Who Wouldn't Want These Jobs?!

Seriously.

We are a growing Marketing company that is looking to hire their 4th graphic designer. We are looking for someone that wants to gain experience and grow with the company. The job opening is for part-time or full time. We are willing to train, but you must have some experience with CS3 or higher. The position will consist of design work as well as some secretarial work. Must be an out going friendly person that is willing to get their foot in the door for $8-$10.00 an hour.

I totally wish I'd went to school for graphic design so I can earn what is essentially minimum wage. What I find odd is this is either in addition to three other graphic designers, or they have burned through three already. The English is ambiguous. Maybe I'm not being totally fair. They are willing to train.

Graphic designer for print shop. Must have experience with Indesign, Illustrator, Photoshop and Fireworks. Position also requires customer contact. Must have reliable transportation.

This one pays $15-$18 an hour, but it's in Fairfield, CT. That's like getting paid $15-$18 in Manhattan. Fairfield, CT is expensive. In fact, on Craigslist, it's under New York, despite being firmly planted in Connecticut.

LOOKING FOR A PHOTOGRAPHER LOOKING TO BUILD THEIR RESUMES AND PORTFOLIOS AND WHO ARE WILLING TO TAKE SHOTS OF MODELS AND MUSIC ARTIST FOR THEIR PORTFOLIO.PLEASE SERIOUS APPLICANTS ONLY  

You can tell they only want serious applicants because they used all caps.

Looking for a really great pair of legs and feet to model privately for me. Please be very clean, inshape and send a pic. No Sex or Drugs. Comp.

No compensation was listed. No gender is listed. I'm intrigued by the line "Please be very clean."  It makes sense though, (s)he wants to look at some legs and feet, not dirt.

Seeking an actor to play a homeless man for a very brief film shoot (30 minutes or less) to be part of a silent film segment for a music video. No experience necessary. Please reply with a photograph. If you have young children, they are welcome to join you - this is a kid-friendly project. Shooting will take place at a local park. Thank you for your time!

This casting call is for Waterbury. I'm sure they could find a real homeless person there (especially given their property taxes.) They'd get more realism that way and potentially help a person eat a meal.

On The "Rich" And The "Job Creators"

Personally, I've been dreaming of this moment for three years. I go to bed every night and I dream of another recession. - Alessio Rastani

To begin with, I'm in favor of taxes, and taxing wealth. I think people deserve to keep what they earn, but earnings are not the result of a windfall, they take time to mature into wealth. My views are unorthodox, but I'd tax exceptional incomes at exceptional rates. Nobody on earth is going to try to earn less money simply because it's taxed more--especially the people who love money the most.

Short term gains should be taxed at the highest rates. Long term investments should be taxed lower. Wages, actual, honest wages should be taxed at the lowest rate since they are the most "earned." I'd still tax income progressively, though, and my top tax bracket would not be $250,000.

A lot of the rhetoric in politics lately talks about the rich and the job creators. Frankly, this gets us nowhere. There's no unilateral definition for "rich." Even job creator as a class is ambiguous. Rich in Connecticut is different than rich in Florida. Rich in Greenwich, Connecticut is different than rich in Derby, Connecticut. Most people would agree that $10 million is rich, but some wouldn't. Some people find this whole conversation irrelevant, because their money is theirs. Period.

Job creator as a title is equally ambiguous. Anyone who has hired someone is a job creator. And referring to a class of people as a job creator doesn't do anything for the national conversation. Should we tax job creators? Absolutely. Should we encourage them to create jobs? Absolutely. Does offering tiny tax cuts to businesses do it? No, not really. But cutting their taxes entirely won't either.

The logic is that if the corporations and rich have more money, they will hire more. The Job Creator Fallacy. The problem with this logic is that corporations are hoarding trillions of dollars in loans from the treasury, and they aren't using it to hire people. They are sitting on it. They are buying their competitors with it. And they are buying patents with it. This actually gets rid of jobs with things like consolidation and excessive litigating. Congress recently passed a law to "reform" patents. This did nothing to solve the problem, though. Google shouldn't be spending $12.5 billion on patents, they should reinvest it, or create jobs. The same is true for every other tech company battling over patents.

The problem with this whole conversation is how polarized and politicized it has become, however. Liberals see the rich as a bunch of assholes hoarding the wealth of this country while taking a massive dump on the rest of Americans. Conservatives see the rich as benevolent job creators who want to reinvest their money in their companies and create jobs, if only their taxes were lower. If only America wasn't such a high-taxed, terrible place to house a corporation. Lower their tax burden, and the jobs will come.

Liberals would counter that this "race to the bottom" gains nothing. Sure, there are jobs then (maybe) but what kind of job? All jobs aren't created equally. There are good quality jobs and terrible quality jobs. And wages are only a very small part of the quality equation.

Conservatives would counter that liberals in favor of taxing the wealthy and spreading their wealth constitutes socialism, and socialists are very, very bad. Why should they have to give up what they earn to lazy, incompetent people who don't want to work, they'd argue. It's a valid point, but who says the poor don't want to work? Maybe no one will give them a job. It's one big circle jerk, where the poor man on the totem pole isn't getting his, but ends up with everyone else's "egg" on their face. And I'm not exactly referring to trickle down "economics."

I don't care where you are on the map of conservative or liberal views, but people like this deserve to be taxed. This person deserves to be taxed at the standard rate up until $75,000 (and I'm being very, very generous. Anything after that should be taxed at 100%.



Some gems in case you don't want to watch the whole five minutes or so:

The governments don't rule the world, Goldman Sachs rules the world.

The savings of millions of people are going to vanish" in less than a year

This economic crisis is like a cancer, if you just wait and wait thinking this will go away, just like a cancer it's going to grow and it's going to be too late

Personally, I've been dreaming of this moment for three years. I go to bed every night and I dream of another recession.

When the market crashes... if you know what to do, if you have the right plan set up, you can make a lot of money from this.

For most traders we don't really care about having a fixed economy, having a fixed situation, our job is to make money from it

Until next time.

Response: Why You Were Probably Expecting Too Much From Taylor Swift, Andrea Lampros

I read this article today entitled, "Parent Regrets: Why I Wish We Never Went to See Taylor Swift" and the arguments made in the article bother me. I'll go through the post little by little, but the author basically says the following: "Wah, wah, wah, I'm butthurt that Taylor Swift isn't the perfect symbol for feminists and her concerts are too flashy."

Good thing she didn't go to this concert; I imagine her son and husband would be scarred for life.

That said, here we go.

A note to moms: If you're thinking about taking your daughters to see Taylor Swift as their first concert, and maybe your first show since the Indigo Girls in 1996, please don't.

Here's your problem, Andrea. You haven't been to a concert in fifteen years. Things are different now. Concerts need to gross hundreds of millions of dollars now. Taylor Swift doesn't actually make money by selling millions of records (believe it or not). She makes money from endorsements and concert ticket sales. (Unless Tay Tay has a 360 deal, which is a possibility).

