Oklahoma GOP Platform: Absolutely batshit insane.

So, like, last weekend the Oklahoma GOP had their convention in Tulsa.

They put together their party platform.

…

It is batshit insane.

Like… *silence*… like just print this off (pdf), close your eyes, point at a random sentence and read it.

There is a 100% chance that the sentence you point at is batshit insane. 100%.

… *silence*

Heres what they think about science education:

7. We believe that the scientific evidence supporting Intelligent Design and biblical creation should be included in the Oklahoma public school curricula, and if any evolution theory is taught, that both should receive equal funding, class time, and material. Teachers should have the freedom to cover creation science without fear of intimidation, reprimand, or lack of professional respect.

Yeah… Yeah you cant do that, Oklahoma GOP. Its quite illegal to teach Creation Science in science classrooms in public schools.
And you cant legislate ‘professional respect’. Thats kinda thought-policing there… psychos…

… *silence*

HT to The Morality War

Comments

#1 MattK
April 25, 2009

Holy crap. For awhile, after Obama was elected in the States, and Harper was elected in Canada, I was feeling confused. You with your pro-science pres. and nobel laureates in government and us with a creationist/chiropractic sci/tech minister. It just seemed so back aswards. Now all seems right with the world again. We may be getting stupider, but the role reversal is probably only temporary.
#2 GaryB, FCD
April 25, 2009

Please tell those of us from the Great White North that the GOP is just a little joke you Americans are playing on the rest of the world.

Please.
#3 lledowyn
April 25, 2009

@#2

The Republican party is becoming a joke, or a self parody by the day. They are completely owned and operated by the lunatic religious fringe, and until they figure out a way to break from that chokehold, they will continue to go down this insane path. While I don’t want them anywhere near power at the moment, I don’t particularly like the idea of one party rule either. Maybe it’s time for a new party to appear?
#4 a lurker
April 25, 2009

We commend:
1. President George W. Bush for his leadership in fighting terrorism and protecting the American people; for articulating his strong commitment to the sanctity of human life; for his uncompromising commitment to tax cuts; for his principled defense of marriage as the union of one man and one woman, for his Social Security reform initiative, and his strong judicial appointments.
2. U. S. Senator Jim Inhofe for his steadfast commitment to military readiness and his support for the cause of freedom around the world and his opposition to the “global warming” scare, and his fiscal conservatism.

Wow.
#5 ERV
April 25, 2009

a lurker– I KNOW, RIGHT?

I was trying to write this post all day. Trying to ‘just quote the really crazy/lol parts’, but I was quoting the whole thing, so I figured it would just be best to let everyone pick their own ‘Wow.’ line.
#6 Enon
April 25, 2009

99% insane. I did find one thing to agree with, repeal of the REAL ID act. Even teh certified psychotic will say something reasonable once in a while.
#7 MTiffany
April 25, 2009

I just love #19 and #20 under “Federal Government.” Oh nooos! The NAFTA Superhighway is coming! The NAFTA Superhighway is coming! Stop the NAFTA superhighway and the Amero!

The wingnuts are now firmly in control of the Republican party. It’s sad really (in a kind of laughable way).
#8 Ian
April 25, 2009

[T]he scientific evidence supporting Intelligent Design and biblical creation should be included in the Oklahoma public school curricula.

What’s unreasonable about that? There’s no scientific evidence supporting ID and creationism. It’s easy to present that evidence – in fact, it could be presented a billion times in the first second of class…and still not impinge in the least on the teacher’s instructional time.
#9 Jorde
April 26, 2009

I have no problem with them presenting the scientific evidence for creation and ID, but giving evolution equal time would mean it just isn’t taught.
#10 a lurker
April 26, 2009

10. We support local school board appointed textbook committees to select the state/district funded textbooks. We favor elimination of the state textbook committee.

This is a way to get creationist “textbooks” funded among other things.
#11 Joe Shelby
April 26, 2009

Well, electronic voting with paper trail isn’t too bad, and most libertarians agree with ditching the income tax in favor of a “VAT”-like sales tax is a good thing, though I’m skeptical of how variable it is going to get, especially in a recession where it would mean the government would be incurring even more debts to keep things afloat.
#12 A lurker
April 26, 2009

Last comment for now, I promise. Cross my heart and hope to become a creationist.

