Tater Awards - University of Oregon

O
JUNE 13, 1999
R
E
G
O
VOLUME XVI, ISSUE XIII
N
A JOURNAL OF OPINION
the aftermath.
the tater awards turn ten.
johnson hall a go-go.
year in review.
goodbye.
MISSION STATEMENT
FOUNDED SEPT.27,1983 • MEMBER COLLEGIATE NETWORK
EDITOR EMERITUS
Ed Madrid
MANAGED EDITOR
Jar-Jar Kriegel
PUBLISHER
Jonathan Collegio
ASSOCIATE EDITORS
Viceroy Beutler, Kerry Delf
OFFLINE EDITOR
Jason Lewis
HONORARY PUBLISHING EDITOR
Rob Elder*
PUBLIC MANIPULATIONS
Melissa Logan
PEOPLE WHO COME TO MEETINGS
Andrew Adams, Gerald Anthony, Dan Atkinson, Gabe Bloch,
Brian Boone, BRETT, Andy Combs, Danzig, Alain Sho Ikeda,
Ben Nahorney, Amanda Nottke, Tom Patterson, Dan Rosenthal,
Andrea Swanson
THE COLLECTIVE
Ed Madrid, Premier, Jonathan Collegio, Unity Coordinator,
Jar-Jar Kriegel, Strength Coordinator
ALUMNI ADVISORY BOARD
Thomas Mann ‘88, Charles H. Deister ‘92,
R.S.D Wederquist ‘92, Scott Camp ‘94,
Ed Carson ‘94, Owen Brennan Rounds ‘95,
Farrah L. Bostic ‘98
The Oregon Commentator is an independent journal of opinion
published at the University of Oregon for the campus community.
Founded by a group of concerned student journalists September 27
1983, the Commentator has had a major impact in the “war of ideas”
on campus, providing students with an alternative to the left-wing
orthodoxy promoted by other student publications, professors and student groups. During its sixteen-year existence, it has enabled
University students to hear both sides of issues. Our paper combines
reporting with opinion, humor and feature articles. We have won
national recognition for our commitment to journalistic excellence.
The Oregon Commentator is operated as a program of the
Associated Students of the University of Oregon (ASUO) and is staffed
solely by volunteer editors and writers. The paper is funded through
student incidental fees, advertising revenue and private donations. We
print a wide variety of material, but our main purpose is to show students that a political philosophy of conservatism, free thought and individual liberty is an intelligent way of looking at the world — contrary
to what they might hear in classrooms and on campus. In general, editors of the Commentator share beliefs in the following:
• We believe that the University should be a forum for rational and
informed debate — instead of the current climate in which ideological
dogma, political correctness, fashion and mob mentality interfere with
academic pursuit.
• We emphatically oppose totalitarianism and its apologists.
• We believe that it is important for the University community to view
the world realistically, intelligently and, above all, rationally.
BOARD OF TRUSTEES
Richard Burr, Robert Davis,
Paul S. Holbo, Michael Rust
• We believe that any attempt to establish utopia is bound to meet with
failure and, more often than not, disaster.
The Oregon Commentator is a conservative journal of
opinion. All signed essays and commentaries herein represent
the opinions of the writers and not necessarily the opinions of
this magazine or its staff. The Commentator is an independent
publication and the Oregon Commentator Publishing Co., Inc.
is an independent corporation; neither are affiliated with the
University of Oregon nor its School of Journalism. And, contrary to popular, paranoid opinion, we are in no way affiliated
with either the CIA or the FBI.
The Oregon Commentator accepts letters to the editor and
commentaries from students, faculty and staff at the University
of Oregon, or anyone else for that matter. Letters and commentaries may be submitted personally to Room 205 EMU or
placed in our mailbox in Suite 4 EMU. All other correspondence
should be mailed to Box 30128, Eugene, OR, 97403. Our email address is at: [email protected]: Phone
number: (541) 346-3721. Unsolicited commentaries are limited
to 700 words and letters to 300 words. We reserve the right to
edit material we find obscene, libelous, inappropriate or lengthy.
We are not obliged to print anything that does not suit us.
Unsolicited material will not be returned unless accompanied by
a stamped, self-addressed envelope. Submission constitutes testimony as to the accuracy.
• We believe that while it would be foolish to praise or agree mindlessly with everything our nation does, it is both ungrateful and dishonest
not to acknowledge the tremendous blessings and benefits we receive
as Americans.
• We believe that free enterprise and economic growth, especially at
the local level, provide the basis for a sound society.
• We believe that the University is an important battleground in the
“war of ideas” and that the outcome of political battles of the future are,
to a large degree, being determined on campuses today.
• We believe that a code of honor, integrity, pride and rationality are the
fundamental characteristics for individual success.
• Socialism guarantees the right to work. However, we believe that the
right not to work is fundamental to individual liberty. Apathy is a
human right.
ISSUE XIII, VOLUME XVI
INSIDE
TEN YEARS OF TATERS
Just pray that you don’t see
your name.
PAGE 6
THE YEAR IN REVIEW
Another year down the tube.
Did we learn anything this
time around?
by William Beutler
PAGE 12
THE FINAL SWIG
Tamir isn’t bitter—he’s too
busy fighting the spins.
by Tamir Kriegel
PAGE 17
ANATOMY OF A SIT-IN
Oh, those wacky kids and
their “activism”. Will
they never learn?
COLLEGIO’S LAST STAND
The final, incoherent ramblings of a drunk Sicilian.
by Jonathan Collegio
PAGE 16
by William Beutler
and Jonathan Collegio
PAGE 9
DEPARTMENTS
EDITORIAL
LETTERS
ANOTHER PERSPECTIVE
SPEW
June 13, 1999
Copyright ©1999 Oregon Commentator Publishing Co., Inc.
*From dictator to lowly staff writer, even we feel for you. Couldn’t you at least manage an Emeritus position?
4
5
20
22
MISSING THE POINT
THE UNOFFICIAL MOTTO OF CAMPUS ACTIVISTS: WHEN IN DOUBT, OVERREACT.
Every once in a great while, the activists
on campus come across an outrage that is
truly worthy of public demonstration.
When they stand up and demand to be
heard, they may, on occasion, effect a
change that benefits the student body—
however inadvertently.
Such is not the case with the controversy ignited by two supposedly racist and
threatening comments made in a Planning,
Public Policy, and Management (PPPM)
class during the Ides of May. Though
these incidents sparked a rally and a sit-in
at UO President Dave Frohnmayer’s office
at Johnson Hall, the outrage was anything
but worthwhile.
The first comment, a casual assumption by student Thomas “Scott” Bones that
Hispanics have an inferior work ethic, was
later dubbed (by a faction of the English
Department) in a June 4th letter to the
Emerald as “an appalling incident of hate
speech.” Hate speech? Like Hitler’s 1939
address to the Nazi Reichstag? The phrase
“hate speech” is usually reserved for the
most offensive of statements, or those that
constitute a hate crime. Bones’ comment
was ignorant, as Bones himself now
admits, but did they really mean to claim
that a hate crime was committed in a
PPPM classroom? Or was the English
Department having a bit of trouble with
their own area of academic study?
The second comment was the e-mail
that directly sparked the sit-in, and its content was inarguably more inflammatory. It
contained words like “bitch” and “cunt,”
and phrases like “fuck you up the ass,” and
was sent from a male student, John Convy,
to his female classmate, Sandra Spoor. But
was it truly a threat of sexual assault?
These questions have, to date, been
dealt with more by emotion than by reason.
As the details of the situation have become
clouded and deemed irrelevant, so have a
number of other issues that should be
brought up by the swift and damning reac-
4
tion here. These issues require analysis
and intelligence—which may explain why
the majority of people involved have yet to
pick up on them.
Issues of free speech, the teacher’s
role in the classroom, and the misuse of
technology have all been greatly overshadowed by the standard denunciation of
“racism, sexism, and homophobia.” The
phrase comes from the protester’s list of
demands as well as from the ASUO
Executive (see Year in Review, page 12),
and on a campus so politically charged,
these words can be just as divisively emotional as the ones that began it all. While
racism, sexism, and homophobia are all
undesirable traits of society, are they actually evident in the situation at hand?
The racial comment, while indeed
seeming to advance stereotypes, was met
with strong objection by the professor,
Elizabeth Rocha. According to a member
of Bones’ group, the professor called members of the group racists—in front of a
class of seventy students.
ASUO President and PPPM student
Wylie Chen disagrees. “She never said
‘racist.’ But, for the situation, she did all
she could do. She was pissed and I’m sure
she wanted to say a lot more, but she never
used that word.”
But another student in the class, who
participated in the protest at Johnson Hall
and wished to remain anonymous, contradicts Chen’s claim. “She definitely said
‘racist,’ but I don’t believe it was in reference to any members of the group. I think
she was referring to the content of the project.”
More than anything, this incident
questions the ethics that teachers use in the
classroom—especially with regard to how
they treat students whose viewpoints differ
from their own.
Ignorant or not, Bones had a right to
his beliefs (which, to be fair, have
changed), and while this situation should
inspire discussion, his subsequent harassment (via the class e-mail listserve) was
unfair. As the discussion degenerated into
finger-pointing, a frustrated John Convy
stepped in and fired off an angry reply to
Spoor—a message most of the class took
as a rape threat.
“I thought it was a rape threat, though
I highly doubt that he would have followed
through with it,” said Chen. “But I didn’t
receive it, so I can’t say how she perceived
it. Other women in the class received similar messages, though not as vulgar, and he
did it through his girlfriend’s account so as
to remain anonymous.”
