Narrow Search

Comment Archives: stories: News & Opinion: Today

Re: “Zona Politics: Talking Congressional and Legislative Races with Journalists Dylan Smith and Hank Stephenson

I live outside TUSD so I don't have a vote but if I did I can't imagine any circumstances in which I would vote for a fifth term for any candidate unless I saw proof positive that the district was in substantially, verifiably better shape now than it was when that candidate ran for the first time. And when trying to decide which non-incumbents to support I'd be looking to see their grades on the old reliable 'Works Well With Others' scale. Nobody who's just aching fora fight or who has a hair trigger temper ought to get any consideration. And party affiliation is no qualification for service on a school board. Please folks, it should be all about the kids,

1 like, 0 dislikes
Posted by franklymydears on 09/24/2018 at 11:12 AM

Re: “Claytoon of the Day: Why I Didn't Report

When Bill Clinton finally admitted to doing it, his supporters explained it away as "happening in his personal life." How many of you are that two faced that you would now condemn someone else for the same thing? That is, if any of it is true. Feinstein is covered in lies, and it is becoming evident they are simply delay tactics.

Might I also remind you that as Obama jammed things down our throats, he said, "elections have consequences and we won." The country will turn away from these two faced liars once they deal with their repressed memories.

1 like, 2 dislikes
Posted by Coach on 09/24/2018 at 10:49 AM

Re: “Claytoon of the Day: Why I Didn't Report

"Let's save this info until the democrats pay us for it." Stop the world I want to tell my story...if I can remember it."

3 likes, 7 dislikes
Posted by Molly P on 09/24/2018 at 9:11 AM

Re: “Nancy MacLean, Author of "Democracy In Chains," Will Be At UA Sept. 24

Betts Putnam-Hidalgo:

I wrote "experiments with persuasion," not "game of persuasion." The difference is significant. Running a political campaign for elected office is a type of experiment with persuasion. It involves persuading people to vote for you. Working for other people's political campaigns or initiative campaigns is another type of persuasion. It involves persuading people to vote for other people or for initiatives. Running an advocacy organization is another type of persuasion. If the advocacy organization is responsible, it involves persuading people in positions of power to adopt beneficial policy.

Attempting to persuade is not in and of itself bad, but some types of persuasion are rightly labeled propaganda. I don't see anyone in this comment stream accusing you of sponsoring propaganda, though there does seem to be some concern: A) with the validity of MacLean's historical METHODS, and B) with attempts to recruit people to hear her speak that don't disclose the controversy surrounding her METHODS. There is also some concern with David Safier's METHODS vis a vis the actual state of our local education systems, what he chooses to include and exclude from his blogs, and how the politicians and the policies he promotes relate to the state of our local education systems.

(You ask whether I have read MacLean's book. I read reviews pro and con. I found the con reviews persuasive, not because I agreed with the political perspectives of their authors -- in most cases I disagreed with them -- but because I found the critiques of MacLean's METHODS substantive. When you invite busy people to spend time reading that book or listening to its author speak, it would seem reasonable and fair to give them an opportunity to take a look at the controversy and decide for themselves whether it is worth their time to consider arguments that have been shown to be based on documentably flimsy evidence. Doesn't coupling supposedly "democratic" ideas with such "evidence" actually discredit democracy? Is it important to establish ideas on the right foundation and use honest methods in communicating with the electorate, or is it just important to get the "right" ideas across, through methodologically unsound "history" and propaganda? How someone answers those questions seems to me to make the difference between a real "democratist" and a specious one.)

1 like, 0 dislikes
Posted by Genuine democratists don't strategically omit relevant facts. on 09/24/2018 at 8:12 AM

Re: “Together We Win at The Rialto

Thanks. But today is Monday, September 24th.

1 like, 0 dislikes
Posted by Kenneth Groves on 09/24/2018 at 4:54 AM

© 2018 Tucson Weekly | 7225 Mona Lisa Rd. Ste. 125, Tucson AZ 85741 | (520) 797-4384 | Powered by Foundation