Oklahoma Blogosphere

“It is ok that I vote how I want for any reason I want…don’t ya think bubba?”

*
That comes from none other than Okie blogger Jim Martin of Fried Green Onions infamy, who has made it his personal mission on his blog to publicly criticize and belittle every other blogger and citizen who takes a position differing in the least from his extreme right-wing worldview while crying foul if anyone dare question the wisdom of his positions or viewpoints.

I’m not sure if it was this post or this post or some other catalyst that got Jim Martin’s dander up about election maps and 2008 election results, but he continues to blather on about how the electorate was evenly split and the last several Presidential elections being “with a margin of error of a few idiots on the far left side of reality.” In his post’s headline, he asks, “How many times do I have to show the 2008 election map?”

The answer, quite simply, is until he gets it right.

In the post, two of the three electoral maps he cites are projections from March and July — not even the final, actual election results. The last map he includes is the familiar, but deceptive county-by-county map that paints the country in a sea of red, where land mass is given more weight and importance than actual votes.

As I pointed out shortly after the election, this nation is not quite as red as it appears. When you look at a cartogram, a map in which the sizes of states are rescaled according to their population, the electoral map looks significantly different.

Even more, when you take the actual proportional voting margins rather than the all-or-nothing extremes shown on Mr. Martin’s cited map, you get an even more accurate picture of where the country stands — even in Oklahoma (not quite so starkly red anymore).

*
To get to Mr. Martin’s claim of an evenly split electorate that was, as he called it, “with[in] a margin of error of a few idiots on the far left side of reality,” the 53% to 46% — a 7% spread — is certainly outside of most credible polls’ margins of error. It is certainly a wider margin than the 52% to 47% — a 5% spread — in 2004 and even more certainly greater than the incredible negative win margin of 47.9% to 48.4% — a negative 0.5% margin — in 2000.

Furthermore, Obama’s electoral win of 365 to 173 (+192 margin) is a significantly more decisive victory than either of Bush’s 2000 or 2004 victories — 271-266 (+5 margin) and 286-252 (+34 margin) respectively.

In both electoral college margins and actual voting percentage margins, the country was much less divided — especially given the significant Democratic gains in both houses of Congress — and certainly much less “evenly split” in 2008 than in the prior two elections.

So, Mr. Martin, you can keep showing your maps, but it doesn’t change the reality. Perhaps you aren’t factoring in the much larger margin of error of a not-so-few idiots on the far right side of reality.

With the new year comes the successful completion of my first resolution, which was to change the name of this blog.

Over the last few months, as I discussed previously, this blog has evolved into more of a commentary site with significant discussion about politics and social issues rather than the light-hearted, observational type blog that I originally envisioned. Since this evolution of the blog no longer represented the spirit of the original concept, I decided that I needed to change the name, even if only slightly.

“Brad Neese: Living Large in Oklahoma” just doesn’t seem to capture the true personality of this specific blog any longer. I’d rather save it for later in case I decide that I want to once again do a light-hearted, more personally focused blog in addition to this commentary blog. The reality is that this blog and its focus will be the one that I will feel most dedicated to. Here’s what I said back in November…

Some friends and long-time readers of this blog and the previous incarnations of my blogging expressed disappointment that I was giving up the political and current affairs writing. It seems, according to them, that I do my best blogging and writing when I talk about those things that stir up my passions. Politics, government and current affairs, social justice, faith matters and specific circumstances that affect me or my family are what stir up my passions the most.

So, I went back to writing specifically about those things that are on my mind and stirring my passions on any given day. Much of the time that means it will be about my viewpoint or others’ viewpoints that I find interesting and what to share regarding current affairs and politics.

So, here it is. The new name of the blog, as you can see at the top, is “Brad Neese At Large.”

at large (idiom) —

a. free from restraint or confinement; at liberty.

b. to a considerable extent; at length: to treat a subject at large.

c. as a whole; in general: the country at large.

d. representing the whole of a state, district, or body rather than one division or part of it: a delegate at large.

Last week, zTruth posted a similar story, except that the religions were reversed…

If this doesn’t take the prize for being two-faced, I don’t know what does.

… a very controversial Islamic organization wants an investigation because a little toy of Jesus was handed out in a kids meal at a Long John Silver in the Mall of America in Minnesota that offended the Muslim parents of a 3 year-old boy.  A 3 year-old boy, folks.

At the end of the post, zTruth rhetorically asks, “isn’t this totally two-faced?”

