Sucking it up for Obama
Last week, Sen. Barack Obama defeated Sen. John McCain to become the next president of the United States. As a conservative Republican, and as someone who has volunteered and campaigned for McCain, I was understandably disappointed with the election results. McCain would have made a fine president of the United States. As an American, however, and as a proud participant of our democratic process, I know that sometimes we have to swallow our pride and respect the rule of the people, even if we don’t agree with the outcome. Such is the nature of our system. We understand that during elections, feelings will get hurt and passions will fervently rage. In an imperfect world, this is how government works. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose. This time, my fellow McCain supporters, the American people once again chose their leader, and we lost.
After George W. Bush won in 2004, the phrase “not my president” became popular. Out of respect for the office, I will never be caught saying that “Obama isn’t my president.” For better or for worse, Obama is my president now. Useless name-calling would only hinder his ability to efficiently run this country. Would I want to hinder the United States? Absolutely not. President-elect Obama will need the support of every American — not just those who voted for him. There are a lot problems in the world we need to fix. Now is no time for divisiveness and hyper-partisanship.I would expect our Democratic colleagues on the left to give us the same respect if McCain had won.
Don’t think, though, that Republicanism is gone with this election. We’re still around, and we’re not going anywhere. To my Democratic friends — enjoy it while it lasts!
Mikael Garcia
Government junior
College ist tot
Marissa Edwards is to be commended for noting that the phrase “Gott ist tot” was not just some random act of provocation on the part of Temple College instructor Kerry Laird but rather a reference to Friedrich Nietzsche’s “Die fröhliche Wissenschaft” and “Also sprach Zarathustra” (“Temple professor asked to remove ‘God is Dead’ sign,” Nov. 7).
However, the reference to bears eating blasphemous children was also a reference, in this case to II Kings 2: 23-24. From the King James version: “And [the prophet Elijah] went up from thence unto Bethel: and as he was going up by the way, there came forth little children out of the city, and mocked him, and said unto him, ‘Go up, thou bald head; go up, thou bald head.’ And he turned back, and looked on them, and cursed them in the name of the Lord. And there came forth two she bears out of the wood, and tare forty and two children of them.”
If Temple College is worried about professors referring either to Nietzsche or to the Bible, they may want to reconsider having the word “college” in their name. Apparently, they don’t know what it means.
John St. Lawrence
UT staff
Unreal Republicans
In his Nov. 11 column “Accepting Obama a struggle and a duty,” Daniel Earnest, our valiant College Republican writer, decided to “rise above [his] immature pouting” only to buck up his comrades by encouraging them to “stop whining like Democrats.” This not-so-mature maturity he extols in himself is unsurprisingly rich.
Further, “happening to be on the backside of the curve” doesn’t adequately appreciate why most Americans voted for Barack Obama: John McCain’s obvious complicity in nearly every abject disaster of the Bush/Cheney administration. There’s a reason Obama won North Carolina, Indiana, Virginia and Ohio, and it isn’t, as the author or his cohorts might claim, that MSNBC is in the tank for the man.
This op-ed virtually sealed my suspicion that the Republican Party — and probably the conservative “movement” in general — has absolutely lost touch with the desires of the American electorate. The kicker was when the author plaintively asserted that Republicans have “several redeeming qualities that [they] have yet to shed enough light on” — truly remarkable stuff, to say nothing of his alligator tears over bipartisanship (spare me!).
This morally bankrupt and vacuous “movement” has had the better part of three decades in power to prove why its policies and heroes are the best, and after the most disastrous eight years of all, they’ve been resoundingly rejected as unmitigated failures. The first step in recovering from a loss is researching what went wrong, then acting in good faith to make repairs. But when I read opinions of this sort, observe the finger-pointing among various leaders on the right and notice many pining for Palin’s return to the national stage, it becomes clear that it may be quite a long time before people once again take the conservative “movement” seriously.
