Attention Surveillance Personnel!

There is absolutely no need for you to waste any time analyzing my reading habits, electronic correspondence or intercepting my snail mail. I can save you the trouble.

I am a subversive.

I voted for Kerry. I do not like your boss. He is not fit to govern the fleas on a dog. I attend Peace Rallies and detest Halliburton. Because I support the troops and the corporation does not. The Bush administration and the PNAC cronies are a bunch of greedy narcisstic bigots and I will do everything in my limited power to subvert their assault on the U.S. Constitution and the people it protects.

I read books on Islam and every other religion that exists on this planet alongside Christianity. I'm one of those dangerous Unitarian Universalists who think everyone has a right to their own spiritual beliefs. I'm pretty darned sure there are plenty of Muslims who aren't terrorists. Shocking thought I know, but there you have it. Right in the open. Pssst.... I've read the Koran. Not in the authentic Arabic so I guess it would be more accurate to say I've read a translation of the Koran. It's really not any more violent, sexist or oppressive than the library composed a few miles to the north. You know, the Bible.

I've even read books on Communism, Fascism, Socialism, Republicanism and a bunch of other isms. Guess what? Each system, whether economic or political has positive and negative attributes. Some weigh more heavily to one side than the other in my opinion. Personally I favor representative democracy so in the eyes of the U.S. CEO himself, I am particularly dangerous. Good heavens, I've even read the Declaration of Independence, the Federalist Papers and the U.S. Constitution. No wonder the government trembles in fear of me.

I criticize the government at least daily, if not more. But don't worry. I'm not criticizing the form of government...much. For the most part it's really just railing on particular personalities. Specifically the borderline disorders in office at present.

I hope I've saved you some time. Perhaps you can knock off early on Friday and get a head start on the holiday weekend knowing you can safely add my name to the list of threats to the current policies of the U.S. government. I correspond with other concerned Americans on-line. I write letters to my representatives and even call them from time to time. I've been published in the Op/Ed section of the newspaper. I vote (and am pounding the pavement for verified voting). Yep, I'm a threat alright.

Next!

come and get me!

Thank you.

:evilgrin:

aaaaah!

:P

Add me to the list too! But don't YOU dare try to frame me!

Until we ACTUALLY become a Neo-fascists Amerika... I think I can STILL find a lawyer who will defend me!!

Never in my lifetime have I seen such blatant disregard for OUR Constitution and YOU Lying LIARS who are trying to RE-Interpre-Hate it!! And hey, I actually campaigned for McGOVERN!!

SHAME ON YOU!!

P.S. GOD IS WATCHING ALL OF YOU!!

;) Sorry, couldn't resist.

asking too many questions that led me to say, when she asked for my first name...... and is my name going to georgie so he can spy on me.

something odd in the surveys the last week here in texas. the questions asked, the way asked, who they ask about. took 15, 20 minutes. granted i did a lot of ranting about the lying, corrupt, thieving bush and the others

I used to gladly answer questions, particularly in the campaign cycle, but now I think I'll politely decline. I always figured if they had my phone number they could make a reasonable guess at who answered the phone.

Good for you. What was her answer?

i would say, you and your company may bot be, but the people that hired you are, you can be sure of that. asked about every relevent office holder in texas, including our mayor, if i was favorable unfavorable, including bush. abortion, wall at texas border, school charter, gambling, lotto paying for education. much like lotto i would say, money promised never made it to school, was stolen by our politicians

at in of call, i am laughing and told her, bet this was a tough call for her. she laughed. many of my rants, she laughed that i would just give a favorable or not, and very polite. but it did feel at the end with the last questions as if a repug in state is hiring to no what to use against their opponent or something. a new dirty trick

My brother says the weather is pretty oppressive at Gitmo.

i told her, the extreme right wing and christian coalition in all their lyin cheatin stealin and corruption

she typed it in word for word, to make sure she got it right. was kinda fun

You and I are on the Naughty, not nice list for sure! :thumbsup:

Who is this survey for?
Is this a for-profit company or a not-for-profit organization?
Is there a website I can go to fill it out?
Why not?
Is there an address the company uses?
How do they get their mail?
What state are they in?
What state are you in?
Are you an employee of the company or a contractor?
How will the results of the survey be used?
Who am I speaking with?
What phone number can you be reached at?

etc.

We are absolutely not allowed to tell anyone who is commissioning the research for fear of biasing the responses. We don't even tell the people making the calls who are doing the survey for!

But all the rest are perfectly legit questions, and a legitimate survey research firm should be willing to provide the anwswers - they should be happy to give you their company's name, address, phone number, and the phone number they are calling from.

