27
   

The new Democratic party. What will it look like?

 
 
McGentrix
 
  0  
Reply Wed 11 Jan, 2017 11:00 pm
@layman,
Quote:
(Congressman) Clay said at the press conference that the painting reflected the young artist’s “impression of law enforcement,” and repeated that some police have displayed “animalistic” behavior numerous times in his remarks to the media.

“I am not anti-police,” Clay said. “I have numerous family members who are part of law enforcement … the artist, has numerous family who are part of law enforcement.

“What I say is that most police officers are good eggs,” Clay said. “But when you think about how this young man formed – his impression of law enforcement.”

“Over the last five years – he’s 18 -- at the age of 13 he witnessed Trey Von Martin’s death at the hands of someone who was supposed to be an authority – George Zimmerman – whose behavior and actions were animalistic,” Clay said. “Fast forward two more years to Michael Brown in Ferguson – unarmed teenager killed by Darren Wilson.”

“Mr. Wilson’s behavior was animalistic,” Clay said. “He shot that kid numerous times.”

“And then you go and see video of Eric Garner in New York being choked by a police officer and killed on video,” Clay said. “That’s animalistic.”

“That’s his impression of this,” Clay said. “You see Tamir Rice being shot in seconds by a person in blue – animalistic behavior.”

“So that’s what I say about police officers,” Clay said. “They do this to teenagers …to young kids.”

“That’s how he formed his opinion about certain officers because of the animalistic behavior toward unarmed teenagers,” Clay said.


Also, the painting had been hung at it's location for months before any of this bru-ha-ha started.
layman
 
  -2  
Reply Wed 11 Jan, 2017 11:07 pm
@McGentrix,
McGentrix wrote:
“So that’s what I say about police officers,” Clay said. “They do this to teenagers …to young kids.”


Yeah, says it all, sure enough.

No need to even get into the many disputable aspects of the "facts" he mentions.

Notice that he turns the whole issue into what HE is saying, not the kid. He appears to assume, and take pride in, his role in influencing the way the kid thinks. That is apparently the viewpoint he want to perpetuate by hanging the painting.
layman
 
  -2  
Reply Wed 11 Jan, 2017 11:15 pm
@layman,
He wants to establish the proposition that "police officers" are "animalistic." The KKK wants to do the same, except with blacks.

I wonder how this black congressman would react if one of his colleagues posted a painting glorifying some "Grand Wizard" in a sheet addressing his adoring cohorts, eh?
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  0  
Reply Wed 11 Jan, 2017 11:31 pm
@layman,
layman wrote:

Notice that he turns the whole issue into what HE is saying, not the kid. He appears to assume, and take pride in, his role in influencing the way the kid thinks. That is apparently the viewpoint he want to perpetuate by hanging the painting.


He was the one giving a press conference, so yeah, it did kind of center around him and what he said.

His role in influencing the kid? He didn't know the painter and had no influence over it's choosing.

Whatever. You want to see the bad in this so that is all that you will see. If you can't bring yourself see any other point of view then I think we are done here.
layman
 
  -2  
Reply Wed 11 Jan, 2017 11:40 pm
@McGentrix,
McGentrix wrote:

If you can't bring yourself see any other point of view then I think we are done here.


I can "see" both of these viewpoints, Gent:

1. Black people are subhuman "apes" who are innate criminals and must be condemned.

2. Police officers are subhuman"pigs" who wantonly kill teenagers and must be condemned.

I just can't see why either view, however "legal" it may be to hold it, should be legitimitized by advocating it in the halls of congress.

Bigotry and hate-mongering do not, in my view, embody the kind of ideals we want to perpetuate, as a nation.

I asked this question before, but you didn't respond. Suppose this kid wants to "react" to his "outrage" by assassinating a police officer. Would we somehow be limiting his "right to react" by condemning his action?
0 Replies
 
layman
 
  -2  
Reply Thu 12 Jan, 2017 01:49 am
This is not a topic that I was particularly informed about, Gent, but I came across this contention, made by Hunter, the first congressman to take the painting down, which is presumably true:

Quote:
“It doesn’t belong in the U.S. Capitol. It’s that simple. It violates the rules of the art competition. You cannot have offensive things in the competition and this does."

