Tulsa Was A Massive Campaign Failure For Trump

The picture of Trump returning from Tulsa says it all. He was disappointed at seeing the small size of the crowd, enraged at his aides on the way back to Washington, and defeated and dejected after returning. Tulsa was supposed to be a massive victory, but it turned into a huge bust -- with only about 6200 supporters in the 19,000 seat stadium. That's humiliating for a narcissist like Trump.

Here's just part of how Steve Peoples and Jonathan Lemire described it at apnews.com:

President Donald Trump’s return to the campaign trail was designed to show strength and enthusiasm heading into the critical final months before an election that will decide whether he remains in the White House.

Instead, his weekend rally in Oklahoma highlighted growing vulnerabilities and crystallized a divisive reelection message that largely ignores broad swaths of voters — independents, suburban women and people of color — who could play a crucial role in choosing Trump or Democratic challenger Joe Biden.

The lower-than-expected turnout at the comeback rally, in particular, left Trump fuming. . . .

The campaign had been betting big on Tulsa.

Trump’s political team spent days proclaiming that more than 1 million people had requested tickets. They also ignored health warnings from the White House coronavirus task force and Oklahoma officials, eager to host an event that would help him move past the civil rights protests and the coronavirus itself.

His first rally in 110 days was meant to be a defiant display of political force to help energize Trump’s spirits, try out some attacks on Biden and serve as a powerful symbol of American’s reopening.

Instead, the city fire marshal’s office reported a crowd of just less than 6,200 in the 19,000-seat BOK Center, and at least six staff members who helped set up the event tested positive for the coronavirus. The vast majority of the attendees, including Trump, did not wear face masks as recommended by the Trump administration’s health experts.

After the rally, the president berated aides over the turnout. He fumed that he had been led to believe he would see huge crowds in deep-red Oklahoma, according to two White House and campaign officials who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly about private conversations.

There was no sign of an imminent staff shakeup, but members of Trump’s inner circle angrily questioned how campaign manager Brad Parscale and other senior aides could so wildly overpromise and underdeliver, according to the officials.

Publicly, Trump’s team scrambled to blame the crowd size on media coverage and protesters outside the venue, but the small crowds of pre-rally demonstrators were largely peaceful. Tulsa police reported just one arrest Saturday afternoon.

It’s unclear when Trump will hold his next rally.

Trump's Massive Tulsa Rally Was A Massive Failure

Donald Trump needed to get his re-election campaign back on track after recent polls showed his trailing Joe Biden by double-digits. So he planned a huge rally in a very red state -- Oklahoma. He would hold that rally in Tulsa on June 19th. But there was a huge backlash about him holding a rally on Juneteenth -- especially in Tulsa (the scene of one of the bloodiest massacres of Black Americans in this country's history.

He gave in, and moved the rally date to June 20th. And his people advertised the rally big time. And they (and Trump) bragged that a million tickets had been requested to get into the rally being held in a 19,000 seat stadium. They predicted that 100,000 people at a minimum would show up. They built a stage and massive screen outside the stadium, where the overflow crowd could see Trump's speech and enjoy some entertainment.

They were set for a massive showing of support for Trump's re-election.

There was only one problem. That massive number of people didn't show up. There was no overflow crowd, and they didn't even draw enough of a crowd to fill the 19,000 seat stadium. Note the pictures above of inside the stadium (top) and outside (bottom).

Trump had to have been humiliated. His campaign kick-off rally was as big a failure as his recent showing in the polls. His campaign is NOT off to a good start.

First Polls Are Released For Minnesota And Oklahoma

These are the first general election presidential polls for Minnesota and Oklahoma that I am aware of. Neither is a surprise. Minnesota is solidly supporting Hillary Clinton, and Oklahoma is solidly supporting Donald Trump.

The Star-Tribune Poll was done between September 12th and 14th of a random sample of 625 Minnesota voters, and has a margin of error of 4 points.

The Sooner Poll was done between September 13th and 15th of a random sample of 515 Oklahoma voters, and has a margin of error of 4.32 points.

Super Tuesday Chances And Predictions From Nate Silver

(The photo above of Clinton/Sanders is from leftfootforward.org.)

