The pressing vision of Oklahoma can be a perspective of a land that, at the very least, does not kill its better shots at improvement. Oklahoma is a state that has a bad relationship with the things that are supposed to fix its heart and health. Drugs batter and ravage Oklahoma and I recall a teacher telling me about shotgunning meth-heads out of a barn. The greater problem is prescription medication and our willingness to accept large court-mandated disbursals from the pockets of the apothecary as a salve for our cut-down and cut-up friends. It is as though we press pills together in court; we do a similar thing with rulings about lands. Children in Oklahoma grow up with a bad sense of right and wrong, because collectively we accept that the order of things is to be set aside but sometimes we get too scientific with the things that kill us.

I think two aspects of Oklahoma life vis-a-vis jurisprudence should be brought to the light and cleaned when we UV see them for what they are. First, the opioid settlements do not clean the state and justice that rolls down to our muddy waters without a clear way out of Oklahoma leaves us flooded unless the earth can somehow swallow it up. Dan’s sister left Oklahoma for college and Dan could have done the same. I waited for thy deliverance, Jehovah. Second, our collective concept of our own land should be a rejection of tribal claims of longstanding rejection of obvious possession. We should not give away what little we have, and we should be smart about getting into bed with people even if we choose them.

Dan and I marched in uniform together. I think it is important to note that we did so at halftime.

One policy that I would advance as Governor is a statewide prohibition on nuclear armament. Oklahoma is not a destroyer leader; USS Texas is the star of Virginia. In nuclear deterrence theory, there is a concept called mutually assured destruction. Basically, if your enemy nukes you, you nuke them back, so either way you both get nuked. There is a problem: in a scenario with multiple nuclear countries, misperception of the source of a first strike — either due to the fog of war in a general sense or misinformation such as a false flag — could result in a country being stricken with nuclear desolation in a retaliatory strike despite a different country having pulled the trigger of the first strike. It is like getting blamed for an attack that came from someone else. The presence of nuclear silos or B-52 bombers in Oklahoma would present a counterforce target directly and would indirectly make Oklahoma cities near Tinker Air Force Base a more militarily damaging countervalue target. Carrying nuclear weapons gives foreign nuclear-armed countries a rational basis to strike you if they are attacked and misperceive you as the source of the incident attack. Imagine if the Saudi Arabians that hijacked the planes on 9/11 had stars on their shoulders. One Davy Crockett is all Texas needed.

The concept of nuclear deterrence is an oversimplified game-theoretical example of how people do not fuck with big strong countries. However, there are some very strong regular countries out there. In the past, a nuclear country could put Jericho missiles on trucks parked uncovered to reveal them to satellites feeding information to one of two poles of global nuclear power. What happens if one country sucker punches another with a submarine-launched nuclear weapon, and the United States gets blamed for it and attacked with a vengeful strike shortly thereafter? It would be good for Oklahoma to completely outlaw nuclear weapons in the state and use every lawful authority to enforce this prohibition upon the United States federal government.

Cryogenic Magnetometer.