Was it a rape threat? The wording of
the message (which can be found in full on
page 11), though profoundly distasteful
and crude, is not technically a threat. If a
reference to assault replaces that of
sodomy, it no longer sounds like a threat.
Yet the sexual innuendo is so highly
charged that it seems that way. Consider:
“you suggested a kick in the ass for Mr.
McCulloch, well what you need is someone to beat you to a pulp, a kick would not
be enough!” Without the emotional reactions wrought by the sexual connotations,
one can plainly see that the message was
not a threat at all. This fact has been wholly overlooked, though it is readily apparent
to anyone willing to look at the situation
objectively.
Objectivity? In the People’s Republic
of Eugene? Don’t count on it. Either the
four English professors and two co-signers
(and the multitudes of protesters that share
their opinion) have a warped idea of what
the terms “hate speech” or “rape threat”
mean, or they were not accurately
informed. Regardless, this manner of
overreaction that the campus left is so
eager to indulge does more harm than
good. Exaggerating the circumstances
only obscures the facts and polarizes those
involved.
Jump to page 9 and decide for yourself.
OREGON COMMENTATOR
Do you have a
problem with
us that’s just
eating you
alive?
Got any idle
threats you’d
like to share?
Enjoy making a
fool of yourself
and being
mocked in
print?
Drop us a letter.
We’ll print it.
Room 205, EMU
ocomment@
darkwing.
uoregon.edu
Letters are limited to 300
words, and may be edited for
length. We reserve the right to
insert as many [sic]’s as we
deem necessary to highlight
your piss-poor grammar,
spelling, and typing skills.
APOLOGY NOT FORTHCOMING
To the Board and Editors of The Oregon
Commentator;
I am writing to object to a racist phrase
used in a story of your Commentator issue of
May 17, 1999/ Vol. XVI, Issue X. The article in
question was on page 20 & 21, “Hit Da Lightz”
by Michael Atkinson. Atkinson describes in the
story, how he and his buddy have “a powder keg
of trouble in the trunk”...”With Nevada’s zero
tolerance drug laws,” when stopped by a patrol
officer in Las Vegas.
At the top of column 3, p. 20, he writes;
“We kept our shades on to hide our telltale
Chinese eyes.”
Obviously, in the context of this sentence,
Atkinson infers the meaning of “shifty”,
“guilty”, “sly” or otherwise negative connotations—that ends up being derogatory to
Chinese in this misuse of metaphor. The fact
that the term was allowed in print, is symptomatic of a staff, editors and proof readers who
do not see anything wrong with the phrase, and
are not aware that it is an offensive use. The
blind acceptance shows the level of ignorance
and lack of exposure by Commentator staff
members, to every-racism [sic] incidents that
are faced by People of Color.
I demand a retraction and apology in print,
in your next issue of the Commentator, and a
written apology by your author, Michael
Atkinson. I expect a response within 2 weeks.
Most sincerely,
Bettie Sing Luke,
Multicultural Trainer & Grad student
Betty Boop,
Obviously, you are an idiot. Featured
columnist Michael Atkinson was making use of
a phrase common to many University students.
For example, consider a few lyrics of the
Beastie Boys’ “B-Boys Bouillabaise” from
Paul’s Boutique: “I got Chinese eyes and
Chinese suits/ Smokin’ much Buddha, smokin’
much boots.” Keeping in mind the content of
Atkinson’s ongoing “The Bottle & the Damage
Done,” it should be obvious to anyone that he
and his friend were simply baked out of their
minds. We don’t know why “Chinese eyes”
means you’re stoned, but it does. The fact that
the term was allowed in print is symptomatic of
editors who refuse to censor the free expression
of their writers in favor of PC blandness.
Your use of the phrase “People of Color” is
proof that politically correct warriors like you
have your heads up your asses. Turn that
phrase around and it’s “Colored People,” a
hateful term from the days of segregation. How
are people going to learn to ignore skin color if
you keep calling attention to it?
Accusing us of “lack of exposure” shows
your own level of ignorance. What the hell do
you know about us? About our lives? Are you
even aware that we have Editors and Staff of
Color? Hell, the four-year-old sister of one of
our editors is Chinese, and she likes the Beastie
Boys just fine.
See Michael Atkinson’s rebuttal on Page 20.
—Ed.
[email protected]
We’re here.
We’re queer.
We’re the Oregon Commentator.
since 1983
JUNE 13, 1999
5
Last year, the Oregon Commentator arrived at a milestone by
proving that a magazine featuring iconoclastic ideas, values, and
humor could survive at a politically correct university. Not just
survive, but flourish—for fifteen years. Granted, some years were
better than others, but that’s still a
long time in people years. More
than a century if you’re a dog.
Today’s Commentator hacks were
drinking Hi-C and watching
“Sesame Street” while yesteryear’s
Commentator founding fathers were
drinking whiskey and watching the
University make an ass of itself.
In 1990, to highlight those who worked overtime to make
asses of themselves, we introduced the Annual Commentator
Awards, published in each year’s final issue. In subsequent years,
they came to be known as the Tater Awards.
You know, ‘tater, as in “Commentator.” Some years, we’ve
printed pictures of potato chips, but that only seemed to confuse
everyone. Let there be no mistake: we’re not talking about
America’s favorite vegetable (or is that catsup?)—we’re talking
about secret ballots, backstabbing and finger-crossing... up until
the last moment, when all is
revealed, and, as William Burroughs
would have put it, everyone sees
what is on the end of every fork.
Welcome one, welcome all, to
the 1999 Tater Awards. Ten years
gone, the UO community can still be
counted on to make an ass of itself,
and we’ve been here the whole way,
handing out awards to the best and brightest jackasses on campus.
Enjoy.
TEN YEARS
Love,
The Company
MAN OF THE YEAR
PROFESSOR OF THE YEAR
GENEVA WORTMAN & MORGAN COWLING (tie)
Who else could it be but JULIA FOX? She’s not a professor yet, and if
there is any justice, she never will be. This instructor made waves at the
Commentator this year—and it’s hard not to, when someone gets up in
public and accuses us in no uncertain terms of being a front for white
supremacists. To clarify a couple of points: We are funded by you, the
enrolled UO student. In the past, we have received grants from
conservative groups—none of whom have racist ties. And just
because we’ve received support by no means implies that such a
group would have any influence over the magazine’s editorial
content. We have no such obligation to anyone. Everything you
read in here was thought up at 3am by a handful of dedicated students who would know if they were political pawns. And what of
it if we do have ties to conservative organizations? What kind of
a double-standard is this when other student groups have comparable
alliances with liberal organizations? Perhaps the real reason we’ve chosen
Fox is because she embodies a hypocritical, self-righteous agenda that
excludes and demonizes those who don’t agree with their vision for the
university. And besides, what the hell would the KKK be aiming for with
midget jokes and cheap insults?
No explanation necessary.
WOMAN OF THE YEAR
MICHAEL DIXON really earned this one by himself. Being caught for
multiple felonies might have been grounds for a Tater award, but
Dixon’s ensuing antics warranted top honors this year. Though a
bit presumptuous, it does look a little funny that Dixon was
appointed to the Senate following his arrest—to impress the
court, perhaps? But this is mere speculation. What is not speculation is that, shortly after being re-elected to the post, Dixon was
exposed for all of his felonious glory by the Oregon Daily
Emerald—and Dixon made great strides to earn this dubious title.
In a letter to the enemy Emerald, he evaded responsibility as thoroughly
as possible, pinning the blame (for the controversy, at least) on the decision to run background checks in the first place. He complained and complained, somehow unaware that being elected to office made him a public figure, and thus subject to scrutiny. Oops—maybe that bid for a credibility with the jury wasn’t for best after all.
S T U D E N T G R O U P O F THE YEAR
HACK OF THE YEAR
This year, we say goodbye to the COMMITTEE TO RE-ESTABLISH
OSPIRG. Dissolved in the wake of this year’s election, we’ll
miss their presence in Suite One come fall term. But giving up
would be too easy. The Oregon Commentator hopes to see a campaign, at the grassroots level, for the founding of the Committee
to Re-Establish the Committee to Re-Establish OSPIRG. Yet
until this happens, all we have are the memories. What did we
love about them? That they tirelessly campaigned for clean water
on 13th street? That they stuck by their guns, even when students
crossed the street to avoid being approached by them? That they were
able to win the endorsement of the Oregon State Public Interest Research
Group during the elections? In fact, we love all of these things, but what
we loved most was the case of Pabst Ice we had the money to purchase,
due entirely to their presence. They will be surely missed.
How do we possibly sum up VINCE MEDEIROS in a few hundred words?
Vince, you probably have a great deal of talent in some particular
area. We do not know what it is; only you can determine that.
What we have determined, however, is that this talent does not lie
in your writing. This year we approached each successive column
like one might a dead body accidently happened upon in the forest—with an unhealthy need to know just how you were going to
continue digging your own editorial grave. Are we sick people?
Well, morbid curiosity is what it is. Not expressly right or wrong;
it’s just part of being human. There were garbled pseudo-commentaries
that existed merely to boast of his drinking habits. There were careless
remarks that put him in hot water with particularly vocal segments of the
student body. There was no justifiable reason for his hiring in the first
place, unless affirmative action required the Emerald to hire an Australian.
6
OREGON COMMENTATOR
RISING STAR
The Dane & the Amphitheater Knob (tie)
What’s not to love? Where pernicious rivalries and perfunctory
committees were the stock and trade of daily campus
life, these two individual personalities showed the
community at large that it could rise above such trivialities.