If you're thinking you'll see a sweet Southern singer/songwriter on stage with her guitar, a few pretty dresses, and simplistic but heartfelt lyrics, you won't.

If you want to see that, go to the House of Blues. You could probably see someone like Adele there. She's probably more up your alley, although not country or southern.

The overwhelming message of the Swift concert to the sea of girls ages 5 to 55: be pretty, be conventional, be quiet (well, it's OK to scream for me), and definitely put on some lipstick.

Bitch much? Considering anything I've ever seen of Taylor swift, she's hardly "conventional." She wears cute dresses instead of lingerie on stage. You ought to be happy you didn't bring your family to a Britney Spears concert where she dry humps the stage for ninety minutes.

When my 10-year-old daughter learned to belt out "A Place in this World" on her guitar a few months ago, I began to feel some affection for Swift. Country music up until the quasi-country, anti-Bush Dixie Chicks had never appealed to me, but Swift's commitment to writing her own songs and to making her own way in the music business was compelling. And she even maintained some dignity after being publicly berated by an obnoxious Kanye West.

Agreed. Taylor Swift is probably the closest I'd get to country music. She seems to handle herself with dignity and poise too, which is, well, unconventional. Plus she writes her songs, like you said.

On a recent trip to Washington, DC, my husband and I splurged on Swift tickets for ourselves and kids -- an 8-year-old boy and two girls, ages 10 and 12. We thought the young singer would be especially inspirational to our daughters who love her music and are avid musicians.

That's sweet of you. Taking your three children to a concert would be quite the outlay of cash for not just tickets, but food and souvenirs as well. And you suckered your husband into tagging along as well. You sneaky devil, you. However, I'm not sure that your reason of it "being inspirational" to your daughters was the best use of your money. But I'll give you a pass—you haven't been to a concert in fifteen years.

We joined the ebullient, predominantly female concertgoers in floral H&M jumpers and cowboy boots streaming into DC's Verizon Center. Many arrived holding their daughters' hands before the first two opening bands to stand in long lines for Swift t-shirts and merchandise and take photos next to the towering Swift cutouts in the lobby.

I hope people paying that much money for tickets at least saw the opening acts. Oftentimes, that's the best part of a concert. Also, those opening acts might have also served as an inspiration for your daughters. Or your son or even your husband for that matter.

The scene was sweet until you got to the CoverGirl stands (Swift is a CoverGirl) where girls of all ages sat on stools before stage mirrors to receive makeovers -- perhaps selecting the lip and eye colors that Taylor wears.

Cross promotion, baby. I'm sure that's in a contract somewhere. Maybe CoverGirl pays part of the concert expenses, or it's a part of her endorsement, either way, is this really important? Do you never wear makeup? If you do, why do you?

The message -- you're not really beautiful until you cake your tiny, pre-pubescent face with makeup -- wasn't the empowering one I had envisioned. (I later watched a five year old with ruby red lipstick pouting because the color had come off in her cotton candy. Welcome to the hardscrabble world, baby.)

This is actually complete, utter bullshit. What little girl doesn't like playing with makeup? For a child, makeup is a fun, tactile, experiment in dress up. This isn't even relegated to those without a Y chromosome; little boys enjoy make up too. This has nothing to do with empowering or belittling children. It doesn't tell them, "you're only as beautiful as the makeup you cake on your face." And if it does, you're probably not doing a very good job as their mother.

OK, I thought, that's advertising -- not Swift's fault? Actually the pre-tweens in makeup set the scene for the CoverGirl meets Disney extravaganza.

At least you seem to be giving Miss Swift the benefit of the doubt, here. Not sure what the latter half means, but I'm not to keen on the over-Disneyfication of our youth, either.

After her opening "Sparks Fly," that featured an inordinate amount of hair flipping, Swift stood on the stage for what felt like a long and awkward few minutes, taking in the screams of her girl fans, eyes wide open with feigned amazement. Glancing to the far reaches of the arena where fans paid upwards of $130 per ticket (the going rate on Craigslist), she gazed left. She gazed right. She beamed. She stood still and put her hands to her heart.

This is what she does. I've not been to a concert, but any performance I've seen, she does this. I think it's nice actually. She seems earnest in her appreciation of her fans. There aren't many concerts where the artist attempts to make a connection with the entire audience, as opposed to the front few rows. Complaining about ticket prices won't get you anywhere either. That's not something she controls; talk to LiveNation/Ticketmaster about that one. I could write entire blog posts about that, so don't get me started.

Throughout the concert, even the best songs -- "Speak Now" and "Fifteen" -- were convoluted by an elaborate stage show and a relentless multimedia set with projected live images of Swift inside a gigantic framed mirror. Hearts and words with curly-cue lettering flashed on the screens. (The most ironic image projected was of a girl's quaint bulletin board with a tacked up ticket stub for a concert that cost $10.)

I think next time you need to do a little more research, Andrea. You went to a concert at a venue that seats 20,000 and expected an intimate style show. At a place like the Verizon center where you are paying "upwards of $130" a ticket, that's not what you're going to get. You're going to get a show. There will be explosions, lights, lasers, projections, and —yes— even a little hair flipping. You can see concerts for $10, too, though I understand the irony.

Dancers swirled up and down a staircase in the middle of the set and around Swift like something out of Glee, but not as entertaining. The music and lyrics (which do speak to girls) were secondary to the sparkle and fireworks -- literally -- of the stage.

Glee is not entertaining. Glee is just a high production value karaoke run by a couple douchebags who whine anytime a band won't let them use their songs. The show is unoriginal, uninspiring, and boring. Not to mention it's just a vehicle to offload said karaoke onto iTunes. And yes there will be sparkles and fireworks at concerts now. Especially ones that take place in large venues such as the Verizon Center.

Fleshing out the princess theme, Swift even drifted just above the crowd in a floating balcony -- her eyes seemingly meeting the eyes of each concertgoer. My husband was sure she was singing just to him.

Not sure if this is a complaint or not, but perhaps you should have enjoyed the show rather than critiquing every.single.aspect of the show. I'm all for critiquing but you could have tried to enjoy the concert at least a little.

My 10-year-old girl stood rapt on her chair, taking in everything. Like most of the girls (except the 13 year old making out with her boyfriend in the row in front of me) she loudly sang along with each song.

Yeah, you're going to see people making out at concerts. Sometimes same-sex couples if that sort of thing bothers you, or if you wish to protect your children from it (though, I hope not). If kids making out bothers you, I advise you to avoid any festivals or any concert with a "lawn" section. You, your husband, and your children will be exposed to far worse. You'll thank me for it.

I didn't expect Taylor Swift to make any radical, edgy, feminist remarks, but I also didn't expect Gidget meets the Little Mermaid. What an incredible platform for Swift to say something as simple as "Girls rock!" or something even crazier like "Love yourselves!"

