Image provided by: University of Nebraska-Lincoln Libraries, Lincoln, NE
About The daily Nebraskan. ([Lincoln, Neb.) 1901-current | View Entire Issue (Sept. 28, 1967)
THE DAILY NEBRASKAN
Thursday, September 28, 1967
l'iiiiii iiiiiiinii iiiiiiiiiniiim imiiiiiii uiiHiiiiiiiinniiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii tiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiimiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiini
Seek Or Demand
implementation of the Bill of Rights.
The crux of the implementation ap
proach for the Student Bill Of Rights
seems to be whether "We seek" or "We
Senator Al Spangler would have ASUN
demand that the Bill of Rights be includ
ed in University policy while President
Dick Schulze would have ASUN seek to
have the Bill of Rights included in Uni
The Nebraskan assumes that Senator
Spangler means by "confrontation" that
ASUN would present the Regents with an
ultimatum either approve the Bill of
Rights or else. And this "else" could
mean anything from demonstrations to
This we do not feel is the proper ap
proach and would only hurt the cause.
Regents, like a cornered animal, would
probably react with a flat "NO." Thus,
the students would be left with no imple
mentation of the Bill of Rights and it is
unlikely they would change their minds
as a result of a demonstration.
Although freshmen are not likely to
realize it, Pass-Fail courses, the Faculty
Evaluation Book, and Senior Keys are
advances during the last four years which
have been accomplished through the "We
BUT, thank heaven for people like
Senator Spangler for who give ASUN a
good kick in the posterior.
Too often the "We Seek" method can
deteriorate into no action, then forgetful
vess and finally the original idea is lost
Vever until some brave soul takes it
Maps a case in point would be the
For all the students knew, the Bill
of Rights was at a complete stalemate.
And yet there were several very im
portant questions to be answered. Which
of the housing amendments, Article 5b or
the SDS-backed amendment, apparently
conflicting), should actually be in the Con
stitution. Secondly, what is actually being
done with the Bill of Rights?
The Nebraskan feels the students have
a right to the answers to these questions.
And it WAS Senator Spangler who final
ly got these questions out into the open.
And it WAS Senator Spangler who is
prodding ASUN executives into action to
But the Bill of Rights is not the only
case. It was also Senator Spangler, in
addition to Senator Phil Bowen, who are
getting the question of Vietnam out to the
students so that they might make a wise
decision on the issue.
And we are sure that these will not
be the last instances. If the Regents
renege on their promise to put the
housing policy into effect when financial
ly possible, Senator Spangler will prob
ably be out in front leading the fight to
get it implemented.
Again let us state that we are not
always in agreement with the manner in
which Senator Spangler would attempt to
accomplish an end.
The Nebraskan feels that prolonged
demonstrations or violence will accom
plish little, and should only be used as a
last resort to a very serious supression
But it is individuals like Al Spangler
who continue to keep organizations like
ASUN on their toes. And active.
W Wg&9 topi, fw V
ExfcMCfc, to "& I A ?oLE. SdOFULL
I Presidential Message I
(Editor's Noy,The foUowing , the full text of the
..VN!eC.UtlyeS day statement on the status
of the Bill of Rights.)
The purposes of thtatement are. t0 answer ques.
tions concerning the sta the Bm of Rights; to clear
up any misunderstandings V mm have resulted from
incorrect or incomplete infot and to discharge the
responsibilities of keeping .t rtudent population in
formed on the plans and progN flf foportant affairs.
On April 12, 1967 students ra seventeen amend
ments to the ASUN Constitution. irst 16 amend.
ments, called the Bill of Rights, wen by a two.
thirds majority vote of the ASUN Sern The 17tn was
placed on the ballot by petition. At thi me aU 17
amendments have met tht necessary ameaenj proced
ures as stated in Section 14 of Article X yje atjn
However, let me emphasize that these ptures
are necessary conditions for amending but they no
sufficient conditions. The preamble of the ASUN Ct.
tution states, "We, the students of the University of
braska, with the consent of the Board of Regents, 6
hereby ordain and establish this constitution for the ad
ministration of student government."
