Accepting submissions

I am accepting submissions for poetry, essays, short stories (fiction or nonfiction), photography or art for our next open access/print journal.

I would like to elaborate on this post. All content submitted and if accepted will be published in print (on demand). I will not be sending out free copies however, the digital version will be available for free download. This website just like this entire project is self-funded and a labor of love. : ) I do not have a set date for publication right now, once I have enough content that I deem fit/worthy for a volume I will announce the date! If you would like to share book reviews, author/poet interviews, political pieces, they are welcome. For political pieces, no bashing or crazy pieces will be published. Only respectful intellectual discussions, even though I lean democrat/liberal, I entertain diverse ideas and mindsets.

There is no particular theme for the volume, themes often emerge from the content people share. I like to watch that emerge.

Thank you!

Sana R. Mitchell, Ed.D.


Featured post

The Arkansas Fixer by Stacey Margaret Jones

He throws the faxed court papers down on the metal Starbucks outdoor table after his “Hey, girl!” greeting and quick, but sincere side-hug. “Read this!” He starts inside to get coffee and turns, “What do you want? I’ll buy!” His Southern accent puts an exclamation point at the end of many of his sentences, as he disappears behind the chain café’s tinted windows.

This self-described “street lawyer,” who would “rather be working on his lawn or cleaning his house” than arguing before the state’s Supreme Court, which he has done many times, is Newport, Arkansas, native David Couch, architect of 2014’s controversial—and unsuccessful—Arkansas Alcoholic Beverage Amendment initiated measure, which sought to circumvent the sucking bog of individual dry-county petition drives in Arkansas by rounding up signatures statewide, including from voters in already wet counties, to get it on the November 4, 2014, ballot. If it had been approved, regardless of local county statutes, alcohol could have legally been sold in every county statewide. That same election cycle, he also shepherded to the ballot, a successful initiated measure to increase the state’s minimum wage and defended that effort against a state Supreme Court challenge as well. And he wrote large sections of the successful Referred Issue 3, which expanded term limits, increased legislator pay and clamped much stricter limits on lobbyists and the gifts lawmakers can accept. On that starting-to-cool October day in 2014, in the countdown to Election Day, he was in faded jeans, a plaid button-down and cowboy boots, his longish blond-to-graying hair falling on his forehead in front and on his ears and collar on the sides and back.

After coffee, in his nearby Heights-neighborhood office, with its outsider-art-covered walls, Razorback-red leather club chairs and a file cabinet covered with bumper stickers advocating liberal causes, Couch reflected on what he does when things don’t go his way.

“I fix it,” he said, nodding. “I just get to work and fix it.”

He got to work and “fixed it” multiple times during the winter of 2015 and 2016, when the state’s attorney general repeatedly rejected the language of his major effort for the fall of 2016, an initiative to legalize medical marijuana in Arkansas. Leslie Rutledge kept rejecting it; he kept revising and resubmitting it. In February, her office approved the language, and the work for a ballot-box win was on as he organized petitions and canvassing personnel.

Couch is what is known in political-science circles as a “policy entrepreneur,” according to Jay Barth, the M.E. and Ima Graves Peace Distinguished Professor of Politics at Hendrix College in Conway, Arkansas.

“That’s somebody who goes out and, as an individual, really pushes forward a policy,” said Barth, over coffee at Community Bakery in Little Rock’s gentrifying SoMa neighborhood. This puts on him the burden of passing the policies he advocates for publicly, but it also holds the possibility of elevating him as “someone who is important to the process.”

Barth explained that Arkansas is uniquely suited in the South as a place such policy entrepreneurs may emerge. Because of its initiated measure law, Arkansans, with the right number of signatures procured according to protocol, can put measures on the ballot for other Arkansans to vote on—this isn’t possible in surrounding states like Missouri and Texas, where it’s either onerously more difficult or not allowed for at all.

“It creates the possibility of somebody, like David, who is deeply interested in policy and politics to become that entrepreneur,” said Barth.

Couch jokes that the term is a euphemism for “loudmouth,” or “troublemaker,” but he sees such a role as a correction for the ways in which the system can go wrong, because the issues he works on populist issues the state Legislature is ill-equipped or unwilling to take on.

For this November, Couch is working on at least three initiated measures for voters which include the proposal to allow medical marijuana prescribed by a physician as well as another alcohol consumption law that is not as wide ranging as well as continued efforts to constrain gifts and funding from lobbyists to state legislators.

“These are things that people really want, but the General Assembly doesn’t have the desire or the intestinal fortitude to do,” he said about a year after his alcohol measure went down to defeat with the voters, and three years after his first attempt at medical marijuana was also beaten, though narrowly.

He’s open to other efforts as well, and the open door to his one-room law office invites people in who might have something else they need to get done. He says he’s up to the challenge.

This is a man who loves the South, though maybe not the South you’re thinking of. Raised in the Church of Christ tradition in Newport, Arkansas, in the attentive environment of an extended family, grandparents on both sides in town, he felt the focus of a close-knit family and its love of its oldest grandchild.

But Couch’s childhood wasn’t an idyll of Southern charm and slow summer breezes. His mother fell while she was pregnant with him, her first child, injuring her head, and when he was in second grade she had a seizure while driving and ran them into a ditch, ending her driving days for good. Her childhood rheumatic fever was the real, lurking threat to her health, resulting in serious heart damage. When Couch was 5-years-old, and his younger sister, Joy, was an infant, his mother had open-heart-surgery, in which she had a pig-valve put in to replace one of her own cardiac valves. Her death in 2000 was unexpected, the result of a surgery to repair an earlier procedure. Couch was then 42.

He grew up helping on the family’s farm. His aunt, Brenda Dawson, 72, who lived in a family home in Newport, and spoke to me before her own sudden death in a car accident in December 2015, said he helped out summer and winter. “He learned to do everything involved in farming,” she recalled.

During college, he clerked, indulging his interest in the workings of government and policy. He originally studied architecture long enough to find himself in pre-calculus, before switching to political science at the University of Arkansas in Fayetteville, spent some time working on an MBA in Kansas City and then returned to Little Rock to law school at the University of Arkansas at Little Rock.

He described his sojourn in KC as the “most miserable nine months of my life.” When he realized he was living in a city on the same parallel with Pittsburgh, a bitter rival of his then-beloved Dallas Cowboys football team, he returned to Little Rock, where he went to law school. After law school, he was offered high-paying jobs in Dallas and Houston firms, but Texas wasn’t for him.

Of course, a lot of his Texas animosity has to do with sports, the Cowboys, to be specific: The wound to Couch is deep and personal: “When Jerry Jones bought the Dallas Cowboys, he unceremoniously dismissed Tom Landry. I’ll like the Cowboys again when Jerry Jones sells the team to somebody nice.”