We favor withholding all payments to the U.N. until all member nations meet their current financial obligations to the U.N.

For or against the U.N., it never makes sense to say that we won’t do x until everyone else does it first. There is also a never have U.S. troops under a foreign command plank as well. That rules out membership in NATO though I doubt that they realize it.
#13 jonp
April 26, 2009

Because of this post, I was inspired to look up my own state’s (Oregon) Republican party platform. While our batshittery may not have been as dense as yours, there was more of it (though a lot of it was redundant… the OR GOP platform is 48 pages long instead of 8 like OK, and I’ll leave it to you to guess how much of that had to do with abortion and TEH GAY).

My favorite part, though was this:

…We propose the following:
… 7.5 Inter-justidictional agency cooperation shall be improved for more effective joint action against organized crime, drug cartels, terrorist networks and the Oregon Democratic Party.

Though I have to point out that, despite the impressive levels of crazy there, they still might get kicked out of the GOP club for calling it the “Democratic Party” instead of “Democrat Party”
#14 Woody
April 26, 2009

My favorite is the following:

“We believe it is the right and responsibility of parents to direct the upbringing and education of their children, without interference, regulation, or penalty from the government.”

Hmm, that means it would be ok to train your kids to be torturers and assassins, willing to kidnap foreign nationals, torture them, kill innocent people… Oh, wait a minute …
#15 Mike Haubrich, FCD
April 26, 2009

Children belong to their parents, not the state.

“Belong?”
#16 Rob Abiera
April 26, 2009

Hi Abbie – the state GOP convention was held in OKC, not Tulsa.

I think you’re looking at the Tulsa County platform, not the state platform. Don’t worry, the final platform adopted at the state convention is only 30 pages long.

You can read it here:
http://okstonewall.org/forums/index.php?topic=3268.0

Thanks for mentioning The Morality War!
#17 Bob O'H
April 26, 2009

@A lurker: They didn’t say “we won’t do x until everyone else does it”, they said “we won’t do x until everyone does it”. A subtle but important difference.
#18 William Wallace
April 26, 2009

I heard you guys are working on legalizing the hunting of feral hogs from aircraft.

Maybe our next vice presidential candidate will come from OK.

So Abbie, why don’t you complete your education at Berkley instead? You’d feel much more at home.
#19 Equisetum
April 26, 2009

4. While the objective study of philosophy and religion can be beneficial, public schools should not be endorsing any specific religion or philosophy. We believe that students and teachers should enjoy the right of free exercise of religion.
5. We support posting the Ten Commandments and our Nation’s motto, “In God We Trust,” in all public schools in recognition of our religious heritage.

How does supporting “posting the Ten Commandments and our Nation’s motto, “In God We Trust,” in all public schools in recognition of our religious heritage” jive with “public schools . . . not . . . endorsing any specific religion or philosophy”?

I’m getting a headache trying to resolve the logic.
#20 Equisetum
April 26, 2009

From the state GOP platform referenced in #16:
On Education:

5. Parents have a natural right to home school their children. We oppose any and all regulation of home schooling.

Translation: “I gots the right to raise my kids as stupid as I wants to.”

On Religious Freedom:

2. We believe the religion clause of the First Amendment was meant to protect an individual’s
freedom of religion, not remove religion from public life.

Traslation: “We believe in the Free Exercise Clause, but not in the Establishment Clause.”

Truly insane.
#21 MadScientist
April 26, 2009

Holy Crap – that’s like a newfangled version of the catlick “Apostle’s Creed” (aka Apostle Screed). Gawd givved ‘dem der’ life, prohputy, libuhty, and gunz. What crazy mo-fos – literally – there must’a been too much mo-fo goin’ round OK to breed morons like these.
#22 386sx
April 26, 2009

2. We believe the religion clause of the First Amendment was meant to protect an individual’s freedom of religion, not remove religion from public life.

