Newspapers / Daily Tar Heel (Chapel … / April 8, 1987, edition 1 / Page 8
Part of Daily Tar Heel (Chapel Hill, N.C.) / About this page
This page has errors
The date, title, or page description is wrong
This page has harmful content
This page contains sensitive or offensive material
8The Daily Tar Heel Wednesday, April 8, 1987 Star HM 95 year of editorial freedom Jil l. GliRBl-R, VMtor Amy Hamilton, Managing vMu,r Sally Pharsall, NtM j VMtor JliAN LUTLS. University VMtor DONN A LLINWANI). A7jc um National llditor J I.ANNli: FARIS. C,7 J AM IIS SUROWILCKI, VMtor Fr.lJSA NLURINCU-R. Business VMtor JlILUi BRASWLLL, f eatures VMtor ll.l.lZAHLTH El.LLN, Am VMtor CHARLOTTE CANNON, Photography VMtor KATHY PliTKRS, Omnibus VMtor Readers' Foiroinni Editorials One giant step backward Occasionally a politician says some thing so idiotic that one sits bolt upright in an 8 o'clock class, staring in disbelief at the newspaper. And when the politician in question is a possible presidential candidate, one remains wide awake for the rest of the lecture. Rep. Jack Kemp of New York announced his bid for the Republican presidential nomination on Monday in Washington and ilew to New Hamp shire, Boston and Buffalo, N.Y., to speak to supporters. Kemp took a strong conservative stand on Strategic Defense Initiative, vowing to "research, test, develop and deploy in our lifetime a defense of the American people and the people of our allies." This is familiar Reagan rhetoric. But Kemp went on to compare his quest for a Star Wars program to President Kennedy's quest for a successful manned lunar expedition. Kemp said, i believe as important as it was to go to the moon, and put a man on the moon by the end of the '60s, 1 think it is even more important to defend our country." This comparison is completely off base. Kennedy's drive to put a man on the moon is a glorious example of what mankind can accomplish, a truly ground-breaking achievement that served to inspire and enlighten. Man's frontiers were broadened, and for a few brilliant moments he saw beyond his own weary world to the limitless possibilities ahead. People wept in front of their televisions out of hope. SDI should make people cry from despair. The program is not an effort to broaden America's horizons, but to narrow them. Putting up a fence of radar and lasers erects yet another boundary instead of breaking them down, as the lunar expedition did. Kemp said, "There are no limits to our future if we don't put limits on our people." Star Wars is nothing but a great big limit to human cooperation, a wall or a moat between America arid the Soviets, hanging up there between man and the moon he once reached out to touch. Kemp vows to fund SDI because "We defend our country against aircraft . . . against tanks . . . against submarine. There is no defense against a ballistic missile threat or attack." There is no defense against the AIDS virus, cancer or the homeless and poor in America, and yet Kemp says nothing about funding programs as massive as SDI to eliminate these more immediate and tangible threats. Neil Armstrong took "one small step for man, one giant step for mankind" forward in the name of human progress. Jack Kemp is taking a giant step backward. B.McC. A gift is a gift is a gift A recent law will make receiving a Morehead scholarship like winning a car on "The Price is Right." It's supposed to be a gift, but it's not really yours until you hand over a check for some sort of mysteriofcs acquisition tax. The 1986 Federal Tax Reform Act says that scholarships can remain tax free only if they are used for tuition, fees and course-related expenses. Room, board, living expenses which used to be exempt are now taxable. Since the Morehead scholar ship provides for all expenses, whether course-related or not, the part that goes to living expenses and summer programs is taxable. The tax will translate to an average of $500 per year for each scholar. Scholarships are awarded for two reasons: to ease financial burdens or to recognize achievement. The More head foundation places merit over financial need in setting its criterion for choosing recipients and is often criticized for it. But the scholarship is private. It was established by John Motley Morehead 111, not the federal government or the state of North Carolina. Taxation will detract from the financial freedom that Morehead scholars enjoy, impeding upon the foundation's reward for excellence. For 42 years, the Morehead foun dation has selected students from across the country who have met its high standards of academic superiority and leadership. The scholarship carries great prestige for its recipients and the University, but more importantly, it encourages necessary diversity among the student body. The program brings in top students who might have chosen other schools without it. A piece of legislation that will make UNC less attractive to outstanding students will lower student academic standards overall. Efforts to