Salem Political Snark

Why is the Salem Public Library so bad? A retired librarian shares the facts.

The Salem Public Library sucks. Sure, I could come up with synonyms for "sucks," which I did in the title of this blog post: bad, horrible, disappointing. But sucks conveys the anger and sorrow library lovers should feel about a recent decision by the City of Salem to cut library hours a lot.

Retired state librarian Jim Scheppke has been sharing Facebook posts that provide solid facts to back up the inescapable conclusion that while the Salem Public Library sucked in comparison to other public libraries in Oregon before those cuts, the Suck Factor is now much worse.

Below are screenshots from the Salem City Council Forum on Facebook of the posts by Scheppke (who is an administrator of the forum). I believe I found them all, but one or more might have escaped me. 

This is disturbing reading.

I grew up in a very small town that still managed to have a decent library. Well, several actually, since before an official library came to be, informal libraries existed in the homes of a couple of women who were avid readers. My mother adored books. Going to the library was a big part of my childhood.

When I see the City of Salem slashing library hours long before budget cuts have to be made following the rejection by Salem voters of a poorly conceived employee payroll tax aimed at increasing city revenue, the cynical side of me thinks, "City officials are gutting the library now in order to have a talking point for another revenue-raising proposal."

Okay, maybe I'm wrong. But when you read the Facebook posts by Scheppke, it's difficult to understand why city officials are making the already below average Salem Public Library even worse off, given that other cuts to City of Salem services haven't been made with such intensity. 

GOP insanity: Nikki Haley doesn't think slavery was the cause of the Civil War

At the risk of having my head explode, I've watched each of the debates between the non-Trump candidates for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination. Well, except for the last debate, which was on some network that I'd never heard of.

Aside from Chris Christie, who I like when he bashes Trump, but not otherwise, the only other candidate who didn't totally disgust me is Nikki Haley. She actually made sense at times, particularly when she talked about foreign policy and the urgent need for the United States to keep supporting Ukraine.

Haley is supposed to be the moderate alternative to Trump. Well, judging by Haley's recent remarks about the cause of the Civil War, it's clear that "moderate" no longer means what it used to when it comes to Republican politics, because what she said is extreme right-wing crazy.

A NBC News story, "Nikki Haley backpedals amid criticism after omitting 'slavery' from Civil War causes," describes the softball question Haley was asked at a campaign event that she managed to whiff on, big time.

BERLIN, N.H. — Republican presidential candidate Nikki Haley declined Wednesday to say slavery was a cause of the Civil War, arguing instead that it came down to “the role of government.”

At a New Hampshire town hall, a voter bluntly asked Haley, “What was the cause of the Civil War?”

Haley, the former South Carolina governor and former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, who is aiming to present herself as the top Republican alternative to former President Donald Trump, gave a lengthy answer but did not mention slavery — the primary cause of the war.

“I think the cause of the Civil War was basically how government was going to run — the freedoms and what people could and couldn’t do,” she said at the beginning of her response.

On Thursday, she appeared to backpedal, saying in a radio interview on “Good Morning New Hampshire” that “of course, the Civil War was about slavery” and that her comments reflect what it “means to us today.”

“What it means to us today is about freedom — that’s what that was all about. It was about individual freedom,” she said. “It was about economic freedom. It was about individual rights.”

Wow. Even when Haley had a second chance today to unequivocally make clear that the cause of the Civil War was slavery, she couldn't summon the courage to speak the truth, instead choosing to once again pander to Republican racism. 

No, Nikki, today the Civil War doesn't mean that the southern states were concerned about individual freedom, economic freedom, and individual rights. That's total B.S. The southern states wanted to preserve slavery, plain and simple, notably including South Carolina, where Haley served as governor.

Haley should have read a Wikipedia article, "South Carolina Declaration of Secession." 

The South Carolina Declaration of Secession, formally known as the Declaration of the Immediate Causes Which Induce and Justify the Secession of South Carolina from the Federal Union, was a proclamation issued on December 24, 1860, by the government of South Carolina to explain its reasons for seceding from the United States. It followed the brief Ordinance of Secession that had been issued on December 20. The declaration is a product of a convention organized by the state's government in the month following the election of Abraham Lincoln as U.S. president, where it was drafted in a committee headed by Christopher Memminger.

The declaration laid out the primary reasoning behind South Carolina's declaring of secession from the U.S., which was described as "increasing hostility on the part of the non-slaveholding States to the Institution of Slavery." The Declaration states, in part, "A geographical line has been drawn across the Union, and all the States north of that line have united in the election of a man to the high office of President of the United States, whose opinions and purposes are hostile to slavery."