That one ain’t so bad.

This one…

1. Our Founding Fathers based our Constitution, the Declaration of Independence, the Bill of
Rights, and our early laws on the Bible and on traditional Judeo-Christian ethics and values.
We believe these documents are the basis for law, order, and behavior, allowing individuals,
including government workers and officials, the freedom to involve God in all activities
according to their conscience.

That one is kinda a tiny bit at odds with the establishment clause. Just a wee little tiny bit.
#23 386sx
April 26, 2009

Those people have the gall to quote Thomas Jefferson. Actually, probably more ignorance than gall. That’s the real problem: ignorance.
#24 The Chimp's Raging Id
April 26, 2009

I think I must have installed a deranged bullshit filter on my PC as it’s refusing to open the PDF. From the quotes above, I think this is probably a good thing as they are frightening.
#25 Aquaria
April 26, 2009

I guess y’all hadn’t seen the TX GOP platform in the past?

It’s been chock full of the cuckoo nuts for ages now.
#26 Azkyroth
April 26, 2009

2. All welfare programs should encourage their recipients to accept personal responsibility and work toward self-sufficiency. Those who repeatedly misuse the system or fraudulently misrepresent themselves should forfeit further assistance.

This is sensible on its face. I wonder what they really mean by it…
#27 Buffy
April 26, 2009

Sally Kern. That pretty much explains it all.
#28 CRS
April 26, 2009

OMF Spaghetti Monster. After that I need my shot of Haldol with the Xanax chaser®. There are more reasonable people filling intensive care psych wards.
#29 ema
April 26, 2009

1. Our Founding Fathers based our Constitution, the Declaration of Independence, the Bill of Rights, and our early laws on the Bible and on traditional Judeo-Christian ethics and values.
We believe these documents are the basis for law…

Viva la Theocracy!

Of course this is also the state where the legislature passed bills mandating, among other things, invasive, unnecessary medical procedures on female patients of repro age without their consent, and prohibiting patients from suing their physician if s/he deliberately withholds information from them, such as the presence of a severe developmental defect. Must be something in the water, I guess.
#30 freelunch
April 26, 2009

Azkyroth,

If you add it to

1. We encourage individuals to look to family and personal relationships as well as charitable and faith-based programs to meet their social needs. Government welfare programs should exist solely to provide a safety net for American citizens who are incapable of supporting themselves.

you will note that they want to abolish all welfare programs for anyone who might be able to take care of themselves. That would start with unemployment compensation. So, if you are a newly widowed young mother with a few kids or you just got laid off, too bad for you unless you can get your church to stump up some money to help.
#31 Mobius
April 26, 2009

OMG…What a pile of religious dominated BS. I know OK is dominated by religious loons, but this is just sad. You have the largest political party in one of the largest counties in the state declaring this tripe as their official policy…GAKK!!!

If they were honest (yeah…like that is going to happen) “…the scientific evidence supporting Intelligent Design and biblical creation should be included in the Oklahoma public school curricula…” wouldn’t change a thing, since there is no evidence for either one. Unfortunately, they will want to include all the fallacious BS that creationists have come up with over the years. Truly, truly sad.
#32 Stokesy
April 26, 2009

15, 18, 21 and 22 scare the living daylights out of me. The rest of it is horrifying, but those four underscore their mentality to me. I.e: We hate everyone that isn’t us. All assimilate!
#33 freelunch
April 26, 2009

William Wallace,

Why do you think religious nuts have the right to violate the constitution anywhere? People shouldn’t be run out of a state because they aren’t willing to put up with reactionaries who refuse to accept the US Constitution. If the OK Republicans don’t like the US Constitution, they are free to move to a country that is more to their liking. Saudi Arabia might be right for them.
#34 Rob Abiera
April 26, 2009

I’d like to take this opportunity to mention my Oklahoma Church-State Separation List:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/okseparation
#35 Rob Abiera
April 26, 2009

And if you’re in the OKC area, don’t forget the Americans United for Separation of Church and State event on May 9th:

“Status of Separation of Church and State in Oklahoma”

http://okcamericansunited.blogspot.com/2009/04/re-scheduled-americans-united-dialogs.html
#36 Wes
April 26, 2009

4. While the objective study of philosophy and religion can be beneficial, public schools should not be endorsing any specific religion or philosophy. We believe that students and teachers should enjoy the right of free exercise of religion.

