Should government subsidize the arts?

[BP3]

Seems like 'Dubya' liked his beer. Personally, I'll take a good anejo tequila anytime! http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/biggrin.gif

[Guest]

Yeah you've got to be careful who you have a beer with as Newk found out. -personally I prefer to pull the cork on a nice Hunter Valley white. Your health gentleman!!

 

http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/biggrin.gif

[tonemonkeyyahoo.com]

I vote for a nice glass of "Aussie Shiraz" (Penfolds?).

[Guest]

I think that's Penfolds Grange Hemitage you are refering to. I think it starts at $150/bottle, out of my league, I tend to go for the Chateau Cardboard.(Cask)

cheers

John

[Anderton]

About America being the greatest country, love it or leave it, blah blah blah...

 

I really feel comfortable in Europe, a lot of it makes sense to me. Living there as a kid made a major impression on me, but here I am in the US. I like the sense of space you have in the US, and the fact that it's still a work in progress. We have wrestled with immigration problems that are just becoming an issue in Europe. And although racism is still a problem in this country, don't let anyone tell you we haven't made progress...there used to be separate drinking fountains for white and blacks, for heaven's sake!! And that was less than 50 years ago. Back then, no one would have dared predict that blacks would hold positions of political power, but here we are. Work remains to be done, but there is a dynamism in the US that is cool. Now, if only the population would become less self-absorbed and more politically sophisticated, we could really make progress.

 

In my ideal world, I'd live half the time in Europe, and half the time in the US. Just when I started getting fed up with US provicialism, I'd head to Europe. And when that got too stifling for me, I'd head back.

 

Then again, I hear Australia is a fabulous place...good thing I haven't been there, it would confuse me even further!

[alphajerk]

well the party is over.

 

i guess to have some of the brightest people in the world, it must be offset with the DUMBEST people in the world. anybody who voted for bush or nader is a complete MORON. i expect our economy will start to fail just as it did with his daddy in office.

 

one thing i guess going for us is that presidents elected in years that end in 0 get shot. hopefully some nut will take care of it before he wrecks the country too bad.

[Guest]

Alpha - it's 2.50am, your time and believe me it's not over yet, shhhh...the fat lady hasn't sung yet http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/wink.gif

 

Cheers

John

 

[This message has been edited by johnsay@lis.net.au (edited 11-08-2000).]

[alphajerk]

i know, something evil happening down in FLA. ballot boxes missing.... jeb is the devil.

[tonemonkeyyahoo.com]

Mr. alpajerk:

 

I really want to be able to respect you (perhaps even like you, certainly celebrate your right to your opinion). However, when you say things like "anyone who voted for Bush or Nader must be a moron" I simply can't respect you.

 

It must be nice to live in a universe where you are perpetually right and infallible. That's the only reason I can see why you would call those who disagree with you "morons."

 

I voted for Bush. I am not a "moron" (anyone who knows me even slightly will tell you that I'm one of the most intelligent people they know - it's a blessing and a curse).

 

Grow up sir! I believe you have something to offer us all and I want to hear it. Don't force me to tune you out because you have no sense of common courtesy toward your fellow human being.

 

Your mileage may vary.

 

[This message has been edited by tonemonkey@yahoo.com (edited 11-09-2000).]

[alphajerk]

oh come on, dont tell me you actually buy into it. bush has got to be the biggest moron to ever run for office. he has a track record to prove it. and by voting for him [my dad did too and he is one of the brightest people i know but he too is a moron] only perpetuates our country towards a negative direction. he is a puppet controlled by higher corporate powers that only serve to kill our earth, wreck our schools, and ruin our general state of humanity. wake up.

[Uh Clem]

Well, I think the govt should sudsidize BEER. Oh, you said subsidize - sorry.

 

Then OK, I'll subsidize the Beer - at least a round for anyone that makes it to the next AES.

