Today's Paper Latest Elections Coronavirus 🔵 Covid Classroom Cooking Families Core values Story ideas iPad Weather Newsletters Obits Puzzles Archive

Comment history

Womack faces town hall critics

Blaming single moms for gun violence??
Ozarka bin Lying does his shtick and it is amazingly enough a repetition of his previous 1000+ comments ranting about liberals and using pejoratives from his usual checklist of insults. The usual suspects chime in and one wonders if a Three Stooges film fest is about to erupt.
But Womack? Attacking single moms?! Are you an idiot or what??!!
No wonder your constituents are getting fed up with your BS!

August 29, 2019 at 1:12 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Shouting again fills Little Rock schools meeting

Ali Noland who attended the meetings offers a different perspective:
I have attended two of the three meetings and watched the other one online, and while there has definitely been tension and shouting, the anger and frustration is generally not internal strife within the LRSD community. These protests have been a cathartic release of years of pent-up resentment, distrust and frustration aimed at the State Board. They are a refusal to validate a community-input process that many people view as a sham. They are not an indication that the people of Little Rock hate each other.

What most media outlets failed to mention was that, while the board members were absent from the room conducting their own small “break-out sessions” elsewhere, hundreds of people participated in a community-led exercise to draft a proposal to the State Board and that exercise was both productive and fairly orderly. No, it wasn’t governed by Robert’s Rules of Order, but it also was not defined by the type of shouting, screaming and disorder that ensued once the State Board members came back into the room and attempted to regain control of the meeting.

The press latched on to a few incidents when people within the LRSD community disagreed with each other. The exchange between Sen. Will Bond (D-Little Rock) and Circuit Judge Wendell Griffen was widely reported on, as was the audience’s pushback against LRSD parent and former PTA president Michelle Davis, who urged the community to try to work with the State Board members in a more productive manner. But what wasn’t reported was the remarkable fact that despite those disagreements, all those people stayed at the meeting and continued talking to each other. They disagreed but kept trying to work together toward a common goal.

There were LRSD parents at last night’s meeting who were deeply offended by allegations of white supremacy that they felt were being unfairly aimed directly at them. And there were people present who were just as deeply offended that others refuse to acknowledge the role that racism has played in so many of our education decisions over the years. There were people who viewed a peaceful and orderly meeting as the best way to craft real solutions and to convince the board that we are ready to govern our ourselves, and there were people who had absolutely no faith in the board’s desire to listen to the community and who viewed protest as a better alternative to participating in a meaningless PR stunt.

Here is the remarkable part: They all showed up at Saint Mark. They all stayed, and they all talked to each other. No one stormed off. No one gave up.

Of course we will disagree. It is inevitable when talking about something as important as our kids’ education. Yet last night hundreds of LRSD supporters put those disagreements aside in order to fight for the future of our schools.

That is unity, not division.

August 28, 2019 at 4:35 p.m. ( | suggest removal )


Maybe, it's because he's imparting wisdom and not cheap laughs. That's very little to laugh about when looking at the craziness wrought by Herr Trump, our Furor in Chief.

August 28, 2019 at 10:29 a.m. ( | suggest removal )


Spot on, Deering. US taxpayers shouldering most of the costs for Trump's terrible tantrum tariffs.

August 28, 2019 at 9:33 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Trump absent from G-7 climate session

More conservatives supporting climate change scenario:
htt ps://w ww.newamerica.or g/political-reform/reports/prospects-climate-change-policy-reform/section-2-data-and-polling-on-the-current-support-for-climate-change/
A 2016 study conducted by researchers from Cornell University indicates that moral foundations theory may offer viable frameworks to use for mitigating political polarization around climate change.21 Moral foundations theory (MFT) posits five different classes of moral values: care/harm (compassion/harming); fairness/cheating; in group loyalty/betrayal; authority/subversion; and sanctity/degradation (purity), which suggests that conservatives and liberals operate from different moral frames. The Cornell study points to compassion and fairness as the relevant moral foundation for liberals who support action on climate change and points to the moral foundation of purity (sanctity/degradation) as a potentially useful frame for conservatives.