And the Texas Longhorns were his beloved Razorbacks’ bitter rival. “That was back in the old days when Arkansas was in the Southwest Conference and we hated everyone from Texas, except for Tom Landry,” he said, explaining his decision to turn down a $90,000 a year job in 1982 for $27,000 annually in Little Rock. “It was less, but it was more. It wasn’t Texas.”

“In some ways, David romanticizes rural Arkansas,” said Marsha Scott, owner of Natural State Strategies and a longtime state and national politico, who has worked with Couch on his initiated-measure efforts for the past two-plus years. “He holds on to his roots in that way, but they’re really grounded in his best version of who we are.”

She spoke of his accent, his syntax, and his small-town Arkansan ways. “David could have unlearned that if he had chosen to, but he has chosen to stay in the truck, the jeans, to stay deliberately rural, fiercely proud of being small town, gun totin’, the ‘bubba,’ but he’s a very enlightened bubba. He’s using that stereotype to bust the stereotype.”

Scott, who is the one degree of separation between Couch and Arkansas’s most famous progressive son, Bill Clinton, describes Couch as “very Gandhi-like, but without the self-discipline of Gandhi.”

“David’s fun,” she said. “He wants to be able to drink, and talk long into the night, go fishing in clean water, and he wants to hunt if he feels like, he wants his son, and hopefully his grandchildren, to have a great education, and he wants everybody to eat good food, without a lot of rules and regulations. He’s got that strong independence… a live-and-let-live type.”

Back in November 2014, the court papers he brought to coffee had to do with that year’s initiated measure No. 5, which Couch also wrote, to increase the minimum wage. The measure, which was approved by a large margin of voters, will raise the wage from $6.25 to $8.50 over the course of three years. A Stephens-banking heir had brought an action to strike it from the ballot, contending not enough signatures were valid to qualify it for a vote by the people. Couch, defended the measure before the Court, allowing that while some of the means of notarizing the signatures were not kosher, the signatures themselves were those of qualified voters, who wanted to see the initiative on the ballot. His argument saved 8,000 signatures, even with acknowledged notary fraud, and kept the measure on the ballot so Arkansas voters could ultimately approve it.

“This is from the Special Master,” he explained of the fax. “He is a retired Justice appointed by the Court to research the issue and give an opinion, see?” He turned the papers away from him as he explained the documents, and then turned them back toward himself to look more carefully at the opinion.

“Now see, he took 386 away from us, but gave us 388, so we’re actually a few ahead.” He laughed that the challenge actually netted signatures for his side. He smiled but didn’t take his eyes from the typed pages. His finger glided down the left margin as he absorbed the decision and ticked information into his brain with finger strikes.

“Good news!” He replaced the front page of the stapled file and slapped the table. “You can make mistakes. But you can fix them,” he said, explaining the Court’s final decision in his, and the measure’s, favor.

Couch’s first Little Rock legal job was with an old Arkansas firm, House Holmes & Jewell, which had as a founding partner, Joe T. Robinson, a progressive senator from Arkansas, who was nominated to the Supreme Court by FDR, and was the Democratic candidate for vice president on Al Smith’s ticket in 1928. In the 1980s, the firm was working on a lot of billable hours for Arkansas Power & Light, now Entergy.

Though he stayed with this job for twenty years, Couch acknowledged he wasn’t the old-school law-firm type. “I was always the rebel at the other firm. I’d come to work in jeans. I mean, I had really long hair,” he said. “But I don’t know if they were happy to see me go, because I did all the work they thought was ‘gutter law’ or ‘street law,’ and they had to have, like, the ‘mechanic,’ you know? They had to have someone like me around.”

He was the one who went to court to make deals for clients with DWI charges. “I’m the fixer, fixin’ things,” he said.

The “fixer’s” Arkansas roots are small-town-and-getting-smaller, which is the story of Newport, Arkansas, in the northeast part of the state, not far from Jonesboro. Couch’s Aunt Brenda was careful to differentiate between the Newport of now and the Newport of Couch’s youth when she gave me a tour shortly before her death. While some of the change is inevitable—this bank gave way to that bank—some of it is economic decrepitude, as she indicated recently blighted areas of town.

Couch knows what he attributes this blight to, the small-mindedness of Newport citizenry that failed to embrace the ideas of a young entrepreneur, Sam Walton. When Walton’s successful lease on a Ben Franklin store was not renewed in 1959, he left for Bentonville, in Northwest Arkansas. Years later, Newport got the eighteenth Walmart store, but not the Walmart economy that has been a life force in Northwest Arkansas.

In his childhood, Couch said there was a “vibrant downtown, with shops, a movie theater and cafes.” But now there are abandoned buildings and slabs of concrete on otherwise empty lots. “Of course,” Couch said, “There is a bronze plaque where the Ben Franklin was, commemorating Sam Walton”

Only a few months before the car crash that took both their lives, David’s cousin, Jeff Dawson, sat with Brenda, his mother, in their Newport home. Jeff said David got the “old Southern ways” from their mutual grandfather, Oscar Johnson.  Jeff also noted that Couch “hates bullies. That’s his major, defining thing.”

After each election cycle, from pundits to individual voters, Americans ponder what the outcomes in aggregate mean. Who is getting the mandate? What party is out and what party is in? What is the political temperature of the nation? And, most importantly, what are the inherent features of democracy that will fix the failures of democracy?

After the November 2014 election results, when the alcohol amendment was defeated, but minimum wage and ethics were approved, Couch contemplated the nature of Arkansas politics.

“Arkansans are like any voters,” he said. “They vote for self interest,” and this is why they approved ethics reforms and minimum wage increases, but voted into office politicians likely to oppose such measures ideologically. Presented with the individual laws, instead of the kind of person who might support them, they approved them. Presented with individuals who embodied opposition to a Democratic president and branch of Congress, they also elected them.

Couch’s explanation is a different sad story from voters choosing people who don’t support their interests, but it is a sad story. “If President Obama weren’t black, Arkansas might be a blue state,” he asserted, leaning back in the desk chair in his office in mid-November 2014, after his two wins and loss. “It’s part of the Southern legacy, the Southern culture. It’s not right, but it’s real.”

Couch asserts that his home state Democrats lost their way. “If the Democrats in Arkansas had embraced all the positive accomplishments and not run a Republican-light campaign, we would have won,” he said.

But there’s more to the South than broad political party strokes, he explained.

