Artists Are All Loser Slackers, Says Lying Media Outlet

I avoid reading the thin drool offered on the PJMedia website but I happened to read the opinion piece recently offered by a failed artist now church employee who demands the National Endowment for the Arts be totally eliminated 

The writer trots out withered, ancient and fake narratives which ignore the reality of what the NEA does and how it does it. The writer wails that crazy commie leftist artists suck up tax dollars to insult you with lousy arty stuff no one needs 'cause art ain't food; another false claim is that all art should be regulated by a free market and therefore insure only good art that everyone likes will survive and crappy art will die; and finally that "all Americans' don't have any creative notions so no creative notion should be supported.

The facts are enormously and utterly at odds with such drivel.

"The NEA’s 2017 budget is $149.8 million. In a nation of 319 million people that amount doesn’t allow the agency to subsidize much of anything. But the endowment has found ways to make the money work with outsized effectiveness and efficiency. It makes thousands of small grants to nonprofit organizations — on average 2,100 a year. Each grant requires the recipient to raise matching local funds — often at a ratio of two or three local dollars for each federal one. So the NEA mostly serves as a catalyst for local groups to raise private and state money to serve their own communities.

On its modest budget, NEA funding now reaches every state, every congressional district, and even most counties — rural and urban — in the United States. Grants fund programs in schools, libraries and military bases. Nearly half the grants go directly to state and regional arts organizations to expand grass-roots efforts. NEA grants never pay overhead or annual expenses. They only fund specific programs of artistic and educational excellence that reach the public."
--
"The arts in America wouldn’t be destroyed if the NEA ceased to exist. But music, dance, theater, literature and visual arts would become less widely available, especially in schools, rural areas and poorer communities. Access to culture should not be a function of family income. That is why citizens should remind their representatives in Washington that the NEA needs to be protected. Believe it or not, most members of Congress will be pleased to get these letters.

Public support for the arts and arts education is neither a partisan nor a divisive issue. Most Americans want to see the arts in their communities and their schools. Most members of Congress agree. So do most governors and state legislatures. A 2016 public opinion poll conducted by the advocacy group Americans for the Arts found that 55% were in favor of doubling the NEA’s budget (from 46 cents per person then to $1 per person)."

Truth - eliminating the tiny amount of the NEA budget resolves no issue and addresses no problem. So why push for it?

I find it fascinating the writer from PJM is employed by a religious organization, which is exempt from paying taxes - if the writer were truly concerned about fair tax policies, shouldn't he argue that religious organizations should be taxed? So it isn't a tax issue or an economics issue - it's a cultural control issue. It also perpetuates hateful, demeaning, false and ignorant views about anyone who works in the arts - as the article's writer asks, "why should my tax dollars pay for your slacker son to be in a play when if had any talent he would not need any support to reach the heights of success and fame and wealth'.

A few million dollars supporting tens of thousands of arts programs is bad. Billions to subsidize oil companies or banking is good. Only art that is bought is good. The crap you make in your own community is crap, go get a real job, slacker.

The Republican party continues to show it opposes collaboration, open dialog, education, a free press, or anything which provides opportunities for the poor, for rural residents, for schools. Every argument about the arts they offer is debunked but they continue to lie and distort reality - the real problem, they say, is your sin of not being wealthy. Art is for the wealthy and talented - your creative contribution is a laughable pile of crap.

And, as usual, those ideas are held only by a small, angry, petty crowd of deplorable clucks who have a warped view of the world. They simply lust for power for it's own sake while claiming to be your Protectors. 

Will Gov. Haslam Be Haunted by Halloween Arrests?

A Tennessee judge says there was no cause to arrest protesters at the Occupy Nashville protests, releasing all those that Gov. Bill Haslam ordered arrested. This Halloween weekend's pointless repression of free speech should haunt the governor.

Are we just supposed to be grateful that - so far - no one has been injured in Nashville? Are we supposed to be grateful the right to free speech is only being discarded for just a few people? 

A roundup of the events from Mike Silence at the KNS.

Excerpts:

R. Neal: After declaring a curfew at Legislative Plaza last night, Gov. Haslam has sent THP state troopers with a SWAT team to clear the area. An Occupy Nashville livestream report from the scene says approx. 100 officers began arresting a small group of peaceful demonstrators at around 4AM (3AM Nashville time). 

Betsy Phillips: Setting time limits and monetary requirements on when people are allowed to gather on taxpayer-funded state property to exercise their first amendment right to peaceably assemble and petition the government for a redress of grievances is unconstitutional.

Also from Betsy:
But please, notice that the Governor is afraid of fifty people. Other Occupies have hundreds, sometimes thousands, of people. And our governor has to sneak up on fifty people in the dead of night.
But what’s worse than sneaking up on fifty people in the middle of the night is stripping everyone in the state of their constitutional right to peaceably assemble.
That hurts everyone.

