Monday, July 11, 2011
The Monday line
Posted by Max Brantley on Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 4:30 PM
Your comments here. Final notes:
* GOOD INTENTIONS, ROCKY ROAD: Interesting report in The Nation on the unhappy outcome of an effort by the Clinton Foundation to hurry up some classrooms for children in hurricane-devastate Haiti.
* DOGGING AT DILLARD'S: In Indiana, a former Dillard's worker gets a little help in court after being fired for eating a couple of leftover hot dogs from a company picnic. The company is contesting his unemployment payments.
* WALTON MONEY: Another episode, featuring candid bragging about it, of Walton money financing anti-teacher efforts — in Illinois and Colorado, particularly. Walton money is used the same way in Arkansas. They can just buy a whole lot more legislators for a lot less money here.
* NO MORE SLAVERY: The right-wing religionists who cooked up an anti-gay marriage vow for Iowa Republican candidates has scrapped the part that said black families were better off during slavery because they supposedly could stick together as a family.
* TAX VOTE COMING: I'll try to update later on the Little Rock Board's consideration of the tax issue. Maybe the mayor will expain how that $22 million for a "research park" will be spent and produce some documented assurances of transparency in the operation of that research park. Perhaps he'll tell us how the port plans to spend $10 million — for example for whose land at what price under whose appraisal. Or not. He's set his shills to work already with the chamber of commerce line, that spending $32 million now has to be a good thing because we finally got some business at the port 30 years or so after taxpayers built a slackwater harbor that sat idle for decades. I'd rather bond these things independently and with full disclosure, as was done on the slackwater harbor vote, not turn over a $38 million sack of cash to the mayor and the gang of five that runs the city through our undemocratic ward representation process.
* UPDATE: The State Republican Party announced it had filed an ethics complaint against Hudson Hallum, the Democratic candidate for House District 54 in a special election tomorrow, because a faxed copy of his pre-election campaign finance report only included the first page and didn't disclose campaign contributors, expenses or the source of an additional $52,000 loan to his campaign. The complaint is meaningless in the short run, of course, except to get some publicity on behalf of the Republican candidate before tomorrow's election. A spokesman for Hallum says his full campaign report is in the mail to the secretary of state and the faxed sheet was sent just to show the campaign report was en route. Pretty slippery, I have to admit. And I don't think the mailed report will show it was mailed by the July 5 deadline. The Republicans are making a fuss about the use of get-out-the-vote money by old school Delta street operators. It's an odorous practice, if not necessarily illegal. There's nothing to prevent someone from encouraging someone to cast a ballot for a candidate, absentee or otherwise. Filling ballots out for others without their consent is another matter. To date, only suspicions, not evidence, have been voiced about that.
The Democratic Party responded:
“It’s clear the Republican Party of Arkansas has so little confidence in their uninspiring candidate that they are turning to every trick in the book to distract voters from their Party’s platform to benefit the rich and powerful and hurt working Arkansans in East Arkansas. Since the Republican candidate has failed in selling his extremist agenda to the people of East Arkansas, the Republican Party has turned to negative attacks on the voting process in a desperate attempt to divert attention from a lackluster candidate and dangerous ideas.”
* LETTERS FROM PULASKI JAIL: Abdulhakim Muhanmad, whose murder trial for shooting servicemen outside a Little Rock military station begins next week, continues to write letters to journalists. Today, it's a letter to Fox 16's David Goins renouncing his U.S. citizenship. Or trying to. He'll go to trial as scheduled.
Speaking of...
-
New wrinkle in Fred Smith ballot case
March 15, 2012AP is reporting that Chicot Circuit Judge Sam Pope has ruled that former state Rep. Fred Smith successfully completed a probationary sentence on a felony theft conviction a year ago and the charge against him has been dismissed. /more/
- More »
Comments (54)
Showing 1-50 of 54
"...said black families were better off during slavery because they supposedly could stick together as a family."
More ignorance about slavery due to the desire for slavery to be like it is portrayed in GWTW.
like
dislike
As our air conditioners are laboring, there's an interesting site that lists electricity consumption by state (28th total, 11th per capita, 7th per $10 million of GDP).
http://www.statemaster.com/graph/ene_tot_e…
Statemaster.com has a lot of other stats you can toss into blog arguments, although realizing that no amount of facts will matter to the Faux-indoctrinated zombies.
Whoops, I left off the last word on the previous post
"...Faux-indoctrinated zombies (Fizzies).
If the Little Rock Board of Directors were proposing a tax increase with revenue restricted to hiring cops, firefighters, improving our blighted parks system, creating outlets for at-risk youth and to other concrete items generally aimed at making the city a better place to live, I could see voting for it (even with two $160,000 city administrators on the payroll). No way I vote for what's on the table now.
High school science class in the state of Louisiana
http://www.doonesbury.com/strip/archive/20…
.
What Is The Least Subtle Way of Telling the World You're Gay?
_Being an Anti-Gay Republican
_Being Married to Michele Bachmann
_Becoming a priest
_Being a spokesman for the American Family Association
_Getting caught in airport bathrooms with luggage boys.
_Deny, deny deny.
_Marrying Liza
_Becoming a member of Exodus International
_Doing it in the street and frightening the horses
_Writing Christian Self-Help Books
...by Betty Bowers, America's best Christian.
eLwood, Driftglass, who does the absolute best ever photo shops came up with Pawlenty's new unofficial campaign slogan: "Whatever Michele Bachmann says less 6%"
http://driftglass.blogspot.com/
Makes one wonder if Mitt will roll around in the bat-shit, too. Or will he just go for a light dusting of bat-shit?
"More ignorance about slavery due to the desire for slavery to be like it is portrayed in GWTW."
Don't pop our bubbles, cato, we love thinking that our slavery was more about a jolly Aunt Jemima cooking and cleaning as a happy part of the Master's family rather than the nasty realities of human slavery. Leave us to our romanticized Demzette version of the Civil War. The war of the Northern Aggression was all about northerners being jealous of our cotton/fine plantations, beautiful women and happy slave families. (And I'm pretty sure there is a Texas schoolbook that tells it that way, too...well, almost.)
You history buffs and all your pesky details/truths sure do muddle up our fairy tales.
When are the right wingers going to stop being herded into a corner with these vows?
No tax vows, stop all abortion vows, keep Terri Shiavo alive forever vows.