In his freshman year, towering center Chris
Christofferson proved to be a powerful force when
unleashed, making critical layups and grabbing solid
rebounds. It’s tough being the third-string at any position, but the Dane
handled it all in stride. His amiable on-court manner, his good-natured
grin, and his powerful 7-2 frame should keep the kids yelling at Ernie to
“Put in the Dane!” for a long time to come. The school needs more like you.
THE “I’LL BE EVERYTHING TO
EVERYBODY (READ: NOTHING
TO NOBODY)” AWARD
Wylie Chen,
Executive yes man
THE ELECTROLYSIS CAN
WORK FOR YOU AWARD
Elaine Green,
seven years running
THE ADRIENNE YOUNG OUTSTANDING
ACHIEVEMENT IN THE FIELD OF FOOLISH
ARROGANCE AWARD
Andrew Schneider,
senatorial ego
THE BEST HANDS AWARD
Herman Ho-Ching,
drops the ball a lot
THE RAG ON A STICK AWARD
Teresa Tobin,
Bo-Batty
THE “I’M HAVING IT CHANGED
TO GUEVERA” AWARD
Geneva Wortman,
Executive radical
THE “NOBODY KNOWS I’M
A DOUBLE AGENT” AWARD
Brian Wise,
computing center janus
JUNE 13, 1999
And what a year for the Amphitheater Knob it’s been. It’s made
entirely out of concrete, it’s roundish on top, square on the bottom, and
shows no signs of going anywhere. One can only imagine what it will do
next, that crazy knob. The Oregon Commentator
salutes you, Amphitheater Knob, and may your second year be as fruitful as your first!
DEBACLE OF THE YEAR
Special Elections. (See Man of the Year.) If, for
some reason, you feel that these intrinsically related selections do indeed
require further explanation, then you have not been paying attention at
all this year. We both pity and envy you, and we will console ourselves
with another Miller High-Life. Mmmm... beer.
THE “I CAN STILL LIVE
VICARIOUSLY THROUGH
THE ASUO NEWSGROUP” AWARD
Selena Brewington,
still godless,still posting
THE ETERNAL
OPTIMIST AWARD
Bryan Myss,
greek
THE “WHO AM I? WHY AM I ON THIS
MASTHEAD?” AWARD
Rob Elder,
still around
THE JUST ANOTHER FLAMING
LIBERAL KID IN A TYEDYED SHIRT AWARD
Scott Austin,
one-time state
legislature candidate
THE PUPPET OR
PUPPETEER? AWARD
Geneva Wortman &
Morgan Cowling,
co-conspirators
THE SPECIAL INTEREST TOOL AWARD
ASUO Constitution Court,
OC-controlled
kangaroo court
THE “A NICKEL
BAG WILL DO
JUST FINE” AWARD
Akili Smith,
millionaire
THE “I PROMISE TO GO
AWAY NOW” AWARD
Mike Carson,
not getting drafted
THE “WHEN WILL I BE SPEWED
IN THE COMMENTATOR?” AWARD
Matt Swanson,
not in this lifetime
THE LEAST CREDIBLE
CAMPUS DEITY AWARD
Amy Goldhammer,
King of the Jews
THE SO VERY, VERY TIRED AWARD
Dave Frohnmayer,
stoic
THE WHATCHYOU TALKIN’
‘BOUT, WILLIS? AWARD
Spencer Hamlin,
future security guard
THE FACE THAT LAUNCHED
A THOUSAND SHIPS AWARD
Morgan Cowling,
in a land of opposites
THE JUMBLE® AWARD
Mitra Anoushiravani,
copycat
7
8
OREGON COMMENTATOR
ANATOMY OF A
SIT-IN
By
William
Beutler
With
additional
reporting
by
Jonathan
Collegio
JUNE 13, 1999
What you know, what you
don’t, and where it all began.
School is out for the summer, and most of the
bright young idealists involved in the May 18th sit-in at
Johnson Hall have already left town to sit in trees or whine
whine elsewhere. Many of them are likely to forget about the
whole thing come fall term. It’s already weeks behind us.
Yet the repercussions, reverberations, and consequences
in its aftermath are not—and the ball of administrative
action has just begun to roll. The sum of the controversy, if
not the protest itself, is still deemed newsworthy by
>>>
9
the local networks. Formal discussions
inspired by last month’s protest still capture the Emerald’s front page day in and
day out (as recently as June 3rd). With
such momentum behind the cause, it’s no
small exaggeration to say that what happens in the following weeks and months is
likely to reshape a good deal of the
University’s policy toward harassment and
minority issues.
Still, lost in the whirlwind of bureaucratic action is the protest’s inciting incident—where this recent spate of feel-good
activism all began.
Ground zero was a 323/448-level
class (Public Service Policy/Community
Development, respectively) in the
Planning, Public Policy and Management
(PPPM or 3PM) department. The twin
geneses, one following the other by less
than a week, were: a) a generalization
made by a student with regard to Latino
culture, and b) a violently worded e-mail
between two 3PM students. The gravity of
these incidents have not been met with
much scrutiny in the local press—their
meanings have been derived almost entirely from the protestor’s side, at face value.
The details of the incidents were
described in the vaguest of terms by the
Emerald on the Wednesday following the
demonstration. The story, co-written by
Maritza Ryciak and David Ryan, referred
only in passing to the “racial comment”
and “threatening e-mails,” focusing primarily on the previous afternoon’s spontaneous display of civil disobedience. The
Emerald’s unwillingness to explore the
both the class and e-mail discussion thereafter. What follows is the most complete
account of the events leading up to the sitin at Johnson Hall as they unfolded yet
available.
1.
The 3PM class was divided into
groups by professor Elizabeth M. Rocha
(Assistant
Professor
and
3PM
Undergraduate Program Director) and
asked to give a presentation considering
the problem of forming policy to help
unemployed and impoverished Latinos—
where all claims were to be backed up by
research.
2. During his group presentation, student Scott Bones was outlining one solution his group had proposed to aid
Hispanics. According to an anonymous
group member, Bones made the assertion
that Hispanics had less of a work ethic,
since they “work for a few hours, take a
siesta, and go back to work.” Reaction
from the class as a whole was sharp and
overwhelmingly negative—attacking him
personally, not questioning if his conclusion was based on statistical finding. Other
members of his group were attacked for
similar reasons.
3. An e-mail discussion of the comment
and the class’ reaction was begun by GTF
Aliscia Niles. The class uniformly condemned Bones’ words. The following
excerpt, from an e-mail by Jennifer
DuMond, is representative of the classroom sentiment (all e-mails verbatim):
There is a definite difference between simply
“THE PRESENTATION YESTERDAY WAS A PAINFUL
EXPERIENCE FOR ME. TROUBLED BY BEING CALLED A
RACIST I FOUND MYSELF SPENDING MUCH OF THE NIGHT
READING CULTURAL LITERATURE AND IMMERSED
IN SELF REFLECTION.”
issue from any other angle (save a precious
few Letters to the Editor) is not surprising.
Were they to do so, a vocal condemnation
would swiftly ensue—just the sort of public outcry that the Emerald can’t afford in
the wake of the controversy surrounding
comments deemed sexist and racist made
by Emerald columnist Vince Medeiros earlier this year.
The Commentator has obtained the emails posted to the class listserve, and has
spoken with several students present for
10
expressing one’s opinion, and blatently discriminating againt a group of people. Individuals
should re-think their major if they are not
devoted to public service without discrimination, because the PPPM department focuses on
public service and irradicating discrimnation...
Thank you again Aliscia and Elizabeth for
showing us not to tolerate racism.
Most messages suggested that Bones voluntarily remove himself from the department. His lone supporter was group member Scott McCulloch, who, even in defense
of his classmate, understandably distanced
himself from the words his partner had
used:
From: [email protected]
Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 19:45:36 EDT
Subject: Apology
Fellow classmates,
I would like to take this oppertunity to opoligize
for the clear misunderstanding which took
place in Tuesdays class. As a member of the
group whos statements were taken as closeminded or racist, I can only offer this in hopes
to help set it right...
The statements made regarding the U of O and
assumed cultural differences were not the
thoughts of the group as a whole. However, I
believe that the statements made were misinterrpreted from the original thoughts that individual may have had, and that when backed into a
corner, took a direction unintended. Please try
to understand this, and remember that we have
all had times when we have mis-spoken ourselves, said something we didn’t actually feel,
and wished we could take it back. Perhaps
Thursday will offer a fishbowl to help sort
things out,
~Scott McCulloch
4. Bones, under intense pressure from
his peers and feeling what can best be
described as “white guilt,” met with Prof.
Rocha to discuss the circumstances and
sort things out, later posting the following
e-mail to the class listserve:
From: [email protected]
Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 19:46:51 EDT
Subject: Dining on crow with fifty guests.
Well, I guess I should begin with an apology to
my classmates for speaking in a manner which
is not generally accepted in a classroom setting.
I am sorry.
Then follow with an apology to Elizabeth
Rocha who seems to have taken the greatest
offense to my remarks. I apologize. Then follow by expressing my remorse to my group
members for presenting our ideas in a manner
that was doomed to be ill-received by our classmates. I am sorry about that.
I must say that the presentation yesterday, while
difficult for many of you, was a painful experience for me. Troubled by being called a racist
afterward I found myself spending much of the
night reading cultural literature and immersed
in self reflection.
