SG not a monarchy
In response to Gordon Moore's Feb. 26 Firing Line "A truly non-partisan university?": I suggest that instead of writing slanderous remarks against SG President Andrew Solomon, Moore should be thanking him for helping to plan Bill Clinton's visit to campus. Simply put, when a former president calls a university and asks if he can speak on campus, you don't say no; you say yes. Regardless of your political perspective, this was a wonderful opportunity that we, the students at the University of Texas, were given.
No one suggested that Clinton's speech was free of references to his wife's campaign. I am certain if John McCain or Michelle Obama requested to speak on campus, Solomon would jump at the opportunity. Some argued that SG did nothing for Ron Paul when he came to visit. This argument, however, neglects the fact that neither Ron Paul nor anyone from his campaign contacted SG. Here, someone from Bill Clinton's office actually called the SG president and made the request.
No one has been crowned king. If Gordon Moore truly feels that SG has turned into a monarchy, then perhaps he should try running in the University-wide student body elections that took place last week. Admittedly, I was unaware that it was customary for a crowned king to be elected each year by a majority of the students that vote.
George Hinchey School of law graduate student
The real McCain
I was appalled to learn that John McCain was the only Senator who chose to skip a crucial vote two weeks ago on the future of clean energy in America - dooming the measure to fail by just a single vote.
Now I am even more appalled to learn that this is a pattern with Sen. McCain. On the League of Conservation Voters scorecard he received a zero for missing the 15 most important environmental votes in 2007. McCain's score of zero is less than how many members of Congress who died last year.
John McCain's LCV score exposes the real record behind the rhetoric: a lifetime pattern of voting with polluters and special interests and ducking the important votes.
Rachel Barajas Geography sophomore
Taking back the spotlight
I am writing this in response to Brandon Lighton's "Don't steal the spotlight, UDems," (The Firing Line, Feb 26). As UDems Secretary, I am stepping up to bat not only on behalf of our president, but on behalf of all of our members, especially the 13 volunteers for the presidential debate who did much more than Lighton suggested.
In fact, there were no tickets. There were wristbands passed out once a guest was checked against a master list - and there were no UDems assisting in this process. Rather, our volunteers, starting Sunday at 1:30 until Thursday at midnight, missed class and worked for the opportunity to be part of confidential aspects of the debate that were critical to its success. The Obama family wasn't at the debate; Powers sat next to former Gov. Mark White. The DOS confirmed that UDems was the volunteer base of the debate, and Laura Hernandez was involved in every aspect of the debate that the University was.
I would suggest that UT has a far more Democratic presence than Republican, so it's understandable that our membership and participation is higher, although I have no doubt that in many areas of Texas College Republicans could claim that instead.
Here's a quick run-through of just a few of UDems co-hosted events this semester: Voterama, Clinton-Obama debate, Clinton-Obama debate watch party, U.S. Senatorial Democratic candidate debate, Bill Clinton speaker event, Austin Progressive Coalition Endorsements, block-walking events to register voters and a voter registration marathon. Clearly, we are not hogging the spotlight when we are so openly involved with so many organizations around Austin.
Oh, and that "I Heart Voting" event, we co-hosted with you. (I have pictures if you need proof.)
Brittany Dawn McAllister Political communication studies freshman University Democrats secretary
Nuclear rights
Trevor Lovell's argument for more solar and wind power instead of nuclear neglects some of the truths about these renewable sources ("Nuclear not the answer," The Firing Line, Feb. 28). Electricity demand, while fluctuating, has a minimum level of baseline power necessary that cannot be met by renewable sources on a large scale. The peak demand also falls at time when there is little to no sunlight or wind available to meet these demands. For this reason there will always be a need for large, operator-controlled power sources.
The nuclear industry recognizes the threat of radioactive waste more than any other alarmist environmental group, as the proper management of nuclear waste is integral to continued operation in the United States. The injection of judges and activists deciding the fate of nuclear waste is much more dangerous than letting the experts of the NRC handle the waste. Perhaps the budget overruns were an attempt to recover the billions of dollars the government has charged companies for disposal while moving zero waste off sight. True, there is no solution that can last for the thousand years necessary, but does this mean we do not implement solutions that will last at least hundreds of years? There is no perfect energy source; we will have to depend on a variety of sources that will always include nuclear power. The American Nuclear Society has already offered a debate on the merits nuclear power and renew the offer to Re-Energize Texas.
Cooper Gill American Nuclear Society Publicity Committee Mechanical engineering senior
In defense of Gilstrap
I wanted to address John Tran's comments in his Feb. 27 op-ed "Empower independent SG candidates." The lack of significant competition in recent years is indeed troubling, and many members of Student Government will agree with him. Since I first experienced student elections in March of 2004, I have noticed the decrease in participation around election times. However, I believe that Tran squandered an opportunity to draw attention to a troubled system by engaging in personal attacks on certain individuals. His comment indicating we don't need any more "Gilstraps" reflects his lack of knowledge regarding campus affairs. I have known Stephen Gilstrap for four years, and I find him to have more integrity than 99 percent of the people I know. Through our shared time as members of the Texas Blazers, I find him to be our most valuable member. He contributes to many aspects of this university - far too many to enumerate within the constraints of a Firing Line. Stephen and his sister before him are assets to the university community. Therefore, I just can not accept your comment that the "Gilstraps" somehow detract something from the University of Texas community. On the contrary, we could all benefit from a few more Gilstraps in the world.
Andrew Limmer Plan II and civil engineering senior
Be the first to comment on this article!