Griffons are told that they, as students, “are not part of the 99%.” This alone reveals a fundamental misunderstanding about the Occupy movement, and what it represents. One cannot opt out of being in the 99%, it is a statistical measure. While you may not agree with Occupy sentiments for whatever reason, if you or your family made less than $343,000 per annum since 2009, you are in the bottom 99%.

Is it really hard work that guarantees success, anyway? Since 1979, the productivity of the American worker has climbed two-hundred forty percent, while wages have stagnated. New technology alone does not account for that increase. Americans work hard. They work long hours. They do more than ever for virtually the same pay as they did in the 1970s. All the while, the gross domestic product has grown by leaps and bounds. And while our fourteen trillion dollar economy can’t seem to push the median wage over fifty-thousand, the top one percent’s share of the wealth has doubled in the last twenty years. Did every Wall Street executive earn that money with “hard work?”

The article also seems to imply that there is a surfeit of activist sentiment on American campuses that must be quelled by cold, hard reality. I wish that were the case. Despite dismal jobs prospects and a collective student loan debt of nearly one trillion dollars, an opinion piece in a campus publication excuses student apathy and the proto-solipsistic worldview that perpetuates the destructive “look out for number one” attitude that we know for certain does not make the world better. This is ultimately unsurprising however. Students and citizens in general throughout this country have been conditioned to believe that mass movements change nothing. On the contrary, mass numbers of ordinary citizens have changed society in the past, and they can do so in the future.

Yes, your job is to be a student. Just don’t let anyone tell you that you can only learn in a classroom.

Nicholas Brothers
Political Science Major, Occupier
Missouri Western State University

Bibliography

Gilson, D. (2011, July/Aug). Overworked America: 12 Charts to Make Your Blood Boil. Mother Jones. http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/06/speedup-americans-working-harder-charts

Luhby, T. (2011, Oct. 20). Who are the 1%? CNNMoney. http://money.cnn.com/2011/10/20/news/economy/occupy_wall_street_income/index.htm

The student claimed that MWSU received budget cuts because of hard economic times and that the cut shouldn’t be shrugged off onto the students. He preferred we look at cutting things like beautification projects.

For the sake of students feeling better, the author suggested that the increase in tuition be counterbalanced with cuts to administration salaries.

Finally, the student made this statement, “It is time our student representatives and SGA leadership stop behaving like toadies for the administration and defend our interest.”

In responding, for the record, you should know I am not and never have been a student representative or part of SGA leadership. I can, though, understand the need for a tuition increase, and I don’t feel it makes me a “toady” for the administration.

MWSU has increased its enrollment by 18 percent over the past three years, which is higher than all of the other four-year universities in the state. Interestingly enough, MWSU accomplishes this while receiving less state aid per student than all of the other four-year universities in the state.

A much improved, more beautiful, campus likely attracted a few of those new students. Thank you community members, because through your itemized donations we have been able to accomplish most of the beautification projects seen on campus. A thank you is also due to the MWSU administration, because they didn’t take a pay raise over the course of the past three years either.

Now, lets review the reason MWSU received budget cuts. Each year the governor hammers out a budget that he sends to the state legislature, which then goes through a legislative process filled with committee hearings, expert testimony, debate, and, of course, voting from the state legislature.

In the event of a major natural disaster the governor can choose to make certain funding withholdings from almost any government entity receiving state funding. These withholdings forego the legislative process; requiring no hearings, no expert testimony, no debate, and definitely no votes from the state legislature.

A state Representative from Joplin, Bill White, was quoted in the St. Louis Post Dispatch on Aug. 27 saying, “This is why we have a rainy day fund; higher education shouldn’t have to pay for debris removal in Joplin. We have other money for that.”

It should also be noted that the governor’s withholdings closely resemble his own budget that he issued to the state legislature earlier in the year. That budget went through the above process, and came out with MWSU receiving its adequate share of funding. Interestingly enough, the governor chose to sign the budget that went through the legislature instead of augmenting it with his power of a line-item veto. Using the line-item veto would’ve allowed him to set the funding level for MWSU, but he would have also been the only person to blame for the change.

SGA, if you’re now considering the proposed way of dealing with tuition increases by cutting administration salaries by the same percent of increase that the students are facing… please don’t do this.

I’ll admit I’m not a math major, but if this policy were to be put into place we would end up with a very poor administration and eventually none at all. For example, with a policy like this, if tuition were to increase with an average rate of inflation (say three percent annually) then within a decade the administration would have a pay cut of 30 percent. Within two decades 60 percent, three decades 90 percent, and 40 years from now the administration would have to pay to work at MWSU.

Sincerly,

Patrick Graham

Thank you for printing my letter in your paper.  I have been happy with the feedback I have received from many students both agreeing and disagreeing with myself.  There is one area of my letter, however, I would like to clarify for any who found my point vague.

The idea that the proposal I voiced was a “political stunt,” as some have suggested, goes to the heart of the intent of my criticism.  This proposal was not meant as a catch all solution to our budgetary woes, in which case it would indeed be a “political stunt.”  Asking the administration to help bear the burden of a tuition hike by the means suggested would be a symbolic gesture that would help us students swallow the pill of increased tuition.  I see no reason why or student representatives could not be in favor of such a condition on our approval.

Furthermore, SGA’s act of unanimously supporting this tuition hike in a symbolic vote is itself a “political stunt,” the problem being it is a stunt with the administration’s interests in mind, not ours.  By failing to promote student interests and allowing its actions to become talking points for the administration SGA has failed to represent its constituents.  It isn’t the system that the students, myself included, disapprove of; it is the abuse and neglect of the system.