“Yankees don’t understand the South, because they don’t understand the shared sense of history we have here,” he said, noting that his great-grandfather fought for the Confederacy in the Civil War, and his great-great-great grandfather was in the Revolutionary War. “If I could make a new Confederate flag, one without the connotations of slavery and racism, I would proudly fly it, because I am a Southerner, too and belong to that as much as I am an American.” For some, all the ramifications of the Confederacy still seem to hold sway, for voters and for politicians alike.

And when the system is too broken to pass the laws people want, the voters must provide the balance, not just the checks. But what contemporary Americans may forget about Arkansas, that Couch and Professor Barth recall, is the state’s progressive tradition, which Barth says now includes Couch.

“He’s definitely an Arkansan,” said Barth. “He’s generally progressive on a lot of social issues, and that is the Arkansas political tradition: Bill Clinton, Dale Bumpers, there was clearly a progressive streak there. It’s faded over the events of the last six or seven years, but it was there, not that long ago.”

Couch identifies with that tradition, and uses its artifact, the initiated measure law in Arkansas, to help create the state he believes in. “I think if you look at Bumpers and David Pryor, McClellan and Fulbright and Wilbur Mills, they captured the spirit of Arkansas,” said Couch. “You’re not going to out-Republican a Republican. It doesn’t even make sense. You have to have the difference in parties. You have to.”

And so, the boyish 5-foot 10-inch “street lawyer” is returning to the voters again this fall with another medical marijuana bill after his initial unsuccessful bid four years ago.

In fact, a fall 2015 Talk Business & Politics/Hendrix College/Impact Management Group survey, indicated that 56 percent of Arkansans strongly agree that citizens should be able to use medical marijuana if it is prescribed by a physician, and 28 percent somewhat agree. That means 84 percent of Arkansans support medical marijuana. A University of Arkansas poll also found a majority in favor. Contrast this with a 2012 Talk Business poll that reported only a 38 percent favorability rating for the measure.

“I don’t really think we’ve changed that many people’s minds,” said Couch. “I think what we’ve done is that we’ve just helped people know that it’s okay to be in favor of this law. Once an Arkansan gets comfortable with a progressive position, they can let themselves say to their neighbor that they support medical marijuana, or that they don’t believe in the death penalty. It’s okay to do what they taught you in Bible School, to love your neighbor. You can look at the haters and say no to their manipulation.”

He pointed to a yard sign in his office, stating “YES ON 5!”— medical marijuana’s identity on the 2012 ballot. “Forty-eight percent of the people voted for that. A majority of Arkansans currently supports it. You’re not going to find anybody in the General Assembly that is going to say they’re for that, anybody that will file a bill for that. They’re always in safe mode.” The political science major explains that this is somewhat how the system saves the populace from radical fronts, “but it’s more often stifling,” he said.

While Couch has a point, the initiated measure isn’t the answer to every policy problem, according to Barth. “There are good arguments on both sides,” he said of the initiated measure strategy. “It can lead to bad consequences in the sense that voters may not have a good understanding of what they’re voting on, the language.”

The absolutism of such measures can also be an issue. “It’s an up or down vote rather than the legislative process that allows measures to be crafted,” said Barth, pointing out the value of the give-and-take that goes on among legislators and between houses as a bill works its way from introduction to the governor’s desk.

“The initiated measure is not a perfect process,” said the political science professor. “But no government process is a perfect process.” He did point out that such efforts don’t proceed in a vacuum and can influence the legislature to take action if lawmakers see a more extreme measure could be approved by voters.

“If you have a radical measure that looks like it’s going to pass, sometimes the legislature will pre-empt that,” he said. “It’s all part of the system. If the legislature knows that the people will do it themselves, sometimes they go ahead and take that step.”

Couch considered the legislators tasked with most of the state’s law-making.

“There’s not a populist person in the entire general assembly, not someone I would consider to be a populist—or one brave enough to admit it,” he said. “This is the weirdest thing in the world, because if someone ever ran in Arkansas as a populist, they would win. Period.” He names some of the senior and bygone stars of the Arkansas political firmament: “That’s what Bumpers was, Pryor, Fulbright, McClellan. That’s what they were.”

For this liberal lawyer in a red state peopled by populists, where there’s the will of one voter, multiplied, there is a way, and Couch wants to give them the opportunity to be part of the solution.

Couch’s current personal-injury practice focuses on advocating for patients injured or killed through negligence in nursing homes, but the trial lawyer got his first experience with the politics of initiated measures at House Holmes & Jewell on behalf of a client trying to get a casino built in West Memphis. He recalled how they worked on it twice, and both times the state Supreme Court pulled the measures from the ballot, even after the signatures were gathered, notarized and filed, for different reasons, all political, he said, accomplished with what he saw as shady means.

“It was really a screwing,” he said. “But I really liked that work, because it’s fun, because you can be political without being a politician.” After that, he worked on the first initiative in Arkansas to take the sales tax off food, which the political establishment decried on behalf of the state’s budget. “I drafted it. We circulated it. Every politician said we were crazy, the state would go broke,” he recalled.

“They fought it, and we never got enough signatures to get it on the ballot. Then, what? Ten years later? Governor Beebe files the bill to take the tax off food and is a hero. And you know what? Even if you don’t pass a measure at first, you elevate the discourse on the issue for a later day.”

The first time Marsha Scott heard the name “David Couch” was about three years ago, when she and Couch were on the opposite sides of a natural-gas taxation issue.  “It was during the campaign that I started noticing that the opposition was getting a little smarter,” she recalled in the campaign headquarters as she waited for Fayetteville to adopt a civil rights ordinance in a vote that day. Someone told her David Couch was helping her opposition. “So I Googled him, and he was linked to all the progressive issues that I believed in, and I thought, ‘Gosh! He’s really good!’ He was always one step ahead of me.”

“I grew up in the Church of Christ,” Couch said, trying to describe his political beliefs, which differ from many in the Bible Belt. “You peel away the evangelical thing, and you look at what you really are supposed to do as a person, and I think that’s it, that’s where my beliefs come from. Maybe I filtered the bullshit out and caught the ‘Jesus loves the little children, all the children of the world’ idea.” He confessed that he no longer goes to church, but should, and has attended a Little Rock United Methodist congregation after leaving the Church of Christ tradition.

“My grandparents and parents, despite the fact they went to the Church of Christ, I never heard them say a bad word about anybody. I had as many black friends as I had white friends growing up, and I grew up in the segregated South, so I mean, that’s it, that’s the foundation of my political beliefs—it’s also supposed to be the foundation of a religion,” he asserts.

