BY EDWIN E. VINEYARD
America has become a bitterly divided nation. The negative campaign of personal attacks and the slimy back-door e-mail rumor mill carried out against Barrack Obama added to the intensity of that division.
Are we to continue the hostility born in the dirty tactics against the Clinton presidency and given impetus by the 2000 election in Florida, which many still consider stolen by the Bushites, partisan state officials, and a partisan Supreme Court?
In a pre-election analysis, a New York Times editorial writer predicted a bitter, angry Republican Party core would become dominant if Obama won the presidency. The writer also forecast that more moderate Republicans would be shunned, while this tight-knit, hard-core right wing base would be in control. If so, the writer argued, Republicans would be in a minority in the nation for years to come.
Even before the votes were counted, Obama was stretching forth his hand in political reconciliation. Let us hope that sensible Republicans accept that, and that they will join in the reform process of making this a better country for all the citizens. Continuing to emote about a smaller, laissez faire government with its hands off business and finance, while touting government intrusion into private, personal, and bedroom affairs, will not work.
While enjoying modestly large traffic in e-mails, this writer has been exposed to the seamy side as well. During the past year he has received all the accusatory e-mail alleging Obama to be unpatriotic, Muslim, a socialist, and terrorist conspirator, and similar bad things.
From time to time, over a period of years, the Militant Moderate has received e-mails touting some extreme version of traditional family and patriotic values, gun rights, accusations of baby-killing, anti-union rights, etc. Most of these promote fear of socialism, Muslims, Jews, or some other subgroup in our society.
But the messages this writer despises the most are those which tell the reader that if they do not agree with the author’s overly zealous points of view, then they are un-American. Further, these messages often state that those who disagree with the sender’s views should leave the country.
Regrettable to say, these come from Republican friends with a Red State mentality, or from other ordinary people who have forgotten about the freedoms guaranteed in America. No one should be thoughtless or cavalier about circulating such un-American slime, and no one should be nonchalant about receiving such.
One anonymous person has made a reply to this Red State threat to run off all who disagree with their “values.” This clever writer from a Blue State, with tongue in cheek, agrees to leave and join with other Blue States in forming a new nation, leaving the Red States to have their own country. The results are interesting.
Blue States would get stem cell research, the Statue of Liberty, Intel, Apple, and Microsoft. They also get all the Ivy League universities, plus Stanford, MIT, CalTech, and the highest rated state universities academically. The Red States get Dollywood, Ole Miss, TCU, and Enron.
Blue States get 85% of the venture capital of entrepreneurs. Blue States get two-thirds of the tax revenue, leaving Red States to raise their fair share of taxes to survive. Since the divorce rate is 22% lower in Blue States, Red States get more of the single moms.
Since Blue States are anti-war, they will want their troops home immediately, leaving southern evangelicals to send more of their own kids to the purposeless war they support. They will also have to raise the $12 billion a month to keep the war in Iraq going.
Blue States will have control of 80% of the fresh water, 90% of the fresh fruit and leafy vegetables, 90% of the cheese, 90% of the high tech industry, and the giant redwoods.
On the other hand, Red States get 88% of the obese Americans and their health care costs, 92% of the mosquitoes, nearly all the tornadoes, 90% of the hurricanes, and 99% of the Southern Baptists and televangelists. They get Rush Limbaugh and Bob Jones University, while Blue States get Hollywood and Yosemite.
Some 60% of those in Red States believe life is sacred – unless gun laws or the death penalty are involved. Forty four percent believe evolution is only a theory, and 52% say Saddam was involved in the 9/11 attack. And, 61% of those in Red States believe their morals are higher than those in Blue States.
These are sobering statistics, even if cited in defensive jest by those who refuse to leave the country when told to do so.
Strong nuances of this prevalent kind of thinking came out several times on the McCain and Palin campaign trails. Palin, in particular, commended local audiences several times about being the “real America,” implying that other people in other places are not real Americans. Obvious rednecks, such as Joe the Liar and Fake Plumber, are touted as folk heroes.
Antagonistic, hostile crews do a poor job of running a railroad, and a divided, hostile people do a poor job of putting a nation back on a strong economic, social, and military base. It is time for the Republicans to join with the rest of Americans to work for what is good for all of us.
– The author, AKA The Militant Moderate, lives in Enid, OK and is a regular contributor to The Oklahoma Observer
Monday, November 10, 2008
Thursday, November 6, 2008
The Reconciliation Agenda
That vision must capture the American dream,
And in the teary eyes of its people gleam.
BY EDWIN E. VINEYARD
Oh, the audacity of hope! Hope swells eternal within the human breast, and it impels us onward toward our vision of destiny. So has it happened in these United States of America.
The gallantry of Barack Obama in extending the friendly hand of reconciliation on election eve was matched only by the graciousness of Sen. John McCain in response. Strangely enough, President Bush rose a bit in the eyes of this observer, as he made his welcoming and perspective speech in the Rose Garden on the morning after.
America is truly a wonder in a world where so often power changes hands by violence.
Not simply to offer another set of comments from the land of punditry, this writer would like to cite some personal observations of Election Day and its aftermath.
Perhaps most touching the heart strings of emotion was the sight of the old warrior, Jesse Jackson, standing toward the forefront of the Chicago celebration with tears streaming unabashedly down his cheeks. That which could not be accomplished by the confrontational tactics of civil rights activism had occurred naturally in the emergence of a new, dynamic, young leader from his race who successfully touched hands, hearts, and minds of the electorate to win the coveted prize of the presidency.
One could not help but note the conciliatory stance of such assertive civil rights activists as the Rev. Al Sharpton, who had followed after Jackson in previous unsuccessful efforts to capture a place in the presidential race. These less popular black Americans took great pride in the accomplishment of one who had come into leadership through his appeal to all the people.
America has become a bitterly divided nation. The negative campaign of personal attacks and the slimy back-door e-mail rumor mill carried out against Barrack Obama have added to the intensity of that division.
Are we to continue the hostility born in the dirty tactics against the Clinton presidency and given impetus by the 2000 election in Florida? Many still consider the election stolen by the Bushites, partisan state officials, and a partisan Supreme Court.
According to an editorial writer in the New York Times, we can expect a bitter, angry Republican Party core to become dominant in the wake of Obama’s victory. More moderate Republicans will be shunned, he thinks, while this tight-knit, hard-core right wing base will be in party control. If so, the writer argues, Republicans will be in a minority in the nation for years to come.
Mr. Obama has already been stretching forth his hand in political reconciliation. Let us hope that sensible Republicans will accept that, and that they will join in the reform process of making this a better country for all the citizens. Continuing to emote about a smaller, laissez faire government with its hands off business and finance, while touting government intrusion into private, personal, and bedroom affairs, will not work.
It is time for Americans to come together to bring a new era into our national government.
– The author, AKA The Militant Moderate, lives in Enid, OK and is a regular contributor to The Oklahoma Observer
And in the teary eyes of its people gleam.
BY EDWIN E. VINEYARD
Oh, the audacity of hope! Hope swells eternal within the human breast, and it impels us onward toward our vision of destiny. So has it happened in these United States of America.
The gallantry of Barack Obama in extending the friendly hand of reconciliation on election eve was matched only by the graciousness of Sen. John McCain in response. Strangely enough, President Bush rose a bit in the eyes of this observer, as he made his welcoming and perspective speech in the Rose Garden on the morning after.
America is truly a wonder in a world where so often power changes hands by violence.
Not simply to offer another set of comments from the land of punditry, this writer would like to cite some personal observations of Election Day and its aftermath.
Perhaps most touching the heart strings of emotion was the sight of the old warrior, Jesse Jackson, standing toward the forefront of the Chicago celebration with tears streaming unabashedly down his cheeks. That which could not be accomplished by the confrontational tactics of civil rights activism had occurred naturally in the emergence of a new, dynamic, young leader from his race who successfully touched hands, hearts, and minds of the electorate to win the coveted prize of the presidency.
One could not help but note the conciliatory stance of such assertive civil rights activists as the Rev. Al Sharpton, who had followed after Jackson in previous unsuccessful efforts to capture a place in the presidential race. These less popular black Americans took great pride in the accomplishment of one who had come into leadership through his appeal to all the people.
America has become a bitterly divided nation. The negative campaign of personal attacks and the slimy back-door e-mail rumor mill carried out against Barrack Obama have added to the intensity of that division.
Are we to continue the hostility born in the dirty tactics against the Clinton presidency and given impetus by the 2000 election in Florida? Many still consider the election stolen by the Bushites, partisan state officials, and a partisan Supreme Court.
According to an editorial writer in the New York Times, we can expect a bitter, angry Republican Party core to become dominant in the wake of Obama’s victory. More moderate Republicans will be shunned, he thinks, while this tight-knit, hard-core right wing base will be in party control. If so, the writer argues, Republicans will be in a minority in the nation for years to come.
Mr. Obama has already been stretching forth his hand in political reconciliation. Let us hope that sensible Republicans will accept that, and that they will join in the reform process of making this a better country for all the citizens. Continuing to emote about a smaller, laissez faire government with its hands off business and finance, while touting government intrusion into private, personal, and bedroom affairs, will not work.
It is time for Americans to come together to bring a new era into our national government.
– The author, AKA The Militant Moderate, lives in Enid, OK and is a regular contributor to The Oklahoma Observer
Monday, November 3, 2008
Clear Differences
BY EDWIN E. VINEYARD
Unfortunately, the current election is not being approached with proper respect for either democratic principles or the ideals which should govern the manner in which election campaigns are conducted.
Nationally, the candidate of the party in power has waged his entire election battle by attacking and trying to denigrate his opponent. The challenger offers a theme of change and outlines the essentials of programs designed to accomplish those changes.
One candidate offers vision, and he challenges and inspires voters toward a better life. He urges youth to aspire, and he seeks to provide a path for those aspirations to be reached through education and opportunity.
The other candidate screams false allegations and personal accusations irrelevant to the issues and concerns of the people. He vows to continue his party’s past governing style, under which the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.
Under the rule of the party in power, science has been scorned, education demeaned, and intelligence and culture scoffed as elitist. The nation has been run into financial bankruptcy at home, and its world reputation ruined. That party candidate rants and raves, but he offers little.
The candidate of the challenging party has inspired millions with his vision of a new and different country, governed by new and different principles and real human values.
His vision encompasses a nation at peace, and one respected in the world for its ideals. His vision is one of a population enjoying the opportunity for decent health care and an opportunity for higher education for their youth.
He seeks equal treatment under the law, and protection of all rights granted by the nation’s Constitution. He seeks a tax plan which will spread prosperity rather than concentrating it with a few.
One candidate envisions a gentler, kinder, more peaceful nation where citizens come together to ensure prosperity for all. The other offers little other than the subjugation of the middle and lower classes to continued exploitation, aided and abetted by a government that favors the powerful.
Sadly, politics in Oklahoma have reached a new low. The incumbent senator is an embarrassment to the state, yet he is likely to continue on through a business-supported campaign aimed toward the less educated, shallow thinking voters.
Most other campaigns of candidates for national office seem similarly conceived, repetitive of time-worn clichés that appeal to that same clientele.
What a shame!
The American dream of democracy is a wonderful thing. Every once in a while it blossoms amidst the thorns of greed and special interests.
The following poem, written by this author a decade or so ago, offers a tribute to that idealism which Americans can bring to the democratic elective process:
VISION
“Where there is no vision the people perish,”
So the great source of wisdom does foretell.
Vision in their leaders is the people’s wish,
As they seek their inner fears to quell,
And prepare to choose in time-respected way.
Vision, dream, and promise become confused,
Which and whither are most difficult to say,
One after one, aspiring leaders stand refused.
Whoever seeks to lead, a vision must display,
The heads and hearts of followers to sway.
And about the people cast enchanting spell
With volition of vision, kinetic to impel.
Into diverse, fenced minds of men infused,
Into the life blood of this land transfused.
