Brummett concludes that uninformed voters (that's a nice way to put it) approved annual legislative sessions. How else to explain a vote for more government by a populace historically disinclined to same? (The headline metaphor is drawn from the column.)
WHICH KIND OF REMINDS ME OF IGNORANCE: A letter writer from Gravette in the D-G this morning wrote proudly of his support of anti-gay Act 1 and objected to polling apparently intended to elicit the answer that sentiments such as his helped explain the act's passage. It is, he declared, his "constitutional right" to vote in this manner without ridicule or contempt from opponents. Alas, Andy, you're wrong again. Until Sarah Palin is president, it remains my constitutional right to criticize in whatever manner I wish the exercise of legislative power expressed in this vote. See: Bill of Rights.