bolster the nation's faltering economy through tax reform should not affect an educational mainstay that does not tlraw out of the federal purse. Regardless of how its recipients are chosen, a private scholarship is a personal gift and should be granted sanctity from arbitrarily determined tax laws. J.G. The Daily Tar Heel Kditorial Writers: Chris Chapman, Laurie Duncan, James Farrer, Michael Krass and Brian McCuskey. Editorial Assistants: Julia Coon and Sharon Kebschull. Assistant Managing Editors: Stephanie Beard and Deirdre Fallon. News: Holly Baker, Jeanna Baxter, Matt Bivens, Eric Bradley, Tom Camp, Paul Cory, Meg Craddock, Phil Craig, Ron Crawford, Toni Creech, Kimberly Edens, Mark Folk, Kristen Gardner, Maria Haren, Lindsay Hayes, Kelly Johnsor, Michael Jordan, Helen Jones, Sharon Kebschull, Robert Keefe, Jennifer Klump, Hunter Lambeth, Laura Lance, Barbara Linn, Brian Long, Mitra Lotfi, Tom McCuiston, Leigh Ann McDonald, Justin McGuire, Dan Morrison, Lee Ann Necessary, Rebecca Nesbit, Susan 1 Odenkirchen, Mary Paradeses, Grant Parsons, Laura Pearlman, Becky Riddick, Debbie Rzasa, Andrea Shaw, Amy Stock, Sherrie Thomas, Clay Thorp, Neil Watson, Nicki Weisensee and Bill Yardley. Jo Fleischer, assistant university editor.. Ruth Davis and Michael Jordan, wire editors. Sports: Bob Young and Patton McDowell, assistant sports editors. Scott Fowler, Scott Greig, Laura Grimmer, Dave Hall, Andy Podolsky, Jill Shaw, Chris Spencer and Langston Wertz. Features: Jessica Brooks, Eric Chilton, Hannah Drum, Carole Ferguson, Jennifer Frost, Melissa Furr, Ronnie Gontram, Laura Jenkins, Jeanie Mamo, Corin Ortlam, Lynn Phillips, Anne Raugh and Kathy Wilson. Arts: James Burrus, Scott Cowen, Andrew Edmonson, David Hester, Marty Michaels, Beth Rhea, Kelly Rhodes, Alston Russell and Rob Sherman. Photography: Charles Carriere, Tony Deifell and Julie Stovall. Copy Editors: Karen Bell, Laurie Duncan, Lisa Lorentz, Toby Moore, Belinda Morris, Sherri Murray, Karen Smiley, Marielle Stachura, Rachel Stiffler and Kaarin Tisue. Cartoonists: Jell Christian, Adam Cohen, Bill Cokas, Greg Humphreys and Trip Park. Campus Calendar: Mindelle Rosenberg and David Starnes. Business and Advertising: Anne Fulcher, general manager; Patricia Benson, advertising director; Mary Pearse, advertising coordinator, Angela Ostwalt, business manager; Sheila Baker, bookkeeper; Genevieve Halkett and Lisa Hawley, administrative assistants; Ruth Anderson, Michael Benfield, Jennifer Garden, Ashley Hinton, Kellie McElhaney, Chrissy Mennitt, Anne Raymer, Julie Settle, Peggy Smith, Kent Sutton, Amanda Tilley and Ashley Waters advertising representatives: Tammy Norris, Angie Peele, Stephanie Chesson, classified advertising representatives; and Mary Brown, secretary. Distribution Tucker Stevens, manager; Stephanie Chesson, assistant. Delivery Tom High, manager; Dale Phillips, assistant. Production: Bill Leslie and Stacy Wynn. Rita Galloway and Lisa Poole, production assistants. Time to bust the Marriott trust OF ne afternoon, a couple of my friends and 1 were eating (if you can call that) downstairs in the Lenoir Commons. As it often does, our conversa tion turned toward the poor quality of the school food. But this discussion was different from most of our other ones, because somebody actually had something construc tive to sav. "You know," my friend Tom said, around a mouthful of cold stringy fries from the anything but quick "H.B. Quicks," "What this school really needs is two food services." Needless to say, we were all shocked. A problem that has plagued college students since the dawn of time had been solved by a simple freshman nicknamed "Roach." Out of the mouths of babes. With this casual, offhand statement, my friend may have changed the future of college life. Ladies and Gentlemen: College Food Does Not Have To Be Bad! No more brown sugar water pretending to be iced tea! No more tables buried under six feet of garbage! No more charging for a single pat of butter! Adequate seating! Recognizable dishes! Reasonable Prices! Students of the world, unite! To be fair to Marriott, whom I understand is an improvement over previous services, they do a good job under the circumstances. Without competition, they have little incentive to go out of their way for us, and they do all put on cute hats and banners every holiday to cheer us up. Think about it. With two food services on campus, using . the same meal card, students would have a choice of where to eat. Some people might argue that we have a choice already, between Franklin Street businesses and the school service. But even though it is often cheaper and more pleasant Matt Bivens Staff Writer to eat in Chapel Hill, there are days when you just don't have the time or inclination to walk a mile or two for a good meal. Usually, the average student has to settle for the convenience of Lenoir or Chase. With two food services competing for the same meal card, and enjoying the conven ience of a central location, all sorts of benefits would come to the students. Food prices would go down (looking at Lenoir, there's no where else to go but down), and the quality and atmosphere of the service would improve. Imaprne, a fixin's bar that doesn't look like an aerial view of the Antietam battleground. Expanding on my friend's idea, 1 propose that we do one or more of the following: 1 ) Give the downstairs of Lenoir, the Commons, to another food service. 