Weekly Opinion/Editorial

THE FENCE BUILDER
by Steve Fair

"Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh." Genesis 2:24.

On May 15, 2008, in a 4-3 decision, California's Supreme Court ruled in favor of two dozen gay couples, and the city of San Francisco, who argued that the 2000 state law banning same-sex marriage in California was discriminatory. The decision makes California the second U.S. state to legalize gay marriage. Currently four states recognize gay marriage and thankfully that number doesn’t include Oklahoma. In his written opinion, California Chief Justice Ron George said, "limiting the designation of marriage to a union 'between a man and a woman' is unconstitutional and must be stricken from the statute." Those who penned California’s state constitution must be spinning in their graves. It never occurred to the framers to include a definition of marriage as being between exclusively a man and a woman. That fact seemed so obvious that it didn’t need defining. Once again activist judges have moved from interpreting the law to legislating from the bench.

Gay marriage opponents in California are collecting signatures to place the same sex marriage issue on the November ballot in hopes of striking down the measure. It's unclear at this time whether the initiative has enough strength to be successful. In the meantime, same-sex California couples, gay rights organizations and gays across the country are celebrating the landmark victory. In a written statement, U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi- D, California, wrote, "I welcome the California Supreme Court’s historic decision. I have long fought against discrimination and believe that the State Constitution provides for equal treatment for all of California’s citizens and families, which today’s decision recognizes."

California Republican Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger called the ballot initiative “a waste of time.” “I personally believe that marriage should be between a man and a woman, but at the same time, I think that my, you know, belief, I don’t want to force on anyone else.”

Back in September 2005, Schwarzenegger vetoed a gay marriage bill but said at the time that gay couples are entitled to full protection under the law and should not be discriminated against based upon their relationship. The Guvanator said "I am proud that California provides the most rigorous protections in the nation for domestic partners.” Arnold is a RINO (Republican in name only), so his illogical statement on this issue was not unexpected. The Republican platform has a plank that calls for a constitutional amendment banning same sex marriage, so Schwarzenegger is out of touch with his party.

California does tend to be getting more tolerant of the gay lifestyle. According to Gregory Lewis of Georgia State University and Charles Gossett of California State Polytechnic University, "Californians born in each decade tend to be more accepting of gay relationships and more willing to grant them legal recognition than those born the decade before," But accepting something that is wrong because you’ve become insulated to it doesn’t make it right.

Former Pennsylvania U.S. Senator Rick Santorum, has said the laws in this country are built upon a certain worldview, and it is the Judeo-Christian worldview. Santorum says that worldview has been expressed in our laws on marriage for 200-plus years and this issue was never an issue until about 25 years ago. To even consider legalized same sex marriage would have been beyond the pale. And so it is clearly a dramatic departure from the Judeo-Christian ethic that is reflected in our laws that say marriage is a sacred union between a man and a woman.

Christians believe that the homosexual lifestyle is sinful and as Americans, they should have the right to be able to express their religious beliefs without fear of being branded as hate-inciting criminals. The truth is, the most hate-filled people in this debate are the homosexual activists who are forcing their worldview on others. Christians should have the right to protest the “gay” agenda that is being forced onto their children via the schools (teaching four-year-olds about same sex relationships) and television shows. Just last week, Heinz pulled an ad that showed a homosexual male couple kissing, but whenever anyone states a position that differs from the gays, they become intolerant.

A fence is a structure serving as an enclosure, a barrier, or a boundary. It offers a means of defense or protection. Before a fence is removed, one should ask why that fence was erected in the first place. There is a societal and Scriptural fence that was erected by Almighty God 6,000 years ago. Many in our culture are seeking to tear down that fence of "Traditional Marriage" which was built by God. While they may think they can get by with ripping down the fence, the fence builder doesn’t take kindly to destruction of His property.

Meet the Republican VP Prospect:

Tim Pawlenty
by Brad Haynes- The Wall Street Journal

Joining Tim Pawlenty at a Minnesota event on June 19, John McCain drew further talk that the two-term Gopher State governor might soon ride shotgun on the national ticket. When it comes to loyalty, McCain couldn’t do much better. Pawlenty has backed the senator’s presidential bid since late 2006, became his campaign’s national co-chairman in January 2007 and stuck with the candidate even when his campaign was near collapse last summer.

