Monday, July 26, 2010
Politics Pity the poor white man
Posted by Max Brantley on Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 2:44 PM
TPM says a key Republican election strategy has come into focus. It is discrimination by the Obama administration against the beleaguered white folks. The race of the president in this tactic is coincidental. It would be laughable were it not such an article of faith among the angry Fox nation.
Comments (35)
Showing 1-35 of 35
like
dislike
Yes all white men are angry. Its just fun to be angry. Why should women have all the fun? Last white man's conference I went to, we all unanimously agreed we would be angry and vote against Obumble strictly due to him not being in our elite angry white man's club. It has nothing to do with policies or incompetence. We angry white guys are just all bigots and homophobes and we just generally don't like, nor understand, anyone that isn't white, angry, uses skoal while smoking Marlboro reds, doesn't shave, drives beat up pick up trucks exclusively, wardrobe with wife beater shirts ONLY, and only drinks Bush Beer. Gotta go, Deliverance is on TV and its my favorite movie, I have some relatives that are actually in it. (They were the angry white guys in that movie.)
ActMax – It is hard sometimes to know when you are being sarcastic or honest. Thanks for being honest on this one, your posting all show what you really are … have you started packing your bag yet… you said you were leaving… I’m still good for your bus fare… try Arizona…
Thanks for the confession, but you left out "old" in your description of the meeting.
And Gail what's her name at the NY Times was beating up Obama the other day for surrounding himself with too many white guys.....now which is it?
Obama is a better person than I am....if I had been him I would have had an all black everything. My god...it's only been about 403 years since a black man touched pre-American soil. They got lots to make up for and if I was Obama...I'd be doing it up grand.
But nope...he's too nice, he's too fair, he's got this crazy idea that setting a good example will be noticed by angry white men. Obama has more faith in humans than I do...or at least way too much faith that Republicans can be reasoned with.
And ActMax....after 8 years of Cheney-Bush...you dare speak of incompetence? Except for enriching their buddies....show me anything Cheney-Bush were competent in doing.....oh yeah, except for making the rest of the world hate us....they were 100% competent in that.
I've spent all morning getting emails from my poor dead Ma's best lifelong friend in Missouri. Edna is 81 and a total Fox News Zombie, bless her heart. I'm not sure she's actually seen a black person in her life, but now all of a sudden every black in America is after her. If you stole everything Edna has you might be able to buy a new mid-level Kia automobile. Here's a little sample of what the angry white Republican men are scaring Edna with:
Ever wonder why we have to depend on the foreign media to find out what's "really" going on in our own country. It's a good thing that Obama and the democrats don't own the Canadian media. Here is what Howard Galganov predicts for Barack Hussein Obama - PLEASE READ:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Barack Hussein Obama:
I Told You So - Yes I Did
By Howard Galganov
Montreal, Quebec , Canada
http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=Galgan… ://www.bilan.usherb.ca/voutes/voute3/postbilan/yvesduhaime_1976.jpg
When Obama won the Presidency with the help of the LEFTIST Media,Hollywood And Entertainment Liberals, Ethnic Socialists (ACORN), Stupid Non-Business Professionals and Bush Haters, I wrote: It won't take six months until the People figure this guy out and realize how horrible a mistake they've made.. And when they come to that realization, the damage to the United States of America will be so great it will take a generation or more to repair - IF EVER.
The IDIOTS who not only voted for the Messiah, but also worked [hard] to promote his Lordship, are now left holding the bag.
Here are two things they will NEVER do: They will NEVER admit to making a Blunder out of all proportion by electing a snake-oil salesman with no Positive social history or management experience of any kind. They will NEVER take responsibility for the curse they've imposed upon the immediate and long-term future of their country.
In essence, the people responsible for putting this horror show in power are themselves responsible for every cataclysmic decision he makes and the Consequences thereof.
In just six months, the Messiah's polls are showing the following: 1. On Healthcare Reform - He's going under for the third time with polling well Under 50 percent, even within his own Party. Even though he might be able to Muscle a Healthcare Reform Bill by using Chicago BULLY tactics against his Fellow Democrats, it will just make things worse. 2. On Cap and Trade (Cap and Tax) - The Fat-Lady is already singing. 3. On the Stimulus Package (Tax and Spend) - His popularity is in FREE-FALL. 4. On the TARP package he took and ran with from President Bush - It's all but Good-Night Irene. 5. On the closing of GITMO and "HIS" war on what he no longer wants called the War On Terrorism - He's standing in quicksand with his head just about to go under. 6. On a Comparison between himself and George W. Bush at the same six months into Their respective first term Presidencies - Bush is ahead of him in the Polls. 7. On a comparison between He Who Walks On Water and the 12 preceding Presidents between WW II and now - Obama ranks 10th. 8. On a Poll just Conducted, that asks who would you vote for today between Obama and Mitt Romney - It's a dead heat. Between Obama and Palin - Obama's ONLY ahead by 8 Points and she hasn't even begun to campaign. It seems to me that Obama Wants to be everywhere where he shouldn't be.
