Spoken Like a True Socialist

Several downtown Tulsa property owners complained Thursday about astronomical raises in their property taxes in order to fund the new baseball stadium, according to the Tulsa World. One of them said his tax rate would go from $100 per year to $6,346, and that he can't afford to pay it.

After the meeting, Mayor Kathy Taylor noted that property owners representing nearly 88 percent of the square footage subject to the assessment fee did not file objections.

Consider the implications of her statement. This is where we are today.

We don't hold elections that we know we cannot win. We create assessment districts through regulatory procedures.

We justify the taking of property (taxes) on the few because they are in the minority, and in the way of "progress."

The mayor pretends that the protests of the assessment fees represents the "no" vote in some sort of referendum. Do you suppose it would have made any difference at all had 51% of the affected property owners complained? How about 61 percent? Ninety percent? One hundred percent?

No, this project is going through whether they like it or not, whether they can afford it or not, and if not then they will have tax liens filed against them, they will probably lose their property, and the chop-licking friends of the Borg Queen will scurry in to assimilate the area.

This is eminent domain on the cheap, by using extraordinary taxing authority against individual property owners who are in the way, all the time proclaiming that the greater good of The People is being advanced.

Several members of the Tulsa city council complained last summer that they were forced to vote quickly, without sufficient study.

Now we see why.

An Oklahomily Elton John/Billy Joel/BoK Center Concert Revue

So many issues, so little ambition.

I'm still feeling the after-effects of the Elton John-Billy Joel concert last night in Tulsa, the most potent of which is the fact that I didn't get back home until 2 a.m. and didn't fall asleep until nearly 3. There was no dispensation from normal morning reveille.

So before I crank up the Christian Constitutionalist hate-mongering for hump day, humor me as I proffer a few reflections on last night's bill of fare.

1. The concert was an artistic triumph. Both men still have their playing chops intact, and although Elton has clearly lost his high range -- not uncommon for human beings -- he doesn't try to do the impossible, using what he has most effectively. All Billy Joel has lost, it seems, is most of his hair. I know this bothers some people, but you'd have to be extremely superficial (or a complete musical idiot) to let that affect your enjoyment of his performance. (By the way, the photo posted is not from last night's event. It's from earlier this year, one I "lifted" from the web.)

For myself, I enjoyed the opening and closing sets where the two men joined forces to sing each other's songs. Their voices are compatible enough, and they are professional entertainers (that means businessmen) who understand that egos get in the way of a good show. But I really enjoyed the separate sets where Elton and his backup band, and Billy and his separate backup band, took off on their own material. Wow! I greatly appreciated the fact that neither performer attempted to fob off on us any of their more modern, less commercial material. That is not to say, however, that every song was a Top Ten'er. Some, as Mr. Joel said, were "album cuts" that longtime fans would know and new fans might appreciate.

In Elton's solo set, he reached back for "Love Lies Bleeding in My Hands," and educated the younger members of the audience as to what genius sounds like. Likewise he performanced "Madman Across the Water" and others. There were the automatic crowd pleasers, too, like "Rocket Man," "Crocodile Rock," and "Saturday Night's Alright for Fighting," (which are heard in constant rotation on the oldies stations). Nothing wrong with that. We got our meat and potatoes.

It was at the conclusion of Elton's set that my wife leaned over to me and said, "How can Billy Joel top this?" My response: "I can't wait to find out."

In Joel's solo set, he reached back for "Zanzibar" and "Italian Restaurant," among others, but let's face it: the guy in his writing prime was a hit machine, and his smoking hot, ten member, New York-area backing band took the musical temperature up a few more notches. Double wow!! And Joel was funny as well. He talks to an audience of thousands as if you were sitting across the piano bar, letting you know that he's in the same mood you're in. This playful touch was especially useful "in the middle" of "In the Middle of the Night," when he suddenly sequed into "Oklahoma" (you know, that old Rodgers & Hammerstein song). As the audience (sort of slowly) realized what was happening, suddenly the BoK Center was filled with the voices of Okies singing their hearts out, many of them standing, and after "O-K-L-A-H-O-M-A, Oklahoma, okay!" Billy and Band seamlessly riffed right back into "In the middle ..." and it was so pitch-perfect that everyone had to laugh and clap.

Eventually John rejoined Joel and they terrifically tore through a few more numbers, before the backing musicians disappeared into the stage and the two men closed out with "Goodbye Norma Jean" and "Piano Man," with Joel doing his own harmonica work.

After just over 31/2 hours of non-stop serenading, an exhausted crowd stood and clapped and several minutes as John and Joel signed a few autographs and waved. It wasn't so much a demand for an encore as it was a tribute to quality. Even at today's inflated ticket prices, we had received every penny's worth.

2. Politics were avoided. The only thing that came close to a political statement, and it would depend upon your interpretation, was that just before "Allentown," Joel's anthem to the culture shift and job losses in the 1980s, the entertainer said, "This next song is sort of topical. And by the way, I want to thank you for keeping me employed. There are a lot of people who don't have jobs right now."

