Oregon Commentator/Kiefer VerSteegh

This image was taken from one of the outer walls of Bean West, near the Hamilton complex. Apparently somebody thought that the dorms (or the university) was much like that of a repressive regime. Does that mean that Dick Lariviere is comparable to Stalin? According to the meaningful social commentary spray-painted on a college dormitory in Oregon, yes. Yes he is.

No word yet on finding the perpetrators. Must solve other spray paint-related crimes first.

In a recent press release to the Elections Committee and general student body, Tony Mecum announced the creation of the Students for Responsible Government. SRG, according to Mecum, is “a watchdog group to monitor campaign promises and rules by creating awareness about this year’s student government elections.”

Mecum, who resigned today from the EMU board, declares that he is tired of the elections being a “giant circus show” and that “for too long have special interest groups poisoned the democratic free allocation process.” He plans to wage this ASUO war with “every constitutional power granted to free paying members of this association.” The group is “nothing short of excited” and has received support from leaders across campus, according to Mecum. SRG is looking forward to the coming weeks, and is already analyzing wire tips.

Well all I can say is that it’s hight time that the UO finally has a group to keep an eye on the ASUO. Despite their stunning effectiveness as a governing body, you never know when the ASUO might misallocate hundreds of thousands of dollars to some kind of shady lobbyist group, or potentially break constitutional law. It’s great that we have upstanding men people in our student body willing to speak out against these abuses. I can rest easy tonight knowing that though ASUO elections loom on the horizon, Mecum and his group “are committed to this cause. Justice will be served.”

May the ASUO fear this face.

The First Amendment is a delicate subject — surprising given its nature, which is one that protects the opinions and speech of all. Such was the argument of a federal appeals court that dismissed a suit against a group of extremist Christians who picketed the funeral of Lance Cpl. Matthew A. Snyder in 2006.

The protesters (Baptists from Kansas) were holding signs that, “maintain that God hates homosexuality and that the death of soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan is God’s way of punishing the United States for its tolerance of it.”

I’m not going to enter the semantic realm of Christians arguing that God punishes evil; that seems an open invitation to interpretation and an unwanted diversion of attention. Instead, what I’d like to point out is the incredible irony that arises out of the situation considering the death was that of a serviceman.

Although I could never do it myself, the burden our military people put on themselves in the line of duty is something I admire in and of itself. Regardless of the conflict, the self-sacrifice–putting yourself in the line of danger for my safety–is something I will never understand, never experience. But I am damn grateful for it.

As a Marine, Lance Cpl. Snyder undoubtedly believed that he was helping to protect our citizens and therefore our Constitution, in some way or another. As such, he actively helped protect the same governing laws that allowed, rightfully, a handful of religious zealots to make light of his death and his sacrifice.

Do I believe the picketers were wrong to protest Lance Cpl. Snyder’s funeral? Yes, but only on moral grounds. Having such disrespect for another human’s life is to be despised, and the grief put upon his family is more than they should have to endure. But as I sit here, with a picture of my grandfather in full Naval uniform staring directly at me, I have to remember that my morals are not solid basis for the policy of this nation’s laws. During WWII, he fought to protect my right to protect myself, to protect my home and my right to speak my mind. There is no doubt that Lance Cpl. Snyder fought to protect those things as well.

That is why when the Supreme Court hears this trial, I hope they will find in favor of the protesters. Not for their sake, and not for their expressed views; those I can live without. Instead, I hope they find in favor of the First Amendment. For all of us. That way, Lance Cpl. Snyder’s service will not have been in vain.

According to a Tomcat article published in the Emerald on Friday, the ASUO Elections board — the same that threatened the Commentator with punishment for Cpt. Peter Freedom Lesiak’s poster – decided against doing so late last Thursday night “unless a student formally files a complaint against him.”

Of course, any student filing a complaint against Lesiak would have to take into consideration that all of the other presidential candidates have had posters on this website as well. Twice. Since Lesiak did not post his flyers under his own volition, filing a complaint against Lesiak would require filing a complaint against all the other candidates as well.