Andrew D. Alter
Government senior
A second chance
I object to the Nov. 10 viewpoint “Politically correct” in its characterization of what the UT administration did in dismissing Buck Burnette from the UT football team. According to the piece, “The University’s sports program has succeeded in doing what a university is supposed to do: teach.” I question this conclusion. I sincerely doubt that UT would classify the hard decision it had to make, what is best for the individual versus what is best for the team, as an example of teaching. My guess is that many were deeply saddened that they found themselves in a position of having to make such a decision.
I would like to think that Burnette could be given a second chance. Back when I was teaching a class at UT, I caught a young gentleman cheating on a lab report. My first inclination was to give him an F for the class. However, after talking to the professor that oversaw the class , I took a different approach. He suggested that I talk to the student and see if there was a possibility of using this unfortunate incident as something positive in the student’s life. I did so and did not regret it. I witnessed a profound (not fake) transformation of the student. He was truly sorry for what he did and he turned out to be the best student in my class that semester. I actually taught something that semester as opposed to teaching someone a lesson as the Texan thinks is the important point. Not all students would use such an opportunity to change course, but some will. Let such countries as North Korea, Iran and Saudi Arabia teach lessons; they are experts at this. UT, on the other hand, has the chance to actually teach, and this is what we should hope for, and I am sorry that the administration found itself in the unfortunate position of not being able to go down this path. But please do not refer to such a decision as teaching.
David Knobles
UT staff
No race card at Kansas State
I would recommend that Anup Shah put a little more thought and research into his articles before stating his opinions on the topic of race in college football’s coaching ranks (“Absence of black coaches still haunts college football,” Nov 11). It is obvious that the quality of a Division 1-A football coach does not depend on race. Kansas State coach Ron Prince was not fired because he is black. He was fired because he is a bad football coach. Shah stated that Prince has gone undefeated against Texas and Texas A&M. This amasses to a solid 3-0 record against the two teams (one of which a high school junior varsity team could have its way with this year). What Shah fails to mention is that Prince is winless (0-8) against Nebraska, Missouri and in-state rival Kansas in his three-year debacle at Kansas State. Prior to Prince’s arrival, Kansas State had won five of the previous eight contests against Nebraska, 12 out of the previous 13 contests against Kansas and 13 straight against Missouri. It goes without question that Prince was expected to win at KSU. When Ron Prince was hired, he was seen on campus as the new face of Kansas State football and the man who would bring Kansas State back to dominance in the Big 12. Instead, Ron Prince has driven Kansas State football into the “nobody” ranks of the Big 12. Not even one of Prince’s trick plays could save the Wildcats and their 108th ranked defense this year. It doesn’t matter if you’re black, white, yellow, red, blue or green in college football — if you don’t win, you won’t be around for long. Regardless of race, it’s time for Prince to go.
Kevin Quinn
Structural engineering graduate student
The audacity of generalizations
I read The Daily Texan almost every day. I am thrilled to be able to hear the voices of many columnists and look forward to seeing the new topics that are brought forth. As an aspiring journalist, I feel it is my duty to keep up with the times and respect others’ opinions. But while the Nov. 12 column “The Audacity of racism” had a very good point, I feel that what Mary Tuma wrote wasn’t clarified in her writing. She wrote, “The ignorant voices in the crowd at rallies for Sen. John McCain have not disappeared. They have just carried their views elsewhere.” Are there ignorant voices behind McCain supporters? Inevitably. But there are ignorant voices behind Obama as well. Austin is a predominantly liberal/Democratic city, I agree. The Daily Texan is writing for Austin readers, agreed. But Tuma should have clarified that not all voices behind McCain are ignorant. Many people have found this sentence offensive, and I’m sure she didn’t mean that McCain supporters were ignorant. Coming from someone who is writing about racism or any type of discrimination looks very hypocritical to use the word “ignorant” against an entire group. Once again, I would like to say that it was a wonderful piece and contributed to making others think about an important topic. It just needed a little clarification. I enjoyed the column.
Stephanie Jacksis
Prejournalism sophomore