He's personally invested in 'totally insulting' America 's ONLY REAL Middle Eastern ally ( Israel ) in favor of Palestinian Despots and Murderers. He's traveling the world apologizing for the USA while lecturing others on how to do it right, when in fact and truth he has no experience at doing anything other than getting elected.
He went to the Muslim world in Egypt to declare that America IS NOT A CHRISTIAN NATION while he heaped praises on Islam, where he compared the "plight" of the Palestinians to the Holocaust.
The Russians think he's a putz, The French think he's rude.
The Germans want him to stop spending.
The Indians want him to mix his nose out of their environmental business.
The North Koreans think he's a joke, The Iranians won't acknowledge his calls.
And the British can't even come up with a comprehensive opinion of him.
As for the Chinese, he's too frightened to even glance their way. [After All, China now owns a large portion of the United States .]
Maybe if America's first Emperor would stay home more, travel less, and work a little bit instead of being on television just about everyday or stop running to "papered" Town Hall Meetings, perhaps he would have a little bit of time to do the work of the nation.
In all fairness, it wasn't HARD to be RIGHT in my prediction concerning Obama's presidency, even in its first six months, so I'm going to make yet another prediction:
OBAMA WILL PROBABLY NOT FINISH HIS 4-YEAR TERM, at least not in a Conventional way.
He is such a political HORROR SHOW, and so detrimental to the USA and his Own Democratic Party, that the Democrats themselves will either FORCE him to Resign or figure out a way to have him thrown out.
Who knows, maybe he really isn't a BORN US Citizen and that's a way the Democrats will be able to get rid of him. [He is a citizen, but not a naturalized citizen with both mother and father being US citizens.]
Or - MORE LIKELY THAN NOT, the Democrats will make Obama THEIR OWN LAME DUCK PRESIDENT.
I don't believe the Democrats have nearly as much love for their country as they do for their own political fortunes. And with Obama, their fortunes are rapidly becoming toast.
If you agree with this email please pass it along to everyone you know! If you don't agree with it, then just delete it and be part of the greatest problem this country has ever seen! My guess is, You don't think this "CHANGE" is what you expected either.
That report is not fair to Obumble. The Iranians won't acknowledge his calls because they are just racists. Not because he's incompetent.
And I never said Bush was competent, just the opposite.
God this sort of S*** just pisses me off. Galganov is a failed right-wing political hack, NOT A JOURNALIST, sort of a third-rate Canadian Rush Limbaugh. DBI I know you know this guy's not worth a plate of poutine, but don't give a stitch of credibility to these loons with loonies.
The rampant stupidity of people is going to be the death of us all.
"The rampant stupidity of people is going to be the death of us all."
I totally agree. I hate people, who needs them. We should get rid of all people and let dogs rule the planet, no wait dolphins, I like them better.
Very insightful article Norma. Thank you. Looks like many cultural changes are ahead.
When Ray-Gun opened the floodgates for brown-skinned immigrants little did he know he was irreparably changing future voter bases. He imagined he was ushering new levels of low wages, which he did.
Act, I don't know if you are legit or an alter ego of the real Max but you really have these moonbats jumping. I know that you have your 'tongue in cheek' when you make these statements but it is raw meat for these folks. Madam Norma, on the other hand, just doesn't get it. She is pretty much of a one issue crusader who sees anything to the right of Marx as a rabid right wing dog. I really enjoy your posts, Act, so keep them coming.
I'm here to help. All you have to do is ask. I'm trying to help these people, they just don't know it.
It's just a shame, Section917, what bad people are doing to the Greatest Generation. I guess old age makes one more susceptible to the Zombie juice, but imagine what kind of sorry son of a bitch you'd have to be to do this to old people.