The vision must capture the American dream,
And in the teary eyes of its people gleam.
A leader’s vision touches the hearts of men,
And inspires tired and weary souls to sing,
As they rise to the gloried heights again.
Once more the air has fresh breath of spring,
And men go forth to redeem their self-esteem;
While their blithesome spirits rise on wing.
Heads are held high and dimmed faces beam,
As America pursues its improbable dream.
- The author, AKA The Militant Moderate, lives in Enid, OK and is a regular contributor to The Oklahoma Observer
Unfortunately, the current election is not being approached with proper respect for either democratic principles or the ideals which should govern the manner in which election campaigns are conducted.
Nationally, the candidate of the party in power has waged his entire election battle by attacking and trying to denigrate his opponent. The challenger offers a theme of change and outlines the essentials of programs designed to accomplish those changes.
One candidate offers vision, and he challenges and inspires voters toward a better life. He urges youth to aspire, and he seeks to provide a path for those aspirations to be reached through education and opportunity.
The other candidate screams false allegations and personal accusations irrelevant to the issues and concerns of the people. He vows to continue his party’s past governing style, under which the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.
Under the rule of the party in power, science has been scorned, education demeaned, and intelligence and culture scoffed as elitist. The nation has been run into financial bankruptcy at home, and its world reputation ruined. That party candidate rants and raves, but he offers little.
The candidate of the challenging party has inspired millions with his vision of a new and different country, governed by new and different principles and real human values.
His vision encompasses a nation at peace, and one respected in the world for its ideals. His vision is one of a population enjoying the opportunity for decent health care and an opportunity for higher education for their youth.
He seeks equal treatment under the law, and protection of all rights granted by the nation’s Constitution. He seeks a tax plan which will spread prosperity rather than concentrating it with a few.
One candidate envisions a gentler, kinder, more peaceful nation where citizens come together to ensure prosperity for all. The other offers little other than the subjugation of the middle and lower classes to continued exploitation, aided and abetted by a government that favors the powerful.
Sadly, politics in Oklahoma have reached a new low. The incumbent senator is an embarrassment to the state, yet he is likely to continue on through a business-supported campaign aimed toward the less educated, shallow thinking voters.
Most other campaigns of candidates for national office seem similarly conceived, repetitive of time-worn clichés that appeal to that same clientele.
What a shame!
The American dream of democracy is a wonderful thing. Every once in a while it blossoms amidst the thorns of greed and special interests.
The following poem, written by this author a decade or so ago, offers a tribute to that idealism which Americans can bring to the democratic elective process:
VISION
“Where there is no vision the people perish,”
So the great source of wisdom does foretell.
Vision in their leaders is the people’s wish,
As they seek their inner fears to quell,
And prepare to choose in time-respected way.
Vision, dream, and promise become confused,
Which and whither are most difficult to say,
One after one, aspiring leaders stand refused.
Whoever seeks to lead, a vision must display,
The heads and hearts of followers to sway.
And about the people cast enchanting spell
With volition of vision, kinetic to impel.
Into diverse, fenced minds of men infused,
Into the life blood of this land transfused.
The vision must capture the American dream,
And in the teary eyes of its people gleam.
A leader’s vision touches the hearts of men,
And inspires tired and weary souls to sing,
As they rise to the gloried heights again.
Once more the air has fresh breath of spring,
And men go forth to redeem their self-esteem;
While their blithesome spirits rise on wing.
Heads are held high and dimmed faces beam,
As America pursues its improbable dream.
- The author, AKA The Militant Moderate, lives in Enid, OK and is a regular contributor to The Oklahoma Observer
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
Send Jim Packing
BY RICHARD G. POULTON
In reference to the Tulsa World’s endorsement of Jim Inhofe for re-election to the U.S. Senate, I am incensed! The justifications you cited speak only to unbending partisanship and parochialism.
As to his partisanship, it is fair to ask what percentage of the time did he vote with the Bush agenda over the past seven years. Your endorsement noted a lone instance when he broke with the president. In general, this crucial statistic should be disclosed to provide an objective means for measuring Inhofe’s true effectiveness in office.
Specifically, what voting or diversionary responsibility does he bear for legislation, or lack thereof, in areas such as deregulation of finance, insurance and bank institutions; preferential treatment for special interests; and critical environmental matters?
Your editorial staff praises the senator’s efforts on behalf of people living in the Tar Creek area. After long years of his denial and diminishment of their plight living on a toxic waste dump, the residents of Picher finally had the good fortune of being hit by a tornado. Only then did the ranking member of the Environment and Public Works Committee take overdue action to help a population that was primarily known in terms of its cancer rate.
Finally, Inhofe has become the poster-boy for ignorance on the subject of global warming. Whether it be serious documentaries or national news reporting on this matter, he is frequently referenced as the champion for its non-existence. What kind of a tornado would it take to get his attention here?
Oklahomans should be embarrassed by this kind of representation. It’s not tough willed; it’s either stubbornly dumb or corrupt, or both.
Our country is in serious trouble today, with plenty of suffering for all. Those who were on the watch as our problems festered and exploded should be held accountable.
In recognition of this fine state of affairs, I endorse Jim Inhofe for retirement on Nov. 4th. He’s earned it!
– The author lives in Tulsa
In reference to the Tulsa World’s endorsement of Jim Inhofe for re-election to the U.S. Senate, I am incensed! The justifications you cited speak only to unbending partisanship and parochialism.
As to his partisanship, it is fair to ask what percentage of the time did he vote with the Bush agenda over the past seven years. Your endorsement noted a lone instance when he broke with the president. In general, this crucial statistic should be disclosed to provide an objective means for measuring Inhofe’s true effectiveness in office.
Specifically, what voting or diversionary responsibility does he bear for legislation, or lack thereof, in areas such as deregulation of finance, insurance and bank institutions; preferential treatment for special interests; and critical environmental matters?
Your editorial staff praises the senator’s efforts on behalf of people living in the Tar Creek area. After long years of his denial and diminishment of their plight living on a toxic waste dump, the residents of Picher finally had the good fortune of being hit by a tornado. Only then did the ranking member of the Environment and Public Works Committee take overdue action to help a population that was primarily known in terms of its cancer rate.
Finally, Inhofe has become the poster-boy for ignorance on the subject of global warming. Whether it be serious documentaries or national news reporting on this matter, he is frequently referenced as the champion for its non-existence. What kind of a tornado would it take to get his attention here?
Oklahomans should be embarrassed by this kind of representation. It’s not tough willed; it’s either stubbornly dumb or corrupt, or both.
Our country is in serious trouble today, with plenty of suffering for all. Those who were on the watch as our problems festered and exploded should be held accountable.
In recognition of this fine state of affairs, I endorse Jim Inhofe for retirement on Nov. 4th. He’s earned it!
– The author lives in Tulsa
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
Democratic Values
BY BRUCE TREADAWAY
My life has been spent in Oklahoma. I was born at the Fort Sill Army Hospital after my dad returned from the Big War, World War II. He was a life-long Democrat. He never voted Republican. He was a child during the Depression, and he lived first-hand the Dust Bowl, the Depression, and everything that went with those two catastrophic events.
After World War II, he never favored another war. He knew the horrors of war personally. He was one of the first to enter the Nazi prison camps, and the horror he witnessed was something that he took to his grave.
He's gone now, but he left values with me.
He taught me that taxes are a part of being a citizen. He didn't much care for them, but he paid his share. My grandfather paid his share, and my great-grandfather before him paid his share.
He taught me that ignorance causes people to vote Republican. He never understood how small farmers and teachers could vote Republican. It's a phenomena that Americans vote for politicians who are against what they do for a living.
He taught me to care about other people, and he taught me that life is a trip and I should enjoy the ride. He certainly did. My dad was special to me, as was my great-grandfather.
When politicians promote tax cuts, they insult the memory of my forefathers. The roads that we have, the schools that we enjoy, everything that this country has, was bought and paid for by previous generations. It denigrates their memories to cut taxes the way this state and nation have done. Let's not hear about tax cuts.
I'm a Democrat, and I'm sick and tired of being called a liberal pansy. If someone wants to call me that to my face, then come on, but don't lump all Democrats in one group.
My dad spent his youth fighting for this country, as did his brothers. Many of those who refer to Democrats as liberal pansies haven't worn the uniform.
Don't insult my dad's memory and all the other soldiers that this great nation has been home to by the weak practice of calling names.
It's time for us to take back this country from the perverted group in charge. What has always been good about America is that this country cares about other countries and its citizens.
It's time to return to the values that we all cherish. Vote Democrat!
– The author lives in Minco, OK
My life has been spent in Oklahoma. I was born at the Fort Sill Army Hospital after my dad returned from the Big War, World War II. He was a life-long Democrat. He never voted Republican. He was a child during the Depression, and he lived first-hand the Dust Bowl, the Depression, and everything that went with those two catastrophic events.
After World War II, he never favored another war. He knew the horrors of war personally. He was one of the first to enter the Nazi prison camps, and the horror he witnessed was something that he took to his grave.
He's gone now, but he left values with me.
He taught me that taxes are a part of being a citizen. He didn't much care for them, but he paid his share. My grandfather paid his share, and my great-grandfather before him paid his share.
He taught me that ignorance causes people to vote Republican. He never understood how small farmers and teachers could vote Republican. It's a phenomena that Americans vote for politicians who are against what they do for a living.
He taught me to care about other people, and he taught me that life is a trip and I should enjoy the ride. He certainly did. My dad was special to me, as was my great-grandfather.
When politicians promote tax cuts, they insult the memory of my forefathers. The roads that we have, the schools that we enjoy, everything that this country has, was bought and paid for by previous generations. It denigrates their memories to cut taxes the way this state and nation have done. Let's not hear about tax cuts.
I'm a Democrat, and I'm sick and tired of being called a liberal pansy. If someone wants to call me that to my face, then come on, but don't lump all Democrats in one group.
My dad spent his youth fighting for this country, as did his brothers. Many of those who refer to Democrats as liberal pansies haven't worn the uniform.
Don't insult my dad's memory and all the other soldiers that this great nation has been home to by the weak practice of calling names.
It's time for us to take back this country from the perverted group in charge. What has always been good about America is that this country cares about other countries and its citizens.
It's time to return to the values that we all cherish. Vote Democrat!
– The author lives in Minco, OK
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
'Politics Makes Me Sick'
BY EDWIN E. VINEYARD
Politics make me sick! I am tired of politics! I’ll be glad when this election is over! How often do we hear these expressions lately?
Well, politics do make us sick! In particular, it is the stench that emanates from John McCain’s and Sarah Palin’s dirty, stinking negative campaign that makes us sick. While we can recall some really bad TV commercials in previous elections, we cannot remember as deceitfully negative and dirty stump speeches coming from the candidates own mouths on the campaign trail.
These Republican candidates will apparently do anything and say anything to get elected. Worse, they bundle themselves in the flag and patriotism while practicing their abominations.
What is this about being “pro-America” and “anti-America?” What is this about Obama’s being a socialist because his tax plan rolls back the Bush tax cuts on the wealthy to 2000 rates? What’s this about “palling around with terrorists?” And, Joe the plumber – what a red herring, and a fake one at that!
One seems to recall a quotation: “The truth is not in them.”
We have seen the Republicans during the past eight years try to label dissent as treason. “If you are not for us, you are against us,” they have been saying. Then they equate that with being anti-American.
One Republican congresswoman is declaring that the Democrats in Congress are anti-American. She also says that Obama is anti-American. Palin and McCain declare certain sections of the country to be “pro-American” and others as “anti-American.”
What kind of rhetoric is that?
Republican campaign tactics have repeatedly assured that whoever wins a presidential election will have a deeply divided, polarized, antagonistic nation to try to govern. Our country’s almost evenly divided citizens line up hostile to one another.
This has happened before. It happened in the past two elections. George W. Bush’s people fought dirty. When he could not defeat Al Gore, it went to the Supreme Court, where the case was decided on a party line vote and not on its merits. Yes, that left many of us hostile.