Of course, the real lesson here is that the ASUO Elections Rules have some pretty asinine provisions. Coupled with vague language, the rules that punish candidates for separate entities actions is fucking stupid. Glad to hear the ASUO Elections Board came to their senses.

A new issue of the Oregon Quarterly is out, most notably with an article by Managing Editor Ross West about the Oregon Commentator’s By the Barrel: 25 Years of the Oregon Commentator.

There’s some great quotes in there, and overall the article is pretty positive. You can check out the digital issue of the Oregon Quarterly here or pick it up in person at the Duckstore.

I should take this time to remind you that By the Barrel: 25 Years of the Oregon Commentator is still only $10.

(We apologize for the delay for the posters. Proper Facebook clearance was needed.)

Looks like the ASUO Elections season is underway! Here’s some sweet posters!

As though the issue of hate speech on campus hasn’t been covered enough.

ASUCSD president Utsav Gupta pulled funding to 33 campus media outlets on February 20, following coinciding with perfectly with the dying Pacifica Forum outrage.

Apparently, “Jigaboo Jones,” a local radio shock-jock, organized a party he called the “Compton Cookout” with the help of several fraternity members. Jones, in his own off-color way of celebrating Black History Month, used the ghetto for the party’s theme. The facebook ad encouraged attendees to dress ghetto style, telling men to roll with their “Jersey’s, stuntin’ up in ya White T” and  women to “have short, nappy hair.” No fraternity houses hosted the party, although several members of the UCSD Greek community helped organize it.

Days after the party, outrage of the offensive stereotypes swept UCSD. And in politics, you cry to state litigators instead of mom and dad. Legislative pressure prompted UCSD authorities to launch an “aggressive investigation” (Why hello, Joe McCarthy) of the students involved in promoting the party.

UCSD publication “The Koala,” known for patently racist and provocative content, aired a public statement on SRTV objecting to the investigations. The statement used the words the words “ungrateful n—-rs” among other racial slurs, according to Adam Kissel of FIRE.

(more…)

Apparently a few police officers in Clackamas have had their feelings hurt by a local man, Robert J. Ekas. According to an article by the Oregonian, Ekas has been arrested several times in the last few years for offering his middle finger to passing officers as a sign of civil protest.

Ekas gave the finger to a deputy in July 2007 while driving near Clackamas Town Center, according to the lawsuit. With the deputy in pursuit, Ekas said he opened his sunroof and again extended a middle finger. The deputy turned on his flashing lights. Ekas stopped and was cited for an illegal lane change and improper display of license plates. He was acquitted of the charges.

Apparently Ekas has filed a lawsuit in the matter, and I really hope he wins it. The purpose of the police force is to “protect and serve.” It is not an uncommon feeling among our citizens that often times they do not fulfill those duties.

What it boils down to is the fact that Ekas has a right to free speech, even if it is a daily bird-flipping to a sheriff. I’m glad to see that self-important traffic cops got their panties in a fuss. It might help them to understand the law next time.

Just added a sweet new button for y’all to buy Sudsy Tees from us if you’re not in the direct vicinity. Due to eBay costs and shipping, the price of the shirt is $16.95 when purchased online, but you can use your credit/debit card or Paypal to buy it!

As always, you are also welcome to send us a check for a mere $15, or come down to the office in person and purchase a shirt less the shipping and eBay tax for just $10.

CLICK HERE TO BUY A SUDSY TEE

For weeks now we’ve been debating back and forth about the Pacifica Forum, and the subsequent maneuvering its protesters have done to try to make the discussion about “student safety”. It came to a head last week when the ASUO Senate Rules Committee passed a resolution that politely asked the Pacifica Forum to fuck off.

It seems that through a highly convoluted series of events, the Student Insurgent has coincidentally “intercepted” a message from Billy Rojas, which has been denied as being a fake. Even if the e-mail is real, it’s long and boring and I don’t really need to go over its contents. The best part is that the Black Tea Society has decided to call on anti-Pacifica supporters from all over the state to protest the next Pacifica meeting on the 12th because of the e-mail.