At a time when most of you were probably
sleeping I came to a realization that freed my
conscience of guilt. I have spent the last two
months attempting to understand the Latino
community and trying develop viable ways to
improve that particular communities economic
condition. Furthermore, I have lived my entire
life letting go of the anglo ego and trying look
through lenses that do not distort the true
nature of the people I see. I mustn’t allow myself
to be overly troubled by one instance of misdelivery of a message. Nor should I allow what
others say about me become my concept of self
identity. I should feel fortunate to have this
experience in an academic setting.
OREGON COMMENTATOR
I felt enlightened after watching “The Color of
Fear” and I carried with me wisping feelings of
disgust after leaving the Woodburn city council.
That exposure reassured me that I did come to
the right university. I do believe that in order to
be a just administrator we must expose ourselves to the full spectrum of viewpoints, movements, and ideals.
React to this episode however you choose to. If
my current colleagues and teachers believe that
I shouldn’t continue learning and with the 3PM
department then, at the next feasible opportunity, I will humbly discontinue me efforts in
obtaining a degree from the department.
with the utmost sincerity,
Thomas ‘Scott’ Bones
5. The majority of the class rejected
Bones’ apology, judging it insincere and
made only to get the class off his back.
Criticism of Bones at this point shifted
from his in-class statements to his retraction, ignoring the inciting incident. Sandra
Spoor, who would quickly emerge as one
of the most outspoken in the class, made
the following (excerpted) comments:
Well, Mr. Bones, you not only owe a big fat
apology to Prof. Rocha but you owe her a big
ass Thank You too- because if you took a
moment to find out the educational backgrounds of the profs. (Hibbard, Rocha) in the
PPPM Dept.- that are feeding us this “stuff”
you would understand why the remarks you
made were so offensive.
On the other hand, tenuous support for
Bones began to materialize, and from
unlikely places (including head of the
department Michael Hibbard). Student
Lauren Baldel made one of the few intelligent assertions about the incident:
The First Amendment guarantees us the right to
free speech and as future policy makers we have
a responsibility to uphold the Constitution.
Although I in no way agree with Scott’s
remarks, I believe that he is entitled to say what
he feels. His statement was ignorant, not true,
and racist. However, in no way did he yell fire
in a crowded theater.
6. McCulloch again ventured out into
open territory, defending Bones’ apology.
From: [email protected]
Date: Mon, 17 May 1999 02:15:22 EDT
Subject: PPPM
I can’t help but feel it is only the same few who
continue these e-mails. I like the comments
being made, but there is little diversity in what
is really being said, or who is saying it. Does
anyone else have a point of view on this
topic???
I feel as though obviously racism is a problem.
The only way to solve this problem is though
education. Education is the only real way to
solve anything. But must we stomp on others to
prove a point? I don’t really know Scott B. all
JUNE 13, 1999
that well, but I still believe he was honest in his
apology. Not just because he wants off the hook,
but because he knew as soon as he said it that
he had made a gross generalizion. I think even
a few of you might owe him an apology. I feel
as though everyone is so quick to jump on
everyone else, some won’t say anything for fear
of being ripped apart. So again, I invite all into
this e-mail exchange. Thanks for your time,
Looking forward to being ripped apart,
Scott McCulloch
7. Ripped apart he was. Spoor immediately fired back, becoming confrontational
with him in a way that the rest of the class
Although Mr. McCullough had a few typos, he
is NOT the one that sounds like an uneducated,
ignorant fool.
If you want people to listen to things you have
to say, I suggest you do it in a more dignified
matter.
One, in particular, was inappropriate,
and proved to be the final straw. The following e-mail, the source of the protest’s
righteous fury, was forwarded to the group
by Spoor:
At 01:17 AM 5/17/99 PDT, Ashley Kingston
wrote:
“I DON’T KNOW WHY SOMEONE DIDN’T THINK OF
THIS BEFORE.... I AM SURPRISED THAT PEOPLE
LIKE MARTIN LUTHER KING DID NOT
USE THE ‘KICK-IN-THE-ASS’ METHOD.”
had not:
From: <[email protected]
Date: Mon, 17 May 1999 00:04:23 -0700
Subject: Re: PPPM
Think of this dialogue as a vehicle of educationThere are many in this class 323/448 that were
offended and had the right to responde vous
plez- like they haveYou Mr. McCullough need two things- spell
check and a kick in the ass
8.
Following this, several angry,
anonymous e-mails were sent to particular
students in the class, including Spoor.
Some were bitter and sarcastic:
From:
“Very
Disgusted”
<[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Date: Mon, 17 May 1999 03:36:47 MDT
Subject:
Dear Ms. Spoor,
I commend you on your non-violent methods. I
think you have set a wonderful example for the
class. Whenever we disagree with someone, I
think we should tell them that they need a kick
in the ass. I don’t know why someone didn’t
think of this before. It is a perfect way to solve
all of the problems in the world. I am surprised
that people like Martin Luther King did not use
the “kick-in-the-ass” method. He and others
like him should have ignored ideas like educating people about racism and using open dialogue as a means of resolving conflict.
I am not signing my name to this document
because you have created a hostile environment
in the class. I am also not sending this e-mail
to the entire class because I am not out to
embarrass you in front of others. Perhaps you
could learn a lesson or two about that.
Trust me, if every time you disagree with someone, you go ballistic on them, people are not
going to listen to what you have to say.
Your remark to Mr. McCulloch was not appropriate,therefore you will get an inappropriate
response I was going to say this to you many
classes ago,before this class, I think you know
who I am. I think you are an “anal”, “prude”
,Bitch, you suggested a kick in the ass for Mr.
McCulloch, well what you need Honey is someone to spread your legs(real wide,considering
how tight it is) and fuck you up the ass, a kick
would not be enough!! and then maybe you will
begin to understand what it is like to be taken
advantage of. HAVE A NICE DAY.....I don’t like
when people get picked on, so don’t mess with
me....
The Ashley Kingston in question
turned out to be the girlfriend of 3PM student John Convy—he had used her e-mail
address in a short-sighted attempt to
remain anonymous. The Office of Public
Safety was contacted less than 24 hours
later, but by this time, students in the class
had already deduced the sender’s identity.
The following class period was just
the next day, and joining the class were
OPS, EPD, and students representing both
the Emerald and the Commentator.
Schoolwork was suspended for the day
while the increasingly out-of-control situation took center stage. Convy was
nowhere to be found. The sit-in was organized and took place that same afternoon.
William Beutler, a sophomore majoring in
English and Journalism, is an Associate
Editor for the Oregon Commentator
Jonathan Collegio, a senior majoring in
Political Science and Economics is
Publisher for the Oregon Commentator
11
THE YEAR IN REVIEW
BY WILLIAM BEUTLER
Ever since Geneva Wortman and
Morgan Cowling “snatched” the
1998-99 ASUO Executive, two
significant forces have governed
the course of student life on this
campus: nothing, and nothing.
Recently, the two were allotted
750 words by the Oregon Daily
Emerald to recap their achievements
during the past academic year. It comes
as no surprise that the tone of the column
was not unlike that of an attorney delivering
the closing argument in defense of a client who
is obviously guilty of multiple grisly deaths.
That’s right: Geneva and Morgan may indeed be
chainsaw killers.
Not two paragraphs into their year-end
summary, they pull out the totalitarian trump
card: “[the students] are allowing the dominant paradigm of racism, sexism and homophobia to prevail in society forever.”
Dominant paradigm? Forever? Did you
steal this from the Nation, or your Writing
121 essay on oppression? These are strong
words at face value, but in reality, it’s
12
OREGON COMMENTATOR
empty rhetoric. You’d have to be a fool to
actually believe that these social ills are the
“status quo” in 1999 Eugene, Oregon. The
same open-minded population that passed
medical marijuana and assisted suicide
legislation is oppressing ethnic minorities,
not to mention 51% of the population? In
the 1960’s, campus activism had a substantial role in changing society. Today it’s
mired in quicksand and will claw desperately at any isolated incident that may offer
a chance of generating social outrage.
There aren’t many good battles left to
fight, but the torch is carried on, inspiring
more annoyance than social change.
Trainspotting’s Bond connoisseur Sick
Boy subscribes to a unifying theory of life
that is of particular relevance here: “At
one point you’ve got it, then you lose it—
then it’s gone forever.” Wortman and
Cowling make several references to “the
good fight” of student government, but the
fact is, its casualties far outnumber the victors. As the year draws to a close, the look
back is not a very pretty view; in fact, it
has been an unredeemable mess.
Are you disgusted by this? Well, you
should be. Judging by the annual election
figures, however, you’re not. You’re apathetic. So am I. You don’t give a shit.
Neither do I. It’s been proven that most of
the student body doesn’t even know what
the acronym “ASUO” stands for, much
less do they care about what happens at
student senate. (You’d be surprised to find
out how much money the senate controls.
You could find out, if you knew where to
go. I don’t.) And that’s fine. It just isn’t
worth it. So nothing in this recap is relevant to the student body. Still, I feel, out of
journalistic ethic, if nothing else, that I
must phone in some kind of “the year that
was” bullshit, just in the off chance that
anybody’s out there. Let’s get it over with.
The Bob Dylan/Van Morrison
concert at Mac Court, Sept. 24
One of Wortman and Cowling’s campaign promises was to bring more concerts
to Mac Court. This is something the
monolithic Athletic Department has more
JUNE 13, 1999
say in than the ASUO
concur, or at least those
Exec ever will. (The AD
clear-headed enough to
remember it.
Any
said “no” to a Rolling
game where underage
Stones Autzen appearance last year because
fans can offer swigs of
vodka to their fiftythe football team had to
something counterpractice.)