Bush’s second election was no better. The domination of the airways with anonymously financed advertising from the “Swift-boat” liars attacking distinguished war records turned the tide for Bush. The name has become synonymous with low-down, lying, filthy politics.
But it goes back farther to the Clinton Administration. Republicans spent eight years in legal and media harassment of the Clintons. This included bribing witnesses to give false stories to reporters and writers, investigating business dealings that were later cleared, and then trying to prosecute and impeach the president for lousy private, personal conduct.
Clinton never had a closely knit country to govern. Bush squandered a degree of mutual support after 9/ll by conspiring to falsify facts and giving spurious reasons to go into an unnecessary war against a country that had no part in the attack. His whole time has been a disaster.
Republicans have pushed a divisive agenda during these last eight years. Attempts to privatize Social Security come to mind. Tax cuts for the wealthy, particularly on income derived from wealth [dividends, capital gains, and inheritances], have proven divisive – especially as budget deficits increase and the middle class suffers lost jobs and losses in buying power.
McCain has been as much a loose chicken during this last economic calamity as was Bush during the hours after the strike on the World Trade Center in New York – from continuing to read “My Pet Goat” to flying hither and yon around the country for hours.
Who can truthfully say McCain is the one to lead the country out of this or any other crisis?
McCain’s campaign has had no focus, except to denigrate Obama. He has no finite proposals on which he can stand bravely and tell middle class people the real truth.
McCain’s choice of a vice president reveals his bad judgment. His desperate attempts to discredit Obama through any and all means, ethical or not, reveal his own character flaws.
– The author, AKA The Militant Moderate, lives in Enid, Oklahoma and is a regular contributor to The Oklahoma Observer
Politics make me sick! I am tired of politics! I’ll be glad when this election is over! How often do we hear these expressions lately?
Well, politics do make us sick! In particular, it is the stench that emanates from John McCain’s and Sarah Palin’s dirty, stinking negative campaign that makes us sick. While we can recall some really bad TV commercials in previous elections, we cannot remember as deceitfully negative and dirty stump speeches coming from the candidates own mouths on the campaign trail.
These Republican candidates will apparently do anything and say anything to get elected. Worse, they bundle themselves in the flag and patriotism while practicing their abominations.
What is this about being “pro-America” and “anti-America?” What is this about Obama’s being a socialist because his tax plan rolls back the Bush tax cuts on the wealthy to 2000 rates? What’s this about “palling around with terrorists?” And, Joe the plumber – what a red herring, and a fake one at that!
One seems to recall a quotation: “The truth is not in them.”
We have seen the Republicans during the past eight years try to label dissent as treason. “If you are not for us, you are against us,” they have been saying. Then they equate that with being anti-American.
One Republican congresswoman is declaring that the Democrats in Congress are anti-American. She also says that Obama is anti-American. Palin and McCain declare certain sections of the country to be “pro-American” and others as “anti-American.”
What kind of rhetoric is that?
Republican campaign tactics have repeatedly assured that whoever wins a presidential election will have a deeply divided, polarized, antagonistic nation to try to govern. Our country’s almost evenly divided citizens line up hostile to one another.
This has happened before. It happened in the past two elections. George W. Bush’s people fought dirty. When he could not defeat Al Gore, it went to the Supreme Court, where the case was decided on a party line vote and not on its merits. Yes, that left many of us hostile.
Bush’s second election was no better. The domination of the airways with anonymously financed advertising from the “Swift-boat” liars attacking distinguished war records turned the tide for Bush. The name has become synonymous with low-down, lying, filthy politics.
But it goes back farther to the Clinton Administration. Republicans spent eight years in legal and media harassment of the Clintons. This included bribing witnesses to give false stories to reporters and writers, investigating business dealings that were later cleared, and then trying to prosecute and impeach the president for lousy private, personal conduct.
Clinton never had a closely knit country to govern. Bush squandered a degree of mutual support after 9/ll by conspiring to falsify facts and giving spurious reasons to go into an unnecessary war against a country that had no part in the attack. His whole time has been a disaster.
Republicans have pushed a divisive agenda during these last eight years. Attempts to privatize Social Security come to mind. Tax cuts for the wealthy, particularly on income derived from wealth [dividends, capital gains, and inheritances], have proven divisive – especially as budget deficits increase and the middle class suffers lost jobs and losses in buying power.
McCain has been as much a loose chicken during this last economic calamity as was Bush during the hours after the strike on the World Trade Center in New York – from continuing to read “My Pet Goat” to flying hither and yon around the country for hours.
Who can truthfully say McCain is the one to lead the country out of this or any other crisis?
McCain’s campaign has had no focus, except to denigrate Obama. He has no finite proposals on which he can stand bravely and tell middle class people the real truth.
McCain’s choice of a vice president reveals his bad judgment. His desperate attempts to discredit Obama through any and all means, ethical or not, reveal his own character flaws.
– The author, AKA The Militant Moderate, lives in Enid, Oklahoma and is a regular contributor to The Oklahoma Observer
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
The Importance Of David Letterman
BY DANNY M. ADKISON
With the last debate over and two weeks to go before the presidential election, there are two important questions to consider.
First, who asked the candidates the toughest question? Second, who made this statement during a debate? “I need to say little to convince [voters] of the necessity which presses us into a pursuit of this measure. They know that our national debt is considerable; this together with domestic debt, is of great magnitude, and it will be attended with the most dreadful consequences to let these run into confusion and ruin, for want of proper regulations to keep them in order.”
Let’s take the second question first. This is what students call a trick question. That’s because it did occur during the debate, but it was the debate over the creation of the Department of the Treasury in the first Congress in May of 1787.
It’s not just a “gotcha” question. It points out that the issues don’t seemingly change much over the decades [or even centuries].
Politicians debate taxes and spending priorities. Yet, we know that for the voters that stay undecided and are not seriously attached to any particular candidate, issues are not that important.
In spite of what your eighth or ninth grade civics teacher may have told you, most of these voters – and they will probably decide the election – are not basing their votes on the two major political parties’ platforms or the candidates’ plans for what they will do once in office. On the contrary, most vote based on how they feel about the past four years.
In these circumstances, political parties [again, contrary to your civics teachers lessons] play an important role. They provide the retrospective voter with a rational choice. If they like the way things are going, they vote for the incumbent; if not, they vote for the challenger.
The problem is that the 22nd Amendment limited the voters’ choices. Presidents Eisenhower, Reagan, Clinton, and Bush could not run for a third term.
This is why Barack Obama has sought to tie his opponent to the policies of President Bush. After all, John McCain is the Republican Party nominee. On the other hand, you don’t hear McCain reminding voters much about his affiliation with the Republican Party.
The proverbial Martian would think that the strong third party in America is the Maverick Party.
Which brings us to the first question.
McCain may or may not be similar to President Bush. He may or may not continue the economic and foreign policies of his predecessor. That doesn’t really matter. What matters to the voters is whether McCain will perform more like Bush or bring genuine change.
All three debates taken together should be enough to supply voters with the answer to this question. But the individual who came the closest to exposing the answer was not a journalist. It was David Letterman.
Letterman pressed McCain like no journalist has. He pressed him on three major points, all of which went to the issue of character and image.
The first was Sarah Palin. It was clear that Letterman, like most Americans, does not believe she is presidential material. He obviously couldn’t get McCain to admit this, but he made his point nevertheless.
Second, Letterman pointed out that it was ridiculous for McCain’s running mate to say Obama had palled around with terrorists. McCain finally admitted that these are just things you say during a campaign.
Then, finally, Letterman brought up Joe the Plumber.
Letterman knew from news reports that Joe was not a licensed plumber and that literally everything [that is not an exaggeration], everything McCain had said about Joe and his financial situation [both real and under an Obama administration] was wrong.
Just as the McCain camp did not know exactly what they were getting with Palin, they were surprised to discover that Joe the Plumber was what Thomas Frank, author of the book What’s The Matter With Kansas? calls a winger.
Joe, it turns out, made just over $40,000 last year, owes back taxes, and isn’t even a licensed plumber. He can’t pay his taxes but he wants to buy a business worth over a quarter of a million dollars?
Here is the overall perception with which the voters are left when viewing the McCain campaign as we head for the home stretch: Sarah Palin, Joe the Plumber, and a rather shrill McCain.
Is McCain, to place it in the context of one of the more memorable moments of the last debate – selection of Supreme Court justices – the individual voters want to entrust the selection of justices [who serve until they die, resign, or are impeached and removed from office]?
As Frank puts it in his new book The Wrecking Crew, “Never again will conservatives shoulder the blame for catastrophes like the Great Depression or even the many blunders of the Bush years; no matter how much of it they control, the government is never theirs, and they cannot be held responsible for its actions.”
– The author teaches constitutional law at Oklahoma State University and is a regular contributor to The Oklahoma Observer.
With the last debate over and two weeks to go before the presidential election, there are two important questions to consider.
First, who asked the candidates the toughest question? Second, who made this statement during a debate? “I need to say little to convince [voters] of the necessity which presses us into a pursuit of this measure. They know that our national debt is considerable; this together with domestic debt, is of great magnitude, and it will be attended with the most dreadful consequences to let these run into confusion and ruin, for want of proper regulations to keep them in order.”
Let’s take the second question first. This is what students call a trick question. That’s because it did occur during the debate, but it was the debate over the creation of the Department of the Treasury in the first Congress in May of 1787.
It’s not just a “gotcha” question. It points out that the issues don’t seemingly change much over the decades [or even centuries].
Politicians debate taxes and spending priorities. Yet, we know that for the voters that stay undecided and are not seriously attached to any particular candidate, issues are not that important.
In spite of what your eighth or ninth grade civics teacher may have told you, most of these voters – and they will probably decide the election – are not basing their votes on the two major political parties’ platforms or the candidates’ plans for what they will do once in office. On the contrary, most vote based on how they feel about the past four years.
In these circumstances, political parties [again, contrary to your civics teachers lessons] play an important role. They provide the retrospective voter with a rational choice. If they like the way things are going, they vote for the incumbent; if not, they vote for the challenger.
The problem is that the 22nd Amendment limited the voters’ choices. Presidents Eisenhower, Reagan, Clinton, and Bush could not run for a third term.
This is why Barack Obama has sought to tie his opponent to the policies of President Bush. After all, John McCain is the Republican Party nominee. On the other hand, you don’t hear McCain reminding voters much about his affiliation with the Republican Party.
The proverbial Martian would think that the strong third party in America is the Maverick Party.
Which brings us to the first question.
McCain may or may not be similar to President Bush. He may or may not continue the economic and foreign policies of his predecessor. That doesn’t really matter. What matters to the voters is whether McCain will perform more like Bush or bring genuine change.
All three debates taken together should be enough to supply voters with the answer to this question. But the individual who came the closest to exposing the answer was not a journalist. It was David Letterman.
Letterman pressed McCain like no journalist has. He pressed him on three major points, all of which went to the issue of character and image.
The first was Sarah Palin. It was clear that Letterman, like most Americans, does not believe she is presidential material. He obviously couldn’t get McCain to admit this, but he made his point nevertheless.
Second, Letterman pointed out that it was ridiculous for McCain’s running mate to say Obama had palled around with terrorists. McCain finally admitted that these are just things you say during a campaign.
Then, finally, Letterman brought up Joe the Plumber.
Letterman knew from news reports that Joe was not a licensed plumber and that literally everything [that is not an exaggeration], everything McCain had said about Joe and his financial situation [both real and under an Obama administration] was wrong.
Just as the McCain camp did not know exactly what they were getting with Palin, they were surprised to discover that Joe the Plumber was what Thomas Frank, author of the book What’s The Matter With Kansas? calls a winger.
Joe, it turns out, made just over $40,000 last year, owes back taxes, and isn’t even a licensed plumber. He can’t pay his taxes but he wants to buy a business worth over a quarter of a million dollars?
