University Press (Beaumont, Tex.), Vol. 73, No. 26, Ed. 1 Friday, January 24, 1997 Page: 3 of 6
This newspaper is part of the collection entitled: Texas Digital Newspaper Program and was provided to The Portal to Texas History by the Lamar University.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
University Press • Friday, January 24,1997 • Page 3
UPOpinion
University Press
Allen Pearson....................................Editor
Tonya Andris...........................Managing Editor
The opinions that appear in editorials are the official views of the
University Press student management as determined by the Student
Editorial Board. Opinions expressed elsewhere on this page are the
views of the writers only and are not necessarily those of the
University Press student management. Opinions are not necessarily
those of the university administration.
Editorial —
Crowds for brawn
outdraw crowds
for LU round ball
On Monday night, 7,000 screaming fans
packed the Montagne Center for action and a
good time. However, this was not an ordinary
night on the Lamar University campus — nor a
Lamar University basketball game. On this
night, the World Wrestling Federation broad-
casted a live episode of the show Monday Night
Raw.
People came from all over Southeast Texas to
see contemporary wrestlers fictionally battle
their brains out. The irony of this is that when
there is a “real” sport, such as basketball, being
played in the Montagne Center, only small
crowds in the community show up.
What message are we trying to send? Does the
Lamar community and Beaumont feel that other
events, whether it be the WWF, are more impor-
tant than supporting its own local team? On
Saturday night, only 2,946 people showed up to
watch Lamar defeat Jacksonville. However, it
must be noted that the low turnout was due to
the fact that the game was broadcast on televi-
sion. So was the WWF and the turnout was still
large.
Lamar University athletics, particularly bas-
- ketball, has always reached out for support in
the community. The community does support
V Lamar sports, but not enough. This has been an
on-going process throughout the basketball sea-
son. Then, in November, commercials started
popping up for the WWF event. The event near-
ly filled the Montagne Center.
If people can spend up to $15 for a front row
ticket to see the WWF, how about spending a
couple of bucks less to see some real athletes.
Letters to the editor-
Editor:
“I would like to take this opportunity to express my sin-
cere appreciation to you and to all the members of the
University Press staff who contributed to the December
1996 publication (UPbeat).
I have had numerous articles written about me over the
years and I must say that this was one of the best I have
ever read. The text was interesting, the photographs were
superb, and the layout was so innovative. Lamar
University Press is fortumate to have you on its staff.
I am proud to be a graduate of Lamar University and
honored that I have been given the opportunity to serve
•* my community as an elected official. I am always interest-
ed in doing what I can to promote Lamar University and
its programs. I look forward to working with you in the
' future.”
David W. Moore
Mayor, Beaumont
University Press
Editor .............................Allen Pearson
Managing Editor.............Tonya Andris
Copy Editor.................Laura Lee Scott
Features-
Editor........................Holly Simmons
Staff Writers-
Samantha McGuire, Kim Green,
Vita Gradney, Ginger Sjolander,
Todd Sonnier, Billie Dorman,
Patience McHenry
Sports-
....Bryce Darby, Brian van Staveren,
Owen Myrhe
Graphics-
Editor...........................Liv Lindberg,
Stephanie Staudt,
Mark Nesmith
Photography-
Editor.............................Mark Smith,
Henrik Sandsjd, Amy Tribes
Advertising.......................Linda Barrett
John Almon, Adria Cormier
Letters to the editor policy
Individuals who wish to speak out on issues should send a letter
fewer than 400 words in length to Letters to the Editor, P. O. Box
10055, LU Station, Beaumont 77710, or drop letters off at our
' offices in 200 Setzer Student Center. The writer’s name, address,
phone number, and social security number must accompany each
letter. Letters received without this information cannot be printed.
* Letters may be edited for length, grammar, style and possible libel.
Opinions expressed in letters are not necessarily those of the UP stu-
dent management. Letters by the same writer on the same subject
will not be published. Poetry, reprints, anonymous letters and reli-
gious debates will not be published. p
MTITj
..muauw
ja&zmw
0USYTD85
cat ru.ce
tNvaenortwM
, AVI ON
lw'*en«5Tii
'nvAVEt.oar
iNvesno*)
Jones vs. Clinton
No court frenzy for Clinton presidency
On the night before her case was argued
before the Supreme Court, I was on Paula Jones’
side.
You don’t have to believe her sexual harass-
ment charges against President Clinton to
believe that she deserves to have a fair trial as
soon as possible. Although I tend to side with
Clinton on most issues, I think he has been too
evasive on Jones’ charges.
She says Clinton, while he was governor of
Arkansas and she was a low level public employ-
ee, used a state trooper to summon her to his
hotel room where he allegedly requested sex
and exposed what the folks on the “Monty
Python” comedy team would call his “naughty
bits.”
Clinton has refused to confirm or deny any of
her charges. That lawyerly response does little to
boost public confidence in him.
Yet, he has asked that the case be put off until
he leaves the presidency, presumably four years
from now.
A lower appeals court overruled Clinton’s
motion. The president is not a monarch, the
court declared. He’s an ordinary citizen who is
subject to the same laws as everyone else.
