Critique of the editorial, "Will the President-elect damper Texas' heavy industry?"

In this editorial article, author jhn26 discusses the potential implications of President-elect Obama's energy plan for the US, and how such a plan might affect the State of Texas. The author goes on to comment on Texas' energy policies - good and bad - and how these policies may translate into a workable solution to the nation's growing energy- and pollution woes.

The author is able to make several valid points throughout his article, but unfortunately they don't all come together very cohesively. Despite this, however, the author's final point noting Texas' $11 billion surplus - with an unanswered question as to how that money will change the state's energy policy - leaves the reader to question how best we as a state should approach this difficult issue.

By leaving questions for the reader to answer, as well as filling his article with poignant arguments, the author connects well to his audience. Many people would do well to consider his point of view with an open mind.

Editorial - How 'Bout a Little Humility, Detroit

At one point or another, most people will experience a greater or lesser period of financial woes in their lives. Being college students, we are especially susceptible to this. So what do you do when you can't make ends meet? I, for one, have a talent for humility which has served me well throughout many a crisis. I take out a loan, I cut back on expenses, I do what I have to do to get by. Most importantly, however, I don't bitch about it. I had the incredible luck to be born into the richest, most prosperous free nations in all of history. If I'm short on cash because unexpected costs came up, I will suck it up and move on.

What I don't like is when people whine and bitch about their luck. There are about a million things out there that you COULD complain about, but I think I have a better idea: shut the hell up. Don't tell me about how terrible gas prices are - go buy a Vespa and shut your pie hole. But before I go off on this rant, there is something even worse than complaining about your bad luck which I must discuss, and that is lacking humility when you ask for help.

When General Motors CEO and chairman Rick Wagoner recently went to the nation's capitol to request a financial bailout for the flagging American auto industry (including several Texas factories), did he do so with humility? Did he beg, Oliver Twist style, holding an empty bowl in his fingerless-gloved hands and tremblingly ask, "please sir, I'd like $25 billion in taxpayer funds to cover my ass?" To the contrary, Mr. Wagoner took one of the company's $36 million corporate jets to Washington to briefly and unenthusiastically let Congress know that he needs some cash. Instead of taking a prime opportunity to show off their new hybrid, Wagoner spent another $20,000 on this one meeting alone.

Now let’s just forget for a minute the fact that Detroit wrought this upon themselves. Let’s forget how Ford, GM and Chrysler - a.k.a. "The Big 3" - have coddled the unions for years, paying the highest auto worker salaries in the world. Lets forget how these excessive reimbursements have brought The Big 3's profit margins down year after year. And most importantly, lets forget that despite their salaries, Americans make unreliable, fuel-inefficient beasts that have earned monikers like Fix Or Repair Daily. Detroit has painted itself into a corner, and yet the executives can't step down off their high horse to admit that they f___ed up.

You know what my answer as a Congressman would be? "No, now get the hell out of here. You're poor? So explain the jet, then. Explain your own $27 million salary. Explain why your business model is so outdated that the people of your own country don't buy your cars. Tell me exactly why a Civic lasts 300,000 miles, but my Focus needs a new engine after less than a fifth of that? Now take your ass back to Detroit, fix your business model, and tell your workers to expect a pay cut. These guys fasten bolts for a living, they can't realistically expect to make $71 an hour. But if you think I'm going to make everyone pay for your mistakes, you've got another thing coming. Bailing out those ass clowns in the mortgage industry was more than enough. This is capitalism: you screw up, you pay for it."

Critique of the editorial, "Photo Fraud"

In this article posted to the blog, Lone Star Debate, the author makes a clear and compelling case for the mandatory use of a photo ID when voting. Throughout the article, the author's use of vocabulary and sentence structure shine through, indicating a professional attitude. He carefully introduces the subject not only in description, but with an accompanying political cartoon which helps to set the tone of his piece.

The focus of this editorial is that there is no good reason not to require a photo ID. The author elaborates on his thesis by reminding the reader of the myriad times that they are required to produce ID daily, and by begging the question, "[i]s there less responsibility involved in voting than, say, renting a movie at Blockbuster?" The author concludes his piece by astutely exploring the likely political motivations behind such a law. "They’re not suggesting that illegal aliens should be able to cast a ballot, are they?? Of course they are," states the author, referring to Democratic opposition to the requiring of ID. By setting a clear logical path for the reader to follow, this article's author succeeds in convincing many open-minded readers that to require a voter to show their photo ID would only help in verifying the legitimacy of coming elections.

Editorial - You don't HAVE to vote

The political season is now fully upon us, and with that comes the civic duty of all Americans to elect leaders and representatives with whom we share the same goals, opinions and dreams. Our forefathers have fought and died for our numerous rights, and it would be the most vile affront to their memory for the people of this great nation to sit idle while others make such important decisions for them. Everyone eligible needs to get out and vote this year... right?

Here's the short answer: no. While laws prohibit minors, felons, and those deemed by a court to be "mentally incapable" from voting, there is a sizable portion of our citizenry in Texas who shouldn't vote: stupid people.