Here is the overall perception with which the voters are left when viewing the McCain campaign as we head for the home stretch: Sarah Palin, Joe the Plumber, and a rather shrill McCain.
Is McCain, to place it in the context of one of the more memorable moments of the last debate – selection of Supreme Court justices – the individual voters want to entrust the selection of justices [who serve until they die, resign, or are impeached and removed from office]?
As Frank puts it in his new book The Wrecking Crew, “Never again will conservatives shoulder the blame for catastrophes like the Great Depression or even the many blunders of the Bush years; no matter how much of it they control, the government is never theirs, and they cannot be held responsible for its actions.”
– The author teaches constitutional law at Oklahoma State University and is a regular contributor to The Oklahoma Observer.
Thursday, October 16, 2008
War Vs. Children
POSTED BY FROSTY TROY
According to a book recently released by First Focus, during the past five years children have lost significant ground in the federal budget.
While overall spending on children's issues increased by about 1.4%, in real terms, total federal non-defense spending grew at nearly 10 times that rate.
As a result, the children's share of the federal non-defense budget declined from 11% in 2004 to 10% in 2008. This drop continues a trend in which the budget share allocated to children has declined 23% since 1960.
In fact, spending for children's education, welfare and youth training has been particularly hard hit during the last half decade, with total spending declining by 9.9%, 11.5% and 14.9% in each area, respectively.
Unfortunately, President Bush's fiscal year 2009 budget proposal continues this trend.
For example, spending on children's health programs would increase by 2.2%, but discretionary spending in this area would drop by 12% from 2008 levels.
It is sad to note that of every dollar the American taxpayer pays, 42 cents goes to the military, with only 4.4 cents going toward education, training, and social services costs.
George W. Bush has not only been a fiscal disaster for America, he also will be remembered for his wanton attacks on social programs.
According to a book recently released by First Focus, during the past five years children have lost significant ground in the federal budget.
While overall spending on children's issues increased by about 1.4%, in real terms, total federal non-defense spending grew at nearly 10 times that rate.
As a result, the children's share of the federal non-defense budget declined from 11% in 2004 to 10% in 2008. This drop continues a trend in which the budget share allocated to children has declined 23% since 1960.
In fact, spending for children's education, welfare and youth training has been particularly hard hit during the last half decade, with total spending declining by 9.9%, 11.5% and 14.9% in each area, respectively.
Unfortunately, President Bush's fiscal year 2009 budget proposal continues this trend.
For example, spending on children's health programs would increase by 2.2%, but discretionary spending in this area would drop by 12% from 2008 levels.
It is sad to note that of every dollar the American taxpayer pays, 42 cents goes to the military, with only 4.4 cents going toward education, training, and social services costs.
George W. Bush has not only been a fiscal disaster for America, he also will be remembered for his wanton attacks on social programs.
Wednesday, October 8, 2008
Gutless Wonder
POSTED BY ARNOLD HAMILTON
As a kid growing up in Oklahoma, we had a derisive term for those who lacked the courage to trash you to your face: Gutless wonder.
The moniker came to mind watching the second round of this year's presidential debates.
John McCain touts himself as the Straight-Talk Express, unabashadely speaking unpopular truths to power. But he weaseled out when given a nationally-televised platform to say to Barack Obama's face what Sarah Palin and other McCain surrogates have been spewing behind Obama's back.
The once-principled McCain -- who was himself victim of scurrilous George W. Bush rumor-mongering in the 2000 GOP primary -- is now employing those Rovian, Atwateresque attacks against Obama, a desperate act aimed at salvaging a sinking campaign.
Yet McCain doesn't have the courage to drop the gloves and deliver the punches himself, hiding instead behind a self-styled Hockey Mom who hopes to trigger a bench-clearing brawl that diverts attention from the serious issues America must confront.
McCain faces a dispiriting truth: He alone is responsible for sullying his reputation as an American Hero, a straight-talker and an anti-politician.
Perhaps such heat-of-the-moment gutter tactics will be forgiven eventually. But even if he manages to win the election, he's lost the most important battle. He's lost his soul.
As a kid growing up in Oklahoma, we had a derisive term for those who lacked the courage to trash you to your face: Gutless wonder.
The moniker came to mind watching the second round of this year's presidential debates.
John McCain touts himself as the Straight-Talk Express, unabashadely speaking unpopular truths to power. But he weaseled out when given a nationally-televised platform to say to Barack Obama's face what Sarah Palin and other McCain surrogates have been spewing behind Obama's back.
The once-principled McCain -- who was himself victim of scurrilous George W. Bush rumor-mongering in the 2000 GOP primary -- is now employing those Rovian, Atwateresque attacks against Obama, a desperate act aimed at salvaging a sinking campaign.
Yet McCain doesn't have the courage to drop the gloves and deliver the punches himself, hiding instead behind a self-styled Hockey Mom who hopes to trigger a bench-clearing brawl that diverts attention from the serious issues America must confront.
McCain faces a dispiriting truth: He alone is responsible for sullying his reputation as an American Hero, a straight-talker and an anti-politician.
Perhaps such heat-of-the-moment gutter tactics will be forgiven eventually. But even if he manages to win the election, he's lost the most important battle. He's lost his soul.
Monday, September 29, 2008
Lipstick On A Pig
POSTED BY ARNOLD HAMILTON
The new-look Daily Disappointment is pulling the same old stunts.
Today's Opinion page includes a sophomoric scolding of Oklahoma Democrats for failing to erase convicted former state auditor Jeff McMahan from the state party web site [okdemocrats.org].
It sets up the attack -- headlined "Definition Of Irony" -- with a quote from "one man" who "described his decision to be a Democrat" this way: "Any government which derives its authority from its people must have its people's interests in mind. Otherwise it is destined to fail."
The Disappointment then huffs, "Could anyone serious argue [McMahan's] an example of a government official who puts others' interests above his own?"
What's really ironic is the next item in the Monday Morning Quarterbacks column -- a recap from politico.com of the federal corruption case against longtime Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens.
Conspicuously missing: Stevens' party affiliation.
Hmmmm. Could it be? Oh, no, Stevens is a Republican ... a Republican U.S. Senator for 40 years.
It's true that these items appear on the "Opinion" page, not in the news columns. Still, isn't it intellectually dishonest not to identify Stevens' party -- especially after taking the other party to task for corruption?
Remember: It's often not what the Daily Disappointment tells you, it's what they don't tell you.
In this case, the new-look Disappointment reads too much like the old.
The new-look Daily Disappointment is pulling the same old stunts.
Today's Opinion page includes a sophomoric scolding of Oklahoma Democrats for failing to erase convicted former state auditor Jeff McMahan from the state party web site [okdemocrats.org].
It sets up the attack -- headlined "Definition Of Irony" -- with a quote from "one man" who "described his decision to be a Democrat" this way: "Any government which derives its authority from its people must have its people's interests in mind. Otherwise it is destined to fail."
The Disappointment then huffs, "Could anyone serious argue [McMahan's] an example of a government official who puts others' interests above his own?"
What's really ironic is the next item in the Monday Morning Quarterbacks column -- a recap from politico.com of the federal corruption case against longtime Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens.
Conspicuously missing: Stevens' party affiliation.
Hmmmm. Could it be? Oh, no, Stevens is a Republican ... a Republican U.S. Senator for 40 years.
It's true that these items appear on the "Opinion" page, not in the news columns. Still, isn't it intellectually dishonest not to identify Stevens' party -- especially after taking the other party to task for corruption?
Remember: It's often not what the Daily Disappointment tells you, it's what they don't tell you.
In this case, the new-look Disappointment reads too much like the old.
Thursday, September 25, 2008
Fake Facts
POSTED BY FROSTY TROY
One of the arguments you hear from those in favor of tort "reform" is the false claim that Oklahoma is losing doctors and liability insurance premiums are unbearably high.
The claim is that Oklahoma is losing doctors in high-risk fields such as emergency medicine and obstetrics.
Are there big malpractice liability payouts that help fuel high insurance rates for doctors?
Before you fall for this fairy tale, check with Hugh Robert, executive director of the Oklahoma Center for Consumer and Patient Safety. He says both contentions are wrong.
The number of doctors in Oklahoma is actually rising and lawsuit outcomes prove that Oklahoma is hardly a jackpot jury haven.
Oklahoma losing doctors? Hardly. In 1997, according to data from the Oklahoma State Board of Medical Licensure and Supervision, 4,787 medical doctors were practicing in the state, including 166 emergency physicians and 276 practicing obstetrics, gynecology or both, including ob-gyn surgical specialists.
By 2007, the total had risen by more than 900 to 5,718, including 283 ER doctors and 395 in the ob/gyn fields. However, the number of the latter had dropped from 414 in 2004.
When it comes to osteopathic physicians, data from the Oklahoma Osteopathic Association shows that in 1997 there were a total of 880 doctors licensed to practice in Oklahoma, not including retirees, interns and residents.
In 2007, the osteopathic association listed 1,324 licensed doctors in Oklahoma, including 143 ER doctors and 58 in the ob/gyn field.
Federation of State Medical Boards shows that Oklahoma ranks 43rd per capita for the number of doctors practicing in the state, just above Arkansas. Texas ranked 49th, Kansas 24th, New Mexico 31st.
In Oklahoma, between 2002 and 2006, population growth in Oklahoma was 2.54%, according to the U.S. Census. The doctor population has grown at 7.93%.
Somebody please read this to the editorial writers at the Daily Disappointment.
One of the arguments you hear from those in favor of tort "reform" is the false claim that Oklahoma is losing doctors and liability insurance premiums are unbearably high.
The claim is that Oklahoma is losing doctors in high-risk fields such as emergency medicine and obstetrics.
Are there big malpractice liability payouts that help fuel high insurance rates for doctors?
Before you fall for this fairy tale, check with Hugh Robert, executive director of the Oklahoma Center for Consumer and Patient Safety. He says both contentions are wrong.
The number of doctors in Oklahoma is actually rising and lawsuit outcomes prove that Oklahoma is hardly a jackpot jury haven.
Oklahoma losing doctors? Hardly. In 1997, according to data from the Oklahoma State Board of Medical Licensure and Supervision, 4,787 medical doctors were practicing in the state, including 166 emergency physicians and 276 practicing obstetrics, gynecology or both, including ob-gyn surgical specialists.
By 2007, the total had risen by more than 900 to 5,718, including 283 ER doctors and 395 in the ob/gyn fields. However, the number of the latter had dropped from 414 in 2004.
When it comes to osteopathic physicians, data from the Oklahoma Osteopathic Association shows that in 1997 there were a total of 880 doctors licensed to practice in Oklahoma, not including retirees, interns and residents.
In 2007, the osteopathic association listed 1,324 licensed doctors in Oklahoma, including 143 ER doctors and 58 in the ob/gyn field.
Federation of State Medical Boards shows that Oklahoma ranks 43rd per capita for the number of doctors practicing in the state, just above Arkansas. Texas ranked 49th, Kansas 24th, New Mexico 31st.
In Oklahoma, between 2002 and 2006, population growth in Oklahoma was 2.54%, according to the U.S. Census. The doctor population has grown at 7.93%.
Somebody please read this to the editorial writers at the Daily Disappointment.
Tuesday, August 26, 2008
The Big Lie
POSTED BY ARNOLD HAMILTON
Oklahoma City television station KWTV once set the standard for broadcast journalism in the state, if not the region.
Its stable of reporters was so extraordinary in the 1970s that some went on to become network correspondents [at a time when networks commanded the lion's share of viewers] and many others help get CNN off the ground.
Today, KWTV journalism is an oxymoron.
Case in point: Dave Jordan's report [8.26.08, 10 p.m. newscast] on the state's crumbling roads and bridges contained enough holes to -- pardon the pun -- drive a big-rig through it.