The son of a Teamster truck driver and the first in his family to attend college, Pawlenty’s blue-collar appeal could help Republicans lock up the white, working-class vote, which Barack Obama struggled with in the primaries. During his first campaign for governor, Pawlenty vowed to make the GOP the party of “Sam’s Club, not just the country club.” Read the entire article at:

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2008/06/25/meet-the-republican-vp-prospect-tim-pawlenty/?mod=googlenews_wsj

COURT BACKS 2ND AMENDMENT!

In a 5-4 decision, the Supreme court confirmed that Americans have a right to defend themselves. Read the entire story at: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080626/ap_on_go_su_co/scotus_guns

WHY I'M VOTING DEMOCRAT!

Fellow blogger Bobby Cleveland has a clever video with "voters" explaining why they will vote Democrat in November. You can access it at http://www.thatsjustbob.blogspot.com/

Tax policy and the election
by George Porter

Barack Obama frequently criticizes the Bush tax cuts and suggests that under an Obama presidency, many will be scrapped. Robert Mundell, Nobel laureate and Columbia University Economics professor, is quoted in the June 21 issue of the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) predicting “If that happens, the U.S. will go into a big recession – a nosedive…This would be devastating to the world’s economy, to the United States, and it would be, I think, political suicide in a general election.”

Mundell recounts how the last century experienced a titanic struggle over tax rates: from 3% on only the few of the wealthiest Americans in 1913; up to 60 percent during WW I; down to 25 percent before Congress and Herbert Hoover raised taxes back to 60 percent in 1932 and “sealed the fate of our economy for a long, long time;” all the way up to 92.5 percent during WW II before falling in three steps, reaching 28 percent under President Ronald Reagan; and back to nearly 40 percent under Bill Clinton before George W Bush lowered them to their present level. “The most important thing that could be done with respect to tax rates now is to make the Bush tax cuts permanent. Eliminating that uncertainty would be more important than pushing for a further tax cut -- in the income tax, anyway.”

He does recommend lowering our corporate tax rate from its current 35 percent down to 25 percent to increase American competitiveness.

Robert Mundell, a Canadian now living in New York, is considered the father of the European euro. He recommended a common European currency for 30 years before it came into existence in 1999. He currently advises China on monetary policy, and has been suggesting an Asiatic version of the euro. Long term he recommends one common world currency, possibly the U.S. dollar – “the global economy needs a global currency…I look on the United States still as the main sparkplug of economic growth in the world.”

Mundell was a participant this past May at the Copenhagen Consensus 2008 Conference. He is now pushing for a monetary conference of the world’s leading nations in 2010 at the Shanghai World Fair. Given Mundell’s past record and his global influence, one common world currency may come in the not so distant future.

The Democrat party is split on fiscal and tax policy. The big spenders, higher tax faction within the party, led by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate majority leader Harry Reid is the dominate Democrat group. More conservative “New” Democrats number only about 40, but were the big gainers in 2006 when Democrats took control of Congress.

“New Democrats” were born in the 1980’s in response to the Reagan Revolution, as the Democratic Leadership Council. Bill Clinton ran on their platform that included economic centrism. The far left despised President Clinton’s embrace of free trade, his accommodation to welfare reform, and his pronouncement that “the era of big government is over.” But Bill Clinton gave the Democrat Party its’ only two full terms in the White House since FDR.

Barack Obama’s tax rate proposals would take us back to those in effect under President Carter. He wants to increase taxes on payroll, capital gains, dividends and death in a redistribution philosophy and the largest tax increase in American history.

John McCain has proposed making the Bush tax cuts permanent, phasing out completely the Alternative Minimum Tax, cutting the corporate tax gradually from the present 35 percent to 25 percent, and doubling the personal exemption for dependents – a move that would lower taxes for all and remove many from having to pay income tax.

While details change weekly as both candidates compete for voter approval, the tax policies advocated by McCain and Obama are radically different and part of packages that embrace two different philosophies of government.

