Issuu on Google+

OpiniOn 4 Friday, April 15, 2011 | The Daily Texan | Lauren Winchester, Editor-in-Chief | (512) 232-2212 | QUoTes To NoTe gallery A visit to Arizona State University “Officials at ASU made it clear that ASU wanted to be an institution defined by its high degree of inclusiveness and ability to manufacture a significant number of degrees at a low cost.” — Student Body President Natalie Butler on her recent trip to Arizona State University with regents Alex Cranberg and Brenda Pejovich, according to a letter Butler sent the UT System Board of Regents. ASU president Michael Crow has implemented reforms to the university, such as offering more online classes, consolidating academic departments and increasing enrollment in an attempt to build the “New American University.” “UT-Austin, rather, is defined by its academic rigor, excellence and support for the intellectually curious who are looking to answer the world’s questions.” — Butler, who grew up six miles from ASU, said she chose to attend UT for its reputation of academic excellence. “From a student perspective, I value having researchers teach my classes, and my courses in the vast array of disciplines have added immeasurable worth to my education.” — Butler on the importance of research in the classroom. Perry speaks “I’m amazingly happy with the boards of regents across the state of Texas.” — Gov. Rick Perry on the extreme joy that the boards of regents have brought him, according to the Austin American-Statesman. “I’ll be honest. I’m not spending a lot of time looking for new forms of revenue in the state of Texas.” — Perry on the budget and non-tax revenue, according to the Austin American-Statesman. Bridges between East and West By Hudson lockett Daily Texan Guest Columnist When making budget cuts, there is a habit of whittling departments down to only what we deem necessary — what we could not live without. To that end, we tend to look inward during tough times and take stock: What makes us Americans? What makes us Texans? What makes us us? In his recent cuts to the College of Liberal Arts budget, Dean Randy Diehl ended 100 percent of University funding for three centers, including the Center for East Asian Studies. As a former Daily Texan reporter who covered the University budget crisis from its early rumblings in 2009 to the grim fallout faced today, I understand that these cuts were not an easy choice. I do not envy him. But I have also walked the streets of Beijing among migrant workers who labor for pitiful wages in baby-blue construction helmets. I have spoken with young women in Shanghai who hope to capitalize on the city’s rising real-estate values and listened to young men worry about scrounging ever more money for a house — a must for any middle-class bachelor in China looking for a fiancée. I have peered through the morning fog of the demilitarized zone between the two Koreas on the 38th parallel, smiling back at the Southern soldiers standing guard nearby. I have spoken with a survivor of the atomic bombing of Hiroshima as an assistant at the BBC’s Tokyo news bureau. At each step I understood more about my own country’s inextricable connections to the rest of the world, and to East Asia in particular. I could not have done any of these things — and would not be returning to Beijing in May for language study — without the patience and encouragement of the faculty and staff at the Center for East Asian Studies. To pull all funding from the center now, when China’s rise is featured more prominently (and often, hysterically) in the news than ever before, strikes me as a grave misstep. After teaching English for a year in the central Chinese city of Xi’an, poet and curmudgeon Bill Holm wrote of how different America looked upon his return. Despite America’s short, 200-odd-year history, he recognized its myriad connections to the rest of humanity and the importance of acknowledging this fact: “We gain nothing by playing ostrich except, conceivably, our own extinction. Either we remember and make conscious connections to the moral and physical lives of others, or we die.” That is reason enough, I think, to continue supporting the men and women at UT who serve as bridges between the East and West. Lockett is a UT and Daily Texan alumnus. Debating concealed carry “Frankly, I do not hold sway over the person standing next to me in the produce aisle whether or not they get to go to medical school. Here at the University of Texas, I do.” — Associate biology professor Molly Cum- mings on the implications of concealed carry in the classroom at a debate held by TIP scholars Wednesday night, according to The Daily Texan. “The funny thing [is], these people who have these licenses are so law-abiding.” — Kory Zipperer, vice president of Students for THe FIrINg lINe Whose fear is more irrational? On Wednesday night, the TIP program hosted a panel in the Union Theatre about the possible legislation that will force public colleges and universities in Texas to allow licensed individuals to bring their concealed handguns on campuses. Tony McDonald of Young Conservatives of Texas and Kory Zipperer of Students for Concealed Carry on Campus argued that the dangerous world we live in is justification for these licensed individuals to carry their Concealed Carry on Campus. gallery reCyCle Please recycle this copy of The Daily Texan. Place the paper in one of the recycling bins on campus or back in the burnt-orange news stand where you found it. legalese Opinions expressed in The Daily Texan are those of the editor, the Editorial Board or the writer of the article. They are not necessarily those of the UT administration, the Board of Regents or the Texas Student Media Board of Operating Trustees. sUBMIT a FIrINg lINe E-mail your Firing Lines to Letters must be more than 100 and fewer than 300 words. The Texan reserves the right to edit all submissions for brevity, clarity and liability. handguns for protection and that to deprive them of this basic liberty is to leave them defenseless. This argument, however, is a false dilemma — to be without a handgun is not to be defenseless but to be lacking one of many options for self-defense. When 93 percent of reported campus crime happens off campus, where guns are currently allowed, the need of a handgun to keep oneself safe on campus is an extreme solution to a rare problem. Tony and Kory argued that those, like myself, who oppose the possible measure to unwillingly force public universities (no university administrators in Texas have come forward in support of the bill) to allow CHL individuals to bring their weapons into classrooms is an irrational fear, even though CHL individuals have been convicted of thousands of crimes, including murder. My question for you is whose fear is more irrational: an opponent to the measure who fears the known presence of a lethal weapon around his or herself or a proponent who is so afraid of an area with an overwhelmingly minimal crime rate that he or she feels the need for a lethal weapon as a likely necessity for survival? — Kathryn Sieverman Research assistant at UT’s Institute of Cellular and Molecular Biology

The Daily Texan

Related publications