Not surprisingly, any appeal Haley had among Black Republicans has taken a well-deserved nose dive, as reported by a Politico story, "'She's toast': Republicans of color disappointed by Haley's slavery misstep."

Republicans of color said on Thursday they were dismayed by Nikki Haley’s initial refusal to say that slavery was the cause of the Civil War. It wasn’t just an offensive historical omission, they argued, but a tactical blunder too.

“She easily could’ve communicated better in that moment, but chose to use a tired old political stump tactic by tossing the same question back to the guy who asked,” said Rina Shah, a Republican strategist based in Washington, D.C., in a text to POLITICO.

“What I do see is her having left out the word ‘slavery’ because she was scared to talk about anything regarding our nation’s complicated history. I think by acknowledging slavery she felt she might be alienating” Donald Trump and Ron DeSantis voters.

This speaks volumes about the pathetic state of today's Republican Party. You can't hope to be the GOP presidential nominee if you talk about slavery being the cause of the Civil War. Worse, Haley has invoked the Lost Cause myth before, which wrongly claims that states rights and similar notions explains why southern states seceded from the union. 

To learn about the Lost Cause myth, read a fascinating Politico story, "Why Was It So Hard for Nikki Haley to say 'Slavery'? History Has the Answer." Here's a brief excerpt.

But as Haley must know — after all, as governor of South Carolina, she presided over the removal of Confederate flags from the Statehouse — many Americans do question the fundamental fact that slavery precipitated the Civil War, and her equivocation played into a long-standing agenda to rewrite American history. Haley was effectively parroting the Lost Cause mythology, a revisionist school of thought born in the war’s immediate aftermath, which whitewashed the Confederacy’s cornerstone interest in raising arms to preserve slavery. Instead, a generation of Lost Cause mythologists chalked the war up to a battle over political abstractions like states’ rights.

Should Trump be banned from the Oregon ballot? I say, no.

Yesterday Colorado banned Trump from that state's primary ballot. The Colorado Supreme Court issued the decision, which almost certainly now will be appealed to the United States Supreme Court.

A divided Colorado Supreme Court on Tuesday declared former President Donald Trump ineligible for the White House under the U.S. Constitution’s insurrection clause and removed him from the state’s presidential primary ballot, setting up a likely showdown in the nation’s highest court to decide whether the front-runner for the GOP nomination can remain in the race.

The decision from a court whose justices were all appointed by Democratic governors marks the first time in history that Section 3 of the 14th Amendment has been used to disqualify a presidential candidate.

“A majority of the court holds that Trump is disqualified from holding the office of president under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment,” the court wrote in its 4-3 decision.

Colorado’s highest court overturned a ruling from a district court judge who found that Trump incited an insurrection for his role in the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol, but said he could not be barred from the ballot because it was unclear that the provision was intended to cover the presidency.

A lawsuit is attempting to have Oregon ban Trump from our state's primary ballot. So reported the Oregon Capital Chronicle on December 6. 

The national advocacy group trying to block former President Donald Trump from appearing on primary ballots filed a lawsuit with the Oregon Supreme Court on behalf of five Oregon voters on Wednesday.

The legal complaint comes less than a week after Secretary of State LaVonne Griffin-Valade announced she wouldn’t keep Trump’s name off primary ballots under advice from the state Department of Justice, who told her she lacks the authority to determine whether presidential primary candidates are qualified. 

Attorneys for Free Speech for People, who filed the state lawsuit, disagree. They’re seeking an order from the state Supreme Court requiring Griffin-Valade to disqualify Trump from the primary and general election ballot, or, alternatively, an order directing Griffin-Valade to demonstrate why she shouldn’t be required to disqualify him. 

The group maintains that Trump is ineligible to run for election because of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which states that no one who previously took an oath to uphold the Constitution and then  “engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof” can hold office. 

Trump’s behavior in late 2020 and early 2021, including attempts to overturn election results and encouraging the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol by his supporters as Congress tried to certify electoral votes, qualify as insurrection, according to the lawsuit. 

I agree that Trump supported the insurrection at the nation's Capitol. And I detest Trump, viewing him as a horrible person who was a terrible president.

If he were to get another four years in the White House by winning the presidency in 2024, there's no doubt that Trump would be even more dangerous to our democracy, the Constitution, and world order. Nonetheless, I don't think Trump should be kicked off the ballot in any state, including Oregon.

