Tuesday, August 10, 2010




Our 12 noon luncheon for Wednesday, August 11th will be held at
Italiano’s restaurant, 4801 North Lincoln in OKC. I am often asked by
people who have never attended one of our meetings whether or not non
members can attend. The answer is a resounding yes as our meetings are
very open. Not only do we have members and friends attend, we also
have enemies and spies attend at various times. We have an arrangement
with the restaurant which is, 3 pieces of pizza and all the salad you
want ‘OR’ your choice of pasta and choice of topping with all the
salad you want, with water, for $9.00. Either of the 2 preceding
choices with a soft drink, tea or coffee is just $10. Taxes and tip
are included in those prices. You may also order off the menu. Over
the next 3 weeks we will be interviewing Republican candidates for the
State Senate, then on September 1st our dues paying members will vote
to determine which of the Senate candidates who appeared before us to
support financially. Invited to attend this Wednesday are Janica
Edmonds running for Senate District 8, Kim David running for District
18 and Joshua Jantz, candidate for District 29 which includes downtown


* THURSDAY - OKC AREA - Central Oklahoma’s large group of patriot
pastors are having their monthly meeting this Thursday, August 12th at
12 noon to take advantage of a visit by Alliance Defense Fund (ADF)
attorney, Eric Stanley from Scottsdale Arizona. The ADF is an
organization specializing in protecting Christian’s civil liberties as
well as supporting the U.S. Constitution. Mr. Stanley’s specialty is
the “pulpit freedom initiative.” Paul Blair wanted me to encourage any
pastor to attend this meeting, and even bring a few of his church
deacons or elders along to the meeting. The location is Twin Hills
Golf and Country Club which is located about 3 blocks East of I-35 on
Northeast 36th Street. I believe the salad buffet only is $8 and the
full buffet is $12. The food is excellent and the time together for
pastors and their church leaders is educational and the fellowship is
most encouraging.

* THURSDAY - OKC AREA - The organization, Break Free For Lunch,
has been meeting for the past few months at the Character Training
Center, 520 West Main in downtown OKC. Their speaker this Thursday
will be Mr. Gordon Lawrence of Washington DC, another attorney with
the Alliance Defense Fund. The meeting starts at 12 noon and the
luncheon is free to all first time attendees. Lunch is $8 for all
others. For more information log onto, www.breakfreeforlunch.com


Congress is busily working to violate the Constitution again with a
proposed $30 BILLION dollar piece of legislation to send to the states
to be used for paying teachers and keeping the states from making
significant cuts in education. There are 2 reasons I suggest the
measure is unconstitutional. First, according to the Constitution, all
spending, funding and taxation legislation must originate in the U.S.
House. This measure was passed in the Senate first last week with I
believe 2 Republicans going along with the Democrats. The second
reason is Education is not one of the 18 enumerated powers granted to
the Federal Government in Article I Section 8 of the Constitution.
According to the Constitution and the 10th Amendment, education is
only in the purview of the states and not the Federal government.

I would suggest the real motive behind Obama and his Democrat lackeys
in Congress desiring to “PRINT” another $30 Billion and send that to
the states is to keep the powerful indoctrination system (known as
“public education”) in place and functioning. I would suggest, that
through the UN’s Unesco program which has been interfacing with
America’s education system and driving many of the problems within our
classrooms, that the Federal Government’s involvement into local
education is far more problematic than valuable. Ronald Reagan ended
our relationship with Unesco and then George W. Bush, unfortunately
restored that relationship.

While I thank God for every brave and alert Christian or conservative
who decides to teach in the government schools, government education
is a broken system which costs too much and fails to produce a quality
product. Rather than begging for federal dollars, we should be telling
the feds to keep out of our business.


This past Wednesday, Senator Brogdon arrived at our meeting around
12:30 following a meeting and press conference with U.S.
Representative Mary Fallin. Randy had several conversations with Mary
before last Wednesday and has been assured she would have the
convictions to stand up to the federal government when and where
needed. She also expressed several other conservative positions and if
elected only time will tell as to what degree she lives up to her
word. However, the question is should Randy’s supporters now be
willing to at least vote for Mary as well as possibly support her in
additional ways. I guess everyone will have to determine their own
course of action, but let me express my thought processes on the

Following the OCPAC meeting which resulted in our endorsement of Randy
Brogdon for Governor, I began to make the case that the race was not
between good and bad, but rather between good and better. I eventually
modified my suggestion that the race was between “OK” and better,
maybe “much better.” As a result of that analysis, my assessment about
Mary being good or maybe just OK, means I consider her at least OK and
as such better than Jari Askins. In addition, I had a fair amount of
success convincing Fallin supporters who agreed that Randy would make
a better governor, to switching their support to Brogdon under this
premise. Under a primary and primary run-off system a person can vote
for Randy Brogdon and if he doesn’t win, then support Mary in the
General election!

To be consistent and avoid hypocrisy, I now must support Mary for the
general election. I know it is hard to invest time and resources
supporting Randy and being completely convinced that Randy was the man
for the time, the more conservative and the more passionate and
courageous for the task and then be asked to lay that down and now
support Mary. The question is, are we going to be citizens ruled by
our emotions or are we going to evaluate this from a position of
reason and strong probabilities that Mary will be much more friendly
toward conservatism than Jari Askins? Case in point, just what are
Jari’s positions regarding Oklahoma’s opt out of Obamacare that we
will be voting on in November? Mary is very supportive of that state
question. Please consider these thoughts, many of the problems we face
today are because Americans make decisions out of emotions rather than
facts, reason and rational judgment. I hope we will subject our
emotion in this case to what is the logical choice and that is Mary.