He asserted that the Oklahoma Education Association -- through the HOPE [Helping Oklahoma Public Education] initiative -- wants to move $800 million over a three-year period from the general fund into public schools.
What the HOPE petition would require -- if approved by the voters -- is that lawmakers fulfill their broken promises to fund public education at the regional average. Currently, Oklahoma is 48th nationally in per pupil expenditures -- $6,944 per child. The regional average currently is $8,300.
Since a vote on the proposed constitutional amendment probably would not occur until next year at the earliest, it may well be at least six years before the funding would be effective ... giving legislators plenty of time to arrange spending priorities to protect sacred cows like the highway contractors.
By the way, the constitutional amendment would be permanent ... not a three-year transfer ... and hardly a transfer directly from the largesse that lawmakers provided this year to the powerful highway industry: $30 million guaranteed annually to transportation, plus $300 million in debt-financed improvements via bonds.
To listen to KWTV's one-sided report, Oklahoma's already crumbling roads and bridges are in danger of suffering even more at the hands of the greedy teachers' union. It's the bogus story line that anti-public education Republicans in the Legislature and highway contractors [anxious, quite naturally, to protect their bountiful new revenue stream] are peddling around-the-clock.
"If that [HOPE wins voter approval] happens," a grave-sounding Bob Stem of the Associated General Contractors said, "you can bet roads and bridges are going to suffer."
Maybe the highway contractors and their well-heeled allies like the Chambers of Commerce should have thought about that when the Legislature's anti-government zealots cut taxes $700 million over the last three years.
There's something else to point out here: This was a crime against journalism.
How does KWTV get away with airing a report that allows the highway contractors' spokesman to spin, spin and spin some more -- yet there is not even a hint of the possibility that there may be other sides to a complex issue critically important to Oklahoma's future?
No one from the OEA or other groups supporting the education initiative were given even a six-second sound bite to rebut the spin? Or set the record straight on what the initiative would do?
No self-respecting editor would permit such a slanted report to appear on air or in print.
Unfortunately, it happens all too often in Oklahoma where the mainstream media fail their readers and viewers on an almost daily basis. The problem isn't necessarily what they tell you. It's what they don't tell you.
And what KWTV failed to do was give its viewers even a smidgen of the whole story on the HOPE initiative and its relationship, or lack thereof, to the state's highway and bridge woes.
Oklahoma City television station KWTV once set the standard for broadcast journalism in the state, if not the region.
Its stable of reporters was so extraordinary in the 1970s that some went on to become network correspondents [at a time when networks commanded the lion's share of viewers] and many others help get CNN off the ground.
Today, KWTV journalism is an oxymoron.
Case in point: Dave Jordan's report [8.26.08, 10 p.m. newscast] on the state's crumbling roads and bridges contained enough holes to -- pardon the pun -- drive a big-rig through it.
He asserted that the Oklahoma Education Association -- through the HOPE [Helping Oklahoma Public Education] initiative -- wants to move $800 million over a three-year period from the general fund into public schools.
What the HOPE petition would require -- if approved by the voters -- is that lawmakers fulfill their broken promises to fund public education at the regional average. Currently, Oklahoma is 48th nationally in per pupil expenditures -- $6,944 per child. The regional average currently is $8,300.
Since a vote on the proposed constitutional amendment probably would not occur until next year at the earliest, it may well be at least six years before the funding would be effective ... giving legislators plenty of time to arrange spending priorities to protect sacred cows like the highway contractors.
By the way, the constitutional amendment would be permanent ... not a three-year transfer ... and hardly a transfer directly from the largesse that lawmakers provided this year to the powerful highway industry: $30 million guaranteed annually to transportation, plus $300 million in debt-financed improvements via bonds.
To listen to KWTV's one-sided report, Oklahoma's already crumbling roads and bridges are in danger of suffering even more at the hands of the greedy teachers' union. It's the bogus story line that anti-public education Republicans in the Legislature and highway contractors [anxious, quite naturally, to protect their bountiful new revenue stream] are peddling around-the-clock.
"If that [HOPE wins voter approval] happens," a grave-sounding Bob Stem of the Associated General Contractors said, "you can bet roads and bridges are going to suffer."
Maybe the highway contractors and their well-heeled allies like the Chambers of Commerce should have thought about that when the Legislature's anti-government zealots cut taxes $700 million over the last three years.
There's something else to point out here: This was a crime against journalism.
How does KWTV get away with airing a report that allows the highway contractors' spokesman to spin, spin and spin some more -- yet there is not even a hint of the possibility that there may be other sides to a complex issue critically important to Oklahoma's future?
No one from the OEA or other groups supporting the education initiative were given even a six-second sound bite to rebut the spin? Or set the record straight on what the initiative would do?
No self-respecting editor would permit such a slanted report to appear on air or in print.
Unfortunately, it happens all too often in Oklahoma where the mainstream media fail their readers and viewers on an almost daily basis. The problem isn't necessarily what they tell you. It's what they don't tell you.
And what KWTV failed to do was give its viewers even a smidgen of the whole story on the HOPE initiative and its relationship, or lack thereof, to the state's highway and bridge woes.
Wednesday, August 20, 2008
Bad Idea
POSTED BY FROSTY TROY
The corn-into-fuel ethanol program has been around for years but has gained traction from President Bush's program to cure America's "addiction to oil" by using biofuels.
Diverting agricultural land to energy production is a major factor in the rise of worldwide food prices.
We've had food riots in Mexico and Egypt. Even in the U.S., Costco and Sam's Club are rationing rice.
Had the Bush Administration and Congress the courage to slap a big gasoline tax on drivers after 9/11 – or even in 2006, when the President made his "addicted to oil" speech – it would have been a better energy policy than the homographic panacea they've given us.
We could have reduced consumption, cut oil imports, kept low-income drivers whole by rebating their gas taxes with income tax breaks, and used the rest of the proceeds for deficit reduction or something else useful.
Food would be cheaper. So would fuel, because demand would be lower and we'd probably have fewer financial speculators, who some experts think are responsible for oil's march from $64 a barrel a year ago to a peake of well over $140.
Turning biological waste like wood chips into fuel makes a lot of sense. But devoting vast acreage of America's breadbasket to fuel – about a third of the U.S. corn crop is dedicated to ethanol – is a terrible idea, as we're now seeing.
Supposedly miraculous and painless cures have a nasty tendency to backfire. Both in scary movies and in the even scarier real world.
The corn-into-fuel ethanol program has been around for years but has gained traction from President Bush's program to cure America's "addiction to oil" by using biofuels.
Diverting agricultural land to energy production is a major factor in the rise of worldwide food prices.
We've had food riots in Mexico and Egypt. Even in the U.S., Costco and Sam's Club are rationing rice.
Had the Bush Administration and Congress the courage to slap a big gasoline tax on drivers after 9/11 – or even in 2006, when the President made his "addicted to oil" speech – it would have been a better energy policy than the homographic panacea they've given us.
We could have reduced consumption, cut oil imports, kept low-income drivers whole by rebating their gas taxes with income tax breaks, and used the rest of the proceeds for deficit reduction or something else useful.
Food would be cheaper. So would fuel, because demand would be lower and we'd probably have fewer financial speculators, who some experts think are responsible for oil's march from $64 a barrel a year ago to a peake of well over $140.
Turning biological waste like wood chips into fuel makes a lot of sense. But devoting vast acreage of America's breadbasket to fuel – about a third of the U.S. corn crop is dedicated to ethanol – is a terrible idea, as we're now seeing.
Supposedly miraculous and painless cures have a nasty tendency to backfire. Both in scary movies and in the even scarier real world.
Thursday, July 24, 2008
A Real Chance To Help Uninsured
POSTED BY ARNOLD HAMILTON
Window dressing? Or substance?
It's way too early to know whether the House's Health Care Reform Task Force is just another interim study for show -- or a meaningful attempt to help the one in five uninsured Oklahomans.
This much is certain: House Speaker Chris Benge picked a dynamite pair to lead the search for solutions.
State Reps. Doug Cox, the Legislature's only physician, and Kris Steele, renowned for his work on behalf of children and seniors, are two Republicans with a history of straight-shooting independence -- party loyalty be damned.
At times, it's left both in the deep freeze with their more partisan colleagues.
The fact Benge tabbed Cox and Steele for the difficult assignment suggests the first-year speaker gets it: It's unconscionable that 700,000 of our fellow residents are without insurance that affords them the most basic, preventative health care.
The human toll is staggering.
As state Insurance Commissioner Kim Holland noted in today's first task force meeting, Oklahoma ranks at or near rock bottom in nearly every imagineable health category.
She cited these health rankings of the 50 states and the District of Columbia, courtesy of the Commonwealth Fund and United Health Foundation:
Oklahoma is 50th in the number of primary care physicians per 100,000 and in rate of cardiovascular deaths; 48th in the percentage of insured adults and adults 50-and-over who received recommended screening and preventative care; 44th in percentage of insured children and prevalence of obesity ...
It seemed her PowerPoint of pitiful health indicators would never end.
"This is perhaps the most significant economic and social challenge facing the state and the nation," Holland said of the task force's mission to find ways to reduce the number of uninsured.
Benge's decision to put Cox and Steele in charge of the task force was a good first step -- but it's not enough. He needs to put the speaker's considerable political muscle behind the project, not only demanding fair, honest and balanced research, but also fighting to transform the panel's recommendations into good public policy.
If he does, his shaky first session as speaker quickly will be forgotten. More importantly, Oklahoma will take a giant step toward realizing its promise.
The task force meets again Aug. 12 at the Capitol.
Window dressing? Or substance?
It's way too early to know whether the House's Health Care Reform Task Force is just another interim study for show -- or a meaningful attempt to help the one in five uninsured Oklahomans.
This much is certain: House Speaker Chris Benge picked a dynamite pair to lead the search for solutions.
State Reps. Doug Cox, the Legislature's only physician, and Kris Steele, renowned for his work on behalf of children and seniors, are two Republicans with a history of straight-shooting independence -- party loyalty be damned.
At times, it's left both in the deep freeze with their more partisan colleagues.
The fact Benge tabbed Cox and Steele for the difficult assignment suggests the first-year speaker gets it: It's unconscionable that 700,000 of our fellow residents are without insurance that affords them the most basic, preventative health care.
The human toll is staggering.
As state Insurance Commissioner Kim Holland noted in today's first task force meeting, Oklahoma ranks at or near rock bottom in nearly every imagineable health category.
She cited these health rankings of the 50 states and the District of Columbia, courtesy of the Commonwealth Fund and United Health Foundation:
Oklahoma is 50th in the number of primary care physicians per 100,000 and in rate of cardiovascular deaths; 48th in the percentage of insured adults and adults 50-and-over who received recommended screening and preventative care; 44th in percentage of insured children and prevalence of obesity ...
It seemed her PowerPoint of pitiful health indicators would never end.
"This is perhaps the most significant economic and social challenge facing the state and the nation," Holland said of the task force's mission to find ways to reduce the number of uninsured.
Benge's decision to put Cox and Steele in charge of the task force was a good first step -- but it's not enough. He needs to put the speaker's considerable political muscle behind the project, not only demanding fair, honest and balanced research, but also fighting to transform the panel's recommendations into good public policy.
If he does, his shaky first session as speaker quickly will be forgotten. More importantly, Oklahoma will take a giant step toward realizing its promise.
The task force meets again Aug. 12 at the Capitol.
Tuesday, July 22, 2008
Whinings Of A GOP Drama King
Editor's Note: A federal bankruptcy trustee wants to reopen state Rep. Randy Terrill's three-year-old case, alleging the controversial lawmaker failed to report all of his assets. Terrill, best known as architect of the state's mean-spirited immigration law [HB 1804], blames a "cartel of immigration lawyers" for his election-eve woes. The matter could be referred to federal prosecutors for review.
BY KAREN WEBB
"We have a bunch of nameless, spineless character assassins who want to go around with hoods over their heads and shoot me in the back and use my wife to do it." – State Rep. Randy Terrill, R-Moore.
