To unsubscribe please send an email requesting removal at ModernPatriot@hotmail.com.

Invite your friends to receive the best political cyber-newsletter in Oklahoma. Tell them to subscribe by sending a subscription request to Cadman12@swbell.net or go to www.ModernPatriot.net and click on the email icon.
*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
M odern P atriot C hronicles
An Eleventh Commandment Free Zone
Vol. 7, Issue 4
March 17, 2008
By Craig Dawkins

Colleges Must Make Hard Choices about Student Safety
Obama Tilts Election to Republicans

Copyright@2008, All Rights Reserved
*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
POLLS! POLLS! POLLS! POLLS!

Which Democratic Party candidate do you believe John McCain has the best chance to defeat?

Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton….

Go to www.ModernPatriot.net and vote today!!!
*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
Colleges Must Make Hard Choices about Student Safety

Much has been made of House Bill 2513 authored by State Representative Jason Murphey, R-Guthrie. His bill, which passed the State House by a 65-36 margin, would allow some students over the age of 21 to carry guns into the classroom. Murphey’s bill has sparked debate among students, faculty, and administrators at state colleges and universities across the state. As a person who makes his living in a college classroom, his bill deserves sober debate and consideration. Let me explain.

For the last four years, I have stood at the front of a college classroom attempting to bring practical, private sector experience and textbook materials to life for students both young and old. I must admit that on a few occasions I have given some thought as to what I might do IF a mad man busted into my classroom guns a blazing. Currently, I really don’t have good solutions other than to put it out of my mind and HOPE I never have to confront such an event.

Sure, my college has security on our campus. And I often see them walking around, observing the happenings in classrooms and lecture halls. But even with active policing of the college, crime still occurs. As good as my college’s security is, (and it’s not bad) security officers cannot be at all places, at all times. This fact places a burden on all college administrators to confront issues of student safety from a PREVENTION perspective, not a RESPONSE perspective.

This burden is an extraordinary challenge for college presidents who wish to rely on previous experience, traditions, and culture of a college in dealing with this kind of domestic terrorism. The investigation of the recent shooting at Northern Illinois University (NIU) showed a response by campus security within minutes. But not fast enough to prevent anything. When security arrived, they found the bodies of five students and one suicide crazed gunman. It should be noted that NIU’s response was much better than that of Virginia Tech University. Proof that colleges have taken steps to improve reaction protocols since the Virginia Tech tragedy.

But there’s a significant problem associated with campus shootings. While mad gunmen are executing, maiming and terrorizing innocent people, colleges are responding to this horror with text messages, phone calls, and email communications. It was only after the shootings that NIU beefed up security. This step is unlikely to prevent another shooting episode. However, it will help soothe the nervous psyche of those who believe something has been done. Meanwhile colleges still have not taken steps to PREVENT these events.

Let’s look at this issue by asking a question. Can a heavy display of law enforcement prevent or deter a mad gunman? Let’s look at the February 7, 2008 City Council meeting of Kirkwood, Missouri where a crazed gunman shot and killed two police officers before proceeding into the meeting to kill 3 city officials. The mayor Mike Swoboda, was shot twice in the head. The meeting was held next door to the Kirkwood Police Department.

Now ask yourself, if the Kirkwood police could not protect their own city officials from a crazed gunman when they are next door to council chambers, what makes anyone believe "beefing up" security on ANY campus will suffice? So what is the answer?

As I see it colleges have two options in preventing mad gunman from making colleges killing zones. One option is to adopt a Transportation Security Administration (TSA) approach where every person is thoroughly screened every day. Colleges would be forced to implement a bottleneck where screeners can scrutinize every person as they enter. This system would be extraordinarily costly in both capital and manpower. It would take untold millions to operate this kind of security system statewide. Not to mention the message it sends students who wish to maintain some sense of their civil liberties. This is clearly an imperfect solution.

The second option is to allow students and others to obtain conceal carry licenses and carry concealed guns into classrooms. This option is a less costly one and also less intrusive in terms of civil liberties. As of the date of this writing, it is consistent with the second amendment of the U.S. Constitution and would provide a disincentive for mad gunmen who would no longer be able to count on confronting unarmed victims.

The down side to this option is the remote risk that rampant shootings will start to occur as those with concealed carry licenses commit gun crimes on campus. However, based on Oklahoma’s experience and history with the current concealed carry law, no such result has occurred. It is highly unlikely that it would occur. Allowing students with concealed carry licenses to carry concealed hand guns is clearly a less costly option than setting up a Homeland Security TSA style protection grid. A potential shooter would be left to wonder WHO is carrying a concealed gun. This is a kind of deterrent. While the concealed carry proposal isn’t fool proof, neither is any other solution I have observed.

It is not enough for administrators of colleges and universities to fight against the concealed carry proposal without offering some kind of solid prevention strategy. If you or your child is in my classroom and the education institution prevents anyone from providing for their own protection with a hand gun in defense of a mad gunman, there has to be some other solution offered by the education institution other than emails, text messages and voice communication. Prevention MUST be the standard offered. Not just a terrorist response mechanism. And as I have already pointed out, institutional prevention is very costly.