How about a vow that says I will weigh the pros and cons of every bill and vote what is best for working Americans and American families.
Then you have tools to negotiate favorable outcomes instead of guaranteed gridlock.
The slavery is better since baby daddies couldn't run out on their kids sure sounds blatantly racist.
I would also point out that very few blacks were in prison back during slavery since the slave masters beat the holy crap out of them everyday and sent them back to work, Ta Da! Black prison population problem solved!
We white people need to take total absolute control of them black so as to save them from their wanton ways!
Now, instead of dropping the idiotic vow all together, they just tidy up the words a little and sign on.
Any minority or person with family worth below a couple million bucks has no business voting Republican. But they do!
This country is being wrecked by a bunch of lunatics but let's not forget how the mainstream media have helped these lunatics appear respectable. This is a story as much of corrupt media figures as it is of corrupt politicians. The media need to be held accountable. Check out the latest nonsense made up by the Arkansas Democrat Gazette propaganda factory:
ADG’s Bradley Gitz reinvents US economic history
http://arkansasmediawatch.wordpress.com/20…
Liberals in this country are still in denial.
Arkansas Media Watch
"You history buffs and all your pesky details/truths sure do muddle up our fairy tales."
LOL. Well, zelda, we 'uns just can't help it. Before you know it someone will come along and tell you Jesus wasn't blonde nor blue eyed (in spite of Hollywood story telling) and George Armstrong Custer's hair was cut short and not worn long at Little Big Horn. As Ronald Reagan once commented, "Facts are stupid things."
"6. Reagan did enact tax cuts but also tax increases..." Mediawatch
One of those tax increases under RR not mentioned was the federal gasoline tax. When RR took office, it was around 4 cents a gallon. As unemployment shot up to 10.3 percent by his third year in office, Congress was asked to increase the tax to 9 cents a gallon so government could create jobs with new highway/bridge construction in an attempt to lower the unemployment figures. Congress complied by more than doubling the federal tax on fuel.
This is what I was taught about slavery in Arkansas in about 1947: Arkansas: Yesterday and Today by Knoop & Grant 1932 was a text written for Arkansas fifth and sixth graders; it contains this passage describing plantation life: “From the time you were a wee baby your black mammy took care of you and watched anxiously over you—often even when you were nearly grown.” . . .”For the most part, the negroes loved their white ‘massa’ and ‘missus,’ while your father and mother took good care of the colored people they owned.”
Elsewhere, Norma and I continue to go back and forth (I can hear her now: "We are too going round and around! Science proves it!") about whether (as she puts it) sexuality "is innate -- from cradle to grave" or not. Is anyone getting anything informative out of our disagreement? Say so if you are and I'll keep slogging, but I won't enjoy it.
Quite frankly, I think it is getting a little tiresome. and you will never get the last word with Norma.
While the Reps continue to oppose closing the hedge fund managers loop hole and taxing corporate jets, Orrin Hatch has come out in favor of some tax increases - that is, taxes on the poor and the lower middle class. He claims that 51% of the people don't pay taxes, which is of course utterly wrong. Yep, he thinks Americans are really that stupid. Is he right?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/11/o…
Arkansas Media Watch
http://arkansasmediawatch.wordpress.com
I think this evangelical, Iowa "Marriage Vow'' Michelle Bachmann proudly signed has even more "eye-openers'' the media has yet to discuss. The slavery issue is one thing, but she also has it out for women as much as she does for gays and African-Americans.
She also pledged never to put women in combat.
She probably doesn't know this (we all agree she's not up on not-so-current events), but women are currently IN combat. There are an untold number of female Air Force fighter pilots, who've flown COMBAT missions since 1993. Yep, that's 18 years.
Women are currently on the front lines in Afghanistan with Marine Infantry units. They are *technically* not listed as being in combat, with jobs as "medics'' or "keepers of bomb sniffing dogs.'' Yet, they are armed exactly as the men, face the same dangers and return fire when fired upon. Is that not combat to you?
So, if Michelle Bachmann becomes our first female POTUS, thousands of women will get an immediate demotion based on this pledge. Ironic, huh?
Also, if women are weak and not worthy to hold the jobs they hold today (according to Bachmann), how can she rationalize running for Commander in Chief of our military? Isn't she too dainty to send big, burly men to war?
If women can't perform the same jobs in the military they've been doing successfully for years, how can one be President of the United States?
As I see it, her anti-female positions cut both ways.
1st of all the only Arkansas history book I was ever taught from was one written in 1936 by Hazel Presson of Fort Baptist. I did all I could to avoid her in high school in the early 70s, she died about 7 years ago way up in her 90s. By the time I got to the 6th grade I started questioning a book written before WWII with no mention of Nazis, but I guess in 1936, Hazel wasn't aware. If there was a darkie passage in it, I don't remember because at the time I wouldn't have thought anything of it. Our bad.
2nd, anyone who is dying to sign your pledge in order to get a few extra votes will also blow you.
3rdly, it's so hot and most of America is busy screaming at each other and worried about last week's jury verdict....I think most people are missing that the owner of Fox News is in some mighty deep doo doo that keeps getting deeper with every sun rise. The investigation into the Murdoch evil empire has spread to the United States...the editor of the Wall Street Journal is looking shady all of a sudden. Could it be my dreams are coming true? A country without Fox News? A world without Murdoch behind the media?
I've thought for a long time that something has to give. Either the Tea Party blow up, or Fox News goes dark, or Obama grows a pair....there must be a pressure relief valve out there somewhere....cause we're fixin to blow and not like Michele Bachmann finishing up her pro-slavery pledge whilst on her 55 year old knees. We're at the point that all it will take is one more dead Arch Duke Ferdinand......can't you smell WWIII around the next corner too?
If Fox News goes dark...there's a slim chance this country might right itself. So take a few minutes and keep an eye on the new ugly coming out about Murdoch....it will brighten your day and might save your future and the future of our kids. Oh our precious precious kids, dod lov em! Bye bye Rupert!
Yes, Sis, And Pawlenty just jumped into the bat-shit with her and signed it too. It was a given that the worthless piece of santorum, AKA Rick Santorum would sign it, but Pawlenty? I speculated about whether the Mittster would dive in too, or just go for a light dusting of bat-shit.