With Harvey's praise of ActMax........it leaves me with nothing to say except.....ActMax, time of death July 26, 2010 at 4:23 PM
Death, by the way if it came to being paid by the word, your buddy, madam norma, would be a millionaire. If they gave bonuses for being 'cleaver' she would also get a bonus. However, if they were giving bonuses for originality she would be in the toilet. She is a 'one horse' issue and it is b o r i n g!!!!! How about giving the girl some new material so she can entertain us men folk?
DBI, I need Canada to be a safe backup plan if these teabaggers/crazies steal another election. The stench is starting to emanate... I haven't seen this much drivel and subterfuge since Lee Atwater was rubbing his sulfuric hands together. It's bad enough that these trolls come in here and poke the beehive, but the worst part is that they actually believe what they say. Now *that's* terror...
Norma wrote, here ( http://www.arktimes.com/ArkansasBlog/archi… )
Tap: "Or maybe you see Religion as the fount of all bigotry and hatred. In that caase we just disagree."
Norma: "Okay, Tap. I'll bite.
"Where DOES bigotry and hatred come from? How is it taught and transmitted generation to generation?"
**************
Racial hatred -- even the *idea* of race -- is a "johnny come lately" notion, practical a "fad" in historical terms, that is only a few hundred years old out of the thousands (certainly more than six thousand) of years of humankind's existence here. It is an illusion, a scam, a scheme, a trick.
It comes from Economics.
"Ancient societies did not divide people according to physical differences, but according to religion, status, class, even language."
http://www.pbs.org/race/001_WhatIsRace/001…
You won't find the concept of "race," as we know it today, as a way of classifying human beings, before the the 1600s. How many centuries did man do without "race?"
Sure there have always been slaves, and on every continent. But you couldn't tell by looking. Slavery was based on conquest or kidnapping or trade, but no particular group was singled out as suitable. Any enemy would do. Greeks and Romans enslaved folk without regard to their appearance. So did tribes in Africa.
Until the New World needed strong, hearty souls to work the tobacco and cotton fields in greater numbers than the economics of using employees or indentured servitude would permit.
And there had to be justification for dealing in Human Cargo, as well as justification for "discovering" new lands in the Americas and stripping the resources of lands in places like India and Africa.
What if these dark skinned people could be characterized as "inferior?" Perhaps "subhuman?" What if they could be placed in those groups in large numbers, without the trouble of conquest of nations like the Greeks and Romans?
What if there were . . . "Race?"
So, Norma, I'd submit that greed=economics=colonialism=Racism.
Faith may have facilitated it ("Let's make them Christians while we're there.), but it didn't trigger it.
I'd submit that this racism wasn't triggered by Faith and wasn't carried on because of faith, but because of economics.
As some point Southerners especially found themselves surrounded by these inferior beings in equal or greater numbers. What would become of the economic and cultural foundations of the land if these creatures were allowed to vote, build, or prosper? That wouldn't do. There hasd to be Jim Crow laws and poll taxes and night riders.
But not on account of Faith. Because it was an economic necessity.
And this is yet another way in which discrimination differs from other kinds of discrimination, and discrimination against blacks in America differs from other kinds of racial discrimination. It has been passed on, entrenched, even *cultivated* . . . out of economic necessity.
Maybe y'all have seen this:
http://64.38.12.138/News/2010/020146.asp
"Custer died for your sins"
"Custer wore Arrow shirts"
"Fighting terrorism since 1492"
Racist? Can a discete and insular minority that has faced a history of oppression ever be racist against a group that predominately (not exclusively -- think Buffalo Soldiers) includes its oppressors?
Just food for thought...grist for the discussion mill.
The AG was right. We are a nation of cowards when it comes to discussing race. Part of the reason, I think (Norma's rebuke on the theory notwithstanding) is because it's so complex.
I happen to think that blacks tend to be more virulently homophobic than whites. I have no studies to back me up. Does that make me a racist?
Maybe I'm using the wrong qualifier or denominator.
Just like when someone said "black kids don't take the ACT," and I thought maybe the *correct* qualifier is "kids from single parent homes whose parents were never married and did not complete one year of college (regardless of race) do not take the ACT."
Why should I link the negative (to me) characteristic of homophobia to race?
Is any generalization about race racist?
It's complex.
Have to giggle whenever I see the economics/"racism is a johnny-come-lately" idea tossed out there. Really? The Romans even thought that the Greeks were a bunch a effete has-been losers, much less other "racial" groups. Probably right about the Greeks though; pretty much downhill after Alexander. But then he was Macedonian. Sort of like the Arkansas of the day.
