March 20, 1997

SGA debates lack student voice
My Turn
Renee Cagle
Managing Editor

Tuesday night I witnessed the most unethical and underhanded display of dirty politics I have ever seen. No, I am not talking about an election involving Jesse Helms. I am talking about the behavior of the SGA candidates, current SGA senators and the tickets' own campaign workers.

Before I get into this opinion let's set the cast of characters in the farce. First, we have Mike Hagerty and Jewel Irish. Then there's Fernando Little and Jake Parker. Last but not least, Cliff Fitte and Michelle Lawrence.

I served on the debate panel along with other members of the student media. After the panel finished, questions were taken from the audience. When I say this, it is supposed to mean students not connected with either ticket or SGA has the chance to ask questions. It was a good idea but it did not happen last night.

Once the debate was turned over to the audience it became like a WWF event. The questions from the audience were planned and delivered as personal attacks on the ticket of Fernando Little and Jake Parker.

The first question was asked by Student Affairs chair Jenny Ruggieri; she asked the Little/Parker ticket about the feasibility of their direct call button on blue light phones. Once the question was answered, the girlfriend of Mike Hagerty ran up and asked Fitte what he had found out about the same subject. Once Fitte explained the cost of installing these buttons, it became obvious that it was all a set-up on the part of Ruggieri and Mike's girlfriend.

I must say I am personally disappointed in the behavior of both. It is pretty pathetic when a candidate has to get his girlfriend to do his dirty work. If you are going to play dirty, get a backbone and do it yourself.

The next question came from an SGA senator and personal buddy of Hagerty's. Not only was this guy pompous and arrogant but he asked a question that had already been addressed during the panel questions. He said experience had not been an issue addressed yet and he wanted each ticket to tell their experience in SGA in years. Hello?

Experience had already been drilled into the ground. The reason this was an obvious attack on two of the tickets is because Fitte, Lawrence and Parker have not been senators. But they are/or were cabinet members of SGA. This person knew this already but felt the need to bring it up again to make Hagerty and Irish look good. In my eyes it made them look petty and conceited.

The question after that came from a very visible worker for the Hagerty/Irish ticket. I have seen her several times and have spoken with her about the ticket. She represents them. Her question was by far the worst because she got nasty with Little/Parker, and she also got personal. She asked Little/Parker how they could run for SGA without ever being senators because they would never understand what it is like to be in their shoes.

First of all, this question had been addressed several times. Secondly, how could she ask that question since she herself is not in SGA. So what right does she have? Anyone can run for SGA. That's supposed to be the beauty of the organization.

After this ambush of Hagerty/Irish acolytes audience members from other camps tried to defend their tickets. It began ugly and ended that way as well.

Because of these personal and vicious attacks the everyday student was denied the right to ask questions. Isn't that the entire point of the debate? Here's my problem: SGA already had all of the candidates to one of their meetings for questions. The SGA senators already had their chance to ask questions. They had their own debate. So why do they feel the need to ask questions before other students who are not affiliated with SGA? Isn't that the point of "The Student Voice" everyone keeps talking about?

I also think students who are working with tickets and have obviously made their voting decision need to be banned from asking questions. I know some people will consider this a violation of free speech but what else do they need to know? They have already made their decision.

It seems that these people and some of the senators don't think students can ask good questions. I have one thing to say to them: Get over yourselves! You're not all that. Students know what they want to ask and what is important to them. Let students who are not necessarily involved in SGA or other student groups ask their questions. The candidates visited a lot of student clubs and organizations and answered questions from the members. At the debate there was a huge line of students trying to ask questions but were never given the chance because of all the mud-slinging. That is the saddest thing that happened at the debate.

If there is a run-off and another debate I hope these suggestions will be considered because I personally don't want to watch another immature episode like Tuesday night. And to the parties who masterminded the dirty politics, here's a tip. Tell your people not to wear your stickers or buttons because it's a dead giveaway. If you are going to play dirty, at least be intelligent about it.

[back]

Our Opinion

Buyer Beware

Recently an English professor brought something to my attention that surprised and confused me. He asked why The Appalachian publishes advertisements from companies which sell term papers to students. I told him that I wasn't sure what our rules were about such advertising, but that I'd check into it.

Doing a little research, I found out that it is ultimately my decision as to whether ads are appropriate for publication. The only exception to this are alcohol-related ads which are already limited by the state government.

So, here's what I've decided to do about this situation in light of all the circumstances.

First, the company that placed the ads has paid us in advance to run the ad for the entire semester. We don't have the extra money to give back to them in exchange for our pulling the ad. So, we can't stop the ads from running this semester.

What I can do about the situation is write a recommendation for next year's editor and hope that he or she follows it. In year's past the staff has drawn up policies at the beginning of the year about ads and that's what I'm going to suggest to my successor.

The professor made a good argument when he said that such ads take away from the academic integrity of the paper as it encourages people to cheat. He was right. Buying term papers and turning them in as your own is not only ethically horrid, it's also against the law. Perjury is a serious crime. We aren't doing public service when we take the companies' money and enable students to cheat.