I'm sorry, but saying "Girls rock!" or "Love yourselves!" is as lame as Glee. Honestly, this is your job. Do you want to rely on pop stars to get your children to like and appreciate themselves? Sure, maybe it wouldn't hurt for children to receive positive messages from many sources, but—really?— "Girls Rock?" I think I saw that on a backpack. And a t-shirt. And a Trapper Keeper. It was lame every single time.

Instead, she finished each song by looking wide-eyed into the crowd and noting how "amazing" it was that so many peopled came to the show and how "beautiful" everyone looked (incredible how she could see people with all those lights in her eyes).

Are you kidding me? You want her to say "Love yourselves" but telling the crowd how beautiful they look is too chock-full-o-bullshit to you? Maybe she couldn't see the crowd; maybe she could. I have no way of knowing, but complaining that she said you're all beautiful makes you look like you're just trying to find something to complain about. And if people came to see me perform night after night, I'd still find it amazing. I'd find it amazing that anyone would spend that kind of money just to see me, no matter how talented or famous I was. To spend that kind of money is amazing and she understands that. Don't you find it amazing that 20,000 people wanted to watch her sing? Consider most of the spectators were probably so far away that they needed to look at the Jumbotron just to see her.

But people aren't paying money to see her, or even watch her perform. People are paying that money for the experience. Good and bad. Parking at a venue like that? Terrible and practically robbery. Who wants to pay that much for a ticket to a show anyway, much less for five tickets? Souvenirs are crappy and overpriced and the food is equally terrible and expensive. But this is what concerts are. This is the, dare I say, charm of a big concert. This is also why some people prefer small venues. Good luck seeing U2 at one of those, though.

Maybe my family got the vacuous experience we deserved. That would be true if it were just a benignly bad concert experience. The problem is that it was an insidious concert experience that emphasized everything but the artist's voice -- the flowing fairy dresses and saccharine monologues covering up Swift's real power. Covering up girl power.

How was the concert insidious? In what way were you or your family harmed? Maybe this was in the bad part of DC? You went to a venue that seats 20,000 what did you expect if not a flashy, explosion-filled performance. Oh right. You expected girl power.

Don't you think that maybe, just maybe this could still inspire your daughter? Maybe she will look at this and realize that women can play music or create art that tens of thousands of people would be more than happy to converge and experience together. That girls can do whatever they want. They can be wildly successful and play giant arenas like U2 or play small hole-in-the-wall pubs for 100 people. That one can be equally successful playing both places is a lesson you could teach your daughters.

The best moments were rare authentic ones with Swift's top lip a wee bit sweaty, hair oh-so-slightly disheveled, strumming "Mean" on a banjo and later "Fearless" on a ukulele. That's what we had come to see, but it was fleeting.

 That's your token mellow song most every large concert has. Sets like these allow the performer to catch their breath in addition to making a more "direct" appeal to the crowd. This is what you wanted the entire concert to be. This is not how large, high-production concerts are produced. Most people would not be happy paying $135-$500 for this type of concert—especially given that most concertgoers could barely see her on stage with just her banjo.

This isn't her fault, nor is it yours. She puts on a certain concert and you were expecting something different. Should you have maybe done a little research? Yeah, probably. Were your expectations for a super positive, "you go, girl" type experience a little out of reach? Yeah, probably. Not because you were unreasonable, though, mostly just because that's not what the other 19,995 people there wanted to hear. The girl positive messages are in her lyrics and (probably) in interviews she gives.

As the house lights came on, my older daughter, age 12 and a half, gave me a deflated, knowing look. My younger daughter was tired but managed to quietly gush: "I loved it." My son loved his glow stick.

 It sounds like your older children know your expectations, and knew you were disappointed. I don't know if this is good or bad. On one hand, you've gotten your beliefs across, which is good. But on the other hand, they probably wished they could revel in the joy that they just saw a sweet concert with their mom instead of having to worry about your disappointment in the show. In all, you wanted to take your daughter to see a concert, to feel inspired and have fun. Did you do that? Did your children enjoy themselves? That's all that should matter.

I hope more discerning parents than us might think twice about Swift tickets. Better to have to explain the explicit sexuality of someone like Gaga and her "Born this Way" message than to have to undo the message of female powerlessness -- especially from an artist who is so fervently emulated by girls. If you have tickets already, perhaps you can prep your music lover. It's sort of like a game of I Spy: look hard and look deeply for Swift's voice. It's there, just buried in the fluff.

Speak Now tour? More like Speak softly and smile a lot.

I don't normally think of Lady GaGa as "explicitly sexual." Sure her style is a bit avant garde but I don't usually see her shoving dildos in her vagina. I think she just has fun with fashion and has a certain aesthetic she likes (Think: Alexander McQueen). I'd say pop stars like Rhianna or Britney are more sexual than GaGa.

As for "her 'Born This Way' message," what are you talking about? I really hope you're not saying this is a message you'd rather they not know or have to "explain" away. Considering all the complaints you made  about wanting your children exposed to more powerful, positive messages "Born This Way" should be the Holy Grail of positive messages for them to hear.

There's nothing wrong with loving who you are"
She said, "'Cause he made you perfect, babe"

"So hold your head up girl and you'll go far,
Listen to me when I say"

I'm beautiful in my way
'Cause God makes no mistakes
I'm on the right track, baby
I was born this way

Don't hide yourself in regret
Just love yourself and you're set
I'm on the right track, baby
I was born this way

I can think of no more empowering a message than accepting who you are and embracing yourself—realizing that you are beautiful the way you were made. For all her quirks and fancy, Lady Gaga really is a good role model for a child. But so is Taylor Swift. If you are going to let a concert spoil her message, you might not be winning at that little game called Life.

Specifics On My Free And Open Arts Studio

Earlier today, Krissy asked me about my post from a week ago regarding an open arts studio. Her question was simple, but perplexed me nonetheless. She asked, (I'm paraphrasing) "So what do you want to do? Is this hypothetical or something you want to do?" I was taken aback because anytime she mentions reading my blog, I blush, but also because I though, "well, isn't it obvious?" But maybe it isn't. I assured her that I want to do it for reals, maybe not so seriously considering she walked in on me in my "Hipster week" look, which makes me look ridiculous.

In a future post, I'll write about fundraising ideas and other details, but this post will be more about general classes. Obviously this is merely some quick brainstorming so this will by no means be complete or final. So there's that.

I will attempt to do this in something resembling a coherent and organized manner.

There are probably an infinite manner of mediums for art. Really if something exists, you can create something with it, or on it. This is really quite fascinating that, in essence, arts is made with anything and everything. There are always barriers to entry for anything, but with art, the barrier can often be quite simple to overcome.

