The Thread of Democrats

[Forty Two]

If anyone can find a constitutional justification for using my tax dollars to fund "art" of any description then I'll gladly pony up the cash. Otherwise put down your crayons, get a real fucking job, and pay for your own shit.

Article I, Sec. 8, Clause 7 (promote science and the useful arts), comes pretty close - that and the necessary and proper clause might do the trick.

Key question is "useful arts." Though term "useful" has some grey in it. I would say that just giving grants to painters to paint or musicians to make music really isn't something that ought to be high on the government priority list.

[Scot Dutchy]

A dog with shit (I have not read it) has turned up. Good evening Vlad how is Moscow this evening?

[Forty Two]

Here is one. Freedom of speech.

If someone is having their speech fucked with, law enfoncement will have to be sent to correct it. That's going to have a cost.

I mean, what happens instead, is that every film starts with a notice that a federal agency will fuck you up if you don't comply, but that's probably not relevant.

Article 1, Sec. 8, Clause 8 - power to secure patents and copyrights.

[Forty Two]

Nah, I don't see the relevance. FoS only protects political speech, and only from government interference. It doesn't imply an artist deserves taxpayer support because people won't pay for his creative output. There's no government censorship of the arts, you can put as many crucifixes in beakers of urine you choose, but if nobody wants to pay for it them maybe you should be a plumber, at least that way you can make money off other people's piss and shit.

Indeed, under the be careful what one wishes for rule, if freedom of speech meant "government pays for your speech" then someone might eye up the second amendment and start asking similar questions.

[Forty Two]

Of course not, and that's settled law. But subsidizing artists isn't the same thing as guaranteeing free political speech, it's giving free money to some people, paid for by other people, the vast majority of whom don't give two shits about "art". What has art ever actually done for anyone? If the Mona Lisa wasn't painted nothing would be any different than it is now. It's not like the latest exhibition or opera performance fed any hungry people, supported a homeless shelter, or paid for chemo treatments, is it?

We could settle this by just pointing out that art is a net carbon emitter, and as an unnecessary industry (given that the world is going to end in 12 years, per Alexandrea Ocathio Corteth) it should be abolished anyway. If "we're" going to be serious about climate change, then all unnecessary activities should be banned, starting with straws, including picture frames, film reels, photography equipment, etc.

[Forty Two]

The $15 minimum wage was so 2018. In the current year, we know it's time for the $33 an hour minimum. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/04/nyre ... nough.html

[Forty Two]

She Guevara, Alexandrrrria Ocathio Corteth, says it's "not normal" to work for what you need. LOL. And, in the next breath, she say that laughing at her for that dumb-ass statement is just being against working for a better world -- a better world which we can achieve if "we just work at it."

Really? Who? Who's going to work for it? I thought you just said that it's not normal to have to work for what you need? So, who has to work for what society needs? Who has to work to make it a better world?

What she means is, she thinks it should be normal for "someone else" to work for what we need. She's just going to be there to see that it's legislated. Thanks, AOC! The new voice of the Democrat Party!

[Cunt]

She should do porn. THAT would make her stand out a bit. Most politicians are too conservative.

[Forty Two]

She should do porn. THAT would make her stand out a bit. Most politicians are too conservative.

I wouldn't kick her out of bed for eating crackers, but her personality is just so entitled and spoiled. It's hard enough dealing with the average woman. To deal with someone who thinks the world should be her boyfriend would be madding.

[laklak]

Indeed, under the be careful what one wishes for rule, if freedom of speech meant "government pays for your speech" then someone might eye up the second amendment and start asking similar questions.

I can get behind ObamaGunz. I've only got 5, that's not nearly enough. We should create Medigunz and Mediammo for all!

[Cunt]

Indeed, under the be careful what one wishes for rule, if freedom of speech meant "government pays for your speech" then someone might eye up the second amendment and start asking similar questions.

I can get behind ObamaGunz. I've only got 5, that's not nearly enough. We should create Medigunz and Mediammo for all!

I understand that under government buyback programs, you can bring them a bunch of scrap, get money for it, and buy fresh new arms.

[Forty Two]

We have a "right" to health care!

We have a "right" to food care!

We have a "right" to housing care!

We have a "right" to school care!

And, it's "not normal" to have to work for things you need! But "if we work hard, we can make the world a place where we don't have to work hard for things they need." It makes perfect sense.

[Tero]

Yeah but Hillary’s emails.

[L'Emmerdeur]

Right wing dopes love to shitcan context and jump up and down on the strawman they've built, shouting in outrage. To be fair, left wing dopes do the same all too often.

The tweet from AOC was specifically referring to health care, not a generic 'what you need.' Pretty much all developed countries other than the US have universal health care systems that provide care for their citizens--they aren't bankrupted, nor are their citizens. If one of those citizens loses their job, their entire family is still able to get health care regardless. But oh, no, the US can't do that because reasons. Ocasio-Cortez thinks differently. Fucking idiot socialist!!!1!

It is truly not okay that posts like these are the everyday reality in the United States, and that some consider the notion of changing it for the better as “controversial” or “divisive.”

Our “normal” is not normal. A better world is possible, and it will come if we work for it.

— Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) January 26, 2019

[rainbow]

No no. You need to love all government. Opposing some, and having a view as to the proper role of government is what right wingers do.

If you think some of the government is bad, then you're no different than the typical right of center conservative. You just like different parts of it.

FFS

Someone thinks some of the government is bad
Conservatives think some of the government is bad
Therefore anyone who thinks that anything is wrong with government is a right-wing nutjob.

You really do need to reread your book "Logic for Dummies"

You missed the sarcasm. I was parroting the structure of argument presented by leftists.

"Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery"

Some vicar said.