There is no one-stop solution to budget problems, and I am not suggesting that tuition increases are out of the question.  If they are employed, however, they should come only after the students have seen evidence of budgetary cuts that do not hinder the quality of our education and only if they are not unilaterally placed on students.  We want to know the powers that be, specifically those responsible for raising tuition, are sharing the burden.  And we see our student representatives as being responsible for ensuring this.  Perhaps there was an administrative hand behind SGA’s tuition vote and perhaps not.  Either way, we students understand it to be a major missed opportunity.  Because our representatives failed to attach conditions to a bill vital to our interests, symbolic or not, they gave our voices up to the administration’s agenda.

I would like to stress that this is not intended as an attack on any individual’s character or integrity.  Respect is due to all persons willing to make an informed judgment on these issues, whether it is the same as mine or not.  Hopefully this dialogue will continue to provoke MWSU students to engage in thoughtful discussion on the issues we face, both as students and as a university.

Respectfully,

Gary Weidemann

It seems that your publication has come under the spell of MWSU administration officials in their attempts to falsely convince students that tuition hikes are the answer to decreased state appropriations. Much of your previous issues have been devoted to deriding these admittedly unfortunate cuts to our university while championing the position of the administration and the unanimous bloc of tuition-hiking student representatives. The unanimity of SGA’s favorable position on tuition hikes only proves one thing, though: SGA does not effectively represent its constituents.

If MWSU receives a budget cut because of hard economic times that cut should not be shrugged off on its students. Cuts are difficult, but they can be made in areas that won’t affect the quality of our education. Many cuts are feasible even if they impinge on some peripheral areas that can await more favorable conditions, such as beautification. In an ironic twist on a recently devised slogan, the new tuition hikes are exactly what is keeping us Griffons down. While the administration and SGA weigh in positively on tuition hikes, many students would like an added amendment that could make these increases more acceptable. Let’s cut the administrator’s salaries by the same percent as the tuition increase students are facing. That way, the administration can be sure to do their part in supporting the quality of our education in these troublesome times and we students can see that this burden is truly being shared.

A few years ago, SGA failed to pass a recycling bill that would have skated through a vote had it not been wedded to entirely unrelated student fees. Even though the MWSU administration forced its way with the fees in the end, the bill failed to pass a student vote. That was because the students and some SGA senators refused to accept an underhanded ploy to sneak in additional fees on the back of a popular program. I am sure a silent majority of students feel the same on this “voluntary” tuition hike. We are tired of an SGA being cajoled and bullied by the MWSU administration and of representatives who are apathetic to the interests of their constituents. It is time our student representatives and SGA leadership stop behaving like toadies for the administration and defend our interests. This next election, let’s get an SGA president and some senators that aren’t afraid to buck the MWSU administration if such action is needed. It probably won’t change the way of things in the end, but at least our voices will be heard.

Sincerely,

Gary Weidemann

There was an article about the SGA President and incoming SGA people concentrating their efforts to enforce the smoking policy of Missouri Western State University and how to deal with the complaints from non-smokers and meeting in the middle for all students to be happy. 

The smokers of cigarettes know to address the problem of trash that is left behind from uncaring people like smokers that leave a bad taste when they view cigarette butts around campus grounds; it’s for all people that come here. 

The passing of the student vote has made SGA become the voice for all students and help with the complaints about smoking and the rules that come with it. The SGA Director is glad the students have spoken in the vote. But, it may become the policy of MWSU anyway because of carelessness of the smokers themselves. 

Due to current financial constraints and to tidy up the campus, this may be the only way for MWSU to clean up the butts.

Employees get a paycheck and the cuts that the campus was dealt needs, to show up somewhere. 

I think that the author is explaining to be thankful of what you have and to respect others that you may affect because human carelessness will have a permanent effect on the campus. It is a privilege and not a right to smoke. 

People need to be aware and respectful of other people and be responsible for the acts that reflect on them. His past article calls it like it is and smokers better listen up. 

My position is that I am thankful that the smokers were there to vote. 

On that day of voting, I was telling people (that were smoking) that they need to vote if they want to continue with the privilege they have. I am a smoker and a firm believer that everyone’s vote counts and if you don’t exercise that right, then you get what you get. 

What I don’t like is that some people are lazy and are not willing to work to get along, like moving the smokers spot to an area that are agreeable for both parties. Now that cigarette butts on the ground have caused an issue, it is clear that we need to move the smoke pad somewhere else. We need to put peer pressure on them to not leave butts on the ground and have some pride in themselves ad help keep the campus clean. Either way, I don’t want to lose what I have and it looks like I’m going to fight to keep it.

Sincerly, 

Brian Gomez

Here we go again! Will we ever be rid of this disastrous show known as the “Vagina Monologues?” Having seen the show myself, reluctantly, many years ago, I fail to see how it benefits women to swear and use creative names for their vagina and other body parts. The entire show is utterly degrading and indicative of the low-level that much of American culture has fallen to in 2011. As one example, a lesbian assault on a 13-year old girl was described approvingly, as a “good rape.” Using degenerate language does not “free” women, it simply reduces their dignity. Having the freedom to do something does not necessarily mean that we should do it. Women wouldn’t, or at least shouldn’t, want a man to use the terms they themselves use in this “theatrical production.” If it is improper for one group to use a term, it should be improper for everyone. And, to make matters worse, it is to be performed on Valentine’s Day—a day traditionally devoted to romantic love, unity, and caring for other people.