5. We support posting the Ten Commandments and our Nation’s motto, “In God We Trust,” in all public schools in recognition of our religious heritage.

…

7. We believe that the scientific evidence supporting Biblical creation should be included in Oklahoma public schools curricula, and if any evolution theory is taught, that both should receive equal funding, class time, and material. Teachers should have the freedom to cover creation science without fear of intimidation, reprimand, or lack of professional respect.

These people can’t be so stupid that they don’t see the blatant contradiction in these statements. They have to be doing this on purpose.
#37 Joe
April 26, 2009

So Abbie, why don’t you complete your education at Berkley instead? You’d feel much more at home.

Well, she is certainly welcome here in BerkEley (heck, I even have a vacant apartment she can rent!). That said, what makes you think OK stupidity would disturb her any less from out here?
#38 D. C. Sessions
April 26, 2009

These people can’t be so stupid that they don’t see the blatant contradiction in these statements.

Good thing I’d put the coffee down.

In future, a “C&C” warning or perhaps <sarcasm> tags might be in order.
#39 George
April 26, 2009

I bet this guy http://www.crunchgear.com/2009/04/26/oklahoma-city-teabagger-arrested-for-threatening-bloodbath-on-twitter/ fits right in in the OK repub party.
#40 Stacy
April 26, 2009

Aauurrgghh! Teh stoopit is everywhere!!
#41 Azkyroth
April 26, 2009

you will note that they want to abolish all welfare programs for anyone who might be able to take care of themselves. That would start with unemployment compensation. So, if you are a newly widowed young mother with a few kids or you just got laid off, too bad for you unless you can get your church to stump up some money to help.

Ah, I see. I thought the first of those was reasonable divorced from context, too, but then considered just how absurdly limited a definition of “cannot support themselves” they want to use.
#42 John Danley
April 26, 2009

Teh, teh , teh.
#43 Joshua Zelinsky
April 27, 2009

Ok, picking three random sections on page 3. Let’s see what we get:

“We oppose the so called Fairness Doctrine or any scheme to limit, shape, moderate or censor Free Speech in the Market Place of Ideas. The freedom of speech and of the press referred to in the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States should apply as well to the electronic media, i.e., radio and television. Thus, we oppose any such restrictions in any and all media.”

That’s not unreasonable, in fact I’m pretty in favor of that (modulo possible issues by what they mean by “shape” – restrictions of broadcasting to prevent multiple transmitters using the same frequency could be considering shaping, but I don’t think they mean that so this isn’t an issue).

We support the complete and permanent elimination of the marriage penalty and the estate tax.
Removing the estate tax is something I disagree with, but this isn’t crazy by itself.

We oppose grants of tax money to any special interest, activist or lobbying, group, e.g., “ACORN” and similar organizations.

Oh good. I was worried I wasn’t going to get any crazy in here. But third one definitely does it. It isn’t clear to me who they don’t want to give money to, but from the wording any “activist” group would seem that funding can’t go to the Red Cross or pretty close to any other organization. Also, it isn’t clear why they need to throw in ACORN there other than that ACORN is one of the right-wing bogeymen. I suspect what they really mean here, is no money going to organizations that have even a ghost of a chance of doing things we don’t like.

In general, that seems like a fair sample. There’s one third or so that I might agree with, one third or so that I disagree with but don’t think is crazy and then there’s a third or so that’s just batshit insane.
#44 BAllanJ
April 27, 2009

As someone from outside the States, I’m still wondering where the big ad campaign is that has its big tag line “Why do Republicans hate America?” I mean… there’s just so much obvious support for asking this question. Each ad could easily back up why this question would come up in thinking people’s minds.
#45 Equisetum
April 27, 2009

Ok, picking three random sections on page 3. Let’s see what we get:

“We oppose the so called Fairness Doctrine or any scheme to limit, shape, moderate or censor Free Speech in the Market Place of Ideas. . . .”