I saw somewhere today that Tammy(and I am ashamed to say I can't remember her last name, perhaps you do?) is running for office again. She is the helicopter pilot who lost both legs from the knees down when her chopper was hit in Iraq. She ran for Congress and lost in 2008 or 2010 and is back in the game.
“For the most part, the negroes loved their white ‘massa’ and ‘missus,’ while your father and mother took good care of the colored people they owned.” ~ Knoop & Grant textbook, 1932
Hard to believe and difficult to understand that slaves could ever have loved their owners. But read some of the Federal Writers’ Project interviews of former Arkansas slaves (1936-1938) and you’ll find that it was sometimes true.
Here are a few remarks made by former slave Lizzie Barnett who was about 100 when interviewed in Conway 75 years ago:
"Yes, I was born a slave. My old mammy was a slave before me. She was owned by my old Miss Fanny Pennington, of Nashville, Tennessee . . . She is dead now. I sho did love Miss Fanny.”
“My mammy and Miss Fanny raised dey chillun together. Three each, and we was jes' like brothers and sisters, all played in de same yard. No, we did not eat together. Dey sot us niggers out in de yard to eat, but many a night I'se slept with Miss Fanny.”
"Yes, siree, I was Miss Fanny's child. Why wouldn't I love her when I sucked titty from her breast when my mammy was working in the field? I did love Miss Fanny.”
"I don't know 'sactly how old I am. Dey say I am 100. If Miss Fanny was livin' she could settle it. Here I is living in my shanty, 'pendin' on my good white neighbors to feed me and no income 'cept my Old Age Pension. Thank God for Mr. Roosevelt. I love my Southern white friends. I am glad the North and South done shook hands and made friends. All I has to do now is sit and look forward to de day when I can meet my old mammy and Miss Fanny in the Glory Land. Thank God."
I’m not at all suggesting that Lizzie Barnett’s comments reflected the prevailing thoughts of former Arkansas slaves, but in reading the many narratives, I found much more “love” than I’d ever have imagined.
Found a lot of abuse and downright brutality, too. It’s a shame 5th and 6th graders back in the ‘30s and ‘40s didn’t get to read THAT part of the story.
Bullwhip Days: The Slaves Remember: An Oral History by James Mellon.
Try it. You will like it. Amazon, Barnes/Noble, etc.
Have Bullwhip, and it’s a good ‘un, indeed.
This one is, too, with 96 Arkansas narratives. Many more Arkie narratives online that aren’t in any of the books.
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/413523.…
Dear Marriage Vow proponents:
I am not surprised at your anti-gay, anti-equality rhetoric, and I'm sure you'll agree there's no point in me debating you on that. My mind's as made up as yours.
(You should be ashamed, though, for saying there's no evidence that same-gender attraction is innate and "irresistible." There *is* evidence people are born to attraction, and heterosexual unions are not "irresistible," either--shoot, there's a good biblical case for divorced folks like me becoming prayer eunuchs, but that's another story.)
I noticed your preoccupation with sex, and see how that plays into your fear of battlefield rape by swarthy enemies. Thanks for your paternalism, but I think women in our volunteer armed forces have considered the various risks in their jobs.
Speaking of paternalism, I'll thank you to stay out of my daughters' business with respect to those "second chance" and "cooling off" concepts related to divorce. I've taught them since their early teens that there must *never* be a second chance for any partner who is abusive -- no prayer, no counseling, no compassion, no cooling off, no promises it'll never happen again. No second chances if a man raises his hand to you. I told them their lives depended on it. Please MYOB.
And thing is, I believe *they* are capable of deciding when, under *other* circumstances, "second chances" are appropriate. I'll thank you not to put artificial obstacles in their way if they choose divorce. Or if they opt for something other than "robust" childbearing. (I appreciate, though, that your invitation to make babies appears to apply to all in America.) Whether my girls choose to bring lots of little brown-skinned Taps into the world is up to them. They will be capable to taking care of them.
Finally, I know you are not claiming a first amendment right to be free from "intolerance" by those who consider your positions to be contrary to justice and equality. You may want to put on your Big Boy and Big Girl Pants and clarify that you expect to stand up to the (first-amendment protected) criticism you'll receive from those who label you bigots and racists; see that protection flows both ways....
By the way, have you guys ever read "The Handmaid's Tale?" You might enjoy part of it.
Very truly yours,
Tap
Having just finished a book on the subject, The Washingtons of Wessyngton Plantation, one chapter of the book dealt with relations the Washington family (George's cousins) had with their many many long term former slaves when the Civil War ended.
It ran the gamut....several of the house slaves stayed during the war mainly because they knew they were better off. Many of their slaves ran off.....and ran right back home. Imagine never having been off a farm for your entire life and the life of your daddy and granddaddy.
The Washingtons were rather kind-hearted slave owners, but they were above all, slave owners. The most beloved of the house servants was not only the mixed race son of 14 year old Mr. Washington's fling with a 14 year old house slave, Granville Washington was still a slave and all that that implies.
The slaves no matter how well treated loathed being slaves. And when the war ended the Washingtons and their former slaves had very rocky times before they figured out how to live together again...and most of them did, clear up into modern times. Seems to me it worked a lot like it does when someone is told they're dying. The book shows everyone left alive experienced:
1. Denial and Isolation.
2. Anger.
3. Bargaining.
4. Depression.
5. Acceptance.
Yeah the Civil War was a bitch, but so was Reconstruction. At the end of it all, many ex slaves stayed on as paid employes or sharecroppers, the former owners recovered from their terrible loses and prospered. The whites learned to accept their former slaves as equals and boy, it didn't go well at times. The ex slaves got over their anger and feelings of reprisal and today have family reunions at the plantation. But to their dying days, the ex slaves never found nice words to say about their slavery days.
The signers of this pro-slavery pledge should be visited by thugs in white hoods. Alice Stewart should get a visit too since her press releases on behalf of Bachmann today only made things worse. Idiots should never mess with history, it always bites them in the ass.
No one should be surprised that (some) slaves born into generations of slavery thought themselves well loved and protected.
You are SO right, James of the Plains.
Naturally, John A begged for more blog attention by posting his query, so . . .
After THIS post comes another!
As a matter of fact, should you peruse the archives, I OFTEN if not USUALLY grant the "last word" to others. But who's counting?
_______________
I don't let up on this issue, John A.
You may think it worthy of "debate" on a blog. You may think your phony "dispute" about the science is equal to the actual science. Like Pawlenty and Bachmann and Huckabee and Beebe and the right wing theocrats.
