MJM | Arkansas news, politics, opinion, restaurants, music, movies and art

MJM 
Member since Sep 28, 2010


Favorite Places

  • None.
Find places »

Saved Events

  • Nada.
Find events »

Saved Stories

  • Seven

    The controversy over the Ten Commandments monument on the Capitol lawn just won't go away.
    • Feb 9, 2017
Find stories »

Custom Lists

  • Zip.

Friends

  • No friends yet.
Become My Friend Find friends »

Recent Comments

Re: “Another attack on free speech by Sen. Trent Garner

When SNL takes breaks from Trump and Co. they could easily parody our Legislature to hysterical effect. As Gloria Steinem might agree --it would be like shooting fish from a bicycle.

1 like, 0 dislikes
Posted by MJM on 03/08/2017 at 8:18 PM

Re: “Seven

I, too, doubt any of those Old Rugged Commandments or Deadly Sins are going to induce many adults crossing the Capitol grounds to do the right thing if they are not there already prepared to do it. However, child psychologists say kids hear "No" and "Don't" and "You can't do that" so often they tend to tune it out; and, instead set about proving "Yes" they can do whatever they shouldn't--ASAP. Therefore, since it is our duty to instill moral principles early into young lives-- before they've gone all the way to Paree --any prophetic statements placed on government property would stand a better chance to reach our youth if expressed positively in a more encouraging, sweet and simple "To Do List."

1 like, 0 dislikes
Posted by MJM on 02/09/2017 at 11:52 PM

Re: “Hillary clarifies, but no apology for seeing Trump viewpoints as deplorable

Hillary should apply her legal training and refrain from giving specifics like "never" going to do this or that or "half" Trump's supporters are deplorable as "never" means just that and "half" is exactly 50%. Better to say, “More or less half are deplorable."

3 likes, 0 dislikes
Posted by MJM on 09/10/2016 at 11:44 PM

Re: “Echols hearing underway UPDATE

Neither the Arkansas DNA statute nor other states' DNA statutes ought demand the convicted offer DNA evidence that proves their "innocence"-- that bar is too high ever to be legally met. The long settled standard used to find both adults and juveniles guilty of a crime is "beyond reasonable doubt." When a DA cannot meet that legal standard defendants are to be held "not guilty"-- but not necessarily "innocent." Laws demanding more of a convicted person than they do of a DA may ultimately be found unconstitutional -- where new, unpursued or previously undisclosed evidence offers "reasonable doubt." Finality's expedience and efficiency ought not trump the pursuit of justice for all or we corrupt our legal system. There is an old Latin saying that goes something like "Where there is little justice one fears what is right."

Posted by MJM on 09/30/2010 at 8:03 PM

Re: “New trial may hinge on DNA statute

It is too close to another election (they seem to come ever few months nowadays) for any elected official (Judges are being elected too.) to be associated with giving a high profile convictee a chance to go free. Near elections politicians absolutely cannot appear soft on crime--even for the sake of justice. Echols attorney should ask the court to postpone its decision until... around Christmas.

Posted by MJM on 09/28/2010 at 6:34 PM

 

© 2017 Arkansas Times | 201 East Markham, Suite 200, Little Rock, AR 72201
Powered by Foundation