8The Daily Tar Heel Thursday, September 13, 1984
Football Iradition
JEFF HIDAY, Editor
Joel Broadway, Managing Editor
Michael Toole, Associate Editor
MARK STINNEFORD, Associate Editor
KELLY SIMMONS, University Editor
WAYNE THOMPSON, State and National Editor
MELANIE WELLS, City Editor
VANCE TREFETHEN, Business Editor
STUART TONKINSON, News Editor
Frank Kennedy, sports Editor
JEFF GROVE, Arts Editor
CINDY DUNLEVY, Features Editor
JEFF NEUVILLE, Photography Editor
i9mlg
Star mml
92nd year of editorial Jreeavm
Deficit debate underway?
Walter Mondale kept his convention
promise and unveiled a detailed plan
earlier this week to cut the federal budget
deficit $177 billion by the end of the
decade.
Though the plan is overly optimistic
on certain points, it is a politically
shrewd move that will force Reagan to
do some tricky footwork to avoid both
debating Mondale's plan and justifying
his own lack of one.
After he heard of Mondale's plan,
Reagan retorted that it was "nothing
new" and was "not going to wash" with
voters. Obviously, Reagan feels confi
dent that his promise to raise taxes only
as a last resort will wash with the voters.
But once Reagan ascertains the
public's reaction to the specifics of
Mondale's plan he might not feel so sure.
The Democrat's plan calls for $85 billion
in new taxes, most of which would fall
on the wealthiest Americans. This, as
Mondale surely recognizes, should come
as good news to lower and middle
income families (the vast majority of
Americans) who would be most hurt by
a tax increase.
In fact, according to campaign advis
ers, Mondale's proposals would not raise
the taxes, of a family of four with two
dependents making an adjusted gross
income of $25,000 a year, which the
advisers said is the median family
income.
If Reagan and Mondale ever meet in
a debate, it's fairly certain that Mondale
will make much of the fact that his plan
would take most of its tax revenue from
those who can best afford it a point
Reagan might have trouble laughing off.
Although, Mondale will have his
share of trouble explaining some other
aspects of His plan.
Besides raising taxes, Mondale has
called for a $25 billion reduction in
projected defense spending increases
which is a good idea. However, while
claiming to replace the MX missile and
the B-l bomber with other weapon
systems, Mondale neglects to mention
what systems and how much they will
cost.
So, to make good on his claim of
laying down "all my cards ... on the table,
VSWURePOUTTHE
MosreFFecws
miousew
B-l BOMBER
AGAINST TE
RUSSIANS,,,
face up," Mondale must also convince
Americans that there's nothing up his
sleeve.
One of the more optimistic promises,
though certainly not lacking in terms of
boldness, to come out of his plan is to
dedicate all new revenue to deficit
reduction. New programs or growth of
existing programs would have to be
matched with new revenues or cuts in
other spending.
In principle, it is an excellent idea.
If the government can't pay for it, it just
won't do it. But, in the real world it might
not be so practical. If it was to become
an inflexible procedure for air govern
ment spending it would foster attempts
(by the federal bureaucracy) to get
around the law, for one reason or
another, to the detriment of the country.
Likewise, the conservative rhetoric
coming from both sides of the campaign
must be treated with skepticism, given
the spending nature of a largely Demo
cratic Congress. As Reagan pointed out
Wednesday, if all his deficit-reduction
proposals had been passed by Congress
the deficit would be about $50 billion
less.
Whether Reagan's figures are com
pletely correct is not as important as the
basic truth that asking Congress to make
substantial cuts in domestic programs,
might end up being just that, asking.
So Mondale's plan, surprisingly
conservative for a Democratic nominee,
might not get the backing it needs from
Congress. It calls for no major job
programs, no sizable antipoverty mea
sures and no substantive housing and
welfare measures essentially telling
Congressional Democrats to act more
like their Republican counterparts than
many would like to admit to their voters
back home.
Despite its problems, Mondale's
deficit-reduction proposal is the most
important thing that has happened in
a campaign that was beginning to get
bogged down in non-issues and person
alities. Now, it is up to Reagan to follow
Mondale's courageuous lead and outline
a plan allowing for a substantive debate
on the problem of reducing the looming
federal deficit.