Today is Super Tuesday, and 11 states will go to the polls to choose their preference for the Democratic presidential nominee. America's best poll analyst, Nate Silver of fivethirtyeight.com, has released his chances of winning and predictions of voting percentages for nine of the Super Tuesday states. The other two (Colorado and Minnesota) have caucuses (which depend mostly on turnout, and not the will of most people). Mr. Silver says:

ALABAMA

Chance of winning
Clinton...............99%
Sanders...............1%

Prediction
Clinton...............73.6%
Sanders...............23.5%

ARKANSAS

Chance of winning
Clinton...............98%
Sanders...............2%

Prediction
Clinton...............64.1%
Sanders...............32.5%

GEORGIA

Chance of winning
Clinton...............99%
Sanders...............1%

Prediction
Clinton...............69.9%
Sanders...............26.9%

MASSACHUSETTS

Chance of winning
Clinton...............87%
Sanders...............13%

Prediction
Clinton...............51.7%
Sanders...............45.2%

OKLAHOMA

Chance of winning
Clinton...............17%
Sanders...............83%

Prediction
Clinton...............45.1%
Sanders...............51.5%

TENNESSEE

Chance of winning
Clinton...............99%
Sanders...............1%

Prediction
Clinton...............64.9%
Sanders...............31.8%

TEXAS

Chance of winning
Clinton...............99%
Sanders...............1%

Prediction
Clinton...............65.2%
Sanders...............31.9%

VERMONT

Chance of winning
Clinton...............1%
Sanders...............99%

Prediction
Clinton...............10.8%
Sanders...............86.9%

VIRGINIA

Chance of winning
Clinton...............99%
Sanders...............1%

Prediction
Clinton...............62.5%
Sanders...............34.5%

New Dem Polls For Massachusetts, Alabama, & Oklahoma

Today is Super Tuesday, and as the voters in several states go to the polls, I bring you these latest polls of three of those states -- Massachusetts, Alabama, and Oklahoma.

The University of Massachusetts at Amherst / WBZ Poll was done between February 19th and 25th of a random sample of 400 likely Massachusetts Democratic voters, and has a 6.5 point margin of error.

The Monmouth University Poll was done between February 25th and 28th of a random sample of 300 likely Alabama Democratic voters, and 300 likely Oklahoma Democratic voters. The margin of error for both states is 5.7 points.

Eleven states will have primaries/caucuses today (plus American Samoa and Democrats Abroad). Bernie Sanders best chances are in Vermont (his home state), Oklahoma, Minnesota, Massachusetts, and Colorado. He will undoubtably take Vermont, and I expect him to take one or two of the others. But they will be close -- with Sanders and Clinton pretty much splitting the delegates offered by these states.

But Hillary Clinton is strong in the Southern states (Arkansas, Georgia, Alabama, Tennessee, Texas, and Virginia). She will take a significant majority of the delegates in those states -- and which will help her to extend her lead in overall delegates.

Oklahoma, New York, & Georgia Democrats Favor Clinton

The Oklahoman Poll (Feb 6-9) 382 Oklahoma Democratic voters (5.01 point moe)

Siena College Poll (Jan 31 - Feb 3) 434 New York Democratic voters (5.6 point moe)

WSB-TV / Landmark Poll (Feb 4) 500 Georgia Democratic voters (4.4 point moe)

Oklahoma and Georgia will vote on March 1st (Super Tuesday). New York will vote on April 19th.

All three states show Hillary Clinton with a substantial lead right now -- 16 points in Oklahoma, 21 points in New York, and 41 points in Georgia.

"Fracking" Is The Likely Cause Of Texas Earthquakes

(This image is from napavalley.edu.)

Fracking is the pumping of huge amounts of water, sand, and dangerous chemicals into the ground to cause or increase fractures in the rock, which releases natural gas. There is a heated debate going on about the safety of this fracking. Gas companies claim it is a safe procedure. Many others disagree, claiming it poisons the earth around it and the water many communities depend on.

Now there are claims that this fracking is having another negative effect. That it is causing earthquakes in Texas (and Oklahoma) -- areas that have been earthquake-free for eons, but having been experiencing them since 2008 (when fracking became common in the area).

Is this true? Very likely. Now there is some scientific evidence that those earthquakes, some as large as a magnitude 4, are being caused by fracking. Here is part of an excellent article on this by Anna Kuchment in the Dallas Morning News:

Scientists presented new evidence this week suggesting that all five North Texas earthquake sequences, including those in Dallas, have been triggered by humans.   

Until now, researchers have not commented on the cause of the Dallas-Irving quakes or the 4-magnitude quake that struck Venus, 30 miles south of Dallas, in May.

While scientists believe that high-volume injection wells may have triggered the quakes in Venus, they have not yet worked out a specific mechanism behind the Dallas and Irving quakes.

“We don’t think they’re natural,” SMU seismologist Heather DeShon told The Dallas Morning News.  “But we don’t understand the subsurface physics surrounding the Irving earthquake sequence, so we’re still considering all causes.”

DeShon’s comments came during the annual American Geophysical Union meeting in San Francisco, where she and her colleagues presented their latest research on North Texas ground shaking. The research has not yet been independently vetted and published.