The elimination of the Fairness Doctrine is censorship. So there’s your crazy, right off the bat.
The Fairness Doctrine requires broadcasters to cover both sides of controversial issues in the public interest. Without it, a broadcaster can push one side of an issue, such as eliminating regulation of hedge funds and banks, and never have to talk about the consequences of it, nor allow anyone else to. This virtually eliminates public debate. The Fairness Doctrine is a way of curtailing censorship, and eliminating it was a way of ensuring censorship.

But Republicans as a rule drink at least two cups of cognitive dissonance for breakfast, so they have no trouble writing shit like this.
#46 freelunch
April 27, 2009

These people can’t be so stupid that they don’t see the blatant contradiction in these statements. They have to be doing this on purpose.

For a lot of these folks religious freedom means that you have the right to be any sort of Christian you want to be or even a Papist or a Jew. They have no idea that having the choice of going to the local SBC affiliate or the supposedly unaffiliated community Christian church is not the limit.
#47 Equisetum
April 27, 2009

Sorry. I just realized that I used cognitive dissonance wrongly. From wikipedia:

Cognitive dissonance is an uncomfortable feeling caused by holding two contradictory ideas simultaneously.

I don’t think Republicans feel any discomfort at all when they write contradictory ideas into policy. So I really don’t know what the hell they’re drinking. Or smoking.
It would be interesting to know if members of The Heritage Foundation et. al. do feel any dissonance. It would at least indicate some level of moral activity.
#48 Ouchimoo
April 27, 2009

7. We believe that the scientific evidence supporting evolution and biology should be included in the Oklahoma public school curricula, and if any scientific theory is taught, that both should receive equal funding, class time, and material. Teachers should have the freedom to cover science without fear of intimidation, reprimand, or lack of professional respect.

There you go you OK GOP F#CKS! I FIXED IT FOR YOU!

*sigh*, okay, one down . . .
#49 Mu
April 27, 2009

Odd, we’re eating pork, shrimp, and beef with cream sauce, all things explicitly forbidden in the bible, but we’re against stem cells and abortions, which are never mentioned. I guess the “original meaning” doesn’t mean “literal meaning”. But that’s how they look at the constitution as well.
#50 Ketil Tveiten
April 27, 2009

I’m impressed that they explicitly state that they oppose rights for children and regulation against discrimination against women.

Amusing: (taxes etc., #17) ‘We believe governmental monetary and regulatory intervention (…) is repugnant to Free Enterprise and a complete anathema to a Sovereign People.’

I thought language like that was reserved for several hundred years ago…

Also, taxes etc. #19: ‘Taxes should not be used to redistribute private income which is legally gained.’ This seems to imply that the only thing government can do with taxes is give them back to the taxpayers, in amounts exactly what was paid in taxes by each individual. Certainly fair, from a sort of Ayn Rand perspective, but doesn’t leave a lot for that cherished military spending…

They seem to be in favour of prosecuting Bush, Cheney etc., for war crimes, torture etc.: just look up ‘Public integrity’ #1 on page 3. Oh no, of course. What those guys did isn’t criminal, what ever was I thinking?

… I was going to read the entire thing, but… THE STUPID! IT BURNS! so I won’t. Ouch.
#51 Saddlebred
April 27, 2009

Days like these make me glad I live in Wisconsin.
#52 Glen Davidson
April 27, 2009

We believe that the scientific evidence supporting Intelligent Design and biblical creation should be included in the Oklahoma public school curricula

They’re just using that to promote a moment of silence. The teacher will say, “And here is all of the evidence for ID/creationism,” pointing to a blank whiteboard, and saying nothing for a few seconds, to perhaps as long as a minute, if they’re dramatic.

True, this doesn’t comport with the equal funding requirement, but then again, posting the 10 commandments doesn’t comply with not promoting specific religions–not to anyone who understands Xianity to be a particular religion, anyway.

