Iron

Click to enlarge


Click to enlarge

To me, this graphic says it all.

However Lady Thatcher would not want us to mourn forever but to pick ourselves up, shake off the dirt, and get back to fighting. One candidate for Mayor in Norman, Oklahoma is doing just that.

Candidate Promises Statue of Free Cheese in Norman, OK

Source: American Thinker | Oleg Atbashian

If David Kempf wins the mayoral race on April 2, a bronze statue of Free Cheese based on the People’s Cube design is going to be built in Oklahoma’s third largest city, Norman. There’s no reason why he shouldn’t, since he just received our official endorsement, which he also announced on his website.

at-1

Our relationship started after we noticed incoming web traffic from David’s campaign website. We traced the link to asection dedicated to Free Cheese. In a humorous way, the candidate for Mayor of Norman described his attitude towards free government cheese, which he defined as “the extraction of taxes from fellow citizens — from one’s neighbors up and down the street — to support one’s habit or business.” In contrast to his opponents, who enjoy and promote many flavors of what they claim is free government cheese, David would like to focus on the essential services the government was contracted to supply, leaving the cheese business to the local independent dairy operators.

The page had a link to adiscussion of free cheeseon the People’s Cube, with testimonies from several immigrants from the former Soviet Union, all of whom agreed that “free cheese can only be found in a mouse trap” — something they had learned from personal life experiences.

We added aplayful commentto the thread with a link to David’s campaign, extending our support and asking in return only that he, if elected, issue an executive order requiring all citizens of Norman to read the People’s Cube on a daily basis and maybe erect a gigantic mousetrap on the central square as a reminder of the dangers of free cheese.

at-3

This started an entirely new discussion among our members. Shortly afterwards, David Kempf emailed us with gratitude for our support and a promise that he would propose to the citizens a bronze mousetrap sculpture modeled after our drawing, paid for out of the generous public funding of the Norman Arts Council who are currently spending taxpayers’ money anyway, but on much less meaningful projects.

This will not be our firstbrush with public statuary projects. Last month we were contacted by a board member of theGrantham Museumin England, who asked for permission to use our design in their campaign for aMargaret Thatcher statue in Grantham, Lincolnshire, where the Prime Minister was born and raised. Our image of the Iron Lady, captioned as “Iron,” was part of a series of portraits parodyingObama’s “Hope” poster; ithas been a popular selling item at ouronline store, especially to customers in the United Kingdom.

Speaking of the arts, the single biggest influence in the city of Norman is the University of Oklahoma, which also accounts for a vibrant cultural life. Having tried himself in the arts, David Kempf moved on to being a businessman, a software architect, and currently the president and CEO ofPort 40, an Oklahoma corporation producing cutting edge computer software. David still supports and spends time with local artists and musicians, and has well-formed opinions on the issue of government funding of the arts, which happen to coincide with ours. He very eloquentlylays them outon his website:

Do you support the public funding of the Arts?

Let’s re-phrase the question into something meaningful to the most people:

Do you support the extraction of taxes from people (ultimately, at the point of a gun) to pay certain people chosen by government bureaucrats to display, exhibit, or perform their art?

If I were you, and I were someone trying to make a living from my art, I would be highly offended at the suggestion that the government knows what good art is.

I would be highly offended by the suggestion that selected artists should get government handouts to promote their activities over mine.

The citizens of Norman do not trust their government officials to even set utility rates: all increases must be approved by a vote of the people. Why would we trust the government to dictate the art we promote or consume?

A review of history easily reveals that government supervised artists are indistinguishable from propagandists. If you value your freedom as an artist, you ought to flee from their employment offers with all haste.

Most artists strive to be a corporation of one: they desire to give voice to their own thoughts and emotions. If you don’t believe the government should favor one corporation over another in a free-market system, then you shouldn’t stand for your tax dollars being spent promoting your artistic competitors over you.

According to Thomas Jefferson, “To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.”

The only way to avoid all these pitfalls is by the private funding of artists and the arts.

Apparently, if our Free Cheese statue is ever going to be built, it will be with the consent of the taxpayers, from the existing budget of the local Arts Council. According to Kempf, he has been in hot debate with the Council members who are avid supporters of the public funding of the Arts. “They should be pleased,” he adds with irony. David promises that he will propose to the City Council that they erect our statue whether or not he gets elected Mayor.

A successful businessman and a computer scientist trained in logic to solve difficult problems, David Kempf believes in limited government and reads The People’s Cube.