“Any discussion of causation for the Dallas-area quakes is premature, and more speculative than scientific,” said Steve Everley, a senior advisor for Energy In Depth, a program of the Independent Petroleum Association of America. “But the SMU team has helped advance our understanding of the conditions that can ultimately lead to induced seismicity, so we’re eager to see what they will publish about the seismic events near Dallas.”

Evidence that human activity is behind the Dallas quakes includes a new analysis showing that the faults beneath Dallas and Fort Worth had been dormant for hundreds of millions of years until 2008, the year felt earthquakes first began rumbling through the area. . . .

Earlier this week, SMU seismologist Beatrice Magnani compared North Texas faults with those known to have produced earthquakes over geologic time. Active faults have visible ruptures, while the small faults that the SMU team has mapped in Azle and Venus have barely perceptible ones.

Unlike historically active faults, those in North Texas also do not extend into the uppermost layers of sediment.  Faults that have been active over hundreds of millions of years typically disturb the uppermost layers of the Earth’s crust, said Magnani.

“Those faults are dead, and they have just been rejuvenated. That is the most reasonable conclusion,” said Magnani, referring to the faults beneath North Texas. . . .

DeShon and her colleagues pointed to the absence of earthquakes in the Dallas-Fort Worth area prior to 2008 as additional evidence that recent tremors are caused by industrial activity. Since 2008, North Texas has had 200 earthquakes large enough to be included in the U.S. Geological Survey’s catalog. Thirty-one quakes have been larger than 3-magnitude.

Magnani said the state’s earthquake rate is on track to be a factor of 20 greater than historic levels. That pales in comparison to Oklahoma, which has seen a 600-fold increase in quakes. Oklahoma’s geological survey said in April that its quakes are triggered by the injection of wastewater from oil and gas operations into deep wells. Studies have found that pressure from the injections can, in rare cases, disturb deep faults. . . .

Court Says Oklahoma's 10 Commandments Is Illegal

In 2012, a monument containing the 10 Commandments (pictured) was placed on the Oklahoma Capitol grounds. It had been approved by the legislature in 2009, and paid for with private money.

The legislature thought they could get away with placing the monument on government property by declaring it to be a historical monument instead of a religious one -- claiming that Western law had it roots in the 10 Commandments. They figured that would get by U.S. Supreme Court restrictions on religious monuments.

It was a laughable assertion, since the 10 Commandments is obviously a religious symbol -- and calling it something else doesn't change that. But it doesn't matter, because the case won't get to the U.S. Supreme Court. The lawmakers overlooked a provision in their own state constitution.

On June 30th, the Oklahoma Supreme Court ruled 7 to 2 that the monument violated Article 2, Section 5 of the Oklahoma Constitution. That provision reads:

“No public money or property shall ever be appropriated, applied, donated, or used, directly or indirectly, for the use, benefit, or support of any sect, church, denomination, or system of religion, or for the use, benefit, or support of any priest, preacher, minister, or other religious teacher or dignitary, or sectarian institution as such.”

The Attorney General and several lawmakers are furious over the court's decision, and the Attorney General has filed for a rehearing (which will delay the removal, but is unlikely to change the decision). Now, some are calling for the removal of the provision from the state constitution. But even if they do that, it is unlikely that the United States Supreme Court will allow the monument, which is obviously religious, to remain.

They should be thankful for the decision. The Satanic Temple was planning to put up a monument of its own on the capitol grounds -- and that could not have been prevented as long as the christian monument remained there. Now that can be prevented because ALL religious monuments are prohibited.

Another Incident Showing Racism Is Still With Us

Recently, a video of a fraternity at the University of Oklahoma went viral -- a video showing the students singing/chanting an extremely racist song. It shows that currently, the racists in this country feel they don't have to hide their sick feelings, but can be open and blatant about them.

Fortunately, the University of Oklahoma took swift action to slap down this horrible behavior. Here is the statement released by the university's president, David Boren:

There isn't much to add. President Boren said what needed to be said, and the University of Oklahoma did what needed to be done. They are to be commended.

Judge Tosses Out Michigan's Ban On Same-Sex Marriage

(This image of Michigan draped in the LGBT Rainbow Flag is from Wikipedia Commons, where it was posted by Fry1989.)

Late Friday U.S. District Judge Bernard Friedman issued a ruling that ended Michigan's ban on same-sex marriages (and adoptions). Michigan's ban was an amendment to the state constitution (called the Michigan Marriage Act) which had been passed by that state's voters in 2004. The judge wrote in his 31-page decision:

“Many Michigan residents have religious convictions whose principles govern the conduct of their daily lives and inform their own viewpoints about marriage. Nonetheless, these views cannot strip other citizens of the guarantees of equal protection under the law.”

This makes Judge Friedman the fifth federal judge in the last four months to rule that a state's ban on same-sex marriage violates the United States Constitution. The first was Utah back in December. Then a judge tossed out Oklahoma's ban in January. In February, federal judges in Virginia and in Texas ruled the bans in those states unconstitutional.