Internet Access A Basic Human Right?

Access to the Internet is a basic human right - so says a report to the U.N. focused on the "promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression".

While noting that for many people in the world, access to electricity is still a prohibitive issue, the report makes bold claims about the fundamental changes which Internet access has sparked worldwide and what changes are yet to take place -

"... the Internet is one of the most powerful instruments of the 21st century for increasing transparency in the conduct of the powerful, access to information, and for facilitating active citizen participation in building democratic societies.

Indeed, the recent wave of demonstrations in countries across the Middle East and North African region has shown the key role that the Internet can play in mobilizing the population to call for justice, equality, accountability and better respect for human rights."

An LA Times article adds:

"La Rue describes the Internet as "revolutionary" and unlike any other communication medium such as radio, television or printed publications, which are "based on one-way transmission of information."

The Internet, on the other hand, is an "interactive medium" that allows not only for the sharing of information, but also "collaboration in the creation of content," which makes people "no longer passive recipients, but also active publishers of information."

As such, the Internet can be a tool of empowerment and aid in the protection of and access to other human rights -- as well as contributing to growth economically, socially and politically -- benefiting mankind as a whole."

We are still far too inexperienced to say just what this type of global and personal expression and creation can provide. But we are absolutely in the early moments of a revolution in how the world communicates. Protecting and nourishing this technology and the freedom it offers is a monumental task.

But is Internet Access a basic human right?

Thomas Jefferson Dance Party On Saturday

The dancing will commence at noon Saturday around the nation to promote ... well, I'm not sure what is being promoted, other than the freedom to dance inside the dome of the Jefferson Memorial in Washington.

I mentioned this earlier, how dancing at the Jefferson Memorial is not exactly legal ... or illegal, really, unless your dancing is meant to convey your convictions or beliefs in something. (The post details the recent arrests and legal issues being challenged)

So tomorrow, high noon, the dancing will commence - not just in Washington, but in most every state (and perhaps even globally), the dancing will take place. As of this hour, some 3000 people say they'll dance at the Memorial.

Here's the Tennessee Dance Party page on Facebook, and the page for the Memphis Party too.

Will you join in?

Officials Threaten Chattanooga Press

Reporting on the recent tornado damage in Southeast Tennessee draws a strange response, according to the Chattanooga Times Free Press:

"Last Thursday, one of our reporters, Kate Harrison, was following volunteers cleaning up debris in the heavily damaged Apison area when she was confronted by three veteran, high-ranking public officials who ordered her to stop taking photographs. The officials — Hamilton County Sheriff Jim Hammond, Chattanooga Police Chief Bobby Dodd and Hamilton County’s director of emergency services, Don Allen — clearly should have known that Harrison’s work was constitutionally protected. That they could occupy such high positions and not know, or care about, or respect the nation’s First Amendment rights boggles the mind.

Harrison also was commanded by emergency services spokeswoman Amy Maxwell not to publish any of the photographs she had taken, and later was threatened with arrest. (We published one of Harrison’s photos.)

All these actions were an unconstitutional infringement on Harrison’s and this newspaper’s right and ability to serve the vital functions of a free press."

Hamblen County Man's Actions Not Protected "Free Speech" Says TN Supreme Court

A June 24, 2006 anti-immigrant and very emotional rally held in Hamblen County on the lawn of the courthouse drew a massive police presence and one would-be attendee, then 61-year-old Teddy Ray Mitchell, was arrested for disorderly conduct. The case against Mitchell has been moving through the courts for five years and the Tennessee Supreme Court has now issued a ruling in the case, a 4-1 decision that found Mitchell was guilty of disorderly conduct. (The opinion written by Justice Gary Wade is here.)

The photos above, showing a tank-like vehicle and heavily armed police, are from that hot day in June (mentioned previously on this blog here and here). There were snipers on the roof above the crowd as well. Obviously there was a great deal of fear and concern from police, who seemed to be expecting a very dangerous atmosphere at the rally.

Mitchell was first convicted, but an appeals court overturned that verdict and the case went to the State Supreme Court in a break from their usual business. Reporter Jamie Satterfield of the Knoxville News Sentinel has a story on the decision here.

The case centered over whether or not Mitchell's conduct was threatening and crossed a line protecting free speech. The court majority says yes. Mitchell was certainly using abusive racial insults towards the police, and police also wanted to bar Mitchell from carrying an American flag into the rally since it was on a large pole which they feared could be "used as a weapon".