Let me elaborate on this with an example: a man named Bubba registers to vote out of obligation not to seem un-patriotic in front of his co-workers. Although vaguely engaged in the political process, Bubba pays only passing attention to political debates. He skips through political reporting on TV and online, only focusing on major scandals and other issues which he may be caught in a discussion about later. In general, he learns very little about the issues at stake. The only thing Bubba has going for him is a faint association with one of the major political parties - most likely the party in favor by his colleagues and friends. So Election Day comes and Bubba heads to the polls, but with what? What is he really doing? There is no cause he supports. There is no underdog candidate, short on funds but long on character, in dire need of his support.

In simple terms, Bubba is blindly casting a vote - one which will help to shape the future of our state - based on the weakest of credentials. In many cases, this fictional character would vote for a candidate who would actually have a worse impact on the district than his opponent, but how could Bubba know? Without a working knowledge of the political system, as well as a basic overview of the candidates and their positions, Bubba's vote is much like a stray bullet: just as powerful as any other, but more likely to injure someone.

Closed-mindedness saturates The Lone Star Times... surprise!

In my recent venture to find a Texas-centric blog article with a less-than-100% partisan slant, I must admit that several hours into the ordeal, I wanted nothing to do with politics what-so-ever, nor the narrow minded automatons who blog about it. Therefore, with that spirit of frustration and disillusionment, I would like to introduce this article from the Lone Star Times:

In this piece ironically titled The Messiah, acclaimed political savant The Panda Man (Christian name: Jeremy Weidenhof) addresses his audience, which must certainly be described as hard-line conservative (to say that the United Rednecks of America are his target audience would be to venture into the well-worn path of Ad Hominem fallacies that Mr. Weidenhof has so explertly blazed; I'll try to keep it professional for you). Throughout his brief diatribe, the author makes several dozen points, but as you may have guessed, not one of them in any way reflect his political credentials (or lack thereof). To the contrary, by his cavalier attitude you can read a genuine disdain for "journalistic conventions" as well as other forms of "proof" that Texans would do well to take their bureaucratic cues from a "Panda."

Lack of ethical or logical appeals to reason aside, Mr. Weidenhof does have one strong suit which he tirelessly exploits throughout the piece: his emotional appeal. Colorful phrases and words abound as the author is set on a path to paint Sen. Obama as a Pied Piper, a socialist, and "Jimmy Carter’s second term." Not content to bash the liberal candidate alone, Weidenhof alludes to the Democratic Party as "Media Disciple Roadies... in their Yellow Media Bubble." While a painfully stereotypical culling of small-town xenophobes could be expected to endure this shallow sermon, the average reader will surely see it for what it is: a stalwart attempt to redefine the phrase "scare tactics."

Having read the article several times over, I am still at a loss as to how such insupportable fallacies can be labeled as journalism, much less find an audience. The Panda Man has contributed absolutely nothing to the political debate here, short of a virulent "us against them" attitude -- an attitude which only the most closed-minded sycophants must enjoy.

Acevedo Keeping APD Honest

Since accepting the position last summer, Chief of Police Acevedo has personally fired or coerced the resignation of over a dozen officers in the Austin Police Department. All of the officers in question have received this punishment after a breach of ethics on their part; from lying on an official report to excessive force, these men and women disgraced themselves and the city they served. In sharp contrast, however, these same officers may well have kept their jobs with little, if any punishment under the previous leadership of APD. Because of this perceived reversal of the old "us against them" mentality in the department, Chief Acevedo is widely viewed as an honest man bringing discipline and honor to his command. In this article posted in the Austin American-Statesman Editorials, the author clearly assumes this opinion, citing the case of Gary Griffin, a former APD officer who was fired in 2006 when it was determined that he used excessive force against a mentally ill man, costing Austin taxpayers $55,000 in the defendant's civil suit against the city. From the beginning, the author underscores Mr. Griffin's hypocracy by detailing how, under the former Police Chief Stan Knee and then-acting chief Cathy Ellison, the officer was reinstated and is currently suing the city himself. The author contrasts this with Chief Acevedo's no-nonsense policy on police misconduct and his lofty record of firings based on inappropriate conduct. In this editorial, the subject of APD officer misconduct and it's consequences is justly evaluated and presented to the residents of Austin, whom it may very well affect for years to come.

Amidst record oil prices, red tape prevails

With the price of gasoline skyrocketing across the nation, Texas has once again found itself at the center of an oil boom. According to state statistics, since 1999 the number of drilling permit applications received by the Railroad Commission has doubled, however the same Commission charged with overseeing the oil and gas industry has cut nearly 20 percent of it's workforce. The result: an estimated 29,000 permits will be issued this year, with an overall average wait time of 40 days. The Texas Railroad Commission is asking the Legislative Budget Board for $750,000 to hire contractors to fill the gaps left open over the past nine years. Although the Legislature does not convene until January, the Legislative Budget Board - composed of top elected officials, including Lieutenant Gov. Dewhurst - has authority to relocate State funds during an emergency. Signs that this issue will be resolved came from the Lt. Gov. himself, admitting "we've got a problem," while Rep. Warren Chisum (chairman of the House Appropriations Committee) agreed to convene a special panel on October 6th to discuss the matter.

This article demonstrates the process by which the Texas Legislature can accomplish tasks (sometimes) even when not convened. It also may introduce the reader (as it did for me) to the fact that Texas is once again in an oil boom that is already poised to be as big as the one of the 1970's. See here for the full Austin American-Statesman article.