Advertisement
What People are Reading
Recent
Popular Alltime
Recent Comments
- It's hard to argue for the
4 hours 59 min ago - Sorry, EA. I don't dispute
5 hours 28 min ago - Au contraire, my column keeps
7 hours 15 min ago - Mushroom Media is still
12 hours 18 min ago - The only distinctions I make
2 days 14 hours ago - Romney's wealth is an issue
2 days 14 hours ago - What!? We haven't quite
4 days 12 hours ago - Yes, from a Maryland
5 days 12 hours ago - Well said...and the Only
5 days 12 hours ago - The public needs to
5 days 13 hours ago
Advertisement
The Universal Notebook: Reign of error in LePage's state of me
Apr 18, 2011 1:00 pm
Edgar Allen Beem
Photo:
Photo: Freelance journalist Edgar Allen Beem lives in Yarmouth. The Universal Notebook is his personal, weekly look at the world around him.
Of all the things there are to be upset about when it comes to Gov. Paul LePage’s notorious order removing the Maine labor history mural from the Department of Labor, the thing that bothers me most is the state’s sick argument that taking down the mural is an act of constitutionally protected “government speech.”
“The State owns the art, and can express its views through that art as it sees fit – by hanging in a government build or not,” said the attorney general’s office in its objection to the motion for a temporary restraining order.
The U.S. District Court in Bangor will decide whether this argument holds legal water, but what’s sick about it is the implication that Gov. Paul LePage is the state.
I was talking with a conservative friend the other day (and, yes, I do have some) and he insisted that the governor has every right to decide what art hangs where in any state building.
I don’t buy that.
LePage can decorate his office or the Blaine House however he sees fit, but, government speech be damned, there is a process by which the state acquires art and by which it can dispose of it. It is a public process, not a matter of personal whim.
Now, you may not think this is a big deal, but, ladies and gentlemen, if the governor can remove any work of art he doesn’t like from public view, does he also have the power to remove any book he doesn’t like from the state library? Based on the state’s argument, we have to presume he does:
“The present administration has now decided to remove that artwork because it was not satisfied that the message conveyed by the work at that location was appropriate.”
So if Paul LePage decides a book does not present a balanced view of, let’s say labor history or environmental conservation, it is apparently a matter of government free speech if he decides it might offend the business community and orders it out of the library. This argument, advanced by attorneys we hope actually know better and are working under duress, is a defense of despotism. The governor is the state and it’s OK for the state to censor anything it finds inappropriate.
Do we really live in a state where an elected public servant has the power to rule by fiat? I sure hope not.
LePage’s argument for removing the mural is that it is inappropriate in the waiting room of the Department of Labor. Say what? The Department of Labor, Your Highness, exists to keep businesses from making a buck by exploiting the health, safety and economic and human rights of workers. At a Portland Museum of Art forum on the mural controversy, a conservative radio talk show host echoed your argument and also complained that the workers in the murals looked oppressed.
Earth to Ray Richardson: that’s because they were oppressed.
In keeping with its “l’etat c’est LePage” defense, the AG’s office also argues that, “As members of the general public, (the plaintiffs) have no standing to inspect the government-owned mural.”
Do you hear that, tea baggers? The general public has no standing when it comes to public art? You nominally anti-authoritarian, Constitution-waving, freedom-loving radicals saddled us with Paul LePage. Now you’re defending his government by dictatorship.
I could get really upset about King Paul’s reign of error except for a dirty little secret Democrats don’t want you to know. He’s been on the throne 100 days now and, other than making trouble, he hasn’t accomplished a blessed thing – zilch, zero, diddlysquat, nada.
Keep up the good work, Sire.
Comments
Melvin Udall says:
eabeem says:
Remains to be seen who is defending democracy and who's either deluded or a hypocrite. I, of course, see the tea party as the greatest threat to liberty America has faced in my lifetime, threatening to turn the country over to corporate warlords while pretending to be patriots and populists -- The Big Lie!
Melvin Udall says:
Some folks ask me how I can speak with such clarity on Eddie's "world." I tell them I think of Ted Kennedy, and I take away reason, civility, and charisma.