[Lee Flier]

Yeah, what Alpha said. I know a lot of supposedly bright people who voted for Bush too (including my dad), but I still don't get it. Nobody has been able to explain exactly what Gore would do that would be any worse than what Bush would do, nor what they find at all viable about Bush and his ability to do the job. I agree with Alpha's opinion of Bush as a corporate run puppet who will probably repeal a lot of important environmental regulations and will certainly make no progress in the areas of environment, education or foreign policy. If anything he will set us back 20 years.

 

--Lee

[alphajerk]

not to mention human rights [and more importantly womens rights]

 

there isnt a single thing that is good about bush. nothing. so if you are so bright as people tell you, then tell me please was positive things bush can contribute? there is nothing.

 

and im certainly not saying gore is perfect [far from it] but certainly the better of the two evils.

 

bush will send us into a recession just like his daddy did. if he is appointed, im selling my stocks before the market crashes and paying off my house and preparing for the sheer and utter hell that WILL ensue during his tenure in office.

[alphajerk]

http://www.alphajerk.com/images/BeavisBushCheny.jpg

 

if the img tag doesnt work click here http://www.alphajerk.com/images/BeavisBushCheny.jpg

[Guest]

Now that is true art. Fantastic.

[Guest]

ALPHA....... yer the best JERK I've never met!! I'd love to met ya and buy a case of beers!! Hell 'PENFOLD'if that's what ya want!

 

Don't lose faith in us Morons. God... I think I love man!!!

 

Morigeau

[Guest]

The biggest issue that will face us in the next decade is -The Environment - and Gore and Nader are the only ones who care a shit about it - I'm with you on this one alpha for the above reason.

 

Also our economic forecasters are now talking about a soft or hard landing for the US economy.

Cheers

John http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/smile.gif

[alphajerk]

well with bush "elected" [i think there was major ballot fraud happening in florida], you can kiss the enviroment goodbye.

 

and you can be bright in your field yet still be a moron [my dad couldnt find his way out of a paper bag] but at least HE has a reason to vote republican thinking his taxes will be cut the greatest [part of that 1%].

 

i think the electorial college should be done away with relying on POPULAR vote with a standardized ballot for the entire nation. it should be clearly laid out with no "punches" immediately next to each other.

 

and the gall of the republicans to ask citizens to stand behind them if they are elected... I WILL NEVER SUPPORT BUSH. and i wish i could dedicate my life to doing everything i can to offset whatever nader does no matter how good a job he is doing [basically what he did to all of us].

 

i attached a letter sent to nader that expresses what he DID to america basically voiding any good work he accomplished in his life:

Dear Ralph Nader:

 

Yesterday you sent me(and many other environmentalists) a long letter defending your candidacy and attacking "the servile mentality" of those of us in the environmental community who are supporting Vice-President Gore.

 

I've worked alongside you as a colleague for thirty years. Neither the letter nor the tactics you are increasingly adopting in your candidacy are worthy of the Ralph Nader I knew.

 

The heart of your letter is the argument that "the threat to our planet articulated by Bush and his ilk" can now be dismissed. But you offer no evidence for this crucial assertion.

 

Based on the polls today Bush is an even bet to become the next President, with both a Republican Senate and a Republican House to accompany him. You have referred to the likely results of a Bush election as being a "cold shower" for the Democratic party. You have made clear that you will consider it a victory if the net result of your campaign is a Bush presidency. But what will your "cold shower" mean for real people and real places? What will it mean for tens of millions of asthmatic children when Bush applies to the nation the "voluntary" approach he's using in Texas to clean up the air. And what about his stated opposition to enforcing environmental standards against corporations?

 

What will it mean for Americans vulnerable to water pollution when Bush allows water quality standards to be degraded to meet the needs of paper mills and refineries as he has consistently done in Texas, most recently at Lake Sam Rayburn?