Is the guy who is saving us from all those illegals really blaming this on immigration lawyers? Obviously he thinks you should be a “born in the USA” American before you get to ignore the laws.
It brings to mind former Rep. Tim Pope wearing a gun on the Oklahoma House floor because he was expecting a shootout with gays. The only thing worse, in Oklahoma, is a gay immigration lawyer who speaks Spanish in front of Randy.
“Spineless character assassins?”
Really, Randy, coming from a guy who would go after low-income 5th graders for their Christmas decorations; pardon me if I don’t join your pity party. Then there are all those kids, born here, you want to punish for their parents wanting a better life and not deserving it.
“Hoods over their heads?”
Randy, that is a bit too much coming from a guy who demeans 5th graders on TV and in the press. They shot him in the back using his wife? Talk about your drama kings. Maybe we need to know exactly what was charged on all those credit cards. Maybe he really blames his wife because maybe they weren’t for books, tuition or gym shorts? Are we sure he didn’t use the credit cards to do campaign purchases?
Is it true that the Terrills owed less than $80,000, mainly on credit cards, and they made $100,000 a year? Is it true that he claimed he was a consultant to the State of Oklahoma instead of a representative?
So he had loaned or paid campaign expenses he was to be reimbursed for. They should have been included in his filing as assets and they weren’t. Then the campaign repaid him after he was granted bankruptcy protection.
These things happen all the time, especially to Republicans. With all those corporate lawyers you would think one would know about this. Stranger things have happened; former President George H.W. Bush was nearly indicted for tax fraud during the 1984 re-election campaign because he “inadvertently omitted” the sale of his house on his tax return.
Ed Meese, while working for President Ronald Reagan “inadvertently omitted” his wife’s income on his joint tax return. “Inadvertently omitted” was the term most used when Republicans were found out.
The fiscally conservative are, in reality, fiscally challenged. There was the savings and loan mess and Iran/Contra of the Reagan years and the Enron, the mortgage crisis and so much more in the Bush years.
The problem comes from having their cake, eating the whole thing too fast and puking it up on the rest of us.
Oklahoma has more than its share of family values nutcases. This year the lunatics are attempting to take over the asylum. First, we had Rep. Sally Kern claiming that the Oklahoma gay agenda was more dangerous than al-Qaeda. This week, multi-indicted Oklahoma County Commissioner Brent Rinehart came out with an “edgy” comic book claiming toga-clad homosexuals are luring boy scouts in the woods.
Now the savior of the white race from people who speak other languages is claiming nameless, spineless, hooded lawyers are assassinating his character and using his wife to shoot him in the back.
You would think he believes it was immigration lawyers who forced her to charge whatever she charged on those cards.
By the way, the guy filing the suit isn’t nameless. Is he an immigration lawyer?
Randy thinks Hispanics should be a lot more forgiving even if he plans to toss their grandparents and their grandchildren into holding facilities indefinitely.
– The author lives in Moore, OK
BY KAREN WEBB
"We have a bunch of nameless, spineless character assassins who want to go around with hoods over their heads and shoot me in the back and use my wife to do it." – State Rep. Randy Terrill, R-Moore.
Is the guy who is saving us from all those illegals really blaming this on immigration lawyers? Obviously he thinks you should be a “born in the USA” American before you get to ignore the laws.
It brings to mind former Rep. Tim Pope wearing a gun on the Oklahoma House floor because he was expecting a shootout with gays. The only thing worse, in Oklahoma, is a gay immigration lawyer who speaks Spanish in front of Randy.
“Spineless character assassins?”
Really, Randy, coming from a guy who would go after low-income 5th graders for their Christmas decorations; pardon me if I don’t join your pity party. Then there are all those kids, born here, you want to punish for their parents wanting a better life and not deserving it.
“Hoods over their heads?”
Randy, that is a bit too much coming from a guy who demeans 5th graders on TV and in the press. They shot him in the back using his wife? Talk about your drama kings. Maybe we need to know exactly what was charged on all those credit cards. Maybe he really blames his wife because maybe they weren’t for books, tuition or gym shorts? Are we sure he didn’t use the credit cards to do campaign purchases?
Is it true that the Terrills owed less than $80,000, mainly on credit cards, and they made $100,000 a year? Is it true that he claimed he was a consultant to the State of Oklahoma instead of a representative?
So he had loaned or paid campaign expenses he was to be reimbursed for. They should have been included in his filing as assets and they weren’t. Then the campaign repaid him after he was granted bankruptcy protection.
These things happen all the time, especially to Republicans. With all those corporate lawyers you would think one would know about this. Stranger things have happened; former President George H.W. Bush was nearly indicted for tax fraud during the 1984 re-election campaign because he “inadvertently omitted” the sale of his house on his tax return.
Ed Meese, while working for President Ronald Reagan “inadvertently omitted” his wife’s income on his joint tax return. “Inadvertently omitted” was the term most used when Republicans were found out.
The fiscally conservative are, in reality, fiscally challenged. There was the savings and loan mess and Iran/Contra of the Reagan years and the Enron, the mortgage crisis and so much more in the Bush years.
The problem comes from having their cake, eating the whole thing too fast and puking it up on the rest of us.
Oklahoma has more than its share of family values nutcases. This year the lunatics are attempting to take over the asylum. First, we had Rep. Sally Kern claiming that the Oklahoma gay agenda was more dangerous than al-Qaeda. This week, multi-indicted Oklahoma County Commissioner Brent Rinehart came out with an “edgy” comic book claiming toga-clad homosexuals are luring boy scouts in the woods.
Now the savior of the white race from people who speak other languages is claiming nameless, spineless, hooded lawyers are assassinating his character and using his wife to shoot him in the back.
You would think he believes it was immigration lawyers who forced her to charge whatever she charged on those cards.
By the way, the guy filing the suit isn’t nameless. Is he an immigration lawyer?
Randy thinks Hispanics should be a lot more forgiving even if he plans to toss their grandparents and their grandchildren into holding facilities indefinitely.
– The author lives in Moore, OK
Friday, April 25, 2008
Whose English?
POSTED BY ARNOLD HAMILTON
OK, call me an elitist if you must, but I think state lawmakers embracing the English-only initiative ought to at least be able to speak proper English.
After all, we already have enough laws the Legislature ignores. The April 1 deadline for funding education? Not once have lawmakers met that requirement. What about the law that state employees who fail to file and pay their taxes can be fired? The last time I checked, Oklahoma legislators draw a state paycheck. Yet, none of the recently identified scofflaws have been canned -- though voters get the chance to play The Donald ["You're Fired!"] in November.
The King's English, as my grandmother used to call it, is mangled early and often in the Legislature.
Many lawmakers have been heard to ask: "Is there a physical impact on this bill?" Not unless someone throws a copy at your head. There may well be a fiscal impact, however.
The presiding officers frequently call upon members to speak by declaring, "You are reck-uh-nized." Alas, there is no recognition the word is being mispronounced.
A silly complaint? About as silly as amending the Oklahoma Constitution to memorialize English as the official language.
English already is the official language. I've been in most of Oklahoma's 77 counties during my lifetime and I don't recall ever seeing bilingual or multilingual government signs, documents or records like I saw on my visit to Quebec.
[Yes, I'm aware of efforts to help Spanish speakers secure driver's licenses ... but perhaps many of them are working hard to develop their English skills. Why would we make it more difficult for them to drive to school and work in the meantime? Will we soon be giving tests to non-English speaking tourists before we allow them to rent cars in the U.S. and drive on our roads?]
The English-only proposition isn't about helping -- or even forcing -- newcomers to participate fully in American society. It's about making a small, but rabid group of nativists feel superior.
They don't get it that strength can be found in this wonderful tapestry of the world's peoples, coalescing to create a magnificent land of opportunity, welcoming those who hunger for a chance to be all their creator made them to be.
The xenophobes offer a glass-is-half-empty view of the American dream. They trace their roots other lands, but are afraid new immigrants will displace them on the socioeconomic pecking order. They want to slam the door shut.
It's an age-old fear, playing itself out again.
Won't we ever learn?
OK, call me an elitist if you must, but I think state lawmakers embracing the English-only initiative ought to at least be able to speak proper English.
After all, we already have enough laws the Legislature ignores. The April 1 deadline for funding education? Not once have lawmakers met that requirement. What about the law that state employees who fail to file and pay their taxes can be fired? The last time I checked, Oklahoma legislators draw a state paycheck. Yet, none of the recently identified scofflaws have been canned -- though voters get the chance to play The Donald ["You're Fired!"] in November.
The King's English, as my grandmother used to call it, is mangled early and often in the Legislature.
Many lawmakers have been heard to ask: "Is there a physical impact on this bill?" Not unless someone throws a copy at your head. There may well be a fiscal impact, however.
The presiding officers frequently call upon members to speak by declaring, "You are reck-uh-nized." Alas, there is no recognition the word is being mispronounced.
A silly complaint? About as silly as amending the Oklahoma Constitution to memorialize English as the official language.
English already is the official language. I've been in most of Oklahoma's 77 counties during my lifetime and I don't recall ever seeing bilingual or multilingual government signs, documents or records like I saw on my visit to Quebec.
[Yes, I'm aware of efforts to help Spanish speakers secure driver's licenses ... but perhaps many of them are working hard to develop their English skills. Why would we make it more difficult for them to drive to school and work in the meantime? Will we soon be giving tests to non-English speaking tourists before we allow them to rent cars in the U.S. and drive on our roads?]
The English-only proposition isn't about helping -- or even forcing -- newcomers to participate fully in American society. It's about making a small, but rabid group of nativists feel superior.
They don't get it that strength can be found in this wonderful tapestry of the world's peoples, coalescing to create a magnificent land of opportunity, welcoming those who hunger for a chance to be all their creator made them to be.
The xenophobes offer a glass-is-half-empty view of the American dream. They trace their roots other lands, but are afraid new immigrants will displace them on the socioeconomic pecking order. They want to slam the door shut.
It's an age-old fear, playing itself out again.
Won't we ever learn?
Thursday, April 10, 2008
House 'Borders On A Dictatorship"
POSTED BY ARNOLD HAMILTON
So much for Speaker Chris Benge's more open, collegial House.
The wingnut wing of the Republican caucus is firmly in control once again, stifling debate with impunity and force-feeding its far-out legislative agenda with parliamentary trickery.
The kinder, gentler House that Benge promised collapsed in a Democratic walkout today, all 44 minority-party members showing their disgust with Republican heavy-handedness that House Minority Leader Danny Morgan said "borders on a dictatorship."
Somewhere, former GOP Speakers Todd Hiett and Lance Cargill must be smiling.
The walkout came the morning after two contentious committee meetings. Without allowing discussion, Republicans in the House Judiciary and Public Safety Committee substituted a 133-page "tort reform" package for a four-page rural hospital bill and rejected a measure in the House Economic Development and Financial Services Commitee that would have required insurance companies to cover costs related to autism.
It also came one week after Rep. Guy Liebmann, R-OKC, chairman of the General Government and Transportation Committee, refused to allow Cherokee Nation Chief Chad Smith to speak in opposition to the wingnuts' English-only initiative.
House Democrats have two beefs, both legitimate.
First, not only is the general public -- at the whim of the committee chair -- being denied the right to speak in "public" committee hearings, but legislators themselves are being silenced, thwarted from asking questions or debating issues. Bottom line: Duly elected representatives are being prevented -- by fiat -- from carrying out their official duties.
Second, House rules are set up so that GOP chairs are now the sole arbiters of whether amendments are germane to specific legislation. House rules are supposed to prohibit rolling separate and discrete subjects into a single piece of legislation. When an amendment is submitted on the House floor, lawmakers can challenge whether it is germane. If the speaker rules it is, a lawmaker -- with the support of 15 others -- can demand the entire House vote on the matter. If an amendment is submitted in committee, however, the chair decides whether it is germane -- a ruling that cannot be appealed in committee or later on the House floor.