Along those lines, here's two new merit badges for the governing policy Eddie and the Beemlings have embraced in Maine for nearly 40 years:
In this report, CBS, the well known conservative shills, point out that Maine is the 2nd worst place to make a living:
http://finance.yahoo.com/career-work/article/112515/best-worst-states-ma...
That's a nice addition to the Forbes report of a few months back that had us last in economic outlook, unless you're a liberal, in which case you see it as ranking us first.
In this new item, Maine ranks 4th in per capita government transfer payments, always a sure sign of prosperity and economic opportunity:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2011-04-26-new-york-government-aid.h...
Even better, we're second in per capita dollar increase over the 10 year period.
Oh the pride! Oh the rejoicing! Oh the indomitable independence and self-reliance of Mainers!
The fact is that Eddie has a local newspaper column that he uses to express opinions that incite impressionable people to hysteria and denial based on lies, distortions, prejudice, and ignorance.
I'm just a humble little web denizen, but, as a patriotic American, I feel compelled to fight back. If I have to "yell" to do so, I will. Eddie and his collectivist Beemian groupies with their positively un-American misunderstanding of democracy are the most destructive force in the nation today. You can have an honest and civil disagreement with a lot of people, but there is no point trying to reason with Eddie and the bullies of the left.
Nor is there any point in listening to them. They are simply too far gone.
Consider them comic relief in the political sense. Watch and laugh as they lay themselves and their heresies bare, and as they sef-destruct in grief over the loss of 35 years of socialist impossibility.
eabeem says:
Apparently I have a newspaper column that incites you. As noted previously, your responses tend to be of the "I know you are but what am I" variety. I call your buddy LePage a "bully' (something thousands of Mainers have called him), so now I'm a bully. Well, bully for you, Schaeffer. And, by the way, Ted Kennedy and I have the same birthday. Quite a coincidence, hunh?
Melvin Udall says:
PS: I believe it's about 82% of the voters voted against the most established liberal extremist in the governor's race. The odds-on favorite going in, and the one who was 'owed the job.'
eabeem says:
You can play with the numbers all you want, but the simple point is that the vast majority of Maine voters did not want an ultra-conservative dinosaur as governor. Maine deserves better than the backwards buffoon we ended up with due to the peculiar dynamics of a five-way race. LePage has NO mandate. He's getting all of his Business Before People initiatives thrown back in his face. He is a disgrace and if you don't know it you've got your head in the sand.
Melvin Udall says:
Biff & Eddie provide the equivalent of a survey class in adult ADD. Bumper car style discussions at their best.
Conservatives, business people (private sector), and filthy rich (anyone who makes 25% more than them); they hate them all.
That leaves, oh, 20% tops of the population that are OK with them.
Eddie can't quite grasp that more than doubling tax revenues still leaves us with gaping deficits and suicidal debt growth.
Why not raise taxes twice that, and spend even more, right, Eddie?
And Biff, how long will your trust fund hold out under this scenario?
Don't worry; Eddie will put you up in the common good shelter he runs in his house.
nmnelson says:
Some Forecaster readers may have become distressed by the political/clinical disintegration of Edgar Allen Beem since the election of Paul LePage. They may take heart in recognizing that Beem is merely passing though the Five Stages of Grief: DENIAL - "62% of the electorate voted against him"; ANGER - Beem's dissections of the entire LePage cabinet; BARGAINING - demanding that LePage restore the mural.
Beem still needs to progress through DEPRESSION (these symptoms he has not yet expressed) before arriving at the final Kübler-Ross stage of ACCEPTANCE of the LePage administration, thereupon assuming his rightful position as a principled leader of "the loyal opposition", rather than his present stance as a “foaming at the mouth” liberal.
Widow’s Weeds are traditionally worn for a year. Beem is learning the reason.
eabeem says:
Thanks, Doc, but I'm guessing your license has either expired or isn't any good in Maine. In case you hadn't noticed, the loyal opposition to Paul LePage is the majority of Maine citizens. Not just the 62% who voted for someone else, but a growing percentage of those duped into voting for LePage. Had he been honest about his business-friendly, job-creation agenda -- roll back decades of environmental protections, kiss the butt of business while screwing the public -- he would never have been elected even in a five-way race. His election was a tragedy for Maine and thousands of us are doing everything we can to make sure he doesn't do too much damage before we toss him out or he is forced to abdicate. I'm betting on the latter.