The
Dylan/
parts is still a good
Morrison show was the
game. The next season
Cultural Forum’s lone
is still up in the air—
victory, yet they still
Bellotti has yet to
decide on a quarterback.
managed to piss everyone
With Akili Smith (aided by
off: those who found out that
E LOST
the real Jerry Maguire, superageneral admission did not mean
TO
gent Lee Steinberg) signed third
festival seating, those tortured at
to the Bengals, Oregon’s offense
the hands of overzealous security,
IM
could be in trouble. This is no
and even Van Morrison, who was
doubt the fault of Geneva and
hurried off-stage before he felt he
Morgan. Even the Delta Gammas
was done. The Emerald, however,
in their matching t-shirts aren’t
was typically enamored of the “lifeenough to push us over the top.
time achievement award” they preWinner: Amy Goldhammer, who
tended to see. All I saw was a cougained new philosophical insight, disple of old-timers riding past glories
covering the “importance of the footto a sweet paycheck, and a group of
ball fan” while supporting our “increkids unrepentantly enabling this kind
di-team.”
of cultural cannibalism.
Loser: Jason Maas, who warmed
Winners: Your parents, who got to
the bench his entire senior year, unless
stand outside and smoke a joint like
we were up by at least three touchthey were 20 again.
downs.
Losers: Your respect for anyone
Give a Shit Quotient: 75%—
involved, including the leading acts.
Everybody likes football, even those who
Give a Shit Quotient: 20%—Most
pretend not to.
students weren’t even in town on
September 24th.
“BLECCH!!!”
W
H ?
The Halloween Riot
The Ducks Football Season
Since the initial 48-14 Sept. 5 upset
versus Michigan St., the Ducks were on a
roll, finishing 8-3 overall. They still managed to fuck up in the games where it
counted. This is a recurring problem in
Oregon sports—as great as some teams
are, they can still be counted on to lose the
big games. Case in point: the fabled Trail
Blazers of the early 90’s will forever be the
Buffalo Bills of the NBA. If the Ducks’
embarrassing Aloha Bowl loss wasn’t bad
enough, losing to a vomiting UCLA on
national TV was. At least the frustrating
44-41, Nov. 21 civil war defeat in
Corvallis was epic—all those in attendance
On Friday, October 30th, the Emerald
came out swinging with three stories related to last years’ riot, and on the following
Monday, they gave this year’s riot the front
page and the day’s editorial. The riot this
time around was less impressive than the
previous year’s, but it garnered at least as
much media attention, if not more. The
Oregonian even ran the story.
The talking heads of the middle-aged,
boring set shook their heads and lamented
the state of today’s youth, as parents often
do, conveniently forgetting that their parents said the same thing about their “long
>>>
13
hair”, or that their grandparents lamented
their parents’ “jazz music.”
Dave
Frohnmayer will recall days of yore when
the kids went rioting out at the coast every
spring break, if you ask him.
Of course, it was all of thirty seconds
before someone blamed the media. Here,
television takes most of the blame. While
the local print media spent most of the time
editorializing, unmistakably, against the
burgeoning tradition, local television spent
most of its editorial time scouring 17th and
Alder for any signs of an uprising.
It was all for naught. Everybody
knows that the Halloween riot of ‘97 was
the truly epic one, and no matter how hard
the kids try—and they will—you just can’t
recapture the excitement of the past.
Winners: Eugene-area policymakers
and “peacekeepers”. Zero Tolerance, now
going strong in its second year, is a surefire way to pad the city coffers.
Losers: Residents of the West
University neighborhood, and unhappy
subjects of the Eugene Police Department.
Give a Shit Quotient: 70%—Most
everybody was in or around the riot, or
wishes they were.
PRIDE Hall
If anything had a chance to go the distance, it was this. Though the proposal
was debated on Bill Maher’s (or rather,
ABC Corp.’s) “Politically Incorrect” and
well-covered in the Eugene/Springfield
market, the University held firm that they
felt the concept basically amounted to segregation. This did not sit well with the
Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender
Alliance (LGBTA), who turned out for
University town hall meetings to overwhelm Dave Frohnmayer with accusations
and pointed questions. The result was a
typical don’t-ask, don’t-tell unofficial
PRIDE Hall on the fourth floor of Carson.
The Housing department has semi-officially announced the floor as a LGBTA “cluster” for the next year. Like so many others,
this game ends in a stalemate.
Winners: Bill Maher, who’s desperate
to keep his job the same way Tim
14
Counterclockwise from left: Bob Dylan falls
from grace, the ASUO Exec snatches back
OSPIRG’s funding, riots increase police power,
leprechauns, Tamir Kriegel is at least three
times the size of all other ASUO candidates,
Amy Goldhammer cluelessly opines on Ducks
football, and a drum circle highlights the
EMU Amphitheater’s first year. Sad, very sad.
Meadows is over at NBC.
Losers: Anybody with the Legally
Gregarious Barristers of the Transatlantic
Association, or whatever they’re called. I
already told you, I don’t follow these
things.
Give a Shit Quotient: 10%—Some say
higher, some say lower. Al Kinsey was a
weirdo, but still a groundbreaking weirdo.
Elections
We won’t even discuss the yearly
turnout rate. Following last year’s gruesome spectacle, this year’s turn at the plate
was nothing if not a disappointment. Sure,
Ralph Nader (or as we affectionately call
him, Nader-Nader) caused a bit of a stir.
And the Honesty-OSPIRG campaigners
predictably held each other at arm’s length.
But the Emerald clung to a group of joke
candidates, since any other angle on the
yearly parade of monotony would have
inevitably put them to sleep. Victory for
the Chen/Anoushiravani ticket was a foregone conclusion, though their landslide
victory in the primaries was somewhat
interesting—if you happened to be a student government wonk.
Here’s another interesting note. The
Johnson Hall kids must have been pretty
self-satisfied to re-enact the demonstrations of past civil rights leaders this May.
Yet they conveniently forget that they were
upstaged months earlier, as ASUO hopeful
Brandon Hartley chained himself to a desk
during the debates to protest his 11th hour
removal from the ballot. You know what
they say: one man’s terrorist is another
man’s freedom fighter.
Winners: Those who don’t like the
Prog Slate. This year, they failed to capture the Exec, and Senator Eric Pfeiffer
turned in his membership card not long
after winning his seat.
Losers: That guy in the ASUO advertisement for the Elections. Did he know
what he was posing for? If so, is he
ashamed of himself?
Give a Shit Quotient: Okay, fine—but
in Da Vinci code: tnecrep neetfiF.
OREGON COMMENTATOR
doubt extraneous to the situation, or were
at least not represented in their actions.
Wortman called it “a victory for students,”
but the only victors here are the blind,
deaf, and mute people who went unaware
of the fiasco. The big, big number emerging from this one? 1.8%—i.e. the exact
voter turnout. Congratulations girls, for
screwing up all of student government—
but you’re only giving Scott Austin more
material to go with.
Other things that went nowhere:
Campus Cash: What happened to this?
Wasn’t it supposed to revolutionize the
way you did business on campus? Well,
did it? At one visionary moment, UO card
manager Joel Woodruff dreamed of a nottoo-distant-future where students would
use Campus Cash in EMU vending
machines. What kind of utopian garbage
is this? In truth, it’s a concept that works
like a charm at other universities—but the
UO, put simply, blew it. The card was not
designed in a manner that made it useful to
anyone, and people stayed away in droves.
The IACUC semi-controversy: Do you
know who Sarah Brown is? Sarah Brown
was apparently on the Institutional Animal
Care and Use Committee (IACUC) at one
time. Then in January, she was kicked off
for some reason, supposedly because she
was in SETA or another junta of the
Survival Center collective, and there was a
sit-in or a protest of some kind for some-
JUNE 13, 1999
thing or other. If you followed this one
closely, you need to find other things to do.
The Gardenburger Boycott: It’s over.
Dorm residents rejoice as they are no
longer forced to deal with anti-NORPAC
propaganda while eating breakfast.
Jeremy Price Bucy: You know who you are.
Zuka Juice and Pizza Planet: More utopian visions from the EMU’s idea people: a
wider selection of food in the EMU food
court. The story goes like this: Zuka Juice
(Starbucks with Slurpees) and Pizza Planet
(some type of Italian food) were to be
available in the food court by spring term.
Where are they? You can ask Susan Racette,
EMU business manager, at 346-6069.
The Special Elections:
If Geneva
Wortman and Morgan Cowling did nothing else this year to lose the students’ trust,
then this alone would still be grounds for
dismissal in a just world. Ethics were no
The EMU Amphitheater: It was the first
full year of the amphitheater’s existence.
Shouldn’t the EMU have pulled out all the
stops? After all, they lost the Cherry
Poppin’ Daddies to an MTV gig for the
opening last year, replacing them with
tedious WOW Hall fodder Calobo. They
owe us. But all we got was Ralph Nader,
a couple of drumming guys, a few local
bands, and Bible Jim. I’ll tell you this:
those drumming guys were the only bright
spot in that roundabout this year. The only
people who won this one were Matt
Scotten and Glen Banfield, whose
$335,000+ over-realized legacy lives on.
The KWVA controversy: Played out entirely in Emerald letters-to-the-editor until the
Commentator took it on last issue, this is a
situation that simply isn’t going to budge.
The ASUO Exec may have dissolved the
KWVA board, but it hasn’t seen many column inches in the Emerald, nor is it likely
to put Frank Jezukewicz in front of a
microphone upstairs announcing “You
Enjoy Myself.”
The Johnson Hall Sit-In: See story, page
9. We can’t write any more on this than we
already have. There isn’t enough beer.
