Bush Issues "Regrets" after U.S. Attack On Oklahoma
WASHINGTON DC - In the wee hours of Sunday morning President Bush held a press conference to issue a statement of regret about the invasion of Oklahoma by U.S. troops. Just hours after crack Black Division units had been withdrawn from positions around Norman, Oklahoma the unusual midnight press conference was carried on WB and UPN. U.S. troops had begun the invasion within two hours after the University of Oklahoma's Sooners had defeated the Texas Longhorns for the third straight year. At 6:49 P.M. Eastern Time wire stories alerted a shocked nation that the Bush Administration had placed Oklahoma on the "Axis of Evil" list with Iraq, Iran, and North Korea.
"I was just kidding," said Bush. "Okay, I lost my temper and made a few statements I shouldn't have but an over-anxious aide took me more serious (sic) than I had meant it to be taken." Unnamed sources at the White House identified the over-anxious aide as Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld. The Secretary was reportedly at an "undisclosed location" and was not available for comment.
The President refused however to back down on his demand for regime change in the coaching staff at OU. "Bob Stoops is an evil man." Bush went on to warn the OU coach ,"and others of his ilk", that if he did not allow UN inspectors to come to OU to search his play books, then the USA would resort to military actions against the ruling regime in Norman. “We want to know if he is creating plays of mass destruction or not. He claims he is not; let the world know about it,” Bush said. Bush went on to predict that "the wind will blow away foreign threats as the noise of an evil covetous tyrant, the enemy of Bevo will eventually be cast to the winds in the mother of all battles".
While troops had been withdrawn Saturday night, Dan Mahoney, Oklahoma Governor Frank Keating's press director reported that a bombing campaign apparently aimed at removing the coach from power was continuing. "Apparently, the President has not heeded our calls to cease the air assault," Mahoney said. "This marks the first military action taken against Oklahoma since 1908."
"This is a confusing policy," said Todd Furman of the Cato Institute. "Bush issues a statement of regret but then continues bombing the Sooners. Just who is in control of our military strategy?" "Strange though it seems, these dueling positions actually make sense when you consider the two competing priorities of Bush's policy ever since he was elected president. One priority is protecting Texas, about which the president and many administration officials have spoken warmly. The other priority is prosecuting America's own war on terrorism. In the fall, that meant recruiting Middle Eastern members for the coalition against the Sooners; today, it means finding Arab support for the unexpected war against Bob Stoops. In either case, Texas is the loser."
Saturday, October 12, 2002
Friday, October 11, 2002
A salad state?
The English have a long tradition as accomplished travel writers. So it was with some eagerness that I discovered a book by Peter Biddlecombe (don't you just love those English names?) entitled "The United Burger States of America". As I wandered the bookstore my eye landed on the cover of this paperback. It featured a cartoon cow in the shape of the USA and sliced up into states. Oklahoma was in the center.
I was familiar with this writer. He is the English version of Jay Cronley. The back cover said:
"The United States is many things to many people: to Peter Biddlecombe it's food. America, he argues, is nothing less than a Great United Bumper Burger: from the meat state of Connecticut, where the hamburger was invented in a New Haven car park .... to the french-fry state of Texas, where potato-head politicians as "Is our children learning?"
Texas the french fry state? Connecticut the meat state? Ok, so Biddlecombe doesn't seem to have in-depth knowledge of America or our food. That naivete is what makes travel writing so much fun to read. I bought it for 6 quid.
Once home I couldn't wait to read the part about Biddlecombe's travels through Oklahoma. The author had divided his book into sections based on food types: the burger states, bun states, cheese states, bacon states, salad states, french fry states, relish, ketchup, salt, fruity (yes, California), and finally, the drink states. Silly? Yes. The classification system was contrived and meaningless. Oklahoma was a "salad state", along with New Mexico, Hawaii, and North Dakota. Go figure.