In the Judiciary Committee, Chairman Rex Duncan, R-Sand Springs, ruled the tort reform language was germane to the rural hospital bill. Never mind that civil procedure is found in an entirely different section of Oklahoma law. Tort reform -- essentially locking the courthouse door to ordinary Oklahomans who have been wronged -- is a Holy Grail for the reactionary right. Duncan marched in lockstep, basically ruling it was germane because he said so.
Don't be misled into thinking this is just so much inside baseball, a typical parliamentary skirmish between partisans. What is taking place in some House committees meets the definition of fascism.
House Democratic leaders met with Benge to discuss the matter, asking for specific rules changes to ensure democracy is not stifled. Benge promised an answer by Monday.
Don't hold your breath that anything will change. Benge is a captive of the House's reactionary right, the old Hiett-Cargill cabal that is so convinced of the righteousness of their cause that they're willing to steamroll anybody or anything in their path, including children with autism.
The sad thing is, Benge is a nice guy. A conservative, yes. But not mean-spirited. He's always been willing to let opponents be heard. And unlike some of his wingnut colleagues, he doesn't think he's smarter than everybody else or that he's on a religious crusade to remake Oklahoma in what he considers to be God's image.
Benge, though, is on the hot seat. He's trying to hold together a fractured caucus, currently driven by about three-dozen of the loudest, most extreme rightwingers in recent memory.
Most House speakers rule with an iron fist. The committee chairs do what the speaker commands -- or else. Benge meekly demurs to his committee chairs, saying repeatedly they're given "certain discretion" in conducting committee business.
How Benge handles this crisis will determine whether he's a token, caretaker speaker -- or a speaker to remember.
So much for Speaker Chris Benge's more open, collegial House.
The wingnut wing of the Republican caucus is firmly in control once again, stifling debate with impunity and force-feeding its far-out legislative agenda with parliamentary trickery.
The kinder, gentler House that Benge promised collapsed in a Democratic walkout today, all 44 minority-party members showing their disgust with Republican heavy-handedness that House Minority Leader Danny Morgan said "borders on a dictatorship."
Somewhere, former GOP Speakers Todd Hiett and Lance Cargill must be smiling.
The walkout came the morning after two contentious committee meetings. Without allowing discussion, Republicans in the House Judiciary and Public Safety Committee substituted a 133-page "tort reform" package for a four-page rural hospital bill and rejected a measure in the House Economic Development and Financial Services Commitee that would have required insurance companies to cover costs related to autism.
It also came one week after Rep. Guy Liebmann, R-OKC, chairman of the General Government and Transportation Committee, refused to allow Cherokee Nation Chief Chad Smith to speak in opposition to the wingnuts' English-only initiative.
House Democrats have two beefs, both legitimate.
First, not only is the general public -- at the whim of the committee chair -- being denied the right to speak in "public" committee hearings, but legislators themselves are being silenced, thwarted from asking questions or debating issues. Bottom line: Duly elected representatives are being prevented -- by fiat -- from carrying out their official duties.
Second, House rules are set up so that GOP chairs are now the sole arbiters of whether amendments are germane to specific legislation. House rules are supposed to prohibit rolling separate and discrete subjects into a single piece of legislation. When an amendment is submitted on the House floor, lawmakers can challenge whether it is germane. If the speaker rules it is, a lawmaker -- with the support of 15 others -- can demand the entire House vote on the matter. If an amendment is submitted in committee, however, the chair decides whether it is germane -- a ruling that cannot be appealed in committee or later on the House floor.
In the Judiciary Committee, Chairman Rex Duncan, R-Sand Springs, ruled the tort reform language was germane to the rural hospital bill. Never mind that civil procedure is found in an entirely different section of Oklahoma law. Tort reform -- essentially locking the courthouse door to ordinary Oklahomans who have been wronged -- is a Holy Grail for the reactionary right. Duncan marched in lockstep, basically ruling it was germane because he said so.
Don't be misled into thinking this is just so much inside baseball, a typical parliamentary skirmish between partisans. What is taking place in some House committees meets the definition of fascism.
House Democratic leaders met with Benge to discuss the matter, asking for specific rules changes to ensure democracy is not stifled. Benge promised an answer by Monday.
Don't hold your breath that anything will change. Benge is a captive of the House's reactionary right, the old Hiett-Cargill cabal that is so convinced of the righteousness of their cause that they're willing to steamroll anybody or anything in their path, including children with autism.
The sad thing is, Benge is a nice guy. A conservative, yes. But not mean-spirited. He's always been willing to let opponents be heard. And unlike some of his wingnut colleagues, he doesn't think he's smarter than everybody else or that he's on a religious crusade to remake Oklahoma in what he considers to be God's image.
Benge, though, is on the hot seat. He's trying to hold together a fractured caucus, currently driven by about three-dozen of the loudest, most extreme rightwingers in recent memory.
Most House speakers rule with an iron fist. The committee chairs do what the speaker commands -- or else. Benge meekly demurs to his committee chairs, saying repeatedly they're given "certain discretion" in conducting committee business.
How Benge handles this crisis will determine whether he's a token, caretaker speaker -- or a speaker to remember.
Monday, March 24, 2008
Religious Bigotry At Its Worst
BY JAMES L. STOVALL
State Rep. Sally Kern recently received some unwanted attention for herself when a recording of an anti-gay speech she gave was posted on YouTube.
Among a wide range of ridiculous statements she made, she stated that homosexuality is a greater threat to our nation than terrorism. She also stated that our nation will never survive if we continue to display tolerance toward gay people.
While I respect Rep. Kern’s right to express her opinion, I want to disagree with her in the strongest possible terms.
I also want to call to her attention that words do hurt people. Words spoken in a public setting by an elected representative especially have very real consequences. Words often contribute to a spirit of intolerance that can strengthen institutionalized discrimination and even lead to acts of violence.
MUTUAL RESPECT EQUALS STRENGTH
When we, as a community, learn to respect one another and live with our differences, we become stronger. Tolerance and a spirit of inclusiveness do not threaten our nation one bit.
The fact that gay people are coming out in growing numbers and being honest about their sexual orientation is a very positive development.
The fact that gay people are participating in the political process and asking for the basic human rights [like marriage] that others enjoy is an important step toward freedom and equality in our country.
In her speech, Sally Kern compares gay people to terrorists. We know what the U.S. has done to respond to the threat presented by terrorism. We have gone to war. We have killed suspected terrorists at every opportunity. We have tortured suspects and locked them up for years without benefit of a trial or any legal process or representation.
So what strategies does Rep. Kern suggest about an even greater threat?
WHAT EXACTLY IS THE THREAT?
She describes a small town in Arkansas where gay people have been elected to the city council. You may now gasp in horror. What she doesn’t explain is exactly what difference it has made [other than bringing in tourists]. Have they thrown out the Constitution? Have they organized forced indoctrination sessions among the citizens? What is the threat that she sees?
She says that gay people have violated God’s word. Once again she is wrong. She uses religion to stir up fears and hatred.
Some of my tolerant friends are of the opinion that all religions are good in their own way. Sure everyone’s beliefs are different but does it all really matter in the end. As they say: “Whatever floats your boat.” Various forms of religion seems to work for different people so who am I to judge?
Given the fact that many people have gone to war over trivial differences in dogma, such a view has some credence.
KERN’S COMMENTS HARDLY INNOCENT
I want to suggest that, like Rep Kern’s comments, religion is not is not nearly as innocent as some would suggest.
The world will not come to an end as a result of her comments but if many others express a similar opinion and go unchallenged then the groundwork is laid for ignorant public policy.
Her comments are an example of bad religion. Bad religion is a system of belief that pulls us farther apart instead of puling us together. Bad religion pits “us” against “them.” It often suggests that those who are different from us are bad and those like us are good.
Religion can draw us into an experience of the sacred depths of life or it can lead to a kind of narrow-minded bigotry.
Religion can lead us to a sense of gratitude and wonder for life as it really is or it can make us intolerant of those we don’t understand.
Religion can serve to facilitate an escape from our world [that many believe to be sacred and created by God] or it can lead us to accept others as they are.
Religion may call us to fully embrace and live our own authentic self or it can lead us away from reality.
– The author is ordained in the United Church of Christ and is an Associate Minister at Church of the Open Arms in Oklahoma City
State Rep. Sally Kern recently received some unwanted attention for herself when a recording of an anti-gay speech she gave was posted on YouTube.
Among a wide range of ridiculous statements she made, she stated that homosexuality is a greater threat to our nation than terrorism. She also stated that our nation will never survive if we continue to display tolerance toward gay people.
While I respect Rep. Kern’s right to express her opinion, I want to disagree with her in the strongest possible terms.
I also want to call to her attention that words do hurt people. Words spoken in a public setting by an elected representative especially have very real consequences. Words often contribute to a spirit of intolerance that can strengthen institutionalized discrimination and even lead to acts of violence.
MUTUAL RESPECT EQUALS STRENGTH
When we, as a community, learn to respect one another and live with our differences, we become stronger. Tolerance and a spirit of inclusiveness do not threaten our nation one bit.
The fact that gay people are coming out in growing numbers and being honest about their sexual orientation is a very positive development.
The fact that gay people are participating in the political process and asking for the basic human rights [like marriage] that others enjoy is an important step toward freedom and equality in our country.
In her speech, Sally Kern compares gay people to terrorists. We know what the U.S. has done to respond to the threat presented by terrorism. We have gone to war. We have killed suspected terrorists at every opportunity. We have tortured suspects and locked them up for years without benefit of a trial or any legal process or representation.
So what strategies does Rep. Kern suggest about an even greater threat?
WHAT EXACTLY IS THE THREAT?
She describes a small town in Arkansas where gay people have been elected to the city council. You may now gasp in horror. What she doesn’t explain is exactly what difference it has made [other than bringing in tourists]. Have they thrown out the Constitution? Have they organized forced indoctrination sessions among the citizens? What is the threat that she sees?
She says that gay people have violated God’s word. Once again she is wrong. She uses religion to stir up fears and hatred.
Some of my tolerant friends are of the opinion that all religions are good in their own way. Sure everyone’s beliefs are different but does it all really matter in the end. As they say: “Whatever floats your boat.” Various forms of religion seems to work for different people so who am I to judge?
Given the fact that many people have gone to war over trivial differences in dogma, such a view has some credence.
KERN’S COMMENTS HARDLY INNOCENT
I want to suggest that, like Rep Kern’s comments, religion is not is not nearly as innocent as some would suggest.
The world will not come to an end as a result of her comments but if many others express a similar opinion and go unchallenged then the groundwork is laid for ignorant public policy.
Her comments are an example of bad religion. Bad religion is a system of belief that pulls us farther apart instead of puling us together. Bad religion pits “us” against “them.” It often suggests that those who are different from us are bad and those like us are good.
Religion can draw us into an experience of the sacred depths of life or it can lead to a kind of narrow-minded bigotry.
Religion can lead us to a sense of gratitude and wonder for life as it really is or it can make us intolerant of those we don’t understand.
Religion can serve to facilitate an escape from our world [that many believe to be sacred and created by God] or it can lead us to accept others as they are.
Religion may call us to fully embrace and live our own authentic self or it can lead us away from reality.
– The author is ordained in the United Church of Christ and is an Associate Minister at Church of the Open Arms in Oklahoma City
Sunday, February 24, 2008
Feasting At The Public Trough
BY JOHN PARKER
As the vote approaches on whether taxpayers should heartily approve a subsidy for some of Oklahoma’s wealthiest citizens, I hope voters will read Free Lunch: How the Wealthiest Americans Enrich Themselves at Government Expense [and Stick You with the Bill].
The new book by Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist David Cay Johnston outlines how supposedly free-market enterprises, such as Bass Pro and sports teams, routinely seek taxpayers’ money to enrich themselves at the expense of their nonsubsidized competitors and the common good.