Melvin Udall says:
Hey Biff and the Beemlings:
Perhaps you can find and link us to Eddie's column wherein he expressed outrage and shame over 'bumbling and arrogant prose' like this:
"typical white person"
"her fear of black men who passed her by on the street."
"If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun,”
"You go into some of these small towns in Pennsylvania, and like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing's replaced them," Obama said. "And they fell through the Clinton Administration, and the Bush Administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not. And it's not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."
"The Cambridge police acted stupidly."
"No, no. I have been practicing...I bowled a 129. It's like -- it was like Special Olympics, or something."
"What I was suggesting -- you're absolutely right that John McCain has not talked about my Muslim faith..."
"If Latinos sit out the election instead of saying, 'We're gonna punish our enemies, and we're gonna reward our friends who stand with us on issues that are important to us' "
And then cite the comments where you joined in with him on condemning the language and the politician who uttered it.
Then, after you report on that, you fine feathered friends can absorb the data in this report:
http://www.cbo.gov/doc.cfm?index=12061&type=1
Specifically, take a look at Table 1 on Page 2.
You'll note a 118% increase in projected revenues between 2010 and 2020; a 58% increase in spending over the same period, and a 93% increase in public debt over the same period (more than $8 trillion in new borrowing.)
So more than doubling the taxes collected by Washington is nowhere near enough to take us out of profligate debtor status. And don't forget that such projections have a tendency to be decidedly optimistic.
Perhaps you could explain how 1) this is sustainable, and 2) how much more needs to be taxed, spent, and borrowed to bring Beemian utopia to the streets.
Biff says:
Hey Melvin and the LePage-a-matics:
How silly. You try so hard to find dumb things that Obama has said. You even pull out the "What I was suggesting -- you're absolutely right that John McCain has not talked about my Muslim faith..." from the George Stepenopulos interview. Out of context and just how the right wing likes it. Just lie and make sure the unquestioning faithfull get the twisted version. Have you really read the interview or do you honestly believe Obama is a Muslim? If the later then what is the point even listening to you? The sorry (and scary) thing about Lepage is that he actually means what he says (and his "followers" laugh and praise him over.) . I really feel sorry for folks like yourself that are stuck having to defend people like LePage. Between people like him, Palin, Beck, Bachman and now Trump, the Republican party is starting to look like a party of bizarre clowns.
eabeem says:
You're absolutely right. This spending is not sustainable. We'll have to raise taxes on the filthy rich to pay off the deficit and cut defense spending in half. No more Iraq, no more Afghanistan, no more (what's the last place we invaded?). Hey, and Udie, don't tell me what I'm supposed to get outraged about. I've got enough outrage for the two of us.
Biff says:
Just read your latest Edgar and...yea! Right on!! I also get the Economist and couldn't believe (actually I could believe) that even their radar is lit up by LePage's bumbling, arrogant "prose". One thing to add concerning the mural... it seems to me that, rather than pull the mural off the wall, that a better way to get his message across would be by commissioning a "counter mural" of Maine businesses that have helped grow Maine. LL Bean being one that comes to mind. Perhaps the Republicans raising the money to "buy" the mural from the government could put that $60,000 towards this new work of art? Then again that would just have been too "normal" and uncontroversial. God forbid we actually try to work together... I guess it's a lot more amusing and interesting to his supporters to just "laugh in the face" and call them "idiots" of those that disagree with you.
Melvin Udall says:
Nothing like a little humble sanctimony, Eddie, to keep all the good little groupies kneeling at the base of your pedestal.
Everybody repeat: Eddie cares more than us; Eddie cares more than us; Eddie cares more than us.
After you've done that 25 times, approach your guru and ask him why, if he "cares" so much, everything he stands for shrinks the economic pie, erodes the tax base, nurtures unemployment, and creates ever more subjects dependent on the bounties of government. All while government has less bounties to extract from the citizenry.
Eddie is conflicted - in more ways than one. On the one hand, he wants the golden goose to lay more eggs and have more chicks. On the other hand, he wants the golden goose population to fly elsewhere to do their work.