I don’t know, is it? Perhaps. But consider this: If it had been Christian parents of a 3-year-old boy who had just found a Muslim “toy” in their Long John Silver’s kid’s meal, do you think they might be offended? If so, would they and/or any one of the fundamentalist Christian organizations who would undoubtedly join the uproar be considered “totally two-faced”?

Also consider that this wasn’t just a toy. The local news reports about this story describe the “toy” as “a notepad that featured a quote from the Bible.” Also worth noting is that the parents requested an alternative toy, but was told “only notepads with Bible verses were available.”

This wasn’t just a toy figurine. It was “a notepad” with Bible verses. Now, again, imagine if this were a notepad with passages from the Koran and Christian parents found it in their child’s meal. Would they be offended? Would it be considered “totally two-faced” that they were offended?

If Christians are offended by the encroachment of other religions — especially Islam — into “our” spaces, especially in non-religious settings where we don’t expect to be confronted by religious expression, how then can we ridicule and lament people of other faiths and religions who get offended by Christian symbols found in non-religious settings?

What was Christian literature doing in a Long John Silver’s kid’s meal anyway? Seriously? Are we going to be proselytized at the restaurants that we eat now? Is that what we want?

I can tell you that I don’t want to find a Muslim or any religious item in my child’s meal at a fast food restaurant. Do you want a local fast food restaurant to add Muslim, Mormon, Jehovah’s Witness, Scientologist or Kabbalah symbols or evangelistic materials to your meal?

Just some food for thought.

Oklahoma Lefty posted this Quote of the Day.

“If people look only to their own interests, our world will certainly fall apart.”
— Pope Benedict XVI

Not surprisingly, Jim Martin at Fried Green Onions posted his own version of this quote.

If people would look out for their own interests. The world would be a better place.

I would be interested in seeing how Mr. Martin would defend such a position scripturally, especially given Jesus’ command(s) regarding looking out for one’s own interest versus others’ interests…

Jesus replied: ” ‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ ” (Matthew 22:37-39)

The Apostle Paul said it this way…

The commandments, “Do not commit adultery,” “Do not murder,” “Do not steal,” “Do not covet,” and whatever other commandment there may be, are summed up in this one rule: “Love your neighbor as yourself.” (Romans 13:9)

The entire law is summed up in a single command: “Love your neighbor as yourself.” (Galatians 5:14)

It would seem that Oklahoma Lefty’s version would more closely reflect the Christian faith that Mr. Martin claims to profess.

Meanwhile, Sinister says both are wrong.

I guess it’s just interesting that both of these bloggers profoundly misunderstand the reality of their respective quotes.

While I understand and respect Sinister’s viewpoint, the quote by Oklahoma Lefty of Pope Benedict is not in and of itself wrong. The sentiment expressed in that statement is absolutely correct. What Sinister’s real objection to, whether he realizes it or not, is to the person who said it and the actions that don’t necessarily measure up with the words expressed.

Sinister’s point about FGO’s inconsistency is spot on. His point about Oklahoma Lefty’s “Amen” is not. I don’t believe Oklahoma Lefty was endorsing Pope Benedict’s track record as much as he was agreeing with the quote itself. It is indeed possible — and I would argue well within Jesus’ command — to look after the interests of others without imposing one’s own agenda upon them and infringing upon their free will.

Leave it to the Oklahoma GOP and people like Jim Martin to make the Christmas holiday — the holiday of “peace on earth and goodwill to all men” — a partisan event.

Wishing You A Merry Red OK Christmas! click on link for flash animation

*

Un-be-liev-able.

This partisanship by the party that so often likes to believe it’s more “Christian” than others certainly doesn’t reflect the spirit of this Christian holiday or the Christ whose birth is being celebrated.

Okie Politics appears to be less than thrilled with the Oklahoma City Council’s decision to begin charging residents for ambulance service with a $3.65 fee added to their monthly utility bills. Residents may opt out if they so choose. According to The Oklahoman …

The fee is needed to help cover the shortfall between EMSA’s revenues and what it costs to provide ambulance service. The city has been paying for that shortfall out of sales tax funds, which are increasingly needed for other priorities.

In his post, “Cornett, Council give thumbs up to socialized ambulance healthcare,” Sam laments:

A regressive tax for a social program. Odd.

Interesting twist as Mayor Mick is consistently in the top five on the Goober-Ten standings. A move towards the left, while a subtle one, on healthcare may provide a tool to change voter perception of the pro-basketball mayor.