And they should tell you how the results will be used right in the introduction (to improve the product, to improve advertising, to determine awareness of brand names, candidate positions, etc). When we are briefing the interviewers about the study, we tell them that. Very often, though, the person calling you either wasn't told why the study is being done, or doesn't remember what they were told.

And FYI re contractors: All legitimate research is done by contractors. Companies NEVER do research themselves -- they can't be objective, and they're only going to "find out" what their boss wants them to find out. Political parties, companies, institutions - they should NOT be doing their own research.

In fact, in many cases, those calling you are contractors of contractors, that is, a company will commission a research company like mine to design the study, choose the appropriate population, and write the survey and then report on the results. Then we commission a survey research center to administer the study (make the calls). Everyone involved subscribes to certain ethics, for instance, we will never provide a respondent's name or number to the people who pay for the study unless the respondent allows us to (our company is so strict, we'll only reveal identities with the WRITTEN permission of the people responding to the survey!)

i asked her some of them, and couldnt get answers. only her company was impartial. but i do like your questions. i will work harder on that end, next time. i have already had two in a mere week

I could use the millions I'd make suing your asses for it.

Lol.

I even put together a whole syllabus of books and articles on communism... on a website frequented by nasty DC-area neocons.

hehheh

They went totally berzerk... attacked me viciously... touted Ayn Rand, Gertrude Himmelfarb, and Dana Goioa.

I will always highly recommend that everyone read Darkness at Noon by Arthur Koestler, Animal Farm by George Orwell, Crime and Punishment by Fyodor Doestoevsky, Monsignor Quixote by Graham Greene, and Under Western Eyes by Joseph Conrad.

I'm still not quite sure what to make of Koestler's place in the history of literature, which seems somewhat problematical and confused to me. Definitely, Darkness at Noon is one of the finest works of art of the last century, greatly conceived, brilliantly and tautly styled, and possessed of great profundity and depths artistically... a true cold bonfire of the profundities that have absorbed us as humans for the last century or two. Along with Graham Greene's great little work, _Monsignor Quixote_, and Joseph Conrad's _Under Western Eyes_, DaN forces us to see and come to grips with the great questions and paradoxes that extremes of fascism, totalitarianism, revolutionary thinking, and communism give us cause to confront.

I am also fond of pointing out the irony in the way that fascist or totalitarian countries have such a long history of firstrate art in every possible genre, whereas the USA.. a presumably free and democratic country.. has for the most part produced second and thirdrate art (with a few exceptions). I especially like pointing this out to neocons, to show them that the USA is the most oppressive and monstrous country in the history of the world, disguising itself as free and democratic. There were a few experiments with art colonies and communes, with some great thinking and art coming out of them, but how long did they last? They were essentially notable failures.

Russia, over the years, has been forced to live with the problems of Stalinist exterminations, forced atheism that of course never works, government controlled production and education, space race, nuclear arms race, cold war, and most paradoxically (at least to me), magnificently beautiful art, top rate in nearly every form. How can that be, I would ask myself... how can great art and artists flourish under such heavy and extreme oppression? I never had an answer, but I did notice ... and I have always appreciated the Russian dance, the tales, the novels, the icons, the sensitive depths and flairs.

Here's an interesting article on this conundrum:

The Atlantic Monthly | May 2001 Russia Is Finished : The unstoppable descent of a once great power into social catastrophe and strategic irrelevance - by Jeffrey Tayler

http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/2001/05/tayler-p1.htm


http://www.artsjournal.com/artswatch/Russianart.htm ART OF SURVIVAL Can Russia's rich tradition of art save it from it from ruin? By Jack Miles and Douglas McLennan

http://www.artsjournal.com/artswatch/Russianart.htm

The article begins by saying:

“Russia Is finished,” proclaims May’s cover story in The Atlantic Monthly. “Within a few decades,” Jeffrey Tayler writes, “Russia will concern the rest of the world no more than any Third World country with abundant resources, an impoverished people, and a corrupt government.” Russia’s population, currently 146 million, may drop below 100 million by mid-century, Tayler writes, comparing the erstwhile superpower to Zaire under Mobutu.

========

Here's a response from a conservative:

Art benefits from opposition, even oppression and injustice. For example, American music IS black music, and black music is a direct result of slavery. How else does one survive 16 hours a day pickin' cotton in the hot, Southern sun but to sing and sing well? The same goes for Western art in general. The Church, inadvertently, was the great spur to western art. Great art is usually a challenge to the status quo. For example, the "gothic" cathedrals were an affront to Roman "classical" sensiblity. "Gothic" was an insult not a name. The Northern Christians were always uneasy with Roman dominance, even in Popish France. Western literary art in general is the story, mostly a result and a response to the Reformation.