HERE is what all that is about.
http://www.dallasvoice.com/cult-leader-kil…
And NOW, my Razorbabies, HERE is why i will never let up on this issue.
______________
I CANNOT thank you enough, John A, for your scientific insights into same-sex equality in contemporary America, and your ad hominem shoot-the-messenger knocks against me, Norma Bates, personally!
(Be that as it may, the rest of my Razorbabies have long known I was born impervious to knockers and don’t waste their or other bloggers’ time reading, much less writing, off-topic spotlight-shifts toward, you know, ME. But thank you for the attention!)
One remains awed by your original post because, frankly, Nobel Prizes have been won on less scientific certainty and you’re from The Natural State and who knows? You could be the next Kris Allen only in sexual orientation research instead of pop music! (Which reminds me: whatever happened to . . . oh, never mind.)
Because your original post, from which you have strayed far and wide (savvy you!) is: “I say that interpretation is wrong. Science hasn't settled that question."
LOVES the “science hasn’t settled that question” bit.
Because, of course, science never “settles” ANYTHING!
That would be the whole point of the scientific method. Everything is eternally open to continued questioning and research! Everything is a “Theory!” (Another favorite right-wing ploy: their idiotic assumption that scientific theories aren’t “facts.” Like, you know, the Theory of Gravity.)
I mean, Einstein’s Theory of Relativity has been and continues to be proved again and again, in all its complexity, but it’s NEVER “settled!” as you demand, John A.
Though originated by Max Planck in 1906 for god’s sake and perfected by Bertie (Albert Einstein, to intimates), and repeatedly verified by scientists for over 100 years, it’s still not “settled,” honey.
Science never is.
Which is why this whole schmear is so threatening to people who need black-and-white right-wrong second-hand “absolutes” for their security.
Thinking, reasoning, comparing, investigating, questioning, is threatening to those who bank on “eternal truths” (no such thing).
“Relativity” is terrifying to those addicted to dogma. “Relativity” is freeing to those addicted to living.
One is dead. Never-changing.
The other? Alive. Ever-changing.
Relativity is Science. Religion is Dogma.
“Settled” is a term for laymen, John A, not scientists. Your using it puts you in league with Michele Bachmann, Tim Pawlenty, Mike Huckabee, Mike Beebe, Maggie Gallagher and others who ignore and denigrate the science of sexual orientation, from personal fear and insecurity or political pandering, that their dogmatic “faith’s” black-and-white evil-versus-good blanket will be jerked from beneath them.
Without which they’re left foundering. Or forced to inform themselves and actually THINK. Too hard. Too threatening. They’d be shunned by the tribe.
Or forced to move to more welcoming progressive, intellectual and economic vibrant tribes and climates.
Which is what successive generations of Arkansans do rather than remain in the south.
The Best and Brightest don’t remain in The Natural State, BTW, which still adores (and perhaps always will) religiously bigoted “faith-based” leaders like Faubus, Huckabee and Beebe, and wants everybody who “knows better,” thinks differently, disagrees, is more intelligent, better educated, more sophisticated, to leave and stay away.
Leaving The Natural State and its “faith”-based leaders to wallow in how “persecuted” they are by the rest of the country, instead of the Truth, which is the other way ‘round.
Then Arkansas wonders, imbecillically like Prissy in “Gone With the Wind,” why Big Businesses don’t chomp at the bit to relocate to bigoted, Babbity, backward, Baptist Arkansas.
Better, to such minds, to follow 2000 year old semi-literate superstitious dictates of some desert tribesmen. Better to deny 2000 years of ensuing research and science – than confront Relativity.
Listen, John A. I’m impressed with your use of “heteronormative.”
SO scientific-sounding. I’ve been using it, or trying to, ten times daily in a sentence. But I gave up after day one from being laughed off of Rodeo Drive.
Now I know why.
Your focus on a “dispute” about the science of sexual orientation: your, “I say that interpretation is wrong. Science hasn't settled that question": goes so far beyond contemporary scientific research and understanding into human biology and human rights that it begs the question: Why have you not been nominated for a Nobel Prize?
Or something.
Is it presumptuous to await your knockers?
Will Kris Allen be the next Conway Twitty?
Does Adam Lambert give a shit?
Relative, I guess.
DBI, my fellow FoD (Father of Daughter(s)); I don't believe we need Government to tell our offspring what is best. Limited Government? Please. We have raised our own.
John A,
I don't mean to butt in on this lively discussion you and Norma are having on several threads, but I'm confused.
You're obviously a friend to the LGBT community. I don't think there's any debating about your being in our corner and I thank you.
However, I find your arguments rather disturbing/hurtful and am thankful to Norma for continuing to poke holes into your unsubstantiated assertions with scientific facts.
Science aside, I can only speak for myself. I knew I was an L when other little girls knew they liked boys. I didn't know what it meant because I had never been informed the term, much less the inclinations. I was totally immersed in an extremely religious, fundamental background.
This "gay thing'' for me sprouted up out of nowhere at age 10. It certainly wasn't encouraged.
In fact, by the time I learned the term "homosexual'' in junior high, I was then taught it was the worst possible thing you could be. In my church, it was akin to being a murderer. Actually, I think a murderer wouldn't have been as vilified as much as a "faggot'' in my Southern church.
I knew then just to keep everything a big secret, play the game, and date men until I could escape to safer environs. Arkansas is by no means safer, but it's 400-miles away from my family (who'd be embarrassed and shamed by their friends if I were an "out-of-the-closet lesbian.'' That remains true to this day).
(Brief aside: This isn't a 'woe is me' post. Every single one of my gay friends over 40 has the same story. We shrug it off and say to ourselves, "We're fine. That's just the price you pay.'' I thank God the younger generation isn't like us. They don't put up with all the BS and the placating of the bigots. The under-40 crowd is the reason why we'll have equality one day. God love 'em.)
Back to you, John A. I have no idea if you identify as straight, gay, bi or trans. That's your business.
But, it becomes MY business when you argue that being gay is a choice. It's not. And you only bait the haters when you argue it is.
Thank you, Norma, for being so dogged in your pursuit of the truth and dispelling the naysayers.
I think I speak for 99 percent of the LGBT community when I say, "Love ya, dearest.''
John A, we love you, too. Just abandon your losing argument once and for all. We know you have our best interests at heart.