Golf can be fun, but if you're no good at it, the people you're playing with might not tolerate your having fun at shooting a fifteen on every hole. Then there's the cost of clubs and greens fees. Baseball, too, isn't much fun when you never, ever hit the ball. True story, in my career in little kids baseball I got two hits. Both in the same game. I'm also fairly certain it's the only two times I swung the bat. Suffice to say, I was very deliberate in everything I did whilst playing baseball.

But art can be made on cardboard or the blacktop using rocks or chalk. Art can last forever (at least, centuries) or be disposable. Art can be physically, mentally, and emotionally draining or shallow. Art can be fancy pants or accessible. In reality, everything that surrounds us is art. Sometimes art is random other times it is calculated. Art does not discriminate (though, the art world can be very discriminating); a blind person can create.

That said, I'm going to try and break down various ideas into more general sections or categories.

Textiles

The first such category of classes will be textiles. Textiles surround us everywhere, and one can improvise with them pretty easily.

Stuffies

My first idea is stuffies. Who doesn't love stuffed animals? Who doesn't have someone in their life who would appreciate stuffed animals? Stuffed animals can be created in numerous ways, in varying complexities, for people of any age. Yes, I don't believe stuffed animals are solely for children. I have at least three of them within five feet of me.

Stuffies can be made very simply in a few minutes by sewing some felt together, or planned out over months leaving you with a whale that takes up an entire room. You can make them out of felt or fabric. You can knit or crochet them. You can make literally anything out of anything resembling a fabric. In fact, I bet you could make them out of other items, but I'm not sure how most people would feel about a cardboard stuffy.



Knitting & Crochet

Being in Woodbury and near Southbury, which are probably the undisputed champions of the world in elderly per capita, crocheting and knitting seem like obvious areas for classes. I especially like that young people are taking these crafts that are traditionally seen as very elderly and injecting them with a youthfulness that might not exist without a marketplace like Etsy.

Knitting and crochet are also limited only by one's imagination. You can knit or crochet almost anything. Want a blanket? How about an Ottoman? Stuffies? Yup, they too can be made with yarn. A fun offshoot of knitting and crocheting would be the process in creating yarn. I know there are quite a few yarn makers nearby to partner with. Any time I've met one, they loved talking about their animals and the yarn they make from their furs.

Basketry

I don't know anything about basketry, but I think it's intriguing. I saw a guy in Hawaii making them out of, I think, palm fronds. This guy clearly just sat there all day making hats and baskets to make a living.

Weaving

This, too, I know nothing about. Weaving is one of those things that seems exceptionally simple, but I imagine is far more complex. You can create some beautiful things with weaving though. I imagine that weaving is a very practical craft as well. You can make rugs, for example. Rugs are expensive. Making your own rugs and rugs for others seems a whole lot better than heading to Target and buying one of their generic rugs. You could make your own instead of blowing a few hundred bucks at Anthropologie, too. But like I said, I don't know anything about weaving.

Making Clothes

Maybe "Seamstressing" (is that a word?) would be a better title? Either way, making clothes intrigues me. I know Krissy would do it if she could sew. I always appreciate when people wear clothes that they make themselves. Of course, I think Jemma is the only person I've been able to say this about, since she made the dress she wore to mine and Krissy's wedding. I think this could be fun, though.

Sewing

I think sewing is an extension of the previous section. Or maybe the previous section is really more of a subsection of sewing. Either way, there's promise in teaching sewing. Everybody should have a very basic working knowledge of sewing (Think: refastening buttons, etc). Then there is hand sewing, which when done right adds an entirely different look to products/items. Sewing machines can do all kinds of fancy shmancy things, too.

Needlepoint

I don't personally care much for needlepoint. It's neat in it's own way, I just don't think it's my style. Maybe this is because most needlepoint is the ballet dancer or wolf crap you see at craft stores. Also, my grandma does it, so there's that. But as far as I understand it, needlepoint is basically pixel art with yarn. In that respect, I feel like I could like pixel art, so long as the endproduct wasn't so...cliche.

Quilting

I think more people should quilt. The irony, of course, is that I've never made a quilt, but I know I will. Think of all the fun family projects that could be made and turned into a quilt. If Krissy and I had children, I'm pretty sure we'd be saving little bits and bobs of art here and there for quilting. I'm a big fan of taking artwork, especially that of children, and turning it into something more display-worthy. Quilts seem like a perfect extension of that ideal.

Printmaking

Block Prints

Linoleum, wood, metal cuts. There's a certain magic in making a block print; cutting or carving them takes a bit of time, but it's very relaxing. Sometimes carving them can be a bit confusing if you're unfamiliar with positive and negative space, or working in reverse, but the worst that can happen is going to be a flaw that adds to the final print anyway.

Screen Printing

If I had the space and money, I'd have a screen printing machine. I'd crank out stuff like you couldn't believe. But that's not exactly why you're here. Screen printing is beautiful because it's automated to a point, but still very "hand made" in a sense. Each color is applied by hand, one at a time creating generally simple (in color) prints. You can print on probably anything, but for many people paper and fabric would be clear winners. I think screen printing would be a great way to raise funds for supplies, salaries, and equipment, too. I'd really like to have a class where parents take their children's drawings and turn them into t-shirts, ideally t-shirts manufactured in the USA.

Engraving & Etching

I don't know tons about these two, but I'm especially intrigues by etchings. I imagine engravings being involved and difficult to make, whereas I bet there are many ways to create etchings—even with common household items. I'm partial to ideas that people will be able to recreate at their home without needing all manner of specialized equipment. I'd really like to offer classes centering around lithographs and stencils, too. Other options include mezzotint, aquatint, drypoint, and photo-lithography.

Photography

Camera: Basics & Intermediate

Classes focusing on how to use camera and their many, many peripheral devices. What various functions are for and what everything on your camera and in the menus means. May also teach photography basics such as composition, understanding expose, when to listen to your camera and, more importantly, when not to.

Portraiture

Classes focusing on photographing living beings—namely people and animals. Certainly classes centering on photographing children, and allowing children to photograph will be offered too. Discuss various styles of portraiture from classic posed portraits to a more documentary style. Classes on using natural light and studio light would also be a given, which leads me to...

Lighting

Light is amazing and integral to all photographs. Classes on this topic would discuss how to understand and work with light in a natural, intuitive way. Topics would cover how to use the light to your advantage in any situation and also how to use strobes when you're looking for something different.

Landscapes

Landscape classes would be no fun inside, so these classes would head out into the natural beauty of Connecticut for some sweet hands-on training. I can think of plenty of places both near and far that a landscape shooter would love. Could be interesting to organize trips to places that are, ahem, a bit more exotic, too.

Darkroom & Film

Want to develop your own black and white film with household materials? Want to know how to set up your own darkroom in your home? Do you want to make prints from your negatives, or scan them into your computer for touch ups and printing? Really anything pertaining to film could be covered here.

Book Arts

Bookbinding: Beginner Through Advanced

I love making books! Making books by hand takes some time, but is really very relaxing. There are many types of bindings and ways to create books and all will be covered here. Hardcover, softcover, perfect binding, stab bindings, and longstitch are just the beginning. Book repair and conservation could also be covered under this section.