Giggle on. Might want to check the PBS link first. Or not. The point is that there were none of the characteristics that we today think of as "race" that reliably distinguished Romans from Greeks. Not skin color. Not hair color or texture. Other *nationalities^ and other *cultures* were regarded as inferior. Show me anything anywhere that made the distinction based on anything like the Caucasoid/Negroid/Mongoloid racial classifications we grew up with.
I stand to be corrected.
I mean, if we want to discuss "race" in an historic context with no reference whatsoever to *skin color,* then yeah -- all bets are off.
Tap -- for you. Everybody else just scroll WAY down and skip this.
Well, Tap, thanks for moving the discussion to a different thread on me!
Onward.
Interesting, your equating your original terms "bigotry and hatred" entirely with the slave trade, in your post above, to make your point about greed and economics fostering bigotry.
(Incidentally, if you haven't seen it, please rent or buy or check out from your library "Traces of the Trade," the best documentary I've ever seen on the slave trade.)
Of COURSE the slave trade was economic. AND dehumanizing "faith"-based ignorance and bigotry "justified" and perpetuated it.
Still, your discussion of slavery bypassed my question about the historic and thoroughly-documented link between religious "faith" and bigotry, ignorance, and hate. Maybe you prefer not to acknowledge that link for your own religious apologetics. Or something.
My original thoughts and focus on the simplicity vs. complexity of bigotry were on exactly that: bigotry.
Your focus centers, rather, perhaps understandably, on racism. Racism is a subset of bigotry -- which includes misogyny, homophobia, classism, elitism, etc.
All I have said is that bigotry -- ANY kind -- is simple because it is ALWAYS based on ignorance (of the Other), the fostering of fear and hate through lies, dehumanization and demonization.
Don't think the Phelps' Westboro Baptist Church in Kansas is worse, say, than Christ the King in Little Rock. One has more money, better wardrobe and superior "manners." But the message (from the pulpit if not the sidewalk signs) is the same: "God Hates Fags." Travel back in time to 1957 when those pulpits and signs preached, "God Hates Niggers" and school me on the "Christian" difference.
(Some churches woke up and came around early, back then, on black equality. We've yet to see that happen to any degree on full legal status for same-sex Americans.)
You seem to prefer focusing on subsets and complexities bigotry takes -- and that's fine. Mine's a completely different point of focus.
I prefer to get to the bottom of things -- the heart of things -- the origins of things. The origins of ignorance, fear, hatred, bigotry and demonization historically lie in religious "faith."
"Most disturbing are findings that show that the religiously devout are on the average more bigoted, more authoritarian, more dogmatic and more antihumanitarian than the less devout."
That's from a 1947 study. There are hundreds of objective studies and writings from any decade you choose. ("Objective" is key: studies from "faith" orgs like the Family Research Council are selling religious authority and dogma, not facts.
You say, "I happen to think that blacks tend to be more virulently homophobic than whites. I have no studies to back me up. Does that make me a racist?"
It's not an "opinion" but a much-studied FACT that blacks are more homophobic as a group because of their churches, which are even more integral centers to black communities than white churches are to white communities.
I don't know why you "have no studies" to back you up, other than you simply haven't looked for any. Where, may I ask, do you get your opinions? Thin air? You obviously formed them from something.
Are you just not interested in Googling the subject of black homophobia and churches?
You're NOT one of those people whose mind is so made up that contradictory facts are irrelevant and not worth your time, are you?
I wouldn't have guessed so, but I'm hard pressed for another answer to why you "have no studies" because such information -- on bigotry of any kind -- is voluminous.
"Does it make me a racist?" you ask. Re-word it, for the moment: "Does it make me a bigot?"
The question becomes, "Am I a bigot (racist) for stating something that is verifiably true about a group?" (I.e., blacks as a group are more homophobic, citing their church teachings.)
In other words, "Does it make me a bigot to tell the truth?"
I made a friend in Little Rock with a woman who turned out to be racist and homophobic. We had discussions about it. Particularly about "the blacks."
At one point, Tap, she asked me, sincerely, "Does that make me a bigot?"
Here is what I told her. "If that's your experience of blacks, living your entire life in Little Rock . . . if your experience has been that blacks are bad people and stupid and shiftless and criminals and on drugs and smell bad and can't speak correct English . . . if that's all you've ever experienced with blacks then that's your Truth and NO, you're not a bigot.
"On the other hand, that has NOT been my experience of blacks as a group or with black friends. They're no more likely to be any of those things than whites or Latinos or Asians or any other group, in my experience. And trust me: you wouldn't last five minutes in Los Angeles or New York because in either city the answer would be, YES, you're a bigot."
