Looks like Mary Fallin will continue to be our governor...
As you all know (or can infer), I didn't vote that way. To be honest, it doesn't look like much of the way I voted didn't come to pass. Am I bummed? Well, I'm not dancing to The Sound of Music but I'm not upset.
I voted.
Voting is not a decision that we make that is passive and it isn't a moment in time that ends on Wednesday. Voting is a civic duty that should not be taken lightly. It's a job that we citizens have that is really threefold. First, it gives us carte blanche to bitch for the next several years because we tried dammit. Second, it gives us a chance to pick the winners (or losers). Third, it sends a referendum to the rest of the state about how we citizens active in the process feel.
All of the races in Oklahoma were closer than the winners would have liked. Don't let the winners forget it. It's time to be active and let Fallin and the others know that we have concerns and we are barely a minority.
It's also a time to remember that democracy has spoken. We have winners. They are our public officials. They are the officials that the majority wanted and it is time to make sure that they are given the respect that their offices deserve.
It is time to start working with Mary Fallin. It's time to let her know why she didn't win by a landslide. It's time to remind her that she works for us... and we aren't giving her a perfect job review. She has a lot to work on, but she is our governor. For better or worse. Start thinking about what needs to be done to better Oklahoma and make damn sure that her office knows about it.
Thanks for voting Oklahoma. It's a trying, partisan time and we are getting through it. The results are similar to the way we would have imagined but the road to it was a little harder fought. Now we come together. Together as Americans, together as Oklahomans.
Let's make the next years better than the last.
2016 is coming.
Tuesday, November 4, 2014
Sunday, November 2, 2014
Why I'm endorsing Joe Dorman... and you should too.
His name isn't Mary Fallin. Best blog post yet...
Sorry. All kidding aside, I am endorsing Joe Dorman. I am voting for Joe Dorman. I couldn't be happier to be voting for him. He is NOT my ideal politician. He does not share my views on where America needs to go.
He is the bridge that Oklahoma needs to let the Red and Blue Oklahomans drop some misconceptions about their party of choice. He is pro-life and pro-gun (you are welcome Oklahoma). He's a small town Oklahoman who wears the D proudly because he is pro-Main Street as opposed to Wall Street.
I'm voting for Joe Dorman because the Democratic party is the party who cares about modern family values. That's right, Republicans, let's talk about the elephant in the room (pun intended). Democrats are the family party (unless your family is white, nuclear, straight, and Christian charismatic). Modern families are so different than the 1950's ideal at this point. We have so many issues. Single parent families need access to health care and other social services to pull themselves out of poverty. Women are working more than ever before and deserve to be in charge of their own reproductive rights. Gay families need the legal support of politicians to ensure that they have the legal rights to be families.
It's not fair to say that America looks differently now than when the Republican "family value" platform arose. It is more accurate to say that we are looking at all of America now and America is looking back demanding to be seen.
Mary Fallin is an anachronism. She is a strong, modern woman wrapped in a regressive ideology. She is a marker of the past that I wish was a harbinger of the future. She hides behind political ideologies that she believes will get her a victory and keep her in power a little while longer. She is willing to think more about state's rights than individual human rights. She is willing to minimize young women's roles in their own rights, because she is old enough and established to be unaffected. She wants to see Oklahoma's businesses succeed even while her people become hopeless and look elsewhere.
Mary Fallin is politics. She is what we all hate about it. She was for it before she was against it. She desires to win, to play the game, to succeed even when it might hinder the progress of our great state.
Please guys, I know you feel hopeless sometimes and feel like your voice doesn't matter and sometimes you might be right. But if you don't go vote on Tuesday and you want to come to me and bitch in the years to come, save it. I'm tired of hearing about how bad it is. I want to hear about how you mobilized and (hopefully not) failed. I want to hear about how we are going to fix it next time. I want to hear that you emailed your Congressman about what we are doing wrong today and how to save Oklahoma's tomorrow.
Go vote. Even if you don't agree with me. Go vote. Vote. Please. However, if you care about "family values," consider going for the new family values party. Consider going with the guys who are looking after all families. Vote Democrat on Tuesday.