On page 199 Biddlecombe gets around to Oklahoma: "And finally, of course, there is Oklahoma. Poor, innocent Oklahoma. I defy anyone to read, see or hear anything about the famous Trail of Tears and not shed a tear for the poor Indians and their families." Then in three short paragraphs Biddlecomb dispenses with poor, innocent Oklahoma by saying that we are famous for the worst race riot in American history (1921) and Timothy McVeigh and the bombing of the federal building in Oklahoma City (1995). That is all there is to Oklahoma according to this Englishman who obviously didn't set foot in our state. Did that stop him from slandering our 3.3 million inhabitants? Of course not. Like so many, the author probably spent 5 minutes on the internet and 2 minutes writing about his indepth research on Oklahoma.
It's lamentable that those who have never been to Oklahoma dismiss it with outdated generalities. To be dismissed is bad enough. To be dismissed out of ignorance is doubly hurtful. To have that ignorance published and distributed worldwide is literary criminality.
The English have a long tradition as accomplished travel writers. So it was with some eagerness that I discovered a book by Peter Biddlecombe (don't you just love those English names?) entitled "The United Burger States of America". As I wandered the bookstore my eye landed on the cover of this paperback. It featured a cartoon cow in the shape of the USA and sliced up into states. Oklahoma was in the center.
I was familiar with this writer. He is the English version of Jay Cronley. The back cover said:
"The United States is many things to many people: to Peter Biddlecombe it's food. America, he argues, is nothing less than a Great United Bumper Burger: from the meat state of Connecticut, where the hamburger was invented in a New Haven car park .... to the french-fry state of Texas, where potato-head politicians as "Is our children learning?"
Texas the french fry state? Connecticut the meat state? Ok, so Biddlecombe doesn't seem to have in-depth knowledge of America or our food. That naivete is what makes travel writing so much fun to read. I bought it for 6 quid.
Once home I couldn't wait to read the part about Biddlecombe's travels through Oklahoma. The author had divided his book into sections based on food types: the burger states, bun states, cheese states, bacon states, salad states, french fry states, relish, ketchup, salt, fruity (yes, California), and finally, the drink states. Silly? Yes. The classification system was contrived and meaningless. Oklahoma was a "salad state", along with New Mexico, Hawaii, and North Dakota. Go figure.
On page 199 Biddlecombe gets around to Oklahoma: "And finally, of course, there is Oklahoma. Poor, innocent Oklahoma. I defy anyone to read, see or hear anything about the famous Trail of Tears and not shed a tear for the poor Indians and their families." Then in three short paragraphs Biddlecomb dispenses with poor, innocent Oklahoma by saying that we are famous for the worst race riot in American history (1921) and Timothy McVeigh and the bombing of the federal building in Oklahoma City (1995). That is all there is to Oklahoma according to this Englishman who obviously didn't set foot in our state. Did that stop him from slandering our 3.3 million inhabitants? Of course not. Like so many, the author probably spent 5 minutes on the internet and 2 minutes writing about his indepth research on Oklahoma.
It's lamentable that those who have never been to Oklahoma dismiss it with outdated generalities. To be dismissed is bad enough. To be dismissed out of ignorance is doubly hurtful. To have that ignorance published and distributed worldwide is literary criminality.
Thursday, October 10, 2002
Insane over Hussein
The Congress on Thursday authorized war-making powers for President Bush, giving him the extra muscle he needs is his determination to free America and the world from what he says is the growing threat of Saddam Hussein's Iraq.
I can't believe this is happening. I can't believe that my country is thinking of attacking a country without certain knowledge that they intend to harm us directly. Saddam is an evil man for certain, but there are a lot of evil leaders in the world today. Are we going to attack North Korea, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Sudan, and Zimbabwe next? China might be in the sights as well. Can we start attacking countries whose leaders are cruel despots? I don't think we can. We are powerful but if we try to take on all the world's bad guys by ourselves we will destroy our economy and abandon the moral highground.
The idea of us being so cocksure of ourselves and in such a rush to unilaterally attack Iraq in order to obtain "regime change" makes me wonder if the saying that "power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely" can apply to the good old USA? Bush's advisors, Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz, seem determined to apply their extreme ideology to US foreign policy at all costs. Bush is in need of some level-headed advice. Hopefully, Powell will stay in there to fight for a pragmatic and principled approach to foreign policy and the Iraq matter.
