100%

Scanned image of the page. Keyboard directions: use + to zoom in, - to zoom out, arrow keys to pan inside the viewer.

Page Options

Download this Issue

Share

Something wrong?

Something wrong with this page? Report problem.

Rights / Permissions

This collection, digitized in collaboration with the Michigan Daily and the Board for Student Publications, contains materials that are protected by copyright law. Access to these materials is provided for non-profit educational and research purposes. If you use an item from this collection, it is your responsibility to consider the work's copyright status and obtain any required permission.

February 13, 1987 - Image 4

Resource type:
Text
Publication:
The Michigan Daily, 1987-02-13

Disclaimer: Computer generated plain text may have errors. Read more about this.

4

OPINION
Friday, February 13, 1987

Page 4

The Michigan Daily

. . ......... ........... ...... - - ---- -----

E a mt nhe chigan
Edited and managed by'students at The University of Michigan

LETTERS:
Egg-throwers:

4

-0

it worked!

Vol. XCVII, No.96

420 Maynard St.
Ann Arbor, MI 48109

Unsigned editorials represent a majority of the Daily's Editorial Board
All other cartoons, signed articles, and letters do not necessarily represent the opinion of the Daily.
Coleman and Schleicher

A NN ARBOR CITY COUNCIL
primaries tend not to attract high
voter turnouts. This is unfortunate
because this year's first and fourth
ward primaries will probably have
an equal or greater impact on the
makeup of the council than April's
general election.
In both the first and the fourth
wards, one party dominates year
after year. The winners of the
primaries in these two wards are
likely to win council seats.3
In the first ward Democratic
primary two candidates are vieing'
for the nomination. Ann Marie
Coleman, Co-Director of Guild
House Campus Ministry, and Bob
Elton, a General Motors designer,
are two qualified and energetic
candidates.
Coleman's campaign is largely
focussed on her belief that Ann
Arbor needs to commit itself to
providing human services for the
needy. This is a particularly vital
need in light of the budget cuts
which the Reagan administration
has made in welfare programs.
Coleman would also like to see
more University-community dis-
cussion and cooperation.
On the development issue,
Coleman believes that local neigh-
borhoods deserve input into the
changes in their surroundings. She
sees a need to bring the neigh-
borhoods into the planning process
earlier. She comes across as an
excellent listener who will take the
views of her constituents very
seriously.
On student housing Coleman
would like to encourage the Uni-
versity to build more student.
housing. She says that she would
consider rent control and that the
housing code needs to be made
stronger.
Coleman is strongly in favor of
the affordable housing referendum
on April's ballot.
Coleman's opponent, Bob
Elton, is very well informed on
issues of housing and develop-
ment. He was a leader in the fight
to stop the University Center mall
near North Campus.
Elton has put forth creative ideas
to solve the off-campus housing
crunch. He wants to convert areas
zoned for commerial use to resi-
dential use. He supports encourag-
ing the "shadow market" for

housing which involves making it
easier for people to take in
roomers. He also is strongly in
favor of subsidies to landlords who
keep their their rents low.
Overall, however, Coleman is
the stronger candidate because of
her ties to students as a campus
minister and her commitment to
cooperation between the University
and the community. While her
emphasis on more University-built
student housing may be less of an
immediate solution than those
advocated by Elton, it is the most
effective approach in the long term.
Since a Republican usually wins
in the fourth ward, its primary race
is equally important as the first
ward's.
Jerry Schleicher, an optometrist
faces Jim Cameron, a lawyer, for
the Republican nomination.
Schleicher's priorities are crime
control, controlling development,
improving downtown, and work-
ing with the University.
Schleicher sees the housing
crunch as a problem but is vague
about solutions. He says that much
of the problem is the University's
responsibilty and that he opposed
the tearing down of the University
Terrace. Perhaps most notably
Schleicher supports better enforce-
ment of the city's rental housing
making him unique among
Republicans. He{says that he is
concerned about the problems of
students in Ann Arbor and is
receptive to involving them in city
politics.
Cameron is extremely vague on
the housing crunch which students
face. His only suggestion is that
the University should realize that
the problems exist. He doesn't see
any role for the city to play in what
has become a crisis.
Cameron also is against improv-
ing the housing code which he says
creates "unrealistic" standards for
landlords.
While neither Cameron or
Schleicher is particularly attractive
as a candidate, Schleicher is more
supportive of student interests.
Improving the housing code is long
overdue and Cameron's opposition
to this is irresponsible.
Voters should support A nn
Marie Coleman and Jerry
Schleicher in the first and fourth
ward primaries.