Besides, said the court, justice delayed is justice
denied.
I thought that was persuasive, from a populist
point of view. But I have changed my mind. I am
now convinced that her case can wait. Paula
Jones’ own lawyers have persuaded me.
Under intense questioning from Justice
Anthony M. Kennedy in the Supreme Court
Monday, Jones’ attorney, Gilbert K. Davis,
opened a gaping hole in his own argument.
When Kennedy pressed Davis as to the toll
that litigation anxiety could take on a president’s
mind, emotions and energies, Davis offered that
a president so distracted from his official duties
could make a “good faith” argument to delay the
case. A trial judge then could grant the delay,
Davis said, even in the pretrial phase, which only
Opinion
Clarence
Page
involves taking statements from other witnesses.
At that, several justices pounced. “It seems to
me that you give away most of your case,” said
Justice Kennedy.
He’s right. Even the conservative Justice
Antonin Scalia, openly skeptical of Clinton’s
argument that the president’s time was too
important for civil court appearances, sounded
just as skeptical of the notion that “any judge,
federal or state, should have the right to decide
how the president should spend his time.
Scalia imagined a trial judge someday telling
a president: “This NATO meeting, it’s not a very
important NATO meeting. You could send your
secretary of state. In fact, I think he’s smarter
than you are, anyway.”
Yes, the presidency is a special office. Is it
above the law and the Constitution? No, the
same Constitution that protects Paula Jones’
rights also defines the specialness of the presi-
dency.
Unlike any other branch of government, the
person who holds the presidency is the very
embodiment of the executive branch. As a sign
on Harry S. Truman’s desk said, the buck stops
here. So, says the Constitution, as do most intru-
sions from the legislative and judicial branches.
The 1982 case of Nixon vs. Fitzgerald reaf-
firmed that specialness. It found that Richard
Nixon, a former president by then, could not be
sued for official acts he committed as president.
Clinton’s lawyers are following that logic. They
claim that Clinton can be sued for acts he
allegedly committed before he became presi-
dent, but he cannot be sued for them while he is
president.
Solicitor General Walter Dellinger argued for
Clinton — and the presidency — that exceptions
could be made for civil case issues that required
the court’s immediate attention. Examples
offered in court included a child custody suit or
an environmental protection suit against a pres-
ident whose private land was oozing toxic
wastes.
Such exceptions would be granted on a case-
by-case basis and the burden of proof would be
on the plaintiff, not the president, as Jones’
lawyers had suggested.
At present, Jones’ case is not that urgent. If
one of her prime witnesses, for example, is on his
or her death bed, she can reasonably petition the
court to have her case moved forward so the'wit-
ness can be deposed. Even with faded memories,
it is unlikely that a few more years would, in
itself, get Clinton off the hook.
Finally, in fairness I must ask myself, there’s
the acid-test political question: Would I feel the
same way if the accuser was Anita Hill and the
president was Clarence Thomas? As much’as I
have been a vocal critic of many of Thomas’
opinions, the answer is, yes. For the good of our
nation and the presidency, it has to be.
Just as Justice Scalia appeared to be agoniz-
ing between his respect for executive power and
his strong ideological differences with this par-
ticular president, so must we all put aside our
personal emotional leanings in Jones vs. Clinton
and consider its larger implications for rights
and the presidency.
As Clinton’s lawyers argue, what’s the rush?
If this is justice delayed, it is not delayed much.
One way or another, Clinton and Jones will
resolve their personal dispute. There’s no need,
at this time, to drag the presidency into it.
Clarence Page is a syndicated columnist for the
Chicago Tribune.
UPSuroey
What is your evaluation of Bill Clinton’s first term as president of the United States?
“Well, he is nice as a president. He did his
best for the economy and education. His cutting the
research budget is affecting the educational institu-
tion. Overall, he did fine.”
Abdullah Mamun
Bangladesh graduate student
“I feel that he did as good as anybody would have
done. They all lie and do not do what they say they
will.”
David Bertino, Jr.
Beaumont freshman
“There were highs and lows during the last
four years. Most, in my opinion, were lows. He and his
cabinet have not kept most of the promises he made
in 1992. This question escaped most people, or they
have simply forgotten the promises he made.”
Thomas Davis
Richmond gradute student
“As the first Democrat in 12 years, he had a rough
term. He dealt well with a Republican Congress.’’- -
Tyrone Toler
Houston junior
“I think he did a very good job. He took a stand on
issues when needed, and backed at times. He did a good
job regarding education, welfare, immigration and the
federal budget.”
Kucheriya Nilesh
Houston sophomore
t
“I feel that his first term was not time enough to
truly evaluate his capabilities. Although I don’t feel
that all of his choices in his personal life were
upstanding, his actions in his first term were average
when looking at past presidents.”
Amy Schafer
Beaumont senior
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This issue can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Newspaper.
Pearson, Allen. University Press (Beaumont, Tex.), Vol. 73, No. 26, Ed. 1 Friday, January 24, 1997, newspaper, January 24, 1997; Beaumont, Texas. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth500755/m1/3/: accessed March 29, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu; crediting Lamar University.