I considered writing to Senators Nickles and Inhofe to let them know how unwise Bush's strategy (if he has one) is but why waste two stamps? Our two Senators are so party-loyal and right wing that I can't even think of them listening to the voices of moderation. They'd never dream of going against President Bush's position, no matter how flawed it is.
The Congress on Thursday authorized war-making powers for President Bush, giving him the extra muscle he needs is his determination to free America and the world from what he says is the growing threat of Saddam Hussein's Iraq.
I can't believe this is happening. I can't believe that my country is thinking of attacking a country without certain knowledge that they intend to harm us directly. Saddam is an evil man for certain, but there are a lot of evil leaders in the world today. Are we going to attack North Korea, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Sudan, and Zimbabwe next? China might be in the sights as well. Can we start attacking countries whose leaders are cruel despots? I don't think we can. We are powerful but if we try to take on all the world's bad guys by ourselves we will destroy our economy and abandon the moral highground.
The idea of us being so cocksure of ourselves and in such a rush to unilaterally attack Iraq in order to obtain "regime change" makes me wonder if the saying that "power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely" can apply to the good old USA? Bush's advisors, Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz, seem determined to apply their extreme ideology to US foreign policy at all costs. Bush is in need of some level-headed advice. Hopefully, Powell will stay in there to fight for a pragmatic and principled approach to foreign policy and the Iraq matter.
I considered writing to Senators Nickles and Inhofe to let them know how unwise Bush's strategy (if he has one) is but why waste two stamps? Our two Senators are so party-loyal and right wing that I can't even think of them listening to the voices of moderation. They'd never dream of going against President Bush's position, no matter how flawed it is.
Wednesday, October 09, 2002
Dinosaurs & Bagels
I had a look at the new Natural History Museum at the University of Oklahoma today. It is first rate in every respect. The dinosaur and fossil exhibits are at least the equal of any museum in the country. The exhibits on Native American culture and environmental habitats in Oklahoma are excellent. It costs just $4 for adults. Unfortunately, the signage getting to the museum is inadequate. Although the museum is only about three miles from I-35 I could find no sign on I-35 to tell me which exit to take. Going south from Oklahoma City towards Dallas you take the fourth Norman exit. The museum is a jewel for Oklahoma and OU.
After the tour of the museum I stopped in at the NY Bagel cafe at Campus Corner for a bagel sandwich. This is one of the few bagel eateries left after the bagel boom of the late 90s. A couple of years ago most of the bagel places went out of business. One chain called the New York Bagel was headquartered in Stillwater but had shops all over Oklahoma and beyond. The chain became involved with a burrito chain, started phasing their shops from bagels to burritos and then to no bagels. What a loss to civilization that was. Those of us who learned to like bagels had to turn to the grocery stores for the packaged variety. $2.70 for four lousy bagels? New York Bagels please come back.
I had a look at the new Natural History Museum at the University of Oklahoma today. It is first rate in every respect. The dinosaur and fossil exhibits are at least the equal of any museum in the country. The exhibits on Native American culture and environmental habitats in Oklahoma are excellent. It costs just $4 for adults. Unfortunately, the signage getting to the museum is inadequate. Although the museum is only about three miles from I-35 I could find no sign on I-35 to tell me which exit to take. Going south from Oklahoma City towards Dallas you take the fourth Norman exit. The museum is a jewel for Oklahoma and OU.
After the tour of the museum I stopped in at the NY Bagel cafe at Campus Corner for a bagel sandwich. This is one of the few bagel eateries left after the bagel boom of the late 90s. A couple of years ago most of the bagel places went out of business. One chain called the New York Bagel was headquartered in Stillwater but had shops all over Oklahoma and beyond. The chain became involved with a burrito chain, started phasing their shops from bagels to burritos and then to no bagels. What a loss to civilization that was. Those of us who learned to like bagels had to turn to the grocery stores for the packaged variety. $2.70 for four lousy bagels? New York Bagels please come back.
Tuesday, October 08, 2002
Mr. Richardson. Goodbye.
