University of South Carolina Libraries
Wednesday, December 9, 1992 "600P-$0t4E0fUS TO THE LOCAL S ?ri Fool first-class journalist To the editor: All right. This is enough. Tim Thorsen's Sportin' Fool column is excellently written and extremely well-thought out. He has one quality which newspapers all over the country strive for: readership. He is a "one-of-a-kind" sports editorialist, a dose of fine commentary within a wave of serious reality. Except for the fact he pulled for the Polar Ice Caps during the World Series, the Sportin' Fool is a first-class journalist. Everything he writes will spark criticism, create laughter, form controversy, promote thought and, most importantly, be read thoroughly by many fans. The Gamecock should be privileged to have such a quality sports writer on its staff. Brooks Tomlin Geography graduate student QB Mitchell immature To the editor: This letter refers to Mr. Mitchell's letter in Monday's Gamecock (12-7-92). I cannot believe an ex-collegiate athlete uucs nui xiavc uic liiaiuiuy iu Handle a sports columnist's criticisms. Mr. Thorsen's comments are not "inane." I find them amusing. In fact, Mr. Thorsen's columns are the highlight of my Friday (yes, he only appears on Friday, so you have been waiting all fall semester on Mondays and Wednesdays for no reason!). With the laughs The Sportin' Fool has brought to my roommates and I, I can assure you that Mr. Thorsen has quite a future ahead of him. Since you attacked Mr. Thorsen's 'manliness,' I feel obligated to point out how manly it was to quit the football team. When you quit, I thought you should have stayed to provide senior leadership and maturity. I am glad you left hpr'Qiicp vnnr lark of matnritv ^ X. ~. JW. -- J could only hinder the Gamecocks. I should also point out The Sportin' Fool is written solely tc amuse others (Come on, an Alonzc Mourning salary drive?). Attacking Mr. Thorsen's athletic ability was a low blow. Not all of us are blessed with the athletic ability that you possess (HA!). I have never seen Mr. Thorsen throw a football, so ] cannot compare him to you athletically, but I have read Mr Thorsen's work and your editoria masterpiece. I think you know whc the winner is in my book. TJ. Horar Computer science senioi I Affirmative Action discriminates To the editor: This letter is in response to Mr Dark's comments in Th< . Gamecock's Dec. 7 article ? "Stereotypes Incorrect...". Mr. Darl advocates affirmative action poli dWUSEAOMM A| Jtm |M hH mj cies which are inclusive yet speaks of "affirmative action jobs," a term which always implies exclusion of white males. Why is it past "injustices" must be "paid for" by "white" males? It is not the government's job to penalize people for what some of their dead ancestors might have done. Besides, were the ancestors of most living white Americans even in this country when slavery existed? Mr. Dark is supposedly concerned about stereotyping but has performed some major league stereotyping himself lately. Should many blacks not be offended when Mr. Dark refers to them as "people who don't have anything?" In America, no race or gender has a monopoly on either poverty or prosperity. This has been made possible through the philosophy of equal opportunity, a term not at all synonymous with affirmative action, as Mr. Dark contends. * i- T~n i. n?* * Mr. i^aiK. is nai-uui wiuuj: m exclaiming, "Anyone can be prejudiced, but blacks can't be racists." The Random House Dictionary defines racism as "hatred or intolerance of another race or other races." When is the first edition of your revised dictionary hitting the presses, Mr. Dark? Listen, most people have no problem acknowledging the abilities of "people of color" and women. The problem arises when individuals are not allowed to compete with others on a fair basis. Such discrimination is exactly what led to the turmoil and unrest in the 1960s and should thus be avoided at all costs in the 1990s Scott Berry Rick Voit Mech. engineering graduate students uciiaiui 3 itui true leaders To the editor: I was personally stunned at what I read in The Gamecock Monday Dec. 7. I can hardly believe Carl Maas and Beth Bangston allowed their names to be printed with this statement of irresponsibility. NOW HEAR THIS. We the students of USC have wasted our time and the time of Ms. Bangston and 1 Mr. Maas (according to their letter) 1 by electing them to deal with the issues currently facing our universi1 ty. As a student, let me personally ' apologize for asking you to carry 1 this cumbersome burden you are so 1 poorly qualified and will undoubt' edly list on your resume as a sign of your leadership abilities for years to come. ' You continue to tell Mr. Elam > how lucky he was that you did not do this and that. Newsflash: Guys, you did not do anything. You ran 1 away. A true leader does not run away every time he thinks he might lose. He accepts