The gamecock. (Columbia, S.C.) 1908-2006, October 15, 1993, Page 3, Image 3
"?aittcock
Serving (JSC Since 1908
J.T. Wagenheim, Editor in Chief Shayla Stutts, Viewpoints Edi
EDITORIAL BOARD
Jay King, Gordon Mantler, Rob Rodusky,
- Lee Clontz, Carson Henderson
QB Controversy
Taneyhill should remain starter
sJpsnitp rprpnt criticism from fnnc
WV/W|y 'VV ? V V/v/? Vfc/f ? y J # V/l I t J V^l t-U
The Cleveland Browns.
The Detroit Lions.
The USC Gamecocks.
What do these football teams have in common?
If you guessed a quarterback controversy, give yourself a hand.
However, this is something USC definitely doesn't need. This is
we are saying that Steve Taneyhill should remain USC's quarterbacl
A quarterback controversy doesn't create good chemistry. It ere?
little bit of anxiety in that, even though the players don't admit it,
feel a little more comfortable with one player rather than the other. 1
after Steve came in and started playing well in 1992, it was like p
were saying, "Wright who?"
After Taneyhill's performance in 1992, it seemed as though evei
had jumped on the Taneywagon and declared him the second comii
Christ. We think we saw people out in front of the library's refle
pond waiting for him to walk across it. USC fans put a ton of pre
on this freshman.
Granted, it was not the wisest thing to come out and say that we
going to win a national championship this year while going undefe
However, everyone seemed to eat up the fact that Taneyhill predicte
would win the last six games in 1992, which we did.
How quickly things change. Taneyhill was just speaking his mine
he always does. It is extremely unfair to blame him for dropped p
and fourth quarter collapses.
We understand it is the fans' right to voice their opinion. They
want to see the best for the school and the team. Who doesn't war
team to be* playing in a bowl game on New Year's Day? Rememb
takes every player on the team and not just one to win arid lose a gai
So, to all of you at the past few games who have been chanting
want Blake!" and stomping on your Taneytails, take it from At
Brave/Falcon Deion Sanders, who said, "Be true to your boo. If y<
going to boo me for striking out, boo me for hitting a triple."
Good luck tomorrow, Steve. We're behind you 100 percent. We 1
you and the rest of the squad can do it against Mississippi S
Vanderbilt and the rest. After all, it was this time in 1992 that you b
your rise to stardom.
Don't punish Wal-Mar
for underpricing goods
Now, lei me see if I get this
Wal-Mart has been forced to pM If I
pay $300,000 to three indepenWal-Mart's
crime? Its prices Kl g
No, that's not a joke. Under a
because Wal-Mart could run
smaller pharmacies out of busi- #
ness, Wal-Mart can't sell health st0^s can * offer lt? 1 thmk n0
and beauty aids and pharmaceu- t^?W. lJ?af th^ Pr5Jedent.
ticals below cost. esft.bl.shed that Wal-Mart is ft
And this is illegal? ^"1 "7
First of all, let me say this. I POn mence st0/f Arukans
love Wal-Mart. Wal-Mart exem- .,, 5 f?" tet 0131 the su
plif.es everything great about , might 0
America. It has everything you base here rd
would probably ever want to more comfortable . T]
buy under one roof, and, for the Pantry for char in $4 f()r6a a
most part, everything is priced ton of milk ^ j would ^
like it's going out of style. Wal-Mart for undercharging n
OK, maybe some of the for my Demerol,
clothing is, in all actuality, Presumably, the idea behii
going out ot style, but other- tbjs Weird law is to preve
wise, Wal-Mart s a cheapskate's Wal-Mart from destroying ind
M^5ca pendent businesses that can
I o be honest, you probably match the low prices,
wouldn't want to do your gro- Time out, folks. That's call<
eery shopping at Wal-Mart competition, isn't it?
unless you choose to subsist on We're not talking about trus
Cheez Balls and Juicy Juice busting here. Wal-Mart is doir
boxes, but it that s what you what it has to do to drum t
want, it s cheap. business, just like any othi
From the time you walk in retailer. If it can afford to c
and are greeted by a senior citi- more, it should be allowed to.
zen with that ominous roll of After all, McDonald's hi
stickers, Wal-Mart envelops you been known to sell hamburge
in a tremendously artificial for 39 cents. What should i
environment that, amazingly, punishment be? Let's si
makes you want to shop. Ronald right out of those b
So, what's the problem? red shoes.