As a practical matter, almost certainly this wouldn't make any difference either in the GOP primary or in the general election. Trump's lead over his Republican rivals is so large, it's hard to see how ballot bans in a few states would make any real difference. And in the general election, any state that would ban Trump wouldn't be at all likely to favor him for president. Then there's the not insignificant fact that Trump hasn't been convicted of insurrection by any court.

Even the Washington D.C. case brought by Jack Smith and the Justice Department doesn't accuse Trump of insurrection. The charges there include obstructing an official proceeding, the counting of electoral college votes, but not insurrection.

Yes, I consider that Trump did indeed actively support the January 6 insurrection, but there's a good chance the Supreme Court will overturn the Colorado ruling on that ground: absence of a trial and conviction on the insurrection charge. (The Colorado case included a ruling from a district court judge that Trump engaged in insurrection. However, the hearing that led to the ruling wasn't a full-blown trial about insurrection.)

I'm glad that attempts are being made to hold Trump accountable under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment. I'm just dubious that this is a viable means of preventing what would be a national disaster if Trump had another four years as president. 

Kicking someone off the ballot is a big deal, especially when that person is an ex-president running to be elected again. Trump thrives on making himself out to be a victim of the deep state and left-wing haters. It's very unlikely that the U.S. Supreme Court is going to agree with Colorado that he should be banned from the ballot.

Most likely all that's going to happen, in the end, is that Republican voters are going to dig in on their support for Trump. He'll still be on the ballot in all 50 states, with an added grievance to use in his campaigning: failed attempts to prevent him from running for president. 

On abortion and Ukraine, Republicans are dangerously crazy

If our major political parties were to undergo a psychiatric examination to determine whether Republicans or Democrats are acting most crazy, there's no doubt who would be committed to a mental hospital for some serious treatment.

The Republican Party, of course.

There's so many current examples of this -- including the perennial favorite, how the lying, incompetent, democracy-defying, obnoxious Donald Trump is the clear favorite to be the GOP presidential nominee in 2024 -- that I'm going to limit myself to two issues that are particularly dangerously crazy.

Abortion and Ukraine.

Look, I've got no problem with Republicans opposing abortion. There's decent reasons to be against abortion, though I find much stronger reasons on the side of a woman's right to choose her own reproductive health care.

What is totally inexcusable is heartlessness that goes beyond the typical Republican position on abortion.

That's what is happening in Texas, where Kate Cox, a woman who already had two children, and was pregnant with a third, learned that the fetus had a serious genetic medical condition that almost certainly meant it would die at birth or shortly after.

Further, Cox had been admitted to an Emergency Room four times during her pregnancy. After a hearing, a Texas judge had ruled that she was entitled to an abortion under Texas law. But Ken Paxton, the horrible Texas Attorney General, threatened hospitals where her doctor practiced with criminal and civil consequences if Cox got an abortion.

So Cox was forced to go out of state for her abortion. She already was under a huge amount of stress due to the disappointment of learning that not only wouldn't her child live after being born, but her chance of ever becoming pregnant again would be at risk if she went ahead with the pregnancy.

This is what Republicans have become: nasty, hateful, preachy controllers of women's bodies. They have no compassion, no empathy, no caring for what Kate Cox and other women who are forced by medical circumstances to choose an abortion are going through.

Back when Democrats were trying to bring health care to many millions of Americans through the Affordable Care Act, Republicans railed about government coming between a person and their doctor. Yet that is exactly what they are doing in Texas and elsewhere: coming between pregnant women and their doctors.

Then there's Ukraine.

After Putin, the dictator of Russia, invaded Ukraine almost two years ago there was pleasing unanimity between Republicans and Democrats that this unprovoked attack on a strong European ally of the United States had to be fought.

So our country, along with many other nations, imposed strict sanctions on Russia. Military equipment desperately needed by Ukraine was provided to this brave country. Other humanitarian support was given to Ukraine whose people were suffering from war crimes by Russia.

Now, though, Republicans in Congress are blocking an aid package for Ukraine that also includes billions for Israel, Taiwan, and securing our southern border.

The party of Ronald Reagan, who presided over the demise of the Soviet Union, has changed into a party that wants Russia to succeed in its invasion of Ukraine, apparently because Trump likes how Russia interfered in the 2016 election on his behalf.

This is disgusting. It's unAmerican. It's unpatriotic. It's giving aid and comfort to our enemy, Russia.