“In the end, I think it’s the fact that I like everybody,” Couch said. “If anybody ever told me I was pretentious, that would be the biggest insult in the whole world. I would be devastated. Look, everybody’s the same to me, and if you go across the state like I did on marijuana or alcohol or whatever, and you get to know people, you see that. And I’m just like everybody else: You have these talents, and you don’t bury them in the sand. I feel like I have some ability to do this, and if I didn’t do this, then that would be not doing what I was supposed to do.”

One of his talents, he said, is to “fade the heat.” When he first was brought in to the medical marijuana issue, he was nervous about how it would look.

“I thought ‘Oh my God, I’m going to sit here and talk about marijuana and stuff. People are gonna think I’m a pothead, and there was some hesitation,” he remembered. “But then I started talking to people…and they would confide in me, and then all of a sudden I realized that there’s this whole big group of people who are probably the vast majority who think it’s okay, and you should be able to get the treatment you need. It’s the perception, and I just got to where I wasn’t worried about the perception.”

In the days before the November 2014 election, he complained, “The Christians are investigating me!” Citizens for Local Rights had filed a complaint against Let Arkansas Decide with the Ethics Commission, and he had to file paperwork listing all his expenditures and contributions. He sat with the filing while his open door invited drop-ins and visitors from the building and beyond.

“They can’t believe I can do what I’ve done with the little money I’ve got,” he told several people, laughing. He manned his phone, calling media outlets and supporters, asking for information for the filing. When his phone rang, it played a Kenny Chesney tune.

Former Arkansas Governor and Senator Dale Bumpers’ son dropped in to ask how the “beer amendment” was going. A worker’s compensation attorney from down the hall in the office tower checked in, telling everyone in the office that he often praises Couch for “working less, dressing more casually than I do and making more money!” But in 2015 Couch admitted that he doesn’t “share well,” and what he meant is he doesn’t delegate or partner.

“It’s like if you want something done, I feel like I have to do it myself,” he said.

While Barth thinks Couch is more engaged in the process of getting things on the ballot than in getting voters to go his way, Scott said team-building to get that done can be an issue for Couch. “It’s challenging when people want process and a hierarchy,” she said, because Couch does things on his own time. “He’s the star of his own drama,” she said. “He’s rewriting the acts as he goes.”

The man Scott described as a “lead horse,” a “Don Quixote” and “a star” is uniquely suited to play this role in Arkansas, not just once for one issue, but repeatedly, election after election, and it’s something Barth would like to see because Couch is not necessarily suited to run for office, a more traditional role in politics.

One reason may be a Couch family trait his aunt Brenda pled guilty to as well. While she said she marked him as he was growing up to play her own role in the family, to take care of everybody, “which he does,” she did admit that he has weaknesses, or at least traits that wouldn’t work for a member of the General Assembly.

“He doesn’t like to be told what to do,” she emphasized.

His cousin Jeff agreed, “That’s kind of a family trait,” he said. “We’ll give you the shirt off our back, but don’t tell us what to do.” Even his father, Alfred Couch, chatting on the lawn of a friend’s Newport home, seemed torn about his son being a candidate, confident he could win, standing taller with pride at the thought of it, but not sure David would like the constraining life of politicians in Little Rock.

While Barth doesn’t like to discourage anyone from running for office, he’s not as interested in Candidate Couch as he is in Couch’s current potential to change the state in the work he’s doing.

“I think he’s pretty good at what he does,” Barth said. “I don’t think there’s a lot of people with the talents he has. I think he has a specialized talent, and I think there’s something valuable about that.”

Scott is the most emphatic in answer to the question of whether Couch should run for office. “No, no and no!” She said, laughing. “And I don’t think he would because he has an almost knee-jerk reaction to over-authority and to rules just for the sake of rules. David needs a sense of freedom.”

She thinks the legislature is the wrong place for him. “He would actually have to sit and listen to the legislators. David’s very active; he fidgets in his seat. His mind is too fast. He’s probably too bright for that job, and he can do so much more in the private sector.”

But Scott does acknowledge that people from both sides of the aisle are drawn to Couch because he is an “honest dealer,” transparent with his information, a coalition-builder. But she says he’s not just a liberal, he’s a radical.

Even so, “It’s hard not to like David. He’s got good friends who are very, very conservative legislators,” Scott said. “He’s seductive to men and women in that even if they start out holding themselves physically back, pretty soon, they’re leaning in, and they’re telling him things.” Couch eschewed the idea of playing a more traditional role in politics in Arkansas. “Then you’re in that muckety-muck,” he said referring to the legislative session and the constant give and take and push and pull of politics.

“I’ll tell you this,” he said, sitting up in his chair and uncrossing his arms in a somewhat rare open posture. “The only office I would ever remotely consider would be attorney general, because you’re the people’s lawyer, and you represent the people.” He lists the AG’s responsibilities: consumer protection, making sure utilities charge fair rates, protecting nursing-home residents, enforcing Medicaid law against fraudsters.

“You don’t have to answer to anybody other than the people, and you aren’t trying to cut this kind of deal or that kind of deal,” he reflected. “I’d be doing what I do today, but only on a broader scope.”

Couch has the talents for the job he’s doing—literally and figuratively. Dawson, Scott and Barth all referred to the trial-lawyer career that has led to his financial success, thus giving him the Scott referenced as being necessary to any role in which Couch would willingly fill.

“I’m independent. I don’t have to work for anybody,” said Couch about career. “I live within my means and I have a good income from my law practice. And that’s the same thing I do with these initiatives. In my job, I represent people who have been neglected in nursing homes, and in the ballot work, I represent people who have been neglected by politicians. I get paid for one; I haven’t been paid for the other.”

But still those with money and freedom don’t necessarily have the expertise: to write the initiatives, to deal with the attorney general’s office, to manage the law overseeing the collection of signatures, to defend legal challenges, to appear before the Arkansas Supreme Court if necessary.

“Marijuana got challenged in 2012, and I argued for it,” he said. “Minimum wage got challenged last time, and I stepped up to the plate and did it, despite the fact that all the political consultants and advertising firms were making bazillions of dollars, somebody had to defend it, and nobody wanted to pay to defend it, so I did.”

These efforts aren’t ends in themselves. The quintessential Arkansan with his jeans, cowboy boots, dogs, fishing pole and reliance on the word “ain’t,” wants the state he loves to be its best, to live up to the potential of its progressive tradition.

One of Couch’s memories growing up was camping in Heber Springs on the weekends or for extended periods of the summer after the dam dedicated by President Kennedy in October 1963 created Greers Ferry Lake. Senator Fulbright accompanied JFK to the event, and Couch, his father, mother and younger sister, Joy, enjoyed the fruits of that labor, before there were any facilities or resorts catering to the tourists who eventually came and came and came.