That was it. No finger pointing at right or left, just an acknowledgement that some people are hurting. In my opinion, Billy Joel is an honest purveyor of observations of American life. We have too few of them.

Elton made no political statements whatever. I appreciated that. In fact, I found myself offering a prayer for him during the concert. He's made a lot of people happy through his songs and his talent, and I would hope that God will take that into account, and maybe work on Elton a little bit.

3. My BoK Center review. This was my first trip to the BoK Center. I give it a "B-minus" overall, which is better than the grade I thought it would deserve.

First, the positive. The sound baffling which prevents standing wave harmonics was excellent. We had seats in the nosebleed section near the top and farthest from the stage, and we could hear everything wonderfully. Sound gets an "A." Sight lines were a bit more troublesome but I've seen a lot worse from such heights. Most patrons could see very well. A "B+." Restrooms were impressive ("A"), hallways were wide ("A), escelators were fast, although there were too few of them, so I downgrade escelator grade to "B-minus."

Now for the not-so-positive. We were told beforehand by BoK Center e-mail that the doors would open at 6 p.m. for the 7:30 concert. Didn't happen. Doors didn't really get going until nearly 7:10 and thousands upon thousands of worried people feared a repeat of the disastrous Mettalica concert last year, sans the rain. On the upside, once the lines began moving, security got a lot of people into the building fast, and the concert was only about 5 minutes late in starting, and I don't think anyone was left outside.

But the principle is this: Let your word be your bond! Say what you mean and mean what you say. If you say the doors open at 6 p.m., then by damn open them at 6 p.m. BoK gets an "F" for punctuality.

Seating: The seats are comfortable ("A"). The seats themselves, that is. There is very little leg room in the upper reaches of the BoK universe (grade "D-minus). I have long legs. By mid concert I found my legs and knees cramping and there was absolutely nothing to do except finally take a short walk down to a walkway where I stood and allowed my circulatory and muscle systems to regenerate. That meant disturbing several people since there was so damn little leg room! Everyone was forced to stand and hope that I didn't step on their feet, while I prayed that my leg cramps didn't cause me to collapse forward into the rows of people below me before I reached the aisle!

(To be fair to myself, this same problem occurred several times during the concert as various people would go the restrooms or the concession stands. The latter occasioned an interesting balancing game in which it often appeared that drinks and foods would go hurtling into reaches below. Thankfully that didn't happen in my viewing last night. But it will, and often.)

(On a sad note our sherpa fell into a crevasse (or maybe it was a stairwell) while assisting us to our seats.)

Okay, so we didn't really have a sherpa guide. Someone will probably say, "But Dave, why didn't you purchase better tickets?" Well, Einstein, the tickets were a gift from my son at Christmas, and it was all he could afford, and more than he should have spent! Does that exonerate the engineers and architects who designed the center? I think not.

Finally, most gratifying was that the people at the concert were very respectful of smoking regulations and each other, one of the best behaved crowds I've seen in recent memory. Maybe that's a sign of things to come. I hope so.

In Defense of Michael Bates

Michael Bates, author of Batesline and one of the finer gentlemen who blog Oklahoma, is being sued for libel by the Tulsa World (World Publishing Co.)

At 3:46 pm yesterday I received a phone call from Tulsa World reporter Randy Krehbiel, asking for my reaction to the lawsuit filed against me by the World Publishing Co. I told him I was unaware that a suit had been filed and that he was the first Tulsa World representative to contact me about a suit.

According to the OSCN database, at 3:01 pm on Thursday, Jan. 15, just 45 minutes before Krehbiel's phone call, attorney J. Schaad Titus filed a civil lawsuit on behalf of World Publishing Co. against Renegade Publishing Inc. DBA Urban Tulsa, Keith Skrzypczak, and Michael D. Bates alleging libel.

I have not seen a copy of the complaint. Based on the offense named and the defendants named in the suit, it appears to have something to do with a column I wrote, likely the most recent column dealing with layoffs at the daily paper. ...

If WPC believes I've written something in error, I'm disappointed that the company would file a suit against me without first contacting me with evidence to contradict what I wrote and giving me the opportunity to issue a clarification or correction.

I'm certain that I am not guilty of libel, but that doesn't mean this won't be a difficult time. Your prayers would be appreciated.

According to the McCarville Report the World is upset by the Jan. 15 Urban Tulsa Weekly story which stated

that the World concealed circulation declines from 1997 to 2007. Bates specifically alleges that a 2006 report by the Audit Bureau of Circulation "suggests the World was inflating its circulation by as much as 20 percent." ...

The World said the ABC audit showed drops of 6 percent in daily circulation and 5 percent in Sunday circulation for the period in question. ...

The lawsuit does not dispute that the newspaper's print editions have lost circulation over the past decade, but it does dispute Bates' claim that the losses were concealed or might have been greater than reported. ...