Sorry. All kidding aside, I am endorsing Joe Dorman. I am voting for Joe Dorman. I couldn't be happier to be voting for him. He is NOT my ideal politician. He does not share my views on where America needs to go.
He is the bridge that Oklahoma needs to let the Red and Blue Oklahomans drop some misconceptions about their party of choice. He is pro-life and pro-gun (you are welcome Oklahoma). He's a small town Oklahoman who wears the D proudly because he is pro-Main Street as opposed to Wall Street.
I'm voting for Joe Dorman because the Democratic party is the party who cares about modern family values. That's right, Republicans, let's talk about the elephant in the room (pun intended). Democrats are the family party (unless your family is white, nuclear, straight, and Christian charismatic). Modern families are so different than the 1950's ideal at this point. We have so many issues. Single parent families need access to health care and other social services to pull themselves out of poverty. Women are working more than ever before and deserve to be in charge of their own reproductive rights. Gay families need the legal support of politicians to ensure that they have the legal rights to be families.
It's not fair to say that America looks differently now than when the Republican "family value" platform arose. It is more accurate to say that we are looking at all of America now and America is looking back demanding to be seen.
Mary Fallin is an anachronism. She is a strong, modern woman wrapped in a regressive ideology. She is a marker of the past that I wish was a harbinger of the future. She hides behind political ideologies that she believes will get her a victory and keep her in power a little while longer. She is willing to think more about state's rights than individual human rights. She is willing to minimize young women's roles in their own rights, because she is old enough and established to be unaffected. She wants to see Oklahoma's businesses succeed even while her people become hopeless and look elsewhere.
Mary Fallin is politics. She is what we all hate about it. She was for it before she was against it. She desires to win, to play the game, to succeed even when it might hinder the progress of our great state.
Please guys, I know you feel hopeless sometimes and feel like your voice doesn't matter and sometimes you might be right. But if you don't go vote on Tuesday and you want to come to me and bitch in the years to come, save it. I'm tired of hearing about how bad it is. I want to hear about how you mobilized and (hopefully not) failed. I want to hear about how we are going to fix it next time. I want to hear that you emailed your Congressman about what we are doing wrong today and how to save Oklahoma's tomorrow.
Go vote. Even if you don't agree with me. Go vote. Vote. Please. However, if you care about "family values," consider going for the new family values party. Consider going with the guys who are looking after all families. Vote Democrat on Tuesday.
Wednesday, October 22, 2014
Adjective-less marriages and a hypocritical moral high-horse
This year will be looked at by future generations as a time that the tides are finally turning on the American landscape. Americans, by and large, either have no opinion or a positive opinion on gay marriage. It seems that only the most socially conservative (read Tea Party Patriots) want their names associated with disliking gay marriage on the basis of sodomy.
Luckily for us, they have a new tactic to protect us from the growing homosexual agenda in the liberal media: State’s rights. If you haven’t been living under a rock, countless numbers of states (our fine state included) have been forced by activist federal judges to allow gay marriage against the will of the people.
OK guys… I can’t do this.
Thank the Flying Spaghetti Monster that I can minimize the use of the term gay marriage. I hate that term. As a former English major, I learned that adjectives can be friends and enemies. In this particular case, the adjective seems unnecessary. I want to talk about marriage. All of it. Straight folks have plenty of problems on this front too.
Luckily for us, they have a new tactic to protect us from the growing homosexual agenda in the liberal media: State’s rights. If you haven’t been living under a rock, countless numbers of states (our fine state included) have been forced by activist federal judges to allow gay marriage against the will of the people.
OK guys… I can’t do this.
Thank the Flying Spaghetti Monster that I can minimize the use of the term gay marriage. I hate that term. As a former English major, I learned that adjectives can be friends and enemies. In this particular case, the adjective seems unnecessary. I want to talk about marriage. All of it. Straight folks have plenty of problems on this front too.
Wednesday, October 8, 2014
The dreaded post-debate post...
