Friday, March 9, 2012

Breaking Ground-- TransCanada or Bust?


      
            At this point, discussing the pros and cons of approving a second Keystone Pipeline is almost as controversial as broaching the topic of abortion. Brave Texan and Lone Star Strong blogger Dave Montgomery has written a valid piece regarding the big question: to drill or not to drill?
Not only appealing to Texans, Montgomery's article strikes a chord with many a U.S. citizen, particularly those who live in one of the states necessary to connect the pipeline. Montgomery is also a journalist for the Fort Worth Star Telegram and he is a fellow Texan. Due to the latter, could he be any more credible?
          The author's political cartoon at the beginning of the article is very tongue-in-cheek. The cartoon displays an unemployment stand with the title “The Obama XL Pipe Line” complete with an extensive line of disgruntled-looking Americans. This humor does a nice job of foreshadowing the author's point of view and “hooking” the audience into wanting to read further. Essentially, the comedy is a nice way to break the ice. It helps the reader to set aside his/her own biases and read with a more open mind.
         The organization of this piece is clear and concise. It begins with a general overview of the controversy regarding the pipeline and how the drilling proposal has currently been rejected by the Obama administration. The article then transitions into the overall fiscal benefits the pipeline would generate. Montgomery cites figures such as “at least 50,000 jobs in Texas, $41 million in state government revenue and $7.6 million for local governments during construction” if the pipeline plan is carried out. When discussing other positive aspects, he references key Texas political figures like Gov. Rick Perry and Sens. Kay Bailey Hutchinson. It is clever to include such local political “big-wigs'” opinions to aid in making a more serious impact.
         The article tapers off with the negative environmental aspects of drilling a connecting pipeline. Montgomery balances the negative aspects with sufficient accounts from east Texas landowners. For example, by referencing Texas farmer Julia Trigg Crawford and providing a back story on her family's ranch, a very personal vibe is added to the article. While it is influential to have local congressmen and congresswomen advocating for a cause, it is equally affecting to have the sob story of individual families.
           In the words of Tom Cruise's character Danny from A Few Good Men, “ We'll use his first name. Start using his first name and all of a sudden he has a home and a family that's gonna miss him.” 
       Critic Eleanor Fairchild, who cites possible water contamination as a cause for concern, is quoted stating that “we can live without oil, but we cannot live without water.” Need she say more? Montgomery's way of serving up only the most resounding quotes helps him to better identify with his readers.
       On a somber and perhaps blunt note, I say build the dang pipeline. In all good sense we should be actively pursuing alternative fuel sources instead of desperately depending upon a nonrenewable resource for energy. Since that is no where near happening ( an issue for another post) my advocating the above point is the equivalent to banging my head against a brick wall. Translation--it ain't gonna happen. We will continue to bleed our country of every last natural resource, including oil, so why not build a pipeline and at least let it bolster our state's economy?

No comments:

Post a Comment