The Michigan Attorney General immediately appealed the decision to the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals. That means there are now three cases that have been appealed and are pending in three different appeals courts. The Utah case is pending in the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals, and the Texas case is pending in the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals.

It will be interesting to see what happens in these three different courts. Will they all agree, or will they make different decisions? If they disagree, then the United States Supreme Court will probably be forced to make the decision it has been avoiding for several years now -- whether these state bans on same-sex marriages violate the United States Constitution by denying same-sex couples equal rights. Will the Supreme Court try to turn back the clock (as a previous court did in the terrible Dred Scott decision), or will they finally admit that all Americans deserve equal rights under the law?

I may be an optimist, but I believe same-sex marriage bans will soon be eliminated in the United States as a whole -- the same way mixed-race marriages were a few decades ago. It is just time for it to happen.

Same-Sex Marriage Ban In Texas Ruled Unconstitutional

Back in 2005, the voters in Texas approved an amendment to the state's constitution that defined marriage as only being between a man and a woman. This amendment, which passed by a huge majority, had the effect of banning marriage between same-sex couples -- and the religious right was sure this amendment would settle the question of same-sex marriage in Texas for good. They were wrong.

While the voters do have the right to alter marriage rules through a constitutional amendment, any changes they approve must apply equally to all citizens. Neither voters nor state officials have the right to deny rights to any group -- rights that are given to other groups. That's because the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution (which trumps all state constitutions) says:

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

And that's just what a judge said on Wednesday in San Antonio. U.S. District Judge Orlando Garcia ruled that the Texas constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage "violates plaintiffs' equal protection and due process rights under the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution". The judge also wrote these powerful words:

"Equal treatment of all individuals under the law is not merely an aspiration — it is a constitutional mandate. Consequently, equal protection is at the heart of our legal system and is essential for the existence of a free society."

This makes Texas the third state to have its same-sex marriage ban overturned recently by a federal judge. The other states are Utah and Oklahoma. All three states have had those decisions stayed until they can be reviewed by a federal appeals court. Utah has appealed to the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals, and Oklahoma is waiting to see the outcome of that appeal (since they are also covered by that appeals court). If the Texas decision is appealed (and it undoubtably will be), it will go to the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals.

So far, the United States Supreme Court has been able to avoid making a decision on the constitutionality of same-sex marriages. But if the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals and the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals don't make the same decisions, then the U.S. Supreme Court will finally be forced to make a decision for the country as a whole. And that is a distinct possibility. Preliminary indications are that the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals might uphold the decision of the federal judge in Utah (that declared Utah's ban on same-sex marriage to be unconstitutional), but the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals is a more conservative court and could overturn the Texas jude's decision.

Regardless of what these two appeals courts decide, it is time for the United States Supreme Court to stop avoiding this issue. The Fourteenth Amendment is very clear, and these same-sex marriage bans clearly violate that amendment. Opponents are going to try to claim these decisions violate their religious rights, but that is a ridiculous assertion. Allowing same-sex couples to marry does nothing to impinge on the religious rights of any person or church, and they can continue to practice their religious bigotry to their hearts content -- they will just no longer be able to force their own bigotry on others.

The majority of Americans support the equal right of the LGBT community to marry the person they love, and it is time for this issue to be put to rest once and for all.

Federal Judge Overturns Virginia Ban On Same-Sex Marriage

The states who want to ban same-sex marriage are starting to fall fast. Last month a federal judge in Utah ruled that such a ban violates the equal protection guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Only a couple of weeks later a federal judge in Oklahoma made that same ruling. Now a judge in Virginia has followed suit.

On Thursday, Judge Arenda Wright Allen ruled in a 41-page ruling that Virginia's ban on same-sex marriages was unconstitutional saying:

"Tradition is revered in the Commonwealth, and often rightly so. However, tradition alone cannot justify denying same-sex couples the right to marry any more than it could justify Virginia's ban on interracial marriage."

And other states may soon follow. A suit is being heard in federal court in San Antonio right now seeking to overturn the same-sex marriage ban in Texas. Many people, including me, believe the San Antonio court is likely to follow the lead of the federal courts in Utah, Oklahoma, and Virginia. These rulings are currently not being enforced, as the courts are waiting to see what happens in the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals (that is hearing Utah's appeal of the ruling in their state).

I may be wrong, but I'm starting to get the feeling that marriage equality will be a reality in all states very soon. And that's a very good thing, since equality denied to any group can easily be extended to all groups -- and equality under the law is one of the most important tenets of a democracy.

