Bulwark Takes Podcast Summary

Episode: OK Governor Jumps Into a Fight Over a Homework Assignment
Date: December 2, 2025
Hosts: JVL & Will Sommer

Overview

In this episode, Bulwark’s JVL and Will Sommer tackle a viral culture war controversy involving a University of Oklahoma undergraduate’s psychology essay. After receiving a zero on the assignment, the student, Samantha Folnicki, became a flashpoint for conservative outrage, culminating in a public statement from Oklahoma's governor. The hosts dissect the merits of the assignment, the reaction from the academic and conservative communities, and broader implications for higher education and the culture war.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Setting the Scene: The Essay Controversy (02:00–03:18)

• An undergraduate at the University of Oklahoma, Samantha Folnicki, submitted a 650-word psychology reaction essay centered around gender roles, largely argued on religious grounds.
• After receiving a zero, Samantha brought her story to her local Turning Point USA chapter, rapidly escalating it in conservative circles.

Will Sommer [02:30]: “She got a zero on the essay. She gave it to her local Turning Point chapter and then they really blew it up... The latest beat in this was on Sunday, the University of Oklahoma says it suspended one of the grad students involved in the grading here. So it is. It's truly crazy it's gotten to this level.”

2. Was the Zero Grade Justified? (03:18–06:16)

• The essay and grading rubric are public. The paper was described by the hosts as low quality, but perhaps not deserving of a zero.
• Points could have been awarded for meeting basic requirements, even if the reflections were shallow or based solely on personal ideology.
• The TAs cited the absence of “objective evidence” and noted “hurtful” language, justifying their harsh grade.

JVL [04:20]: “It does hit at least 10 points of the rubric...I probably would have given Samantha like one point for clarity of writing and probably, I don't know, like 10 points for reaction. She's reacting to the content...I think Samantha kind of has a point here.”

Will Sommer [05:46]: “A zero... that seems sort of like plagiarism level or, you know, somehow fabricating evidence or something like that.”

3. The Culture War Escalation (07:39–11:04)

• The situation escalated beyond university channels, with the Oklahoma governor tweeting concern about free speech and First Amendment rights.
• The hosts question the necessity and proportionality of such high-level political intervention in a relatively minor academic dispute.
• Background information: Samantha’s family has ties to conservative activism, amplifying the story’s exposure.

JVL [09:27]: “Instead she goes to Turning Point USA and we wind up then with the governor of Oklahoma, Governor Kevin Stitt, tweeting out that the First Amendment is foundational to our freedom and inseparable from a well rounded education. The situation at OU is deeply concerning. Is it deeply concerning, Kevin? Is it really?”

4. Broader Implications for Academia and Politics (11:04–14:04)

• Will Sommer notes the challenges for academics in red states, especially when grading conservative students who may have activist backgrounds.
• The hosts discuss the potential for such incidents to be used as test cases by organizations like Turning Point USA.
• There’s concern over the trend of escalating minor campus spats into national culture war firestorms.

Will Sommer [10:26]: “Particularly in red states, I mean, if I were a liberal or a particularly sort of a vulnerable minority professor or grad student in a red state grading a conservative student... it’s getting to a position where you’d say... let’s get you out of my class for the semester.”

5. The Absurdity and Disproportion of the Response (12:52–14:49)

• Both hosts lament the lack of proportionality, suggesting the student could have addressed the issue via standard university processes instead of making it a national spectacle.
• JVL points out the contrast between this controversy and more significant national issues.

JVL [12:52]: “Is there nobody in the country who's just like prepared to deal with these things in proportionate ways?... You don't have to start a fire and then pour a ton of gasoline on it in order to, I don't know. To do what? Score points?”

JVL [14:04]: “It would be nice if the victim here was a little more sympathetic and wasn't somebody who looked like they are trying to be an agitator... I am glad that Samantha is going to get a better grade. I hope she gets the 12 or 13 out of 25 that she deserves and I hope that that makes a real difference in her life...”

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• JVL [08:42]: “If you're paying full freight to OU and you're being graded by a grad student, not a professor... I'd kind of be pissed too. Am I a crazy person? Am I red pilled, Will?”
• Will Sommer [09:05]: “Often when you have these professor bias cases, there's not a lot of evidence presented. And, you know, look, yeah, people on Twitter are really roasting this, but I kind of think the average undergrad essay anywhere would probably not look that good if scrutinized.”
• JVL [14:49]: “I hope she gets the 12 or 13 out of 25 that she deserves and I hope that that makes a real difference in her life and that she is able to graduate with whatever high honors a 12 out of 25 gets you in psych assignments and go on to parlay that into the graduate school or law school of her choice.”
• Will Sommer [14:49]: “The governor's going to weigh in, say A plus. You did great.”

Timestamps for Important Segments

• [02:00] – Introduction to the controversy and summary of the OU essay incident.
• [03:18] – Evaluation of the essay, grading process, and rubric details.
• [07:39] – The teaching assistants’ justification for the zero grade.
• [09:27] – Escalation to Turning Point USA and involvement of the Oklahoma governor.
• [11:04] – Discussion of conservative activism, campus climate in red states, and the student’s background.
• [12:52] – Critique of the nationalization and politicization of minor academic conflicts.
• [14:04] – Closing thoughts on the pettiness and absurdity of the controversy.

Tone & Takeaways

The discussion is sharp, skeptical, and laced with exasperated humor. Both hosts express sympathy for the procedural unfairness but criticize the decision to escalate the issue into a national political cause. They bemoan the wider trend of disproportionate responses to campus skirmishes, particularly when driven by outside activist organizations and opportunistic politicians.

The episode serves as both a breakdown of one incident and a broader critique of the politicization of higher ed, demonstrating how even mundane academic disputes can become grist for the culture war mill.

End of Summary