But the real laugher is this sentence:

Lorton said he does not object to criticism of himself or the World but will not stand for the organization's honesty being impugned.

It's been a long time since anyone I've read has publicly accused the Tulsa World of honesty.

It's possible this is mostly about protecting its advertising revenues. After all, a paper which has just trimmed its staff by 28 people is obviously concerned about receivables. I have yet to read the Urban Tulsa story, but I find it difficult to believe that Mr. Bates said anything remotely actionable as he is a very careful writer who strives to get his facts straight. Furthermore, as modern libel laws are construed in Oklahoma, I do not think it possible that you can libel a newspaper, per se. A newspaper, or its publishing company, is about the ultimate in what one would consider "a public figure."

So what we probably have here is the owners of the Tulsa World using their considerable power of the purse to intimidate and attempt to silence someone who has embarrassed them. How noble they must see themselves!

And it's not the first time that the World has turned its legal guns on Michael Bates. In 2005 they claimed that he violated their copyright by posting excerpts from their news columns on his blog. This was absurd on its face in that every news organization worthy of the name knows about fair use.

But that's really the point, isn't it. The Tulsa World has for a long time been a poor role model for responsible reporting. (It was a very sad day when the vastly superior Tulsa Tribune was forced to close.) The World has chosen to pursue editorial policies that run contrary to the philosophies and beliefs of much of its readership, slanted articles to reflect the biases of its editors, and has chosen to ignore some inconvenient stories and/or facts altogether. Of course, it is the World's First Amendment right to do all of these things, but they should not be shocked when subscriptions and readership drop.

Even if Michael Bates is being attacked for something he wrote outside of Batesline, he deserves the support of Oklahoma's blogging community. Whether or not you like his views or personality, you should realize that if the World succeeds in silencing him, they can silence anyone. We need to speak up - accurately and with truth - against the injustice of a big multi-million dollar corporation attempting to use the court system to silence an alternative voice.

I do not know if we can shame the World out of this action, but indeed its ownership should be ashamed.

Obviously, there will be more to say on this topic.

A very belated review of the Moodys' concert

We have been horribly remiss in not posting on the results of the Moody Blues concert in Tulsa twelve evenings ago. Almost immediately afterward the Oklahomilist was called to work a "special project" that ended last Friday, leaving little time and almost no extra energy.

Simply, it was incredible. So much better than the 1987 concert we attended. The Brady Theatre is a better venue, for one, but since that concert 20 years ago, the Moodies have learned a few things about recreating their lush, studio sound onstage. After seeing them the other night, we re-watched their 1990s DVD at Red Rocks Amphitheatre in Denver, and realized that they have improved on their live chops since then. The Tulsa event was very close to equaling the quality of their marvelous Hall of Fame DVD at London's Royal Albert Hall.

The capacity crowd responded warmly to Justin, John and Graeme and their talented group of backing musicians who displayed a virtuosity not often seen on stage these days. Especially standout was Norda, a lovely musician-singer who plays flute, guitar, harmonica and, of course, killer tambourine. (Sadly I have forgotten her last name. Were I much younger and single, I could see making it my life's ambition to seek her out. Alas.) I do not wish to slight the other singer who recently joined the tour. The same for the other musicians. Great bunch.

It was good to see Graeme so animated and spot-on with his drumming. It looks like he's stepped his game up a notch. John was in fine voice and as ever the showman. Justin was Justin: no superlative is quite enough. He remains the Oklahomilist's favorite musician-songwriter of all time.

We ran into several friends at the concert, and all of us were laughing at the widespread demographic - everything from aging hippies in their late 60s (who knew they'd live so long?) to people more in the middle years, and then young stalwarts like our two sons and their entourage. We were happy to hear them tell us that it was the best concert they had ever seen.

No surprise to us.

The set list we posted was correct except that the Moodies added "Lean on Me" from the Keys to the Kingdom album (1991).

1. Lovely to See You
2. Tuesday Afternoon
3. Lean on Me (Tonight)
4. Never Comes the Day
5. Slide Zone
6. The Voice
7. One More Time to Live
8. I Know You're Out There Somewhere
9. Story In Your Eyes
10. Wildest Dreams
11. Isn't Life Strange
12. The Other Side of Life
13. December Snow
14. Higher and Higher
15. Are You Sitting Comfortably
16. Singer in a Rock and Roll Band
17. Nights in White Satin
18. Question
19. Ride My See-Saw (The Encore)

We could be picky and complain that there were a number of tunes that should have been played for a complete representative sample of Moody Blues discography ("English Sunset" comes most quickly to mind), but the truth of the matter is that a great representative sample was presented, and some of us would never be completely satisfied unless the band stayed several days and played everything. That's not very realistic, but it's a great dream.

So thanks, guys, for dropping by our little corner of the world. It was lovely to see you again, indeed!