I ran across this an interesting article a couple of nights ago and I'd like to share some thoughts about it. The article is entitled "Can rural America hold the world ransom?" and is a blog post from a BBC news reporter doing some gallivanting state side.
Interestingly enough, Justin Rowlett nailed the point by simply naming his article. Yes, rural America can hold the rest of the world ransom. Regardless of whether you believe in the consensus on climate change or not (in which I do not), the article aims right at the heart of why our country is great and why it is important to remember what rural folks provide. After reading the post, you will discover that the key to passing any climate change legislation lies with the senators from West Virginia who are not budging on their position opposing the bill. I have to hand it to them, they are doing what they are supposed to do, holding out for the best interest of their constituents, who would undoubtedly be hurt by the legislation. Congratulation for having a backbone.
Also, after perusing the comments on the post, I was pleasantly surprised by the amount of support the rural state was getting. Sure, their state bet big on one main industry and it is probably crippling them, but why cause any more pain by helping to disintegrate their economy with unwanted legislation? Why should any elected official get to be the judge of who wins and who loses?
This dilemma exposes the urban to rural divide in extremely poignant moment of world history. Just when the majority vote of urban citizens thinks they are going to rule the roost, they are reminded of their ignorance by those who ensure the comforts of their existence by working professions many of us see as unfit. As I wrote in a previous post, our nation cannot simply forget about our rural economy and its huge contribution to our way of life. So way to go West Viginia and your senators for protecting your own, I can get on board with that.
The pink vets of Texas rewrite stereotypes
2 hours ago