His aunt Brenda said that though he talks of retiring, she was not sure that would ever happen, and Couch scoffs at the thought. “I never want to retire. It’s too fun. It’s too fun,” he said. Brenda didn’t think he’d end up back in the Newport he loves and still actively (and financially) supports. Regardless, he’ll stay in Arkansas, an Arkansas he is helping create.

“He wants an Arkansas that’s in harmony,” said his aunt. “One of the things he has not liked is the way that the people who have tried to keep alcohol from being county-to-county put in a lot of money to keep their own license and not let other people open up their own stores in their own counties. To him, that’s just not a fair deal.”

But Couch disagreed with the idea he is creating something; he just wants Arkansas to be Arkansas.

“I disagree with a lot of the political pundits that have cast Arkansas as this red, dark state,” he said. “I think the people of Arkansas are very kind-hearted and progressive. If you put progressive issues out there where people can vote that issue up or down, I think Arkansas can pass a lot of good things.”

What are some of those “good things”? When he’s feeling expansive, rolling around in his office chair, filing and straightening up, Couch rattles off a number of possible future initiated measures, including universal Pre-K, prison and sentencing reform and more campaign-money reforms.

Barth sees the value of initiated measures when it comes to popular initiatives that take state funds, making them DOA in the state house, but very much alive at the polls. He agreed with Pre-K and after-school/summer programs, independent redistricting commissions, and voter ID but he also thinks some environmental measures, addressing fracking and the like could be very popular activist issues among voters. He also thinks Arkansas may have too many elected officials that Couch and his cohort could talk voters into eliminating.

Couch agreed with all these efforts, but he thinks he could also get Arkansans to repeal the death penalty in their state, while Barth thinks that is “not a winner at this point.”

Standing in the parking lot of his office building, on his way to hear Chelsea Clinton speak, Couch heard that Barth thinks the death penalty is an issue for the legislature, not the voters, and therefore not for Couch. “I’m going to do it just to prove everyone wrong!” he laughed, because the Fixer doesn’t like to be told what to do—or what he can’t do.

Back in 2014, before the election and its results were known, and plans were made to fix them, Couch had lunch in one of his favorite Little Rock hang-outs, Hillcrest Southern food landmark the Oyster Bar. After greeting several friends also waiting on their po’ boy sandwiches and gumbo, Couch talked about what the voters might do at the polls that year.

“I hope that alcohol wins, I really, really do,” he said. “But if it doesn’t, I already have lined up what I’m going to do the day after. I mean, I know exactly what I’m going to do.”

He had specific plans. “I don’t wanna lose, but it doesn’t bother me if I lose. Sun’s gonna come up in the morning, you know?” He picked up a piece of fried okra and popped it into his mouth, mumbling, “It’s like popcorn.”

Couch wants his work to be part of the solution, the people’s checks and balances on breaking or broken-down government.

“Whatever happens on election day, I’ll fix it,” he said. “I’ll just fix it.”

Charles Olson and the Counterculture of the 1950s and ‘60s by Craig Stormont

…………Charles Olson’s Maximus Poems include frequent mention of polis, taken from the ancient Greek city/state, but his use of the term polis refers to a more rewarding and beneficial way of life than that which he observed, particularly in Washington D.C., where he abandoned a promising political career. His idea of polis refers to “a new kind of nation” in which all members of the extended community strive to accomplish common goals intended to enhance their shared experience. Those who were familiar with Olson’s work and valued his ideas, as well as those who were effected by them, should be recognized as participants in his extended polis, and when they are, it is clear that much of Olson’s ideology contributed significantly to the counterculture of both the 1950s and the turbulent 1960s.

…………In Henry Ferrini’s film titled Polis Is This: Charles Olson and the Persistence of Place, folksinger Pete Seeger is interviewed in reference to an occasion when he met Olson, in 1942, on Eighth St. in Greenwich Village and invited him home to “have supper.” As Seeger recalls:

There he met Woody Guthrie, and he asked Woody would he like to write a little article for a little magazine called Common Ground. Woody’s  article was called “Ear Music,” and he started off by saying, ‘I don’t  mean you pluck the guitar with your ear. I mean you don’t need any paper to learn this kind of music.’ A beautiful description of folk music by one of the folks. And Charles Olson printed it, Angus Cameron of Little, Brown read it. Next thing you know Woody was writing a book called Bound for Glory.

Olson’s generosity to fellow writers and artists in this regard is never addressed in Tom Clark’s biography of the poet, Allegory of a Poet’s Life, yet it attests to the important role Olson played in shaping the “new kind of nation” he wrote of. It’s conceivable that Bound for Glory (1943) would never have been written or published if not for Olson’s suggestion that Guthrie write the aforementioned article. Bob Dylan, who emulated Guthrie in his youth, states in his autobiography titled Chronicles: Volume One: “Woody Guthrie ruled my universe” (49). Dylan suggests that Bound for Glory affected him deeply in the following lines:

One of the Svengali-type Beats on the scene happened to have Woody’s  autobiography, Bound for Glory, and he lent it to me. I went through it  from cover to cover like a hurricane, totally focused on every word, and the book sang out to me like the radio [….] Guthrie divides the world between those who work and those who don’t and is interested in the liberation of the human race and wants to create a world worth living in. Bound for Glory is a hell of a book. It’s huge. Almost too big. (245)

Clearly, Guthrie and Olson shared the idea of creating “a world worth living in,” and Dylan, whose songs are central to the 1960s counterculture, to some extent can be viewed as a member of Olson’s extended, ideological polis, whether he recognizes it or not. The songwriter’s close association with Allen Ginsberg supports that contention, which is underscored by the fact that Ginsberg was a pallbearer at Olson’s funeral.

…………Olson’s idea for “a new kind of nation” resonated with Ginsberg and his fellow Beats who rejected mainstream American culture since it did not accurately reflect their own experience in this country at that time. Diane di Prima, a poet associated with the Beats, as well as the Diggers and the 1960s counterculture, was happy to discuss her involvement with the Grateful Dead when I asked her about her poem titled “Pigpen,” named after their keyboardist and harmonica player who died in 1973, at the Charles Olson Centennial held in Gloucester in October of 2010. She specifically mentioned how she was present during Ken Kesey’s Acid Tests where the Dead performed as the house band. The LSD was provided by Owsley Stanley, a friend of di Prima’s, who manufactured it and worked as a sound engineer for the band. Considering the fact that Call Me Ishmael (1947), Olson’s first book, begins with the statement: “I take SPACE to be the central fact to man born in America” (Collected Prose 17), the following comments from Jerry Garcia, the late lead guitarist and vocalist of the Dead, suggests that he was familiar with Olson’s ideas:

Music is a thing that has optimism built into it. Optimism is another way of saying ‘space.’ Music has infinite space [….] Music is an infinite cylinder, it’s open-ended, it’s space. The form of music has infinite space as a part of it and that, in itself, means that its momentum is essentially in that open place. (A Signpost to New Space 97)

Garcia’s comments correlate directly with Olson’s dictum, borrowed from Robert Creeley and stated in “Projective Verse,” that “FORM IS NEVER MORE THAN AN EXTENSION OF CONTENT” as well as his practice of “open field” poetics. Garcia goes on to say,

We were doing the Acid Test, which was our first exposure to formlessness. Formlessness and chaos lead to new forms. And new order. Closer to, probably, what the real order is. When you break down the old order and the old forms and leave them broken and shattered, you suddenly find yourself a new space with new form and new order which are more like the way it is. More like the flow. (101)

The “new space with new form and new order” that Garcia mentions correlates directly with Olson’s entire approach to poetics, human experience, and nation building. The following rare footage of Neal Cassady, in which he speaks primarily about form, suggests that he was also quite familiar with Olson’s views: . When di Prima’s friendships with Olson, the Dead, and Cassady are considered, it becomes difficult to dispute the contention that Garcia’s opinions can be traced to Olson through di Prima, who along with Leroi Jones, later Amiri Baraka, consistently published Olson’s work in The Floating Bear, a poetry magazine they edited throughout the 1960’s.

…………Olson’s example was clearly far reaching, and di Prima, in Recollections of My Life as a Woman (2001), twice cites Olson stating, “A man is what he does”(107, 343). Her esteem for the elder poet is clarified in the following footage by Henry Ferrini filmed at the Olson Centennial: . She had traveled to Gloucester in order to meet Olson, as many younger writers had, and they visited Dogtown together. Not surprisingly, there is no mention of di Prima in Allegory of a Poet’s Life which is a problematic omission on Clark’s part. As di Prima states of Olson in Recollections:

Years later, Charles Olson told me how important it was to him to know in those early years of the Bear, that he could send us a new piece of, say, The Maximus Poems, and within two weeks a hundred and fifty artists, many of them his friends, would read it. Would not only read it, but answer in their work – incorporate some innovation of line or syntax, and build on that. Like we were all in one big jam session, blowing. The changes happened that fast. (254)

One of the “hundred and fifty artists” di Prima refers to – who should all be recognized as participants in Olson’s extended, ideological polis – is Michael McClure, who read at the Six Gallery in San Francisco, in 1955, in what is widely considered the first important Beat poetry reading since it is where Ginsberg first read Howl publicly. In Recollections, di Prima discusses her initial meeting with McClure in New York by stating: “It was a blast” (246). The fact that McClure is seen enthusiastically applauding in film footage of di Prima being named Poet Laureate of San Francisco in 2009 suggests that they remain friends.

…………McClure visited Olson in Gloucester, in 1959, though they had previously corresponded and met in San Francisco in 1957 while the elder poet was giving a lecture on The Special View of History. Clark states that “McClure […] reacted negatively to the wholesale intellectualism of the lectures. (McClure was reported to have gone out and ‘sold his library’)” (264). Clark offers no indication of who he is purportedly quoting here, and the fact that McClure would travel to Gloucester to visit Olson two years later suggests that his assertion is contrived. Clark refers to those from Black Mountain College in Olson’s audience for the lectures in San Francisco as “the survivors of his polis” (264) clarifying his misunderstanding of the importance of Olson’s extended, ideological polis in the poet’s work.

…………Olson is frequently referenced in McClure’s writing which focuses on “the biological basis of poetry,” discussed in detail in Scratching the Beat Surface (1982), a published version of McClure’s talks in The Charles Olson Memorial Lectures, given at SUNY Buffalo in 1980. McClure builds on Olson’s view of the poem as a “high energy – construct” (Selected Writings 16) – in which the poem is a transfer of energy from the poet, through the poem, to the reader – concluding that poems are “like an organism” and “organically complex works of art” (Scratching the Beat Surface 43). McClure states in an interview titled “Writing One’s Body”: “Olson’s recognition that the mind is a construct of the heart, of the nervous system, and his interest in the energy charge that we derive from the subject, whether in mind or in the world, as a motivating force, was a help” (Lighting the Corners 15).

…………Contrary to the misconception offered by Clark in regard to the two poets, Olson’s work served as a foundation for McClure’s own poetics. In “Projective Verse: The Spiritual Legacy of the Beat Generation,” Paul Nelson claims, “It is Michael McClure’s use of Projective Verse, a method similar to but deeper than Kerouac’s Spontaneous Bop Prosody, that future generations of writers and readers will come to appreciate as that movement’s spiritual legacy.” McClure states: “When I discovered Olson’s essay ‘Projective Verse,’ I found one of the bases for my own poetics” (Lighting the Corners 15). This admission by McClure is immensely important in regard to Olson’s polis by extension when McClure’s association with Jim Morrison and The Doors is considered. In an interview titled “Nile insect Eyes: Talking on Jim Morrison,” McClure discusses his friendship with Morrison which began in 1968 and lasted until the singer and poet’s death in 1971. McClure says, “What Jim had was not specific knowledge of, or readings in, a lot of poets but a large, stable, working, vivid, imaginative, and lively picture of what post–World War II poetry is” (238). Although Olson is never mentioned in the interview, the fact that McClure is recognized as Morrison’s poetic mentor suggests a definite link, by extension, through McClure from Olson to Morrison where poetics is concerned, and Morrison, along with the other members of The Doors should be viewed as part of Olson’s extended, ideological polis. The fact that McClure had been regularly reciting his own poetry to the accompaniment of The Doors’ keyboardist Ray Manzarak from 1987 (Lighting the Corners 299) until the latter’s death in 2013 underscores that contention. A performance can be viewed here: .

…………Had Morrison and The Doors never even heard of Olson, McClure’s engagement with Olson’s work, along with his association with Morrison, illustrates the specific manner in which Olson’s extended, ideological polis functions. Olson was primarily a teacher, and his ideas were transfused to many important figures in the counterculture of the 1960’s by other poets, thinkers and artists who valued his work. As he stated in 1951 in “Human Universe,” “Man has made himself an ugliness and a bore” (Selected Writings 64). The Beat Generation and the counterculture of the 1960’s should be interpreted as reactions to the same ugliness and boredom that Olson criticized.