Article II of this constitution defines the powers of
ASUN as subject to the University regulations as estab
lished by the Board of Regents, and Subsection A, Sec
tion C of Article VII states "Nothing herein is to be con
strued as limiting or supplanting any of rights, privi
leges, immunities, or obligations of each student under
the rules and regulations of the University of Nebraska
Board of Regents."
It is explicitly clear then, that amendments to the
ASUN Constitution are not final, nor do they have official
sanction within the University community until they have
been approved by the Board of Regents. The answer to
the question of the status of the Bill of Rights cannot
be a simple "Yes they are amendments" or "No they
are not amendments."
A word of auction: let's not become so tangled up
In tht legal, official or constitutional status of the "Bill
of Rights" that we forget or neglect the purpose this
endeavour. Its purpose was not to be an exercise of con
Its purpose was not to bring about a confrontation
with the Regents.
The purpose of the BUI of Rights was to affirm and
define those conditions of the University environment nec
essary for the development of the student as an individual
and as a responsible citizen of society.
. The Bill of Rights was an attempt on the part of
the students to stimulate and improve the educational at
mosphere of the University.
This document was based on the educational prin
ciples that free inquiry and free expression are essen
tial attributes of a community of scholars, that students
should be encouraged to develop the capacity for critical
judgement and to engage in a sustained and independ
ent search for truth and that people learn through living,
through the process of integrating their thoughts with
their actions, through testing their values against those
of a community, through a capacity to act.
Implementation of the Bill of Rights has become the
responsibility of the executive branch of ASUN. Acknow
ledgement of the educational conditions stated in the Bill
of Rights which already exists and establishment of those
conditions as University policy which do not exist, are
necessary conditions of implementation.
We are more concerned with whether or not the con
ditions essential to education exist on our campus than
we are with the exact wording of policy statements that
might provide for them.
Necessarily, high priority has been given to coopera
tive efforts of students, faculty, administrators and Board
of Regents as a means for making those changes with
in the community that we feel are important.
On Sept. 11, we presented the ASUN amendments
to the Regents for discussion. The Regents expressed
concern about the wording and interpretations of some
of the amendments.
Their reaction to the purpose of the Bill of Rights
and the-conditions it outlined was very positive.
They stated that many conditions outlined in the Bill
of Rights already exist. There was some disagreement
about the wording of some amendments.
It was suggested by the Regents that a committee
students, faculty and administrators formulate Uni
yjity policy statements dealing with these issues. The
ASl executives have decided to pursue this suggestion.
Thert a general agreement within the University
community tne basic issues. This approach will
T?2, in poV statements that would be more than just
As a resu 0f a meeting this afternoon with
Chancellor Cliffy Hardin, a six-man committee was es
tablished which N,iU rep0rt directly to the Chancellor.
The committee w De composed of two students, two
administrators and y0 faculty members. Its task will be
to formulate a statei 0f those conditions which should
exist in our University statement which will have the
support of the entire diversity community.
The product of this coittee will go to the Board
of Regents, the Faculty Sene and through ASUN Sen
ate to the student body. If u those .bodies endorse it,
this statement will become all'jnjVersity policy, as well
as being ASUN amendments.
The ASUN executives are invested in establishing
these conditions as University pqCy. We do not feel
that student, nor faculty nor admi,iStrators should for
mulate policy in isolation.
As we stated in March of 1967, "T new student will
not merely try to destroy one power arrangement for the
personal satisfaction of setting up his byn in its place.
An irresponsibly-run student controllti university is
just as wrong as an irresponsibly-run Administration
controlled university. We have to realize th$ the task of
creating a better University is a task that 'an only be
won by working together."
Our statement of position on the Bill of lights fur
ther stated. "We realize and honestly admit tha. imple
mentation of the Bill of Rights will be accomplished
when the University community recognizes the Bill of
Rights. We are prepared to work with the entire Uni
versity community as it exists."
Our approach was outlined last spring. Students who
grumble and protest about the University's inadequacies
should be prepared to pay the price in time and initia
tive required to improve that University.