XXOO,
Sistertoldja
P.S. Tap, my love, that was one of your all-time best posts. I think I'm switching my Male Crush allegiance back to you. Besides, Durango sent me squat on our anniversary and WBW's still kind of miffed.
I don't care what they say on Rodeo Drive, Norma. You should consider, however, that maybe they laugh at you when you talk about heteronormativity because you're using a word that you don't understand. Maybe this will help: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heteronormati… . I also recommend reading Michael Warner on the subject.
I do care about your dedication to the scientific method:
"I know you put no store in astrology, but I'm telling you (eLwood can confirm), Cammack's afflicted Sixth House and Virgo positions speak clearly to her destiny..."
http://m.arktimes.com/ArkansasBlog/archive…
That was just the first example I hit, from the first page of your collected comments.
Someone who takes astrology and tarot (further down in your comment) seriously has a lot of nerve lecturing on how science works.
Let me clue you in on something here: Science does settle some things.
Einstein was closer to the truth than Newton. Science settled that.
Darwin was closer to the truth than Wallace. Science settled that.
Gay people deserve equal rights. Science won't settle that. Political action and demography will settle that.
Do you think that louse from the Dallas Voice article wouldn't have killed that poor four-year-old if you'd been able to convince him that sexual orientation "is innate--from the cradle to the grave"? I think he'd've only regretted not killing the kid in his cradle.
And on that cheerful note I'll retire for the evening.
Moving right along . . . there are wonderful old holiday movies families enjoy 'round the hearthside.
If they have hearthsides. Which everybody doesn't anymore. But still.
"Meet Me in St. Louis." "It's a Wonderful Life." "The Bishop's Wife." "Shane." "Parent Trap." "Old Yeller."
Like that.
Other families are a bit dysfunctional and enjoy obscure gems like "Peeping Tom."
That would be Michael Powell's ("The Red Shoes") sleazoid slasher masterpiece originally banned in several countries which ruined his career.
Then shocking! Tame, today . . . yet still oddly disturbing. I can identify.
Beloved at Bates family reunions where we gather the kids and sharp objects around the wall-size flat-screen plasma, turn out the lights and immerse the wee ones in the bizarro world of "Peeping Tom."
We Bates's feel it's best to prepare our younger generations for the Real World instead of sugar-coating things with childish fantasies of living large in Austrian castles with a salacious money-grubbing ex-nun governess seducing Daddy with four-octave soprano warblings about whiskers-on-kittens whilst Nazis circle about and we escape on foot over the Alps into a life of international show-biz stardom because everybody knows THAT'S never gonna happen.
Instead, as a daughter of the gritty Reality-Based Bates family, I offer my Razorbabies this secret link to "Peeping Tom."
You won't find it by searching YouTube. It's not supposed to be there. It's illegal. Well, it violates YouTube's TOS.
It's 1:37:09 long. Full length.
I SO identify.
Here, Razorbabies, it is.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qiSfSNjo6uE…
Click up the forbidden. Turn out the lights. Feel the love.
Show business is my life.
Aw, cripes. Now there's a sweet note from Sistertoldja to answer.
Sister, I cannot and will not argue with your life experience. I believe you completely. I figure you are one of those for whom your sexuality was determined early in your life, if not before your birth. There is undoubtedly a strong genetic component to sexual orientation--that twin study is pretty convincing. There's nothing quite as convincing about the effect of hormones on sexual development, but there's evidence there, too, and I'm afraid unethical experimentation is going to produce stronger evidence. For a lot of people, both gay and straight, that's the whole story. Just because Norma is overstating the case doesn't mean she's entirely wrong.
The thing is, I don't think biology is the whole story, and I know other people for whom the "determined by birth" narrative doesn't fit. I believe their stories, too.
I have a dear friend of over thirty years who is currently in a three-way marriage with a man and another woman. She's been married to the man for about twenty years and to the woman for about two. From the outside, she appears to me to be transitioning from a hetero orientation to a homo orientation. We'll see how it plays out.
Now, am I to tell her that she's been a lesbian all along, and that she was just deluded for the first few decades of her life? I'd have to duck. Should I tell her that she's fooling herself and she's really still straight? That'd get me kicked in the nuts. What I think, and what I would say to her if the occasion arose, is that her sexuality is fluid.
Another friend, from even further back but who is recently deceased, was, so long as I knew him, hetero. We'd fallen out of touch the last few years of his life. At his funeral, though, a friend approached me with a delicate question: How to remove the videos of him having sex with men from his belongings before his parents stumbled onto them?
As she explained it, after he'd gotten older and less attractive, he found that it was easier to get other older, less attractive men to put out (her words, not mine) than women. Now, can you tell me when he was straight, when he was gay, and when he was just horny and having sex? I couldn't, and I knew him pretty well.
So, as they say on Facebook, it's complicated.
I get pissy with Norma because, well, because I think Norma is a prick.
But, as you say about me, there's no doubt she's "obviously a friend to the LGBT community", and that's really more important than our considerable differences.
And now, I really am going to bed.
All I know is--***waaaay***before I knew what "sex" was, and ***waaaay**before I know what genitals were for--Laura Petrie and Samantha Stevens and Elly Mae Clampitt held an attraction for me. And Annette Funicello and her Beach Blanket Bingo stirred something in me. I assume there were others, males, who felt the stirrings for Bobby Darin or Frankie Avalon. It was not a choice. It was not about sexual activity. It just *was.*
But, yeah, I accept what the AMA and APA have to say about it....
The comments of Sister TJ struck a cord. Despite the fact I just drove 5 hours and am dog-tired, I want to share a little story.
I would like to preface this by saying I am not gay. I am married to a great guy who makes his living in professional sports, so a good portion of the time, I am encased in a testosterone-filled world. But, in those times whenI get to pick and choose for myself, I am much more inclined toward the world of art, music and theater than I am sports.
Becasue I have had gay friends since I was a young person, the subject has always been a non-issue for me. I have done my best to champion their cause because I saw first hand how difficult their lives were, trying to fit into a world where many people felt they didn't belong.
Last year, a wonderful man I have known since my teens passed away. He was in his 70s, a popular and successful businessman, had been in a committed loving relationship for 35 years and he just happened to be gay. Because I had been around when he first met his partner, known them both throughout their relationship, and was there with his partner and his family when he drew his last breath, the family asked if I would give the eulogy at his memorial service.