 

And what if he eliminates federal financial support for both drinking water and water pollution, as his budget calls for and his record in Texas (46th in spending on drinking water) suggests? What will it mean for communities of color and poverty located near toxic waste sites, when Bush applies his Texas approach of lower standards and lower polluter liability to toxic waste clean-up?

 

What will a Bush election mean to the Gwich'in people of the Arctic, when the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is turned over the oil companies and the calving grounds of the Porcupine Caribou herd on which they depend are destroyed and despoiled? What will it mean for the fishing families of the Pacific Northwest when Bush amends the Endangered Species Act to make extinction for the endangered salmon a legally acceptable option? If he refuses to remove the dams on the Snake River or reduce timber cutting levels to preserve salmon? What will it mean for millions of rural Americans whose livelihood, health and communities are being destroyed by unregulated factory feeding operations, if Bush weakens the Clean Water Act? When he appoints Supreme Court justices who complete the task of shutting down access to federal courts for citizens trying to enforce environmental laws?

 

What will it mean for the wildlife that depend upon our National Forests when Bush undoes the Clinton-Gore Administration reforms, reverses their roadless area protection policy, and restores the timber industry to the mastery of the forests and the Forest Service that it enjoyed under his father? If he doubles, or triples, the cut on those Forests? What will it mean for millions of people in Bangladesh and other low-lying countries when an American refusal to confront the problem of global warming unleashes the floods and typhoons of a rising ocean upon them? Your letter addresses none of these real consequences of a Bush victory. Nor has your campaign. Instead, you indulge yourself in the language of academic discourse when you claim: "Bush's "old school" allegiance to plunder and extermination as humanity's appropriate relationship to our world speaks a language effectively discounted by the great tradition of naturalists from John Muir to David Brower. Bush's blatant anti-environmentalism will lose corporate favor as it loses popular support. It is a language of politics fading rapidly, and without a future." Candidate Bush may well be speaking a fading language. So was candidate Reagan in 1980 when he ranted that trees caused air pollution. It is power, however, not language, that determines policy. President Bush would be vested with the powers of the government of the United States, and he is an even more devoted servant of environmental counter-revolution than Reagan ever was. Because your letter is couched in this language, so divorced from the real world consequences of your candidacy, and the real world choices that face Americans, it is difficult to respond to all of its selective misrepresentations and inaccuracies. A few samples, however, may show you why I am so disappointed in the turn your candidacy has taken: You claim that "Earth in the Balance" was "an advertisement for his calculated strategy and availability as an environmental poseur." Can you offer a single piece of evidence to support this quite astonishing statement?

You claim that the Clinton Administration stood up to the oil industry on the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge only because "focus groups have shown him he cannot give" it up.In fact, most polls show that the public is somewhat split on this issue, and there are certainly no focus groups I know of showing that it is a third-rail which no President can cross at his peril.

Can you cite your evidence? You lament that the Administration has "set aside lands not in National Parks, but rather in National Monuments...."

You are surely aware that a President cannot legally create national parks, which require an act or Congress; nor can you be under the misapprehension that this Congress with Don Young as the head of the House Resources Committee and Frank Murkowski as his counterpart in the Senate would have designated these areas as parks however long a battle Clinton and Gore might have fought. No, you simply took a cheap shot, and ignored the facts. You have also broken your word to your followers who signed the petitions that got you on the ballot in many states. You pledged you would not campaign as a spoiler and would avoid the swing states. Your recent campaign rhetoric and campaign schedule make it clear that you have broken this

pledge.

 

Your response: you are a political candidate, and a political candidate

wants to take every vote he can. Very well-you admit you are a candidate-admit that you are, like your opponents, a flawed one. Irresponsible as I find your strategy, I accept that you genuinely believe in it. Please accept that I, and the overwhelming majority of the environmental movement in this country, genuinely believe that your strategy is flawed, dangerous and reckless. Until you can answer how you will protect the people and places who will be put in harm's way, or destroyed, by a Bush presidency, you have no right to slander those who disagree with you as "servile."

