Univ. of Oregon defends its "Ban on the Troops"

Kevin McCullough Blog ^ | 1.29.2004

[KMC1]

THEY DON'T SEEM TO GRASP THE CONCEPT: A full five days has now passed since I first read and reacted to the University of Oregon banning the "Supprt the Troops" ribbons.

They admit in various news stories that they have been in fact inundated with reaction to the issue.

In the Oregon Daily Emerald, Moriah Balingit, put it this way:

Last week, the University asked delivery truck driver Pete Baker to remove the magnet from his car to comply with an Oregon state administrative policy that prohibits "unauthorized stickers" on state-owned vehicles after another employee complained. The only decals permitted, according to the policy, are those that identify the state agency that owns the vehicle.

KEZI-TV, Channel 9, Eugene, picked up the story, but Andrew Padula reported that Baker was forced to remove the decal because it may constitute "a political message."

"I don't know how they think they're political," Baker said in the news program. "I think they're patriotic."

After the show aired, news of Baker's magnet spread like wildfire across political Weblogs. Many Webloggers construed the story as an egregious violation of Baker's rights.

"Since when did the Bill of Rights have to undergo perusal and permission of the administration of the University of Oregon?" asked Kevin McCullough on his Weblog on Monday. McCullough is a radio talk show host and syndicated columnist based in New York City, and he brought up the story on his show.

McCuIlough posted University President Dave Frohnmayer's e-mail address and phone number on the Web site and called on readers to "form a blog swarm/storm."

Similar messages appeared on other Weblogs. One Weblogger, a graduate of the University identified as "Gaius Livius," gave an explanation for the University's actions.

"A relatively small, but vociferously vocal and disproportionately influential leftist clique among the faculty, administrators and students dictates policy at the Berkeley of the Northwest," the Weblogger said. "They loathe the United States in general, and anyone/anything connected to social/political conservatism in particular."

That deep into the piece and I am thinking "this is pretty good" so far as it comes from the University itself. She continued...

The next day, yellow ribbons appeared on the bannisters of Johnson Hall and other campus locations. Executive Assistant to the President David Hubin said these ribbons are legal and therefore did not have to be removed.

"They are a political statement, and there's not a policy that precludes it," Hubin said.

The only problem is - the ribbons were down before Hubin even spoke to the media...saying they could remain. How do we know - because on my show we spoke to the undercover employee at the University who placed the yellow ribbons around the administrative building.

Now Hubin and the University have resorted to implying that those of us who have spoken out against the administration's policy and attitudes towards the troops - have based it on misinformation and are "scaring" the wives of those troops who are serving.

Hubin said he responded to a call from the wife of an officer who is on active duty in Mosul. He said after he explained the policy the woman pointed out that the military has similar policies. "Our policy was not an indication that we don't support the sacrifice their loved ones are making," he said.

But in another prominent story in the Eugene, Oregon papers today there is some question as to whether the military would ban the "Support the Troops" ribbons/magnets.

Under normal circumstances, the military prohibits political statements on its vehicles or any kind of distinctive art, he  said. (Lt. Col.Joe Richard, spokeman for the Pentagon)

Whether the popular magnetic yellow ribbons would actually be banned was hard to say, he said.

"Something that says, 'Support your fellow soldiers', there might be some leeway," he said.

And from the same article the University of Oregon goes one step further claiming that no employee's cubicle, bulletin board, basically ANY property of the University may be used to make such expressions.

But there's no wiggle room for vehicles owned by the state, or even employee cubicles in state buildings, said Mike Beard, spokesman for the Administration Services office.

The issue more commonly comes up during political campaigns when employees want to put signs on their cubicle walls, Beard said.

"You can put it on your own car. You can wear a button. You could put a bumper sticker on your coat and wear it around. But the fact is the outside of the cubicle is owned by the public. It's not owned by the state," he said.

But again employees who have spoken with me ON THE RECORD have repeatedly confirmed that Kerry/Edwards signs, stickers, buttons, adorned cubicles, walls, windows, and other state property throughout 2004.

The facts are these...
1. If the University wished to repair its anti-Troops position, it could make the "Support the Troops" an "authorized" message that could in fact be displayed on every vehicle in the University Fleet.
2. They looked the other way on Kerry/Edwards stickers...
3. They were willfully dishonest on the non-vehicle ribbons and the "allowance" to leave them up.
4. They continue to misrepresent what those of us speaking out about their policies are in fact saying.

Keep up the pressure...
Office of President Dave Frohnmayer
E-MAIL:UNIVERSITY'S PRESIDENT
PHONE HIM:541-346-3036

[muawiyah]

Time to excise that bunch from the American military defense perimeter.

[End Times Sentinel]

"Since when did the Bill of Rights have to undergo perusal and permission of the administration of the University of Oregon?"

 

The point is, if the vehicle belongs to the University of Oregon, then the President of the University can determine what can and can't go on them.

 

That being said, President Frohnmayer is a communist symp and should be shipped to Cuba immediately.

Owl_Eagle

”Guns Before Butter.”