( GiVS TH6M
I PRIMTS
Ik J 1
i mi i. -I A, -WiwwMU'?te.w i ! mil
The Daily Tar Heel
Assistant News Editors: Lynn Davis, Jo Ellen Meekins, Heidi Zehnal
Editorial Writers: Ben Perkowski and Mike Persinger
Assistant Managing Editors: Dick Anderson, Elizabeth Huth and Glenn Peterson
News: Mike Allen, Diana Bosniack, Amy Branen, Lisa Brantley, Richard Boyce, Tim Brown,
Matt Campbell, Tom Conlon, Dennis Dowdy, Katy Fridl, Mike Gunzenhauser, Lane Harvey,
Heather Hay, Tracy Hilton, Jim Hoffman, Melissa Holland, Mary Benton Hudgens, Ray Jones,
Guy Lucas, Myra Knight, Sallie Krawcheck, Georgia Ann Martin, Dora McAlpin, Margaret
McKinnon, Andy Miller, Jennifer Mooney, Marjorie Morris, Brian Mullaney, Thad Ogburn,
Janet Olson, Beth Ownley, Thomas Pinkerton, Ruthie Pipkin, Mark Powell, Frank Proctor,
Sarah Raper, Bill Rose, David Schmidt, Allison Smoak, Amy Styers, Kevin Sullivan, Lisa
Swicegood, Dan Tillman, Andy Trincia, Jennifer Trotter, Kevin Washington, Cheryl Williams,
Vanessa Williams, Karen Youngblood and Jim Zook. Steve Ferguson, assistant University editor
Sports: Scott Fowler and Lee Roberts, assistant sports editors. Scott Canterberry, Kimball
Crossley, Mike DeSisti, Pete Fields, Scott Fowler, Tamera Majors, Kurt Rosenberg, Mike
Sanders, Mike Schoor, Scott Smith, Mike Waters, David Wells and Bob Young
Features: Sharon Sheridan, assistant features editor. Mike Altieri, Nancy Atkinson, Clarice
Bickford, Tom Camacho, Daniel Cowhig, Loretta Grantham, Marymelda Hall, Missy Holland,
Jennifer Keller, Vanessa Orr, Liz Saylor, Devi Sen and Sonya Terrell
Arts: Ed Brackett, Frank Bruni, Steve Carr, Louis Corrigan, Ivy Hilliard, Eddie Huffman, Steve
Murray, Virginia Smith and David Sotolongo
Photography: Larry Childress, Nancy London, Jamie Moncrief, Stretch, and Lori Thomas
Business and Advertising: Anne Fulcher, general manager; Paula Brewer, advertising director;
Tammy Martin, student business manager; Angela Booze, accounts receivable clerk; Terry Lee,
student advertising manager; Reid Barker, Alicia Susan D'Anna, Greg Goosmann, Patricia
Gorry, Melanie Parlier, Stacey Ramirez, Doug Robinson, Amy Schutz, Randi Thompson and
Scott Whitaker, ad representatives; Patti Pittman, classified advertising manager, Laura Bowen,
assistant; Jim Greenhill, office manager; and Cathy Davis, secretary
Distributioncirculation: William Austin, manager; Lori Crow, assistant
Production: Brenda.Moore and Stacy Wynn. Rita Galloway, assistant
Printing: Hinton Press, Inc. of Mebane
Fighting to revive mikeman
By GENE KRCELIC
When Navy invades Chapel Hill
this Saturday, it won't be like any
other football Saturday. There will
still be tailgating, football players,
coaches, referees, cheerleaders,
and an enthusiastic crowd scream
ing, "Carolina Carolina, fight fight
fight."
Even though all the ingredients
of a perfect football Saturday will
seem to be present, one proud
tradition will be missing. Over the
past year, this UNC tradition was
silently abolished.
The tradition of the mikeman
died without the knowledge of the
student body the group the
mikeman was designed for. No
one is quite sure why the tradition
was terminated or who played
God in deciding its doom.
The gradual downfall of the
mikeman can be traced back to
the 1981 football season when the
first and only freshman mikeman
was elected by a panel of judges
that consisted of cheerleaders,
band members and other author
ities on the UNC spirit system.