You have called upon us to vote our hopes, not our fears. I find it easy to do so. My hope is that by electing the best environmental President

in American history, Al Gore, we can move forward. My fear is that you,

blinded by your anger at flaws of the Clinton-Gore Administration, may

be instrumental in electing the worst.

 

Sincerely yours,

Carl Pope

Executive Director

The Sierra Club

[good morning]

That 'Nader stole Gore votes' argument cracks me up. Seems few people are happy with either major party candidate. But at least Nader acted on his convictions -- which is a lot more than can be said of many Gore voters. Plus, I'll bet Nader voters can figure out a ballot and know who they voted for.

 

Gore always struck me as a "poseur," as Nader said. The man (Gore) has quite a penchant for claiming feats and passing opinion for knowledge.

 

Gee, I'm no recording engineer, but I've read a few books and I've got some opinions now. Maybe I should write a book.

 

What a joke -- er, maybe that's "art" then. I could get a grant...

 

alpha, I'm glad you don't like hatred (religion and nationalism both breed it, like you said in an earlier post). But why do you let it take you in? Hoping for Bush's early demise by getting elected in '00 is pretty damned hateful.

[alphajerk]

i have said i hate ignorance and that qualifies bush pretty easily.

 

gore is a politician. ALL politicians say what people want to hear. it is their nature.

 

and reinvention is the key to personal growth. somebody who isnt constantly reinventing themselves isnt growing as a person or learning. bush obviously hasnt learned much in his life sucking off his daddy's nipple.

 

nobody STILL has said one positive thing bush would do if elected. i wonder why people even voted for him. its like a bunch of mindless robots. ONE REASON! cant even give that.

[good morning]

For me there was only one compelling reason: a genuine slowing down of federal government expansion. This will happen on three fronts: Congress, fed. agencies, and the Supreme Court.

 

Will every decision be the wisest? No. But we're not in a utopia.

 

Federal law and regulation touch nearly everything. I think that contributes to apathy, inaction, and confusion among the electorate. It weakens our country, ironically. Who writes these laws and regs? A handful of people who are either (a) blindly re-elected almost without fail, or (b) completely unaccountable (the "faceless bureaucrat"). This clogs courts and makes our legal system a parody of justice. The Florida fiasco will grandly illustrate that in the coming weeks, with lawsuits filed under every imaginable pretext.

 

States rights (10th amendment, I think) have been reduced almost to a question, as in, "What have they got to do with anything?"

 

Reducing the number of feds is not a genuine reduction of expansionist centralized government, as Gore claims. In fact, it mucks things up when spending and programs remain. Look how funding the arts came into being and got so whacked? It's laughable, but I think arts funding falls under the commerce clause, of all things!

[alphajerk]

bush isnt planning on downsizing the government. in fact he is planning on spending even MORE money.

 

and deregulation.... better be careful what you wish for. might have to think twice before taking a sip of your water or even going outside.

 

as governor of texas, he runs a state that is the of the worst in the nation to live, send your children to school, and breathe in. now that is a track record.

[good morning]

I know Bush'll grow the gov., too. I expect there will be more restraint, that's all.

 

I like clean air and water as much as anyone. I also like an honest dialogue on issues. Gore panders more than I can stand and he peddles bad science because it sells. I expect more from a leader.

 

Correction on my ref. to arts funding. It's in Section 8 (where the commerce clause is).

[alphajerk]

well i like intelligent dialogue which bush will never be able to do.

 

and i certainly wouldnt call him honest by any stretch, just ask him about his rampant cocaine use. or his DWI, which he LIED about on his application for president. or how he already swindled taxpayers on his business fiascos. the list goes on and on.

[good morning]

Bush lies; Gore lies. What else is news. And SO WHAT about the drug use? Both were users. It's not an issue with me, and you support de-criminalization anyway.