I am absolutely opposed to violence against women, but there are far superior ways, both morally and economically, to address the issue. How about campus organizations sponsoring a Valentine’s Day dance where couples could sell tickets across campus for some type of prize? A large percentage of ticket sales could be donated to the YWCA to help women who have been assaulted or otherwise abused. On some campuses, I have witnessed students selling flowers around Valentine’s day to support various causes. And if the students believe they would want to put on a play, there are many that emphasize and promote the goodness in people and the dignity of both men and women without debasing themselves in the process. This is not a naive hope for some unattainable utopia, but rather a confidence that university students and faculty can rise above the level of the street and strive for something better. Abuse against women will decline when they are no longer seen as sex objects by men (and women), but viewed with dignity as individuals. Our current popular culture, i.e., music, movies, television, social networking, all conspire against this view of women by essentially saying that sex is all that matters. Why should our students simply follow in lock-step with this superficial paradigm? Where is the innovation and inventiveness of students and faculty? Can’t we think of anything better than what the New York Times tells us is “funny” or “edgy”? Do we have to rely on Broadway or Hollywood or Eve Ensler to tell us what to do? Surely, we can think of something more appropriate, and more innovative, to generate funds for the YWCA than an old, tired show that highlights the worst in human behavior.

Sincerely,

Kenneth Dagel

Kenneth Dagel
Associate Professor of Geography
Missouri Western State University
St. Joseph, MO

“Secede from Secularism”

As a student who has been an associate senator and a senator of SGA, when you have a complaint about SGA, you should talk to a senator or any one of the executive board members or come to a senate meeting, which is open to all students to attend. The senate meeting is at 5 p.m. Monday night on the second floor of Blum. The only way to get correct facts about what is going on with SGA is by attending a senate meeting or talking to a member of SGA. There has been a lot of talk about the administrative assistant for SGA that has been in the paper and other people talking about it, but they are giving out the wrong facts about this position that Kathy Kelly will be filling.

Kelly’s position is not really new, it’s mainly just a change in title and moving her office within the SGA office since she will be doing the same job that she has been doing for years with SGA. Kelly has been helping everyone in SGA for years with training all the officers in the responsibility of all the executive officers and senators, For instance, the director of finance who runs the FOC committee where the clubs and organizations apply for funding for their club events or conferences that the clubs are attending. Once FOC approves their requests, then Kelly sends the money to the clubs account or pays electronically for the tickets, hotel expenses or whatever the approved funding is for. Since the director of finance cannot send the money himself, Kelly will not be taking over responsibilities of any of the executive officers with her new position.
SGA decided to this, since we hired a new vice president of student affairs. Kelly’s responsibilities have doubled compared to our last advisor for SGA, who was an associate dean of student affairs, who has less responsibility than a vice president of student affairs? Dr. Esther Peralez who is the new VP of student affairs and our new advisor for SGA agreed with SGA wanting to make Kelly the administrative assistant for SGA, with this change we will continue to have consistency from year to year within SGA. Having Peralez as the advisor for SGA is a good thing for student government since Peralez is for the students and encourages more students to get involve with student government, and her being a vice president can also help with getting student’s voice with top administration.

Sincerely,
Dan Drope

The campus and community are all abuzz about the unexpected retirement of long time staff member Ellen Kisker. Many people know Ellen for her passion and dedication to meeting the needs of non-traditional students. But what most people do not know is that Ellen has also devoted a significant amount of her time to meeting the needs of students with disabilities.

Beginning in 1989, Ellen was asked to provide services to students with disabilities in addition to her other duties. As the number of students with disabilities increased, it soon became apparent that a full-time position was needed. Ellen worked diligently to convince the campus to create the Office of Special Needs and to hire Lois E. Fox as the first Special Needs Coordinator. I worked for Lois as a work-study employee when I returned to Western to complete my degree in Psychology. And now, many years later, I occupy the position that was created by Ellen and most recently held by Lois.

Throughout all of the changes that have occurred in the Office of Special Needs (which is now called the Office of Disability Services) the one thing that has remained consistent has been Ellen’s desire to create a welcoming and accessible environment for students with disabilities to pursue their education. To the best of my knowledge, Ellen has been a member of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) committee since 1989 and she has served as the chair of that committee for the majority of those years.

The numerous changes that have been made to our campus since 1989 have made it possible for many students with disabilities to pursue their education at MWSU. And while those changes have been very subtle, the changes are important nonetheless. Each time we improve accessibility on our campus, we remove a barrier and we become a part of each student’s success story.

Missouri Western alumnus, Michelle Ritter ‘00 commented that, “Ellen was the first person I met when I was thinking about returning to college after a debilitating accident in 1995. She never once gave me the impression that I wouldn’t be a successful student and her “can do” attitude made me believe that I could earn a college degree, which I did in 2000! No matter how busy she was, she always took the time to meet with me and made me feel as though no other student was on her mind. It is impossible to calculate how many lives have been forever changed for the better because of Ellen’s encouragement to all to follow their dream of earning a college degree.” She was the true meaning of a “student service” provider and will be greatly missed.

Students with disabilities who have graduated from MWSU have gone on to become counselors, physical therapy assistants, music teachers, college professors, business owners, web designers, etc. These students would all say that Ellen’s dedication to the ADA committee had a positive impact on their ability to be successful at Western.

Either directly or indirectly, every accessible amenity on our campus is a reflection of Ellen’s work on behalf of students with disabilities. From the resting benches that dot our sidewalks, to the automatic doors in every campus building, to the chair lift for the swimming pool in the Looney Complex, Ellen’s legacy of creating a welcome and accessible campus for students with disabilities will live on for many years to come. She will be missed by students, faculty, staff and community members alike.

