Subscribe Register Login
Thursday, June 21, 2018, 5:25 a.m.

ADVERTISEMENT

Top Picks - Arkansas Daily Deal

OPINION

PAUL GREENBERG: Shut up, she explains

Her Honor Courtney Goodson’s gag rule

By Paul Greenberg

This article was published May 23, 2018 at 4:30 a.m.

When all else fails a campaigner, why bother with the pros and cons of the issues and all the other piffle of politics when you can simply impose a gag rule on the opposition instead? Which seems to be the campaign strategy of Her Honor Courtney Goodson, if just using the political equivalent of a truncheon can be mistaken for a strategy instead of just a desperate delusion. This decision of hers should rightly be considered less of an argument for her re-election to the state's Supreme Court but for her impeachment.

This story is only available from the Arkansas Online archives. Stories can be purchased individually for $2.95. Click here to search for this story in the archives.

Print Headline: Shut up, she explains

ADVERTISEMENT

Comments on: PAUL GREENBERG: Shut up, she explains

To report abuse or misuse of this area please hit the "Suggest Removal" link in the comment to alert our online managers. Read our Terms of Use policy.

Subscribe Register Login

You must login to make comments.

Displaying 1 - 10 of 21 total comments

Jump to last page >>

TimberTopper says... May 23, 2018 at 6:47 a.m.

For the time being, it appears she beat all that dark money. However, they will be back with more of that dark stuff. Wonder actually just how much of it is Russian money. One can never tell the Russians may like Sterling as much as they like Trump, and be funding some of that dark money his way. Is it possible that Greenburg is on their payroll as well?

( | suggest removal )

WhododueDiligence says... May 23, 2018 at 7:57 a.m.

"Welcome back to the fight in defense of free speech ..."
*
Why is this free speech so expensive?
Why is this free speech bought with dark money?
Why was dark money from electioneering organizations given tax-exempt status?
Why was dark money from electioneering organizations given free-speech rights?
Does the Constitution say dark money from electioneering organizations has free speech rights like individuals?
Since dark money has no light shed on it, will We the People ever know where it comes from and where it goes?

( | suggest removal )

LRAttorneyCrime says... May 23, 2018 at 8:30 a.m.

A lot of people believe the "dark money" is from the Clintons. She p$@*ed off the Clintons when Bill campaigned for her first run. She ran on family values and immediately after being elected it came out that she was having an affair, for years, with Goodson. Supposedly this upset Bill (wonder why with his playing around), so several are suggesting this dark money was payback.

( | suggest removal )

JakeTidmore says... May 23, 2018 at 8:39 a.m.

Odd stance considering how strict they are about letters to the editor passing the smell test while here Greenberg seems to be saying let the stench rise and prevail. Dark money and hypocrisy both stink, for sure.

LRAC - Troll gossip (!) or substantiated fact (?). It'll remain the former until you produce something in the latter category. I do believe hearsay is admissible in court, right?? (RAP..RAP...RAP!!! goes the judge's gavel. "Jury will ignore the attorney's comment.")

( | suggest removal )

JakeTidmore says... May 23, 2018 at 8:42 a.m.

Cowards who make scurrilous comments and hide behind pseudonyms are lowlife slime. Dark forces are usually afraid of the light and the truth.

( | suggest removal )

drs01 says... May 23, 2018 at 8:45 a.m.

Dark money has shown the light on the hanky panky legal system where Goodson can get a judge to issue a restraining order against ads that showed her in an unfavorable light. Truth? We can never expect it when politicians open their mouths.
Goodson is the female John Kerry. Get in politics using your second husband's money to fund your campaign just like Kerry did when he married "up" to the billionaire ketchup queen.

( | suggest removal )

Rupert says... May 23, 2018 at 9:07 a.m.

You asked why anyone would vote for Judge Goodson. I don't know much about her but I voted for her because of the dark attack ads. I don't think freedom of speech allows snipers cloaked in secret. Seems like every election is now so full of lies that the lies win because we are not able to discern the real story. That is why newspapers are so important.

( | suggest removal )

BOLTAR says... May 23, 2018 at 10:10 a.m.

We have a right to anonymity, and we have a right to troll, and all of us must respect those rights. I cannot, however, recognize as legitimate the act of trolling anonymously, and I will always treat the anonymous troller as a craven creature of meritless fiction who is less credible than the worst attributable claim made about it.

( | suggest removal )

GeneralMac says... May 23, 2018 at 10:21 a.m.

BOLTAR despises the coward , anonymous , poster mrcharles ?

( | suggest removal )

BOLTAR says... May 23, 2018 at 10:27 a.m.

If you read my actual words, anonymous troll, you will see that I respect the right to anonymity and the freedom of speech that allows trolling, but I have no respect for the cowardly creature that combines the two: the anonymous troll. Unlike you, mrcharles is anonymous, but he is not also a troll.

( | suggest removal )

Click here to make a comment

To report abuse or misuse of this area please hit the "Suggest Removal" link in the comment to alert our online managers. Read our Terms of Use policy.

ADVERTISEMENT

SHOPPING

loading...

ADVERTISEMENT

Top Picks - Arkansas Daily Deal
Arkansas Online