Newspapers / The Yancey Journal (Burnsville, … / Jan. 29, 1970, edition 1 / Page 2
Part of The Yancey Journal (Burnsville, 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
ESTABLISHED 1936 I EDWARD A. YUZIUK - EDITOR & PUBLISHER I CAROLYN R. YUZIUK - ASSOCIATE EDITOR I ARCHIE BALLEW - PHOTOGRAPHER & PRESSMAN I JERRY McGUIRE - ADVERTISING MANAGER I MBS PATSY BRIGGS - OFFICE MANAGER | PUBLEHED EVERY THURSDAY BY I YANCEY PUBLISHING COMPANY I SECOND CLASS POSTAGE PAID AT BURNS VILLE.N.C. I THURSDAY, JANUARY 29, 1970 NUMBER FIVE SUBSCRIPTION RATES $3.00/YEAR OUT OF COUNTY $5.00/ YEAR SENATOR ' rm \ k SAM ERVIN 'jftjsA. * SAYS * gfppWfc WASHINGTQN-Confronted with a new national mood and changing priorities, the President's State of the Union Address eloquently presented the challenges of the new de cade. The Address, however, did not blueprint proposed solutions to our problems. The Chief Executive said he would propose his remedies in a dozen or more special mes sages to the Congress later in the session. There was much common ground between the senti ments of the President and the Nation on what the prodens are. With respect to foreign policy, he called for an end to the Vietnam War through a just peace. He annnmwt also that his foreign policy would deal with the realities of a world that has changed much in the last twenty-five yrs. and said the time has come for us to "reduce our involve ment and our presence in other nations' affairs." In essence, what the President appeared to be saying was that we have strained our economy and our resources in trying to act as the world's policeman, an opinion which I have expressed many times during the last two decades. The two other key issues mentioned by the President inflation and crime control certainly strike a responsiie note in the minds of Americans. lam gratified that the President announced that he would present a balanced bud get for fiscal 1971. He correctly blamed deficit Federal spending which has occurred in many prior years as the cause of today's rising prices. In calling for a broad attak on crime, the President was emphasizing anew what most Americans have urged for some time. It should be renum bered, however, that neither of these most pressing do rus tic problems has yet been responsive to simple rhetoric.. Any relief in these areas will require the cooperative ef forts of our entire governmental structure. Congress and the Executive branch must work together to control Fede ral spending and inflation. Both of these branches of the Government sorely need the cooperation of the Juducial branch to cope with crirre. The President laudably gave environmental pollutioi control a priority status in the Administration's catalog of programs. Unquestionably, there is much need to contin ue the major programs enacted by the Congress in this area in recent years. There was some frictionßetwe^iCon- gress and the Administration at the last session when Con gress raised the budget request for anti-pollution control. It remains to be seen just how the President will seek to implement existing Federal efforts to purify the air we breathe and the water we drink. While the President advocated new solutions for most of the nation's ills, and should be commended for so do his message shed no light on one of the most troublerome problems oflhis hour - - the crisis of the public schools and what we could and should do to improve that situation. It would have been laudable if the President had urged that ■ we take a realistic approach to this problem also. Indeed, it wouM be refreshing if the nation embarked upon a new policy which emphasized education as the prime function of the public schools. How About A Moritorium? How about b morttorium asking the Communists to quit killing, maiming and tortur - ing in Vietnam ? 0* are the leftists who organize moratorfc under the impression that when Communists kill, maim and torture it doesn't hurt —or it doesn't make any difference? -Indianapolis (Ind.) Star strSLiglit By Tom Anderson MR. AGNEW IS CORRECT Under the so-called “fairness doctrine” of the FCC, broadcasters are supposed to give “equal time” to the “other side” on controversial ques tions. Mr. Agnew says he believes both sides have a right to be heard. But the main reason broad casting is so one-sided is not because of Front lev and Pinkley, but because of the, govern ment itself. Big Brother, through the Federal Communications Commission’s “fairness doc trine,” has decreed that' the “other side” must be given equal time to present its side of con troversial subjects. What’s controversial? It’s what FCC says is. And the FCC is loaded with “Liberals.” In the past, anything which was against the New Frontier and Great Society “line” was “controversial.” In other words, So cialism is not controversial, but anti-Socialism is. Stations which have an over-balance of anti- Socialist programs are subject not only to giving equal time, but are subject to losing their license. CBS and NBC are the worst. The compari son between them reminds me of the time the Earl of Sandwich (who invented the sandwich) was challenged by backbencher John Wilkes in the English Parliament. Sandwich was kind of a ladies’ man, but he was tough in debate and told Wilkes that he was a no good So-and-So and that he’d surely die on the gallows or of a dread disease. Wilkes replied: “That depends, my lord, whether I embrace your principles or your mistress.” Being able to switch channels and get Frank McGee or Howard K. Smith instead of Walter Cronkite is like getting shipwrecked on a desert island with your own wife. Last year the FBI and other investigators, do ing work for the House Agriculture Appropria tions Subcommittee chaired by