One more thought, the Oklahoman’s lead editorial on Sunday, August the
8th was titled: “After making a dent, what’s next for tea party?”
With the exception of one error (Brogdon was not term limited), a
fabricated perspective (the controversy over militias was a media
created hysteria and never an agenda item of Oklahoma tea parties or
of Senator Brogdon) and at least one other poor perspective. Other
than that, the rest of the editorial was quite good. Following are
some excerpts:

“Brogdon, from Owasso, wasn’t well known statewide before the tea
party momentum began to build. He parlayed his message of limited
government and states’ rights into a solid run for the GOP nomination.
One high-ranking Republican we spoke with before the primary said
Brogdon could win the race if he had more money.

As it turned out, Brodgon (their spelling not mine) finished with 39
percent of the vote in the primary. Fallin won it with 54%. A 15-point
win is nothing to scoff at (rounded off, it was a 55% to 45% victory
for Fallin, a 10 point win, as Brogdon’s 39% along with Mr. Jackson
and Mr. Hubbard receiving 6% meant that 45% of the voters didn’t want
to vote for Mary) but many expected her to have an easier time,
especially given her profile - two-term U.S. House member and popular
former three-term lieutenant governor with much greater name

Brogdon’s presence forced Fallin to defend her conservative bona fides
instead of spending more time out-lining her plans for governor…”

Now to the point of the high-ranking Republican telling the Oklahoman
that if Randy would have had more money he could have won. Let me say
this, Randy received 96,000 votes. If every person who voted for Randy
would have contributed just $10 to his campaign, he would have had a
half million dollars more than he raised. He could have had a real
presence on TV and radio and no doubt in my mind, at least forced Mary
into a run-off where she would then have lost.

My point is not to re-hash the election so much, but rather to
challenge us as citizens to contribute to good candidates. The best
way to take lobbyists and big money out of politics is for the average
citizen to contribute to good candidates so they have the resources to
communicate with the electorate and not have to rely on big money. In
the past I have suggested at least budgeting a little money each month
for citizenship duties. Over a 2 year period of time, citizens would
have enough saved to contribute at least small amounts to candidates
or join an organization such as OCPAC to leverage their impact on the


Early on, Kevin Calvey was the front-runner in the 5th District
Congressional race. Talking with Kevin months ago, he indicated he
knew he would be attacked, he just didn’t know from how many
directions the attacks would come.

I have believed for some time that the Oklahoman would be against
Kevin. In my opinion, the multiple news articles in Sunday’s Oklahoman
regarding Kevin was just the start of a subtle effort to raise doubts
in the minds of voters regarding Calvey. Particularly the totally
irrelevant article about stopping to help a vagrant in a driving rain
storm near a park known to be a bee hive of activity for homosexuals
and the fact that the vagrant told Kevin about a dead body in a vacant
building… yada, yada, yada.

Here is the deal, Mark Shannon asked Kevin on air during the
controversial debate regarding Maps III if he supported the extension
of the sales tax? Kevin’s answer was no because he believed that
during a recession, the citizens could best benefit from a tax cut. I
am of the opinion, that Clay Bennett, a member of the family who owns
the Oklahoman, is probably out there urging the business community to
oppose Calvey and support James Lankford for Congress. It is also my
understanding that former Mayor Kirk Humphreys is going to host a fund
raiser for James Lankford. If that information is correct, you
couldn’t have a better picture of the central planning establishment
working to capture the ear and service of Lankford and thus begin
their efforts to be served by a Congressman.

Even though OCPAC endorsed Kevin Calvey, I have had a great deal of
respect for James Lankford and the campaign he has conducted. Up until
now, his campaign has primarily been financed by people who have never
before contributed to political races. He has truly brought a whole
new group of people into the process, at least to a deeper level of
commitment than just being a voter.

I know how seductive these powerful central planners can be and am
very concerned as to whether or not James can be independent with
their support should he win? Will he have the ability to say no when
they want some pork for a pet project? Will James continue to care
about excessive spending and huge deficits? This is where is gets
really tough to be in elected office.

During the debate on Maps III, all of the then known candidates were
against the proposition except Mike Thompson who told me he had a
strong opinion but wouldn’t dare share it with anyone and James
Lankford who wouldn’t say if he were against or for the measure as he
didn’t believe a person in Congress should interject himself into
local matters. I always struggled with that answer as I don’t believe
that to be leadership. I suspect James’ answer was partly determined
based on advice from a political consultant. Real leadership will
always get out front and lead. Kevin did that and now is at risk from
those special interests who may be the primary beneficiaries from the
extension of the sales tax.

This run-off election could go either way, so please consider these
perspectives and consider as to why the Oklahoman may not support
Kevin Calvey. It is all the more reason for me to want to support
Kevin as I believe he is not the candidate of what I might suggest are
the OKC central planners.

I look forward to seeing everyone this Wednesday.

Charlie Meadows