It's also encouraging China to invade Taiwan, since if additional support to Ukraine is cut off after less than two years of war between that country and Russia, China knows that the United States will be unlikely to support Taiwan for very long if it invades their smaller neighbor that, like Russia, they believe rightfully belongs to them.

My mother was a lifelong Republican. I grew up reading National Review and William F. Buckley. I understand the appeal of conservatism. But if my mother were alive today, she'd be appalled at what the Republican Party has become.

So am I. 

Oregonian column about Liberty University makes fun of Oregon's moralistic football opponent

Thank you, Bill Oram. I needed your Oregonian sports section column about Oregon's opponent in the Fiesta Bowl on New Year's Day 2024. These wintry days have been dark, drenching, and dismal recently.  Making fun of Liberty University is just what I needed from you to raise my spirits.

Below I've taken the liberty of sharing the entire column, copyright law be damned. 

For as many Oregon football fans as possible need to have at least a half-smile put back upon their face, given the crushing disappointment of Oregon's third three-point loss to Washington in a row, with the most recent defeat landing the Ducks in the Fiesta bowl against a far inferior opponent, instead of having a decent chance of making the four-team national championship playoff if they'd beaten the Huskies.

Having written a recent blog post called "It's godless Oregon versus godly Liberty University in Fiesta Bowl," it was pleasing to see Oram ridicule Liberty's right-wing fundamentalist religiosity. I'll copy in the Liberty University Statement on Sexuality and Relationships after Oram's column to show how backward this school is.

If enough Oregon students attend the Fiesta Bowl to produce some sarcastic insulting chants about Liberty University, they certainly will have plenty of material to work with. I usually like fans at sporting events to be fairly respectful to the opposing team, but I think an exception should be made in this case.

Here's the column by Bill Oram, "Liberty fans have spoken and I want to tell you the good word."

I’ve heard a lot from Liberty fans this week and it’s been very educational.

For example, I learned Liberty has fans.

And that this is not the same Liberty that Sabrina Ionescu has been playing for since leaving Eugene.

Turns out, Liberty folks are very sensitive to the suggestion that people were unfamiliar with Liberty before the Flames earned a Fiesta Bowl pairing with Oregon.

This seems rather backwards to me.

I would think they’d prefer to keep it a secret, given the university’s views on gay people and its segregationist origins.

Guess that’s why they don’t call it Civil Liberty University.

I’m not saying Liberty is a conservative institution, but after seeing the Flames reach the Fiesta Bowl, The Heritage Foundation must have considered fielding a team of its own. Oregon is wrapping up its tenure in the Pac, but Liberty basically is a PAC.

The Flames’ next media rights deal might as well be with OAN. And while some teams go to Disneyland to celebrate an undefeated season, Liberty may go to Mar-A-Lago.

You think Eugene is a little granola? To Liberty fans, it’s Gomorrah.

I could go on, but I’d just be fanning the Flames fans’ flames.

Try saying that 10 times fast after a few beers — just not at Liberty.

Oregon’s most notable benefactor is Phil Knight. Liberty has the guy who wrote the Left Behind series.

No, those books aren’t about Oregon State and Washington State.

One reader sent me a photo of Liberty’s campus, including the 275-foot Freedom Tower. I’ll just say this: You do not want to get into a tower-measuring contest with the Ducks.

Have you seen the protuberance at the new Hayward Field? Height is overrated.

Liberty made the jump from the championship Football Championship Subdivision just five years ago and hired ex-Ole Miss coach Hugh Freeze to usher in the new era. He won 34 games and went to four bowl games, which was apparently the threshold to overcome his multifarious NCAA recruiting violations and get him back to the SEC at Auburn.

It’s an incredible story, truly. George R.R. Martin should write it: “A Song of Freeze and Flames.”

We really must stop joking for a second and acknowledge that Liberty does have a terrific team under first-year head coach Jamey Chadwell. It’s remarkably difficult to win 13 games, no matter who’s on the schedule. In fact, as some readers noted, the Flames lead the nation in rushing yards per game and rank third, right behind Oregon, in total offensive — ahhh-fensive— output.

You have to be careful with that first syllable when talking about Liberty, lest it be confused to mean something people might find to be uhhh-fensive.

This game could feature so much scoring that Liberty administrators need to update the honor code to prohibit it.

The honor code at Liberty is called “The Liberty Way.” You would violate it on campus at the University of Oregon by breathing.