We should have seen this one coming. We’ve had socialized fire service and socialized police protection for years now. What’s next? Socialized education and socialized street maintenance? Oh, the “horror” — the horror!

Yesterday, Dave at Oklahoma Lefty asked the question, “What is wrong with ‘Happy Holidays’?” In his post, he said:

For as long as I can remember the term “Happy Holidays” referred to the time of the year from Thanksgiving through New Years and was an inclusive way of wishing folks well. Somehow “Happy Holidays” has become demonized by those who believe that Christmas and Christianity are under attack in this country.

I say we take “Happy Holidays” back from those who would demean and demoralize its inclusive, hopeful, and true nature.

*

Dave is absolutely right. “Happy Holidays” doesn’t dishonor “Merry Christmas.” Rather, it honors the plethora of holidays during this season, including Thanksgiving, Hanukkah, Kwanzaa, the Winter solstice, Festivus, Christmas, and the New Year. There is nothing wrong with saying “Happy Holidays” to others. There is nothing wrong with saying “Merry Christmas” to others — even non-believers and/or non-participants in the Christian holiday, as long as you don’t mind them wishing you Happy Rosh Hashana or Merry Ramadan. We are, after all, a democracy and not a theocracy.

Just as Dave remembered, I too recall “Happy Holidays” being commonplace for as long as I can remember — even as a little kid. Granted, I’m not as ancient as others (like Mr. Martin), but I’m no spring chicken either. This phrase is not something brand new.

The fact that so many Christians choose to be offended by the term “Happy Holidays” is more of a reflection on those Christians than on the purported persecution of the Christmas holiday — and by extension the Christian faith. It is a classic speck-and-plank scenario Continued

Okie blogger Dr. Bruce Prescott points to an essay by Robert Tapp posted at Religion Dispatches that raises a quite provocative point:

A major controversy in contemporary culture is the question of when human life begins. Religions have given different answers and the consequences that have followed have been very divisive. Does life begin at conception, or at implantation, or at quickening, or at birth, or…? Family planning and contraceptives have further complicated these controversies. Is pregnancy the normal/natural purpose/result of our sexuality—or is it an outcome that can be either intended or accidental (and thus probably undesired)?

We know now that perhaps 30 percent of fertilized human eggs spontaneously cease development and are thus aborted in the early stages of pregnancy—often undetected. A considerable number of embryos miscarry during later stages of pregnancy. If we use the phrasing of the country’s founders—Nature and Nature’s God—what do we make of this reality? Should we view Nature or God as the supreme abortionist? A friend of mine who is a churchgoing fertility specialist speaks of such events as “accidents” but the theological and philosophical implications are enormous. A current metaphor is that not every acorn can or does or should become an oak tree.

…

As we help US culture emerge from its anti-scientific faith moment, we need to stress a rational morality. One in which the playing fields become more level. One in which children are intended—by persons who are prepared to assume parenthood roles emotionally, intellectually, and economically. To bring an unintended zygote into embryohood and birth sets the stage for childhood deprivation, a form of child abuse. A moral society will help young persons learn to avoid this. Premature parenthood entails tremendous costs—to mother and father as well as the child.

*
Dr. Prescott asks on his own blog:

If nature is so wasteful toward human embryos, how can anti-abortionists be so sure that there is a divine imperative to preserve embryos that were produced by rape, incest and in instances where the life and health of the mother is at risk?

The right end of the dial is all atwitter — borderline messing themselves — with this Blagojevich scandal. Nothing like a good scandal to get everyone all hot-and-bothered.

“Americans voted for change. Barack Obama promised that he would have the most open and honest administration and transition in history,” said RNC chairman Mike Duncan, on a conference call with reporters. “But that’s not what we’re getting. What we’re getting is the same old politics out of Chicago.”

Why all the sudden interest in an “open and honest administration” by the party whose leader for the last eight years was anything but “open and honest”? What short memories the clamorers must have. Wasn’t this the same party who just a couple of years ago faced significant losses in Congress following one of the worst corruption scandals in Congressional history? Does Abramoff ring any bells?

I’m as disgusted as anyone with the Illinois governor’s outrageous behavior. But, as Mike McCarville said, “guilt by association without facts is irresponsible.” Those so quick to pass arbitrary and capricious judgment on Obama were strangely silent — or worse, complicit with their unashamed defense of the indefensible — when their own president and administration, Congressional leaders and party powerbrokers were whole hog in the filth of corruption.

It seems to me that all the hand-wringing about this scandal would be better done with clean hands — something the GOP and its faithful following in the blogosphere cannot rightfully claim.