers and my mouth wide
open. As she was' talking, she looked at me.
She looked at me and smiled. 1 felt privileged
and honored. 1 never thought that she knew
that" 1 was alive.
After the two most wonderful hours of my
life, she walked off the stage. She was gone. 1
rushed backstage to see if I could get her
autograph. Someone had gotten to her first.
While I waited, 1 stared at her bouncy red
hair, her precious smile, and her beautiful
dress. And, I must admit, I glanced at her.
I couldn't believe that 1 was this close to
her. Then, she looked at me and said hello.
My knees shook as 1 told her my name. As
she handed her autograph to me, she leaned
forward and kissed me. She kissed me. My
face turned red and 1 stood motionless with a
shocked look. 1 dashed for the door. 1
haven't washed my face since that night.
1 hope that you can see that I'm one who
wouldn't trade those two hours with Lois for
anything. I believe in Lois Lane! I must end
this letter now because the ice in my cherry
coke is melting and my cheeseburger is
getting cold. By the way, did you know that a
fairy dies every time that someone says that
there are no such things as fairies?
To the editors:
On Thursday, Feb. 20, an academic panel
met at the Union. It consisted of four faculty
members and a small number of students.
We could have talked all night and still
resolved nothing, barely having aired views.
mi; 7 '
WmL "Wot : n
X V mM. " f J' 1
And as far as that meeting was concerned, a
Current Affairs Committee spokesman
revealed that there were no follow-ups
planned, effectively making , the meeting
useless as far as any results were concerned.
One of the faculty members even confessed
he only knew about the meeting shortly prior
to it being held.
Despite these faults, one thing emerges
clearly: the need for students to have the
opportunity not only to air their views, but
to discuss various academic policies with
those faculty who are gathered together with
the aim of resolving some of the many
problems in the academic system,
recognizing that the students opinions are
important. 1 am by no means suggesting that
these changes could appear overnight. But
what 1 am expressing is the surprise that no
open discussion on an issue as important as
this exists openly on campus. I suggest that
such a discussion should appear at intervals
throughout the semester, and confine itself
to limited topics and try to resolve some of
Although 1 criticize the Current Affairs
Committee for holding an apparently
aimless meeting in terms of effect and
continuity, it would be productive to have
some feedback of students interested in this
205 E. Hargrave Avenue .
Though the enemy fights dirty, we must be
fair for the sake of our own consciences. And
thanks to those who supported me.
To the editors:
: For the information of the student body I
would like to clarify certain misleading
statements in Friday's article on the AWS
endorsement of the DTH candidate.
Tom Wright did not attend because he had
addressed AWS at an earlier meeting; in
other words, all candidates were heard.
The . decision to endorse was partly a
response to an expression of interest in an
AWS endorsement by students, as well as a
positive encouragement of such interest; it
was not an ego trip. My quotes were not
indicated in the article as they are here; when
1 used the expression "to seek political power
while hiding behind anonymity I was
quoting from the unfortunate DTH editorial
of the previous Friday, in criticism of the
. To the editors:
James Condie deserves jtrt tpolosy, ind I
intend to deliver U personify ind verbally,
not physically. My impulsive action gave
satisfaction but achieved ncthir.j in the long
run. - 777
After being both damned ind tppliudsd, .
I realized it was the people of North Carolina
who deserved that, pie for allowing Dr.
Condie to make the decisions he has. To me.
his actions have been like a pie in the face to
all UNC student but I did net Intend to
descend to his level. Unfortunately. I did.
and I apologize to all who see mt In that
IIm Cbopsry Greg Turcsak
7 ;7r7' ;;7.Ed!loraf; ; .
Dsirid Enn!,' Associate Edtsr
' Lu Ann Jsnts, Assselstd JECHzt
Dv!d KHnssr, flsa Obiter
Akn Murray, Festurt 3 Editor
Cussn Chssfcslferd, Cpsrte E!sr
Gsna Johnson, Wire Editor
?CJ!sctha Clsvsns, Hssd Ptictogrcphsr
Jim Grimsby KIsht Editor
pompous and inappropriate public,
expression ' of the editors personal
differences with members of the Carolina
Coalition. As an editorial it was inexcusable;
the writers allowed themselves an unjustified
generalization about endorsement, based on
personal quibbles, that has a dangerous
effect of discouraging desperately needed
student interest. (The editors seem to be
expressing the same paranoia about their
personal standing that they did in an earlier
article on grade inflation.) If seven
lefthanded redheads announce their
endorsement of a candidate, at least seven
people have formed an opinion and are
voting and others will know.
Finally, the article cited Campbell's
advertising rates as his winning qualification
for endorsement, an outrageous
misrepresentation of his platform and our
evaluation, not to mention the priorities of
AWS. 1 trust students wilt acquaint
themselves with all as'pe'cts of his platformv
as we did.
1 hope that the article did not do more
harm than good for both Campbell and
AWS. through careless journalism.
To the editors:
The Old East Quasimotos. in keeping with'
the recent DTH editorials urging all major
campus political forces to get involved, and
in response specifically to last Friday's
editorial concerning the power of intramural
football team end.orcements, have decided to
endorse Cole Carabell (sic). We feel that
Cole Campbell has the necessary creativity,
resourcefulness and experience to make a
great editor. Unlike some coalitions on
'campus, our pedastat from which we view
the campus and make this decision is a solid
one. We urge all other concerned students to
support us and elect Cole Campbell.
,; :. ' ' - ... " ; Bob Williams
" - and 10 teammates
Old East Dorm