Many upperclassmen were upset
by the fact that they had to follow
cheers by a lowly freshman. But
the mikeman gained acceptance
week-by-week.
Paradoxically, the tradition
may have been hurt by the excel
lent mikeman chosen for the 1982
football season. Senior Greg
"Lump" Lunsford was so good at
the job tfiat he was an impossible
act to follow. Almost anyone who
won the job the following year was
destined for disaster.
Then came 1983 and the death
of the mikeman tradition. At the
tryouts, it was evident that the
judges made the wrong decision.
Kenny Ward wasnl the man for
the job! Because of his rude and
offensive style, Ward was asked
to leave the position before the
season was over. The remaining
games were played without a
mikeman.
The cheerleaders were asked to
take on the duties of the mikeman.
Obviously, they loved the change,
but many students, fans and
players were dissatisfied with the
new system. It was an obvious
change for the worse.
If the mikeman tradition was
abolished because of Kenny Ward,
there is something very wrong with
our university system. Fifty
thousand students and fans should
not have to suffer because of one
person's mistake.
The administration should
reconsider. They didn't abolish the
football program when we lost to
Virginia. They wouldn't abolish
the "Band of Champions" if
members play out of key or
continue typically crazy band
antics. It is unfair to everyone that
the mikeman was abolished
because of one bad incident.
The mikeman is for the students
and should be continued by the
students. If the tradition is abol
ished, the students should vote on
it not Dean Boulton, not
Sharon Mitchell, not Dick Crum,
not Major Y, not the cheerleaders,
but the students.
It is unknown who dropped the
ax on mikeman but someone
should take credit and some
changes must be made.
A student vote should be held
on the future of the mikeman
tradition. If students want a
mikeman, I recommend a panel
of about 30 students and 10
university officials be established
to interview students interested in
taking on the job.
jl " y y - " ''
f I - i V - ' i
? ' " f J
: ' " ' $ ;
$ ' ; f 4 v
I 46 V 1 W
' f I
i C: , -h cn A A A i,
4
Ward: Last of a breed?
DTHFile photo
A great tradition such as the
mikeman is too precious to be
abolished overnight. It has been
adding humor and enjoyment to
football Saturdays for decades. If
the game is going badly, the
mikeman serves as a pleasant
break. If things are going well, he
makes a good time even better.
If a great mikeman is chosen,
he can become as much of an
attraction as the game itself. The
tradition must return.
I encourage all readers to voice
their opinion on this delicate
subject. If you don't, there may
never be another mikeman at
UNC again. We probably can't
change the decision this year, but
if there are enough students who
care, the great tradition of the
mikeman could be reestablished at
UNC.
Gene Krcelic, a senior journalism
and drama major from Owatonna,
Minn., was the 1981 mikeman.
urging to preserve card section
To the editor:
Once again, our University has
provided us with the opportunity
to run a card section during the
football games this fall. UNC has
the distinction of being one of five
schools in the country which has
a card section, something we can
be proud of. Writh this in mind,
we, the brothers of Sigma Phi
Epsilon,. would like to make this
year's card section the best ever.
In order for this to happen, we
ask for your help in making the
tradition run smoothly.
The card section has been the
subject of some controversy in the
past, so now is the time to clear
up some misunderstandings. First
of all, the work done to prepare
the card section is handled by this
fraternity. Each brother spends
about four hours a week preparing
the cards for the halftime show.
Another misunderstanding con
cerns the cards themselves. Last
year, the University bought hew
cards for the card section because
the old paper cards had been
damaged by rain and wear. The
new cards are laminated to protect
them from the water. This plastic
coating allows the cards to fly long
distances when they are thrown,
providing us with the problem of
injury resulting from thrown
cards. These cards are fairly heavy
and their edges could cause serious
eye injuries. This is why we ask
people not to throw the cards after
the stunts are finished. We remind
you that the cards are University
property, and if an injury occurs
from throwing these cards, it is a
campus code violation. We would
like to have a card section that is
perfectly safe. Only your cooper
ation can make the cards harmless.