…………Poet, musician, and political activist Ed Sanders, a self-proclaimed Yippie, is frequently referred to as a bridge between the Beat Generation and the anti-establishment Hippie movement of the 1960’s.   In an interview published as American History, Line by Line, conducted by Steve Paul, Sanders refers to Olson as his “mentor.” Sanders owned and ran the Peace Eye Bookstore on the Lower East Side of Manhattan from which he published Fuck You: A Magazine of the Arts. Sanders frequently included Olson’s work in the magazine, and the two became close friends. As Paul states of Sanders:

He was present at enough important poet-activist culture clashes of the decade that he, too, seems now like the elder statesman of the crowd: the march on Washington (1963), the Pentagon march and ‘exorcism’ by music (1967), the siege of Chicago (1968), the set of William F. Buckley’s ‘Firing Line’ with a drunken Jack Kerouac (1968), the bloody wake of the Manson family murder spree (1969), which he corralled into a still-vital work of narrative nonfiction, The Family.

Through following Olson’s directive to “find out for oneself,” Sanders developed what he terms “Investigative Poetry” which he applied in his research of Manson, detailed in The Family (1971). Sanders lived for a time with the remaining members of Manson’s “family” following the arrest of their leader and those who took part in the Tate-La Bianca murders in 1969 in order to get a clearer sense of what lead to the murders, as well as to arrive at an accurate understanding of what life in the Manson family was like. Sanders also attended the trial. Along with his radical band, The Fugs, which was well-respected in the 1960s counterculture, he attempted to exorcise the Pentagon in 1967 while demonstrating against the Vietnam War. Norman Mailer, in Armies of the Night (1968), describes the scene as a continuous chanting of “out, demons, out” while the demonstrators were being driven away by the military (125-27). The connection between Olson and Sanders is immensely important in terms of Olson’s influence on the counterculture of the 1960s when the fact that the younger poet adopted Olson’s method of “finding out for oneself” and put it into action is considered. Sanders is not only a bridge between the Beats and Hippies, but he should also be viewed as a direct link from Olson to the 1960s counterculture. He even arranged a date for Olson with singer Janis Joplin. More importantly, Sanders stated in a panel discussion at the Charles Olson Festival in Gloucester, in 1995, that Olson was “the first guy that I ever knew that talked about preserving tidal wetlands ( More information concerning Sanders and his relationship with Olson can be found here, in his own words, filmed by Henry Ferrini in Gloucester in 2012: .

…………Olson in Connecticut (1975), written by Charles Boer, a former student of Olson’s at SUNY Buffalo and his initial literary executor, also attests to Olson’s role in the 1960s counterculture. Boer cites another former student of Olson’s at Buffalo who had attended the Woodstock Festival (1969) in upstate New York, Charles Brover, stating to Olson in reference to the event: “I’m surprised you didn’t go to it yourself – all your people were there.” Boer also states that, at that time, Olson held the “view of pan-hippieism as the key to our national salvation” (47). What is frequently referred to as the Woodstock nation correlates with the “new kind of nation” that Olson was proposing, and regardless of whether or not they had ever heard of Olson, all who attended Woodstock should be recognized as members of his extended, ideological polis for their participation in an event totally contrary to the established order.

…………Olson strove to initiate a “new kind of nation” because he concluded that humanity is capable of a more beneficial and rewarding experience than the rat race he observed around him headquartered in Washington D.C. that persists today. As he states in Causal Mythology, in order to accomplish that, “You have to put establishment out of business” (36). Olson is clearly an overlooked American icon of the anti-establishment movements of the 1950s and ‘60s, and it is my contention that his work is being systematically removed from poetry anthologies used in college classrooms for that very reason. Any threat to the status quo and those in control of power – who benefit from it financially – is systematically eradicated by those who regulate the system in place. For any who are interested in developing an understanding of how the human predicament came to be what it is, Olson’s work offers clarification. Follow his directive and “find out for oneself.”

Pro Ball by Fred Russell

All games are child’s play. This includes the games played by adults, though not all adults who play games are childish. There is, after all, a lot of money to be made playing games, so you can’t really blame anyone who has the knack for it for devoting the best years of his life to frivolous pursuits like hitting a ball with a stick or jumping up and down. The essential stupidity of adult games, of sports as a profession, of what grown men and women are actually engaged in doing with a golf club or a tennis racket or a baseball bat or a hockey stick, has less to do with the athletes themselves than with the society that glorifies them, that watches, not just sports but everything else – in a word, the viewing audience.

Not even the Ancient Romans or Byzantines in their most degenerate phases attached themselves so enthusiastically to the heroes of the arena. We all understand pretty well what is behind all this, for nothing is more boring, even for the diehard sports fan, than watching a game where you aren’t rooting for one side or the other. We do not watch a game for its own sake but for the sake of living vicariously through a surrogate self. We require this in societies such as ours in the absence of personal distinction, which is the fate of the vast majority of mankind. It is a sad commentary on our society that the heroes we choose to idolize are not scientists, artists, doctors, teachers or simply decent human beings, but ballplayers, and of course movie stars.

From time to time, ballplayers and movie stars get together for some gala event, and then you have a curious situation where you can’t really say who is going to be starstruck over whom. The ballplayers, after all, are actually doing something and doing it very well while the actors are only pretending to be what they are not and have no real skills. On the other hand, the celebrity of the actor is greater than the celebrity of the ballplayer, his offscreen life is more interesting to the viewing audience, and what is more he usually has a lively personality whereas the athlete usually does not, is in fact pretty dull, talking in platitudes or mumbling something about going out there and having fun. In all of pro basketball, I can think of very few players you would have wanted to listen to for more than 30 seconds: Shaquille O’Neal certainly, Dennis Rodman, Charles Barkley, Allen Iverson for his edge, Michael Jordan for his presence. As for baseball, I have never heard any player say anything that would interest a 10-year-old child. And in boxing there is only the incomparable Ali.

It is a basic feature of modern societies that people are rewarded for the economic value of their work rather than for its social value. This is natural and desirable from the entrepreneur’s point of view. Work that produces money is worth more on the market than work that doesn’t, and therefore executives in the dog food industry make a lot more money than teachers and nurses and baseball players make a lot more money than cleaning women, though the work of the latter has considerably more social value than the work of the former, since without cleanliness we would get disease while without entertainment we would only get boredom. In this respect, medieval man was far more sensible than modern man, rewarding jesters and jongleurs modestly and holding them in fairly low esteem in contrast to our own times where clowns become idols and sometimes even get their own talk shows.

It may be said that, if not for social or intellectual achievement, surely we might have chosen to idolize manly heroes of a more worthy kind instead of frivolous ones: military men, law enforcers, fire fighters, for example; and many of us do in fact admire them greatly, especially when they are portrayed on the screen by Hollywood stars. In real life, however, their careers interest us less, for the simple reason that their lives have not been sufficiently commercialized to keep them in front of us wherever we look: no live broadcasts, no instant replays, no postgame interviews. no endorsements, no bubble gum cards. Also, their contests are less dramatic, less sharply focused. On the ballfield you get a winner in just a few hours, each and every day, so the rush is bigger and better when it comes. Soldiers and fire fighters can’t compete with baseball players when it comes to giving the viewing audience the fix that it needs.