The incumbent Mayor of Norman, on the other hand, is a socialist-leaning ideologue with a left-wing academic background: in other words, a free-cheese-peddling mousetrap operator.

If I were a resident of Norman, I’d rather have a symbolic bronze mousetrap housed in the public square, as opposed to a real one built around us, as we are being lured with false promises of free cheese.

Oleg Atbashian, a writer and graphic artist from the former USSR, is the author of Shakedown Socialism, of which David Horowitz said, “I hope everyone reads this book.” In 1994 he moved to the U.S. with the hope of living in a country ruled by reason and common sense, appreciative of its freedoms and prosperity. To his dismay, he discovered a nation deeply infected by the leftist disease of “progressivism” that was arresting true societal progress. American movies, TV, and news media reminded him of his former occupation as a visual propaganda artist for the Communist Party — a job he reluctantly held, as he knew that no intelligent person would take such art-by-numbers agitprop seriously. Oleg is the creator of a satirical website ThePeoplesCube.com, which Rush Limbaugh described on his show as “a Stalinist version of The Onion.” His graphic work frequently appears in the American Thinker.

Comments

  1. Ivan Vasiliev says

    Please do not in any way misunderstand this as a criticism of a Peoples Artist, but, perhaps, some fingers reaching for the cheese, Comrade Kempf? The prize goes to the swift!

  2. Stay Strong says

    DIOCESE OF CHICAGO AND MID-AMERICA: April 9, 2013
    Statement from the Diocesan Chancery on the Contemporary Question of Homosexual Marriage to the Clergy and Flock of the Diocese

    March 16/29, 2013
    Martyrs Sabinus and Papas

    The Supreme Court of the United States is presently considering two cases which deal with the question of homosexual marriage. Given the ubiquitous coverage the news media is providing on this issue it is important that our clergymen and parishioners fully understand the position of the Church in this regard.

    Living in a free society as we do, we should first be thankful that we have the opportunity to
    practice our Orthodox Faith without inordinate interference from the government. In recent history this was not the case in Russia, and is still not the case in many countries throughout the world. In a free society all views can be shared in the public arena – both views we agree with as Orthodox Christians and those we disagree with. We call upon our flock to be guided first and foremost by the Holy Tradition of the Church in discerning whether any contemporary question is something that is compatible to the Orthodox faith. If an Orthodox Christian chooses to engage in public political discourse this should be done with moderation and with a firm intention and watchfulness not to fall into extremism. Extremism is not conducive to softening hearts or bringing others to the faith. Laymen who choose to engage in political speech should not state that they speak on behalf of the Church. Strictly speaking such an authoritative statement can be made only by a bishop or with a bishop’s specific blessing.

    It should also be made clear that living a homosexual or any other sinful lifestyle is not compatible with Christianity and this has always been the teaching of the Church. That being stated, it is also crucial to state that the Church is a Spiritual Hospital and all those wishing to receive the healing freely offered by God through their repentance and God’s Grace are fully
    welcome. This includes those who have participated in immoral or unnatural acts of any kind as well as those who are tempted by such sins. The Church is empathetic to those who suffer in such a way and offers them support, healing, and Christian love. Those actively engaging in any immoral or unnatural pursuits cannot live a full sacramental life within the Church. However, this does not mean that we seek to drive away or ostracize those who have transgressed in such a
    way. Rather, we must make all efforts to draw those in such an unfortunate situation back to chastity and the opportunity to again partake in the Life Giving Mysteries of the Church and to engage the struggle for their salvation within the parish community.

    It is entirely possible that the decision will eventually be made to recognize homosexual marriage by the federal government. Several states have already made such decisions. Under no circumstances will the Church recognize homosexual marriage, accord it the status of traditional
    marriage, or bless such unions. However, this is not to state that those who have entered into such a union have stepped beyond a line from which they cannot return. The Church has always strongly condemned heresies (such as Novatianism, Montanism, and Donatism) which deny the
    possibility of repentance for those having committed certain sins. It is crucial that our clergymen not shy away from the position of the Church as regards the sinfulness of homosexuality and other unnatural expressions of the God-given gift of human sexuality – but it is also crucial that such statements be made with love and with a corresponding invitation to repentance and reconciliation with the Church.

    We call upon all to pray for our land – that the Lord will forgive us our collective societal sins as well as our personal sins and provide us a safe haven which allows us to work out our salvation in peace.