I write in regard to your
objective and clearsighted
essay regarding a possible
FM station for NU. It stir
red me to give an opinion
on two points.
First it would seem that
the condemnation of the
proposed station by the Ne
braska chapter of the NAB
gives us all the more rea
son to seek a student
oriented radio voice. Any
one who would still be of
the opinion that commer
cial radio is a public ser
vice is deluding himself:
worthwhile music program
mingin short, the whole
bag are absolutely second
ary in nature (See any is
sue of "Broadcasting" es
pecially the editorial page).
Whatever sort of annoy
ing nonsense they wish to
throw out may be their
business (no pun in
tended), but when the
broadcasting monopoly at
tempts to crassly squash
all competition irregrard
less of its nature we must
definitely oppose them.
Second, the r e a c t i o n of
the Administration to the
broadcaster's resolution is
hardly a surprise. It can
not be denied that the in
dustry has the political
power to dictate its de
sires; whether it has been
pulling strings in this case,
I can only speculate.
At any rate, the FM sta
tion is (for Nebraska) a
new idea and the powers-that-be
have taken the us
ual "let's push it under the
carpet and maybe It will go
away" attitude. I assume
that other "negative voice"
on campus would be the
"Daily Nebraskan" which,
as everyone knows, is run
by Communists and quotes
Mao-think instead of duti
fully reporting Dean Ross'
speeches to local ladies
aids. How un-Nebraskan it
would be to have such a
Or is it really the case
that the broadcast industry
and the Administration have
unwittingly joined hands
because they're scared to
death that someone may
actually listen to a 1 i 1 1 1 e
ten-watt student voice?
L. E. Baudler
I will start out by ad
mitting that when I wrote
this letter, I was ready to
argue in a physical way
with Mr. or Miss Cater
Chamblee, whoever the per
son may be.
It has occurred to me and
I am sure that it must
have occurred to other
moviegoers on the campus,
that this person is either
dead set against being
truthful, has a very notice
able lack of taste or simp
ly has an axe to grind. I
prefer to believe that the
latter situation holds.
Now, I ask anyone, why
does this person insist on
reviewing movies in such
a dishonest fashion? Let
us take the case of "Dr.
Zhivago" (which I admit
I have not seen). Just as
"Ben Hur" was widely ac
claimed as a triumph in
movie-making by literally
hundreds of reviewers (pro
fessional reviewers), so
has "Dr. Zhivago" been
widely acclaimed for its
great impact, detail and
pure sense of quality. A lot
of people hold this belief,
and the awards this movie
has won speak for them
selves. I don't believe all
these people hold the wrong
values, and I am sure that
Cater Chamblee, deep in
side, doesn't feel that so
many people can be so
As a second case, I cite
Chamblee"s review of the
movie, "The Saint Valen
tine's Day Massacre." This
movie also has caught my
attention in professional re
views. I admit it is not a
movie that will leave so
ciety stunned or stimulated
by its message, but the
movie is not all that bad,
either. The movie is not
soaked in blood as Chamb
lee implies. I was surprised
to discover this when I saw
the movie. This movie has
had very good review (for
get Chamblee's review) and
is showing an excellent de
gree of popularity.
I found the film to be
truthful, frank and very
well detailed (Warren Beat
ty wears a modern, ivy-league
shirt In "Bonnie and
I shall repeat my state
ment that so many people
can't be wrong. Now that I
have the time, I shall see
"Dr. Zhivago," I will en
joy it, I am sure, because
I have more faith in the
majority than I do in
Chamblee, while you are
grinding away on your axe,
be sure to get it good and
sharp. Then, cut your
damned, stubborn head off
Between the Lines
By Dave Buntain
University Greeks are learning at long last how elu
sive the Invisible Shield really is.
Forced into the role of what perennial bad guy, De.
cay, the fraternity and 'sorority systems have thrown
themselves against the unseen, unassailable barrier: the
Campaign For Deferred Rush.