I was looking for clues to Gary Richardson's thinking and decision-making processes. As I mentioned yesterday, Richardson said he could not support a ban on cockfighting on a statewide basis. Richardson said he would handle it on a county-option basis because he did not think it right for the urban areas to tell rural counties what to do. If we carry this thinking to its "logical" conclusion we would have to ask Mr. Richardson if he believes it fair that the urban areas subsidize education in rural areas - as is currently the case. What if we extend this flawed line of thinking to the other issues the State Legislature and the Governor must deal with? Will abortion, gambling, speed laws, etc all be handled on a county option basis? Why not just abdicate all state law-making matters to the county level? Why would we need a Governor or a State Legislature at all?
Of course, anyone with the slightest sense sees Richardson's position on cockfighting as a cop-out as well as a lack of moral fiber. What do we need with such a candidate for Governor? Mr. Richardson, you are the weakest link. Goodbye.
Brad Henry, the Democrat candidate for Governor, says he can't support the ban on cockfighting because the penelties are too harsh. Of course, the penelties for dogfighting are exactly the same as the proposed penalties for cockfighting. Is Brad Henry also against the ban on dogfighting? Anyone with sense also sees Henry's position against the ban on cockfighting as a disingenuous cop-out. We don't need a Governor that can't manage enough spine to take a real position or one that is so loathsome as to cuddle with cockfighters.
As uncomfortable as I am with Steve Largent's extreme social conservatism, his love of the NRA, and his desire to put his religion in policy, I have to admire his principle-led decisions and his clear positions. I'm impressed with his clear opposition to the cockfighters.
I was looking for clues to Gary Richardson's thinking and decision-making processes. As I mentioned yesterday, Richardson said he could not support a ban on cockfighting on a statewide basis. Richardson said he would handle it on a county-option basis because he did not think it right for the urban areas to tell rural counties what to do. If we carry this thinking to its "logical" conclusion we would have to ask Mr. Richardson if he believes it fair that the urban areas subsidize education in rural areas - as is currently the case. What if we extend this flawed line of thinking to the other issues the State Legislature and the Governor must deal with? Will abortion, gambling, speed laws, etc all be handled on a county option basis? Why not just abdicate all state law-making matters to the county level? Why would we need a Governor or a State Legislature at all?
Of course, anyone with the slightest sense sees Richardson's position on cockfighting as a cop-out as well as a lack of moral fiber. What do we need with such a candidate for Governor? Mr. Richardson, you are the weakest link. Goodbye.
Brad Henry, the Democrat candidate for Governor, says he can't support the ban on cockfighting because the penelties are too harsh. Of course, the penelties for dogfighting are exactly the same as the proposed penalties for cockfighting. Is Brad Henry also against the ban on dogfighting? Anyone with sense also sees Henry's position against the ban on cockfighting as a disingenuous cop-out. We don't need a Governor that can't manage enough spine to take a real position or one that is so loathsome as to cuddle with cockfighters.
As uncomfortable as I am with Steve Largent's extreme social conservatism, his love of the NRA, and his desire to put his religion in policy, I have to admire his principle-led decisions and his clear positions. I'm impressed with his clear opposition to the cockfighters.
Sunday, October 06, 2002
My computer is back in order and we can continue our blog. It's been a week since I could get online.
The Tulsa World reports today that of the three candidates for Governor in Oklahoma only Steve Largent supports the ban on cockfighting that Oklahomans will vote on in November. Brad Henry and Gary Richardson did not support the ban. That's all I needed to know about Richardson, Henry and Largent. There is no way in the world I'd vote for Richardson or Henry now. Any "statesman" that supports cockfighting is an embarrassment to Oklahoma and to humanity.
The Tulsa World reports today that of the three candidates for Governor in Oklahoma only Steve Largent supports the ban on cockfighting that Oklahomans will vote on in November. Brad Henry and Gary Richardson did not support the ban. That's all I needed to know about Richardson, Henry and Largent. There is no way in the world I'd vote for Richardson or Henry now. Any "statesman" that supports cockfighting is an embarrassment to Oklahoma and to humanity.