From Andrew Bucknall
I would like to thank the Daily Texan editor for allowing me the opportunity to share my experience and platform for City Council Place 1 with the readers.
Through missed communications, I was not interviewed when The Daily Texan staff made its endorsements.
My experience of community involvement includes service on Mayor Pro-tem Goodman's Affordable Housing Committee, chair of Precinct 126, Travis County Democratic Party, president of Huston-Tillotson Young Democrats, co-president of Martin Luther King Neighborhood Association, student organizer of the Austin Howard Dean rally and two-day grassroots training workshop, and chair of the Bethany Committee, the Sustainable Housing Committee, the Affordable Housing Summit and the Police-Community Solutions Panel.
I worked with youth and abused and neglected children for eight years, before I became a single father when my son was two.
I started Shining Star Cleaning Company when I became a single father and have been running the business since that time. I will receive a bachelor's degree in political science from Huston-Tillotson on May 7.
I am endorsed by the Travis County Green Party, Huston-Tillotson Young Democrats, Black Women's Political Caucus, Chicano Huelgistas, Latinos for Texas, The Villager and NOKOA newspapers.
I believe in open, transparent and inclusive government that brings all people to the table. This is central to my grassroots campaign, which focuses on individual Austinites, not large corporate and developer interests. With your support, I will place my attention on diversifying our economy, shoring up human service agencies, improving police community relations, providing real affordable housing, and addressing Austin's traffic problems. I have lobbied at the Capitol for continued investment in TEG grants and will work to stop efforts to limit Pell grants to 125 credit hours.
Since The Daily Texan has already made its endorsement with the facts it had available, I would ask you to consider this additional information in making your own endorsement on Saturday, May 7. Please vote for Andrew Bucknall, the candidate who understands your issues and will represent your concerns on the Austin City Council.
Andrew Bucknall Candidate for City Council, Place One
Regent bill a good step
The original version of Patrick Rose's HB 1968 called for a voting student to be appointed by the governor as one of the nine members of the Board of Regents. Obviously, the governor does not want to give up one of his most valuable appointments. So far the Legislature has been sympathetic to this point of view, hence, Rose's substitution for a nonvoting student as a tenth member of the Board of Regents.
The Texan's Viewpoint says that the editorial board continues to support bills that still call for a voting student - I stand beside you. However, I see the significance in taking realistic steps toward an ultimate goal.
Sen. Eliot Shapleigh's bill, SB 870, had a hearing on March 21. The bill essentially died in committee much like every other student regent bill in the history of the Texas Legislature. The governor and the Legislature will not support a voting student regent, so why not take what we can get and work from there?
California began with a non-voting student regent and eventually was upgraded to a voting member. Don't think that our battle for a student vote would end if Rose's bill, HB 1968, passed both the House and Senate - it would be an initial victory in a greater war.
The Texan's editorial mentioned that students have a voice with the Regents in their System Advisory Council (UT-SAC). But this council only holds one brief meeting a semester with the Board of Regents. At least a nonvoting student regent would be a voice at the table of the monthly closed sessions of the Board. While the UT-SAC would remain intact, a nonvoting student regent would provide greater student input for the Board of Regents.
Rather than chastise student leaders for their efforts toward a student regent, why not commend their efforts like the members of the House Committee on Higher Education did on Monday morning?
If HB 1968 passes, it will not be the ideal situation for students, but is most certainly "a step in the right direction."
Andrew Solomon Plan II freshman Liberal arts representative, Student Government
DSC paid $12,000 to Coulter
To clarify on the use of fees for the Ann Coulter event:
The Distinguished Speakers committee gave a total of $12,000 to the event. This comes partly from direct student fees and party from Texas Union revenue.
The Student Endowed Centennial Lectureship gave roughly $23,000 to the event. Some of these funds are from endowments and some from the optional $2 option during registration.
The Travis County Republican Party donated about $2,000 that went mostly toward a reception and incidentals for the events.
The event cost right around $35,000 after the reception and travel fees. Of this, about half of the money for the event actually was used from student fees (a culmination of direct and optional student fees).
The idea that $30,000 of direct student fees were used to fund the lecture is false and over-exaggerated.
Some speaker fees are as follows: Al Franken $45,000, Micheal Moore $50,000-60,000, Bill O'Reilly $70,000 plus travel on a private jet, Rudolph Gulliani $100,000 plus private jet travel, Donald Trump $275,000 plus private jet.
This past year the DSC, through co-sponsorships and a $80,000 budget, held $170,000 worth of event programming.
SECL also was able to program more with their budget due to co-sponsorships. While some speakers might not draw the support of all students on campus, both committees work hard to ensure the wise and efficient use of student fees.