The really diehard fan, it has to be said, the fan that professional sports organizations are always thanking, the fan who inspires the players, the fan for whom they are playing, is a pathetic figure. He lives and dies with his team. His destiny is bound up with it. He has invested everything he has in it. Days before big games his stomach is already in knots. You can’t talk to him. He won’t even take out the garbage. And after a loss he is inconsolable. It takes him days to recover. Not everyone is this sick of course. There is a kind of recovery index that will tell you just how sick one is, running from seconds for healthy individuals to days for terminal cases. The fan is an inseparable part of sports culture. Now that we have talkbacks you will find him in front of a computer cursing everyone in sight from morning till night. Without such fans, where would professional sports be?

The status of ballplayers, like the status of movie stars, is indicative of a very sick society, a society whose members look around desperately for some source of satisfaction, something to lift them up, something outside themselves to which they can attach themselves when it becomes clear that they aren’t going to get any satisfaction from within themselves. They are not to blame. This is the ethos. The American Dream is a hollow dream, of wealth and fame. It leaves very little room for other dreams, it seduces and captivates and dooms an entire society to chasing after distant stars.


Newsspeak by Fred Russell

Journalists talk and write in platitudes. This is not surprising. They are not, after all, writers. Their command of the language is limited. Their minds are commonplace. They are also not scholars or political scientists. I occasionally watch Fox News, but what is true of Fox is true of any other news organization. The ideologies may be different but the mediocrity isn’t, except for a kind of starry-eyed machoism among Fox’s noncombatants whenever the subject is the military or national security, and hence their breezy, insiderish tone and the penchant for hardass army talk, referring now to soldiers as warriors and speaking incessantly about boots on the ground, gridlock, lockdown, Intel, recon, choppers, nukes, and all the rest. It is true that journalists lack the talent to invent anything. They are the middlemen of language, picking up on words and phrases that are in the air and wearing them out through excessive use. The Bush administration, for example, gave them troop surges and enhanced interrogation techniques, which sounds a lot better than reinforcements and torture, though it is supposedly the job of journalists to cut through the crap and call a euphemism a euphemism. Fox fields an all-star lineup of nonstop talkers. What they say doesn’t have very much value or meaning. It plays to the biases of their viewers, gives them new scandals and new arguments, but doesn’t have the slightest effect on how the country is governed. On the whole, in their superficiality, journalists contribute only to the ignorance of the public and of course to the degeneration of language.

It is sometimes hard to distinguish between an idiom and a platitude. For this reason, one of the few real services that journalists provide, aside from giving us the weather report and ball scores, is to draw the line for us, as though they were themselves lexicographers. A platitude then becomes simply a word or phrase used repeatedly by journalists, which grates so abrasively against the ear that no real writer would ever think to use it. Here are a few: slippery slope, fiscal cliff, crunching numbers, growing the economy, do the math, level playing field, cutting edge, no brainer, game changer, harm’s way, take a listen, sound byte, outside the box, under the radar, in the loop, proactive, Obamacare, outsourcing, win-win, toxic, viral, uber, czar, buzz, spin.

What kind of mind uses such language? Clearly a lazy one, and that is a fair characterization of the journalist’s mind. Because his use of language is so narrow, and his ideas are so banal, the first word or phrase that pops into his head when he tries to express a thought is naturally one that he has used before, that is, a platitude. Unfortunately, he lacks the critical sense to reject it and look for something better. He finds the familiar comforting and feels that he is using the language well when he comes up with a hackneyed phrase. For the journalist the platitude represents clear and incisive language. It would never occur to him that it is dull. This is the standard. When he reaches into the barrel, nothing is there. That is why he is a journalist and not a writer.

The news networks and journalists in general are forever assuring us that they are keeping an eye on things for us. That is their job, they tell us. They are always working for us, bringing us the news, so that we can – what? The idea, I suppose, is so that we can make the right decisions at election time, penalize the politicians who let us down and reward those who don’t. But of course the net result of the entire political process is to elect representatives with whom the public is invariably dissatisfied and holds in very low esteem, so it is hard to see what the news networks accomplish other than sensationalizing events to hold our attention until the next commercial break – now a scandal, now a decomposing body in someone’s garage, now some disaster footage from Nepal or New Orleans, and then the endless commentary, day after day with the same tedious arguments – Benghazi, ISIS, the IRS, the Ebola epidemic, whatever. They never let up. They are like dogs with a bone.

If any of this did some good, made a difference, gave us something other than drama and spectacle – that is, entertainment – then there might be some justification for the enormous price the media demand for their supposed services. The price they demand is the right to invade people’s privacy and to conceal sources of defamatory or illegally obtained information. That is quite a price, but since they do not really deliver what they promise to deliver, they are in effect engaging in a species of fraud, representing themselves as the guardians of democracy and of the public’s “right to know” when they clearly are not. Both legislators and law courts have been completely taken in by this deceit and habitually pay lip service to the notion that the press really is the watchdog of democracy and thus deserving of the widest latitude. But the cornerstone of a democracy is in fact its legal system and the traditions that sustain it. The guardians of democracy are the courts. All the investigative reporting and all the talk shows in the world have not had the remotest impact on how governments operate.

I am not suggesting that we shut down the news organizations, any more than I would suggest that we ban poorly written books. By all means, let them go on doing exactly what they have always done if that’s what people want or need, but without their special privileges. Let them be hauled into court for hounding and harassing whomever they deem newsworthy and sued, fined or prosecuted for stalking them. Let them pay a price that hurts for their gossip, innuendo and calumny.

This would obviously inhibit them. The question is whether the public would suffer, no longer know what is really going on, as if it does now, become more ignorant than it already is, as if this is possible. The answer is of course no. It wouldn’t make the slightest difference. It would not make the slightest difference if people were or were not told who smoked marijuana thirty years ago or slept with his neighbor’s wife, or for that matter were or were not told what is going to happen in a week or a month by talk show sages who don’t know what is going to happen in the next five minutes. We think we are being kept up to date when we get the news. What we are in fact getting is a kind of alternate reality, the journalistic equivalent of pulp fiction where “stories” are selected for their dramatic value and seldom coincide with real historical or social processes. This too is not surprising. Journalists are not equipped to give us anything more. If they were they would be historians or even novelists.

Blog at

Up ↑