2) Give Chase Hall to another dining service. 3) Build a new hall for another dining service. The last suggestion is probably the most unlikely, as it would be expensive, and difficult to find an area that is convenient to students. But donating either the Com mons or Chase to a new food service should be relatively easy, and the benefits would be great. Of course, the Marriott Corp. might be a little irate. But if they have any sporting blood or sense of fair play, they should rise to the occasion like true American capital ists. If not, I'm certain two small food services looking for credibility would be willing to take on the job. Of course, if you let them, both of the services might cooperate so that neither would have to suffer. Therefore, 1 think the students should propose some kind of incentives to the food services for them to compete. For example, the food service that serves more students in a month, or is rated the highest in periodic contests for quality, will get special prizes cash, reputation, awards to hang on the wall and all that. The different food services could also be kept from cooperating by giving them different facilities. For example, if one food service doesn't have a pizza oven and the other does, it will have to compete, as the have-nots try to keep up. Obviously, this is a very simple view of the situation. I don't claim to be an expert on food service, and I haven't consulted with Julia Child or anything. But the idea of two food services seems like a very plausible one. Not only would the students benefit, but so woold the competing food service. If we lose Marriott, neither the school or the corporation will be hurt. So if anyone sees any technical problems or anything else wrong with my proposal, talk to my friend, Tom. But first, go to Lenoir and wait 20 minutes for someone to ladle a hamburger out of a vat of grease, slap some brown lettuce on it and then pay $2 for it. Matt Bivens is a freshman journalism and political science major from Olney, Md. Disease not funny To the editor: I have noticed that several DTH articles during the past year, and a recent letter to the editor, contained the word "schizophrenic" in its unfortu nate, but common, idiomatic sense ("Have a nude day," April 3). 1 quote the letter, "If you wear clothes but no shoes, you support the CGLA. And if you wear shoes and clothes, you're just plain schizophrenic." All of your writers and readers (especially those who are attempting to show support for a group they consider to be persecuted), should be aware that schizophrenia is a medical term denoting a mental illness that can inflict great suffering on those who have it. It is sad and shocking that many in our society casually use such med ical terms and their vulgar couterparts (e.g., "crazy") to ridicule and denigrate others usually those who are fortunate enough not to be mentally ill. This is both inaccurate and cruel, and is on the same moral plane as making a joke out of any disability that the speaker does not have. I can remember when, as a child, I learned not to use the word "retarded" to amuse or insult my friends. This elemen tary lesson in charity and humility is one which many college students have yet to grasp. i LISA JACOBS Graduate Classics Student Health run well To the editor: In reference to Lori Taylor's letter concerning Student Health Service ("Student Health really hurts," March 31): perhaps the doctors, nurses and receptionists there are human. In the week before spring break, many, many students had viral infections and tried to cram in an appoint ment. I don't know what she told the receptionist, though her situation was obviously distressing. I wonder if she told the receptionist that she needed to be seen as soon as possible, or immediately. I was able to get a same-day appointment OH ferlAlf or The etABAS5Y I'D THAT... QjH DlOuATE and 1 " " i wn JL AUVibuG-w we HAVE HAP SECOflrrY BRtrVHe TN -THE fftST . AS THE5E B0fT A ONfcS - - fir. tL J im-,1 mM iW,.,IUIII "."'mil. tjl during that week, and I'm willing to bet that other stu dents were, too. Although her situation was bad, there was no reason to be spiteful or nasty. The people who work at Student Health are not mind-readers. They may not be perfect, but I, for one, have yet to meet a perfect person. I do know that they generally do a good job. I also know that they do try to give good service. In clinics 1, 2, and 3 of Student Health Service, there are nine physicians and three nurse practioners. At this University, there are over 22,000 students who