John Grube Former chairman, DSC Government and history junior
DSC should've paid nothing
As a UT graduate, I'm more than a little shocked that Ann Coulter was invited to speak her hateful nonsense on the campus, and I am stunned that she was paid for doing so. The woman is little more than Rush Limbaugh with slightly higher aesthetic appeal, and her books are even more monocled than Limbaugh's.
Last I checked, UT was an educational institution. What does this hatemongering shill for the extreme right have to teach us through her jibes and attacks?
Kirk Humphries UT alumnus
Honors student explains joke
The humor of Ann Coulter is very unique and quite hilarious to many, including myself. I thought I'd help some of you out by explaining one of her recently talked-about jokes.
"They're [liberals] always trying to act like they're oppressed," she said. "So let's do it. Let's oppress them."
This is funny for several different reasons. First, she's alluding to the fact that liberals actually think that conservatives have the kind of power to do such a thing. Second, she's making a joke about how liberals think that conservatives would truly want to do this if they could. Just like they think conservatives want to take voting rights away from women and re-enslave blacks.
And lastly, the most obvious joke. If liberals are acting this crazy when they're not oppressed, just imagine what they would do if they actually were. It's something funny to imagine, not to do.
So please, quit finding things to be offended by and just learn to laugh a little.
Kristi Kern Civil engineering honors junior
Web Exclusive Firing Lines
Embarrassed
This week, the University found itself on the national stage, not for a ground-breaking discovery or a substantial achievement, but for the events that happened Tuesday night.
Because of the wide media coverage, our university now finds itself as a target of national scorn. Despite the fact that Coulter received a warm reception from the largely supportive crowd, the perception of our university was based on the radical response of a few immature individuals.
As an institution committed to becoming one of the top universities in the country, the University should strive to emulate other highly-regarded colleges. As Coulter pointed out last night on Fox News' Hannity and Colmes, every time she speaks at Harvard, her opponents are able to behave in a civil manner while constructing thought-provoking and respectful questions.
Instead of aligning our University with top intellectual campuses, the actions of the protesters on Monday made our community a laughingstock. Let's focus on legitimate arguments rather than profanity and pointless drivel to avoid this embarrassment in the future.
Taylor Gadberry Business honors sophomore
If a tree falls...
Apparently, there was a Distinguished Speaker on campus Tuesday night.
You wouldn't know that from a variety of sources, including the campus paper: There were no ads or articles announcing it in Friday's or Monday's or Tuesday's Daily Texan.
The event is not listed on The Texas Union Events Calendar Web site (http://www.utexas.edu/student/txunion/calendar/).
The event wasn't publicized through the OnCampusEvents Listings for Tuesday, May 3. It wasn't mentioned in the Around Campus section of The Daily Texan on Monday or Tuesday. It isn't on the Student Endowed Centennial Lectureship Web site (http://studentorgs.utexas.edu/secl/).
In fact, that Web site still has the publicity for the last SECL lecture: An Evening with Michael Moore. I may be wrong, but the quick (Google) research I did only turned up a brief announcement that appears to be issued on Saturday, April 30 (see http://www.burntorangereport.com/archives/003778.html).
Furthermore, the aforementioned SECL website says, "Student Endowed Centennial Lectureship proudly presents An Evening with Michael Moore April 14, 2003" whereas the April 30 press announcement says, "The Student Endowed Centennial Lectureship (SECL) and the Student Events Center Distinguished Speakers Committee (DSC) are pleased to invite UT Austin students, faculty, and staff to a lecture with Ann Coulter, political columnist and best-selling author."
The difference, to me, speaks volumes. So, if an event is barely publicized, did it really happen?
Still scratching my head,
David Stallcup UT staff
Can't take Coulter seriously
Wow, lots of people seemed to have opinions about Ann Coulter in Thursday's Firing Line.
First off, I've got to say that this much heated partisan discussion is exactly what keeps Coulter and her neo-con counterparts in business. She lives for making incendiary remarks, and bathes in the mixed, but equally fervid, reception she gets.
I chose not to attend the event, because I felt that my attitude of protest was best demonstrated by not feeding the animals. Attacking Ann Coulter with protest signs and middle fingers is like attacking fire with kerosene. Coulter's preaching wouldn't make the choir sing unless they had a readily identifiable adversary to sing against, and protestors provided that on Tuesday night. Bad call.
Now onto a specific opinion that I feel the need to address. I've already given a semi-nod to Kipp Marshall's idea that liberals proved Coulter's point on Tuesday, but I disagree with what Coulter's point was. Her speeches have a lot less to do with "liberals are immature" than they have to do with "liberals don't deserve to breathe the same oxygen that I do."
You can't take a woman like Ann Coulter's remarks and equate them to logical thought, it just doesn't work. I don't see how commanding her neo-con base to "oppress liberals" is similar to making a coherent argument as to why liberals are childish.