 

Reinvention isn't just for Gore.

 

What distresses me about Gore is that he's silent about something he's proclaimed LOUDLY to care so much about: the environment. He got us into Kyoto goals based on selective science and shrill emotionalism. The Senate didn't ratify, but we need to move on in The Hague because the environment DOES need work. Where's Al? He's counting and recounting votes till he gets the result he wants.

 

Is there global warming? Yes. But how much humans contribute to it, and how much can humans affect it is not clear at all. Despite what is commonly written by the most poorly educated college grads in America (journalists), the best estimates remain a 1.5 degree C. increase. This, despite the effects of clouds, cow flatulence, termite emissions, you name it...

 

I know you are very intelligent -- your posts are some of the best. Take the time, read, and reach your own conclusions.

 

You worry about recession under Bush? I worry about depression under Gore, with UN-monitored limits on waste levels.

 

Ralph was right about him.

 

Trees like CO2. Why doesn't Al, and how can the EPA call it a poison gas? That's the approach to regulation I find scary.

 

Somewhere on this forum I think you said you smoke. How would you like to pay $20 for a pack of cigarettes? You'd buy them at the pharmacy with a prescription. THAT'S centralized control. FDA tried to regulate nicotine levels in cigarettes, calling it a drug under its jurisdiction.

 

You can thank corporate America for FDA's failed attempt. And you can continue to enjoy paying 1/10 that for a pack.

 

Anyway, I cast my vote and so did much of the country. Whatever happens, happens.

 

Maybe NOW states like Florida will trash their 19th century paper ballots and buy (at least) 20th century machines. And a constitutional amendment should come of this mess, too. It took an amendment about 100 years ago to elect Senators directly.

 

Progress happens, eventually.

 

Is this forum art?

[Guest]

c,mon alpha, you asked someone to say something positive about Bush, but all you say is anyone that voted for him is a moron. I haven't heard you say anything positive about Gore, except that everyone that voted for Bush is a moron. the claim has been made that your posts here are of an intelligent nature, but all I 've heard from you is the same bullshit that kept racism alive for so many years,if you don't think like me, or act like me, you're a moron.

I'm tired of Bill Clinton lying about everything he has done, and Al Gore lying about everything he hasn't done. I would rather have someone tell me to my face they are going to screw me, and not do it behind my back.

As far as the economics of Bush/Reagan, you must have only been a few steps from that scenerio anyway, because my life didn't change any.

It's time for change, and if you don't embrace it, you will get left even further behind.

JP

[alphajerk]

"He's counting and recounting votes till he gets the result he wants"

 

 

that is just a poor statement. there IS something very wrong and Jeb most likely had something to do with it. ballot boxes misplaced that had votes for Gore.... hmmmm. THAT sounds more like the countries the republickants are referring to with the aforementioned statement. looks to me like florida was rigged. finding ballot boxes at sheridan hotels in heavily a democratic county.

 

then as they slandered gore for possible legal action were the first to start in with a legal battle. just goes to show you that they certainly cant be trusted and are basically a bunch of hypocrites. they are just scared the truth will be discovered and that being fraud commited by the bush campaign.

 

there is nothing wrong with a recount and when using such an archaic voting system like the punch card, isnt it more important [especially in such a close race] that everybodys votes truely counts. if it were the other way around, i think they would be doing the exact same thing.

 

then they have the gall to bring up nixon being such a statesman against kennedy. well kennedy was eventually SHOT [most likely by the republickans] and nixon was eventually impeached. what a statesman he was...

 

hell in new mexico, a recount put bush up by 17 votes that gore initially won and nobody is saying anything about that. i dont have a problem with it even though it went for bush.

 

its bush's withholding the truth that bothers me about his drug use [not that he used cocaine] at least gore admits to smoking pot. bush lied on his application about the dwi. what makes you think you can trust him, especially when you dont even really know who is controlling him because believe me, he is simply a pawn, a puppet. he isnt capable of an original thought.