are eligible for Student Health care. Think about the numbers for yourself. I'd say that the people, the doctors, nurses and reception ists of Student Health, are doing a fine job of student care. JENNIFER KILBORN Junior Education Art center lacks tact To the editor: 1 was truly shocked by the display of a painting in Hanes Art Center. The painting por trays an almost life-sized man naked from the waist down and obviously sexually aroused. It is not the content of the paint ing which is disturbing, because I realize that art is whatever the artist wishes it to be, but rather the location of the display. The painting is located on the wall directly opposite several main entry doors for everyone enter ing to see. Not only is the location of the painting bad, but the timing was also. The uncensored painting was in full display for all the parents to see over Parent's Weekend. What an embarrassment to the Univer sity, especially since many families were coming to UNC for the very first time! Furth ermore, the induction cerem ony for Phi Beta Sigma, a freshmen honor society, was held in the room next to the painting. I'm sure that families, especially those with young children, did not think well of this tasteless act. 1 hope that the committee in charge of the art display at Hanes Art Center will learn from its mistakes and, in the future, avoid such acts which are degrading to the University. JOHN OUDERKIRK Freshman Biology Psychology Buffett review botched up To the editor: Why did someone who obviously knew so little about Jimmy Buffett review his recent concert ("Buffett throws party in Dean Dome," April 6)? The review by Rob Sherman was not so bad but it showed a complete mix-up or lack of knowledge concerning Jimmy Buffett and the Coral Reefer Band. The first and most blat ant mistake is the fact that "Floridays" (1986) is off Buf fer's latest album, not "Last Mango in Paris," (1985). Next, as a loyal parrothead (notice I did not say "Buffett-head" as Sherman did), I have always been under the impression that Buffett considers himself a native of Alabama, not Mon tana. Sherman even misnamed one of Buffett's songs. He called "Life is Just a Tireswing" somethig totally different, "Life is Just too Tiresome." Please. He also said Buffett main tained a loyal following only because of his older material. 1 know this to be untrue because 1, for one, enjoy listen ing to such tunes as "Creola" and "I Love the Now" off of the "Floridays" album. But of course Sherman had never heard of that one, even though the title was plastered all over half of the t-shirts being sold at Friday's concert. This letter is not meant to offend Sherman, but only to say that some information in his review was wrong. Maybe more attention should have been paid to Buffett and his music instead of comparing him so much to The Grateful Dead. LYNNE MEDLIN Junior Psycology Professors should educate, not annihilate To the editor: After reading Dr. Paul Brandes' column ("UNC: the old mediocrity shoppe," March 25), I am grateful and disturbed. I am grateful that he almost said what needs to be said at this university. It is well-known that UNC is a research university and that this is its first priority. Education ranks second (third, if you count faculty pay raises), and this is more than apparent from some of the instructors here. What Brandes has pointed out is not just the mediocrity of instruction but the corruption of administrative "policy" on excellence. Superiority of UNC courses, according to South Building, is contingent upon the number of students an instructor is failing. And the more students failed, the merrier. That the faculty receives praise for this practice not to mention bonuses is outrageous. What has happened to learning? I admit that students are concerned with grades, but it should be a part of the instructor's job to remind us that learning is at least as important as a grade. 1 truly hate to think that the money I am earning to attend this university pays for an "educ ion" that consists merely of arbitrarily rded grades. 1 understand that somewhere along the way some students are going to flunk some courses; I am not against flunking, per se. Nor am I against raising the standard of excellence at this or any other learning institution if it benefits that institution and its students. What I oppose are administra tive policies that give instructors medals of honor for failing students regardless of the quality of instruction, and instructors who determine borderline grades based on the temptation of bonuses. "Suffice it to say that, although I have not had Brandes as an instructor, perhaps he has taught me more in ten minutes than I have learned thus far at Carolina. JENNIFER L. PEGRAM Junior Psychology
Daily Tar Heel (Chapel Hill, N.C.)
Standardized title groups preceding, succeeding, and alternate titles together.
April 8, 1987, edition 1
8
Click "Submit" to request a review of this page. NCDHC staff will check .
0 / 75