Michael Ritter

I have a feeling this will be the last letter I’ll ever write to the Griffon News since I’m graduating very soon; so to everyone I’ve ever met or worked with at this University, it’s been a pleasure. The people at this school are amazing, and are going great places. It is awesome.
Joshu Todd
Former SGA President

In response to the April 15, 2010 issue of Griffon News Editorial.

Just as happens in most communities, the votes of a few have decided an issue. Perhaps the outcome actually represents the opinion of the majority since the economy is so poor. However, can we accurately make this claim since only a fraction of the students voted? What scientific methodology did the Griffon News staff use to confirm that the fee would have passed if only SGA officers had been more “prepared”? Did the Griffon News effectively inform the public? Let me offer my solution to the issue; let’s create a better relationship between the SGA and the Griffon News. Let’s embrace a cooperative effort to achieve positive outcomes and refrain from deceptive discourse.

Thanks for your commentary and support,
Jacob Scott
Parliamentarian & Student Senator
Student Government Association

Staff Response

Jacob Scott

Thank you for submitting a letter in response to the April 15 editorial. The Griffon News respects your position and obvious disagreement and we appreciate your pro-addictiveness in student politics.

The fact is though, Jacob, that not all students are as willing to engage themselves as you are. Students either don’t have the time or interest in the issues to get involved. This is where the Student Government Association plays one of its major roles. The SGA, spear headed by the president, are solely responsible for educating the public on any issues they wish to pass. This is called a direct line of communication—which has been lacking all this year.

As far as The Griffon News’ duty to the public, three stories were published on the proposal (Feburary 5, March 5, and April 2, which can also be found online). The final story’s headline read “Western students vote on technology recycling fee April 7th-9th.” It was the most detailed, describing how much the fee would cost and the provisions that the proposal called for. The article mentions Gordon Mapely, the Dean of Western Institute, who helped co-author the proposal, stating why the technology fee is needed. No doubt, the fee had support from the administration, especially in this current economic climate, but the administration is not enough to convince students why the proposal was important.

The Griffon News can only educate the public so much; at the end of the voting day only the SGA can be blamed for a failed vote. A failed vote can occur for several reasons, but it is the opinion of The Griffon News that the major contributing factor was the lack of communication from senior members of SGA to the public and in some places even within the SGA.

Government should never rely on newspapers to be their direct line of communication with the people they represent. As mentioned in the editorial, a public forum directed and advertised toward students to ask questions and respond to the fee would have been an appropriate response to opening the communications channels between SGA and the students. Senate meetings are held for senators and are not primarily for students to voice their opinion.

The Griffon News never attempted to speculate how the voters would have voted if SGA had been more pro-active in their communication. It is logical to conclude though, had SGA been more prepared (held more forums, prevent political divide among the senate, educate the students, and open the lines of communication between students and SGA) then voter turnout would have been higher than roughly 10 percent.

In response to your final sentence, The Griffon News and SGA have a healthy relationship as is proven with the coverage of the Technology and Recycling fee. Jacob, the issue though isn’t the relationship between The Griffon News and SGA, but instead SGA and the public.

The Griffon News will always “refrain from deceptive discourse” but to be clear, The Griffon News is not a propaganda tool for the SGA. The Griffon News in a student outlet and open forum for everyone on campus. The Griffon News will not “embrace a cooperative effort to achieve positive outcomes,” because that is not our duty to Western. It is instead, SGA’s duty to convince both the students and The Griffon News that your positive outcomes are indeed positive.

Once again, thank you for responding to The Griffon News editorial. We encourage every student to speak their mind.
Respectively
The Griffon New Staff

“August 1, 2009 by a 3-1 vote of members present and in good academic and financial standing in accordance to Phi Mu National Constitution and Bylaws Phi Mu Zeta Pi will not be returning to campus pending National Council approval.

You will undoubtedly hear that things were unfair and I can assure you they were not. First, this meeting was scheduled more then 3 months ago and the issue at hand was tabled at our July meeting giving the members 3 weeks to make arrangements to be there. These summer meetings are a requirement from nationals and a $50 fine is imposed for not attending.

Therefore any who were not in attendance cannot say it was unfair.

Second, those who were not in academic or financial good standing were not allowed a vote; again this is clearly stated in the constitution and bylaws of our fraternity. Members have had the opportunity to pay their bill since January 1, 2009 therefore those who had not done so as of 10:00 am Saturday August 1, 2009 were not allowed to vote. Members that are not in good academic standing have been put on academic probation through MWSU and again in accordance to our constitution and bylaws do not get a vote and are on probation within the organization. Third, I would like to point out that our calendar of meetings and our constitution and bylaws are publically posted so anyone claiming unfairness is doing so because they do not like the decision made because it does not agree with their opinion.

I understand that to do things their own way but the decision was made democratically. I would like to inform you that we do have the complete support of our National Council and any attempt to tell you otherwise is wrong. If you have any questions concerning the validity of this letter please contact Robin Fanning, Phi Mu National President at np@phimu.org.

This decision was not an easy one to make. Zeta Pi has been struggling to meet national requirements for quite some time now. We are the lowest ranked chapter within Phi Mu Fraternity. You will hear that the 3 that voted to voluntarily close are selfish and too lazy to do the work and that is simply not true. We, along with other members not present are all in agreement that it is not fair to bring new members into a struggling organization. These women are seeking a positive Greek life experience and we can not give them that. I have spoken with the Pan-Hellenic President and voiced our eagerness and willingness to promote Greek life on campus with her as well. We are willing to do whatever it takes for the advancement of Greek life but also realize that Zeta Pi is not beneficial to Greek life on campus at this juncture.”