Altered Books

Classes here would focus of using books to create new pieces of art through, you guessed it, alteration. While I'm a bit undecided on whether I like seeing books destroyed, I have to admit that the end result can be pretty unique. In a good way. Altered books can take a flat, almost two dimensional object and turn that into something very sculptural and dynamic. Where bookbinding is the physical act of creating a book, altered books are those books turned into something new. Art books could probably fall under the purview of altered books as well.

Making and Using Book Cloth

Book cloth is great for keeping your finished book together since it resists tears far better than paper, but you're often limited to solid colors at your local store. This class would show various ways to turn any fabric into book cloth and various ways to use said bookcloth.

How To Make Books Out Of Anything

Books really can be made out of anything. My first was made out of a USPS mailing box and some dried acrylic paint. I think this class would be more child-friendly since the class is inherently more down to earth and less erudite. I have some craft foamy stuff in a drawer that would make an excellent children's book cover.

Making Boxes

Making boxes is sort of an extension of making hardcover books. Both use the same materials, just in slightly different ways. Making your own boxes, say for jewelry, photos, or books is far easier than you'd think. What are the odds you'll find a box the exact size you'll need anyway? Make it yourself and you can be certain it's perfect. Boxes are a great way to present books, gifts, or portfolios, too.

In Conclusion...

Well, I think that's a good start. Obviously this is just a very general outline of avenues worth exploring. Not knowing most of these arts and crafts myself, I'd need to get in touch with an awful lot of people who share in the same idea I have of a wonderful, free, and open art studio and would be willing to teach to their respective expertise. I know that I've left out plenty of worthy arts and crafts (painting; drawing) worth teaching too, so this list will be pretty heavily amended over time; but like I said, it's a start.

More to come!

A Grand Plan

I don't know about most people, but I always have ideas popping into my head. Most of them are what I'd consider insignificant in terms of their scope. Over the last couple years, Krissy and I have bantered about on varying ideas like selling pictures, crafting things, and so on, while others have suggested we do other things--namely open a bakery or go into construction.

Most of my ideas are not very organized. Krissy would probably disagree, thinking I can come up with a pretty organized plan off the bat, but my idea of organized and hers can be a bit different at times (which is great).

I think that there's a lack of accessible, free and open education; namely in the arts. College really shouldn't bankrupt people, and it hardly guarantees employment. Arts degrees, I suspect, are becoming even less worthwhile since it seems like funding for the arts is always getting cut.

I don't know what it's like now, but I really never took an art class. There were the normal arts and crafts type things in elementary school, but nothing that really encouraged a desire for the arts. I seem to recall cutting construction paper into circles and making a chain out of it. Now that's inspiring! Middle school actually got worse, if you can believe it. In Middle School we had this bizarre system where every single "elective" shared a period. This essentially meant that you spent two weeks in each class: Phys Ed., Health, Library, Art, Wood Shop, Computers, Spanish, French (and more that I'm sure I'm forgetting). This is a terrible "solution" for a mountain of reasons, but that's my exposure to art class as I remember it. My high school, as awesome as it is, did not require art classes and, having never been given the chance to want to like art, I skipped it.

Which takes me to now, where I have a vested interest in art and in a most bizarre turn of events: education. I'm not going to go into detail, but growing up I really did not like school. I think I prefer a more hands-on, learn at your own pace type of environment, rather than the standard approach that treats everyone the same and teaches, primarily, to standardized tests. Creativity is often a casualty in these methods.

Please excuse my rather rapid and poor graphic:

Perhaps I should explain. I'll try to do that in a reasonably coherent way, but I make no promises. My brain tends to go off on tangents.

Some Basics And Background

I've long been a proponent of free stuff. I understand the basic tenets of capitalism and respect the great wealth it has infused into this country. But I can't help but think that that's a bit selfish. Should Exxon-Mobil be rolling in the dough while your average Saudi is dirt poor. Or while Somalia is stricken with the most atrocious bouts of poverty and malnourishment-- far worse than I could possibly begin to fathom.

Or how musicians make little money while the organizations that purport to represent them are filthy filthy rich.
But that's not what this is about. What I want is an unrestricted. accessible place where people can (and will) come together. Not merely in the physical sense either, I want people to come together emotionally and intellectually because I believe that's the backbone of art. And I want this space to invite and encourage anyone to teach, and teach often.

Much has been written that information wants to be free; this is an old debate. but whether or not information wants to be free doesn't matter, it deserves to be free. Modern Science or mathematics would not exist if this basic idea didn't hold true.

The Basics

Don't mind the sentence fragments, this is a pseudo list.

I want to create a community-driven, free, and open space for arts education. I would certainly be open to other types of education as well, but the emphasis would focus on the arts, both arcane and modern.

Small classes, because no thirty people learn the same way, and no instructor ought to be stretched that thin.
I want to create a focus on children, but without alienating adults. I'd like to see children and parents working together. But there'd also be plenty of programs for adults. too.

Really fun informal events like open dance studio where kids and adults can dance together to some sweet jams. Well, the little tykes will probably dance while the parents watch from the perimeter waiting for some other brave adult to make the first move.

Something A Wee Bit Different

I'd like to have a user-friendly and intuitive website that makes all the information and lessons available to anyone, for any use.

I'd really like to encourage the premise of the open exchange of ideas. I feel that by giving away the information and allowing others to see and use it, that they can also improve upon it. This is a good thing. Not everyone is the best teacher in the world (it's statistically impossible) but the simple desire to teach should be celebrated. By teaching in a cooperative community-driven way, any idea can turn into something much bigger.

In a more technical sense, everything released by the "school" would be under a Creative Commons license. Specifically a non-commercial Share-Alike license. It might sound like gobbledygook, but this is the general idea:
We release something (a lesson plan, artwork, a template, et cetera). Someone can take that and share it with whomever they like. But, they cannot do so commercially. They are also free to create a derivative work. But this derivative must also be shared under the same license, ad infinitum. This kind of piracy is encouraged.

Crazy Talk

I'm not going to actually put a price on any of this. Art classes are typically expensive. Between tuition and course supply fees, art classes have a certain barrier to entry that most might find intimidating.

Instead, I'd institute a pay what you can model. I don't want someone to choose between art classes for their child or dinner. No one should ever have to make such a choice. (More on this in a future post.)

I understand there are a lot of kinks to work out, and that creating a non-profit is incredibly complex and that this hardly scratches the surface of what would need to be done, but this is just one post, and I think blogs with lots of words and few pictures can be, well, a bit wordy.

How do I hope to achieve this craziness and what are some more details? We'll just have to wait and see.
More to come...

What Is Art To You?

Everyone has their own version of Art.

Some people believe Picasso to be a genius, others find their children can draw just as well as he.

He did say it took him his whole life to draw like a child, after all.