Oklahoma Fundamentalist Idiocy

It's no secret that fundamentalist christians hate the idea of LGBT Americans having the same rights as all other Americans -- especially when it comes to marriage. In spite of the fact that a growing majority of Americans believe same-sex couples should be afforded the same right to marry the person they love as opposite-sex couples have, fundamentalists oppose same-sex marriage and want that to be the law.

The problem they have is that this hateful belief is a religious one, and not a constitutional one. In fact, a federal judge in Tulsa has recently ruled that the Oklahoma ban on same-sex marriages violates the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution -- the amendment that guarantees all Americans equal rights under the law.

The decision is currently stayed from being executed because the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals is considering a similar case from Utah, but that hasn't kept Oklahoma fundies from getting all bent out of shape. They simply cannot stand the idea of everyone having the same rights -- and to prevent that from happening in Oklahoma, some fundies have come up with a rather insane idea. They want to ban ALL marriages in that state.

The idea comes from State Rep. Mike Turner (R-Edmond). Rep. Turner (pictured above) has already written a shell of the bill, but is waiting for the appeals court decision before submitting it to the legislature -- but amazingly, there is some support from his fundamentalist brethren.

These idiots have obviously not thought this thing through, because banning all marriages would mean the state could no longer give certain advantages to any married couples -- same-sex or opposite sex (things like tax advantages, inheritance rights, hospital visiting privileges, etc.). Because to grant any of those things the state would have to define exactly what a marriage is (and that would put them back in the same situation they are currently in).

Also, that move would not mean the federal government wouldn't grant their benefits to married couples in Oklahoma, and those benefits would be the same to both same-sex and opposite-sex couples. And all anyone would have to do to be recognized as being married by the federal government is to get married in a state where their marriage is legal. In other words, both same-sex and opposite-sex couples could just go to another state and get legally married.

This whole idea of banning all marriages to prevent same-sex marriages is nothing short of stupid. It not only won't work, but could cause problems for opposite-sex couples in the state. It just exposes the primary fundamentalist value as being "hate" -- a value that is the opposite of the only commandment given by Jesus (who they claim to be following). His only commandment was to "love" (both god and other people).

Personally, I find it amazing that these fundamentalists would be willing to deny the teaching of their savior so they could promote their own hate and discrimination. It makes their religious argument meaningless.

NOTE -- Even making marriage a purely religious function would not work, since there would be some liberal churches in Oklahoma willing to perform marriages for same-sex couples (and denying those churches that right would once again put the state in the position of violating the Constitution).

Same-Sex Marriage Ban In Oklahoma Is Overturned

It looks like another state has fallen in the battle for equal rights -- and this time it is one of the reddest states of all. Yesterday, U.S. District Judge Terence Kern in Tulsa struck down Oklahoma's constitutional ban on same-sex marriages. The judge ruled that the ban violated the U.S. Constitution, which guarantees equal rights to all citizens under the Fourteenth Amendment.

But same-sex couples in Oklahoma cannot immediately start getting married (as more than 1200 couples did in Utah when their ban was overturned). That's because the judge stayed the execution of his ruling until the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals can hear and rule on the Utah case (which is almost identical to the ruling in Oklahoma). Unless the Supreme Court steps in, the appeals court ruling will determine the fate of same-sex marriages in both Utah and Oklahoma.

This does not really surprise me all that much, because attitudes are changing fast in the United States. A recent YouGov Poll (taken between January 4th and 6th of 1,000 randomly chosen adults nationwide, with a margin of error of 3.9 points) showed that 70% of Americans are in favor of either sam-sex marriage or legal civil unions (granting same-sex couples the same rights as opposite-sex couples have through marriage). Only 23% of Americans don't approve of same-sex couples being bonded with a legal ceremony.

Two other findings from that same poll reflect just how much things are changing in this country. About 75% (or three out of four people) now believe same-sex marriages will be legal across the country within 30 years. And 63% now believe homosexuality is a life-style that should be accepted by society.

Oklahoma Legislators Blunder Into A Religious Controversy

 Recently, the Oklahoma legislators accepted a gift and approved placing it on the grounds of the state capitol. It was a monument depicting the 10 Commandments (see picture at left). The smug legislators thought they had put one over on the non-christians living in the state. They had not only put the state government in the position of favoring one religion over all others, but probably reassured their own re-election in a state full of fundamentalist christians.

But they overlooked (or knowingly ignored) one small thing -- the Constitution of the United States. The First Amendment to the Constitution guarantees religious freedom, and forbids government establishment of religion. That has always been understood, even by the United States Supreme Court, to mean no government entity in the United States (local, state, or federal) can do anything that would favor one religion over any other religion (or favor religion in general over non-religion).

And thanks to that amendment, those Oklahoma legislators      have gotten themselves into a real mess. That mess was created because, while those legislators may not understand the Constitution, other people do. And some of those other people believe in a different religion.

