GreekChat.com Forums  

Go Back   GreekChat.com Forums > General Chat Topics > News & Politics
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

» GC Stats
Members: 331,900
Threads: 115,724
Posts: 2,207,983
Welcome to our newest member, masonooglet9185
» Online Users: 5,217
1 members and 5,216 guests
No Members online
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 03-01-2013, 03:52 PM
Kevin Kevin is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
Posts: 18,669
Quote:
Originally Posted by DubaiSis View Post
I heard recently that a Congressman will change his vote if he gets 6 calls on a subject. 6. Because he assumes 1000 people agree with the 1 person who actually picks up the phone. If every logical person in Oklahoma (and I'm sure there are a few of you out there) made one phone call or sent an email that was carefully worded and polite, you could revolutionize Oklahoma. If the only people who are squeaking are the wingnuts, that's who they're going to respond to.
I think you're on to something. This is going to be a very Oklahoma specific answer, but I'm at a pretty good vantage point to understand what's going on here.

Prior to the last 5 years or so, Oklahoma had been run by the Democrats in the legislature exclusively for over 90 years. These were Southern [note the capital S] Democrats who fought racial integration, socially enlightened policy, etc. They were corrupt and dominated by trial lawyers, which has resulted in the practice of law being particularly lucrative for my colleague-kin in certain areas.

Back in the late 80s/early 90s, the Chamber of Commerce hatched a plan to control the state. With the help of the local media, headed by E.K. Gaylord (those of you in Nashville are acquainted), who had just been put through the ringer by the Attorney General, were naturally very anti trial lawyer and compliant in this endeavor, began to malign attorneys at all levels, to push "tort reform" as salvation, to go after unions and to rejigger the courtrooms to favor large institutions with deep pockets. Bit by bit, folks bought that these ideas were "conservative," even though conservative used to mean personal responsibility, not corporate immunity, the public bought it.

With evil trial lawyers marginalized and the word "conservative" being associated with virtuous for a slight majority of our citizens, the Republican brand caught fire. It was almost a snowball effect--a politician could say anything was conservative and the public would buy it. Destroying Unions? Conservative. Getting rid of pollution controls? Conservative. Capping damages in lawsuits? Conservative. [not making this up] Ensuring oil and gas royalty owners can't file class action suits against producers? Must be Conservative.

To make matters worse, the wingnuts figured this out. We have two groups, OCPAC (Oklahoma Conservative PAC) and the Sooner Tea Party, which are formed of a bunch of self-described conservative/libertarian/constitutionalist malcontents who believe almost uniformly that UN Agenda 21 is a conspiracy against the Constitution to steal our sovereignty and that our President is a Kenyan Muslim whose goal is to marginalize the U.S. to make up for English colonialism. These two groups (which both claim the other is too liberal and continually push one another to further and further extremes) figured out they could take control of the message of Conservatives which the Chamber of Commerce used to control.

If a Republican dares to speak against any of these groups, they will run someone in the primary against him. Sometimes they even do it to their good foot soldiers who march in lock step with the agenda. I am friends with a couple of our Republican legislators. They're intelligent and reasonable individuals, but they have been forced to support some of the stupidest legislation imaginable.

Just a few examples:

-- Making it a felony for a state official to do anything in compliance with Obamacare.

--Allowing local school districts to opt out of state mandated standards.

--Exempting intrastate manufactured firearms from federal regulations entirely so long as they remain within the state.
__________________
SN -SINCE 1869-
"EXCELLING WITH HONOR"
S N E T T
Mu Tau 5, Central Oklahoma
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 03-01-2013, 06:56 PM
Psi U MC Vito Psi U MC Vito is offline
GreekChat Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: nasty and inebriated
Posts: 5,783
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
Just a few examples:

--Exempting intrastate manufactured firearms from federal regulations entirely so long as they remain within the state.
I agree that it is an end run around the Federal government, but it appears to me at least that they do have a constitutional leg to stand on.
__________________
And he took a cup of coffee and gave thanks to God for it, saying, 'Each of you drink from it. This is my caffeine, which gives life.'
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 03-02-2013, 08:50 AM
Kevin Kevin is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
Posts: 18,669
Quote:
Originally Posted by Psi U MC Vito View Post
I agree that it is an end run around the Federal government, but it appears to me at least that they do have a constitutional leg to stand on.
Not at all. If you can't sell marijuana grown intra state to folks in your own state according to the SCOTUS, why could you sell guns?
__________________
SN -SINCE 1869-
"EXCELLING WITH HONOR"
S N E T T
Mu Tau 5, Central Oklahoma
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 03-02-2013, 09:17 AM
DGTess DGTess is offline
GreekChat Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Bryan, TX
Posts: 1,039
Send a message via Yahoo to DGTess
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
Not at all. If you can't sell marijuana grown intra state to folks in your own state according to the SCOTUS, why could you sell guns?
Legally, the difference is that marijuana - the substance itself - is federally prohibited, while guns themselves are not. So the legal question is intrastate commerce, not interstate, in a product that is not prohibited.
__________________
When seconds count, the police are only minutes away.
Laws alone can not secure freedom of expression; in order that every man present his views without penalty there must be spirit of tolerance in the entire population.-Einstein
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 03-02-2013, 09:24 AM
Kevin Kevin is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
Posts: 18,669
Quote:
Originally Posted by DGTess View Post
Legally, the difference is that marijuana - the substance itself - is federally prohibited, while guns themselves are not. So the legal question is intrastate commerce, not interstate, in a product that is not prohibited.
The law is to allow, for example, fully automatic firearms to be sold intrastate if they're made here. So the firearms in question would be federally prohibited ones.
__________________
SN -SINCE 1869-
"EXCELLING WITH HONOR"
S N E T T
Mu Tau 5, Central Oklahoma
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Ignorant things politicians say AGDee News & Politics 47 08-22-2012 11:46 PM
APO HIV/AIDS Legislative Working Group Senusret I Alpha Phi Omega 13 09-26-2010 07:54 AM
Congressional Black Caucus 36th Annual Legislative Conference Bamboozled Alpha Kappa Alpha 11 09-08-2006 03:49 PM
Some people are just so ignorant Maya AKAngelou Alpha Kappa Alpha 0 05-12-2004 05:20 AM
Legislative Secretaries Can't Gossip AGDLynn News & Politics 1 01-28-2004 07:38 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:30 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.