Economist Kurt Hauser 15 years ago published data that documented that federal tax revenue has been a relatively consistent 19.5 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) since 1950, under ever changing tax rates. Tax rate hikes have produced lower GDP. Houser concludes: “Higher taxes reduce the incentives to work, produce, invest and save, thereby dampening overall economic activity and job creation.”

If Robert Mundell and Kurt Hauser are correct, lower taxes will promote economic growth and a higher GPD, and more government revenue. It’s part of the McCain package.

Tom Coburn, McCain’s co-chair in Oklahoma, wrote in a recent article in the WSJ “John McCain, for all his faults, is the one Republican candidate who can lead us through our wilderness. Mr. McCain is not running on a messianic platform or as a greart healer of dysfunctional Republicans who refuse to help themselves. His humility is one of his great strengths. In his heart, he’s a soldier who sees one more hill to climb, one more mission to complete.”

George Porter is a retired insurance company executive and a Duncan Banner columnist. He may be contacted at geo.porter@att.net

Weekly Opinion/Editorial

LIBERALISM IS NOTHING NEW!
by Steve Fair

Can Barrick Obama be America’s next President? That remains to be seen, but the young Senator has defied the odds and beaten Hillary Clinton for the Democratic nomination, but can he beat John McCain? Granted, the forty six year old Obama can string a sentence together. He is an inspiring speaker who can work a crowd with the best. He also inspires young and old alike with his message of change. The problem is that Obama speaks in such generalities that it’s hard to determine what he actually stands for. Anyone can advocate change, but unless there is a detailed execution strategy to bring change about, it’s just talk. A better indicator of Obama’s true values is not the speeches he delivers at campaign rallies, but how he has voted in the U.S. Senate.

According to the National Journal Senator Obama was the most liberal senator in the storied body in 2007. The insurgent presidential candidate shifted further to the left last year in the run-up to the primaries, after ranking as the 16th- and 10th-most-liberal during his first two years in the Senate. He is even more liberal than Hillary. Senator Clinton ranked as the 16th-most-liberal senator in the 2007 ratings. Obama is a classic liberal. He energizes young educated professions- many with limited political knowledge or experience. As a liberal, Obama and his followers believe the government should be more involved in people’s lives. They also believe those who disagree with them are uninformed hillbillies.

An example of how Obama feels about the average working class Democrat was revealed in the statement he made in Pennsylvania during the primary campaign. The Senator said, "it's not surprising, then, they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations." The “they” Obama was referring to were average working class Americans.
Syndicated columnist George Will wrote in response. “Obama's dismissal is: Americans, especially working-class conservatives, are unable, because of their false consciousness, to deconstruct their social context and embrace the liberal program. Today that program is to elect Obama, thereby making his wife at long last proud of America.”

The condescending attitude Obama and his liberal followers have for working class Americans defies conventional wisdom. They arrogantly proclaim that only their liberal ideas of change can save America. But this characteristic of arrogance is nothing new to liberalism. In 1952, Illinois liberal Adlai Stevenson was the Dem’s nominee for President after a brokered nominating convention. With nine candidates on the ballot, including Oklahoma US Senator Robert S. Kerr, Stevenson finished second on the first ballot. The party bosses were convinced the young liberal would do well in the general election and pressured the delegates to nominate the grandson of President Cleveland’s Vice President. They did so on the third ballot of the convention. But Stevenson failed to connect with the average American and was soundly beaten by General Dwight D. Eisenhower- not just in 1952, but in 1956 as well.

The similarities between Obama and Stevenson are striking. Both came to national prominence after delivering stirring speeches at the Democratic National Convention. Like Obama, Stevenson was young and was an Ivy League graduate. He was considered an intellectual like Obama. In fact, Stevenson’s nickname was “the egghead.”

But Stevenson’s electability problem was his inability to connect to the average man. According to David Greenberg, “to mainstream Americans, Stevenson was an odd bird. He was divorced, and a Unitarian, and he talked funny. Mort Sahl joked that Adlai believed in the "Ten Suggestions" and that if Stevenson were in the Klan, he would burn a question mark on your front lawn.