There were individuals that were unhappy with the results of the vote and petitioned to the National Council claiming we were 1 member short of a technical quorum. This was not true, there were enough members present at the meeting however, two of them were not in good standing and were not allowed to vote. There ability to vote was irrelevant to quorum it was their presence alone that qualified as quorum. Robin Fanning, National President of Phi Mu Fraternity called a special meeting of the National Council. This meeting was NOT to discuss the validity of the vote asking to voluntarily shut down; the vote had already been accepted. The intention of the Council was to asses the future of our chapter. You see we voted to ASK to be voluntarily shut down. Just because we ask does not mean Nationals will allow it, the National Council must vote on whether or not to suspend the chapter. That was the intention of the council meeting.

Shortly after the council meeting two representatives came to Western to meet with the chapter in order to deliver the decision of the National Council. This decision was based on many factors; membership total, financial stability, and the ability to meet national requirements. After assessing the past several years the council decided that the best thing for the chapter was to suspend the charter.

In delivering the decision the representatives also notified the chapter that we had 30 days to appeal the decision of the National Council. In order to appeal the chapter would one, need quorum of all active members and two, need a majority vote of active members in good financial and academic standing in accordance with the national constitution and by laws of Phi Mu Fraternity. The chapter decided to vote on whether or not to appeal the National Council’s decision. At this meeting 9 of the 11 members were present qualifying quorum; the two members that were not present were not in good financial standing and would not have been allowed a vote. One member present did not vote because she was granted ICMS status meaning she was inactive for the semester. A silent vote, counted by the National Representatives resulted in a majority vote (5:3) NOT to appeal the National Council’s decision. It is understandable that Alumni and Active members alike will be upset.

Being one of the individuals who voted to ask for voluntary shut down and not to appeal I can assure you that this was not an easy decision. It is very easy to make an emotional decision, it is not so easy to make a more logical decision when you KNOW that it will hurt people you care about and lead to massive repercussions. I know that the decision has upset many Alumni but I truly feel given the state of the chapter it was truly what was best for the chapter at this time. This decision has led to many immatthat feel that the decision was in the best interest of the chapter.

That is our burden to deal with and I feel that we are maintaining an advance level of maturity while being referred to as such names as the Anti-Christ’s. The last thing that we need is the Griffon News condoning and encouraging such behavior.
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion on this issue. However, that does not mean that the issue should not be presented fairly and accurately. On behalf of the MAJORITY of the members of Phi Mu Zeta Pi I am asking for a correction statement in the next issue of Griffon News.

I wish that I could generate the letter given to us by Nationals for publication but it was specifically stated that the letter was not for publication. However, if you would like to contact Colleen Kowich, Pan-Hellenic Advisor, the National Representative presented her with a letter from Phi Mu National Fraternity as well. This letter is NOT for publication either but you may use it to verify that it WAS in fact the decision of the national council.

Sincerely,
Kerri Rollins

 King Whitney Jr, president of Personal Laboratory Inc., made a statement about change at a sales meeting that is appropriate and it was later quoted in the Wall Street Journal in June of 1967. He said, “Change has a considerable psychological impact on the human mind. To the fearful it is threatening because it means that things may get worse. To the hopeful it is encouraging because things may get better. To the confident it is inspiring because the challenge exists to make things better.” At Missouri Western the question must be asked, will we view these new beginnings with hope, confidence or fear?

 There are always those individuals that would rather face an existence of mundane banality than open themselves to new experiences because new things can be scary. Mankind has always been afraid of what it does not understand, However we at the Griffon News feel that this should be seen as an opportunity to raise ourselves to a new standard. Missouri Western is facing a new dawn that ushers in the great light of knowledge to a community that could only stand to benefit from having a more collegiate environment. By seizing the new day with eager and willing hearts and backbones choke full of hard work, the students and administration could use this new beginning to propel our university into an era of greatness in this ever advancing society. We could build brilliant minds for tomorrow.

 Heraclitus was a Greek philosopher who lived from 540 B.C. to 480 B.C. but even as early in human history as he lived there was already one truth that proved constant and still does in this constantly changing world. That truth is elegant and simple. “Nothing endures but change.” Heraclitus was right about that. So with change comes new beginnings and new chances to do better or worse that was done before. We at the Griffon Newsroom are ready to do better. Are you?

 The media has always been an integral part of the democratic process, especially on college campuses across this great nation.  A wise historian once told me that the media was especially important, because it is the first obligation of a responsible citizen or group of citizens to question authority—especially the authority of government. 

 With the recent issues faced by the Student Government Association, I can honestly say that I have been proud of our student newspaper.  The Griffon News has done a fairly good job, tracking major issues, and ensuring that our student body has been well informed.

However, after reading last week’s issue, I dare say that I am deeply concerned, and very disappointed with the staff editorial, “Have some respect, this isn’t High School.”

The issues addressed by Tay Triggs in the October 22nd meeting of the Student Senate, were not minority issues.  I feel as if the authors missed the point.  This is a serious problem, as I, and a huge number of students were extremely offended by last week’s newspaper.

First and foremost, the articles published in last weeks paper, are being viewed as an attack on black students.  The paper singled out an ethnic group, and charged those students with being disruptive, rude, vulgar, and even lazy.  Furthermore, the over use of the terms such as, “you,” “they,” “their,” etc, do nothing but offend minority students.  What’s worse is that such language propagates stereotypes, and breeds disunity.

