Quoth the Gander: We Got Us a Goose

I run a nary-mentioned, hardly-frequented, often-pithy, likely-ignoble blog.

It's a blog. It's a simply-templated piece of real estate along the Information Super Highway and it lets me voice my opinions, thoughts, musings, what-have-you, in a loose atmosphere, free of the high standards of quality press journalism, like the Arkansas News Bureau's site, where I am the Web Content Editor and a staff writer.

I regularly see and deal with the disparity between a meager blog and a credible website, and feel like I have a pretty good handle on the situation. UFW is of the former, meant for (at least I attempt to provide) somewhat insightful commentary, blended with humor and frivolity.

But I am in a position to do so; I'm a youngblood, as my good friend Heir Brummett would say, and have very few responsibilities that would be slighted or depreciated if this humble blog were ever to run wayward into, dare I say, offensive territories. It's all pretty nonvenomous. I am in a position to do so because my position is relatively unimportant.

My position is not Speaker of the House of the Arkansas Legislature.

Robbie Wills, D-Conway, on the other hand, is.

Wills jumped on the blogging board just a few days prior to the maiden voyage of the 87th General Assembly. His colleague, Steve Harrelson, D-Texarkana, has been running Under the Dome for awhile, and it's been a pretty neat bird's-eye-view of the inner workings of the Arkansas Legislature.

But this Robbie fellow thinks he's funny, and is taking shots for the guffaws of a few. Let's delve.

Wills started out doing what most expected him to do; Make some pitches regarding legislation he'd like to have passed, give passive talking points for why he likes some bills and not others, shake some digital hands, kiss some digital babies, and whatever else a technologically advanced politician aims to do.

This was all well and good. A little weak sauce by blogging terms, but hey, he's an elected official. You might expect a little bit of bland, and likely get it with no complaints.

But then the first big issue of the Fightin' 87th came up: HB 1204, the Cigarette Tax. A highly divisive issue, Wills decided to fire off at the mout— I mean, keyboard at his opposition.

He fired off at national legislators who were coming in to speak against the bill, namely Dick Armey of Texas. Now, some points in Wills' defense:

• Armey dished out some weak material at the obvious behest of tobacco lobbyists.
• Wills rightly called him out regarding his own state's cigarette tax exceeding our own.
• Wills genuinely disagreed with what this national spokesman had to say, and wished to dismantle his arguments.

But there's a right way and a wrong way. Mocking the people who attended the rally, trivializing the excuses —albeit weak— by the opposition that probably wisely didn't want to get into a losing debate, and finally referencing a movie that is contrary to your point (Thank You For Smoking actually shows a humane side to big tobacco, a point which apparently completely escapes Rep. Wills). It reminds me of the episode of Seinfeld where Jerry seeks the counsel of a priest when his dentist, Dr. Tim Whatley, converts to Judaism strictly for the jokes.

Priest: "And this offends you as a Jewish person?"
Jerry: "No! It offends me as a comedian!"

You let some things slide. You don't stoop down to someone else's level. Which brings me to another point, the posts where he openly ridicules a colleague of mine, columnist David J. Sanders.

Sanders, an avowed conservative and opponent of the tax hike, is not a legislator. While he may often be in the ear of legislators, he is not one of them. The best way to rebut is to make your case, not to apostatize about how the man dresses or combs his hair. It's a bully tactic from the pulpit with a gavel. You can rebut through meaningful legislation, not cheap verbal shots like some kid under the monkey bars. And not that Sanders was taking unnecessarily low-blows; Sanders gets paid to levee opinions, Wills get paid to lead Arkansas' representation.

Plus, if you're going to take the shot, maybe take it a little more forcefully than just saying "Nu-uh!" to his points. Were you really not worried about it, you wouldn't have felt the necessary to post anything in the first place. Again, there's a time and a place.

But the biggest point concerning Wills and his gunslinging blog is the point he himself halted legislation last Thursday to make: Decorum.

After Rep. Mark Martin, R-Prairie Grove (no, not that Mark Martin), bellowed "It's the law!" during Rep. Gregg Reep's closing arguments of HB 1204, Wills made an angry plea for decorum. Apparently, there were cat calls and chiding, but that's beside the point. Martin later apologized for his actions, case closed.

You'd think so, but then you read Wills' post about how disappointed he was in the Republicans and their decorum. He said it was "a complete lack of respect for the House of Representatives," and a "shocking display of pettiness," when the House GOP called off the pairing rule so every legislator had to be there for the crucial vote.

Wills has openly lambasted opponents in a manner unbecoming of the speaker, on his blog and elsewhere. Gov. Beebe lambasted Arkansas Republicans — Freshman legislator Jonathan Dismang, R-Beebe, by name — for being openly partisan and divisive.

For someone who holds the House of Representatives to such a high standard, and is the head of that very House, he certainly has not walked the walk.

A blog, in its very essence perhaps, is meant to be informal. But choosing words a bit more carefully could bode well for the Speaker. It sort of goes against the whole bipartisan, non-divisive, people friendly image the Speaker pushes outside of the confines of the interweb.