So we can’t expect consistency from them, not when intellectual standards are in force.

Glen D
http://tinyurl.com/6mb592
#53 JBlilie
April 27, 2009

Teachers should have the freedom to cover creation science without fear of intimidation, reprimand, or lack of professional respect.

Sally, I require that you be friends with Johnny … You will not criticize him.

They ought to bring in the Islamic council lawyers to write up an anti-defamation plank for them:

Thou shalt not point out the idiocy and total lack of evidence for “intelligent design.”

Thou shalt not criticise the use of iron-age fairy tales as scientific data.

Thou shalt not dogmatically and intolerantly insist upon verifiable evidence (“visible certainty” — Galileo).

Thou shalt not dogmatically and intolerantly reject magic in logical discussion.

… Like you said, absolute batshit nuts.
#54 RAM
April 27, 2009

“4. While the objective study of philosophy and religion can be beneficial, public schools should not be endorsing any specific religion or philosophy. We believe that students and teachers should enjoy the right of free exercise of religion.”
Their arguement is and will be that evolution is also a religion.
#55 Hank Fox
April 27, 2009

Word frequencies:

A total of 27 mentions of religion, including 9 mentions of “God,” 9 more of “religious” or “religion,” 4 of “creation,” 2 of “faith,” 1 of “Bible,” 1 of “biblical,” and 1 of “Christian.”

But only 3 mentions of “science,” zero mentions of “reason,” and the phrase “any evolution theory” used as if it’s a generic supermarket brand of doubtful quality.
#56 Kristjan Wager
April 27, 2009

20. We oppose the formation of a North American Union with Mexico and Canada and any common currency.

Then it’s lucky that no one is planning such an Union, isn’t it?
#57 JBlilie
April 27, 2009

My comment @53:

Whoops on the html tags ……
#58 Qwerty
April 27, 2009

ERV, this is acutally the Tulsa County Republican Platform which is why it is proabably more bat-shit crezy than a state platform.

This does show how wacky their thinking is and how out of touch with most of the electorate.
#59 Joshua Zelinsky
April 27, 2009

Equisetum, not at all. Broadcasters have every right to talk about or not talk about any issue they please just as any citizen does or any newspaper. Content based restrictions are censorship independent of the medium.
#60 Coragyps
April 27, 2009

“These people can’t be so stupid that they don’t see the blatant contradiction in these statements. They have to be doing this on purpose.”

Wanna bet? I used to live there, and now I’m out of that frying pan into the Texas below.

They can be that stupid. I work with some of ‘em.
#61 eddie
April 27, 2009

In any w european country such a platform would get <n;5% in an election. In Tulsa, this is a safe thug district.
#62 Vorn
April 27, 2009

Equisetum: I too will argue against the Fairness Doctrine, but for a different reason: who chooses what sides get represented? I mean, most rational people would object to giving Gene Ray equal time, but there’s always those nuts that would sue about it.
#63 Martian Buddy
April 27, 2009

Remember when conservatives used to dismiss crazy-ass state GOP party platforms like that of Texas by saying that it was the people with the most time to spend on the party (ie. the nutty fundies with nothing better to do) who determined the state platforms, and that the party as a whole wasn’t as nuts as those platforms would lead one to believe?

I miss the days when that argument was still remotely plausible.
#64 vhutchison
April 27, 2009

The Repug platform in Oklahoma has been like the current one for several years, although the current one is somewhat more
nasty. OTH, the Oklahoma Demo platform is just the opposite. Unfortunately, the Repugs are now in control of both houses of the legislature for the first time in history. Fortunately, the Democratic Governor has been vetoing the worst bills. Unlike Texas, Louisiana and some other states, we still have been able to defeat creationist bills for the past ten years.
#65 Monado
April 27, 2009

As long as they’re disavowing any educational program originating with UNEP, maybe they’d also renounce the use of any medical treatment originating in evolutionary principles, any use of petroleum products found by dating strata with fossils, and so on. They can find their own oil with a dowsing rod and a prayer.