Believers at the Satanic Temple have decided that since Oklahoma now allows religious monuments on government property, they want a monument of their own placed there. And this is not just an idle threat. They have already received enough in donations (about $20,000) to build that monument (pictured at left). They correctly reason that since one religion can have a monument on capitol grounds, then other religions may also have one there.

And the satanists aren't the only ones expressing a desire to put a religious monument on capitol grounds. A hindu group wants to put a statue of their "monkey god" on government property, and pastafarians say they want a likeness of the Flying Spaghetti Monster to be displayed there. Undoubtably, other religious (and probably even atheist) groups will follow suit.

These legislators will try to fight the placement of these other monuments, but the issue is pretty clear cut -- they will lose. Then they'll have to make a decision -- either allow the other monuments, or remove the 10 Commandments monument (and go back to having no religious monuments at all on capitol grounds).

I expect they will choose the latter. There is no way they want to be known as the ones that allowed a satanic monument on government property, thus angering all those fundamentalist voters they were trying to please. By removing the christian monument, they can claim they were the victims of "godless liberals" -- and fundamentalists love to claim they are victims. That way they can still be heroic to the fundamentalist voters, as they glory in their victimhood.

Satanists To Build Monument On Oklahoma Capitol Grounds

The picture at the left (by Seam Murphy on the CBS News website) shows the six-foot tall monument depicting the 10 Commandments that was paid for by Republican State Rep. Mike Ritze and his family. It sits on the grounds of the Oklahoma Capitol.

The intention of the right-wing representative was to make it clear that the Oklahoma government supports christianity above all other religions. Ritze, and other right-wing Republicans, don't support the constitutional guarantee of religious freedom. For them "religious freedom" means they should have the freedom to impose their religion on all citizens.

But that is not the accepted legal definition of the constitutional guarantee of religious freedom. According to most scholars, the government cannot favor one religion over another in any way, and cannot deny the right of any citizen to believe in any religion (or no religion at all.

That means, of course, that since the Oklahoma legislature has allowed a christian (or jewish) monument to be erected on capitol grounds, they have opened the door to allowing all religions to erect monuments on those government grounds -- and the Satanists are now going to walk through that open door.

Lucien Greaves, a spokesman for the Satanic Temple, has notified the Capitol Preservation Commission that it plans to erect a monument on the Oklahoma Capitol grounds -- a monument costing up to $20,000, and containing a pentagram (and possibly even involving "an interactive display for children"). Greaves credited Ritze with helping the Satanic Temple to spread its message, saying:

"He's helping a satanic agenda grow more than any of us possibly could. You don't walk around and see too many satanic temples around, but when you open the door to public spaces for us, that's when you're going to see us."

This puts the Oklahoma legislature in a quandary. They must either allow the Satanic Temple to build a monument and place it on capitol grounds (and any other religion that wants to do that), or they must remove the 10 Commandments monument. The Constitution is clear, and there is no middle ground. Oklahoma can't even try to keep the christian monument on the grounds that it has historical value (since it was only erected last year). As Brady Henderson of the Oklahoma ACLU says:

"We would prefer to see Oklahoma's government officials work to faithfully serve our communities and improve the lives of Oklahomans instead of erecting granite monuments to show us all how righteous they are. But if the Ten Commandments, with its overtly Christian message, is allowed to stay at the Capitol, the Satanic Temple's proposed monument cannot be rejected because of its different religious viewpoint."

I can hardly wait to see what decision Oklahoma politicians make. Will they remove their christian monument, or allow monuments from all religions? Perhaps one day we will see a monument honoring the noodlie greatness of the Great Spaghetti Monster.

An Oklahoma Republican Speaks The Truth

As regular readers of this blog will know, I seldom have anything good to say about today's Republican Party. That's because they seem to have abandoned their conservative principles in favor of a mean-spirited ideology -- an ideology that puts right-wing religious fundamentalism above common sense solutions to this country's problems.

But every now and then, a Republican will surprise me by actually seeing and speaking the truth -- and when they do, I feel an obligation to point it out. One of those Republicans is Oklahoma State Rep. Doug Cox. I probably will disagree with Rep. Cox on many issues, but on the issue of contraceptives we are in agreement (an issue he should be familiar with since he is a practicing physician).

Rep. Cox wrote the following in The Oklahoman on May 29th of this year:

All of the new Oklahoma laws aimed at limiting abortion and contraception are great for the Republican family that lives in a gingerbread house with a two-car garage, two planned kids and a dog. In the real world, they are less than perfect.

As a practicing physician (who never has or will perform an abortion), I deal with the real world. In the real world, 15- and 16-year-olds get pregnant (sadly, 12-, 13- and 14-year-olds do also). In the real world, 62 percent of women ages 20 to 24 who give birth are unmarried. And in the world I work and live in, an unplanned pregnancy can throw up a real roadblock on a woman's path to escaping the shackles of poverty.