defeat as the will of the majority. Mr. Maas, Ms. Bangston, Ms. Lovelace and all the rest of you who ran from senate chambers: It looks like you are on your ways to promising political careers, but because you do not have what it takes, you will NEVER be true leaders. s Mario de Armas Latin American Studies/Business Administration TChc (5am i Victims' fee Nat Hentoff s book Free Speech for t But Not for Thee: How the American and Left Relentlessly Censor Each Othe recently published. I have not reai Hentoff's dissection of the censoring mostly for supposedly righteous inter but nevertheless I am well aware of his expertise concerning the free speech gi tee included in the First Amendment. I devour Mr. Hentoff s weekly colum Village Voice and his occasional nation cations. I now realize it is not only wing which attempts to stifle speech; s left wing wears the blood of suppressi more noticeably than the extremists on side. To analyze a historical definition of left and right, each wing is dangerous] in its advocation of any censorship. 1 rwinin^llv nhhnrrprt anv onvprnment inti v"*fc ?v o in private matters, including speech, an staunchly supported individual rights, i speech. I firmly support an individual's rigl the life he so chooses free of govemm vention. I may be "pulling a Clinton,' conscience dictates that the middle of Ban produces * effectiveness S n To the editor: b I would like to call for an apology from Jay Tilley concerning his ^ article on gays in the military. Not only did he make slanderous = remarks about our senior elected c military officials, he had the nerve ^ to try to question the honor of these 11 men. Then, if this was not enough, a he tried to speak for the "decent" ^ American citizens with the same v insulting, ungrateful tongue. Well, c vn>, tnoro n.at cru>ol'inii fr\r mp \/tr 1 y v/u wut nui oi/ucuviiii, xv/* niv, *?**. Tilley! r The gay ban is not a conspiracy to rob homosexuals of their rights. It is a policy created and supported by men whose primary objective is military effectiveness. The policy is " based on years of experience and training. Even if they are wrong, they deserve the respect and atten- ( tion of better men than you, Mr. Tilley. Having over seven years military experience myself, I feel confident in saying Mr. Tilley did very little research before staining The Gamecock with his article. There is < a big difference between a journal- ] ist presenting viewpoints in a 1 respectful, constructive manner and ! some irresponsible person with a 1 nen clnnnino rtnwn a hrvdopnndoe ' kv" ?c --i oofB.S. just to raise controversy. Mr. Tilley claims to be the man 1 on campus people love to hate. If 1 this is true, it is not because of his 1 viewpoints. It is for the half-witted, disrespectful manner in which 1 he presents it. If Mr. Tilley is the best columnist The Gamecock can provide, then my advice is for the editorial staff would be to shorten the paper by one page. Jim Rachels Engineering Sophomore Selection warrants improvement To the editor: After reading the article about the bill to create a committee to select a homecoming queen, 1 was shocked at some of the qualifications. I could care less whether or not we have a homecoming queen. It might be a "wonderful tradi tion," ana l nave no prooiein wiui the idea of selecting a queen. However, I have a serious problem with the criteria that the decision is to be based on. I have trouble throwing blame on the student senate for running out of the chamber before the bill was presented. After reading what the bill contained, I would have done the same. According to the bill, the homecoming queen must have a minimum 2.5 GPA. This in itself is quite a shock. But the article goes on to quote USC President John Palms saying, "I don't necessarily think a homecoming queen has to have a minimum 2.5 GPA. A student may work hard for the USC community and only have a 2.2 or 2.3." I agree that a major aspect of selecting a queen would be to coni sider her endeavors to help the i community. However, will someone please correct me if I seem lock lings rob I Me ? Right r was j Mr. iSEre35!yiTH7i?j?a done llions> C O L U M N I noted | jaranis the proper road on thi n in The I had to recall Mr. Ht al syndi- censorship when I re< the right Joseph Perkins, a syi adly, the Newspaper Enterprise i on much (he article, "'Basic vict the other due," summarizes his i rising crime rates durinj both the I wholeheartedly sup ly wrong whether or not I act The right amendment ? our fou erference perspective that is virt d the left now. When Mr. Perkin including Bill of Rights, the mos written, I jump to place it to live break his pencils, ent inter- Five of the first ten ' but my stitution outline the rif the road United States was the tisled in assuming that the reason lost universities were started was i further one's education; although has been made