The real issues at hand are far different than a few students, with “high school” mentalities, hanging out with their friends.  College isn’t the place for having fun?  I beg to differ.  Everyone has the right to mess around with their friends, and college is supposed to offer invaluable social experiences.  Not to mention the fact that we have several hundred freshmen attending this University.  I’m sorry to point out this reality, but students do not instantly get a “college mentality,” just because they walk across the stage after their senior year, and get a high school diploma.  To insinuate, for one moment, that the students in question are not here to learn, is absolutely absurd.

Furthermore, I can’t believe that someone would single out minority students for sleeping at convocation!  Does anyone remember Elijah Haahr, and the controversy it caused when he fell asleep ON STAGE at a convocation address?  He was the SGA President for crying out loud!  And I’m pretty sure that he was white.  In regards to the student on her phone… yes, she engaged in an act of disrespect, but considering the fact that students all over that auditorium sit through the address, chatting with their friends, no one has the right to single out black students for their behavior.

It seems apparent that the authors of these articles have not spent much time in the cafeteria, the residence halls, the second floor of the Blum Union, the Non-Traditional Student Office, or any other popular hangout on this campus.  If they had, they would have heard students of all walks of life:  residents, Greeks, non-trads, etc, act in a manner, which isn’t always befitting or professional.

The fact of the matter is that we are all human.  We all talk our own way, and we want to do what we want, when we want.  We are all guilty of disrespecting someone else.  The authors of that editorial didn’t have the right to cast the first stone.  I know from experience, that The Griffon News staff is not above this mess.  After a meeting with the editorial board, I recall the dismay of a major university administrator, because she walked into The Griffon News office, when an editor was dropping the “f-bomb” left and right.  Again, I dare say, that none of us are above this mess.

The Griffon News had a great opportunity to do something positive with this situation.  Instead, the editorial singled out a group of students, based on their race, and published an appalling issue, criticizing minority students.  This is not the role of a responsible journalistic venue, which exists to spread ideas.  Just because you have the right to publish an article, does not make you exempt from displaying common decency.

I know I speak for many students across campus, when I say that this situation is unacceptable, and that The Griffon News should immediately issue an apology.
-Luke Herrington

Respectfully,
Tau Sigma Chapter of Zeta Phi Beta Sorority Inc. 

Too often, bad behavior by an individual, or individuals, of a particular race is spread across the entire race like a patina of rust.

I am, of course, referring to the editorial entitled “Have some respect, this isn’t High School,” in which the editorialist does just that.

Bad behavior is not black behavior, and to make ‘disrespect’ a racial issue is, in fact, an act of disrespect and ignorance.

I am white.

I am male.

I am also gay, which makes me a minority.

Let me assure you that the dubious actions of notable figures such as George Michael or Senator Larry Craig have absolutely no bearing upon my own actions. The same applies to other minorities, who should fall into rank with the black students this article has offended.

This leaves us with the issue of bad behavior. I’ve witnessed a fair bit of it in my three years at Western.

I’ve seen vandalism scrawled on restroom walls that disgusts me.

I’ve seen a fight or two.

I’ve witnessed students take phone calls during classes.

I’ve come across many students of many backgrounds who think that the most basic rules of politeness don’t apply to their situation.

The behavior problem at Western is not about race, but about a bit of youth mixed with a grand sense of entitlement.

One might say the latter is a function of the former, but it seems to me that youth can be outgrown, entitlement often isn’t.

Youth is answering a cell phone during convocation; entitlement is refusing to put it away when asked.

Youth is arriving late to a class; entitlement is entering a classroom to use a computer during a class. 

Youth is yelling profanities loudly across the student union; entitlement is damaging the property in the Student Union.

Entitlement is telling those that do not conform to a certain mode of behavior to “go home,” which is the default insult when we stereotype the behavior of another group.

“Go home” is shorthand for “You don’t belong here, (insert ethnic/gender/sexuality slur)!”

This attitude is simplistic and serves neither the Western community nor the students who desperately need to learn how the adult world functions.

These students have not learned the mode of proper behavior in their home community, so shipping them off isn’t going to educate them.

It seems that in these cases, the Western community has the opportunity to create outstanding citizens.

I speak for myself and many other members of the Western Community when I say to the students who’ve exhibited the bad behavior on campus:
Stay.

Mature a little and realize that our planet revolves around the sun, not your life.

Make up for your bad decisions.

And, please, behave yourself!

How dare you prematurely accentuate that one group of minorities need to be in High School. Who gave you the audacity to judge an entire race at Missouri Western State University, which you obviously don’t know anything about. Let me explain our culture to you since you lack the needed diversity training. We, as African Americans our a proud, out spoken, and passionate culture. We boldly support the things that mean something to us, and will stop at nothing for our voice to be heard. So yes when you get several opinionated individuals around each other the volume will increase, just like anywhere you go in America.

The only thing I remotely agree with you on is that the profane language, obscene gestures need to stop. Everyone must have a part of, since it doesn’t come from just one race. I want you to understand that “we” our not the only one that is guilty of this. I assume that you have school sprit, so I want you to go to a public football game and listen to students of all ethic backgrounds behaving the same way that you assumed that we do, in front of family alumni, and children. But to judge us as “we” all need to go back to High School is boarder line racist. Especially how you single handedly singled out an entire race. That’s as if I seen some European Americans dancing with no rhythm then I assume that all European Americans do not have rhythm.  Would I be correct in writing about that in the News Paper? No I wouldn’t.

 What you did was the same thing Hitler did during the holocaust. In saying that our race is not ready for College, we are lacking maturity, home training, and that we our an inferior race and that we should go back to, concentration camps (high school). College is about how to grow as human beings. Yes, everyone can grow and learn; even you.