Another aspect that the professor's question brought to light was that students often times fall prey to scams.

My thinking about this is that if something sounds too good to be true (i.e. a $150 all expenses paid trip to Mexico), it probably is. The Appalachian can not be held accountable for the behavior of the companies advertising with us. Whenever possible we try to validate the claims made in ads, but we can't do all the work for you.

When responding to ads, don't ever give your credit card number out to someone you have a bad feeling about. Don't send money until you have a deal in writing and never assume that you'll get a refund if you aren't satisfied. Above all use your head.

And, remember that even if next year's staff does decide not to run the ads, U. Magazine does and we'll certainly still run that publication as an insert in ours.

And, as Dino DiBernardi said about a bought paper that was faxed accidentally to his office, "I don't know why anyone would want to pay for a paper that bad anyway." He said there were so many spelling mistakes it was hardly readable.

[back]

Letters to the Editor

Injustice of Justice

To the Editor,

I was totally outraged by the photo of the sign of Justice Hall with the word "in" written in front of Justice. It has been 6 days since I have heard anything about was going on about the NOW rally, and all the upset people about the decision about the football players. I really wish that the picture was not published. We need to leave well-enough alone, and try to get back to normal.

While we are on the subject about the recent events, I would like to leave two thoughts about the recent events in Justice. I an very outraged about the rapes, but yet some people have the philosophy of guilty into proven innocent, when it should be innocent into proven guilty. My last thought on this issue is that people in Justice have feelings too.

Thomas Wall
ASU Box 1111O

Grrls need to grow up

To the Editor,

"You Live Among Rapists," and, "If you are raped, you might as well enjoy it because no one will believe you." Give Me a Break!

Why does it seem like every time something happens around here, some vigilante group plasters ridiculous posters all over campus and downtown Boone? Groups like these do nothing but undermine the legitimate action groups such as NOW and the NAACP. (I don't include the ACLU, they're almost as bad, but that's another letter.)

These are the types of people that started the fires in L.A. after the Rodney King decision. These "Grrrls" must have these posters pre-printed just in case of a non-favorable decision. Instead of making fools of themselves and giving me something to laugh about (which I'm grateful for on a Monday morning), why don't they devote their energies toward something that will do some good?

These are probably the same people that defaced the Justice Hall sign. Vandalism solves about as much as violence does. So to the

"Guerrilla Grrrls"...I say grow up!

Jeff Cabell
ASU Box 17799

Stop the hate

To the Editor,

A female in front of me was wearing a t-shirt with a message on the back. I did not know her, and did not have time to write down what the shirt said verbatim so I will have to paraphrase as closely as memory allows.

What it said was this: This is your world and we will grow and learn in it and we will learn to hate you. I did not get the chance to see the front of the shirt to see if it indicated to whom the message was

directed, so I can only assume from context that it was at least partially directed at the world at large.

I realize that to many people I would seem to be making a big deal out of a small thing. I am fairly selective about the messages I choose to display on my person, but I realize there are many who would say, "it's just a t-shirt, no big deal." Either way, I am still disturbed.

For if the young lady chose to display such a message so casually, and if we are meant to receive it so casually, what does this say about our society's attitude towards hate? Are we truly so indifferent to such bitter sentiments? Have we become so callous as to be flip about hatred of others?

On the other hand, does it say anything better about ourselves if we have created a world in which people feel compelled to not only harbor,

but to express such a thing openly to people they don't even know? How does one respond to such a thing?

There are probably a million ways, here is mine: don't give in to hate, whether heartfelt or casual. We are creatures of habit, and once we begin to hate, in little ways or big, it is difficult to stop hating. When you hate, the one who suffers most is you.

Hank Walkup
ASU Box 13965

Amnesty International returns

Letter to the Editor,

I am writing this letter to inform students, faculty, and anyone else possibly interested about the re-establishment of an Amnesty International chapter for Appalachian State University.

For anyone who does not know, Amnesty International is a worldwide organization of more than 1.1 million members, using letter-writing campaigns as an effective way to help people whose rights are being violated.

Amnesty adopts political prisoners, publicizes patterns of human rights abuses, meets with government representatives, and, in cases where torture and death are feared, sends urgent telegrams expressing international concern.

Over the last thirty years public pressure has forced repressive governments to stop abusing the human rights of their citizens, so the system does work. Prisoners of conscience have been released; political prisoners have been treated more fairly; torture chambers have been closed; and executions have been stopped, all due to Amnesty International.

Torture, illegal executions, and other human rights violations still continue all over the world however. As an individual, you can stop torture, free innocent people, save lives, and make a difference while working for Amnesty International.

Anyone, regardless of race or gender, is welcome to join. We need your help, but more than that suffering people need your help. Meetings are being held every Thursday in the Basement Lobby of East Residence Hall, starting at 7:15 P.M.

Sincerely,

Bill Pillow
ASU Box 14776

[back]

E-mail The Appalachian Online at theapp@conrad.appstate.edu