But what is art to you? Personally?

Is art visceral or intellectual? Certainly it can be both.

Is art tactile or abstract? Again, it is certainly both.

Art is constantly evolving and yet staying the same.

My views on art have varied wildly over the last couple years, starting with being essentially nonexistent. Two years ago, to me, art merely existed. I didn't understand it because I never thought to try. Art was an enigma because I kept it in the dark. I think everybody does this, to some extent, saying to themselves that they just don't get art. But what's their to get?

Sure, when an artist creates something, they may have a very specific idea of what that art means and what they want you to feel. But what if you look at that art and see something different.

Take The Swing, for example.

There's a few things going on, but most people would not likely draw the same conclusion. Nor would I expect them to feel the same way about this painting. In the middle you have a lady swinging. She stands out, wearing pink, from the otherwise dismal colored painting. How does this make you feel? Look at the man pulling her from the back; he is smiling. Why? Should he be? Who is he? What about the man in front of he in the bushes. She is clearly looking at him and her cheeks are flushed. And she's kicking up her leg (losing her shoe) to let the man below her look up her dress. Considering all the clothing she's wearing, this is probably a very naughty thing to do during a time when, I imagine, modesty is best. Also, consider that they are, essentially, in public. Now how does this painting make you feel?

At first, this painting feels kind of happy. Sure, the painting is mostly dark, but the light casting through the shadows onto the woman adds a certain brightness to the painting; almost like there is something to look forward to.

But really this painting is a giant fuck you.

The painting was commissioned by a man for his mistress. He's the one on the ground up front; she's the one on the swing. Her husband is in the shadows (literally and figuratively) unaware of this affair. Is he pulling her back or Is he pushing her into it?

Art has a way of taking what you think you know and flipping it upside-down.

Now That That's Out Of The Way...

Now my personal journey through art hasn't focused so much on the minutiae of looking at and understanding art. My journey, short as it may be, has focused more on the process. I've long been intrigued by process more than meaning with art.

In particular, I've become more interested in more traditional, process-oriented arts. I feel like the process of creating and binding a book by hand is more rewarding than drawing a picture. That is not to say that drawing isn't rewarding, I just find that personally, for me, the tactility of an art encourages me to continue it.

I'm really intrigued by letterpress right now. I want to learn it. The process from beginning to end blows my mind. Letterpress seems like the perfect blend of old-school art form and new digital technology culminating in an amazing product that itself, too, is tactile.



I think that's all for now.

The Future Calls...

Everyone has dreams, right? Sadly, I think most of us never realize them.

I think I know what I'd like to do with myself, and with my life.

Unfortunately, it will take a lot of money. Actually, this may be one case where an alot of money will come in handy, only I am unsure of how to snare the elusive beast. His or her ever-replenishing coat of Jacksons or Benjamins could certainly come in handy.

Of course there are things like Kickstarter but I think that would be better put to use later in this dream.

I have a place in mind for this fantasy to take place in too.

I even have ideas of some people to involve in it, maybe some people I know would like to be involved in it. I'm not much of a networker though.

I suppose I could qualify for grants, but I don't know the beginning of that sort of thing. I see people hiring grantwriters from time to time--that must be what they are for.

I'm pretty sure I wouldn't have to worry about finding accountants to help with things, but I think the type of plan I have requires lawyers. Well at least one, probably not more than that.

Its funny because I haven't really felt excited about anything job-related. like, ever, but for once I do. I just don't know where to begin. Unfortunately, I don't think the Internet adage of

Step 1: Dream Project
Step 2: Start project
Step 3: ???
Step 4: Profit!

applies here.

Especially since what I have floating in my head is anything but a for-profit mega-conglomerate. No, it'd be local and very community and art-driven.

I'd actually had a different plan months ago that was related to this, but I think that was more fanciful (and selfish). This non-plan-plan is much better because instead of (potentially) fattening my wallet, it would fatten the collective spirit of a community.

Most people give up on dreams, and I understand why; it's hard. I don't want mine to end up in the same place as most others. I want others to reap the benefits of what I want to sow.

Drawing is pencil and charcoal pencil on paper.

On Terrible Ironies

There is currently a movement in New York for a living wage. I wrote about Minimum Wage and how as a system it's full of fail twice back in December, and it's refreshing to see people fighting against it, even if the war isn't being won, small battles won are nice.

The problem with minimum wage goes far deeper than it's name suggests. Seriously, how has no one given this a nice sounding euphemism by now? Nothing about "Minimum Wage" connotates good feelings. Where is the pro-business lobby on this one? Oh right, they were trying to eliminate the minimum wage entirely, almost forgot.

What they are fighting for in New York is livable wages, though, not just the bare minimum. And this is why the battle, and the war, are ultimately foolhardy. You see, they are fighting and protesting over, not a livable wage, but ten dollars an hour. Could you live in NYC for ten bucks an hour? Remember, that's just over twenty grand a year, before taxes or any kind of expenses--like healthcare for example. The answer is obviously no. No one can.

Minimum wage should be abolished, and replaced with a system that scales based on location and average expenses.

Unfortunately, this won't happen because Big Business has lots and lots of money to lobby with, and Republicans (and conservative democrats) really like that money, which is why so little progress has been made for regular folks in the wage department over the years.

You know what the worst part about this nonsense is though? It's not that it won't happen; I think we've resigned ourselves to that (as sad as that fact may be). No, it's that the people who fight against minimum and livable wages are the same people who fought for the Bush tax cuts being extended for uber rich people and for keeping executive pay high (and keeping "golden parachutes") "because we need to entice them to stay as CEOs, even if they are running the company into the ground" or something.

The message they're sending?

You only deserve the money if you earned it by running a business poorly, but those people who are now out of work, because that douchebag doesn't understand how to run a profitable company, sorry you're going to need to take a pay cut or lose your job. Don't worry though, with luck, you'll be able to find a job with another company-- and that same douchebag might just be running that one into the ground, too.

Long Walks And Blistered Feet

Awhile ago, Krissy and I went for a walk; I think it was at Flanders' or something. We were almost certainly trespassing, but I think the statute of limitations has expired, so we should be safe now.


There were sheep, pigs, chickens, donkeys, and, of course, these two beauties. You might not notice it at first, but there is actually a second horse in the foreground-- see its mane? Yeah, he's about to take a lunging horse to the face.

You ever have something bop you in the nose? You know how you instinctively cringe and your eyes tear up? Imagine if instead of a stick tapping your nose you had this monstrosity coming at you instead.

As I remember it, it was kind of intense, but the horses seemed fine. In fact, they were rather playful afterwards. I seem to remember them rolling around on the ground afterwards, which was kind of funny.

We haven't been on any long long walks in awhile, but the walks definitely are filled with happy memories.

They are the reasons why I think we're getting married-- mischievous walks that maybe, just maybe, were a few miles too long.