He said the rules do not allow paintings with "sensationalistic" subjects or those that depict "contemporary political controversy."


http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/01/10/missouri-lawmaker-seeks-to-press-charges-against-rep-over-painting-removal.html

Perhaps you object to having any such rules, but those are apparently the rules, like it or not.

I think there are valid reasons for adopting such rules, myself.

Does that knowledge in any way alter your condemnation of removing the painting?
McGentrix
 
  0  
Reply Thu 12 Jan, 2017 07:31 am
@layman,
I already read that report and I continue to hold the line on freedom.

The only reason Hunter took it down was because someone from the Law Enforcement lobby told him about it. I bet he walked past it a hundred times and failed to even know of its existence.

2016 RULES AND REGULATIONS FOR STUDENTS AND TEACHERS
Quote:
Suitability Guidelines
As outlined in these guidelines, the final decision regarding the suitability of all artwork for the 2016 Congressional Art Competition exhibition in the Capitol will be made by a panel of qualified persons chaired by the Architect of the Capitol. While it is not the intent to censor any artwork, we do wish to avoid artwork that is potentially inappropriate for display in this highly travelled area leading to the Capitol.

Artwork must adhere to the policy of the House Office Building Commission. In accordance with this policy, exhibits depicting subjects of contemporary political controversy or a sensationalistic or gruesome nature are not allowed. It is necessary that all artwork be reviewed by the panel chaired by the Architect of the Capitol and any portion not in consonance with the Commission’s policy will be omitted from the exhibit. If an entrant is unsure about whether a piece of artwork is acceptable, he or she should contact the staff of his or her Member of Congress; the congressional staff can speak with personnel who can determine whether the artwork would be accepted


Notice what I have highlighted for your benefit. Yes, exhibits depicting subjects of contemporary political controversy or a sensationalistic or gruesome nature are not allowed. But, the painting has been reviewed and was not omitted so therefore it was found to not be either sensationalistic or of gruesome nature as those are not allowed.



Frugal1
 
  -3  
Reply Thu 12 Jan, 2017 07:34 am
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C0urRKDUcAAucJN.jpg
MontereyJack
 
  6  
Reply Thu 12 Jan, 2017 09:36 am
@Frugal1,
Make up **** much, frug?
0 Replies
 
layman
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 12 Jan, 2017 09:47 am
@McGentrix,
McGentrix wrote:


Suitability Guidelines
Artwork must adhere to the policy of the House Office Building Commission. In accordance with this policy, exhibits depicting subjects of contemporary political controversy or a sensationalistic or gruesome nature are not allowed.

Notice what I have highlighted for your benefit. Yes, exhibits depicting subjects of contemporary political controversy or a sensationalistic or gruesome nature are not allowed... But, the painting has been reviewed and was not omitted so therefore it was found to not be either sensationalistic or of gruesome nature as those are not allowed.


Well, Gent, your "so, therefore" doesn't really follow, if you're suggesting that such a "finding" is absolutely conclusive. That's about like saying that if a guy is convicted of murder in a trial court, he is conclusively guilty. We have "courts of appeal" in this country.

In this case, I would say the "court of appeal" is the people most directly affected, i.e., the police and the american public. The painting is "sensationalistic," "gruesome," and a subject of "contempory political controversy" by generally accepted standards of reason and common sense. The fact that this was overlooked by some panel need not be an irreversible judgment that stands for eternity.

More to the point, maybe, as far as what I'm asking you, is this: Do you agree that reasonable limits can/should be put on what kind of "art" is hung in the nation's capitol?

The stated intention says:

Quote:
While it is not the intent to censor any artwork, we do wish to avoid artwork that is potentially inappropriate for display in this highly travelled area leading to the Capitol.