It wasn’t that bad, was it? Well, have
fun this summer, and unless you’re lucky
enough to have graduated or failed out, get
ready to do it all again next year.
William Beutler, a sophomore majoring in
Journalism and English, is very, very tired.
15
I
COLLEGIO’S
LAST
STAND
sat befuddled at the
Plaza Caletilla in the
sweltering Acapulco
heat. The bullfight I’d come
to see, that fabled battle
between man and beast I’d
read of in the works of
Hemingway and Michener—
was pretty weak. I sat in the
cheaper “sol” (or sun) seats of
the bull ring during the first
fight, and watched the picador
GAINST THE NIVERSITY
on his armored horse cowardly drive a spear over and over OF
REGON
ARL
ARX
into the bull’s back. Blood
AND THE DEBACLE THAT
gushed from el toro’s pierced
IS THE
hide, and it became painfully
obvious that this was not a
fight at all, but rather an exhiBY JONATHAN COLLEGIO
bition of how long this beast
could hold on before simply
bleeding to death. Honor schmonor. That torrero (Javier 10’s best football team, the UO is more pathetic still, akin to one
Gutierrez was his name) wouldn’t have to kill the bull—he’d sim- of those ridiculous Big 8 schools.
UO women?
ply have to out-endure it, which was no real challenge following
Unexceptional too. Finding an attractive, intelligent woman
the thrashing said taurus had taken from the horseman. Twenty
here
is like finding pork in a Rabbi’s fridge—unless the word
minutes later, after twice missing the kill with his sword, the ani“attractive”
means something that came out of a cookie-cutter and
mal collapsed, blacking out in a dizzy, shameful daze.
“intelligent”
means someone taken to regurgitating leftist one-linIt was a lousy bullfight. Hey, it was Acapulco, not
ers
handed
down
by their womyn’s studies professors. Interested
Pamplona—I recognized this.
in
finding
an
even
mildly attractive, self-aware, intelligent and
But this level of outright mediocrity put my thoughts into perarticulate
woman
with
an iota of style? You might as well change
spective. After spending four years in a politically correct hellyour
orientation.
If
college
is some great free market for finding
hole named after some moron with an effeminate name, thousands
another
of
the
opposite
sex
(as
one Economics professor once told
of miles removed from that pathetic little microcosm, I recognized
me),
Eugene
sells
lemons,
not
peaches. I’m not going to stand
that the University of Oregon was the Plaza Caletilla of academia.
back
like
some
new
age
punk
and
say that looks don’t matter—
A mediocre pit. Period.
they
do
matter,
probably
more
than
any
one other trait. But ladies,
And this was no grand revelation, either. Like a grotesque
really:
when
taken
as
a
whole,
a
reasonable
guy can take off as
brute catcalling a gorgeous woman by the shore, all the while
many
as
30
‘physical
attractiveness’
points
if
they are backed up
knowing full well he’d never have a chance with her, I too underby
a
brain.
Still,
I’ve
yet
to
see
that
combination
on any more than
stood my plight all along. I’d just never admitted it to myself.
a
few,
pitifully
few,
occasions.
The University of Oregon is a mediocre school in a mediocre
town, swelling with mediocre academics who work in mediocre
buildings, teaching mediocre students a mediocre curriculum in a
mediocre style. And if the only redemption it finds is in the PAC PLEASE TURN TO PAGE 18
A
O
U
,K
M
,
ASUO
16
OREGON COMMENTATOR
THE
FINAL
SWIG
Recruiter: “This is _______.”
Friend:
“What position do you play?”
Recruit:
“Outside Linebacker.”
Friend:
“How do you like it here?”
Recruit:
(Looking the 5’7” blond girl
up and down, approvingly:) “It’s pretty
nice.”
Most major athletic programs on campus have a section of their budget allocated toward recruiting. Part of the recruiting
budget is dedicated towards entertaining
potential signees during weekend trips.
Usually
a recruit will visit with a member
INISH OFF WHAT
of the team—sleeping in their homes,
EVER S LEFTOVER
going with them to classes, sporting
BECAUSE AMIR S events, parties, etc. Naturally, the team
member will be given a small chunk of
ALREADY TANKED
change with which to wine and dine the
recruit. In many instances, a recruit is taken
BY TAMIR KRIEGEL out for cheap meals so that the hosting athlete can pocket the money.
eresheit Bara Eloheem, et Hashamayim ve et Haaretz:
Football players and men’s basketball players seem to get a
The Genesis
different angle on this recruiting process altogether. While they
My first article was in a Tater Awards issue. I worked may sleep with potential other female undergraduates, their offifor hours on the thing, and the issue was never distributed. I think cial recruiters are University-recognized 5’7” blond girls. These
it’s kind of fitting that my last piece will appear in an issue that recruiters take the athletes out and show them the best that the
will come out between spring finals and summer midterms to a University and its surrounding areas have to offer—and being that
very limited readership. Ashes to ashes, dust to dust.
the school is underfunded, infested with Hate Crimes™, and easy
to get into, the best things are probably 5’7” blond girls.
My One Regret: Where’s My Baby?
The idea that the University regularly whores out its females
Looking back at my career at the University of Oregon, I only as recruiting bait for potential students is revolting. It sickens me
have one regret: I should have authorized the organization that to even entertain the notion that many of our finest women have
administers the PSAT’s to release my scores to interested univer- been reduced to strumpets, courtesans, harlots, and demisities. Because maybe if I had, I would have been recruited by the mondaines under the guises of modest per diems and legal recruitUniversity of Oregon, instead of just randomly picking this place. ing budgets.
I didn’t even know the damn place recruited until I was introI guess what I’m really trying to say is: “Where’s my 5’7”
duced to a self-proclaimed recruiter during halftime of a men’s blond girl?”
basketball game earlier this year. She was 5’7”, blond, with a
I had a very intimate relationship with this school for nearly
great body, standing outside of MacArthur Court with a 250 lbs. four years; I gave things to this place, I took things from this
Goliath of a human being who didn’t speak much, but appeared to place, I carried on dialogues with this establishment, I got angry
be enjoying his company. When asked what she was doing, she with it, I made up with it—in many respects, my relationship to
said, “recruiting.”
Friend:
“Aren’t you going to introduce us to your recruit?”
PLEASE TURN TO PAGE 19
F
,
’
T
’
.
B
JUNE 13, 1999
17
CONTINUED FROM PAGE 16
The Campus Left?
If someone or something can be
“extraordinarily mediocre,” (regardless of
the apparent contradiction) campus leftists
here at the UO define the term. But before
I go on, I need to clarify some minutiae for
the many oblivious to campus politics.
Whichever genius said that “politics is
Hollywood for ugly people” was right on
the money. Go to our city halls, our State
Capitol, our Congress— and one undeniable fact slaps you right in the face: the
level of talent in politics is discouragingly,
dishearteningly, and dauntingly low.
Three types of people are prone to
entering politics: 1) those with ideas
(shamefully few exist), 2) those wanting
attention, but not attractive enough to get
into the media otherwise, and 3) the deviously power-hungry. Corruption derives
from a combination of 2 & 3. And evil is
the corruption base with a dash of Marxist
ideology.
Now, to be fair, the majority of student
“activists” just belong to the second category. They do have some (inchoate, hazy)
ideas (referenced from their sociology,
women’s studies, and PPPM classes), but
by and large these folks just want to feel
important. A few (our past three student
body presidents) have the malignant combination (noted above) to fuck up policy in
a major, major way. But an idiot can only
fuck something up so far. That’s what
keeps things in check at the UO: Idiots run
the show. And when they conspire and get
a clever idea like calling a special election
to
get
OSPIRG
refunded,
the
Commentator is here to call them on it.
Yet sometimes, unfortunately, they’ll get
away with it—(that skatepark in front of
the EMU: case in point).
With a megaphone and some posters,
I took the entire campus left down on election day, 1998. OSPIRG lost and I was
the devil; they called my then-girlfriend,
“Satan’s concubine.” I felt pretty good
about it—until I admitted to myself that
the victory was something akin to Hulk
Hogan body-slamming a retarded kid. It’s
just not that fulfilling when you beat the
morons.
Who are my favorite campus people?
SO, AFTER FOUR
YEARS HERE, MY
INESCAPABLE VERDICT IS IN: THE
UO = MEDIOCRE
OSPIRG!, who continually campaign for
campaign finance, yet who still refused a
voluntary spending cap for their most
recent campaign on the University of
Oregon campus. They outspent their
opponents more than 7-1 with off-campus
money, so is it difficult to comprehend the
inevitability their “overwhelming” victory—as they defiantly call it?
Collegio’s standing enemies:
• OSPIRG Chairwoman Merriah
Fairchild is recorded as saying that credit
unions don’t charge ATM fees because
they’re “good people.” She is the foremost
“consumer advocate” on campus. And
also its biggest moron.
• Fanatical OSPIRG followers who
probably believe in “democracy,” yet see
no shame in tearing down hundreds of
18
their opponents posters during the campaign (or dumping stacks of Commentator
issues that fairly criticize their pet projects).
• Ralph Nader, for advancing the special interest of the ambulance-chasing trial
lawyers while campaigning for the “public
interest.”
• Sociology instructor Julia Fox who
claimed repeatedly that we are funded by a
“right-wing” organization called the
Madison Center. Well, Ms. Fox, it is difficult for us to be funded by an organization
that no longer exists.
So after four years here, my
inescapable verdict is in: The UO =
MEDIOCRE. Imagine how much worse it
would be without Mr. Knight building us a
library and a law school.
