Confeder-ignorance

In a very fresh post on his blog, author Charles Kuffner makes an argument against the usage and even opportunity to allow drivers in Texas to have the confederate flag on their license plates. Being born and raised in New York would normally work against the author's credit in matters of the south (particularly the "old south"), but in this particular situation I believe that Kuffner's "Yankee" background allows him to provide a certain insight that many life-long Texas natives may not initially see. He contends that the confederate flag will always be a representation of a group of states that stood up against the United States in a war that resulted in the death of millions. Along with a strong sense of pride in what they thought was "right" at the time, the confederate states also carried with them a truly remarkable ignorance that they were willing to defend to the death in many cases. Although not much evidence is provided, i would be willing to say that not much is needed to make his case. Surely we can all agree that the confederate flag also stood as a great force of oppression and intimidation for many minorities during the civil war. For these reasons, it should be clear from my word choice that i more than agree with the author but that i also support his clear and concise argument. As he stated in the post, as a state of the US, Texas should make more efforts to advance towards a future where equality and opportunity reign supreme far above the tyrannies of empires past which stood for values that we as a people should no longer hold dear. We SHOULD, as Kuffner says, move only forward and never backward in matters such as this. While there is nothing wrong with learning about, appreciating, and even loving where we came from, we must never forget the lessons taught to us by wars past. Progress, no matter how intimidating, should always be an agent of change for the better and never one of oppression. As we move forward in our nations history, it is crucial that we take into account "higher law" when considering what rules that govern our people. The implications of this argument are simply that, in order to prevent offense by anyone that may be insulted by the confederate flag on the license plate of the car in front of us at a stop light, we should do away with signs of ignorance. I have never been an advocate of bumper stickers as i feel that i would rather a person get to know who i am before they decide that i am ignorant or oppressive, so to condemn the use of a more "official" way of promoting faulty and shallow values only makes sense to me. Why would you want somebody to think you hate them or are better than them simply based on the color of their skin or country of origin? We must always remember that even the founders of this country which grants us the freedom to say and do almost anything (even the things the promote hate on some occasion) were at one point "foreigners" themselves.

The Keystone Conundrum

At first glance, a recent article on the Austin AmericanStatesmen website commentaries written by Texas Railroad Commission member, Barry Smitherman in support of the recently proposed Keystond XL Pipeline would have you believe that it is more than a good idea to allow said pipeline to be built, but upon further investigation it is evident that it is a flawed argument which does not take into account a great number of factors. As a member of the Texas Railroad Commission, one cannot help but call into question the motifs of the author. Since the RRC is responsible for regulating the oil industry, it becomes apparent that Barry Smitherman could possibly stand to make a substantial amount of money if the Keystone XL Pipeline is approved for completion. Although his agenda might be a bit questionable, there is little confusion about the intended audience, as he directly states his desire for "all Americans" to support the pipeline and calls for them to act by voicing their opinions to the Obama administration. Although broad, Smitherman leaves the possibility of converting any possible rejecting special interest groups, or even "anti-pipeline-ists" completely open by attempting to appeal to any and all citizens of the country, who (starting this week) will have the opportunity to be heard about their views on the pipeline.

The author contends that the pipeline would be very safe as he refers to it as a “new, high-tech crude-oil highway”, but doesn’t really provide much tangible evidence of such a claim.  The author also goes on to provide a large range of dollar figures that he thinks are benefits of the deal but does not provide a source for that information nor is there any clear timeline provided to explain in how long a span we can expect the listed “benefits” to occur to completion.  Another major selling point of the argument is that we (as the title suggests) “need” this pipeline to help wean the US away from our dependence on foreign oil.  I remain conflicted about this point because I feel that even with that end goal in mind, it could possible make more sense to provide more funding for further research in other sources of renewable energy so that we may curb our need for oil as a whole one day. While there is no doubt that we should try to focus on having a future where we don’t depend on the exports of countries where stability isn’t the norm, it also appears to me that this pipeline would only be a quick fix to the overall problem.

The article concludes, stating bluntly, that “Keystone XL is good for the US and it’s good for Texas”. I do not agree with this statement because, although the author attempts to list a number of economic benefits to the state and country, it does not take into account the enormous cost when the pipeline inevitably ruptures. The pipeline, if approved, would have to pass through the Ogallala aquifer, a major source of both drinking and farming water for at least eight states it passes through. While this pipeline could payoff economically in several ways, it also could potentially be the worst large-scale industrial disaster since the Japanese earthquake that caused its nuclear power plant to meltdown (a disaster who’s entire ecological impact cannot even yet be determined as it is still ongoing).

The idea that building another (and not to mention rather ambitious) pipeline to pump crude oil is going to one day help the US be free from the addiction to oil is somewhat paradoxical. Surely there are smarter ways to spend the "$20 billion private-sector investment" necessary for the pipeline that could provide more long-term solutions to our worlds ever-growing energy problem. While this argument implies that initially many would be employed to help with the construction of the pipeline (therefore creating more jobs), it is impossible to quantify the amount of damage the pipeline stands to cause when it does rupture, as other, less-extensive pipelines ultimately have in the past.

How do you say "procrastination" in Texan?

In the not-so-distant past, when assigned to report on a news story for class, I read an article on the Texas Tribune about an inmate who had been convicted of murdering two people in a shooting spree was sentenced to death based (at least in some part) on his race. Although, only until recently, I had not been following the story. According to the MOST recent story also on the Tribune written by Brandi Grissom about Duane Buck, the inmate in question, this man appears to have had quite the saga play out right before him. The latter of the two stories serves, for the most part, as a documentation of the legal path Buck's trail has taken. After being convicted of the 1995 shooting-spree, when Buck was to be sentenced, Psychologist, Dr. Walter Quijano testified that he believed Duane Buck's race to cause him to be prone to more violent crime. Quijano also testified in the sentencing hearings of six other men also involving their race who were sentenced to death. They were granted retrials, but due to legal issues, Buck was not granted a retrial. The story goes on to say that Buck's legal team has sent a letter to Governor Rick Perry to ask that he grant him a 30-day reprieve. The reprieve, if granted, would be only one of five Perry has ever granted since his career as governor began in 2000. With his Presidential campaign in full-swing, Rick Perry's absence would cause the decision to fall upon the Lieutenant Governor, David Dewhurst. many people from very high places in the legal system of Texas urged there to be a decision made about this matter for weeks now, but on the final day, the supreme court would grant  Buck the 30-day reprieve. Buck was scheduled to be executed at a later time on the exact same day the decision to grant him the stay was made. This is of great interest to me because (as you can guess from the time of my post) I am a fluent speaker of the language of procrastination. It is comical at times when we remember that even the people in the highest of offices are susceptible to the pitfalls of regular human tendencies, such as putting off a deadline  until the very last minute.