Additionally, researchers at the University of Cologne found in a 2016 study that conservatives are more responsive to climate messages rooted in the past, while liberals were more responsive to forward-looking climate change messages.
When it comes to renewables, however, a variety of options poll relatively well. A December 2018 Yale report30 on politics and global warming found that:

81 percent of Republicans support funding more research on renewable energy
71 percent of Republicans support providing tax rebates to people who purchase energy-efficient vehicles or solar panels
60 percent of Republicans support regulating carbon dioxide as a pollutant
48 percent of Republicans support setting strict carbon dioxide emission limits on existing coal-fired power plants to reduce global warming and improve public health, even if the cost of electricity to consumers and companies would likely increase
49 percent of Republicans support requiring fossil fuel companies to pay a carbon tax and using the money to reduce other taxes (such as income tax) by an equal amount

August 27, 2019 at 6:05 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Trump absent from G-7 climate session

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Nearly 70 percent of Americans, including a majority of Republicans, want the United States to take “aggressive” action to combat climate change - but only a third would support an extra tax of $100 a year to help, according to a Reuters/Ipsos poll released Wednesday.
The results underscore a crucial challenge for Democrats seeking to unseat President Donald Trump in next year’s election. Many will have to balance their calls for strict environmental regulation with a convincing argument for why the changes are good for taxpayers and the economy.

“There isn’t any doubt climate change has emerged as an important issue in this election,” said G. Terry Madonna, Director of the Center for Politics and Public Affairs at Franklin and Marshall College. “But when it comes to how you will pay for it, that’s what can make a big difference.”

August 27, 2019 at 5:59 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Trump absent from G-7 climate session

Compared with a decade ago, more Americans today say protecting the environment and dealing with global climate change should be top priorities for the president and Congress. A majority of U.S. adults (56%) say protecting the environment should be a top priority for the president and Congress, while a smaller share (44%) says the same about dealing with global climate change, according to a 2019 Pew Research Center survey.
A majority of Americans see at least some effect of climate change where they live. In 2018, about six-in-ten Americans (59%) said that global climate change was affecting their local community a great deal or some. Those who said this explained how they see such effects in a number of ways. Many pointed to changes in the weather, including increasing frequency of severe storms, droughts, floods and wildfires (45% of those asked cited this reason).

Rising sea levels could endanger coastal communities, which are especially vulnerable to floods and storm surges. Our 2018 analysis found that two-thirds of Americans who live within 25 miles of a coastline (67%) say climate change is affecting their local community at least some, compared with half of those who live 300 miles or more from the coast.

August 27, 2019 at 5:57 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Trump absent from G-7 climate session

Climate change is real. See h ttp://ww w.realclimate.or g/
Those who say otherwise are ignorant of the facts and mistakenly or mendaciously polluting this conversation with untruths about climate change.
"It ain't so much the things we don't know that get us into trouble. It's the things we know that just ain't so." - A popular observation most often attributed to Mark Twain, as well as to fellow humorists Artemus Ward, Kin Hubbard and Will Rogers.
What Trump "knows" just ain't so. And why should anyone trust a pathological liar like him??
Dump Trump 2020!! Out with the bad, in with the good!!
Sic semper tyrannis.

August 27, 2019 at 5:54 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Arkansas, home to supremacist groups, weighs hate crimes law

Problem: Won't stand up against racism or bigotry.
Diagnosis: Sin cojones. Nada testĂ­culos.

August 25, 2019 at 8:38 p.m. ( | suggest removal )


L.D. - hopefully (and soon), folks will realize that the Fake News was actually those propaganda-fueled "Alternative Facts" that our Pathological Liar in Chief and his toadies kept using to confuse his zealous followers - the ones he claimed would turn a blind eye if he were to murder someone in broad daylight, the ones who ignore his constant flipflopping when asked to comment on a decision, and the ones who turn into ranting lunatics at his propaganda spewing gatherings.
DumpTrump2020!! End the nightmare and evil of GOP tyranny.
Sic semper tyrannis!!

August 25, 2019 at 6:39 a.m. ( | suggest removal )