So if your sitting in the card
section this fall, please refrain from
throwing the plastic cards. The five
minutes it takes to do the stunts
add much to the experience of a
Carolina football game for little
effort. If the cards continue to be
thrown, the card section will be
discontinued by the University
regardless of who runs it. Let's
keep alive a Carolina tradition
the card section. We thank you for
your cooperation.
Jimmy Johnson
President, Sigma Phi Epsilon .
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
Black's comments not astute
To the editor:
While reading The Daily Tar Heel recently,
I have been disturbed by the numerous political
articles and editorials which never fail to unfairly
criticize Republican candidates, namely Presi
dent Reagan and Sen. Helms. It's not that I'm
blind; I'm well aware of the DTITs liberal views
and can accept the fact that Reagan and Helms
will get more than their share of liberal attacks.
But these attacks went too far in the article "Jesse
Double standard
To the editor:
In his column "Racism: A ghost of elections
past (DTHf Sept. 6), John Hinton accuses Sen.
Jesse Helms of being racist. This charge is very
serious and should be substantiated by proof,
not just opinions of some of Helms political
opponents. True, Helms was involved in Smith's
1950 Senate campaign, but there is no proof to
the claim that he masterminded the effort. Helms
clearly denied writing any of the racist campaign
material.
Hinton also tries to link the 1950 campaign
with a recent fund-raising letter from state
Republican party chairman David Flaherty.
Flaherty's letter is in no way similar to the
rhetoric of the Smith campaign. It simply points
out the fact that Jesse Jackson registered
thousands of voters who will most assuredly vote
against Reagan and Helms. Flaherty's concern
is justified by the fact that these voters represent
twice President Reagan's victory margin in the
1980 election. The fact that these voters are black
is irrelevent. Flaherty's only concern was that
Jesse Jackson had registered these voters
specifically to vote against the Republican ticket
in November.
Hinton looks at one side of the coin. No one
can deny that Jackson and some of his allies
were openly racist during his primary campaign.
But there is a double standard at work here that
Hinton overlooks. As long as it was Jesse Jackson
registering voters to vote the Democratic ticket
all was fine. However, when Flaherty, Helms,
and others try to register conservative voters to
help keep the Republican ticket in office, cries
of racism abound.
Hinton implies that sleazy racist tactics are
being used to try to keep Reagan and Helms
in office. The Democrats in this campaign are
the ones using the race issue to try to smear
Helms and alienate the voters in this state from
the Republican Party. Hinton's column is but
one example of this tactic. Let's keep race out
of this campaign and focus on the issues.
Joel Houston
Foxcroft Apts.
and Jim gear up for the debates (DTH, Sept.
7)." Even if Merle Black is an associate professor
of political science, I feel that the DTH was out
of line when it quoted him as saying Helms was
"stupid, ignorant and like a senile grandfather."
An associate professor should be able to make
a more profound statement than that. Even in
the midst of a heated political campaign, Helms
deserves more respect than the DTH has given
him.
The elections will tell the story.
Vernon Byrd
W. Cameron Ave.
Shame on you, Jeff
To the editor:
Imagine that the UNC campus has women
who wear larger than B-cup sizes! I can give
the benefit of the doubt to a freshman who, in
his innocent attempt to portray "a normal guy,"
focuses on the male reaction to such an
astonishing (disturbing? frustrating?) fact. But
Jeff Hiday, shame on you! As a senior and as
editor of the DTH, surely you recognized the
sexist content of William Cokas' "Man from
UNCle"comic strip. If you support campus talent
as you claim, why did you allow Cokas to alienate
and perhaps offend a large sector of the student
body in his DTH debut?
Renae Lias
Ehringhaus
More abuse for Hiday
To the editor
In principle, running a cartoon by a UNC
student seems like a good idea, but in the case
of "The Man from UNCle," the DTH should
exercise, a little better judgement. The first
installment of the strip was incredibly offensive
and sexist. Rather than congratulating the paper
for maintaining a "student perspective," as Jeff
Hiday does in his Editor's note on this strip,
he ought to consider whether a comic strip which
idemeans more than half of the students at UNC
can truly represent a "student perspective."
Allan Rubinoff
Northampton Plaza
- TV
2 jr. .a if
x- -j ft . , r di
ft r
r in m
i f
so maw cwwms mm sop ov nm s;pj