quite evident to te that there are people here who elieve otherwise. If this bill is enacted, I hope that le standards are raised instead of owered. I find it to be a true disrace to have an individual homeoming queen representing a center or learning, when this individual is iot capable of doing just that. I lso find it to be an even greater lisgrace that the president of this iniversity, is not only NOT advoating higher academic standards, >ut making excuses for the very eason why we are here. Neil Jacobs Engineering major Hnmprnmino compromise needed To the editor: Because the Homecoming bill I :o-sponsored has come under so much lire in the student senate, I feel compelled to explain to the student body and the senate the purpose of the legislation. I honestly think that although the Homecoming queen has been unpopular in the past, the majority 3f the student senate supports the re-instatement of the position. Thus, as a representative, it is my duty to try and implement the wishes of the students. The bill was, and still is, the best way to do this. I am not claiming the legislation is perfect or unamendable. In fact, I am fully in favor of a compromise. I realize most of the student senators, unlike myself, do not want a Homecoming queen. Because of this, I will support all efforts to find some middle ground. If this means a Homecoming ambassador, or something nice it, then so be it. But it is the duty oi the senate to find a compromise. 1 hope all senators, regardless of personal position, feel this way. As rare as it is for me to agree with The Gamecock, this time I am compelled to. While the attitude ol the editorials has been basically hostile toward the senate (anc often-times incorrect), I agree witl one point ? it is my job to repre sent the wishes of the student body This time, it means finding a com promise to the Homecoming issue. Owen Donlej Student senatoi Attorneys require privileges To the editor: This letter is in response to th column "Jailhouse lawyers trie) prisoners" of the Dec. 2 edition o The Gamecock. Mr. Henderson, I am writing I you today to correct a misunder standing you have concerning th dliuiiicytlltlll 11 id oci that, rather than take the time t pursue honest journalism, yo would rather shoot from the hi and give an uninformed opinion a to what the law should be. We in this country are fortunat to pursue justice through an advei (ill of Right '***' " that the st \ SuiIt inst( * * ; _ cence. Th -sjwd " >j yet ^r -WlL "becomes 7T1 " i * no legal s s jt ii a m ^ vici Perkins v. tims wou sJ?rey, , Notice thai inte rs plea lor no more ^ ^ , :ently read a piece by . . idicated columnist for 0ljn ' \ssociation. The title of . 1 00 1 , . .. , above para tms rights are way pas. ^ ^ (f tenlimems regarding the effect! I the past decade. , u v?-ii r n u. of law, ev< >port the Bill of Rights, , ? , .. ' -.u u and collect ually agree with each is Ju(j inding fathers enjoyed a rnnorl-. a ually unattainable to us- ^ ? o< s proposes to amend the dv=, * crucial document ever ' uiuc uvci ui5 niuuui aiiu . , also needs amendments to the con- exa Pje' n< ;hts of a defendant. The e^: e 11 n= first society to mandate 1 1S 1S ^0I respected. ISB sarial process. In order for this adversarial process to be as fair as possible, it is necessary there be a confidential relationship between the attorney and the client. The courts recognized this in the form of case law. What is important about the case you used in your illustration is the fact your "jailhouse lawyer" was not an attorney. The elements necessary for the privilege to arise have been set down in the case law of this state's courts. Those elements are: 1) where legal advice is sought; 2) from an attorney: 3) the communications relating to that purpose; 4) made in confidence; 5) by the client; 6) are at his instance permanently protected; 7) from disclosure by himself or his attorney; 8) except where the protection is waived. The absence of a S.C. Bar Association attorney made this communication non-privilesed, and, even if it had been communicated to an attorney, the fact that Mr. Owen communicated it to a third person would have destroyed the attorney-client privilege. The privileged communication between attorney and client is an awesome responsibility that comes with some major limitations. For example, did you know an attorney is bound not to misrepresent the truth? Thus, if Mr. Owens had come to an attorney and said he committed the crime, the attorney would be ethically bound not to allow Mr. Owens on the stand to give testimony that he did not do it. It is only with intensive training that a person may become aware of the boundaries of this privilege and thus be able to use it effectively. The S.C. court system has decided certain people, due to positions of confidentiality, deserve a privilege of non-disclosure of communications. Mr. Henderson, I