To The Daily:
As a participator in the rally
against Edwin Meese, et al.
last week, I feel pressed to
respond to your misguided
editorial of February 9th -
"Don't Egg Him On."
First of all, I was one of the
ones who threw eggs.
Did we really "prevent" you
from making your point? Is
that why you were making
speeches to each other on the
steps of the Law Library while
any people of real significance
to the issues that night -
Meese, Ford, the various media
- were a block and a half
away, entering the Art
Museum, unmolested? A lot
of good that does.,
The law students initially
asked for a "silent vigil." One
of the great lessons the
establishment learned in the
'60s is that the best way to
deal with passive resistance is
to ignore it. That means you
get all the freedom of speech
you want, and they can still
walk right by you. Don't tell
me that it was meant to be a
show of strength. A crowd of
500 eunuchs is still just that
- abunch of eunuchs.
Impotent.
Basically, I'm beginning to
think you're just jealous: we
got our message across, to the
media, and you failed. Because
you were too afraid to take
decisive action. Because you
were worried about your
present actions' endangering
future business endeavors. And
most of all, because you've
forgotten - compromise is
one tool among many, and not
a goal in itself. Next time,
you've got a message for Mr.
Meese, you can write it on one
of our eggs - it might reach
him that way.
-Anonymous
February 11

Threw snow
To The Daily:
I was puzzled and dismayed
by the editorial concerning the
Meese rally entitled "Don't egg
him on." The writer's prin-
cipal objection to the throwing
of eggs and snowballs was that
it prevented the demonstrators
from conveying their message.
I believe that s/he is just
wrong about this. First of all,
what exaclty was the message
trying to be conveyed? The
contents of the speeches pre-
sented during the initial part of
the rally? Protests just aren't
the appropriate vehicle for the
dissemination of large amounts
of information. Protests are
primarily visual. Their value
lies in presenting an image to
the media and thus to the
nation at large, and not in
providng a detailed socio-
political critique of the Meese
agenda. Of course the media
picked up on the violence, but
far from "making people laugh
at the demonstrators," their
remarks were more addressed to
the discontent expressed by the
disorderly protest-just disorder.
Even non-violent civil diso-
bedience is disorderly in brea-
ing the law-and therein lies its
effectiveness. If the protest had
gone smoothly with no
incident whatsoever the media
would have barely acknow-
ledged its existence. Thus or-
ganizers of the "silent vigil"
would have felt comforted in
the exercie of their gith to free
speech while in actuality
having accomplished nothing.
Such a position is narrow
sighted and hypocritical. Who
were the real political dupes at
the rally -the egg-throwers or
the people content with
politely listening to speeches?.
I'm glad I threw snow that day.
Marcus Eli Kalderon
February 12

It's justified
To the Daily:
I am responding to the
editorials concerning the
"egging" of dignitaries that
occurred last Wednesday. I
detest being called "leftist". It
was my good friend that pelted
an SS man with an egg. It was
a splendid shot.
We will not behave in an
orderly British fashion. For
those that think a peaceful
protest is sufficient, I pity you.
To believe in such high ideals
is swell, but to be too much of
a whimp to stand behind them,
life and limb, makes me sick.
Mr. Byrd, you have
mentioned that you support
"the right for people to protest
in order to bring about
change." For this I thank you,
however, protests do not pre-
cede change, conflict precedes
change. This is the nineties.
You are correct, we support
disarmament, violently. We are
tired of directionless liberals.
We are tired of pampered
communists. Please try to
understand.
To Mr. Fetterman, you are
precisely right, we are the
future "businessman, teachers,
administrators, artists, engi-
neers, doctors, lawyers, and
parents." And it is for this
reason we must show the
aristocratic right that it is our
world now. We shall be
running it. We are not looking
at the past British precedents,
but instead to the American
future. Stalin is dead now. We
don't have to listen to your
racist, elitist garbage. We are
responsible.
And in addressing Mr.
Krause:
You seem to be immersed
in a black and white reality.
We are not comparable to Nazi
Germany. Relativity. The
Nazi's ran the show, we are but
a minority. You must look at
the relative strength of insti-
tutions and ideas in relation to
others. Keep in mind, we are
not liberals, we do not believe
in equality of opinion sharing
because it does not exist. I
personally have thrown away
thousands of Michigan
Reviews. But do you know
why? Because I cannot afford to
compete in this "open"~ free
information society. Gerald
Ford will not support me like
he financially supports that
racist mommas-boy rag, the
Michigan Review.
I must again stress that we
are not leftists. Our radicalism
comes not from some rich
German ideologue, but instead
from the back alleys of Ireland,
Israel, Arizona, New Hamp-
shire, & downriver Detroit. We
all excel academically. We all
love Martin Luther King, but
we must not forget Malcom X.
We attended the Meese rally in

Detroit (by the way, we were
the only "intellectuals" that left
Ann Arbor for the cause). It
consisted of a bunch of weak
liberals with signs. Meese
came and left through the back
way. It did not make the news.
It was peaceful. It did not exist.
We believe in the right to
assemble. We believe the Klan
should be allowed to march,
publically. They then should
be shot, publically. Those that
infringe on the rights of others
should not be entitled to re-
spect in any matter, Mr.
Meese. We don't hate rich
people. We don't hate Led
Zeppelin. We don't hate sports.