A dissenting opinion from the Supreme Court by Justice Sharon Lee says Mitchell's conduct was not disorderly and that he was protected by the right of free speech. Some excerpts from her opinion:


"Anticipating a possible confrontation between pro-immigration and anti-immigration participants at the rally, the Hamblen County Sheriff’s Department assembled between eighty and ninety police officers from various police agencies in and around the rally site. The police presence included officers from the Hamblen County Sheriff’s Department, the Morristown Police Department, the Sevierville Emergency Rescue Squad, and the Tennessee Highway Patrol. Most of the officers were in uniform; some were in riot gear, many were in full body armor and carried loaded M-16 weapons; and others carried AK-47 weapons. Police officers were on the ground, snipers on rooftops, and a half-track tank was hidden in the bushes of the courthouse lawn."

---

"The videos depict a scene where Mr. Mitchell is agitated, but the police officers and bystanders appear undisturbed by Mr. Mitchell’s conduct. Indeed, not a single person testified that he or she felt threatened by Mr. Mitchell.
At this point, an order came across the radio from Officer Weisgarber, who was stationed next to the courthouse, to remove Mr. Mitchell. Officer Weisgarber never saw Mr. Mitchell until after his arrest."

---

"Although Mr. Mitchell’s conduct was rude and belligerent, the fatal flaw in the State’s case was its failure to establish that Mr. Mitchell’s conduct was violent or threatening."

---

"After considering the principles in these cases and the evidence in the record before us, I am convinced that the proof was not sufficient to sustain the conviction for disorderly conduct. In vociferously challenging the officers’ authority to deny him permission to enter the rally with his American flag, there is no doubt Mr. Mitchell was rude, loud, and belligerent. However, the entire verbal exchange between the numerous officers and Mr. Mitchell appears to have lasted less than 15 seconds. There was no proof that Mr. Mitchell made any threats of violence. There was no proof that any of the seven police officers at the entrance felt threatened at any time by Mr. Mitchell. There was no proof that Mr. Mitchell committed any act of violence toward any of the police officers or counseled others to do so. Although the State argues that Mr. Mitchell “shook the flag pole and poked Officer Wallen two or three times with the eagle attached to the end of the flag pole,” this argument is simply not supported by the videotapes that captured the entire encounter. Obviously, the jury’s role is to resolve conflicts in the proof; however, the State’s argument that Mr. Mitchell used his flag to poke Officer Wallen in a threatening or violent manner and that this conduct somehow took place outside of the video cameras’ view is sheer conjecture."

---

"Officers’ mere speculation as to what may have happened was not a basis to arrest Mr. Mitchell for boisterously expressing his views on a matter of public concern. Therefore, I would hold that Mr. Mitchell’s conduct was protected free speech under the First Amendment."

Contempt for Students and Free Speech in Tennessee

UPDATE: State Senator Randy McNally of Oak Ridge wants the students who protested to be expelled from college. More contempt for free speech and students from the Republican-led legislature.

---

Hysteria and falsehoods from state officials flowed heavily when a group of Tennessee college students disrupted a legislative committee meeting this week - most troubling is the hateful attitude on display which shows pure contempt for free speech and civil disobedience. Oh, that awful civil disobedience ...

Lt. Gov. Ron Ramsey, the would-be Tea Party Governor, let fly a whopper:

"The right of all citizens to protest and assemble peacefully is sacred in the State of Tennessee,” Ramsey said in a statement. “However, this General Assembly will not be intimidated by nomadic bands of professional agitators on spring break bent on disruption. We talk through our differences here. Tennessee is not Wisconsin.”

Yeah, those darn students!! Darn elitist education seekers!! Speaking out of turn!! Arrest them!! Jail them!!! Spring Break, boooooo!!! And it's so disappointing to hear a lifelong politician say we have "rights" - except when they are used. You can "talk through our differences" when we decide it is okay for you to talk.

Tom Humphrey covered the spectacle and the comments from readers stoke the hysteria:

"Yes, these are the same thugs (Organized for America hoods) that were at the Union Rally at the Plaza on Mar.5th. Several walked up to us (the Counter-Protesters-read Tea Party) and asked "Ya wanna pick a fight"? They are being funded by MoveOn.org (soros $) and are well-funded. They are being paid. These are Obama's "Army". Freedom & Rights for Them, no one else!"

But, as already noted, the protesters were just Tennessee students demanding a voice in how education policy is created:

"The previous comment is a joke. I was one of the participants in the direction action today, and know all but a couple of the others very well. None of us were at the March 5 rally (not that we don't support the efforts of teachers to fight for their own rights) and we are certainly not connected to Organized for America in any way. OFA was/is an Obama support group that would never dream of endorsing a direct action such as what we pulled off today.