The woman was a Baptist who had lived entirely in a small-town bigoted environment where racism was implicitly and explicitly taught in schools and churches for generations and generally accepted among her peers.
EXACTLY as blacks are taught racism against whites and gays (considered by many blacks, as you may know, to be a white "disease") through the same institutions.
Big cities are diverse on a scale small ones can't be. It's hard NOT to work with, befriend and get to know people of all nationalities, races, religions, philosophies and sexual orientations in large population centers. It broadens your exposure and perspective of life.
If THAT's how you are exposed to and learn about life; if THAT'S how you grow up; bigotry becomes obvious and unacceptable. Sure, bigoted communities exist in large cities. But they're not the WHOLE. THERE ARE SO MANY MORE OPTIONS that you rarely have to personally deal with bigotry if you don't want to.
In places like Little Rock, bigotry in some degree is really inescapable -- on a daily basis. Ignorance, faith-based dogma, limited and biased educations, unbelievable pressure to "conform," demonization of the Other, the Outsider, the "different" -- there are reasons why small-town America, including states like Arkansas -- reap the reputations and hardships they do.
Non-conformity, greater education, creativity and invention thrive in larger more diverse environments.
Arkansas simply doesn't provide the variety of economic opportunities that better-educated more diverse regions offer. Nor is one "elitist" for stating the fact. (Waltons and Stephens', etc.; exceptions that prove the rule.)
If you follow the principle of Occam's Razor then most if not all of your life becomes a string of "True / False" binary statements. Ironically, that simplicity, believe it or not, leads ever-more-fully to what we are pleased to call "God," even as it deconstructs revealed religion.
Thomas Paine's "The Age of Reason" still says it all as well as or better than anybody.
Binary living is tremendously helpful in eliminating bullshit, avoiding wasting time and basing actions on False people and situations . . . simultaneously maximizing your chances of living a long, healthy, happy and fulfilling life by sticking with what you know to be True.
Talking snakes exist or they don't. Jesus was an historical figure or one in a series of identical ancient myths. God is a "He" or isn't. Women are subservient to men or not. Epileptics need exorcism or medical treatment. A politician lies or tells the truth. On and on.
Catch? You must verify truths for yourself rather than accepting them second-hand without question (as in all revealed religions). But with the internet, information and verification have become easily available compared to even 20 years ago.
"True / False." Binary living. Nothing could be simpler, though it requires effort and FACTS on which to base choices and actions.
As Richard Dawkins says, "Faith is an evil precisely because it requires no justification and brooks no discussion." No facts, no questions. Surrender.
Maybe the seemingly existential clash between Faith and Fact is a human constant that can never be "won" collectively.
But it can CERTAINLY be won individually. Possessing Knowledge, one can live entirely outside the dis-ease of Bigotry though it be all around.
"Know thyself" is one of the oldest oracular secrets on earth.
It's still the best.
Norma,
I apologize for moving the discussion to a more current thread without leaving a forwarding address. Thoughtless of me.
You make good points, as always. In the end we'll just disagree on some things. But I do want to clear up the areas in which we have a failure to communicate.
I said I believe blacks tend to be more virulently homophobic but "I have no studies" to make a specific point. It's not that there *are* no studies on the question (I knew of course there were) or that I couldn't find them (yes, I can Google). The point was that I had *chosen* to adopt a belief about a racial group just based on my anecdotal experience, not on empirical data or scientific fact. *Elected* not to challenge the veracity of my belief through thorough research. Went with my gut. Arguably, that's racist. So I asked the question. Because I began to wonder about the scope and form of racism itself.
And we began with me saying "Or maybe you see Religion as the fount of all bigotry and hatred." I pondered a while on using the word "font" rather than "fount" -- for greater clarity. Turns out I should have chosen asterisks for emphasis "the fount of *all* bigotry and hatred."
Using font/fount in the sense of "source," I chose the subset of racism because that is *one* kind of hatred that, in my opinion, does not have Faith at its *source.* Faith is not the fount of racism, in my view. Economics is. Once racism began to flow from the font as a swift stream, Faith -- I will admit -- helped turn it into a mighty river.
I didn't mean that racism is worse than other forms of bigotry. I meant to use it as an example of bigotry not rooted in Religion.