Caring, like art, must be in the eye of the beholder. Squishy, that is, at least in Eddie's personal style.
eabeem says:
So, Mr. Schaeffer, you must then subscribe to the strange, old-fashioned notion that if you let Corporate America do whatever it wants, everyone will prosper? Unfettered free market capitalism floats all boats, right? Well, it was unfettered free market capitalism and laissez-faire Bush era lack of regulation that nearly sunk the ship of state. Trickle down economics means most people get dumped on. No, sir, Pemster, rich folks don't create jobs if you just let them have all their money. They hoard it. What is needed is a clampdown on financial markets like we haven't seen since FDR. Investors should have to raise their hands when they want to go #1 or #2. Prohibit speculation in commodities and currency. Out a surcharge on any goods made by U.S. companies that ship jobs overseas. Get out of NAFTA. Drop all tax loopholes. Repeal tax cuts for anyone making over $250,000. Raise taxes as necessary to pay the bills. E pluribus unum! In God We Trust!
Pen Bay Person says:
Johnny-come-late-to-the-party, I know. I just found this page and felt compelled to add a couple of points.
(1) The Judy Taylor mural was not only, as Beem pointed out, commissioned in an orderly fashion by the Marine Arts Commission and the Department of Labor, it was commissioned in fulfillment of state law, the so-called "Percent for Art" law (Title 27, Chapter 16, Sections 451 thru 459). Beem notes that Baldacci didn't order this, and he's correct. But it's important to also note that the 1979 law REQUIRES that 1 percent of public funds used for public buildings be spent on public art. It says, at Section 453, "A contracting agency... SHALL expend out of money appropriated or allocated by the Legislature for the construction of a public building or facility, except for a correctional facility, a minimum amount of 1% of the construction portion of the appropriation or allocation, for the purpose of acquiring, transporting and installing works of art." [Emphasis mine.]
(2) According to a Labor Department press release from 2007, the building that brought about the mural, the current Department of Labor, "resulted in lease savings of over $300K a year" due to consolidation of resources.
(3) In addition to Beem's notes on the Taylor contract, there is also a section 19 that reads, "The contracting agency agrees that it will not intentionally destroy or alter the work in any way whatsoever without prior consultation with the Commission and the artist." And sections 26 and 27 which read in part, "... the right of either party hereto... to enforce the [contract] in the event of any subsequent breaches by the other party..." and "This agreement may be amended or modified only if in writing and signed by the parties, and represents the entire agreement of the parties."
So, not only was the dictatorial removal morally wrong, it was an illegal breach of contract and an unconstutional appropriation of authority. The mural was created as part of a Legislatively required process. It is clearly beyond the scope of powers alloted to the Executive branch of Maine government to remove this work without due process. This act may be considered ultra vires and consequently judicially reviewable because LePage did not have the power to make this decision AND it was an abuse of the Executive's power to do so.
Governors are not Kings and, tho this may be news to some, we, the citizens of Maine, have not given that office absolute power.
eabeem says:
Actually, the Maine Labor History Mural was not a Percent for Art project, though it did use the Percent for Art selection process. The Dept of Labor is a tenant in a privately-owned building, not a state-owned building, so the law did not apply. The real point, of course, is that there is a proper way to commission and decommission a work of public art and Gov. LePage did not follow it.
buckybeaver says:
Why isn't this contract made available to the public? Transparency in government is critical for a public debate regarding this issue. DOL website doesn't have it on their site. Not that I don't believe you, but you only referenced one part of this contract (Section 5). to be able to read the whole contract in context is easier to have questions answered. thanks for the quick response. Really enjoy your column.
Melvin Udall says:
Well, Fast Eddie the E-gagger offers more of the same genius policy he's reveled in for the last 40 years or so. Why not? It's a tested and proven approach to social perfection and economic destruction. It's elevated Maine to 50th in economic outlook in this country. That only leaves 7 more places to go to reach the top in messiah-land. With something like 1/3 of our population on welfare of one sort or another, there's lots of head-room for making things 'better.'
What do you recommend in the way of tax increases to get there, Eddie? Would doubling income tax rates be good enough for you? Would that be enough to finance utopia for the residents still remaining? How about doubling the sales tax too? Why stop when you're on a taker roll?
Like a good little party loyalist, Eddie wants to fix the union problems 'on the backs of the taxpayers who had nothing to do with the problem.'