For the record, should Murphey’s concealed carry proposal become law, I won’t fear being shot by one of my licensed concealed carry students. But I will trust them to act in their best interest should a mad gunman burst into my classroom. I think the fact that some students could be armed with a concealed hand gun will strengthen the deterrent to the execution type crimes we’ve seen at colleges across the country.
*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
Obama Tilts Election to Republicans

In the fall of 2007, I informed some of my friends that 2008 would be a sweeping Democratic Party year. When I made this prediction, I assumed that Hillary Clinton would be the Democratic Party nominee. And of course, I sensed that Republicans desperately wanted to run against Hillary Clinton. They knew that Hillary would energize the Republican base towards John McCain, who is arguably the weakest Republican presidential nominee since Bob Dole in 1996. (I would argue McCain is weaker.)

Then along came a fellow named Barack Obama, who is a one term U.S. Senator from Illinois. While Hillary Clinton is still fighting for the Democratic Party nomination, it is clear that Obama is now the probable winner. And IF he’s not the actual winner, there’s going to be big problems under the DNC tent. Imagine what would happen when Obama goes into the DNC convention with more popular votes and more delegates than Hillary Clinton and then loses the nomination because Democratic Party super delegates throw their support to Clinton. If that occurs, Democrats will be fractured, but not likely so much that Hillary loses the general election.

However, assuming Barack Obama wins the nomination, I believe his nomination will greatly improve McCain’s odds of winning the presidential election. I believe this for several reasons.

First, while Obama’s nomination will result in a record voter turnout, it is clear that Clinton voters are disproportionately unhappy with Obama as the nominee. I believe a large percentage of Clinton voters will vote for McCain rather than Obama.

If Clinton is the nominee, again I believe we will see a record turnout, but I also believe that Obama would be the VP nominee. This duo would be extraordinarily difficult to defeat for Republicans. But with Obama at the top of the ticket, would Hillary accept the VP nomination? Would Obama offer it? I don’t think so. But it is becoming increasingly more evident that Obama needs Clinton on the ticket in order to retain Clinton voters. And does anyone doubt that she would not prefer to bide her time for four years in order to run again should McCain win?

Second, Obama clearly contrasts McCain’s position on Iraq. Regardless of how people feel about the war in Iraq, I believe there is a solid majority of Americans who believe the exit from Iraq must be properly handled. If McCain can cast Obama as an inexperienced, cut and run liberal, voters who view this issue as important will go for McCain.

Third, Obama lacks experience. His one term as U.S. Senator pales by comparison to McCain. Can we expect a repeat of Kennedy versus Nixon? While McCain has admitted that he has no experience or understanding in running the economy, what can Obama claim in terms of experience? And IF the economy is still perceived to be struggling, can Obama successfully argue that his tax increases will actually help economy? I doubt it. And if the economy has made progress by November, will voters turn their attention to the war on terror?

Fourth, while Obama says he wants to change Washington D.C., imagine what Obama might look like after the Swift Boat 527’s get finished with him. There’s only going to be two months to engage in this negative campaign after the DNC convention. This means that the 527’s will explore the implications of Barack Hussein Obama. What will happen when the words of Obama’s pastor, Reverend Jeremiah Wright who said, "Barack knows what it means to be a black man living in a country and a culture that is controlled by rich white people," are more widely publicized? What about the Louis Farrakhan endorsement? Will they draw upon Michelle Obama’s past comments? Will they attempt to make Obama the Manchurian Candidate? Will they demonize his youthful drug use? And let’s not for Antoin "Tony" Rezko (from Syria) who faces federal prosecution and who was Obama’s campaign fundraiser and friend for two decades. (See Wall Street Journal article about Rezko.) And IF all of these issues are effectively raised, will Obama look like the change people say they are craving?

Fifth, it would be derelict of me to fail to mention the racial component that would serve as a subtext of the election. Some will support Obama because he is a racial minority. Others will shun his candidacy for the same reason. Race has become an extraordinarily difficult subject to confront in our society. I find it interesting that the Democratic Party primary has resulted in allegations of racism directed at former president Bill Clinton and most recently Geraldine Ferraro. Race will be unmistakably front and center in the campaign. The main stream media will define the fairness of the political attacks levied by Republicans. This dynamic favors Obama.

When Obama addresses the issue of race, will he have the cojones to suggest a change in how issues of race are confronted in our country? Will he dare to suggest that, if future Affirmative Action programs are to survive in the U.S., they need to be based on economic need rather than race? Will he suggest that America needs to move beyond a culture that hyphenates their Americanism to one which lifts up the ideals of simply being an AMERICAN? Will Obama challenge all racism? Even from his friend the Reverend Jeremiah Wright? Can Obama be so bold? Somehow I doubt it. But we will see on March 18, 2008 when Obama delivers his views on the issue of race.

While I still believe this to be a Democrat year, I believe an Obama nomination gives the Republicans a better chance of victory. Democrats may actually, unbelievably, snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.