Maybe I'm just confused, but Welcome to America, land <
it seems contrary to free enter- the free. Oops, I mean, land <
prise to penalize a retailer for the comparably priced,
selling products for below cost.
Lots of stores do it. Are we to Lee Clontz is Caroline
close down Bi-Lo because I can Editor of The Gamecock. H
get a dozen eggs for one cent column appears every otht
with a coupon and smaller Friday.
I mi /-I 1 .< < . . 11 1 * 1 T
i ne uamecocK will try to print an letters received, luetic
should be 200-250 words and must include full nair
professional title or year and major if a student. Lette
must be personally delivered by author to The Gameco
newsroom in Russell House room 321. The Gameco
reserves the right to edit all letters for style, possible lit
or space limitations. Names will not be withheld under a;
circumstances.
Viewpoints
= CHM
Do you think Steve Taneyhill si
# Jm SBWk
"Yes. I think he is "I don't see why not
doing a good job and if he can get the job
is getting a hard time done."
for the mistakes he v .. ?
has marie " Katlna Ferguson
nas maae. Psychology junior
Chris Peebles
Business freshman
. why
c.
some
ss Should media be cer
jction
ssure [223 By Ryan Atkinson
were The concept of censorship is a frightening one to the majority of
:ated. Americans. To some, it even takes on an Orwellian aura. The attitude
d we of many staunch defenders of the First Amendment is comparable to
I like ^at memt>ers ?f die NRA when confronted with the Brady bill,
asses This attitude reflects a fear that any proposed restrictionsare a
move toward greater ones. These parties are therefore opposed to all
' just regulation pertaining to their interests.
it his To adequately construct an opinion on censorship, it is necessary to
er? 11 put the First Amendment in historical perspective. Considered to be
the most important of human freedoms by the framers of the
We
lanta Constitution, speech was guaranteed above all else.
. Uouino IivaH in a ctat#? nf rplioirtiic onH nnlitifol Annractmn <n
j-g ituTing u*vu 1*1 u ouiiv iva^ivuo uiiu pvnuvai UppwOOiUII lil
England, Americans understood that the free dissemination of ideas
enow was necessary for the establishment of a democratic society. Note the
itate, use of the word "idea" in the previous sentence,
egan The First Amendment is there to make sure that ideas, concepts or
opinions can be expressed freely whether they are popular or not. The
objective here is to allow members of society to have as much infortmation
as possible to make decisions for their own good. However,
some people do not understand the puipose of free speech.
So called protectors of the First Amendment often have no understanding
of its aforementioned purpose. It is there to protect the dissemination
of ideas, not vulgarity. These defenders are often led to
protecting vulgar and offensive material that has no purpose. If this is
the case, then the censorship of such material is not a threat to society
or democracy.
Personally, I believe that any adult who wishes to view, listen or
read certain material should have that right. The problem arises when
children are allowed that same right. Of course, children are going to
acquire a good bit of knowledge outside the realm of their parents'
direction.
But when lewd, vulgar or possibly offensive material is broadcast
on free airwaves or made easily accessible in print, society is sending
a bad message. While I am far from being a prude, I am often shocked
t at what many children are subjected to.
js The conditions of social decay permeating our society can definitely
lir be linked to a breakdown of values. While it may not be the driving
3p force, the media has played a large part. Therefore, it may be necesas
sary to use a little more discretion,
its
^ Ryan Atkinson is a regular contributor to Crossfire.
m College students lack | LAME...
good'Green'education
' To the editor: 0oW "Tl
In the short time I have been on StfoW
this campus, I have become
1(j painfully aware that my suspicions WlL^^i lQf0??o$ fo?wQo& o$?
about the short burst of environ- Ho***' ?0o?J??q?ir~
;t_ mental awareness that gave me PRICE $ ?w |
hope a few years ago were true: It $7AP|^1I $L,rJpo?0
,p was a fad. J& f
er The lack of education and action v_
l0 by students toward "greener" atti- oooo ofooVo^^i
tudes is appalling. It appears that Cjwj^ H| | ^
1S one must now be extremist or radirs
cal to care anymore, yet showing a V] c
little concern or interest is all it / s\ ' /rb /
ie takes- J. WkA /r%rbAMa
. How many realize the simple J
fact that there really is no such -r. J
, thing as recycled Styrofoam? life. /r^zM /ySHAtif.c.
