Your Taxes Really Are "Play Money" - Government Asshats Fund Sympathetic Portrayal Of Muslim Terrorist
"TORONTO - Tax dollars from the very governments he's convicted of plotting to blow up are helping ensure the curtain goes up next week on a "sympathetic portrayal" of one of the members of the so-called Toronto 18 terror plotters.
Shareef Abdelhaleem was found guilty earlier this year of two terrorism-related charges in connection with the plot to bomb downtown Toronto."
...
The Lunatics who authorized this waste of tax dollars should be fired.
...
Update: Bravo, Canadian Arts Community
"“You want to put on a play? Fine. Hang up your shingle and ask people to pay for it," Gaudet said. "If it has to do with sympathetic portraits of terrorists who want to destroy my country, I won’t go."
"Vaughan said it isn't up to politicians to decide what art should be shown in theatres or hung on gallery walls."
This A-hole doesn't get it. Politicians aren't banning; they are questioning why taxpayers should fund this crap. But then again, that's Adam Vaughan
Vaughan is an Asshat.
Start your own gallery or theatre; show whatever you want. Make your art; show it there. If it doesn't violate existing laws, have a ball epater-ing the bourgeoisie. Just don't expect people who would be offended by it TO PAY FOR IT.
Why is that so hard to understand? Clearly Adam Vaughan doesn't.
Where do idiots like Vaughan get these notions from? It isn't his money.
Crazy idea: Dismantle gov't arts funding and return the money to the public as a discrete credit, then encourage the arts groups, galleries, festivals and publications who've been getting funding to set up a self-administering fund that the public can return their credit to - voluntarily - and let them fund themselves out of that, wrangling for money and priority with the bureaucracy that will inevitably coalesce around this organization.
It'll give artists a decent idea of how many regular citizens support what they do, without coercion. Hell, I'd even allow for tax breaks for corporations that contribute to the fund. But forcing monetary "tribute" from taxpayers to the highly politicized arts community would end.
Think it'll happen? It's the sole plank in my campaign to become Heritage Minister, people.
Hell I'd elect you king if you ran on that platform.
Toronto's chic left assume the Toronto 18 are victims for no other reason than that they were tried and convicted.
I dare say that many on the left would be happy if these punks succeeded in killing conservative politicians. these are the "but" people who raised their ugly heads after 9/11. you know whom I speak of. it was a terrible thing but; insert whatever marxist bs you wish.
I think I have finally figured out why so many are against a voluntary census. They think it will lead to voluntarily funding arts, national daycare and so many other govt funded programs.
Wonder what would happen if, instead of using govt funding, we used the term taxpayer funded, meaning you and me.
Sounds to me like just another case of a weak Western woman falling in love with the barbarian who isn't really a barbarian but just left out in the cold because he wasn't mothered enough. You can't entirely prove her thesis wrong, and yet we can't survive with modern freedoms if too many people take such victim claims seriously. Rick has the right idea; no centralized state funding for the "arts"; no nanny-victim state.
I think the play's writer has shlockholm syndrome.
And I'd gladly voulunteer to be Rick's deputy minister.
O c'mon, guys. This North American chick has drunk the equality Kool-Aid and is just doing what comes naturally: singing the praises of ANOTHER culture (while trashing ours, but being blind to what she's doing; she doesn't recognize the good things in Western culture and simply takes all of her rights and freedoms for granted -- like, they just "happened.").
Hey, she's been taught that there's no such scale as "good, better, best." ALL cultures are equal, dontcha know?
But the sooner arts funding from the government is scaled way back the better. We all know who's getting the giant's share.
No matter how he slices her, she's still one Sick Chick.
I'm not surprised, the arts industry is infested with liberal loons, if Harper made any attempt to control Heritage Canada's funding by assigning a "Moral and ethical" code to said funding the leftards would get totally hysterical and MSM would join them in outrage. Thus we must fund their filth and perversion and look away lest we offend some of the most untalented twits on the planet.
So now I'm into some kind of Twitter argument with a guy making the "defunding = censorship" argument. Not that anyone has been censored - or defunded, for that matter. The best he can come up with is comparing the Sun to Fred Phelps. Liberal argument at its finest.
Rick, have you considered or used these points tactic in your debate with what sounds like a brick wall:
1) Censorship, by definiton=editing/banning/suppressing/destruction after the fact.
2) Defunding is not forcibly stopping anyone from writing, creating "art", etc.
3) Freedom of expression means you provide your own platform/soapbox; we are not obliged to fund your platform/soapbox.
On a topic like this, you probably know that it's like arguing between two viewpoints that work from fundamentally different assumptions. For many people today, arts funding is the approval that makes art "art." It's the pair of ears in the forest hearing the tree fall, and confirming that it's made a sound. De-funding delegitimizes art.
The larger story is this: the play hasn't been given any direct public funding. The festival featuring it is being given public funding, and they're choosing to exhibit the play.
Now, that being said: they shouldn't.
I'd be willing to go far enough to say that before a drama festival can receive any public funding, it should be required to submit synopses of any plays being exhibited.
If something like Homegrown appears on such an application, it should be nixed.
Hi all just playin catch up was out all afternoon. Will have to check out your Twitter fed Rick, I did hear a similar argument being made by some twit guest host on CFRB this evening. They don't seem to get it - it's my money.
I think you just hit the nail on te head regarding the "legitimization of art by funding" Rick. Normal people would call it welfare.
Patrick - submit to whom? Because if it's the government, and they nix the play, the people crying censorship have a leg to stand on, don't they. Better to just take gov't money - which is to say taxpayer money - out of the equation entirely. Because what we're seeing now is the ultimate end of public arts funding - the inextricable logical knot where gov't money has to fund everything, because as soon as it doesn't it's seen as a censor. I don't believe in censorship, which is why I don't think the gov't should have anything to do with the arts except, occasionally, as a paying customer, buying work for an archive or museum.
Anyone can do what they want. Just don't use my tax dollars for your obsessions.
BCF, It will be a cold day in the lake of fire, before these guys get fired. More than likely they will end up making a movie about Lesbians with tax dollars at the NFB or CBC.
JMO
All this time I've been complaining that I can't get a date! I've been looking in the wrong places. Turns out that Trotskyites and such all filled with babes just for the likes of me, if only I get desperate enough, which is maybe sort of. A clever fellow calls their groups, as above as well, "Shag shops for ugly thickos." Wow, what's it cost for just-price chocolates? If it ain't too dear, I'm dressing down and hitting the town tonight. Government subsidies? Trot-babes, here I come.
"submit to whom? Because if it's the government, and they nix the play, the people crying censorship have a leg to stand on, don't they."
I have a solution: it's called "fuck those people."
Fuck them. Ignore them. No one worth considering gives two shits and a fuck what they think -- all you have to do is publicize what this play is about and Canadians will agree.
Yes but Harper backed down last election, he needs to man up and cut this sort of waste.
In general, it isn't arts funding that's the problem.
It's a lack of government oversight in how those funds are dispersed. Government needs to get choosier about how this funding is dispersed.
If that means that government steps in and makes some value judgements based on the applications, then so be it.
Anyone who complains that a terrorist-sympathizing work is "censored" can sincerely go fuck themselves. Sincerely.
No matter how he slices her, she's still one Sick Chick.
>>