OCR Text |
Show 'One step and I'll...' entrance except the people who actually denied him. On the surface, this may appear to be just another case of an established institution protecting itself from less-than-established individuals. in-dividuals. Certainly there is precedent for such a move, in light of the sit-in in the "Tribune" editorial offices severaHmonths ago. It is only natural that both papers would want to protect themselves from similar events in the future. See related story-page 5-by Jim Nelson As things stand now, however, it appears that Charlie Brown was specifically singled out to be denied the use of an organ which purports to exist as something close to a public service. We are convinced that such a blanket prohibition against an individual, as appears to be the case, constitutes rank and overt discrimination. It is particularly noteworthy that these instances of discrimination against Brown, and against his campaign manager, occured soon after he filed for the City Commission. Brown is one of several candidates who obviously divert from the "norm" of candidacy. It is entirely plausible that the majority of the community and its institutions should see their very candidacy as an affront and an outrage. And even while we understand the community's consternation, we must insist they change their strategy and use fairness and justice in dealing with it. |