Sometimes Wedding Bells Sound More Like Thunder Claps

Weddings are fickle things. They are important but silly all at the same time. They are kind of like birthdays in a way. I don't feel much different on or after my birthday, but the ticker that keeps track of my life has seemed fit to increase by one. After a wedding, is anything really different than before? I don't think marriage makes you care for someone more or love them more, but the way people treat weddings, you feel like you ought to.

I maintain a wedding is just a big ass party; I don't think you can deny that. Sure, there's a ceremony, but the bulk of a wedding is the reception-- that's the part people have fun at, the part people remember. Do people really remember a ho-hum ceremony when the DJ rocked some pretty phat beats courtesy Kenny G? I highly doubt it.

So it seems silly that for what is essentially a gathering of people, strongly resembling that of a party, has so much pressure put on it. Even more weird is that, most weddings are pretty much the same, formulaic bullshit. No offense to anyone who opts for such a wedding, some people love tradition, I respect that. I just think people should shake things up a bit from time to time.

I don't know if the best way to manifest that is by playing the Sex Pistols at a wedding, though. Just sayin'

There is definitely a weird aura that surrounds weddings and their planning, though. Everyone has an opinion. Most of those people, of course, are the ones who pay for weddings, so their opinions tend to find themselves grounded more in fact than opinion, though. This can be kind of stressful at times though, when the same people are telling you to do what you want to do in one breath, and the next don't seem too thrilled by your choices.

Like rings. Engagement rings aren't really necessary, are they?

Apparently to everyone else they are very important.

A song which will likely be played at the wedding:




This is pretty much verbatim what went down buying a suit. Some words may be slightly off, but I could not understand the tailor at all. Personally, since she was a woman, I think she is a seamstress. To me, tailors are men.

The salesman dude reminded me of an amalgamation of a whole lot of people. I actually quite liked him, though. He wasn't very pushy (until the end, but that's okay, I guess). He was more than patient, gave us space, and didn't mind being playful. Salesmen are all too often far too serious. I know, I used to be one and worked with a bunch of them. Pushy little fuckers. That company is out of business now though, so it serves them right. He had a kindness about him though, sort of Tim Gunn-esque. Just not as fabulous.

Prairie dogs. Need I say more?

Pronghorns. Their horns are unlike that of other horned animals. They actually shed their horns every year. They are also bone, which is covered in a sort of hair-like furryness.

Pygmy marmosets. Pretty much Krissy's favorite animal ever, so they had to be included. The Howler Monkeys are rather fun, too.

Apparently, dinosaurs are not appropriate. I think the dinosaurs and zoo animals would get along just fine. A rather large group of people are under the impression that humans and dinosaurs once coexisted peacefully, so I think they'd get along with peacocks as well.

Seating cards. If we could do it the way I'd want to (in an ideal world) they'd be flawless and seamless. Since we lack the right kinds of equipment and expertise and junk, we'll have to settle for adorable and still pretty kick-ass.

Where the whole shin-dig is going down. This picture is so pro. I should get paid for this kind of thing.

What's nice is that the walls are wood, so any light ends up with a very warm color temperature.



Peacock! They just roam about. There are at least five of them. This one is particularly pretty.



In the end, any stress really isn't worth it, though. Minuscule details, even if not perfect, will probably be forgotten. What people will remember is if the day was fun, if they enjoyed themselves, and hopefully that the day was a bit different.

What's On Our Dresser?

Being in a small space that's already filled with someone else's stuff is, no doubt, a pain in the ass. Anytime we want to use something or get something, there is simply no room for it. And being creative people with a lot of time on our hands means that most of the time we are trying to do something. This, as you can imagine, gets very frustrating.

This is a snapshot of really one of the only places we have to store things or put things. Originally, this was covered in porcelain houses and other trinkets.

Here is an overview of what it looks like from further out. It was dark so I had to use the light. And yes, it's always there, stripbox and all. That's how we roll.



Here is a view a bit closer. The two pictures after this will highlight the awesomeness that is: our dresser. This changes from day to day as we use and move things, but this is more or less how it looks on a regular basis. It's much neater after we clean, since I usually organize the random pain-in-the-ass-to-organize things. The regular boring-as-all-hell cleaning is usually performed (flawlessly I might add) by my Krissy.



Below some things are highlighted. I'll go into them in a bit of detail afterwards:



Starting from the left, we have (in no order, really):

A bag of buttons that do not fit in the larger jar of buttons further to the left.
Some books
A scarf Krissy made
A baby that Krissy's grandma crocheted. Here is a better picture. This may or may not be the same, since all I can see is the hair and skin:



India Ink

A rather large stack of revolving books (more detail later)

Buttons and knick-knacks

Stamp pad

Wax seal presser thingy

Below is the same picture, with some other stuff highlighted, notably the books.



Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince
I Like You
How To Make Books
Heidi
The Wind In The Willows
The Cute Book
How To Crochet (I'm sure that's not what it's really called)
Sketchbook from The Sketchbook Project. (Total failure. lame)
The Little Prince (English)
The Little Prince (Italian)
The Little Prince (German)
Harry Potter And The Sorcerer's Stone
Stormy Night
The Bread Baker's Apprentice
Platon
Photographic Wisdom

There are more books to the left like:

Pipi Longstocking
Kat Kong
Handmade Marketplace
Swiss Family Robinson
Tales From Outer Suburbia
I Am America (And So Can You)
Disappearing Spoon

Next to those are some sweet records. I cannot read them from where I am sitting, but I believe there is some Belle and Sebastian, White Stripes, and Raconteurs, for starters.

Then there is Krissy's record player.

The lantern which sits atop it

And finally, my Alienbees Einstein 640 Strobe, and my stipbox which is connected to it.

It's Valentines Day

I've been instructed specifically not to blog about the origins of Valentines Day by my other half. There will be no rant about how Valentines Day is a "hallmark holiday" or how it really caters to women, and in a way sort of forces men to do something for their women today. There will be no mention of the executions of two men named Valentine, both on February 14th of different years. Nor will I delve into their canonizations.

Nope. Not gonna do it. And not just because the wife said so. Truth is, it's kind of depressing to think about all that on a day that's supposed to be happy (and hopefully stress-free).

A lot of people buy things on Valentine's Day, and you have to wonder why? Not "why do they do it" why, why why this day? Do flowers and a card mean more today than some other day? Is Valentine's really a holiday that caters to women and only to them? Is Valentine's a day for a guy to behave so he gets rewarded by his lady (or man)? I don't really think so.

Speaking of which, here is mine. I hope she doesn't get too upset with me over this. ; )

How can one not love this girl?

I don't think that Valentine's, at it's core, meant to become what it is today. I think we made it that way.

No one says you have to give someone a Hallmark card. No one said you have to give anyone flowers, or massages, or anything else. Who says today requires a romantic dinner? What makes it special today? To me, I think it is less special.

The best part about romantic dinners is that they are usually a surprise. They are special because, for all you know, you are the only two people doing it at that very moment. Chances are you are not, but you can believe it to be so.