There is another way, of course, and that's for the $1000 or so the obedient union happy workers pay each year to their union enforcer bosses, for redistribution to Democrats, to be rerouted to their retirement accounts instead of the graft accounts that have been accumulating slush funds for decades. How about that for 'clean election funding?'
Oh, and I wonder whether a Governor should be able to order a book added to libraries because he wants it promulgated in the public conscience?
eabeem says:
We could start by not spending tens of thousands of dollars defend our bumbling governor's mistakes and by trying to lure back some of the tourism and business he has no doubt driven away by giving the world the idea that Maine is filled with foul-mouthed rednecks. Look, Melvin-Pelvin, I'm just a Maine guy writing about how thre world looks to me. You're just an anonymous online commenter. Clearly, neither of us is going to solve the economic problems of the state or the nation. I understand that. You don't seem to. Frankly, I don't know how anyone other than a fellow lout or bully could be anything but mortified and embarassed by the conduct of Paul LePage. For me, the issue is not the mural, the issue is LePage trying to throw his weight around. I was raised to stand up to bullies.
David R. Hill says:
Wow, Ed, it looks like you've got the AMG crowd after you now, right here on your home turf!
I have a question -- does the DOL contract include any remedies for breach of contract? If so, what would they be?
Melvin Udall says:
Ooooohhh....big scary people from Earth dare to desecrate the Beemian's alternative universe. Free rides back to reality are being offered for those with a modicum of self-awareness.
David R. Hill says:
Wasn't Melvin Udall the cranky old man played by Jack Nicholson? Jack Nicholson you're not.
David R. Hill says:
Well, I guess as long as you're around here, you've got that right.
Look, I've just asked a simple question of Ed since I know he has a copy of the DOL contract, so why don't you just save your snide comments for when he responds, as I'm sure he will.
Or, better yet, go back to your AMG playground.
Melvin Udall says:
I was going to list all the people "you're not," but why waste the time? It must be fun to be a supporter of the ignorant and nonsensical policies that have made Maine the stand-out economic and social experiment it is.
Justice, thy name is dependency.
If only 'quality of place' could feed the hungry.
David R. Hill says:
Look, champ, you have no idea what I support and what I don't support, so why don't you save your insults for some time (whenever that might be) when you actually know what you're talking about.
eabeem says:
Oh, come on, Pembroke, don't insult us by pretending to be concerned about the hungry. All you need to know about conservatives is that they put themselves and their money first and will do anything for their corporate masters...gut environmental regulations, roll back labor laws, cut social services, and give huge, undeserved tax breaks the wealthy, all the while pretending to be concerned about deficits.
buckybeaver says:
Thank you for the prompt response. Can you provide the link to the DOL contract for the mural? I agree with alot of your solutions to cleaning up welfare, subsidizing any business with taxpayer money is welfare, winners and losers. A flat tax or national sales tax for everybody would be the fairest as everyone would have skin in the game, no exceptions. 18 to 20% would be right, not the 39 to 47% they now with IRS enforcement take from you. Government by the people, they work for us. Peace.
eabeem says:
The contract was e-mailed to me, so I do not have a link to it. Section 5 of the contract says “The permanent location of the work shall be: Department of Labor, Augusta, Maine.” Section 22 says: “Relocation: The work will be placed in the location for which it was selected. The contracting agency agrees that the artist and the Commission will be notified if, for any reason, the work has to be removed or moved to a new location. The artist and the Commission have the right to advise or consult with the contracting agency or its designee regarding this treatment of the work.” I'm afarid I couldn;t support a national sales tax as it would be likely to hurt the most vulnerable among us.
buckybeaver says:
A good retort instead of using a dictionary goes for a sign a protestor used, and that makes it so. In regards to the contract being available for public inspection, it is my understanding that the DOL has it in it's office and is not allowing anyone to see it. So when did you actually read the contract? hmmm. Oh on the subject of drowning in the sea of red ink, you swing back around and want to tax the rich. If you have been breathing in the past few days, the WSJ had an article that stated that if you lined up all these so called rich and shook em down, it wouldn't even begin to pay 1 Trillion of the 15 Trillion in debt. So where is the other 14 Trillion coming from? You and Me baby. Never, do you mention cut the spending on welfare. There was a time in America that taking welfare was shameful. People in America should be at work, not sitting on their collective backsides waiting for the gravy check. So otherwise than taxing the rich, cause the math just doesn't work what is your plan pops? PS Peace
eabeem says:
It is the mural that the DOL is not allowing anyone to see. The contract has been made public and I have an electronic copy. The AG does not dispute that LePage violated the contract by not advising or consulting the artist as required by the contract, but the artist is not a party to the suit. And you've said just about all that needs to be said about taking welfare being shameful. If so, so is corporate welfare, government subsidies of any kind. Eliminate all tax loopholes. Tax the untaxed rich. Raise taxes. End wars. problem solved.