It’s also funny that with one breath they call for judges who will rule on the text of the constitution, not any fancy interpretation, and with the next they re-interpret the text of the Constitution to suit them.
#66 SteveL
April 28, 2009

Heh… this is what I got.

5. We support the right of parents to apply for exemptions for their children from school vaccinations requirements for medical reasons, religious reasons, or other reasons of conscience.
#67 stogoe
April 28, 2009

Broadcasters have every right to talk about or not talk about any issue they please just as any citizen does or any newspaper.

What about when we give them a monopoly on broadcasting like we have for the past thirty years? What then? What happens when there are only three newspaper companies straddling the entire nation? We allow them to have a monopoly, like the power and cable company, and in return they agree to, you know, cover the actual news instead of shatting out corporatist propaganda 24/7. Well, that’s what happens in theory, anyways.

Broadcast and print news have become de facto public utilities, and while the internet is a spike in the dam, letting a trickle of unfiltered news out, it’s simply not strong enough yet to counteract the wall of propaganda blaring out on every wavelength.
#68 WHARRGARBLE
April 28, 2009

@ Saddlebred

http://www.wisgop.org/RPWPlatform.aspx

The Wisconsin platform is really just as bad. No I am not paying for the forehead fracture from the facepalm.
#69 Steverino
April 28, 2009

HOLY SHIT!…I say, we move all these brain-dead nutters to Texas….get a big ass saw (work with me here…)…and cut Texas off from the US and set them to drift…and…HOLY SHIT!

What a bunch of fvcking morons!
#70 BeamStalk
April 28, 2009

7. That the 9-11 commission’s investigation was concluded prematurely and should be reopened.

TEH TWUFF IS OWT TEHERE!!!!11!!!one!!
#71 Joshua Zelinsky
April 28, 2009

Stogoe, and who decides what is actual news and what isn’t and which opinions are worth getting time? Should radios be required to have a blurb from creationists whenever they report on any new fossil discovery?

Moreover, if you are concerned about a small number of broadcast companies there are other ways of handling that that don’t require content based decisions. We have anti-trust rules and can have if necessary local ownership rules.
#72 Gryndyl
April 28, 2009

“We believe that the scientific evidence supporting Intelligent Design and biblical creation should be included in the Oklahoma public school curricula”

I think that we’re safe there, as no such scientific evidence exists.
#73 Wow!
April 28, 2009

The first line is disturbing and misleading:

“God who gave us life gave us liberty.” – Thomas Jefferson

Don’t they know that Thomas Jefferson was an atheist?? Look here:

http://www.atheistempire.com/greatminds/quotes.php?author=2

Here’s a snippet:

“The day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the Supreme Being as His father, in the womb of a virgin will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter.” Letter to John Adams, April 11, 1823
#74 jmo
April 28, 2009

The fact that this sort of thing is still happening is a good sign that my “prayers” are being ignored. I really hope my home state (California) has a better platform drawn out…

Phonics? Really??
#75 Slugsie
April 29, 2009

But, isn’t the science behind ID and Creationism already taught? I mean, since there is absolutely no science there, all of it is being presented.

Or is that too obtuse?
#76 Lurks
April 30, 2009

I was actually there at the convention, hell I was even on the platform committee.

There were many of us trying to clean up the hypocrisies and contradictions found through out that platform as many of you pointed out. The more level headed and principled of us are still in the minority at this time however. :/

One sentence calling for freedom or speech or religion and in the next trying to shove a certain religion down the publics throat. I am a person of faith myself but am secure enough to not need to force my ways on others.

Mostly it is a problem of emotional rhetoric, ignorance, and lack of principles (or at least real understanding of the principles the party claims).
#77 Olorin
May 2, 2009

Edwards v. Aguillard. Have all the Oklahoma lawyers left the Republican party? The OK Republicans must be down to almost nothing….
#78 Science Avenger
May 18, 2009

You gotta love this one:

We oppose the use of subjective determination of mental intent to increase criminal penalties.

I assume this is aimed at hate crimes, but they just did away with the distinction between an accidental killing and a murder as well.