But on Valentine's Day? Being special, being different is what I think makes a day memorable. You can (and should) shower your significant other with love, gifts, and the like every day of the year. On Valentine's Day, do something different. Make them something by hand, for example. I know no woman who doesn't appreciate something made by hand. And I'm going to assume that guys would feel the same way. I know I do.



Making your own valentine is certainly a start. This couple has been using the same valentine for seventy years. It doesn't have to be anything too fancy. If you are not artistic or crafty, it won't matter. It really is the effort and out put that matter, not the artistic sensibilities behind it. Though, if your other half is an art critic, I cannot guarantee this previous statement.

Maybe that is too simple, or you've been doing that and you want to impress your love with something new, something different. You might try a new, unique craft. Quilling (or paper filigree) is one of those lost crafts that people just don't see much of anymore. It's incredibly inexpensive, all you need is some paper, a quilling tool, and some glue. It costs maybe ten dollars to get started. You could make something like this:



You could go with a different craft, too. Maybe you are clumsy with your fingers, or you have large hands, or can't focus on the small minutiae of quilling. Try making a book. There are all kinds of ways to make, and further customize, a book. It could be a recipe book, a note book, or a book for him or her to write you letters. We personally have this one, and I like it. It's simple and not too overwhelming if you are starting out. Even better is that some books require nothing more than paper, while others do require a few more tools. I assure you though, they're not expensive.

I think an important part of Valentine's Day though, arguably the most important in fact, is every single other day of the year. No amount of neglect can be made up for in one day of flowers and chocolate. No Hallmark card is going to make up for you being a bastard for the rest of the year. It doesn't take much to go a long way. Make them breakfast (Pancakes are yummy). Leave them notes at random, maybe daily before they leave for work. Surprise them every once in awhile. Tell them you're going to go out for dinner, and leave work early to prepare a meal at home instead.

This is not that difficult.

Really, if you're going to be spending the rest of your life with someone, it is in your best interest (and theirs) to treat every day like Valentine's Day.

You'll only have yourself to thank for it.

On Consequences: When What You Do Provokes Death And Crazy People

First and foremost, the fact that this is necessary sucks, but it is. There are crazy people in the world. Lots of them. There are lots of stupid, idiotic, morons out there, who misinterpret, misunderstand, and otherwise just don't get it.

This is about Congresswoman Giffords who, in case you aren't aware, was shot in the head yesterday, along with several others. The congresswoman is alive but a judge who was passing by to say hello is dead, and so is a little girl. There is no denying that the person who did it is imbalanced to say the least, but a small part of me has to believe that this wasn't a totally random act of violence.

Before the election, Sarah Palin famously marked various congressional seats up for election as targets. These were very literal targets, using crosshairs (wouldn't a circle or a square have sufficed?). Naturally Sarah Palin's camp denies that this has anything to do with the shooting, but what are they supposed to say? "Whoops, our bad!" I'm sorry but that's not going to fly, so all they can do is condemn the action, and duck the blame.

Don't get me wrong, this isn't Sarah Palin's fault. Or Republicans fault. There are far too many aspects of the crime to point to any single fault. But it didn't help any by putting a target on her head, and the heads of nineteen others. Remember when the graphic first came out? Remember how bricks were thrown through windows, bullets were shot into offices, and so on? One of those offices was congresswoman Giffords. And now a bullet is in her head (actually, it went straight through her brain).

So rather than be politically correct, why doesn't Sarah Palin and her aides admit that maybe they might have played a minor, inadvertent role in this? I know they didn't intend on anyone shooting anybody, but when you place crosshairs on people, someone is going to take the message the wrong way.

There is no denying that conservatives love guns. That's fine, they are entitled to them. But when conservatives bow to the bastion of gun lobbyists that is the NRA, and the conservative princess paints crosshairs on democratic "targets" can anyone blame someone for getting a mixed message? I'm not surprised this happened, which is what makes this whole scenario so frustrating. A lot of "liberals" saw this coming, or more accurately, were afraid of it occurring. This fear was unnecessary and could have been avoided.

By the way, if Sarah Palin's Take Back The 20 campaign "had nothing to do" with this, then why is it all of a sudden taken down? Sure, the election is over, but it was over two months ago, why now? Palin also argued that the symbols on the map aren't gun sights, but map crosshairs. But she tweeted this:

Commonsense Conservatives & lovers of America: 'Don't Retreat, Instead - RELOAD!' Pls see my Facebook page.

and then later congratulated herself on 18 of the 20 on her bulls-eye list being defeated. What kind of message does this send? Reload? Bulls-eyes? Crosshairs? This may not be calling explicitly for violence, but at the very least does so implicitly.

But this isn't Palin's fault. Nor is it the fault of conservatives, republicans, gun owners, or gun rights advocates. This person is imbalanced, and he is to blame. But would he have done it otherwise? We can't be certain, but the rhetoric surrounding the mid term elections cannot have stayed this attack. Journalists are pointing out that he read Karl Marx, and Hitler, and that he wants a return to gold and silver currency. But I don't think that's relevant. Lots of people read Marx, I would read Marx if I read more often. And I remember picking up the biography of Hitler and being earnestly interested in reading it after reading the introduction. But I am the last person who would shoot anybody. And wanting a gold standard? Lots of people want that; Ron Paul for instance.

So if people want to peg his reading material on why he did this, then they should be fair and equate equal blame to the hateful political rhetoric of late. Hate, violence, aggression, these are all things that don't belong in politics. Politics is and should be all about diplomacy, but it's not. Political ads do nothing but attack, attack, attack their opponents. Rarely do these ads talk about the merits of a politician. Instead, we are left with a mentality of "who isn't worse than the other" rather than "who is the best."

The best example of this rhetoric that we need to avoid? Congresswoman Giffords's opponent last election, Jesse Kelly, held a campaign event to supplant her. Actually, the event was more specifically themed with removing her from office. This, from the Arizona Daily Star:

Kelly’s campaign event website has a stern-looking photo of the former Marine in military garb holding his weapon. It includes the headline: “Get on Target for Victory in November. Help remove Gabrielle Giffords from office. Shoot a fully automatic M16 with Jesse Kelly.”
The event costs $50.

Yes, a photo of a marine, in uniform, holding his weapon, asking supporters to come fire an M16 for crying out loud, under the guise of removing her from office. Not only is this in extremely poor taste, but this does not strike me as behavior a Marine should exhibit. No one should, but a Marine especially. This is madness (cue 300 references "This. Is. Sparta!) This kind of garbage needs to stop. It shouldn't be tolerated, by anyone regardless of where they stand on issues. And I don't care how badly you disagree with someone, you don't take it into your own hands with a weapon, you do it at the ballot box.


Here's the original graphic, judge for yourself whether or not they are crosshairs or not. I certainly hope those crosshairs were worth a little girls life.