Art is created against something, not with it. Writers write against other writers, as painters and musicians compose their works agianst other painters and musicians. Art IS Agon. Speaking of Russia, great souls like Tolstoy are perhaps creating against God itself (or, in Tolstoy's case, Shakespeare, which may be the same thing).

The problem today for art is the very permissiveness of our culture. Opposition to anything is extremely weak and mostly passive. Art cannot do well in a permissive environment. Neither can artists, it should be said. Giving grants etc. to artists only encourages the weaker sort while turning off the stronger. We are mired in bad art because they are pampered with money and recognition and because there is no really dominating intellectual battlefield in our culture today. Animal Rights and the Gay agenda hardly qualify for vigorous intellectual debate. Perhaps the new "War on Terrorism" may spur art again (but I doubt it).
=======

And one from an angry, arrogant, egotistical neocon:

Art needs nothing except for a society to decide that what was once merely a piece of writing or a painting is now Art. That's all.

The only guarantee of oppression is that it is oppressive and destructive. Great works have been written by people of privilege (or under privilege of a patron) who lived in relative political and cultural serenity. Unmemorable dreck has been written by people in prison camps.

Art becomes Art by cirstances far too complex to be measured by a simple index of oppressivity. That's why "funding for the Arts" is as well a misnomer. Societies can't simply decide that they're going to buy another "Ulysses," another "Brandenburg Concerto." Civil unrest or war doesn't always create great Art. WW I saw the emergence of the "War Poet": Graves, Sassoon, Edmund Blunden, Wilfred Owen. But WW II, much larger and directly affecting many more people, resulted in only one true "War Poet," Keith Douglas, who died in 1944 and who really wasn't all that good anyway.

How does Art become Art? Through endless discussions like this one, actually. They're free and don't require taxpayer money. And, much like art, they're generally done under cirstances of relative calm, when societies can afford the time to gather together and decide what we're going to call Art today. And , like art, discussions about Art generally require that its participants know quite a bit about it.

-----------

I tended to agree more with the conservative than the neocon.

So, Dod, pResident *, NSA, whoever: surveil me. You might learn something. lol

ananda

Maybe we'll do our part in educating those doing the surveilling. :toast:

with his definition.

Let's start at the beginning: If art is created "against" something, why did cave people create images?

It is true that an art movement will sometimes foster a counter movement. That's called: being bored with doing it the same old way, let's be creative and try (in Pythonesque terms) something completely different. But in other cases a movement or art form springs from local and regional circumstances. (like oppression or freedom)

Creativity simply is. It's what you do with it and the form of the discipline that makes it art as opposed to science. Just ask Einstein. (well, if you could)

We are mired in bad art because art schools are teaching the equivalent of Intelligent Design (pun intended). Art schools used to offer formal training. Meaning you learned the elements and principals of design and then made an effort to successfully utilize them in your work.

But since the genius that was Picasso, people have the idea that making art is about cobbling together junk and slapping paint on a surface willy-nilly without attempting to develop the necessary formal framework of an underlying structure. We are currently in an era of Expressionism (or Romanticism) as opposed to Formalism, which is attempting to make a comeback.

To the Neo-Expressionists Creativity will explain itself, much like ID where the progenitor will be self-evident with a little thought.

What none of them seem to realize is that both science and art require a structure and a testable framework. Scientist test by repeating experiments with subtle variations in the tests. Artist test in a similar fashion, by "repeating" paintings with subtle variations in color or composition and then deciding which was the more successful outcome.

Bad art is not the result of societal permissiveness, but rather the result of the inability to think critically and the lack of technical skills by both the teacher and the student. Which becomes a vicious cycle as these students then go out and become teachers.

I agree with the last sentence that discussing art requires much more critical thinking than "I like it" or "I hate it". Much as discussing biology or astrophysics requires more than a passing acquaintance with the subject in order to garner anything of substance from a discussion about it.

We need to understand and discuss art because it helps us to think creatively and critically at the same time. That is why arts education in schools is vital. There isn't one other subject that utilizes and develops both sides of the brain/mind quite so successfully.


(Yes I have a degree in art. I'm a MFA...no not a MotherF*cking Asshole)

And I do not plan to stop.

Ya can't POSSIBLY get any more left-wing radical than that. :bounce:

Oh, by the way. *bush is a traitor. Somebody please arrest him...

Oh, English isn't my first language. One time, MoveOn sent me flowers. And, I think Al Sharpton is innocent of all the cr@p! you set him up with.

Same with Scott Ritter.

Same with Hans Blix.

Same with -- well, YOU know, Special Agent. :hi:

sushi-eating, volvo-driving, New York Times-reading, Hollywood-loving, left-wing freak show" from Vermont so you know my name should be on that list. In fact I think the whole state of Vermont is on the list.