 

and yes, trees need CO2 which turn it back into O2 for us humans [of which CO2 is toxic to us] and bush would pass legislation to CUT THEM DOWN! as for global warming, its a little coincidental that temperatures started to rise as marijuana [one of the best air purifiers on the planet that grew wildly and rampantly on the earth] was eradicated.

 

and depression with gore in office? with what do you base that on? GWB was the last to pull our economy into a recession, clinton got us out of it. now his son [who is far more dumb than his dad, who also cant even run a business successfully] would be more likely to put us in a depression than gore. i just dont see your logic.... seems like fuzzy math.

 

so you still havent provided one good reason bush should be president or anything that qualifies him for the position. gore at least has intelligence.

 

 

and all right, you're not morons. i dont ever mean to come across as anything affiliated with a racist. but tell me something that would make me understand why on earth you would vote for bush [and dont give me that trusting thing because its just not true]

[Kris]

Maybe the reason that our economy has been so strong is because since there was a republican led house/senate, and a democratic white House, they weren't able to pass any sweeping changes and screw anything up. I hate this crap.

 

Did you know that democrats support partial birth abortions? Never new what the heck that was until yesterday... How about a normal birth happening, and after the head pops out, lets make an incision at the back of the neck and suck out the brain with a vacuum cleaner! Doesn't seem right...

 

Why can't people take care of themselves, why can't people avoid these situations... who would want a partial birth abortion? Why is this an issue???

 

Why should I support crack addicts on welfare?

 

What about in Australia when they took away all guns a few years back... It's now coming out that there has been a 61% increase in violent crimes there... and an honest man has no defense, or if he does, he's a criminal.

 

Why does the government have to protect the environment,,, why can't we all step up and do it ourselves... dumb question... people suck.

 

My dad has given a good chunk of his paycheck to Social Security for since 1965... When he retires he will get $1100 per month in return... That's not shit and not worth it!!!! What a crock!!!

 

 

Just a few random thoughts, and I voted for Gore, in Florida... Maybe I'm the moron.

Lets have a revote so I can change my mind!!!

[BP3]

Both Bush & Gore had better watch their step. They both have sworn to uphold the Constitution. Gore seems on a path to subvert it! Bush isn't far behind. And Daley http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/mad.gif, the fact that Gore has chose the son of the greatest practicioner of election fraud in my life as his point man, is chilling!

 

If the election is not resolved soon, our economy will tank, some of our jobs disappear, our schools end up in worse shape, and faith in any politican will be nill. Canada anyone?

 

[This message has been edited by TinderArts (edited 11-13-2000).]

[alphajerk]

actually, they [clinton even] have now passed regulations on the time alotted to welfare. personally, i think it should be done away with.

 

and i think they should just get rid of social security too. i dont really want to pay for it out of my checks. lets just get rid of it so we can invest it ourselves how we please.

 

and i dont really care about partial birth abortions. i have a new son [10 months old] and couldnt imagine aborting him but im also older and can handle the responsibility. i can think of many times previously in my life that it wasnt the case [thank god it turned out negative so nothing ever had to be done about it] i just dont have a problem with partial birth abortion mainly for the reason the eventual child never "existed" meaning it never took on experiences.

 

thats such an odd fact about austrailia... just goes to show illegalizing guns isnt the answer.

 

 

i dont know how gore is subverting the constitution however. subverting it would be NOT having a fair count.

 

our economy is based on US. if we get paranoid and stop spending money, then the economy tanks [which i would probably do if bush is elected] if we all keep spending, the economy will stay strong.

 

and faith in politicians is already NILL.

 

 

and BTW: i really agree with the libertarian platform over democrats and republicans anyday. it just happens that republicans are the most evil, at least democrats have some compassion.

 

 

i say we should all just have a tax strike! no more taxes, no more government. what do they really provide anyways?