Yet I cannot convince my Republican colleagues that one of the best ways to eliminate abortions is to ensure access to contraception. A recent attempt by my fellow lawmakers to prevent Medicaid dollars from covering the “morning after” pill is a case in point. Denying access to this important contraceptive is a sure way to increase legal and back-alley abortions. Moreover, such a law would discriminate against low-income women who depend on Medicaid for their health care.

But wait, some lawmakers want to go even further and limit everyone's access to birth control by allowing pharmacists to refuse to fill prescriptions for contraception.

What happened to the Republican Party that I joined? The party where conservative presidential candidate Barry Goldwater felt women should have the right to control their own destiny? The party where President Ronald Reagan said a poor person showing up in the emergency room deserved needed treatment regardless of ability to pay? What happened to the Republican Party that felt government should not overregulate people until (as we say in Oklahoma) “you have walked a mile in their moccasins”?

Dr. Cox is right. The best (and probably the only) way to reduce or eliminate the number of abortions is to make contraceptives easily available to all women. And I believe this should be done at no cost and without any age restrictions (as recommended by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists).

It simply makes no sense to be against both contraceptives and abortion -- since the one is the solution for the other. Those who are against both don't really have the health and well-being of women in mind. They are just trying to shove their own religious view on their fellow Americans -- a view that women should be kept in a second-class status in this country.

I can understand the desire of many to reduce or eliminate abortions -- but the way to do that is not to criminalize abortions. It is to make contraceptives free and easy for all women to access -- and to educate Americans on their proper use, starting in our schools.

I applaud State Rep. Doug Cox for speaking the truth on this issue.

Tulsa's Racist Killers Are Caught

The pictures above are of the racist killers in Tulsa that shot five innocent and unarmed African-Americans in just a few hours -- killing three of them. They are Jake England (19) and Alvin Watts (32). They were found after England tried to burn his pick-up to hide their heinous crime.

I have to offer kudos to both the Tulsa police and the town's community. These killers were caught in an amazingly short period of time for stranger killings (which can be among the hardest crimes to solve). The reason it was solved in such a short period of time is because the Tulsa Police made it known quickly that they would spare no effort in bringing the killers to justice, and the Tulsa community responded quickly with a flood of tips leading police to the culprits.

Tulsa Police Major Walter Evans, who led the task force quickly assembled to catch the killers, said, "In my 23 years of law enforcement, I don't think I've ever seen any crime as heinous as this. But at the same time, I don't think I've seen such an outpouring of support and cooperation from the community." That outpouring of support and cooperation is a good thing, and hopefully it can serve to bring the community closer together to defeat racism (or at the very least lessen its impact in the community).

There are already a few people trying to drum up sympathy for England, saying his father was killed two years ago and his wife committed suicide in front of him six months ago. I'm sorry he's had some hard times, but that in no way justifies his shooting of five unarmed strangers (of any race ). This was nothing more than a hate crime, with the victims being shot simply because they were African-Americans.

There is talk of charging the two men with a hate crime enhancement. I don't have any problem with that, but I wonder if its necessary. If I know Oklahoma, these two guys will spend the rest of their lives in prison -- if they are able to avoid the death penalty. I doubt if a hate crime enhancement will make any difference in the penalty they receive for their dastardly crimes. Hate crime or not, they have obviously given up any right to ever be free again.

Super Tuesday Is A Mixed Bag

The results from Super Tuesday show that a lot of Republican voters still have doubts about Willard Mitt Romney (aka Wall Street Willie). Here are the numbers:

VIRGINIA (99% reporting)
Mitt Romney...............156,765  (59.44%)
Ron Paul...............106,992  (40.56%)
TOTAL VOTES...............263,757

GEORGIA (97% reporting)
Newt Gingrich...............414,896  (47.46%)
Mitt Romney...............224,361  (25.66%)
Rick Santorum...............171,346  (19.60%)
Ron Paul...............56,823  (6.50%)
Others...............6,839  (0.78%)
TOTAL VOTES...............874,265

MASSACHUSETTS (98% reporting)
Mitt Romney...............260,509  (72.09%)
Rick Santorum...............43,614  (12.07%)
Ron Paul...............34,575  (9.57%)
Newt Gingrich...............16,756  (4.64%)
Others...............5,927  (1.64%)
TOTAL VOTES...............361,381

OKLAHOMA (99% reporting)
Rick Santorum...............95,478  (33.77%)
Mitt Romney...............79,327  (28.06%)
Newt Gingrich...............77,770  (27.51%)
Ron Paul...............27,199  (9.62%)
Others...............2,944  (1.04%)
TOTAL VOTES...............282,718