And at the fore of this invisible Campaign are those
protectors of students, Dean Gardoll and his Office of Stu
It is not difficult to surmise that the movement for
deferred rush originated in the Office of the Dean to
Student Affairs, though the Dean himself flatly denies
this charge. Yet, he cannot deny that Administrative
control over the Greek system centers in his office and
that to be successful such a movement would need his
What is difficult to understand is why these invisible
proponents of deferred rush have chosen to remain si
lent in the face of the strong arguments both logical
and ethical that have been presented in favor of the
present system. Indeed, Daily Nebraskan has been un
able to discover a single person Greek, alum or ad
ministratorwho is willing to speak out against the pre
sent rush system in specific terms.
Such secrecy has had three major effects on those
who are sincerely interested in the Greek system.
FIRST, it has placed both IFC and Panhellenic at
a definite disadvantage in preparing their objective re
ports on the merits of the deferred and early rush
systems. No one can be certain whether the Campaign
is one against early rush or one in favor of deferred
rush. Nor can they ascertain which issues particularly
bother the Campaigners and the Regents.
As a result, the IFC and Panhellenic reports are
largely guesswork which attempt to anticipate the major
areas of concern. This deception whether intentional or
not has greatly impaired the ability of the two groups
to present a meaningful analysis of the rush systems.
SECOND, the secrecy of the Campaign has forced
those interested in the rush question to deal in speculation
and rumor. They have been crushed by the persistency
of reports from "informed sources" that deferred rush
is imminent, especially since no strong criticisms of the
present system have been heard.
They have also come to place considerable stock U
one report, which has been confirmed by a Housing offi
cial and several leading Lincoln businessmen, that the
Chancellor has ordered the Regents to institute deferred
rush because his daughter was so happy with deferred
rush at Kansas.
As long as the deferred rush advocates remain in
hiding, shocking reports such as this one must carry more
than a little weight.
FINALLY, the deferred rush secrecy has kept the
fraternity alumni largely in the dark about what is going
on. While part of the blame for this lies at the feet of
IFC, it seems inexcusable that the Dean of Student Af
fairs has not sought to discuss the problem at length
with alumni of the houses involved.
In the light of the heavily-documented argumentation
offered by both Panhellenic and IFC on the rush ques
tion and the unwillingness of deferred rush proponents
to communicate, it would seem impossible that the Re
gents could choose in favor of deferred rush.
Yet, as University students are well aware, the im
possible haa a way of occuring regularly around here,
Should the Regents rule in favor of deferred rush
and the Invisible Shield, this toothpaste will leave a bad
taste in a lot of mouths.
Vol. 1, No. 10
Stpt. , 1WT
Second-clan rosta paid ( Lincoln. Kt.
TELEPHONE: 472-35M, 472-25W, 472-2590.
Subscription role are 14 per Minuter or M for tha (-don In mr Puh.
d SSTSSSSi '.2. f r "JZ
during vacations) ana txam perloda, br tha tudemta n th iiMMHif. j tj.ka
under lb. Jurisdiction of the racult, ubwSSttS. butt?
Publication .ball to fre. from otworabSnSi Uw gutoSuStteSfar aSSmS
Member Aaaoclatcd Co!fc(late Preo. Natlnaxi Aitniri..
ontol. PuMtetod at Boom M. N.taSS viU Sfc
Editor Bruce Gllei: Managing Editor Jack TxW- h v, n iu.
flight New. Editor Alan i Iawiun; Ednortal PawAaibSS ESJ'uSSS1 fSSi
Zditor Mark Gordons Aaabtant Sport, Editor ChElta It!, wiEi SSI
Buntain, Andy Corrlgan. Gary GUlen, Ed tceauie I-SSSl f
Buaineu Manager Glenn Frlendti National AdvertJ.ir.. u... ..
Production Manager Charlea Baxter; Secretary JJSlLJt0!.. ini
CUuaified. Allan Brandt; Sotworlption Manager An? iSIAjSSZ
David Kovanaugh and Gary Meyer i SaleTlSiilSra nil ?u.?S
Kick aaaach, Kea Miller and Ways Moleir D" CroBk' KUw Dr"Ul
Powered by Open ONI