You might have noticed a small slack in long-form writing. I've done a lot more on the Facebook page and a little less here. Part of it has been the shear lack of separation in the candidates. It's a lot easier to write about the differences between apples and bananas than it is golden delicious and red apples.
I thought, "wait until the debate, Michael, you'll hear so many things to write about." It wasn't true. Predictably, I wrote about a lot of the topics that came up in the debate. I haven't written about medicaid expansion in great detail, so I plan to get there.
After the debate, it has put me in even less of a mood to write. I'm a little despondent, fellow Goobers. I need a pick-me-up. I think that the medicine will be writing about the new marriage ruling. I'm going to be doing that shortly (with some insight as a State worker, I hope). Before I get there, I need to bring myself to talk about the debates and the standout moments.
First of all, I covered all of this live on the Facebook page. I'm basically going to be going through that and making it more coherent in case you didn't watch the debates (for shame! they were an hour, go livestream it or something).
Before I get into specifics, I'd like to say that both candidates did horribly. But, if I had to pick a winner, I would say that Dorman hit the most talking points. I'd also give him a slight handicap as a Democrat in Oklahoma and coming against a strong incumbent but he did not flinch.
I thought, "wait until the debate, Michael, you'll hear so many things to write about." It wasn't true. Predictably, I wrote about a lot of the topics that came up in the debate. I haven't written about medicaid expansion in great detail, so I plan to get there.
After the debate, it has put me in even less of a mood to write. I'm a little despondent, fellow Goobers. I need a pick-me-up. I think that the medicine will be writing about the new marriage ruling. I'm going to be doing that shortly (with some insight as a State worker, I hope). Before I get there, I need to bring myself to talk about the debates and the standout moments.
First of all, I covered all of this live on the Facebook page. I'm basically going to be going through that and making it more coherent in case you didn't watch the debates (for shame! they were an hour, go livestream it or something).
Before I get into specifics, I'd like to say that both candidates did horribly. But, if I had to pick a winner, I would say that Dorman hit the most talking points. I'd also give him a slight handicap as a Democrat in Oklahoma and coming against a strong incumbent but he did not flinch.
Monday, September 22, 2014
Take Shelter . . . or leave it
Tornado Alley. Two words synonymous with Oklahoma, the central corridor in particular. We know extreme weather. In fact, every Okie I know says the same thing to the transplants. "You can tell a real Okie by the direction they go in the event of a storm." That direction being to the nearest covered porch to watch the thunderous murmurs wash over the countryside. There is a (possibly insane) calmness to the deafening thunderclaps and rain hitting metal roofs.
Romanticism aside, when the weather here becomes bad, it becomes fatal. Unfortunately, Oklahomans lose their lives every year to sever weather. Sometimes those Oklahomans are children, currently under State care at their schools.
Is it the role of the State government (especially the Governor) to spearhead the charge for shelter legislation?
It seems our current governor does not think so. Her idea to solve the issue is to allow more bonds to be taken out by municipalities to cover schools if that area feels it is appropriate. This mirrors Republican views that government should be handled at the smallest level possible. The shelter issue, then, can be seen as a local problem.
Joe Dorman, leader on the issue of sheltering Oklahoma's schools, disagrees. From Dorman's perspective, the safety of our children is a right while we are keeping them in State custody. Dorman has spearheaded a campaign to use the Oklahoma Franchise tax to raise $500 million dollars to retrofit storm shelters into every public school in the state. Estimates vary but tend to be around the $800 million dollar mark. The rest of the money could potentially be made up for with potential grants from FEMA.
The franchise tax would cost all of Oklahoma but would ensure that all of Oklahoma's public school kids have a place to go. The Fallin approach is a de facto permanent property tax increase in every school district that decides to build a shelter (how else will they pay?) Which is more fair? Does every part of Oklahoma need storm shelters? Should more dangerous communities pay more of a burden? After all, most tornados happen after 4pm when kids are supposed to be home from school.