Marriott would like you to believe
3 there is, but we as a student body
must educate ourselves. ________
f We must understand the impact
college students have had and can
[s have on national attitudes and poli- i
Jcies. If you have concerns, realize "
you are not alone. Poorly funded
and undermanned organizations The Gamecock is
Dlike SAGE or the Recycling Club Q(-nHp? flhrmf thf> 10
can only become successful if stu- oluiivo auwui nit j\j
dents are motivated and willing to USC. If vour friend
?rs contribute. ^ c\rr\ i
' We have every opportunity and 1 VOlJS, please COIlta
reason to make USC an example of YX/o Xi/onf f^ Upar -I
Jrs responsibility rather than an engine ^ Wdlll I (J flcdi
ck of waste and indolence. VCllO W OF pUFplC! C
Ck * Elton Ueoka J
j English freshman L?????i
ny
iould remain USC quarterback?
V
"If he has what it "It all depends on
t qVa C QnH Ko nt*A\ra c u;hr?tkAf /\ ^
kuixwo Uliu uo piu VV/O W 11^ L1IC1 U1 11 U I
he can do the job." Sparky Woods feels
Sarah Thomas he can do the job."
Engineering sophomore Crellen Hopkins
Physical therapy freshman
isored for vulgarity?
By Patrick Sharbaugh
This past week, a home burned down in Moranie, Ohio. The owner, a
woman whose daughter died in the fire, claimed her five-year old son
started the blaze after watching an installment of MTV's "Beavis and
Butt-head." She leveled blame for the fire and her daughter's death directly
at MTV programmers, claiming the oft-depicted pyromaniacal impulses
of the animated pair turned her son into an arsonist.
On another front, ABC's "NYPD Blue" is taking shots from every
quarter for its alleged inclusion of excessively graphic violence, sex and
foul language.
In light of these examples, there is talk that the basic moral and ethical
fiber of our country is being corrupted, that we and our children are losing
the battle for our minds to the network agenda. The only answer,
many maintain, is federal regulation of television content. This, from the
same group that usually faints dead away at the merest mention "of government
regulation.
Granted, programs such as "Beavis and Butt-head" and "NYPD Bine"
serve little purpose other than to further deaden the minds of those unfortunates
who waste their time with them and to generate ever bigger profits
for networks and advertisers. But to claim television content bears primary
responsibility for individual behavior is to deny the ultimate
accountability of individuals for their own lives and of parents for their
children's lives.
We are all conscious adults, capable of choosing whether to watch a
given program. As adults, we are also responsible for deciding what our
children watch.
Placing blame on television content and its programmers is -a reprehensible
effort to avoid that accountability and thereby place the bujrden of
responsibility somewhere else.. Television allows us to justify oui shortcomings
as parents and determinants of our actions.
No television show is so all-important that we cannot live without it.
Televisions themselves are merely luxuries we allow ourselves, additional
sources of entertainment and information. Unfortunately, untold millions
of people have convinced themselves and their children that they cannot
live without one.
The First Amendment guarantees us the right to express ourselves
freely. But we cannot expect to enjoy that right as individuals and at the
same time deny it to certain members of the mass media.
We can exhort them to act with responsibility and integrity. But we
cannot arbitrarily revoke privileges they are granted under the
Constitution because their product may have an ill influence on those who
choose to partake of it. Some 300,000 people die each year from cigarette
smoke-related illnesses, but we do not outlaw cigarettes.
With freedom comes responsibility. If we are to continue to espouse
freedom as the highest democratic ideal, then we must acknowledge that
we are tne nnai aetermmators 01 our late, not Beavis and Butt-head.
Patrick Sharbaugh is a regular contributor to Crossfire.
Gamecock Football is i
W HALFTlME HEAH, ^ I
WAS So Cool/// 1HE TuBA |
^ J SECTtobl SoUfi/t>EP ^
totally %
\ N T E D
i ? i f
planning 10 ao a series or teature
>th anniversary of racial integration at
s or relatives attended Carolina in the
ct Rochelle Killingbeck at 777-7181.
from everyone ? black, white, red,
all now!