John Frary says:
A selection of rabid phrases EAB applies to the governor’s doings: “war on the poor,” “assault on the working class,” “destroy unions,” “privatize everything,”. “[wreak] havoc on the weak,” “balance the state budget on the backs of the teachers and state workers,” “phony...crisis,” “reign of terror,” “despotism,” “government by dictatorship,” and wrapping it all up “war on the poor and working class.” Was there ever a revivalist parson who spoke more harshly of Beelzebub?” Doesn’t seem possible.
On this evidence I conclude his hatred for Paul LePage far exceeds any love he may have for the toiling masses, for legal niceties or for Art. More, this mouth-frothing rage over a governor who has accomplished zilch, zero, diddlysquat, nada, nienti, nichts supports my conclusion that if you strip contemporary liberalism of its hate, hypocrisy, and hyperbole there would be nothing left.
John Frary says:
I must remember to post one of those smiley-face buttons whenever I indulge in jocularity with liberals. A permanent state of indignation makes people so literal-minded. I guess we can leave it at that---Paul LePage awoke one morning and said to himself---"Gee, wouldn't be fun to make war on the poor"---and carried on from there.
eabeem says:
Oh, yes, the great and good candidate Frary! The last time we heard from him it was to threaten me with "Come the counter-revolution I will use all my influence to see that you are put to death in a humane and painless fashion. One must always try to temper justice with mercy." This for being among the first to point out that Glenn Beck was a public menace, something now known to all rational men and women. No, Mr. Frary, we will not be taking lessons in compassion from you, sir. I do wish my characterizations of Mr. LePage were excessive and in error, but, alas, tis all true. I do believe, however that I wrote "reign of error."
Melvin Udall says:
Poor, poor Eddie. It's become apparent that his emotional and cognitive disorder has moved up the Krugman scale to level III, calling for increased medication and therapy.
Hence the constant gnawing on his Berkenstocks, and the fevered rolling of those funny little things he 'smokes,' filled with a leafy substance providing soothing qualities for the troubled mind.
Judging from his latest effort, neither seems to be working, and it's surprising he can even type his calls to anger and antagonism while fidgeting with both. In between practicing karate chops on slabs of marble, that is.
Eddie seems to think it's perfectly fine for one Governor to use taxpayer money to create "art" and hang it in a government building, and for the cognizant Commissioner in his cabinet to have herself painted into the work as a 'legend' in Maine's labor history.
Yet another Governor absolutely does not have collateral authority, but in the reverse direction.
A noted local artist, who by all accounts makes his own way without the need for involuntary taxpayer subsidy, raised this point recently in another local paper. We know that for the anointed like Eddie, any artist who can earn his own keep forfeits the soul of a true artiste, since suffering is necessary for art to have merit.
I can't wait to hear what Eddie and the Beemians have to say about said artist. It should be uplifting, so boys, please respond ASAP as you finish your fag.
Which reminds me; apparently that Open and Affirming congregation of Eddie's, not to mention the Forecaster's leadership, are hunky-dory with the Beemster's use of homosexual slurs in his bursts of name-calling.
One might say that both are "Open" to Eddie's hateful language, and "Affirming" of his lack of respect for his brothers and sisters of alternative persuasions.
Talk about "artistic license...."
eabeem says:
If you are referring to Tom Crotty's op-ed piece in the Portland papers, I can only say that Crotty missed the mark entirely -- attacking the art and the artist when the issue is government censorship. I don't think you will find very many people in the Maine arts community agreeing with Mr. Crotty, who is one of the very few conservative artists I have ever come across.
And just to straighten your warped argument out a bit, Baldacci had nothing to do with the labor mural's creation and LePage should not have had anything to do with its removal.
