The Oklahoma State Capital

Oklahoma Republican gubernatorial nominee Mike Mazzei has an embarrassment of riches.

His opponent Cyndi Munson, absolutely nails the stereotype of the radical left that Oklahomans have come to associate with a Democratic radical: with perhaps an exception for the university towns, she's an inner-city liberal whose ability to appeal to Oklahoma values goes absolutely no farther than the massive, punitive turnpike loops surrounding the state’s two metropolitan areas.

It’s a left-wing radicalism that's demonstrated by the most cursory review of Munson’s decade of voting for left-wing causes in the state House.

Tax hikes?

For sure.

No self-respecting left-wing politician goes before the voters without a solid resume demonstrating that she has done her part to levy a heavy toll on the people—a people already so heavily taxed that it is reasonable to suggest that 50 percent of one’s income is taken through either direct taxation, passed-on costs, or the second-order effects of taxation.

Those second-order effects are extraordinarily destructive to the health of society, as they entice both parents into the workforce, placing their children in the hands of others.

Munson certainly did her part to add to that burden with her support of HB 1010XX, a nearly $500 million revenue-raising monstrosity believed to be the largest tax increase in the history of the state. It included an especially punitive provision raising the gasoline tax—a tax that must be paid by the hardworking and productive person who is seeking to do right, work hard, and be a net contributor to the social contract.

Left-wing woke liberalism imported from blue-state America?

Of course.

In a plan that can only be described as straight from the streets of San Francisco, Munson was on board with the “needles for junkies” program, voting for SB 511 and essentially putting the state on the side of those who enable the people seeking self-destruction and addiction to the most debilitating habits—a sick approach that even the most basic observers of human nature learned long ago, just doesn’t work.

Or consider Munson’s vote to table grassroots champion Molly Jenkins' proposal; it would have allowed Oklahomans to know how many illegal-alien invaders are in the school system. That is an important metric—one of the most important metrics—for understanding why funds are being diverted from rural school systems to Oklahoma City. It's a vital number for understanding why, according to the SEO-baiting listicle site WalletHub, Oklahoma once ranked “50th” in the nation in education, a joke index, but a now-dated reference almost every Oklahoma liberal instinctively declares to this day.

That’s transparency Munson doesn’t want you to have, even though your taxpayer dollars are paying the bill and even as entire inner-city school districts are being taken over by the illegal invasion. Those districts are incentivized to keep bringing in the illegals to keep the money flowing.

How about setting up “implicit bias” training for Oklahoma maternity nurses?

Yes, Munson was on board with ensuring that, instead of focusing on delivering babies and saving lives, certain Oklahoma nurses would potentially spend their time trying to understand how their “implicit” biases affect their judgment.

It was extraordinarily insulting to health care professionals everywhere: the nanny state attempting to help them come to terms with their supposed racism—or, as HB 3088 defined it:

“Implicit bias” means a bias in judgment or behavior that results from subtle cognitive processes, including implicit prejudice and implicit stereotypes, that often operate at a level below conscious awareness and without intentional control.

What about the latest blue-state craze of turning human beings into tree fertilizer?

Yup. When a Washington state company specializing in this new form of human-body composting—a new disposal method of choice for adherents of the woke religion of Mother Earth environmentalism—came to Oklahoma, it hired prominent leftist lobbyist Jason Dunnington.

Dunnington found an ally in Munson, who, though she missed the vote on fourth reading, was there to advance the bill on third reading.

Speaking of environmentalism, what about the green-energy invasion?

Of course. When grassroots leader Jim Shaw sought to place commonsense constraints on the invasion of government-subsidized wind turbines, Munson was there to vote against Shaw’s amendment and ensure that meaningful protections would not be extended to those seeking to protect their piece of rural Oklahoma from the destruction wrought by unsustainable green-energy adherents. One can only imagine how an empowered "Governor Munson" would step on the green energy gas, if the left comes back into national prominence in 2028.

How about attacking the sanctity of Oklahoma’s elections?

Oh yes, you’ve got that, too.

Munson supported HB 3317, lifting the notary cap for no-excuse absentee ballots from 20 to 50. It was a 2020 election-year initiative, as the leftists continued to pick at the weak point in Oklahoma’s election system in what I believe was a clear attempt to save Kendra Horn and the Democrats’ hold on Congressional District 5.

That was a year in which it is certainly difficult to believe there wasn’t a good deal of ballot-harvesting-type activity, as witnessed by the extraordinarily one-sided nature of the absentee mail-in returns.

How about giving criminals a free pass and moving toward cashless bail?

Yup. SB 252 was undoubtedly the state’s response to the cashless-bail craze in the blue states—a watered-down version, perhaps, so as not to entirely offend red-state sensibilities, but an initiative lauded by leftists who were no doubt salivating at the opportunity to point to red-state Oklahoma as leading the way.

The surveillance state?

For sure. Munson was on board with HB 1712, the nearly $4 million pilot program to test tracking every mile you drive and sending you the bill. Once again, it was a potential environmentalist tool for controlling the population’s ability to travel, opening the door to congestion-based pricing and an Orwellian future that, though hard to imagine, is being driven by some very powerful special interests and could easily return with a fury the next time there is a Democratic administration in Washington, D.C.

Spending?

It wouldn’t be a liberal Democratic candidacy without indefensible spending, and we’ve got plenty of that.

Perhaps the best example is the infamous off-the-top sales-tax diversion program that Munson greenlit with HB 1571, even after it was revealed that the program had financed a cow-food vending machine.