This is a difficult question to answer. After all, it is the duty of the government to ensure the safety of its citizens and promote public good. The franchise tax forces Oklahoma communities to look out for one another, sharing Tornado Alley's burden on the entire state. It also guarantees that low income, rural communities will have access to the same shelters that upper income suburban districts will have.
It is also the duty of the government to spend its constituents money intelligently. Is it a better approach to decide where shelters should go based off of research first and not potential fear mongering?
I might lay down a suggestion for a third position. Maybe we should use a portion of the franchise tax to fund storm shelters. However, a task force should be put together to see where it needs to be done and where the spending would be wasteful. In this way, we will ensure the safety of the lives of Oklahoma's kids without a "bridge to nowhere" style spending problem.
The "Shelter for nothing" scandal... I can see it now. I'm going to keep this one short, voters. I think it is up to you to make a decision on this point if it is a sticking point for you. I can see both sides and understand what is at stake, and I understand both ideologies at this point. I honestly don't know which side of the fence I lay on (if looking at the plans put forth with no compromise).
Tornados are so often after school and don't affect the state equally, so I have a hard time asking for $800 million dollars spent on something like this, but I also understand the duty we have to protect our children from something that clearly does happen here.
What do you guys think? Should we be funding shelters for Oklahoma's schools? How about you take this back to the Facebook page, like us, and give your opinions? I think this is an issue that is much more built for dialogue than monologue.
Romanticism aside, when the weather here becomes bad, it becomes fatal. Unfortunately, Oklahomans lose their lives every year to sever weather. Sometimes those Oklahomans are children, currently under State care at their schools.
Is it the role of the State government (especially the Governor) to spearhead the charge for shelter legislation?
It seems our current governor does not think so. Her idea to solve the issue is to allow more bonds to be taken out by municipalities to cover schools if that area feels it is appropriate. This mirrors Republican views that government should be handled at the smallest level possible. The shelter issue, then, can be seen as a local problem.
Joe Dorman, leader on the issue of sheltering Oklahoma's schools, disagrees. From Dorman's perspective, the safety of our children is a right while we are keeping them in State custody. Dorman has spearheaded a campaign to use the Oklahoma Franchise tax to raise $500 million dollars to retrofit storm shelters into every public school in the state. Estimates vary but tend to be around the $800 million dollar mark. The rest of the money could potentially be made up for with potential grants from FEMA.
The franchise tax would cost all of Oklahoma but would ensure that all of Oklahoma's public school kids have a place to go. The Fallin approach is a de facto permanent property tax increase in every school district that decides to build a shelter (how else will they pay?) Which is more fair? Does every part of Oklahoma need storm shelters? Should more dangerous communities pay more of a burden? After all, most tornados happen after 4pm when kids are supposed to be home from school.
This is a difficult question to answer. After all, it is the duty of the government to ensure the safety of its citizens and promote public good. The franchise tax forces Oklahoma communities to look out for one another, sharing Tornado Alley's burden on the entire state. It also guarantees that low income, rural communities will have access to the same shelters that upper income suburban districts will have.
It is also the duty of the government to spend its constituents money intelligently. Is it a better approach to decide where shelters should go based off of research first and not potential fear mongering?
I might lay down a suggestion for a third position. Maybe we should use a portion of the franchise tax to fund storm shelters. However, a task force should be put together to see where it needs to be done and where the spending would be wasteful. In this way, we will ensure the safety of the lives of Oklahoma's kids without a "bridge to nowhere" style spending problem.
The "Shelter for nothing" scandal... I can see it now. I'm going to keep this one short, voters. I think it is up to you to make a decision on this point if it is a sticking point for you. I can see both sides and understand what is at stake, and I understand both ideologies at this point. I honestly don't know which side of the fence I lay on (if looking at the plans put forth with no compromise).
Tornados are so often after school and don't affect the state equally, so I have a hard time asking for $800 million dollars spent on something like this, but I also understand the duty we have to protect our children from something that clearly does happen here.
What do you guys think? Should we be funding shelters for Oklahoma's schools? How about you take this back to the Facebook page, like us, and give your opinions? I think this is an issue that is much more built for dialogue than monologue.