The mural was commissioned by an orderly process and it could have been replaced by an orderly process. If LePage had been smart (and he has demonstrated time and time again that he is not) he could have simply consulted the artist and the arts commission as the contract requires and then ignore their counsel. Personally, I see this as a clear example of government censorship. Judge Woodcock suggested as much at yesterday's hearing, questioning whether silencing a message was the same as government speech. Even the AG's office admitted at yesterday's hearing that the Governor would not have the right to remove a book from the State Library if he did not approve of the message. This is no different. Though LePage doesn't even understand the mural's message.
Homosexual slurs? No idea what you're talking about. As usual, you make no sense at all to me.
Melvin Udall says:
What a great retort......"you make no sense to me."
It is well known what 'tea bagger' refers to. Not-withstanding your distraction away from that.
eabeem says:
There is a sexual connotation to the phrase, but I'm not sure why you think it is an exclusively homosexual practice. As I have explained elsewhere, tea party demonstrators first used the term themselves in protesting the stimulus package. Sorry if it got shoved back in their faces.
buckybeaver says:
Seems a nerve has been struck. Mr. Beem has resorted to the filthy word to address tea party members = citizens that are concerned that the government is overspending, the elected politicans acting like a ruling class from Uncle Joe (Stalin). As I wade into the peapatch, it is a mural that concerns Mr. Beem, not the out of control spending, state debt, and taxes that will be raised to feed this monster. Has Mr. Beem studied the contract that produced this mural, as he so studiously studied the pension problem information. Perhaps that contract would have the terms of use in a clear language that would allow Mr. Beem a bit of peace, and clean up his use of potty mouth. I enjoy Mr. Beem's column for awhile now, and cannot recall him being so agitated as when Mr. Baldacci was the governor. Peace.
eabeem says:
Filthy? Potty mouth? The term tea bagger has been used as an admittedly derogatory term for tea party members since February 2009 when a tea party anti-stimulus protestor paraded in front of the White House carrying a sign that read, "TEA BAG the LIBERALS DEMS BEFORE THEY TEA BAG YOU!!" So we liberal Dems tea bagged you. When I looked up the slang definition, I did find the sexual practice to which you must be referring, but I also found "Conservatives who masquerade as “concerned citizens”. That's exactly what I meant.
eabeem says:
Yes, I have studied the contract. Yes, Gov. LePage violated the contract by failing to consult with the artist about its relocation. No, the tea party and Republicans are not really serious about debt reduction. If they were they would not be willing to fall on the sword to preserve tax cuts for the wealthy, which do no good for anyone except the wealthy.
eabeem says:
UPDATE: Bangor -- U.S. District Court Judge John Woodock spent two hours leading Assnt. AG Paul Stern and plaintiffs' attorney Jeff Young through the details of the mural removal case before promising to "get out my decision as soon as I can" in this morning's hearing requesting a temporary restraining order.
Woodcock asked Stern whether the state's theory of the case meant that the governor could remove books from the State Library that he disagreed with. Stern replied that it did not. He also asked Stern whether taking the mural down was actually "government speech" or "censorship," the silencing of speech.
Woodcock seemed to indicate that he was not sure anyone's rights would be harmed if he allowed the status quo to be maintained (meaning the mural in storage) while the case makes its way through the courts. He also noted that the federal judiciary is generally reluctant to interfere in state matters. My guess is that he will decide to deny the temporary restraining order.
Rodney Porter says:
Governor LePage may or may not be able to say that the mural can be moved because it is state free speech, but can anyone defend that he does not permit the people of the state to view it? He's keeping it safe? Because there has been so much interest that it might get harmed?
Insightful response on the status of Maine's citizens and economy, Eddie. Just like you to stay on point.
And while you're at it, why not reveal who Biff and Pen Bay Person are? Your loyal groupies surely must deserve as much attention as those who question you.
And then tell us how much extra you send in on your tax payments - property tax (you selfish SOB, claiming ownership of land that 'belongs to all of us'); state income tax; and federal income tax, to begin with. All adorned with a cute little hand written note dedicating the excess to 'the common good,' in keeping with your moral superiority.
As for me, I'm just defending democracy, like any good American would do. Liberal extremist columnists are a plague on this great nation and I will continue to say so every chance I get.