Rep. Jamie Whitten of Mississippi, delved into the produc tion of CBS’s “documentary” mislabeled “Hun ger in America.” Investigators discovered that SFSFS If the feds are going to dictate the detattfcdC operation of local sjhool systems, it is nothing less than fair for all 50 of the consenting states to pay the bill. There is absolutely no doubt now that the high and mighty Supreme Court of this “Land” —the self same court that ignored the uncon stitutional law permitting the Justice and HEW Departments to persecute the citizens of se lected states with regulations that do not apply to people in the majority of the states, and who in fact aided and abetted the persecution with its own rulings—this high court will never pcimit the browbeaten states to help their downtrodden people with appropriations of extra local funds. In short, the Supreme Court of the United States of America—the 1960’s version face lifted—will never allow Mississippi, Alabama nor Georgia (nor any of the select states where the people no longer are free to guide the edu cation of their children) to appropriate funds for private schools. Every lawmaker, be he a first-term state legislator from the sticks or a national politician, or demagogue, should be able to sec that vc:se boldly inscribed in the handwriting on the wall. (If there is one who doesn't see it, please pass this on to him so he can take it from a scribbler who sees it plain as day.) If there arc any and executives in any of these states worth the salt in their daily expense allowance, there is one thing left that they surely can do; that is to repeal every state law that earmarks any taxes whatsoever for "public" education. Since the Federal Government insists on directing the educational processes in every detail in these states . . . then let the federal government pay for said education. This will accomplish two just results: I) it will give some tax relief to local citizens (all much of the film was deliberate distortion. In one dramatic scene fn she movie, a CBS com mentator solemnly stated that a baby he was looking at had just died of starvation. But the doctor who had pronounced the baby dead told House Investigators that the baby was not even undernourished and had died from other causes. Agnew has done well. But that’s not enough. We should demand a congressional investiga tion of the news media—print and air—of this country, because sinister monopolists and gov ernment, are destroying our right-to-the-truth. They own the shoe store and are buying all the shoes to fit themselves. The guts of the issue is that the networks have too much power. They have a government-sanctioned monopolistic stranglehold on the people’s air-w? es. The an swer to that is simple: kill the networks. Return television news production and programming to the independent stations. Thus, the diversity of opinion and the competition of the free market would take over. Let’s beseech Congress to pass an airwaves anti-monopoly law to prohibit any corporation, individual or group from owning more than one station and also to prohibit any station from affiliating with any group of sta tions, newspaper or wire service, s nd to pro hibit joint ownership of newspape.and radio or TV stations. Anti-monopoly statutes should bar joint ownership of radio or TV or newspapers in the same city. Newspaper monopolies should also be broken up. In a skin doctor’s office, a woman waiting for her ultra-violet treatment kept staring at the peculiar marking on the face of another woman. “You been x-rayed?” she asked. “No’m, I been ultra-violated!” The American people have been ultra violated by the networks.—American Way Features BILL KENNEDY? & LET THE FED'S STATES PAY THE TAB colors, please) so that they may more nearly afford the private schools" they see as the only acceptable solution; and 2) it will let the ma jority of the people and states, who sat quietly by to let six states be violated, share heavily in the expense of keeping federal schools open in the states where privacy was violated. They deserve every dollar it costs them, as they continue to sit by and await their turn. The vast majority of whites and blacks, separately and in unison, given an honest free dom of choice have plainly indicated that they prefer to have their children attend schools where most of the students and teachers are of their own race. This can be confirmed by anyone who wants to take the trouble to seek the truth, and is further indicated *by the de mands of blacks in integrated schools who now want separate dorms and studies departments. Beyond all that, it is a common sense choice. And those who do not see it that way are Lee to “mix” at will. This experiment in manipulation of the lives of people by an all-powerful federal authority is a shame and disgrace resting on the collec tive heads of an entire society in a so-called free nation. There has been much talk lately about the “sins of society;” this is one case where there is little doubt that our society as a whole is guilty, for only the society can do something about it. When the time comes when this same edict of absolute balance in race mixing is applied to the Washington, D. C. metropolitan area, and to city school systems in New York, Chicago, Detroit, Los Angeles, Cleveland and elsewhere, there are sure to be revolts by both black and white races. But it will be too late, more likely; the federal police force will already have set its pattern in the Deep South.—American Way Features #>
The Yancey Journal (Burnsville, N.C.)
Standardized title groups preceding, succeeding, and alternate titles together.
Jan. 29, 1970, edition 1
2
Click "Submit" to request a review of this page. NCDHC staff will check .
0 / 75