Liberty squeezed its way into the Fiesta Bowl when Tulane lost the American Athletic Conference’s championship game last weekend. Could one school’s postseason fate have depended on a university any more different from the other?

At Liberty, students are not allowed to expose their midriffs. Tulane cancels classes for Mardi Gras.

Ducks fans would have loved tailgating next to Tulane fans. They serve cocktails out of their pores.

As for the matchup we have instead, I should say that I’m not particularly aggrieved on Oregon’s behalf. The Ducks had their shot at a higher-pedigree opponent and couldn’t close against Washington.

I think it’s a good teaching moment. One of those life-comes-at-you fast deals.

One day you’re competing for a national championship, the next you’re playing Liberty in the Fiesta Bowl. Dan Lanning can use that next time a player says he can’t do an extra rep on the bench.

And I want you to know that I do believe Liberty can prevail ...

Oh, sorry. I was working on my stump speech for an upcoming run for federal office.

The football game? No, Liberty can’t win. Are you serious?

OK, fine. Liberty can win. But this will be the most significant test the Flames have faced since having to click past “Fifty Shades Freed” on HBO in the team hotel at last year’s RoofClaim.com Boca Raton Bowl.

It’s the bedrock of college sports that we get traditional powers playing upstarts. Ever see “Hoosiers” or any other sports movie ever?

The best moment in college football history came in 2007 when Boise State upended Oklahoma in this very bowl game with the Statue of, um, Liberty play.

College football is trying its best to homogenize its product into the NFL Lite, and even the overdue arrival of the 12-team playoff next season won’t exactly give us the football equivalent of March Madness.

December Delirium?

The 12-team playoff will only further entrench the haves from the have-nots, save for the one playoff spot reserved for the best team from the so-called Group of Five. This year that would have been Liberty.

And while you might not be that excited about Liberty in a one-off showcase game against the Ducks, there certainly would be more intrigue in this matchup if advancing to a playoff quarterfinal were on the line.

That would get everyone’s attention. Celebrities, presidents ... well, at least one president. Point is, it would be great theater.

The Fiesta Bowl can be, too, even if there isn’t as much at stake.

And to my new friends, the Liberty fans: I sincerely look forward to getting more familiar with your program and meeting you in Glendale.

All nine of you.

This is the Liberty University Statement on Sexuality and Relationships.

Liberty University is bound by its Doctrinal Statement and by the teaching of the traditional biblical definition of gender, which is that humans are created by God either biologically male or female from the womb, as well as the traditional biblical definition of marriage, which is that it is only between a natural-born man and a natural-born woman.

Statements and other conduct contravening this traditional biblical definition of gender or marriage are inconsistent with the Liberty University Doctrinal Position and the Bible and are not permissible for members of the university community.

For example, sexual relations outside a biblically ordained marriage, romantic displays of affection with a member of the same sex (e.g., hand-holding, kissing, dating, etc.), and actions confirming denial of biological birth sex (e.g., asking to be referred to by pronouns inconsistent with one’s birth sex, using restrooms and changing facilities reserved for persons other than one’s birth sex, etc.) are prohibited by The Liberty Way.

In personal relationships, students are encouraged to know and abide by common-sense guidelines to avoid the appearance of impropriety.

For example, students should avoid visiting alone with the opposite sex at an off-campus residence, entering the residence hallway, quad, or on-campus apartment of the opposite sex or allowing the same, or visiting any dwelling or residence with a member of the opposite sex in inappropriate circumstances.

Additionally, sexual misconduct, including sexual activity, inappropriate personal contact, any state of undress in inappropriate circumstances, or spending the night with a member of the opposite sex are prohibited. Activities inconsistent with these standards and guidelines are violations of The Liberty Way.

My comment is... do you remember this Jerry Falwell scandal? I sure do. 

My fervent hope is that The Liberty Way also includes a crushing loss to the University of Oregon in the Fiesta Bowl, since there's no doubt that Liberty University students and faculty will be doing a hell of a lot of praying between now and January 1 for an upset victory.

It's godless Oregon versus godly Liberty University in Fiesta Bowl

I do my best to view sports as a refuge from divisive subjects like religion and politics. But after the bowl pairings were announced for the 2023-24 football season, it's impossible for me to do this.

The main reason is that the University of Oregon, which lost last Friday to Washington (again) by a measly three points (again) was chosen to play on New Year's Day in the Fiesta Bowl. So yay, say we Oregon fans.

(A secondary reason is a Florida senator, Rick Scott, wanting an inquiry into Florida State being left out of the four-team national championship playoff.) 