Wednesday, September 17, 2014
We DO need that education!
I used to be a teacher.
I don’t know who felt more ineffective. Was it me as a first year English teacher? What about the stuck-up administrators of the small charter school I was in that thought kids needed lectures (Can you imagine 30 inner city 6th graders lectured to 5 days a week)? Was it the PASS objectives that were so long no one could actually remember what they were supposed to teach? Was it our State government who was consistently inconsistent with their message and their expectations? Was it the parents who showed us teachers so little respect in front of their children that the kids learned we were powerless? Was it the children? Had our system of privilege and funding for some and poverty and missed opportunities for others left this group of kids out of the scope of my mission for the 186 days I had them? Was it a question I hadn’t even thought of yet because I was so frustrated with my life as an educator that I didn’t even have a concept of what or whom to blame?
I used to be a teacher. And I’ll be damned if I vote for anyone who won’t make their jobs better, because the ones that stayed in the trenches were made of tougher stuff than me.
Neither Joe Dorman or Mary Fallin are currently in support of the Common Core initiatives, but I feel due to their recent importance in Oklahoma and the Fallin Flip-Flop Effect (a scientific term detailing the fact that we may never know what she actually wants) deems it necessary that we go over what the Common Core is, where it came from, and what it means to the country. From there, I will look at the education platforms of both candidates and critique all of it with a mix of my usual razor sharp wit and middle school snark.
I don’t know who felt more ineffective. Was it me as a first year English teacher? What about the stuck-up administrators of the small charter school I was in that thought kids needed lectures (Can you imagine 30 inner city 6th graders lectured to 5 days a week)? Was it the PASS objectives that were so long no one could actually remember what they were supposed to teach? Was it our State government who was consistently inconsistent with their message and their expectations? Was it the parents who showed us teachers so little respect in front of their children that the kids learned we were powerless? Was it the children? Had our system of privilege and funding for some and poverty and missed opportunities for others left this group of kids out of the scope of my mission for the 186 days I had them? Was it a question I hadn’t even thought of yet because I was so frustrated with my life as an educator that I didn’t even have a concept of what or whom to blame?
I used to be a teacher. And I’ll be damned if I vote for anyone who won’t make their jobs better, because the ones that stayed in the trenches were made of tougher stuff than me.
Neither Joe Dorman or Mary Fallin are currently in support of the Common Core initiatives, but I feel due to their recent importance in Oklahoma and the Fallin Flip-Flop Effect (a scientific term detailing the fact that we may never know what she actually wants) deems it necessary that we go over what the Common Core is, where it came from, and what it means to the country. From there, I will look at the education platforms of both candidates and critique all of it with a mix of my usual razor sharp wit and middle school snark.
Monday, September 8, 2014
Michael Brown's death, though tragic, is not the national lesson we need to learn from Ferguson, MO
This is a mini post as it doesn't really relate to the scope of this blog but it is something that we are all keeping tabs on.
The death of Michael Brown in Ferguson, MO is not a national issue. The news media wants it to be but it isn't. It is a local issue, albeit one that may be generalizable across most of the country.
The issue at hand for us, as Oklahomans (just read on and substitute with your neck of the woods if applicable) is an increasingly militarized police presence. Communities all over the country, like Ferguson, are looking more occupied than protected.
For those of you that believe that we are overreacting and that police need military grade vehicles and weapons to patrol the streets, I would say two things. First, travel to various countries and look at the policing style of those countries. Would you rather live in a place that the police force looks more like France or Afghanistan? Second, when police act like the military, they do so to promote fear, not protection. Police in camouflage is intimidating to almost anyone. What happened to protect and serve?
The death of Michael Brown in Ferguson, MO is not a national issue. The news media wants it to be but it isn't. It is a local issue, albeit one that may be generalizable across most of the country.
The issue at hand for us, as Oklahomans (just read on and substitute with your neck of the woods if applicable) is an increasingly militarized police presence. Communities all over the country, like Ferguson, are looking more occupied than protected.