But you can wade through this mediocrity and actually make the experience
worthwhile? Take lots of pictures. Drink
lots of beer. Have a Bloody Mary at the
Vet’s Club every now and then. Avoid the
Sociology, Psychology, and Women’s
Studies departments. Go to the football
and basketball games.
And most importantly, read the
Oregon Commentator. Beer in hand.
Jonathan Collegio, a senior in search of
truth, love, and redemption, once published the Oregon Commentator
OREGON COMMENTATOR
CONTINUED FROM PAGE 17
this University was comparable to a marriage of sorts, and to think that I could
have derived sexual pleasure from this
relationship but was not afforded the
opportunity only makes me ill.
Some People: Good
I usually surround myself with around
8 good people. Sometimes more, sometimes less. Right now, it’s more. Are you
there?
1_2_3_4_5_6_7_8_9_10_11_12_13_
Some People: Bad
A lot of ugly kids out there. Stop being
ugly. Also, stop being so sensitive. In conclusion, stop being so ugly and sensitive.
Who I Am: Being Held Back by the Man
moted within a year of receiving the affliction. Ed, on the other hand, held the position for nearly two years—and now he’s
quitting the magazine a year early, with all
the bitterness of rancid horseradish.
Further proof that my previous torchbearers knew the position sucked, look
where they placed me on the masthead. All
year long, I have been directly under the
Editor-in-Chief, and directly above the
Publisher. The Publisher and Editor-inChief are the respective heads of the areas
they monitor—a buck always stops with
one of those two titles. There is no logic in
placing the Managing Editor above either
one of those positions—the buck never
stops with me.
The position placement was the
board’s attempt at appeasement upon realizing that they had relegated me to gradu-
FOR WHAT IT’S WORTH, THIS IS MY FINAL
SWIG WITH THE COMMENTATOR FAMILY; THIS
IS MY OFFICIAL RESIGNATION. BUT I’M NOT
BITTER BECAUSE I’M NOT GOING OUT TAKING
A PULL OFF OF THAT FINAL SWIG. LADIES
AND GENTLEMEN, I’M ALREADY DRUNK.
I never got the sweet title. While Ed
flaunted his title of Editor-in-Chief, and
Jon cavorted through the streets known
simply as the Publisher, I was stuck with
Managing Editor.
As in night manager, restaurant manager, middle manager, manager at
McDonald’s. Or as in, “just managing to
get by.” Maybe even, “He’s not all that
qualified or talented, but he’ll manage.”
What about baseball managers? Well,
what about them? Tommy Lasorda is a fatass who had a heart attack. Joe Torre has
cancer.
Even the people that gave me the title
knew that it sucked. Farrah Bostic,
Andrew Oberriter, and Ed Madrid—three
of the four directors that cursed me with
the ridiculous title—all held the title at one
time. But Farrah and Andrew were proJUNE 13, 1999
ating as a fat, disease-ridden, hamburgermonitoring, middle-of-the-road lackey.
I’m the first Managing Editor in nearly 8
years to leave the Commentator as a
Managing Editor—do you realize how
pathetic that is? Farrah, Andrew, Ed—all
promoted to Editor-in-Chief. The
Managing Editors before them were also
promoted to Editor-in-Chief.
In the end, though, I won. After all, I
only used the Commentator as a springboard to carry me to the ASUO Executive,
and it worked. While my name sat on the
magazine’s masthead—albeit under a
tainted title—my soul was dedicated to
achieving greatness within the hallowed
halls of student government.
Have you ever seen Mitra—the newly
elected ASUO Vice President—and me in
the same room together? No. Unscramble
‘Mitra’. That’s right, it spells Rimat—er...
Tamir. I am Mitra Ano%#lDÁØ∏†mavi†n. I am next year’s ASUO Exec.
Last Call: The Final Swig
At some point between “last call” and
“final pick up,” a man is left alone with a
warm glass of something that once was a
well drink—the last swig, the farewell
bonanza. A collection of backwash, mixer,
and melted ice. It is the essence of saying
goodbye; it is the epitome of the last few
moments before departing.
In those last few moments, before the
drinks are collected and people are asked
to exit the bar, an equalizing hysteria
spreads through the area—will this buzz
last? do I have anything at home? am I
even tipsy?—and people start grabbing at
anything in the hopes of getting their alcoholic fix and maintaining loopiness far into
the night. Drunkards push themselves
towards vomiting and sober people appear
pathetically drunk.
Alas, there is no alcohol in those
drinks, only saliva and water. The final
swigs are hoaxes: the anger bringers, the
cynicism builders, and the suppliers of
hate and anguish. For what it’s worth, this
is my final swig with the Commentator
family; this is my official resignation.
But I’m not bitter, because I’m not
going out taking a pull off of that final
swig. Ladies and gentlemen, I’m already
drunk. Right next to my Commentator
glass of melted ice sits hundreds of other
glasses. I’ve had a great time at this school,
and I’ve had a great time at this magazine,
and now, hearing “last call,” I can smile,
because I’m loaded. Go ahead folks,
scrounge for my cups, drink my nut, soak
yourself in aged ice and choice mucous.
I’m done and I’m happy and I’m sorry for
anyone out there who took anything within these walls of academia seriously. You
wasted it all. Go ahead, drink my final
swigs until they start collecting the cups.
Go ahead.
Tamir Kriegel owns the names of both the
Commentator and the Voice. He was also
the Managing Editor of this damn thing.
19
Printed in this issue’s Letters section is an e-mail from Bettie Sing
Luke, Multicultural Trainer at
Lane Community College. In
addition to the Commentator, the
letter was Cc’ed to the Emerald,
the Asian Pacific-American
Student Union, and 34 assorted
individuals at both Lane and the
University of Oregon. In the letter, Luke demanded a retraction
for use of the phrase “Chinese
eyes” in Another Perspective
columnist Michael Atkinson’s serial, “The Bottle and the Damage
Done.” The editorial response
can be found alongside the letter
on page five. Here is Michael
Atkinson’s rebuttal.
victim of a racist scribe. No, you
are a victim if your own paranoid
delusional thinking. You made
the grossly blind assumption that
my buddy and I are Caucasian. It
never occurred to you that we
might actually be Chinese? Well
guess what?
We’re both
Chinese-Americans. Michael
Atkinson is just the Anglo name
my adoptive parents gave me
after I left the Zhejiang province
as a 14-month-old baby. Bettie,
if the conclusion-jump were a
“THE BOTTLE AND THE DAMAGE DONE”
track and field event, you’d be a
WILL NOT BE SEEN AT ITS REGULARLY
Olympic Gold Medalist.
SCHEDULED TIME. WE HOPE YOU ENJOY
I can’t believe you had the
audacity
to announce what I
THIS VERY SPECIAL EPISODE OF
“obviously” meant to imply in
ANOTHER PERSPECTIVE.
my writing. Like your interpre—Ed.
tation is absolutely the correct
one.
Furthermore, I don’t like
BY MICHAEL ATKINSON
ear Bettie,
your tone. Being a minority
graduate student doesn’t give
you the clout to “demand” anything. You “expect” a response
I was distressed to learn that you took offense to my story. It within two weeks? Or what? You’ll file a grievance, it will be
was honestly not my intention. You want an apology? Okay, I’m buried under red tape and eventually forgotten. Oh-blah-di, ohsorry—sorry that you devote your life’s energy making yourself blah-da—life goes on.
out as a victim—that truly is sorry. Let me tell ya sister, if I was
I’m not threatened by your title or your long list of email
actually trying to offend you, you’d know it. But you are not the recipients. I’m responding on my own volition. At first I didn’t
BIG TROUBLE
IN LITTLE
CHINA
D
20
OREGON COMMENTATOR
YOU DO NOT TURN TO MY PAGE TO CATCH UP ON THE DAILY NEWS OR
TO ENGAGE IN EDUCATIONAL INTELLECTUAL DISCOURSE. THIS IS NOT
THE EMERALD; MY COLUMN IS NOT SUBJECT TO THE SAME ETHICAL
GAUNTLET AS POOR OL’ VINCE MEDEIROS’. MINE IS MERELY ENTERTAINMENT, NO DIFFERENT THAN CHEECH AND CHONG OR THE
BEASTIES. IT’S JUST ME, DOING MY TIRED OLD GONZO SHTICK.
plan to dignify your whiny letter with a
response. But yours is the first formal
objection that I’ve ever received, so I’m
really tickled. I also feel personally obligated to give you a bit of your own “multicultural training”:
In the contemporary American counterculture idiom, the term “Chinese eyes”
is used to describe the droopy squinting
that naturally occurs after taking one or ten
bong hits (inhalation of marijuana smoke
through a water-filtering device). It is
not intended to be a derogatory
term. Cheech and Chong use
it all the time; Tommy
Chong is half Chinese. As
mentioned in the letters
page, the Beastie Boys
used the term on their
second album, “Paul’s
Boutique.” They sold out
every show they ever played in
Beijing, at least until they
endorsed the “Free Tibet” movement.
My writing does not contain any serious political or
social agenda. You do not
turn to my page to catch up
on the daily news or to
engage in educational intellectual discourse. This is not the
Emerald, my column is not subject to the
same ethical gauntlet as poor ol’ Vince
Medeiros’. Mine is merely entertainment,
no different than Cheech and Chong or the
Beasties. It’s just me, doing my tired old
Gonzo shtick. Just sit your ass down at
JUNE 13, 1999
your favorite bar or toilet and read until
your legs fall asleep. My goal is to make
you laugh with me; or at least laugh AT
me. I don’t care, as long as I can provide a
chuckle. Maybe you won’t laugh at all;
perhaps you’ll be offended. It doesn’t matter either way, because I’ve got Freedom of
the Press. What I write is what you get,
take it or leave it. Tape it on your wall,
wipe your ass with it, burn it in a demonstration—I couldn’t give two shits what
you do. But if you think you’re going
to change either the Commentator or
myself, then you’re barking up the
wrong tree, Bettie. And you are
really dreamin’ if you think you
can force us to apologize for
anything.