Due to the nature of his business, the majority of people he knew and worked with were straight, and many of them prominent members of the LR community. These would be the people who would be attending his (very large) service. I made the decision that this would be a good time to tell his love story to people who might not have had the opportunity to know a couple such as this in the way that I did.
It was so easy to write because these were two lives I had watched for 35 years...and a love that I really couldn't compare to anyone elses.
And as I stood at the lecturn (terrified because I am not a public speaker), and let the story of his life and love unfold, I noticed that many in the 300+ audience were either smiling or sheding tears. I could only hope I had touched someone's heart and helped them to love our departed friend even more.
In the days that followed, I got calls and emails, mostly from complete strangers, asking for copies, and telling me our friend would have been proud.
I think this is the point: Love is love. I really don't think I know anyone who loved someone more than these two did. We don't pick the gender or race or nationality or religion of the person we fall in love with. We just love who we love.
I guess I just don't understand why this is such a bad thing. We should all be so fortunate.........and I get the impression Sister TJ is!
Oh, John A! You stubborn, splendid, adorable Fool!
(GOD I love Anne Baxter in "Ten Commandments!" Channel her daily.)
You're STILL shooting the messenger, aren't you, honey!
LOVES it!
75% of the world uses astrology, and has for millennia.
YOU, yet again, reject it because -- though you've never investigated it personally -- accept secondhand pooh-pooh!
NONE of this has to do with the topic at hand, but you've decided to introduce my practice of astrology as some sort of shoot-the-messenger slur.
ADORABLE!
CHERISH people like you who knee-jerk reject ancient ideas, philosophies, practices, knowledge, out of hand, yet unquestioningly accept others, because they're TOLD to.
SO "scientific." So INTELLIGENT! Rejecting stuff because Father Flannigan says to. Or The Amazing Randi. Seriously.
Avoid this this topic like the plague.
Carl Jung and . . . oh, who cares. Sources don't matter, John A. You're just here to shoot sources down and pump yourself up. The AMA, APA, etc., are "irrelevant" to you.
The reason astrology is pooh-poohed is right here.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8…
Religions don't want you to know their origins.
I couldn't care less "why" astrology works. All I know is it does. Of course, unlike you, John A, I'm willing to actually explore things instead of dismissing them out of hand based on somebody else telling me they're stupid or Satanic or worthless or whatever.
In fact, the MORE somebody tells me something's stupid, the MORE I figure they've got something to hide.
Honey, you've got your life cookie-cuttered for you and I'm happy for you.
YOU know everything about the science of sexual orientation. YOU know astrology is bunk. YOU think "heteronormative" makes you look smart and I couldn't agree more!
Though I must quibble about making proclamations about topics one hasn't personally explored. Not really "scientific" or even rational. "I've never studied it, but it's wrong."
Parroting second-hand anti-intellectual stay-away-from-this-ridiculous dogma? Sure.
Cheap trick. Anybody can. Most do.
LOVES those like you, John A, who disparage, as told by "authorities, without personally investigating, topics like astrology or same-sex orientatiion, etc.
There is a certain kind of mentality that's willing to accept dogma without question or even knowledge.
You're know all about it.
Astrology isn't nuclear physics, nor does it claim to be.
What it is is an amazing, ancient, spiritual, insightful observation and study of natural cycles in our solar system as relate to the "seasons" on Earth, originally agriculturally, then collectively and individually.
Its misty origins basically pre-date Plato's "cave" analogy.
Astrology provides, if you actually investigate it rather than dismiss it, a profoundly moving and verifiable link between the "stars," the individual Mind and Experience.
"The stars are inside your head," said Plato and the ancients.
"Thy kingdom come, thy will be done, in Earth (three dimensions) as it is in Heaven (in the "stars" -- in your Head).
"As above, so below."
To ridicule and dismiss anything without having personally explored it tells me something. It is the opposite of "science." It's the opposite of knowledge. It is the opposite of curiosity and one's critical faculty.
It is bigotry and prejudice.
It is a symptom of those willing to sacrifice individual freedom -- their souls and lives amd tithes -- to second-hand "authorities" in exchange for Love and Approval and tribal "Belonging."
One reason astrology has been so universally condemned in "Christendom" is its direct link to "Christianity's" origins in far more ancient Egyptian Sun-Worship.
The "Helios Biblos," the "Holy Bible," is the "Book of the Sun."
An allegorical esoteric (secret) "High Priest" record of ancient astronomical knowledge. The "personification" of that knowledge into myths involving "Jesus" (the "Eye of the World, Seen by All" -- the Sun), Virgin Births (Virgo, the zodiacal House of Bread) December 25th (the Sun's apparent Winter Solstice "death" in the Southern Cross for three days before it begins its apparent rise again), Twelve Disciples (twelve Signs of the Zodiac, etc.), all that extends MUCH farther back into antiquity than 2,000 years.
ALL of it is magnificent and worthy of study. NONE of it has to do with the exclusivity of Judaism, Christianity or Islam.
To dismiss astrology -- or, more accurately, astrotheosophy -- as in the link above -- is to sever one's connection to the most ancient universal wisdom on Earth and to surrender one's heart and soul to generations of increasingly man-made tribal "truths" and "faiths" without connection to "nature" and the Solar System and the Universe . . . dependent instead on somebody like Mike Huckabee speaking for "God."
So, no, John A. 75% if the world has always used "astrology" to guide large and small choices.
If you think, John A, because you've been told and have bought that astrology is a "fortune-telling" con-game, that's just testimony to your unfamiliarity of it. And your loss.
Beyond all that, however, is your sharing your mentality, your "thought processes."
You're eager to reject a subject (astrology) you've never personally investigated because some outside "authority" told you it was worthless. (It's not. It's the oldest system of recorded knowledge on Earth. Its principles are utilized daily by 75% of Earth's population).
You claim there's some scientific "dispute" about sexual orientation when there isn't: except by a tiny minority of religiously-motivated bigots to whom you like to give "equal" time.
You claim your trumped-up "dispute" means the science isn't "settled." Implying the jury's still out on genetic sexual orientation. It isn't out. It's in. NOTHING'S ever "settled" in science. Straw man for the stupid and unthinking.
Insulting.
But I BOW to you, John A!
LOVES chutzpah!
No, no. REALLY!