NORTH DAKOTA (100% reporting)
Rick Santorum...............4,339  (39.99%)
Ron Paul...............2,938  (27.08%)
Mitt Romney...............2,639  (24.32%)
Newt Gingrich...............933  (8.60%)
TOTAL VOTES...............10,849

TENNESSEE (99% reporting)
Rick Santorum...............202,198  (37.30%)
Mitt Romney...............150,511  (27.77%)
Newt Gingrich...............130,689  (24.11%)
Ron Paul...............49,299  (9.10%)
Others...............9,325  (1.72%)
TOTAL VOTES...............542,022

OHIO (99% reporting)
Mitt Romney...............453,430  (37.99%)
Rick Santorum...............441,501  (36.99%)
Newt Gingrich...............174,456  (14.61%)
Ron Paul...............110,516  (9.26%)
Others...............13,780  (1.15%)
TOTAL VOTES...............1,193,683

VERMONT (93% reporting)
Mitt Romney...............22,632  (39.78%)
Ron Paul...............14,488  (25.46%)
Rick Santorum...............13,466  (23.67%)
Newt Gingrich...............4,636  (8.15%)
Others...............1,676  (2.95%)
TOTAL VOTES...............56,898

IDAHO (91% reporting)
Mitt Romney...............27,301  (63.74%)
Ron Paul...............7,675  (17.92%)
Rick Santorum...............6,920  (16.16%)
Newt Gingrich...............916  (2.14%)
Others...............17  (0.03%)
TOTAL VOTES...............42,829

ALASKA (95% reporting)
Mitt Romney...............4,167  (32.73%)
Rick Santorum...............3,704  (29.09%)
Ron Paul...............3,033  (23.82%)
Newt Gingrich...............1,798  (14.12%)
Others...............31  (0.24%)
TOTAL VOTES...............12,733

COMBINED SUPER TUESDAY VOTES
Mitt Romney...............1,381,642  (37.95%)
Rick Santorum...............982,566  (26.99%)
Newt Gingrich...............822,850  (22.60%)
Ron Paul...............413,538  (11.36%)
Others...............40,539  (1.11%)
TOTAL VOTES...............3,641,135

Mitt Romney came out of Super Tuesday winning more states and more delegates than the other candidates, but once again his weakness is apparent. He wasn't even able to get 40% of the Super Tuesday votes, which means over 60% of the people who voted yesterday preferred someone else -- even if that someone else is Santorum, Gingrich, or Paul. Romney still hasn't won over the teabaggers and evangelicals.

Wall Street Willie Wins Washington Caucuses

Wall Street Willie (Willard Mitt Romney) had a good day in Washington yesterday. He outperformed expectations and won the caucuses fairly handily. Ron Paul and Rick Santorum both had hopes of carrying the state, but wound up vying for second place. The final delegate totals for each candidate won't be official until the state convention, but they will roughly equal the percentages the candidates received yesterday. Here are the numbers for Washington:

WASHINGTON CAUCUS (94% reporting)
Mitt Romney...............17,275  (36.69%)
Ron Paul...............11,767  (24.99%)
Rick Santorum...............11,496  (24.41%)
Newt Gingrich...............4,995  (10.61%)
Uncommitted...............1,556  (3.30%)
TOTAL VOTES...............47,089

Here are the latest polls for some Super Tuesday states:

LANDMARK/ROSETTA STONE POLL (Georgia)
Newt Gingrich...............42%
Mitt Romney...............22%
Rick Santorum...............16%
Ron Paul...............5%
Undecided...............15%

YOU-GOV POLL (Georgia)
Newt Gingrich...............32%
Mitt Romney...............27%
Rick Santorum...............17%
Ron Paul...............10%
Undecided...............14%

YOU-GOV POLL (Ohio)
Rick Santorum..............33%
Mitt Romney...............27%
Newt Gingrich...............12%
Ron Paul...............9%
Undecided...............19%

YOU-GOV POLL (Tennessee)
Rick Santorum...............32%
Mitt Romney...............23%
Newt Gingrich...............16%
Ron Paul...............13%
Undecided...............15%

AMERICAN RESEARCH GROUP POLL (Oklahoma)
Rick Santorum...............37%
Mitt Romney...............26%
Newt Gingrich...............22%
Ron Paul...............9%
Other/Undecided...............6%

YOU-GOV POLL (Oklahoma)
Rick Santorum...............28%
Mitt Romney...............25%
Newt Gingrich...............20%
Ron Paul...............8%
Undecided...............19%

YOU-GOV POLL (Massachusetts)
Mitt Romney...............56%
Rick Santorum...............16%
Newt Gingrich...............5%
Ron Paul...............5%
Undecided...............17%