Kevin Lumpkin Biology sophomore
Settle down and dance
Would Stephen Thibodeau, Joseph Bogen, Kendall Lynch, Jon Bougie, and Jake Holbrook please collectively lighten up?
When Ann Coulter says, "let's oppress the liberals," it's a joke that means, "We conservatives are the majority in this country, so let's act like it and quit capitulating to the small but shrill voice of the left."
And if the "Republican" that Mr. Bogen refers to really is conservative, he probably laughed at the "girl" comment. At the very least, he probably wasn't too broken up about it. Conservatives tend to not have easily broken hearts about such things (A liberal might say we don't have any hearts to begin with).
By the way, where were all these people when Norman Mailer, prominent author as well as Castro supporter, conspiracy nut, attempted wife-stabber, and general conservative-hater, was speaking on campus? I recall reading in the Texan of one dissenter in the crowd who spoke her disdain directly to Mr. Mailer, and somehow she managed to do it without reference to sodomy or masturbation. But I guess he's not as bad as Ann Coulter. After all, he never called anybody a "girl."
I would also like to defend James Burnham, who authored the opinion column on the subject. I don't know quite what his political leanings are just by reading that column (a credit to him, I think.) On the one hand, he doesn't seem to care much for Ann Coulter. On the other, he respects her right to speak uninterrupted in a peaceful demonstration. A fair-minded journalist, perhaps? I heard they were extinct.
Luke McClory Theatre and dance freshman
Remarks were childish
What, exactly, did protesters accomplish at Ann Coulter's speech? ("Arrest made at Coulter speech," May 4.) Although I'm a liberal and I loathe Coulter, I'm disturbed by the left's frequent actions to stifle the free speech of those with whom we disagree.
These childish antics only play right into Coulter's and conservatives' hands - they don't actually accomplish anything.
Drew Dupuy Austin resident
Pressure from ISO?
I am a University journalism graduate, a former long-time Texan staffer, and now a lawyer. A friend recently forwarded to me the Texan article on the Ann Coulter speech at the LBJ school on Tuesday.
I write today to inquire about the Texan's current standards for politically labeling. I was struck that the subject article opens with labeling Ms. Coulter an "extreme right-wing pundit". OK, fair enough.
However, the article then introduces its readers to the "International Socialist Organization" (ISO) without a label. The ISO openly advocates and, it says, actively organizes for the violent overthrow of the American government and other American societal institutions (see the ISO Web site: http://www.internationalsocialist.org/wherewestand.shtml)
By labeling Ms. Coulter as "extreme", the Texan has shown that it does not shy from political labeling. What must we conclude then when the ISO is not labeled - that the Texan views the ISO as "mainstream American"?
When I worked at the Texan in the 1970s, there were occasional attempts by ISO-like groups to intimidate Texan staffers when we published articles counter to their world view.
Yes, ISO-like groups would invade the news room and start acting as they did with Coulter, and sometimes would steal or burn our newspapers in early morning raids.
My question: Have such groups finally succeeded in intimidating the Texan to the extent that even an organization that promotes the violent overthrow of American societal institutions is presented as mainstream? And please do not say the article did not present the ISO as mainstream - not when the same article called Ms. Coulter "extreme."
Finally, and this may have been simply an error in judgment or more evidence of Texan fears of ISO-style intimidation, but I think the readers deserve a bit more warning before the "f-word". Yes, I know the teenager-giddiness that goes with finding a reason to publish the f-word - it was there in my time at the Texan, too; in fact, I think we chartered the use of it.
However, it is certainly jarring to the reader to see the offending phrase when it was introduced in the story lead as simply "broaching the issue of gay marriage." It did a lot more than that, don't you think?
All in all, I found little in the article likely to prompt an ISO assault on the Texan offices; but then, I understand that a professor in the same building complex is an ISO member. I recommend, just to be on the safe side, that none of her students be forced to jeopardize their GPAs by covering stories important to the ISO.
Robert Roy Hamilton San Antonio, Texas UT alumnus, 1981
Radicals self-defeating
After reading Kendall Lynch's respose to Mr. Burnham's piece on the Coulter debacle, I have to wonder if being overly melodramatic is a prerequisite to enter into graduate studies of playwriting. I suppose it goes with the territory.
But seriously, only in The Daily Texan would someone seriously be criticized for promoting "civil" and "rational" behavior. Only in The Daily Texan would one statement admit enjoyment of fart noises only to be juxtaposed with another that accuses another adult of being lazy and immature.
Get a hint; being radical and being an extremist does not make you brave or innovative. It does not change the world, if anything it detracts the rational people who have the power to effect change from your cause. All this immature nonsense does is make sheltered little college kids think that they are important and validates the political views that are so easy to cultivate inside the ivory tower of academia.
David Ransom UT alumnus
Be the first to comment on this article!