It seems to be your position that anything and everything is "appropriate" so long as you call it art and/or that questions of "propriety" should never be asked.
0 Replies
 
Frugal1
 
  -4  
Reply Thu 12 Jan, 2017 10:20 am


Given the chance, the so-called new democrat party will make America sick again.
farmerman
 
  6  
Reply Thu 12 Jan, 2017 11:09 am
@Frugal1,
even though more people voted for Hillary thqn they did for the Dumpster.
Does he hqve ANY credibility???
He denies the lies hes said right on TV qnd ccuses the FBI/NSA/CIA of lying.

I think we have a Nascent Nero or Caligula on our hands. Lets hope the Republic can make it for four years of this d' Bag
Frugal1
 
  -4  
Reply Thu 12 Jan, 2017 11:14 am
@farmerman,
Trump has a mandate that was given to him by the American people, so to answer your question - yes he has a ton of credibility, more than 0bama ever had, or will ever have. This nation survived 8 long & dark years of rule by an individual that was raised to HATE America, so we can easily survive & thrive with an American president that knows nothing but love for America.
Finn dAbuzz
 
  3  
Reply Thu 12 Jan, 2017 12:51 pm
@McGentrix,
I'm not for censorship. I don't want to see the government sticking it's nose into the realm of art in any way.

Taking the photo out of the Capital isn't censorship.

Banning it from ever being shown anywhere would be censorship.

I agree that the deciding factor of "inoffensive" is open to wide interpretation, but that's fine. The Capital is not an art gallery. Let it stick to "art" depicting elected officials.

Someone would probably argue that a bust or portrait of Thomas Jefferson was "offensive" to them, but I think a line can easily be drawn against such nonsense.



0 Replies
 
giujohn
 
  -2  
Reply Thu 12 Jan, 2017 01:12 pm
“I am not anti-police,” Clay said. “I have numerous family members who are part of law enforcement … the artist, has numerous family who are part of law enforcement.”

(isnt that as offensive as saying, some of my best friends are black?)


“Over the last five years – he’s 18 -- at the age of 13 he witnessed Trey Von Martin’s death at the hands of someone who was supposed to be an authority – George Zimmerman

(George Zimmerman was an authority??)


– whose behavior and actions were animalistic,”

(So the young black thug on top of him pounding his head was a ******* choir boy?)


Clay said. “Fast forward two more years to Michael Brown in Ferguson – unarmed teenager killed by Darren Wilson.”

“Mr. Wilson’s behavior was animalistic,” Clay said. “He shot that kid numerous times.

(So the 6'4" 210lb black felon who was fighting the cop for his gun was really a ******* Nobel Peace prize recipient?)

Lacy is a ******* douschbag and an embarrassment to all blacks.
0 Replies
 
reasoning logic
 
  -3  
Reply Thu 12 Jan, 2017 05:37 pm
Should we blame Democrats for high cost of pharmaceuticals?



0 Replies
 
Builder
 
  -2  
Reply Fri 13 Jan, 2017 03:47 am
@Frugal1,
That guy is on the CIA payroll. The screaming muslim.

We had this guy in Australia dubbed the Thick Sheik. He's an agent as well.
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  5  
Reply Fri 13 Jan, 2017 06:18 am
@Frugal1,
Quote:
yes he has a ton of credibility, more than 0bama ever had, or will ever have. This nation survived 8 long & dark years of rule by an individual that was raised to HATE America, so we can easily survive & thrive with an American president that knows nothing but love for America.
A HA HA HA HA HA HAAA. PS, your hood is showing. I predict that history will be lot more objective bout Obama than your own opinion, (which I consider mostly as rqcist responses pre programmed into your KKK vestments)
You guys want to totally dismiss how he got this country turned around from the disaster yrs that defined the GWB regime.

Do you guys go through required brainwashing every few years or so?
It certinly seems so.

If it werent for Obama's resolve, this country would be like Venezuela.

Weve become qlmost energy indepoendent under thi guy.