Not justfied
To The Daily:
There has been a lot of heated4
argument lately about Ed
Meese, Jerry Ford, and the
throwing of eggs. It is pro-
bably safe to say that most of
the people who attended last
week's rally against Meese's
policies knew nothing about
the egging incident until they
picked up their Daily the next
morning. In fact, as it is
revealed now, the egg throwingl
never occurred in the way the
Daily vividly described it.
President Ford was not covered
with eggs as he walked to
dinner that night; he was not
even hit.
While we find it absolutely
impossible to endorse the
throwing of eggs at former
President Ford or even Ed
Meese, we do believe that was
a relatively isolated incident at
the rally that has been distorted
into a major confrontation
between good and evil, with
the Daily unwilling to look
behind the most sensational as -
pects of the incident. What
happened was simply that a
few hundred people who
strongly disagree with Meese
held a peaceful demonstration
to register their dissent against
the Attorney General's policies.
One does not blame an entire
congregation when a thought-
less person yells out during a
moment of silence at a
memorial service. Likewise,
one should not ignore te
views of many concernei4
citizens just because one dr
two of them violated the spirit
of a peaceful and dignified
show of opposition to Meese:
The desire to hold Attorney
General Meese political'
accountable for his views s
the reason for the rally. M
can believe whatever he wants,
but he cannot make those
views the law of the land
without engaging in th'e
proverbial political tug-of-wa.
The people who marchexd
against Meese wanted to deliv4r
one simple message to tte
Attorney General: The
majority of the Americai
people find his policies to be
regressive and offensive. We
will not go back to a society
where only upper-middle cla$s
white males have a say in the
workings of the government.
It is amazing how Meese hs
managed to ignore this
message after it has been
repeated many times over. The
message has been delivered Co
him by members of Congress
and leading citizens throughou#
the country. Many peope
undoubtedly would be happy to
invite Edwin Meese into their
parlor and offer him their
hospitality in order to get him
to listen to this message. But
Meese refuses to listen. When
almost half of the United
States Senate hesitated to
confirm an appointee whom
Meese had recommended for a
federal judgeship, President

Reagan (Meese's boss) referred
to these distinguished senators
as a "lynch mob of
opposition." If this is the
response that the people who
oppose Meese's views are
going to get, then there will be
many more demonstrations like
the one held last week. We
will continue to be as polite as
we possible can be, but we
refuse to have our views
ignored.
The rally against Ed Meese
was an important symbol of
opposition to the Justice
Department's frequent attempts
to roll back history in order to
serve an agenda that is often at
odds with that of the American

Friends eat meals together

To The Daily:
Your recent article on the
Couzens racist flier incident
("Racist Flier Sparks Forum at
Couzens," Daily 2/2/87)
sparked memories of my UM
days in the Markley dormitory.
I am particularly reacting to
these students' opinions that
Black students sitting together
in the cafeteria can be
interpreted as a subtle form of
racism.
I remember, sitting in the
Markley cafeteria and, yes, it
was readily apparent that the
majority of the Black students
sat together. However, when
my White friends asked me
why this was so, I responded:
"you see a table of Black
students sitting together, only
because they are easily
identifiabletby their skin color.
I see a table of friends who
usually eat lunch and dinner
together." At first, my friends
scoffed at my response. So, I
provided a theory, a
hypothesis, and a noncontrolled
experiment to clarify my
response.
I theorized that many people
dine together on a regular
basis, however, it is not readily
apparent in the absence of a
distinguishing factor such as
race. I further hypothesized, if

we were to go to dinner one
Monday and mentally tag five
arbitrary groups of students
dining together with a color
code, then observe these dining
parties for the next five
evenings, the results would
indicate that these five arbitrary
groups dined together on a
regular basis, and probably all
at the same table. My friends
agreed to put this hypothesis to
the test. The results indicated
that all five groups dined
together every evening at the
same table.
Following these results, I
put forth two questions to my
White counterparts: Do you
feel slighted, in any way, that
these five groups of students
sit together at one table all the
time? Do you feel that because
we sit together at the same
table every evening that it is
interpreted as racism? The
response was a unanimous no.
However, further discussion led
us to believe that presently the
table of Black students could be
observed as a table of friends
sitting together, as well as, a
table of fellow student with
whom to make friends.
-Christina Crawford
February 2

-.---
H7

*1
U'o

;,
i;
.
.
g
/
t

t>
.
.
i

ft v
a.
a
f

--

i> s
K P
it
iI
'4
iI~
3

. _ ..

^ifii tl

Mere athletes won't cut it

To the Daily:
"An outstanding athlete
should be admitted to the
University on the valid merits
of exceptional athletic ability."

institutions?
Why subject less than
academically prepared freshman
to the joint rigors of academic
and collegiate sports? Allowing
such voung people the oD -

l I

Back to Top

© 2021 Regents of the University of Michigan