But the Fiesta Bowl opponent chosen by the College Football Playoff selection committee is Liberty University. So, boo, say we Oregon fans. There's a lot wrong with this, but also one thing I love. First, the wrongness. 

Oregon is #8 in the final college football rankings. Liberty is #23. That's a big difference. By contrast, Oregon State is #19 and their bowl game opponent is Notre Dame, #16. That's a small difference. So Oregon gets a virtually unknown opponent, while Oregon State gets a very well known opponent, even though Oregon is ranked much higher.

Today sports writer John Canzano shared some questions and answers about Liberty University in his Bald Faced Truth column that I subscribe to.

Q: Who the #%$# is Liberty and why are they in the Fiesta Bowl? — @RickBakas

A: Liberty University is a private evangelical Christian university located in Lynchburg, Va. It was founded in the 1970s by Jerry Falwell Sr. The school boasts an enrollment of 16,000 students on campus, but has online courses that enroll another 115,000 students. Be clear, it’s an educational cash cow.

Jamey Chadwell is the team’s head coach. This Fiesta Bowl vs. Oregon will be the highest-profile football game in the university’s brief history.

The Flames play in Conference USA, where they went 13-0 this season playing opponents such as New Mexico State and Western Kentucky. Liberty played the weakest schedule in the country. It didn’t play a single Power Five opponent and half the teams in Conference USA finished with eight losses or more.

Liberty is in the Fiesta Bowl because it’s the highest ranked Group of Five conference champion. Oregon would have played Tulane, but it lost to SMU in the AAC Championship Game. So the Ducks get Liberty. The loser of the Pac-12 Championship game is 0-11 in its subsequent bowl game. Something tells me Oregon breaks that trend.

Q: Does the Fiesta Bowl automatically get the No. 2 team from the Pac-12? — @johnniethek

A: The College Football Playoff selection committee makes the pairings for the six New Year’s Day bowl games. The Rose Bowl and Sugar Bowl are semifinal games this season. The Fiesta Bowl, Orange Bowl, Cotton Bowl and Peach Bowl aren’t semifinals. Those bowl bids go to a handful of highly ranked teams this season (No. 5-11) that missed the semifinal cut and the top-ranked champion from the Group of Five (No. 23 Liberty).

Last year, the Fiesta Bowl was a semifinal (TCU vs. Michigan). Two years ago, the Fiesta Bowl featured Oklahoma State vs. Notre Dame. I wonder if all those ‘home-schooled’ Liberty fans make the trip. I’m skeptical that Oregon fans will bother given the disappointment. If you’re going, tell me in the comment section.

Now, here's what I love about the Oregon-Liberty matchup. Even though many Oregon players are religious (I've heard quarterback Bo Nix praise God in remarks after games Oregon won; I didn't hear that praise after Oregon lost to Washington last Friday), the state of Oregon is highly irreligious. 

Only four states have a majority of residents who identify as "none's." Meaning, atheist, agnostic, or nothing in particular. In 2022, Oregon's percentage was 53%, ranking second highest in the country, behind only Maine at 54%. Virginia, where Liberty University is located, is only 35% none's.

But Liberty, as a religious institution, seemingly would be 0% none's. The Wikipedia page for Liberty University says:

Liberty, whose website and officials speak of "training Champions for Christ", requires undergraduate students to take three Evangelical Bible-studies classes. The university's honor code, called the "Liberty Way", prohibits premarital sex, cohabitation, any kind of romantic relationship between members of the same sex, and alcohol use. 

Described as a "bastion of the Christian right", the university played a prominent role in Republican politics under Falwell and his son and successor Jerry Falwell Jr.; in 2021, Liberty interim president Jerry Prevo said getting conservative candidates elected to office was "one of our main goals".

So as a progressive atheist, I can't help but view the Fiesta Bowl as not only a contest between two opposing football teams, but also as a clash between two political persuasions. For while Liberty students and faculty will be doing a lot of praying before the game, Oregon fans are more likely to be doing some serious marijuana imbibing.

Who knows, Liberty might pull off a highly unexpected upset. I sure hope this doesn't happen, because that would be viewed as a miracle by the true believing Liberty fans. My dream is that Oregon crushes Liberty. That would ease the pain of the loss to Washington and give me hope for Oregon's future in the Big Ten.

But if that dream becomes a nightmare of a Liberty victory, I've always got my supply of quality Oregon pot to raise my godless spirits.