I operate free from the
Commentator’s
editorial
policy.
This year our
Filipino Editor Emeritus, Ed
Madrid, and our Jewish
managing editor, Tamir
Kriegel, invited me to do the
“Another Perspective” column. They told me that as
an outsider, I was allowed
to write whatever I want,
free from censorship. So
all your talk about the
“ignorant” staff and their
“lack of exposure” is utter nonsense. Your
issue is solely with me, and I say you’re
the ignorant one, Betty, for trying to tell me
what I “obviously” intended to say—while
being completely oblivious to my knack
for the American vernacular. You’re the
one making the blatantly biased assumption that the Commentator staff is purely
composed of thick-headed, all-American
white boys; we have a far more ethnically
diverse, worldly staff than the Emerald
does. It’s your brand of knee-jerk, victimcomplex, politically correct bullshit that
keeps America from being a true melting
pot. Once you guys learn to relax and have
a sense of humor for a change, then we can
talk about racial harmony. Until then,
since you want to be offended, and strive
so hard to be a victim, your wish has been
granted. Bettie Sing Luke, you are the
proud recipient of a customized
Commentator clowning. Now that’s something to cry about.
Yours,
Michael Atkinson
P.S. I apologize to those expecting to read
“The Bottle and the Damage Done, Part
VII.” In the next issue, due out later this
summer, I will conclude the saga with an
extended episode, complete with the epilogue. Until then, cheers.
Michael Atkinson, a multicultural trainer
at Drunken State University, is a featured
columnist for the Oregon Commentator.
21
ON CLINTON DER FÜHRER
Clinton... first takes the mind of his public citizens and gets each
one to like him for different reasons. The Hippies because he
smoked pot. The peace movement and war protesters because he
was a draft-dodger... All the unfaithful husbands because he let
some chic [sic] suck his dick... Then he got the TV people by
going on talk shows.
—Peon, in the June Insurgent, pointing out Clinton’s ruthless
manipulation of the world. It’s truly incredible how he went on
TV like that, to get the “TV people” to like him... what a deviant
genius! What brilliant research! Preach on, Comrade Peon!
So, with the immense power over nearly his whole American
population based on extreme conditions of money based [sic]
media/propaganda and government tentacles on their minds, he
then makes crucial decisions behind closed doors to pass free
trade agreements...
—Peon, same article, same rant. Immense power over the
American population?? Government tentacles?? And *gasp* free
trade!! Soon the computers will take over and enslave our souls.
Only then will Clinton’s Final Solution see fruition.
ON A WRINKLE IN TIME
Senators David Sanchez and Andrew Oberriter requested more
time to read the [diversity] proposal.
—Jason George in the May 27 Emerald, mistaking former
Senator and OC Editor Oberriter for current Senator Andrew
Schneider. After which, ASUO President Bobby Lee turned to
OC Editor Owen Brennan Rounds and said, “See you at Guido’s
tonight?”
ON WHAT A TIME TO BE ALIVE
The internet is an ocean—just punch a key and it’s got any
damned thing you want.
—Journalism Professor Jim Dunne, an authority on everything.
There they are, a Kleenex in one hand, naked in front of a computer that has little marks on the screen.
—Sex therapist Wendy Maltz, quoted in the June 17 Eugene
Weekly, commenting on the damned thing most internet users
want.
ON WE DON’T BELIEVE YOU
feces
“The Insurgent is the Award-Winning Newspaper of the Left!”
22
This will be a really great thing for the campus. It won’t just be
another piece of paper.
—ASUO Housing Advocate Matt Lieuallen in the May 28
Emerald, on the Pledge of Respect, to be signed by all incoming
freshmen. Ask yourself this: does anyone actually think that one
more paper forced upon incoming freshmen is going to make for
a more accepting campus environment? Only the Bic pen company will benefit from this one.
OREGON COMMENTATOR
ON KKKORPORATIONS
*All of which
are available at
http://darkwing.
uoregon.edu/
~ocomment!
Clinton needs [the corporations] to infiltrate other parts of the
world to further his goal of world domination. These corporations have only to be compared Hitler’s [sic] armies; Pol Pot’s
Khmer Rouge; Augustus Caesar’s gladiators; Pinochet’s military
posses; Clinton’s Corporations.
—More from the anonymous Peon. World domination? For a
lame duck presidency, he’s sure got plans! Still, that whole
“checks and balances” thing might be a bit of a problem.
ON BOOBIES, KNOCKERS AND HOOTERS*
[Playboy’s Pac-10 issue]... is where the images of young womyn
in college are placed onto a page to become objects—not the
minds they are paying so much money to broaden.
—Good old Chelsea Lincoln, in the June Insurgent. Yes, and
with the good money that Playboy is paying them, they’ll have so
much more money with which to continue their education. Or as
Butthead might point out... she said ‘broad’.
Playboy and similar publications create a violent and sexist society with the objectification of womyn in these publications...
Everyone needs to take responsibility for their own actions and
educate themselves on the issue of how pornography is detrimental to our society.
—Lincoln again, dutifully exchanging that “e” for a “y” without
fail. Interesting. And yet instead of everyone taking personal
responsibility for society’s ills, we should blame it on a magazine, is that it? Check that—one hell of a magazine!
ON I’LL ASK THE QUESTIONS HERE
Who are the folk? Are you the folk? What is lore?
—Folklore Professor Daniel Wojcik, in a crippling moment of angst.
Where are we going? What were we talking about? How did we get on this tangent?
It’s kinda fun.
—Wojcik again, working his way to firmer ground.
ON INTOXICANTS
Dude, I’d take Christ if it were a drug.
—University sophomore Joe Ryan
MAY 3, 1999
23
Canoe, hike, and bike
through scenic
Huitzilopochtli. Visit
Cuauhtli Springs,
Tlazolteotl Caverns, and
Quebracho Falls! Back at
the luxurious Abadesa
Pueblos, you can treat
yourself to Paul
Discover Huitzilopochtli
4 or 7 days
28 days
Has the general ¡huelga!
atmosphere got you tired,
cynical, and thirsting for
comic relief? Then pack
yourself a mule and head
straight for Club Bacalao,
located right in the heart
of wild, high-falutin’
Cagada. Featuring a full-
Club Bacalao***
in Cagada
4 days
Relive the excitement of Pancho Villa’s 1916
early-morning guerilla attack on the United
States’ army’s Camp Furlong! Groups of six,
eight, and ten can join Chicano revolutionary reenactments at the original battle site, today’s
Pancho Villa State Park!
Departs bi-weekly
from $2258 (20,673 NP)
Untamed Xiuhtecuhtli**
Rodriguez’s albondigas-splitting 1994 romp “A
Million to Juan.” For a spicier treat, tune in to midnight showings of Alejandro Montejainas’ landmark erotic political film, “El Sex-enio,” If you
haven’t acostarse con rosemaria in
Huitzilopochtli, you haven’t acostarse con rosemaria!
Departs weekly
from $365 (3540 NP)
The astonishing Cañón Gran, Aztlán
The Best of
Xochiqueztal is
truly a revolutionary camping
adventure. In 5
days or less,
visit the highlights of new
Bustling downtown New Tenochtitlan
Aztlán ciudads
Quetzalcoatl City
and New Tenochtitlan. The final destination is the
Nation of Aztlán’s hacienda, in Whittier, CA,
hometown of infamous gabacho Richard Nixon.
Departs daily
from $161 (1562 NP*)
The Best of Xochiquetzal 2, 3, or 5 days
TRAVEL PACKAGES
*NP=Nuevo Pesos
**100% Gringo-free!
***Mucha gumersinda!
service berreadero, this club has been renowned
throughout the world since 1942 for its top-notch
entertainment. Now through January, 2000, enjoy
heartwarming comedy from the courageous Chris
Fonseca, with special guest John Leguizamo.
And starting in February, take in the folk-pop
stylings of Joe Bob Puente (Tito’s cousin!), in
town for an exclusive two-year stand!
Departs weekly
from $2312 (25,832 NP)
The Luzór Hotel in wild, high-falutin’ Cagada
Tired of the gabacho exploiting your riches and
AZTLÁN!
SCENIC
This summer,
why not
For more information contact:
mecha@
gladstone.
uoregon.edu
A land of beauty and of wonder. A
land of quiet sunsets and raucous
fiestas. A land of freedom. Aztlán.
Encompassing the former United
States of California, Texas, Arizona,
and New Mexico, Aztlán is a homeland for the Chicano people. It is a
place of emancipation from the evil
effects of the gringo invasion. In the
barrios, the campos, the pueblos,
and the ranchitos, can be found the
spiritual and physical home of a
proud and sacred people.
Aztlán welcomes you with open
arms. From the poetic Pacific Coast
in the west, to the rugged Rocky
Mountains in the east, Aztlán is a
playground for the mind, the body,
the spirit. Our writers, poets, musicians, and artists produce literature
and art that is appealing to our people and relates to our revolutionary
culture. Our cultural values of life,
family, and home serve as a powerful weapon against the gringo dollar
value system and encourage the
process of love and brotherhood.
Welcome.
AZTLÁN!