Yes, cows now have their own vending machine, financed by money diverted away before it can even reach the appropriations process.

We’ve only scratched the surface, but the observant reader of these articles knows that something isn’t right.

This isn’t just another article breaking down a liberal Democrat’s bad votes.

This is of proposals made by, supported by—or allowed to advance under—Republican House leadership.

For you see, Mike Mazzei is in an uncomfortable position.

Sure, he can expose Munson’s liberalism, a liberalism extraordinarily out of touch with Oklahoma voters. But when he does so, he will also be indicting the leaders of his own party’s legislative leadership both past and present—and even other statewide candidates, such as attorney general candidate Jon Echols.

But Mazzei is well advised to not pull his punch.

He should indict the whole system.

Indict Munson.

Indict the Legislature.

Indict Echols and every other statewide candidate who supported these initiatives.

The people of Oklahoma will appreciate the honesty. And, let’s face it: those legislators, many of whom supported Drummond, are likely already conspiring over how to run over Mazzei, just as they did Kevin Stitt.

By coming out strong from the start and understanding that enough conservatives still remain in the Legislature to protect his vetoes, Mazzei will have a strength that Stitt never did. Unlike Stitt, he would be allowed to govern, bolstered by the enthusiasm of the people—an enthusiasm that Mazzei traded away when he flip-flopped on the corporate-welfare matter involving the United Arab Emirates smelter in Inola.

When he indicts the process, Mazzei will prove Drummond wrong. As Drummond closed his campaign for governor, he did so with what appeared to be some sort of heavily altered voice audio—too altered not to be distracting—attempting to portray strength and present Mazzei as weak, clearly using the Mazzei flip-flop to make that point.

Was Drummond right?

Time will tell. But if Mazzei is willing to indict not only Munson, but the entire sick Oklahoma City Capitol swamp, he can show Oklahomans that he is truly on their side. For once, the governor’s mansion can stand above the swamp instead of becoming another outpost within it.

How about attacking the sanctity of Oklahoma’s elections?

Oh yes, you’ve got that, too.

Munson supported HB 3317, lifting the notary cap for no-excuse absentee ballots from 20 to 50. It was a 2020 election-year initiative, as the leftists continued to pick at the weak point in Oklahoma’s election system in what I believe was a clear attempt to save Kendra Horn and the Democrats’ hold on Congressional District 5.

How about giving criminals a free pass and moving toward cashless bail?

Yup. SB 252, co-sponsored by Munson, was undoubtedly the state’s response to the cashless-bail craze in the blue states—a watered-down version, perhaps, so as not to entirely offend red-state sensibilities, but an initiative lauded by leftists who were no doubt salivating at the opportunity to point to red-state Oklahoma as leading the way.

The surveillance state?

For sure. Munson was on board with HB 1712, the nearly $4 million pilot program to test tracking every mile you drive and sending you the bill. Once again, it was a potential environmentalist tool for controlling the population’s ability to travel, opening the door to congestion-based pricing and an Orwellian future that, though hard to imagine, is being driven by some very powerful special interests and could easily return with a fury the next time there is a Democratic administration in Washington, D.C.

Spending?

It wouldn’t be a liberal Democratic candidacy without indefensible spending, and we’ve got plenty of that.

Perhaps the best example is the infamous off-the-top sales-tax diversion program that Munson allowed to stay on the books, co-sponsoring HB 1571, even after it was revealed that the program had financed a cow-food vending machine.

Yes, cows now have their own vending machine, financed by money diverted away before it can even reach the appropriations process.

We’ve only scratched the surface, but the observant reader of these articles knows that something isn’t right.

This isn’t just another article breaking down a liberal Democrat’s bad votes.

This is of proposals made by, supported by—or allowed to advance under—Republican House leadership.

For you see, Mike Mazzei is in an uncomfortable position.

Sure, he can expose Munson’s liberalism, a liberalism extraordinarily out of touch with Oklahoma voters. But when he does so, he will also be indicting the leaders of his own party’s legislative leadership both past and present—and even other statewide candidates, such as attorney general candidate Jon Echols.

But Mazzei is well advised to not pull his punch.

He should indict the whole system.

Indict Munson.

Indict the Legislature.

Indict Echols and every other statewide candidate who supported these initiatives.

The people of Oklahoma will appreciate the honesty. And, let’s face it: those legislators, many of whom supported Drummond, are likely already conspiring over how to run over Mazzei, just as they did Kevin Stitt.

By coming out strong from the start and understanding that enough conservatives still remain in the Legislature to protect his vetoes, Mazzei will have a strength that Stitt never did. Unlike Stitt, he would be allowed to govern, bolstered by the enthusiasm of the people—an enthusiasm that Mazzei traded away when he flip-flopped on the corporate-welfare matter involving the United Arab Emirates smelter in Inola.

When he indicts the process, Mazzei will prove Drummond wrong. As Drummond closed his campaign for governor, he did so with what appeared to this writer to be some sort of heavily altered voice audio—too altered not to be distracting—attempting to portray strength and present Mazzei as weak, clearly using the Mazzei flip-flop to make that point.

Was Drummond right?

Time will tell. But if Mazzei is willing to indict not only Munson, but the entire sick Oklahoma City Capitol swamp, he can show Oklahomans that he is truly on their side. For once, the governor’s mansion can stand above the swamp instead of becoming another outpost within it.