So before you walk through Blum Lobby and glance at few and assume that “we” vandalize our propriety that all students bought through our tuition. Before you assume that there was a “fight” at one of “our” functions; please do your research or even stop and sit and talk to these students, get to know our culture, and you might learn something. You might learn that all students study in between classes, some laugh and joke and the some have 3.0. 3.5, or even 4.0’s. We are all here to learn, grow, and mature. Allow us to do so, for us to adapt to a new culture of college life. We all get the same education, we all come from different backgrounds, we all can learn from each other. I ask you not to judge us on what some have witness from few students. Do not judge our race because of a couple of students that our going through learning fazes. In addition we will not judge an entire race over some idiot that doesn’t have enough diversity training to properly understand “one groups” culture.

Across campus, organizations, departments and offices are feeling the pressure of the upper administration, specifically, the Office of Academic and Student Affairs. 

The overall morale of students, staff, and faculty involved in the effected areas is low. 

The exodus this past summer, of university staff and faculty was not without reason.  In addition to several faculty members, officials in both Student Services and Student Development fled the University because they too, were well aware of the problems rolling down hill from Academic and Student Affairs.

Where are we now? 
 
Teachers have used the classroom to tell their students to revolt or protest.  It even seems that prominent students involved in the system have thought about transferring to other schools. 

Of course, there is also the fact that students are losing their rights, each day, as the top officials in Academic and Student Affairs have attempted to shut down our Student Government Association in the same manner that they dismantled the Office of First Year Programs.

If Missouri Western really is seeking to set the standard of excellence in the field of student development, then their handling of the Student Government Association has been mediocre at best. 

Authoritarian tactics are by no means effective in student development, and they are completely contrary to the values held by the university community.    

In pursuit of fulfilling its vision, the University seeks to serve the student body, and teach us the value of freedom, by promoting “the free exchange of ideas that make education liberating, and democracy unique.”   

The powers-that-be have perverted the Constitution of our SGA and our student body.  Their unwillingness to recognize the legitimate Constitution, has led them to pick and choose at their pleasure, the portions of two separate constitutions, in an attempt to exploit the student government.  They have perverted the very values that Western holds dear.

Every student at Missouri Western should be outraged. But as we already said, the students are not alone. 

Faculty and staff have seen the same issues, but many of them have been afraid to speak up, for fear of losing their jobs.   
The management of the several departments and offices under Academic and Student Affairs has been poor.  Imagine the things this great institution could accomplish if its leaders were not so concerned about doing everybody else’s jobs.  If everyone worked together, without having to worry about being micro-managed, then the advancements that this university desires to see might actually be achieved.  We know that there is a long serial list of grievances held by the University community.
   
If every department, office, organization, student, faculty member, and staff member stood up together, and declared with one unified voice, that they are unhappy with the direction that the institution is taking, then maybe we’ll be heard.
 
There is strength in numbers. No one could achieve such a goal working alone, especially when many members of our community have to worry about the potential ramifications of taking such an open and vocal stance.

Students, please support your SGA.  They need your help now, more than ever.

Sincerely,
Natalie Bailey, Luke Herrington, David Williams, Tyson Malone, Trevor Kincaid, Amanda Williams, Rachel Burton    Rachel Booth, Kim Morton, David Allison    Michael DeFelice  Brandon Arnold, Beth Murphy, Jaclyn Hurkman, Janell Banks, Natasha Price, Stephanie Gromowski  Kori Gordon, Nathan Noland, Lindsey Hibler, Jodi Main, Dustin Wheeler, Felicia Keney, Candie DeShon, Matthew Stauffer,  Olin Kinsey, Brooke Tallman, Mercedes Hyman, Trisha Steele, Matt Canaday

The Republican toy, known as George W. Bush was elected because America wanted to get out of the immoral shadow that Bill Clinton had cast over it. Yea, I remember the good old days when Bill Clinton looked America in the face and lied to us. Is this what America wants?

Would we rather have an immoral president than one who will actually defend us? George Bush never deliberately lied. He was told by his intelligence that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction.

President Bush’s ratings may be bad, but only because liberal news stations plaster our television screens with negative reports of how or soldiers are being killed.

These news stations try as hard as they can to hide the success of the war on terror.

Successes like millions of Iraqis and Afghanis being saved from brutal regimes, and having a chance to vote and experience freedom.

America hasn’t been attacked in five years, and Bin Laden is hiding in a cave. Maybe if President Clinton would have killed Bin Laden when he had the chance to, we wouldn’t have experienced 9/11.

And yes Clinton did have the chance, this is fact.

This war is a war that has to be fought now, and President Bush has decided to take the fight to the enemy.

Radical Islam knows no boundaries.

There goal is to create a world of tyranny where freedom no longer exists. Lets say a Democrat is elected in 2008 and they withdrawal our troops. Will this make the terrorist leave us alone?

I think not. We didn’t ask for this war, it was brought to us on our front door step by cowards who hate our western culture and the freedoms that we enjoy.

With every war comes sacrifice. The question is: Are we willing to make sacrifices in order to protect our nation?

Ask our military men and women who are fighting if this war is worth it. They’re the ones who fight for your right to say you don’t believe in this country anymore! George Bush is not a mistake.

Brandon Boswell

Why would this student want to be closer to his classroom? Because it is more convenient; the “cost” of being further from the building would be greater. I assume this would be equally true for faculty (if you discount youth versus older faculty and creaky bones). And how many years would this student have to bear this cost? Four years? And how long would the faculty member have to bear this same cost? I am in my twenty-eighth year at Missouri Western. So, if this freshman were to graduate in four years, I would at that point have born 800% more pain than he. Contrary to the student’s charge of discrimination, it is just simple cost-benefit.