The highly researched book exposes how America’s wealthy elite is phenomenally successful in getting voters, and our elected representatives, to use our tax money to make them richer.
Have no illusions: On March 4, you’ll be asked to voluntarily give up a portion of your money to support this policy.
With a penny tax that will raise an estimated $121 million, here’s what some of Oklahoma City’s richest “success” stories are proposing: Hand over one-cent for every dollar you spend for 15 months, or Oklahoma City will not get an NBA team.
Just who is trying to sell you this?
Forbes magazine pegs part team-owner Aubrey McClendon’s oil fortune at $1.5 billion. By himself, not to mention the other tycoon team owners, McClendon could devote a paltry 10% of that wealth [$150 million] to renovate Ford Center and easily arrange sweetheart profits rubber-stamped by his fellow owners and an all-too-accomodating City Hall.
Instead, Oklahoma’s “best and brightest” are taking the low and lazy road.
Many of America’s wealthy elite, as Johnston points out, can’t resist “corporate socialism” by using their money to divert the people’s taxing power for their personal gain.
The free and economically self-destructive ride they take is immoral; it doesn’t follow Adam Smith’s prescriptions for thriving capitalism; but it sure is profitable for the wealthy few who covet greed over using our taxes to help the less fortunate – the poor, ill, elderly and children who need our help.
The Sonics owners are counting on Oklahomans to be gullible this March. They do not want you to know about propaganda-weary and victimized American cities that were led down the rosy path to rip-offs of their tax money.
They don’t want you to know about the $150 million Nationwide Arena, which opened in 2000 in Columbus, Ohio – funded completely by private money [and there are more].
After voters rejected welfare for the rich in 1997, two profitable private companies stepped in – after the bluff was blown – and funded a lucrative arena to their profit.
If citizens agree to tax themselves for the rich, the Sonics owners will be at least $121 million richer because they got you to pay for overhead costs that all the other nonsubsidized businesses in Oklahoma pay for by themselves.
So, think: As a voter, you’ll end up March 4 with a blank ballot in that private space at the precinct. No one will be looking at how you vote.
You know an NBA team would be really cool for Oklahoma City. You also know people vastly richer than you want to put that team here, and they can make it happen with their own money. As owner McClendon said, in a remark that earned him a $250,000 NBA fine, their plan was to bring the team to OKC all along.
Most of all, you know those rich people aren’t offering anything near a penny of their own dollars – unless it benefits their bank account – to make your life, or that of your children, any better with this tax. They’re saying $121 million is better spent on NBA salaries and their profits than your neighborhood school.
Then think about that people you’re giving your money to: Would a quarter-of-a-million-dollar fine be a big deal to you?
If not, why are you helping people who think it’s not?
– The author is a former journalist for the Oklahoma Gazette and the Oklahoman. He and his wife live in unincorporated Fairwood, WA, near Seattle.
As the vote approaches on whether taxpayers should heartily approve a subsidy for some of Oklahoma’s wealthiest citizens, I hope voters will read Free Lunch: How the Wealthiest Americans Enrich Themselves at Government Expense [and Stick You with the Bill].
The new book by Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist David Cay Johnston outlines how supposedly free-market enterprises, such as Bass Pro and sports teams, routinely seek taxpayers’ money to enrich themselves at the expense of their nonsubsidized competitors and the common good.
The highly researched book exposes how America’s wealthy elite is phenomenally successful in getting voters, and our elected representatives, to use our tax money to make them richer.
Have no illusions: On March 4, you’ll be asked to voluntarily give up a portion of your money to support this policy.
With a penny tax that will raise an estimated $121 million, here’s what some of Oklahoma City’s richest “success” stories are proposing: Hand over one-cent for every dollar you spend for 15 months, or Oklahoma City will not get an NBA team.
Just who is trying to sell you this?
Forbes magazine pegs part team-owner Aubrey McClendon’s oil fortune at $1.5 billion. By himself, not to mention the other tycoon team owners, McClendon could devote a paltry 10% of that wealth [$150 million] to renovate Ford Center and easily arrange sweetheart profits rubber-stamped by his fellow owners and an all-too-accomodating City Hall.
Instead, Oklahoma’s “best and brightest” are taking the low and lazy road.
Many of America’s wealthy elite, as Johnston points out, can’t resist “corporate socialism” by using their money to divert the people’s taxing power for their personal gain.
The free and economically self-destructive ride they take is immoral; it doesn’t follow Adam Smith’s prescriptions for thriving capitalism; but it sure is profitable for the wealthy few who covet greed over using our taxes to help the less fortunate – the poor, ill, elderly and children who need our help.
The Sonics owners are counting on Oklahomans to be gullible this March. They do not want you to know about propaganda-weary and victimized American cities that were led down the rosy path to rip-offs of their tax money.
They don’t want you to know about the $150 million Nationwide Arena, which opened in 2000 in Columbus, Ohio – funded completely by private money [and there are more].
After voters rejected welfare for the rich in 1997, two profitable private companies stepped in – after the bluff was blown – and funded a lucrative arena to their profit.
If citizens agree to tax themselves for the rich, the Sonics owners will be at least $121 million richer because they got you to pay for overhead costs that all the other nonsubsidized businesses in Oklahoma pay for by themselves.
So, think: As a voter, you’ll end up March 4 with a blank ballot in that private space at the precinct. No one will be looking at how you vote.
You know an NBA team would be really cool for Oklahoma City. You also know people vastly richer than you want to put that team here, and they can make it happen with their own money. As owner McClendon said, in a remark that earned him a $250,000 NBA fine, their plan was to bring the team to OKC all along.
Most of all, you know those rich people aren’t offering anything near a penny of their own dollars – unless it benefits their bank account – to make your life, or that of your children, any better with this tax. They’re saying $121 million is better spent on NBA salaries and their profits than your neighborhood school.
Then think about that people you’re giving your money to: Would a quarter-of-a-million-dollar fine be a big deal to you?
If not, why are you helping people who think it’s not?
– The author is a former journalist for the Oklahoma Gazette and the Oklahoman. He and his wife live in unincorporated Fairwood, WA, near Seattle.
Wednesday, January 9, 2008
Third World
POSTED BY ARNOLD HAMILTON
Oklahoma's bridges are rated the nation's worst. Teacher salaries are languishing near the 50-state bottom. Smaller class sizes are but a distant memory. The state's correctional facilities are judged in a new performance audit to be the most decrepit in America...
Where to begin tackling Oklahoma's problems?
Republican legislative leaders have an idea: cut taxes even more.
The state will have but $32 million in extra money to spend this legislative session -- out of a $7 billion-plus budget. Corrections alone needs at least $30 million.
Yet House Speaker Lance Cargill, R-Harrah, told a Tulsa audience Tuesday that "it's proper to keep tax cuts on the table."
Senate Republicans joined the chorus Wednesday when unveiling their 2008 legislative agenda.
Isn't it time for some new material?
Many of today's GOP lawmakers are unabashed government haters. They are tickled pink that $700 million in tax cuts in recent years already is shrinking the state's financial bottom line.
They are convinced government is a nest of thieves and profligate spenders. Their belief is so strong they hired an outside firm to conduct an independent "performance audit" of the state's troubled prison system. They just knew millions of dollars were being wasted.
They are still wiping the egg off their faces from the results: MGT of America Inc. found the prison system is mostly lean, well-managed ... and grossly underfunded.
Cargill argues tax cuts remain an appropriate topic because there is $300 million or so in new revenue this year. It's not clear where he came up with that figure, but whatever the amount, much already is committed to spending on roads/bridges and on the state's successful college scholarship program.
Senate Co-President Pro Tem Glenn Coffee said he hopes eventually to get Oklahoma's income tax rate [currently at 5.5%] down to 3% or 3.5%.
To their credit, Coffee and Senate Republicans at least say they want to take a hard look at Oklahoma's laundry list of special interest tax breaks and tax incentives as a way to offset the lost income tax revenue.
We've long opposed corporate welfare. Example: We don't think it's right the state's media are tax exempt while mothers pay sales tax on milk for their babies.
Oklahoma's needs are great. Talk of more tax cuts -- especially with the nation's economy slowing -- is nothing but political pandering. It's time to invest in the state and its future, not accelerate a slide into Third World status.
A year ago, Republican lawmakers prescribed a new personal finance course for Oklahoma high school students. Too many don't know the first thing about balancing a checkbook or managing credit cards.
Physician, heal thyself.
Oklahoma's bridges are rated the nation's worst. Teacher salaries are languishing near the 50-state bottom. Smaller class sizes are but a distant memory. The state's correctional facilities are judged in a new performance audit to be the most decrepit in America...
Where to begin tackling Oklahoma's problems?
Republican legislative leaders have an idea: cut taxes even more.
The state will have but $32 million in extra money to spend this legislative session -- out of a $7 billion-plus budget. Corrections alone needs at least $30 million.
Yet House Speaker Lance Cargill, R-Harrah, told a Tulsa audience Tuesday that "it's proper to keep tax cuts on the table."
Senate Republicans joined the chorus Wednesday when unveiling their 2008 legislative agenda.
Isn't it time for some new material?
Many of today's GOP lawmakers are unabashed government haters. They are tickled pink that $700 million in tax cuts in recent years already is shrinking the state's financial bottom line.
They are convinced government is a nest of thieves and profligate spenders. Their belief is so strong they hired an outside firm to conduct an independent "performance audit" of the state's troubled prison system. They just knew millions of dollars were being wasted.
They are still wiping the egg off their faces from the results: MGT of America Inc. found the prison system is mostly lean, well-managed ... and grossly underfunded.
Cargill argues tax cuts remain an appropriate topic because there is $300 million or so in new revenue this year. It's not clear where he came up with that figure, but whatever the amount, much already is committed to spending on roads/bridges and on the state's successful college scholarship program.
Senate Co-President Pro Tem Glenn Coffee said he hopes eventually to get Oklahoma's income tax rate [currently at 5.5%] down to 3% or 3.5%.
To their credit, Coffee and Senate Republicans at least say they want to take a hard look at Oklahoma's laundry list of special interest tax breaks and tax incentives as a way to offset the lost income tax revenue.
We've long opposed corporate welfare. Example: We don't think it's right the state's media are tax exempt while mothers pay sales tax on milk for their babies.
Oklahoma's needs are great. Talk of more tax cuts -- especially with the nation's economy slowing -- is nothing but political pandering. It's time to invest in the state and its future, not accelerate a slide into Third World status.
A year ago, Republican lawmakers prescribed a new personal finance course for Oklahoma high school students. Too many don't know the first thing about balancing a checkbook or managing credit cards.
Physician, heal thyself.
Tuesday, January 8, 2008
The Enemy?
POSTED BY FROSTY TROY
The Center for Global Development recently released data showing the United States is the world's biggest carbon dioxide emitter, releasing 2.8 billion tons of carbon dioxide each year.
Many governors are recognizing the seriousness of the U.S. emissions problem and are frustrated with the slow progress of legislation in Washington on energy and global warming.
Several governors have created regional agreements to cap greenhouse gases and are engaged in a concerted lobbying effort to prod Congress to act.
Midwestern states have jointly agreed to reduce carbon emissions, following a meeting of 31 states who decided to measure and jointly track greenhouse gas emissions.
The globe is polluted while the politicians in Washington piddle.
The Center for Global Development recently released data showing the United States is the world's biggest carbon dioxide emitter, releasing 2.8 billion tons of carbon dioxide each year.
Many governors are recognizing the seriousness of the U.S. emissions problem and are frustrated with the slow progress of legislation in Washington on energy and global warming.
Several governors have created regional agreements to cap greenhouse gases and are engaged in a concerted lobbying effort to prod Congress to act.
Midwestern states have jointly agreed to reduce carbon emissions, following a meeting of 31 states who decided to measure and jointly track greenhouse gas emissions.
The globe is polluted while the politicians in Washington piddle.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)