As for talking snakes or earth-covering floods or men surviving in the digestive tracts of sea creatures, I understand you take a binary view. Of course, that leaves no room for allegory. I think allegory is pretty important, but I don't feel the need to convince others (not those who believe I've just typed heresy or those who believe the whole thing is silly myth).
At bottom, I'm just a shades of gray person. You're not. I guess that means I will always stumble around feeling my way around some things I find complex, even as you race ahead with sure footing. It's okay with me.
Of course it leaves room for allegory. Just call it what it is -- allegory -- instead of calling it literal fact.
At bottom, Tap, "shades of gray" is a still a binary on-off series of light (on) and dark (off) (see HEX codes for the millions of colors).
That's why, for me, knowing one or two things about a person tells me everything I need to know about the role, if any, they will play in my life. It has nothing to do with whether we "agree" on things or not -- except on their positions on equal rights for same-sex Americans and women's freedom of reproductive choice.
Their positions on those two issues tell me whether they're willing to impose their religious dogma and "faith" on others, on America, or not.
Did you see the sign from the anti-gay Catholic sponsored NOM rally all over the internet today? It quotes Leviticus and shows two nooses. A "kill the gays" lynching. Sound familiar?
Good grief, Norma! No, I didn't see that--but I'm Googling it now. Unbelievable.
I've seen it now.
The drafters of our Constitution were deeply flawed, like all of us. They made some mistakes. But one thing they absolutely did right --
They were wise beyond measure when they said Government shall make no law to advance Religion.
Thanks for posting that, Norma. I read that several hours ago and said to myself, "what's next?''
Honestly, where's the outrage from the mainstream media against the NOM and their true motives?
While Googling for the MurderTheGays message, I came across this parody of the NOM "Storm Gathering" commericial.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L0pPEAdDn64…
Tap,
That one's a classic. I love Jane Lynch in her cameo...she's a riot. Have you seen the video of the world's best christian on gay marriage? It, too, is an oldie but timeless.
Enjoy, if you haven't already seen it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zEeF_zbG-nU
I have L-O-N-G been a Betty Bowers and Landover Baptist Church fan.
They nail it.
You know, Norma, I thought you were Betty Bowers at one time. She has your personality:)
That is a zinger, stj!
But all this levity won't help me sleep tonight. As you know, I'm a divorced man, and when my ex divorced me she forever "causeth [me] to commit adultery" unless I remain celibate, re-married or not.
When will NOM come for me? Leviticus has a remedy for us adulterers as well.
Yes, Tap, you'll be stoned too. (not the cannabis type, either, DAMNIT!).
I still can't get it through my head why/how a heterosexual woman would willingly CHOOSE not to be married to you. I'd be fighting for you tooth & nail if you slipped that ring on my finger (of course, if I had been infected with that heterosexual gene. Ick!).
With that said, I have to dedicate a song to you, my love. I hope this can be "our'' song.
Hit it, Bonnie.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z04r_tlWdRs
More by Author
-
Oh what a beautiful open line
Have you ever experienced a more glorious day in Little Rock, Ark.? Not me. What's happening: * CLIMATE CHANGE?
- Apr 21, 2012
-
Republican war on women spreads to the states
National Republicans have been spooked by the fierce blowback to congressional efforts to legislative restrictions on women's health coverage, particularly to restrict coverage of contraception, even by secular employers.
- Mar 15, 2012
- More »
Event Calendar
-
Re: Little Rock can do better than ditches
A very good point made by 33.
RE the bike friendly state blog. -…- on May 24, 2012
-
Re: Arkansas at bottom on friendliness to bicycles
The bicycle league's friendly state distinction is based on 5 parameters. Only one is directly…
- on May 24, 2012
-
Re: Take the load off: Ride a pedicab to Riverfest
Kudos to Kum & Go.
I can only imagine the logistics that the…- on May 24, 2012
Top Commenters
Blogroll
Slideshows
-
Police close the Occupy Little Rock camp, perhaps the last Occupy encampment on public land.
Site Index
News
Cover Story / Arkansas Reporter / The Week That Was / Smart Talk / The Insider / The Observer / Editorial / Max Brantley / Ernest Dumas / Gene Lyons / Bob Lancaster / Words / Guest Writer / Letters
Entertainment
A&E Feature / To-Do List / In Brief / Movie Reviews / Music Reviews / Theater Reviews / A&E News / Art Notes / Graham Gordy / Books / Media / Dining Reviews / Dining Guide / What's Cookin' / Calendar / The Televisionist / Movie Listings / Gallery Listings
This Week's Cover
Quick Links
Special Publications
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