For those of you that believe that we are overreacting and that police need military grade vehicles and weapons to patrol the streets, I would say two things. First, travel to various countries and look at the policing style of those countries. Would you rather live in a place that the police force looks more like France or Afghanistan? Second, when police act like the military, they do so to promote fear, not protection. Police in camouflage is intimidating to almost anyone. What happened to protect and serve?
Saturday, September 6, 2014
A Brief Glimpse at Mary Fallin: Through her Campaign Website
I'm going to keep this one fairly short. We've experienced Fallin in the office, so we are probably a little more familiar with her. Also, I don't plan on this being my actual post this week (it's probably coming Sunday). Things have been busy this week with my real job (I'm taking all next week off, so maybe I'll get to spend more time in my fake job as a blogger).
To accomplish this post, I'm going to look at Mary Fallin's campaign website. She also has a more in depth State website than Dorman but since I only looked at Dorman's campaign site, I saw this as more fair.
Also, since we have experienced her as governor, she uses a list of accomplishments instead of goals / platforms. I'll analyze these in short order. The Governor lists 12 accomplishments (pretty proud of herself, I miss Dorman's five short and sweet already): fiscal responsibility, economy and jobs, government efficiency, education, energy and environment, infrastructure, healthcare, sanctity of life, veterans, vulnerable Oklahomans, 2nd amendment, and agriculture. Did you get all that? There will be a quiz later...
To accomplish this post, I'm going to look at Mary Fallin's campaign website. She also has a more in depth State website than Dorman but since I only looked at Dorman's campaign site, I saw this as more fair.
Also, since we have experienced her as governor, she uses a list of accomplishments instead of goals / platforms. I'll analyze these in short order. The Governor lists 12 accomplishments (pretty proud of herself, I miss Dorman's five short and sweet already): fiscal responsibility, economy and jobs, government efficiency, education, energy and environment, infrastructure, healthcare, sanctity of life, veterans, vulnerable Oklahomans, 2nd amendment, and agriculture. Did you get all that? There will be a quiz later...
Monday, September 1, 2014
For the uninitiated pt. 1: Joe Dorman
It is important to start like in most things at the beginning. Let's face it... it seems most people don't really follow State politics all that closely. Even in many of our political science classes and external dialogues, we focus on National and International politics with a sprinkling of sensationalized topics of the week and news of the weird thrown in.
This has to change now... for me too.
In November, we are going to have some big decisions to make about the future of our great state. We have two candidates with what seem to be drastically different platforms, philosophies, and goals. I think that we should first look at each of these candidates individually. See what makes them tick... in 500 words or less (don't hold me to that).
This has to change now... for me too.
In November, we are going to have some big decisions to make about the future of our great state. We have two candidates with what seem to be drastically different platforms, philosophies, and goals. I think that we should first look at each of these candidates individually. See what makes them tick... in 500 words or less (don't hold me to that).
Sunday, August 24, 2014
Welcome to OKGooberNation!
Hello everyone and welcome to the GooberNation. The purpose of this blog is to look at the specific policies and issues surrounding Oklahoma politics and public administrative issues.
I will be positing on a number of topics in the upcoming months focusing on the 2014 Oklahoma gubernatorial election. I am going to profile the candidates, talk about important issues, and look at the platforms each candidate will be running on.
I hope to make this blog easy enough (and entertaining enough) for those who are not getting their master's in political science (or public administration) to be able to follow and understand. It is my hope to create a viewership that is more engaged and informed for reading. I also plan on digging deep, so politicos fear not, this is a place for you as well.
So join us on this adventure, will you?
I will be positing on a number of topics in the upcoming months focusing on the 2014 Oklahoma gubernatorial election. I am going to profile the candidates, talk about important issues, and look at the platforms each candidate will be running on.
I hope to make this blog easy enough (and entertaining enough) for those who are not getting their master's in political science (or public administration) to be able to follow and understand. It is my hope to create a viewership that is more engaged and informed for reading. I also plan on digging deep, so politicos fear not, this is a place for you as well.
So join us on this adventure, will you?
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)