Stevenson’s primary problem was that he thought he knew more about what Americans needed than they did. That is a classic characteristic of liberalism. Liberals believe they are smarter, can jump higher, and run faster than the average man. The liberal’s favorite book is Humility and how I mastered it. Liberals don’t subscribe to personal responsibility and accountability. They believe the government is the answer to every problem. Liberals don’t believe in absolutes. To a liberal, behavior is dictated by the situation, not by solid concrete principles of right and wrong.

Obama is cut from the same piece of cloth as Stevenson. Like Stevenson, Obama fails to recognize, respect, and appreciate the people of middle America. He cannot understand that owning a gun or practicing ones faith doesn’t make them bitter. It defines who they are and what they stand for. To imply otherwise reveals a lack of understanding of what made America great. Obama is disconnected from middle American and for that reason, Abe Lincoln, the first Republican President, will continue to remain the only person ever be elected President from Illinois.

Steve's comments appear in red

Gary Jones’ Five Most Shameful Lies

Written Wednesday, November 01, 2006

by now convicted felon Lori McMahon

Republican Gary Jones is running for State Auditor of Oklahoma with the motto “an auditor you can trust.” So just how much can he be trusted?I’m Lori McMahan, and I’m tired of the trash-talking, headline grabbing nonsense about my husband coming from Gary Jones and his supporters. Jeff has been advised to ignore these frantic efforts to tarnish his reputation since they’re an obvious attempt to gain traction in a race where Jones is hopelessly behind. They’ve told Jeff to remain on the positive message of his exceptional accomplishments as State Auditor. But I’m not going to sit by and let Jones drag a courageous, honest public servant through the mud with appalling lies and outlandish innuendos. It would be almost impossible for me to respond to them all, but here are Gary’s five most shameful lies, along with the truth. Shame on you, Gary!Jones

Lie #1: The Abstractor Issue. Jones says he’s behind in fundraising because he’s not accepting any donations from abstractors. Although the donations are not illegal, Jones said, he doesn’t think they’re right. “We are not taking any money from anybody we regulate,” Jones said. “When you regulate somebody, you need to make decisions based on the best interests of the citizens. When a large part of your contributions come from an industry you regulate, you may put yourself in a position to be influenced.”

THE TRUTH:Jones’ sanctimonious stance on this issue conveniently materialized only after it dawned on him that not a single abstractor in the state was willing to support him. In 2002, Jones burned those bridges when he bragged loudly and repeatedly that, if elected, he would “do away with abstracting,” and was openly soliciting and receiving funds from individuals and industries supporting the idea. Jones had also personally solicited abstractors for funds numerous times, but finally gave up when none would contribute, even after he threatened them. Who can blame abstractors for heavily supporting Jeff after Jones viciously attacked their industry and threatened their livelihood?McMahan contributors are reminded when they contribute to Jeff’s campaign that what they’ll get in return is a public servant who will treat everyone equally and fairly. Jeff actively voiced his support to Governor Henry and the state legislature for the collective efforts of the Oklahoma Land Title Association and the Oklahoma Realtors Association to overhaul state laws regulating the abstracting industry. This finally led to the passage of House Bill 3009, which takes effect July 2007, and gives the Auditor the tools he needs to improve customer service and to prevent abuse of consumers by a few companies that give the rest of the industry a bad reputation.

THE REAL TRUTH The McMahans took money from Steve Phipps and did him and his partners favors that benefited them financially. McMahon stalled an application for a new abstract company that would have competed with Phipps. Presented with the facts at the trial, Phipps(an abstractor) said they "stole the election" from Jones. The "sanctimonious stance" Lori McMahan writes of is her and her husband.

Lie #2: The Stipe Factor, Part A. Jones has incessantly repeated the accusation that my husband accepted campaign donations from former Senator Gene Stipe and his family members and associates.

THE TRUTH:In this well-crafted invention, Jones carefully words his accusation in a manner that implies Jeff willingly seeks and accepts campaign contributions from people he knows to be convicted felons or targets of an ongoing investigation. In 2002, Jeff gratefully accepted legal campaign contributions from a wide variety of supporters, including Senator Stipe, with the unmistakable understanding the donations were an investment in nothing more than good government.However, during Jeff’s 2002 campaign, Gene Stipe was not a felon and was not a former senator. He was a senior member of the Oklahoma Senate; revered by some, reviled by others. At that time, it had not been disclosed by investigators or by the media, and it was not known by the McMahan campaign or by any of the dozens of other statewide and local candidates who accepted Stipe-related contributions, that Stipe was even under investigation. During the 2006 election cycle, Jeff has neither solicited nor accepted any campaign contributions from Gene Stipe nor any of his family members or business associates.