Here’s where it gets juicy. The Black Tea Society intends to bring militants to the University of Oregon campus in order to protest the Pacifica Forum. That’s right… militants.

“Militants wishing to participate in this action should arrive in front of Agate Hall on the University of Oregon campus, this Friday February 12th at 4:30pm”

(more…)

Dear everyone who stopped caring,
Remember how much we’ve been reading about Pacifica Forum for the last month (partly my fault)? I have a pop quiz for you, just to see if you were paying attention.

QUESTION:
PACIFICA FORUM IS…:
A)     A Neo-Nazi Group
B)      Responsible for vandalizing LGBTQA
C)      A Free Speech Group
D)     Against feminism, homosexuality, and ethnic equality.
E)      A White Supremacist Group
F)      Responsible for the anti-Semitic note
G)     Loving, respectful, intelligent people
H)     All of the above

(more…)

Earlier this week I had the great fortune of sitting down with both Vice President Robin Holmes and President Richard Lariviere. At the time these meetings were scheduled two weeks ago, there remained an array of unanswered questions in regard to the Pacifica issue, including and not limited to: much misinformation about the stances of the University, misunderstanding regarding the legal rights and causality regarding the Forum, a multitude of smear tactics and intolerance displayed by both sides, misquotation and misrepresentation of our university administration.

Since two weeks ago, much has happened. A Student Senate resolution was declined, a protest was outraged, and a hideous act of vandalism was induced. I was worried, perhaps erroneously, that these events could have clouded the judgment of our institution like they have clouded judgment of many protesters and student body (much of the student body still thinks “Pacifica Forum” is a “Neo-Nazi Group,” hence the populace of the “Anti-Pacifica” Facebook group).

I am humbled and relieved at the remarkable objectivity and forward thinking of our administration. I now know that it was unfair of me to equate the mental capacity of our university officials with the riotous aggrandized assertions of some undergraduate protests; I irrationally feared that the UO would get swept away in the deep rooted emotion of many of the students, a very alluring mentality.

I may say with confidence now that my fear has been put to rest.

(more…)

An outsider’s view of the McDisasterfuck that is the PF.

FIRE Article

I’ve been giving a lot of thought to Drew’s editorial from the last issue lately, and the more I think about it, the more I think the premise of his argument is a viable, actionable plan. If you haven’t read it, the argument revolves around a plan that would involve students–including those protesting the Pacifica Forum–into the actual Forum as debaters.

The Pacifica Forum was started in 1994 as a way to debate two sides (or three) of an issue. As the years have gone on, speakers at the Pacifica Forum have started to push the envelope of topics discussed. Here, we should make an important distinction: The Pacifica Forum has no members per se, but an open call for its organizers. Indeed, the premise of a Forum is just that–an open discussion or debate. Instead, its protesters have been acting as if the Pacifica Forum is one, solid group with a single mindset.

Contrary to what many may think, the Pacifica Forum is not all Nazis. Instead, the organizers of the Forum have invited Nazis and debated back and forth with them about certain topics–the swastika, the Sieg Heil etc. The problem lately, however, is that the two sides of the debate haven’t been far apart enough in their arguments. Instead of a debater that is far to one side and another that is far to the other, the debaters at the Pacifica Forum have been far to one side with the other somewhere in the middle.

This is where our beloved protesters come in. Although protests were initially meant to be “silent” they have strayed far and away from that premise. Effectively, the anti-Pacifica people want their voices heard. What Drew proposed–and what I think is an exceedingly good idea–is that those protesters join the debate on the other side of the table, as speakers. Instead of holding signs and shouting, or waiting for your turn to speak at the microphone, why not sit on the other end of the table as a third party, a third side to the debate about Nazism or what have you?

I find it harder and harder to find any support within myself for the anti-Pacifica protesters. The Forum itself is not perpetuating Nazism–idiots like Jimmy Marr and Anelauskas are. Why not stand up, take charge, and take back the Forum for yourselves?

Amidst this conflict, somebody told me, “The proper reaction to bad speech is not less speech. The proper reaction is more speech.”

If only this campus could grasp that concept.