If Trump can do even 1/3 of what Obama accomplished, Ill kiss your ass on Broadway{metaphorically speaking} (And from the Dumpster's lies, lies, lies, his outbursts and his ADD episodes, Im not betting the farm that hes gonna make his first year without total capitulation

Frugal1
 
  -3  
Reply Fri 13 Jan, 2017 07:42 am
https://scontent-atl3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/15940645_1825712684369307_2018858270444967095_n.jpg?oh=18151797a1325091c19f06c514290b8c&oe=59126CA3
McGentrix
 
  -2  
Reply Fri 13 Jan, 2017 10:10 am
@farmerman,
Yeah History will have a ball with Obama...

Quote:
The Obama administration has been marred by debt, scandals, foreign policy failures, and an overall fragmentation of this country. He has plunged the United States into an abyss of economic debt that will create generations of American servitude paying off his wayward spending endeavors. The Red, White and Blue’s epitaph will read like a litany of failures perpetrated on both the American people and the world by this president:

Scandals:
1. IRS targets Obama’s enemies
2. Benghazi
3. Spying on the AP
4. The ATF “Fast and Furious” scheme
5. Sebelius demands payment
6. The Pigford Agriculture Department Scandal
7. The General Services Administration Las Vegas Spending Spree.
8. Veterans Affairs in Disney World and neglecting vets
9. New Black Panthers Voter Intimidation
10. The hacking of Sharyl Attkisson’s computer
11. Obama’s LIES about the Affordable Care Act
12. “I’ll Pass My Own Laws”
13. NSA Spying on American People

Foreign Policy
1. Lack of solidarity with Israel
2. Disaster with the Arab Spring
3. Crimea
4. Leaving Iraq too soon and letting ISIS take over
5. Handling of Syrian Red Line
6. Calling ISIS “JV”
7. Failing to Recognize ISIS as a Radical (or Devout) Muslim Movement
8. Returning the bust of Churchill to the Brits
9. Lack of Confidence by NATO nations
10. Signing a Disastrous Nuclear Deal with the Mullahs of Iran
11. Paid $5 Billion & Released 5 Taliban Prisoners For Deserter Bergdahl
12. Waging war by attacking Libya without Congressional approval
13. Allowed the building of Chinese bases in the South China Sea and off the coast of Somalia at the entrance to the gulf of Aden
14. Paying ransom to Iranian for hostages- and using foreign currency in unmarked plane
15. Lying about paying ransom (which media ignored!)
16. Pays tribute to Japanese at Hiroshima on US Memorial Day
17. Obama trashed America 18 times on Asian Tour

Domestic Policy
1. Failure to secure the Border
2. Illegals bringing guns, drug and diseases through the southern border
3. Bowe Bergdahl swap
4. Passing on the keystone pipeline
5. 9 Trillion dollars more in debt
6. Vast expansion of government
7. Racial Division at all-time high
8. Inviting Bomb Boy Ahmed to White House
9. Disrespect for Cops
10. Failed economic stimulus plan
11. Constant disregard for the Constitution and tyrannical rule
12. China overtook America as world’s largest economy
13. Double Downgrade
14. Housing policies failed to stop foreclosures
15. Price of healthcare has drastically risen for those purchasing it
16. Education policies failed to curb college costs
17. Highest percentage of Americans on Food Stamps and Medicaid
18. Record 92,898,000 Americans over 16 years not working
19. Lowest Labor Force participation rate of 62.7%
20. Denying the notion of American Exceptionalism
21. Securing the Olympics for Chicago in 2016
22. Naming numerous Communists/Socialists/Progressives to Czar Positions
23. Mismanagement and cover up of Terrorist shootings in San Bernardino, California
24. Mismanagement of Gulf Oil Spill
25. Disastrous Vetting Process of “Immigrants” from Muslim Nations
26. Refusing to Listen to CIA/FBI that there is no way to properly vet certain immigrants from Muslim nations
27. Fort Hood Shooting
28. Colorado EPA Disaster
29. Veto of 911 Crime Bill- which was overturned
30. Worst economic recovery since the depression with anemic GDP numbers
31. Over 94 million Americans out of the workforce
32. Solyndra
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
Copyright © 2017 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 09/24/2017 at 04:22:50