Patrick H. McMurry, Ph.D.
Chair, Dept of Economics

I’m sure you receive many letters of compliant about the limited parking on campus, but this one is different from the others.

I recently received two violations for parking in reserved parking areas for faculty members. The citations are currently on appeal and should be overturned due to legal justification.

However, through this ordeal I did learn that faculty members have reserved parking. Why is that?

Why can faculty members park in student areas, but students can not park in faculty areas?

As students we pay good money to the college for our education. Many students have work loans that rival and exceed many faculty members.

Part of the student’s tuition covers the many benefits of going to a large campus area.

But faculty members get paid to park closer to their office and students have to pay to park further from our office.

I have the utmost respect for professors and faculty members, but why do they get the privilege of parking closer to their office?

In this day and time one would think that all public actions and rules of discrimination by official public administrators would be extinct.

To treat faculty members as senior citizens or ones that are handicapped is outrageous.

There should be a review of the parking regulations on campus. If the policy of allowing faculty members to park closer than students remains, then we should divide the parking lots by how many credit hours a student has on their transcript. Or divide the parking lots by race, sex, religion, etc. Discrimination must end at MWSU by allowing “Equal Parking.”

- Scott Buis

Jason Jones is the media director of Human Life International and travels in many foreign countries. These two “thirty-something” men presented a very stimulating call to the  volunteers in attendance to defeat Amendment 2. It was awesome!

They defined stem cell research into two types: adult (65 medical treatment successes), and embryonic (0 cures). They emphasized  how the amendment deceives voters because it attempts to re-define cloning by leading people to believe life begins when the fertilized egg is implanted in the uterus and not at conception.

Tarek told the volunteers that California has been working on embryonic stem cell research for the last 15 years and h as spent $6 billion and still no cure. “It doesn’t work,” said Tarek.

Jason spoke of his global travels and has seen many corruptive documents, but nothing like the deceptive language written in Amendment 2. This amendment will mandate taxpayers to pay for this research by enshrining this into our state constitution. But more horribly, how this Amendment 2 will exploit women, worse than abortion. Both men have stories of how they became to be Pro-Life advocates: one was a spared abortion, the other was the father of a child to whom the mother had a secretive abortion. These two young men were both emotional and passionate about getting out the truth after their own traumatic experiences.

They both had wonderful testimonies in their spiritual journeys defending the truth.

These out-of-town visitors have taken time out from their regular busy lives to promote culture of life, and to help us Missourians defeat Amendment 2. They believe that prayer,
penance, and action is what is needed to defeat this amendment. Evil happens when good people do nothing.

Wake up Missouri!

Sincerely,
Pat Baker

Supporters of stem cell research hope Missouri’s disabled voters will make their way to the polls on November 7th. If not, a flood of campaign cash may decide the nation’s closest Senate race.

As conservative columnist Robert Novak noted in a recent column: “Missouri polls show this race on the razor’s edge between Sen. Jim Talent (R) and state Auditor Claire McCaskill (D). Talent, however, has more than 15 times as much cash (emphasis added) in his own campaign account for the home stretch–$4.2 million to $250,000.”*

However, Missouri also has 889,917 voters with a disability**—21.4% of the voting public. Disabled folks like my paralyzed son Roman tend to vote Democratic, and overwhelmingly support stem cell research.

If wheelchair drivers turn out in substantial numbers, even a tidal wave of money won’t keep the anti-research Talent in power.

Thank you,

Don C. Reed Chair,
Californians for Cures

*Evans-Novak Political Report, October 18, 2006

**American Association of People with Disabilities, U.S. Census 2000.

As I watched the Fox News Channel most of the afternoon this Sept. 11 I eventually began to think about the fact that America is so divided today. And to be honest, it bothered the hell out of me. As all the pictures from five years ago flashed across the screen, a feeling of stupidity started to creep into my body. I thought to myself, “What ever happened to us Americans being united?” “Why can’t we Americans put aside our political, social and whatever other differences we may have, and just be Americans?”

Some people say the Bush Administration has caused this division. So what if you don’t support the Bush administrations policies. Does this mean that we should divide ourselves as American brothers and sisters under one great flag and create a war here in our homeland? What if we put aside these disagreements and decided to support our president and each other in this time of war? Would the possibility that the war on terror could end much quicker be in the cards? I am optimistic that it would. The rest of the world sees the polls splashed all over the television that this country is divided, and our enemies are only emboldened to fight the cause of freedom. We need to look at President Bush as an American president at this time, not a Republican president.

On my way home from class that afternoon, I was listening to 96.5 The Buzz and the disc jockey had an interesting story. He talked about how he was present in New York City on 9/11, and how after the attacks everybody was very loving and caring. People didn’t see each other as Republican or Democrat. They didn’t see each other as black, white, Jew, Christian, Muslim, or atheist. They only saw each other as Americans. Where has this attitude gone? We have become blind to our unifying nationality.

I am a conservative and constantly find myself screaming at the television when the likes of John Kerry or Hillary Clinton are on the screen bashing the president and his policies. But on the fifth anniversary of 9/11, I thought about how those politicians are Americans just like me. We must unite right now, just as we did during the World Wars. America is at war, and there is no denying it. Even if we pulled out of the Middle East, the enemies of freedom would still attack us. It is an ideology of hate and anarchy that our enemies want the world to live by, not just succeed in driving America from the lands they inhabit. We didn’t ask for this war, it was given to us right on our front door step. Now we must do what ever it takes to win it. God Bless.

Brandon R. Boswell