You're so . . . I don't know . . .pointless.
Except you "believe" the science is out on whether LGBT Americans entitled to full equality under the law because it's a "choice" and not biology and Boy Howdy.
2009 Pew Research poll- Belief in astrology? 25%---http://pewforum.org/Other-Beliefs-and-Prac…
From Wiki: Contemporary scientists, such as Richard Dawkins, regard astrology as unscientific,[63] and those such as Andrew Fraknoi of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific have labeled it a pseudoscience.[64] In a lecture in 2001, Stephen Hawking stated "The reason most scientists don't believe in astrology is because it is not consistent with our theories that have been tested by experiment."[65] In 1975, the American Humanist Association characterized those who have faith in astrology as doing so "in spite of the fact that there is no verified scientific basis for their beliefs, and indeed that there is strong evidence to the contrary".[66] Astronomer Carl Sagan was unwilling to sign the statement, not because he felt astrology was valid, but because he found the statement's tone authoritarian.[67][68] Sagan stated that he would instead have been willing to sign a statement describing and refuting the principal tenets of astrological belief, which he believed would have been more persuasive and would have produced less controversy than the circulated statement.[69]
Astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson asserted that "astrology was discredited 600 years ago with the birth of modern science. 'To teach it as though you are contributing to the fundamental knowledge of an informed electorate is astonishing in this, the 21st century'. Education should be about knowing how to think, 'And part of knowing how to think is knowing how the laws of nature shape the world around us. Without that knowledge, without that capacity to think, you can easily become a victim of people who seek to take advantage of you'".
“I guess I just don't understand why this is such a bad thing.”
Me, either, mountaingirl. Never have. Never will.
Sister, my love, one of these days or nights maybe I’ll find HHW and get her intoxicated to the point of telling me precisely where in Hillcrest you and WBW live. After that happens, there’ll be a gift every day for you girls. But in the end, I know Tap will prevail for your affection. There’s no competing with those splendid, brainy posts of his.
revmojoryson, thanks for the interesting link and info regarding astrology. My thinking very much runs with that of Dawkins, Fraknoi, the outlier, et al.
"No one should be surprised that (some) slaves born into generations of slavery thought themselves well loved and protected."
Absolutely...just as many of the first women to enter male-dominated professions tended to espouse the same ole gender crap that their male predecessors did. Not all, of course, but most simply regurgitated the bulk of what their teachers/books/profession's-history told em. And, in their defense, they probably had to in order to survive...just as many slaves knew their survival depended on their outward acquiescence to the will and norms of their owners.
Plus, of course, there were goodhearted loving people among the slave owners and so the closeness of other goodhearted humans inevitably produced familial bonds. Not all southern slave owners were evil incarnate...and a slave's acquiescence to a plantation's way of life doesn't automatically translate to an approval of or love for those norms.
Survival mechanisms are powerful and those without power often do whatever it takes to exist. Change comes after basic survival is ensured...along the lines of Maslow's hierarchical way of thinking.
Nah, I don't find the discussion tiresome...sometimes, however, the specific details of disagreement cause some congestion in my little ole brain when a discussion goes long. (Guess that's my pop-culture fried attention span trying to squash everything into a 30-second sound bite.) My point is we get enough sound bites and I enjoy the occasional long look at a topic...and, of course, if I don't I simply skip over the bulk. So...discuss on norma/john! (Heck skypilot and I once wallowed in the boredom that is who or whom...ha...talk about tiresome.)
Speaking of inequality and heartbreak...and sexism, I watched part of (couldn't stand more) HBO's special, "Love Crimes of Kabul," on the sex-police in Afghanistan. It was mostly women unjustly persecuting other women...all at the behest of the three-inchers (love ya jazzy!) who dominate one of the most anti-women sexist cultures in existence. Given the history of religion's horrid treatment of women (and, of course, gays)...it's often hard to separate any God from his nasty fan clubs.
Durango, I too am captured by the kind, soulful intellect Tap shares with us. I mentioned awhile back that we could all learn something from him.
Somehow, he has mastered the art of offering a contrasting opinion with an air of grace and calm that makes it absolutely impossible to ignore his views.
@zelda: I'm complimented that you remember our who/whom dialogue.
As for "boring," I must confess that words and their study and use were never boring for me; most intriguing and stimulating. I guess we all dance to different tunes.
@mountaingirl: Tap is an excellent demonstration of the principle that people can disagree without being disagreeable.
As a communication professor, and especially as a debate coach, I tried to practice what I preached to my students about giving everyone the same rights I claimed for myself about having my own views and expressing them, but also offering them the same respect I would like for them to extend to me. I think Tap does an excellent job of putting that principle into practice.
American discourse could enjoy a lot more civility than it currently employs.
IMHO
I was simply referencing the boredom of those who weren't interested in our discussion, skypilot. And of course I remember it; I actually made a little headway into the troublesome twosome...thanks teacher!
Different strokes for different folks...the wonderfulness of blog conversations.
I have the solution for those suffering from ennui when they read Norma/John and other discussions/flame wars here at ATblog. SCROLL DOWN!
Much better, apparently, to some's way of thinking is to read them and have something to whine about.
Guess John A just can't help himself. Completely off topic now. Diverts attention to my using astrology, as if that had anything to do with the science of sexual orientation.
It doesn't, but I assume John A thinks, and others will automatically agree with him, that using astrology invalidates somebody, or something. Who knows what John A thinks? "Look over here! No, look over here!" He's all over the map on this one.
Be that as it may, I LOVES talking about astrology. I never said it was a science, though in fact it is the oldest of them all and predates them all, being the origin of the study of astronomy. Observation of the planets and constellations, the sun and moon, day and night, in relation to earth led naturally to their study and to astronomy and mathematics -- the first of the sciences along with, naturally, the healing arts -- in the attempt to gain greater accuracy of astrological "predictions." Even Hippocrates, "father of modern medicine" upon whose name physicians still take an oath, refers to it.
All I know is it works. It worked for me out of the box. Somebody turned me on to a book long out of print. It explained how to set up one's horoscope. The rest of the book -- a big, thick one -- was detailed interpretations.
Imagine my surprise when it said, correctly, that I had a scar on my left arm from an injury at age five. Uh . . . wait a minute. How can that be? How can that old book be that specific? This wasn't just, "You have a sunny disposition, love to dance and are popular."