THE REAL TRUTH: Jones was right! Period!

Lie #3: The Stipe Factor, Part B. Jones says Jeff gave special treatment to associates of Stipe in exchange for financial support of his campaign, that Jeff allowed his office to be used for meetings involving “shady business deals that are currently under investigation” and has even suggested that Jeff has business ties to Stipe.

THE TRUTH: The record is clear with regard to how all contributors to Jeff’s campaign have been treated by the State Auditor in his first term; if any of them ever secretly thought they might benefit directly from contributing campaign funds, they now know they were sadly mistaken. No one has ever requested any favors or special treatment by Jeff or his staff, with or without an offer of financial consideration. The suggestion that Jeff would even consider such a request is absurd.My husband is not, nor has he ever been financially involved or in business with, and has not received any form of compensation from anyone connected with these ludicrous allegations. Jeff has neither allowed his office to be used for any business deals, nor has he attended any such meetings. It’s difficult for me to comprehend the nerve Jones has to make these ridiculous allegations when he knowingly solicited and received contributions, in this election cycle, from multiple persons who have been burned by Jeff’s fearless audits. For instance, Jones' own contribution reports show he took money from a western Oklahoma official named along with several other Hinton residents in a scam to bilk taxpayers of over $7.5 million in a fraudulent get-rich economic development scam. Months after the investigation became public knowledge and even after his grand jury indictment was announced, Kenneth Doughty handed over a contribution to help fund Jones' lie-filled campaign against Jeff. Why? Because it was Jeff who uncovered the Doughty scheme and turned the information over to prosecutors.Accepting legal campaign contributions from individuals who later become the targets of an investigation or are later indicted is one thing, but it’s quite another to knowingly solicit and accept money from someone after it’s known they have already been indicted by a grand jury, which is exactly what Jones has done.

THE REAL TRUTH: Lori says, "It’s difficult for me to comprehend the nerve Jones has to make these ridiculous allegations." Sure she can- in her own testimony she confirms exactly what Gary was accusing the McMahans of doing.

Lie #4: Imaginary Employee Arm-Twisting Jones has said as State Auditor and Inspector he will not accept donations from anyone he employs. He claims Jeff and others harassed employees in the office to support his campaign, and that they would be fired if they didn’t.

THE TRUTH: A few disgruntled, unproductive and disruptive former employees have fueled this lie. But Jeff’s had no takers on his offer to open personnel files and/or discuss the termination circumstances of any former employees who are willing to sign a privacy release. It was easy for these malcontents to make phony allegations about their former employer when they knew all along Jeff couldn’t prove they lied without breaking laws barring employers from disclosing information about employees, former or otherwise. But it now appears the former employees who misrepresented themselves are unwilling to risk exposure of the truth behind their departures from the State Auditor’s office.Jeff’s primary employment policy has always been to hire and retain qualified, industrious, effective public servants. Many dozens of long-term agency employees currently work for my husband, even though they have never volunteered any time or money to his campaign. Jeff has not, nor would he ever condone any form of pressure on anyone to support his campaign. While Jeff’s flattered to know that some agency employees believe in him so strongly they are supporting his campaign, they know it has no impact on their employment status.Examples of Jeff's impartial treatment of employees who didn’t support his campaign include the fact that after he was elected, he retained Rod Dillard - an honest, hard working and very competent employee. Yet, Rod had actually run against Jeff for the 2002 Democratic nomination for the office. Rod remained at the State Auditor's office for more than a year after Jeff took office, before leaving on good terms for better opportunities.Angie Welch is another case in point. She supported John Fodge for the Democratic nomination for state auditor in 2002. Yet Angie remains a member of Jeff’s staff today, and was recently promoted to a supervisory position due to her exemplary work in the performance of her duties.

THE REAL TRUTH: Gary was right!