hope you do pursue a career as an attorney, but, if you do so, you must be sure of \;mir nrkcitinn cinrt vmir fafK Krinn E. Evans Third-year law student Gays pose J no discipline ; problem To the editor: I read the editorial in Monday's edition of The Gamecock aboul homosexuals being allowed to f serve in the military. As a future r military leader, I felt compelled to write and congratulate Mr. Jay Tilley on his editorial. It was superbly written. I served in the Army in Europe for three years after high school While in Europe, I served witl numerous gay and lesbian service members. They all did their jobs with honor and distinction. I also served in the S.C. Nationa Guard during Operation Deser e Storm. I knew several homosexual: k who served in my unit and othei f military units. I even observed gay: from other country's military units 0 This never caused a disciplint - problem, or any other problems fo: e that matter. d Currently, I am on an Arm; 0 ROTC scholarship to USC. I d( u not see any problem with gays ant P lesbians serving alongside me ii ? the military. If any officers objec to basic civil rights extended t< e homosexuals and they resign fron 5 ;s of power ate or plaintiff prove the defendant's tad of proving a defendant's innoe burden is on the prosecution, and Perkins complains that a victim little more than a witness and has landing." !ims are awarded the rights Mr. 'ould place in their hands, most vicld be judge, jury and executioner. L the law already provides for all he victim is rightfully nowhere to be possess the heart of stone the four graphs imply. In fact, I sympathize >r the victims who suffer through the >. But if feelings counted in a court sryone would be found guilty here damages there. licrous for Mr. Perkins to suggest mend the Bill of Rights to include ? of victims: the defendant possesses itage. ;, and God knows this includes me, to adhere to Mr. Hentoff's golden o matter the opinion another express;ht or wrong (and if it is wrong, then npnnp pIcp'c nnininn^ it miKt he mm the military, I am sure they can, and will, be replaced rather easily. Furthermore, I find the assertion that heterosexual service members cannot, and will not, get along with homosexuals a lame excuse. It is a slap in the face to enlisted soldiers to claim they will not follow orders. I believe the military leadership should give today's professional soldiers credit for being just that ? professionals! My views do not represent the official military point of view and I am probably in the minority in my support of gays and lesbians. I want it also to be known that not all military leaders are "a bunch of discriminating, hypocritical, Marge Schott warmabeEs." Jay Belangia Criminal Justice sophomore Attorney criticizes columnist totw ZK&fh v'" "*' Ta tka orlS#rvr?* A V HIV VUliUI This letter is in response to the article written by Carson Henderson concerning the South Carolina Supreme Court's Decision in State v. Owens. As a recent graduate of USC's School of Law and someone who has some interest in this case, I would just like to clear up a few misconceptions I believe Mr. Henderson has concerning the matter. First, the South Carolina Supreme Court does have jurisdiction over constitutional issues involved in this case or any other case, as does any other court in the state. Second, Mr. Henderson apparently believes that the Supreme Court simply "giossea over me jailhouse lawyer issue. This is just not true. The court considered this issue as it did the others involved in the case. As explained on the final page of the court's opinion, jailhouse lawyers are not attorneys. It is simply ludicrous to suggest that a professional privilege should be extended to cover conversations with someone who has obtained his knowledge of the law and the court system through his participation in it in the role of a criminal defendant and inmate. It is analogous to extending the doctor-patient privilege to conversations about a , sprained ankle with someone who has had one before and read about it in a medical self-help book. It is ! for this very reason the court dis? missed this argument as being ' without merit. i If the truth be known, the real issues in the case centered around Hmihlp ipnnardv imnlirafions and a troublesome coercion charge given i by the trial judge. Unfortunately, ; these issues don't make for excit; ing reading, and the main thrust of the case was missed. 1 In defense of Mr. Henderson, it t appears that he obtained his infor> mation from an article in The State, r and he cannot be held responsible s for someone else's point of view. However, if Mr. Henderson does ; plan to attend law school, he r should remember two thfngs: 1) Always read a case before you / expound upon it, and 2) Never ask ) a question (rhetorical or otherwise), 1 unless you know the answer. i t Allen Bullard a Attorney at Law i