So, of course, my curiosity was piqued and I went on from there. It was that simple. It was specific and accurate out of the box. I continued studying it and using it, and have never stopped. Because it works. That's all I know.
Of course I know what scientists think of astrology. I have no idea what their criteria are, what their demands of astrology are, or if they've even studied and tested it for themselves.
But it doesn't matter to me, because it's always worked -- amazingly -- for me. So Carl Sagan says it's not scientific. Fine. I don't know what it is. I just know it works.
I'd be an idiot to keep using it if it didn't. (Yes, I studied tarot. Didn't work, for me anyway. Palmistry. Didn't work, for me. Those were quickly abandoned since I found no practical value in them. But I wasn't afraid to explore them.)
Astrology is widely and commonly practiced throughout Asia, India, Europe, etc. And of course everybody knows, and laughs at, the Reagans use of it (Joan Quigley was their astrologer) even to set the "odd" timing for his inauguration, which I believe was somewhere around midnight. Everybody laughed. But he survived an assassination attempt and, by much of America if not me, is still widely venerated.
What I always find interesting about this topic, which has nothing to do with the original one, but thanks for the digression, John A, is that people are so willing to accept, secondhand, the opinions of others instead of investigating a subject for themselves.
So-and-so says astrology is bunk, therefore it's bunk. Anybody who uses it is stupid, therefore they're invalid. And so on. That's the OPPOSITE of critical thinking, but common.
Those same people are quite content to accept the literal existence of a mythical figure named Jesus, on "faith," though there isn't a shred of evidence for it and indeed voluminous evidence all around the world for the mythical origins of the same resurrection myth, born of a virgin named Mary on December 25th, under various names, extending back nearly six thousand years. Why? Because the December 25th date is extremely important astronomically (and astrologically) regarding the Sun's apparent position in relation to earth.
People have asked if I "believe" in astrology as if it were a religion. The question itself is uninformed. It's like asking if I "believe" the sun rises every morning in the east.
I understand astrology philosophically and metaphysically and can explain to myself, and others, "why" it works from those standpoints. But that's not the same as a physical cause-and-effect, which, I guess, is what people like Sagan demand of it.
So I just go on merrily using astrology because it works. And quite specifically; not in some general sun-sign newspaper column way. I've met remarkable, highly intelligent, highly successful people from all over the world who routinely use astrology and discuss it knowledgeably.
I just laugh when people who know nothing about it and wouldn't CONSIDER studying it for themselves, think it's a sign of great intelligence to ridicule it and those who use it.
All the way to the bank.
Miss Norma, your scar story should win you the James Randi Education Foundation's Million Dollar Challenge Prize. "http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/1m-cha…"(Reckon I can get a finder's fee cut?)
I've actually met James and he's adorable. His "challenge" is wonderful PR, but in fact nothing more than an extended game of "Yes, But." Which we discussed at some length.
In any case, his "challenge" is limited to those with an existing media presence and the backing of a "reputable" academic. I eschew publicity in connection with astrology, though I was once interviewed by somebody from the National Enquirer. They'd heard about me somehow (Hollywood's a small town in many ways) and they basically wanted gossip about stars I knew and had read for. I wasn't interested.
Incidentally, before John A so delightfully introduced the astrology distraction into this topic, you DO know that James Randi is and always has been gay, don't you? I was glad for him when he finally came out at age 82.
Plus he's an atheist. I adored him, except for his constant, "Yes, buts . . . ." He's a Leo. Great showman. And I applaud him for exposing frauds like Sylvia Browne and Uri Geller.
I'm a skeptic by nature, Revmojo. But I'm also experimental. If something works, I'll keep exploring and using it, if it's of value to me.
The thing about astrology, at least for me and those I read for, is simple: as I said, I'd be an idiot to keep using it, and they'd be idiots to keep returning over the years for astrology's input, if it didn't work.
Beyond that, it's been and continues to be a richly rewarding (in more ways than one) pursuit that naturally leads one deeply into philosophy, psychology, medicine, health / dis-ease, contemporary and ancient history, metaphysics and religions.
Most important of all, astrology opens up incredible insights into self-awareness, flaws and assets, and makes them conscious. You literally see how you create the things in your life, good and bad, and how to maximize the good and minimize or eliminate the bad.
Contrary to popular opinion, astrology EXPANDS one's choices and freedom from "fate" -- which is to say one's programming from parents, communities, regions, societies, environments, and "authorities," etc.
But if astrology didn't work on practical decision-making levels, I'd have dropped it long ago.
As you can probably tell if you've been on this blog for any length of time, I just don't care, genuinely don't care, whether who I am or what I do meets with others' "approval" or not.
Not that I don't listen to people: I DO. And I'm a voracious reader. But I investigate for myself. And some, perhaps many, people including "authorities" are simply liars, though they and their lies may be beloved my millions. I'm perfectly capable, as is anybody who cares to, of finding out what's true and what's not.
It's nice when people give approval; it's wonderful to love and be loved; but I've never lived for "approval."
I've always lived Joseph Campbell's maxim, "Follow your bliss." It's never failed me.
Somebody angrily said to me once, "You get everything you want, don't you!"
"No, I don't," I answered. "But the difference between my life and yours, if you can understand this, is that everything in my life, I WANTED."
That person's life, unfortunately, was filled with problems they thought they didn't want but unconsciously did and unconsciously created. They thought things just "happened" to them out of nowhere and for no reason. Nothing is further from the truth.
Thanks for remembering dear old Randi.
An annoying know-it-all, yes: but . . . a darling.
More by Author
-
Huntsman: GOP like China
Jon Huntsman, the Republican former governor of Utah, nailed modern Republican politics in remarks Sunday.
- Apr 23, 2012
-
U.S. Rep. Tim Griffin: Hypocrite of the day
U.S. Rep. Tim Griffin was given a big space in the Saline Courier recently to expound on the failure of President Obama's stimulus program.
- Mar 13, 2012
- More »
Event Calendar
-
Re: Hurst fined again by bar committee for late filing
Hackett... I practice law and I can tell you that unfortunately, that's a large amount…
- on May 24, 2012
-
Re: Two LR cops busted in federal marijuana sting
Funny. Seems I recall just such a scenario being played out before -- traffickers needing…
- on May 24, 2012
-
Re: Riverfest eve open line UPDATE
In case you didn't receive an invitation to Monaco, here it is -
- 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