Lie #5: Jeff’s Qualifications.Recent TV campaign ads aired by Jones assert Jeff “can’t even count to ten” and offers as evidence a video clip showing Jeff counting his fingers, skipping the number six. The ad goes on to say that Jeff isn’t qualified to be the auditor because he isn’t a CPA.

THE TRUTH:As an elementary teacher, I can assure you Jeff can actually count to ten. In fact, he’s occasionally even counted higher than that – let’s take a quick look at some of the more notable counts Jeff has made:200,000,000 = Approximate dollar amount in government fraud, waste and abuse exposed by Jeff’s audits in the last 4 years.1,300,000 = Approximate dollar amount cut from Jeff’s budget in his first year in office.1,400 = The number of audits produced by Jeff’s office during his first term, more than any other 4 year period in state history, in spite of those cuts to his own budget.14 = Number of years experience Jeff gained under previous State Auditor Clifton Scott, who endorsed Jeff as his replacement, recognizing Jeff’s hard work, outstanding abilities and tough mentality in performing hundreds of audits across the state.7 = Number of years Jeff served as manager of the Investigative Audit Division under Mr. Scott.2 = Number of times over the last 4 years Jeff has been honored by his peers with national recognition for his accomplishments as Oklahoma’s State Auditor.To be completely fair, I have noticed Jeff has lost the ability to count the number of toes he’s stepped on or enemies he’s made as a result of his tough audits. Now let’s look at a few numbers with which Gary Jones should be quite familiar:160,000 = Approximate dollar amount Comanche County Commissioners were forced to strip out of the district's general operating funds in 1999 to replace federal grant money that mysteriously disappeared or was mismanaged under Jones’ watch in a brief stint as District 3 Commissioner.100,000 = Approximate dollar amount Gary improperly paid himself from corporate funds over a two-year period, according to court-ordered audit in a lawsuit filed against him by a former business partner.100 = Approximate dollar amount left in reserve after Jones’ apparent mishandling of public funds nearly bankrupted the Comanche County district he served, leaving it far short of the amount required by law to be maintained in the fund.1 = Number of terms Gary Jones served as Comanche County Commissioner before voters realized their mistake and voted him back out of office.0 = Number of government audits conducted by Gary Jones. Also, the amount of experience Jones has in public practice as a CPA.As for that video clip, in December 2002, Jeff and I were present at what Jones describes as a “family Christmas party,” although attended by more than 1,100 people (wow, big family!) at which master hypnotist Dr. Don White was a paid entertainer. Jeff good-naturedly agreed to join about a dozen volunteers on stage, where Dr. White induced hypnosis and then suggested to Jeff that the number six was not in his vocabulary. It was one of many effective and entertaining stunts performed that evening, one which Dr. White has said is most humorous when he has a “victim” with an accounting or math-related profession. However, Gary Jones knows this material is the proprietary property of Dr. White. He also knows the tape was acquired underhandedly. Jones is now broadcasting a segment he’s taken out of context, and has twisted it in a pathetic attempt to gain unethical advantage in a race for a public office that, by its very nature, requires strong ethical standards.

THE REAL TRUTH: McMahan is not a formally trained accountant. He was elected largely based on the recommendation of Clifton Scott- who Steve Phipps said was on board with the straw donor contribution scheme. The TV commercial was a clever spot that featured McMahan under hypnosis. Whether it garnered Gary more votes or hurt him can be debated, but the jest of the spot was McMahan's lack of qualifications- not his inability to count.

EDITORIAL COMMENTS: The McMahans STOLE the 2002 and 2006 elections from Gary Jones. Lori McMahan admitted that in court- Jeff said he didn't realize it(they were stealing the election) at the time, but it looked like that's what had happened. So Phipps and both McMahans have confirmed what Jones had alledged for years.

If Governor Henry has a bi-partisan bone in his body, he will right the wrongs of the past and appoint Gary Jones because HE IS THE MOST QUALIFIED! All evidence indicates Jones would have been elected State Auditor- not once, but twice-had the McMahans not lied and cheated!

To email Governor Brad Henry and urge him to appoint Gary Jones, click on link http://www.governor.state.ok.us/message.php