And as for us being well-funded (or funded at all), that's absolutely false. None of us have any connection to MoveOn, nor did we receive any funding whatsoever from any other source except our own jobs. We are just workers from all over the state who are tired of having our rights assaulted by the super rich and their legislative allies and decided to do something about it. I'm sad to see other workers join the Tea Party to support the interests of corporations over the interests of workers. Y'all are some very confused individuals. And everything you said in your comment is just straight up false and made up.

P. S. Most of us don't even like Obama. He refuses to stand up for working people, instead supporting tax cuts for the wealthy and spending cuts on programs that benefit ordinary people. I didn't vote for him in 2008 and I won't vote for him in 2012."

The truth is that very highly organized and fabulously wealthy business, corporate, and out-of-state groups get invited and seated at conference tables in legislative committee hearings, get called in as experts in their fields, are praised and lauded by elected officials -- and are not called "professional nomads of agitation", are they?

Every Tennessee legislator knows the education issues - from pre-school through college - are under intense scrutiny and residents and workers have rights to express their views, and even to peacefully protest and yes, even disrupt meetings. It's one way to petition government and demand representation.

To insult them - like Knoxville Senator Campfield or Lt. Gov. Ramsey - shows these "leaders" have nothing but contempt for the ideals of free speech, nothing but contempt for students and education.

On Wednesday, Gov. Haslam retreated from the national Republican plan to strip away all collective bargaining for teachers, which shows that he knows the national plan led by Wisconsin Gov. Walker has been a huge FAIL.

Legislation crafted by Gov. Haslam and Rep. Beth Harwell would allow collective bargaining for basic pay and benefits but still excludes several items Republicans, as a national party plan, want to remove, including the union's rights to make political donations from the dues of members.

Yet, even that proposal is pure political blackmail and goes against recent Supreme Court decisions regarding free speech for corporations and unions.

Rep. Glen Casada is leading the hypocritical forces in this shady tactic. His newest legislation proves it by claiming only one type of organized political financial donations - from corporations - should be allowed, while criminalizing organized workers and limiting their financial donations. Of course, labor unions tend to donate more to Democrats - Rep. Casada and the new Republicans in charge want to stop that cold.

His plan is to remove restrictions now in place on how much corporations can give directly to candidates - but he's already filed bills to make it illegal for unions to donate to political campaigns and to ban the ability of unions to use funds for any political donations.

Rep. Casada tells the Tennessean something very hypocritical in defense of his pro-corporate money plan:

"However unions are treated, that's how corporations should be treated," Casada said. "That's my bottom line."

He then adds that he'll withdraw his anti-union bills if the legislature approves his pro-corporate one. Sounds like political blackmail.

All in all - it shows that free speech and political participation for the few and not all are being pushed into place.

Giving Dictators The Boot - I Mean, Shoe

From Cairo, February 2011. It worked - Mubarak resigns presidency.

The shoe?? Oh, right, the shoe ... Some "notable shoe incidents". Wait, the shoe is a sign??

Meanwhile, the story in America ... cut off assistance for the poor, for innovation, and aim for a government shutdown.

(NOTE: this is not related to the previous post -- just synchronicity I suppose.)

Tigger, The ACLU and Ken Starr

With endless accounts that students in America's schools just can't make the cut when it comes to excellence in studies of math or science or reading and writing, the following report indicates our schools are mastering absurdity.

Seems a young student went to school and mocked all authority by wearing a pair of socks that showed the character Tigger from Winnie-The-Pooh. Yes, Tigger. Maybe it's all the bouncing he does or that he likes to have fun, fun, fun. Reports say she was then forced to an in-school suspension program called "Students With Attitude Problems."

Well, to be honest, it wasn't only the socks. She also wore a brown shirt with a pink border and a denim skirt. The school does have a 'dress code' which says the "policy requires students to wear clothes with solid colors in blue, white, green, yellow, khaki, gray, brown and black. Permitted fabrics are cotton twill, corduroy and chino. No denim is allowed."

Thos darn anti-authoritarian colors are ruining Amurica!!

The Florida school is now being sued by the seventh-grader on the basis that the policy is unconstitutionally vague and restrictive. I suppose suing on the grounds that a policy is silly won't hold much weight in court. And yes, a school certainly has the right to create and enforce a dress code. I just can't imagine denim being banned.

Which reveals, of course, that my mind was rotted with filth, degradation and snarky attitude problems as I attended school wearing denim jeans. No cartoon socks, no. But I did have a couple of Mickey Mouse shirts.

I would call this event "Goofy" but that could be misconstrued as a cartoon reference.

Is it any wonder that the United States Supreme Court this week heard a case involving the suspension of a student who carried a silly sign outside school property and was suspended by a principal who saw the sign as a flagrant assault on the "mission of the school"?

Even stranger, groups ranging from Pat Robertson's Law Center and the ACLU are supporting the student's case and the U.S. attorney arguing the case for the government is ... wait for it .. Kenneth Starr.