    СРЕДНЕ-АМЕРИКАНСКАЯ ЕПАРХИЯ: 9 апреля 2013 г.
    Заявление духовного суда Средне-Американской епархии по современному вопросу об однополых браках

    Верховный суд США в настоящее время рассматривает два дела, имеющие отношение к однополым бракам. Учитывая подробное освещение этой темы в средствах массовой информации важно, чтобы наше духовенство и прихожане полностью понимали позицию Церкви по этому вопросу.

    Живя в свободном обществе, мы должны быть в первую очередь благодарны за то, что у нас есть возможность исповедовать православную веру без излишнего вмешательства со стороны властей. Еще недавно этого не было в России, и нет до сих пор во многих странах мира. В свободном обществе можно выражать публично любые взгляды – как такие, с которыми мы, как православные христиане, согласны, так и такие, с которыми мы не согласны. Мы призываем наших прихожан в первую очередь руководствоваться Священным Преданием Церкви, чтобы различать, совместим ли какой-либо современный вопрос с православной верой. Если православный христианин решает вступить в политические дискуссии, при этом следует проявлять выдержку и осмотрительность, чтобы не впасть в экстремизм. Экстремизм не способствует смягчению нравов или привлечению к вере. Миряне, которые принимают участие в политических выступлениях, не должны заявлять, что выступают от лица Церкви. Строго говоря, такие заявления могут делаться только архиереем, или по особому благословению архиерея.

    Кроме того, следует понимать, что гомосексуализм, или иной греховный образ жизни, не совместим с христианством, о чем изначально говорится в учении Церкви. Не менее важно помнить и о том, что Церковь – это духовная лечебница, всегда открытая для всех желающих получить исцеление, даруемое Богом через покаяние. Это относится и к тем, кто совершал аморальные или противоестественные поступки любого рода, а также тем, кто искушаем такими грехами. Церковь сочувствует страждущим и предлагает им поддержку, исцеление и христианскую любовь. Те, кто активно участвует в аморальных или противоестественных занятиях не могут участвовать в Таинствах Церкви. Тем не менее, это не означает, что мы хотим отторгнуть или изгнать тех, кто согрешил подобным образом. Вместо этого мы должны стремиться вернуть попавших в такое плачевное положение к чистоте, чтобы они снова получили возможность участвовать в Животворящих Таинствах Церкви и подвизаться ради спасения в приходской общине.

    Вполне возможно, что в конце концов федеральное правительство примет решение признать однополые браки. Церковь не признает однополые браки ни при каких обстоятельствах, не признает их равными традиционным бракам, и не будет благословлять такие браки. Тем не менее, это не значит, что те, кто вступил в такой брак пересекли черту, из-за которой нет возврата. Церковь всегда строго осуждала ереси (такие как новацианство, монтанизм и донатизм) отвергающие возможность покаяния тех, кто совершил определенные грехи. Очень важно, чтобы наше духовенство не стеснялось позиции Церкви относительно греховности гомосексуализма и иных неестественных проявлений данной Богом человеку сексуальности, однако не менее важно, чтобы соответствующие заявления делались в духе любви,с приглашением к покаянию и воссоединению с Церковью.

    Мы призываем всех молиться о нашей стране – чтобы Господь простил общие грехи нашего общества, как и наши личные грехи, и даровал нам тихую гавань, чтобы мы могли спасаться в мире.

    • Ladder of Divine Ascent says

      “It is entirely possible that the decision will eventually be made to recognize homosexual marriage by the federal government. Several states have already made such decisions. Under no circumstances will the Church recognize homosexual marriage, accord it the status of traditional marriage, or bless such unions. However, this is not to state that those who have entered into such a union have stepped beyond a line from which they cannot return. The Church has always strongly condemned heresies (such as Novatianism, Montanism, and Donatism) which deny the possibility of repentance for those having committed certain sins”

      Is this code for letting people get “married,” then “repent” and partake of the Mysteries while continuing in their secular legal “marriage” to a member of the same sex? Are those who hold that actual repentance entails the ending of such a “marriage” going to be classified as heretics?

      And if not, does the below mean we must welcome sodomite couples among us into the life of the Church, just not “fully” as in partaking of the Mysteries? Church Directories with families consisting of “Bob and Steve (Last name) and unfortunately adopted children” and “Cindy and Sarah (Last name) and artificially conceived children” with smiling photos for example?

      “Those actively engaging in any immoral or unnatural pursuits cannot live a full sacramental life within the Church. However, this does not mean that we seek to drive away or ostracize those who have transgressed in such a
      way. Rather, we must make all efforts to draw those in such an unfortunate situation back to chastity and the opportunity to again partake in the Life Giving Mysteries of the Church and to engage the struggle for their salvation within the parish community.”

      The type of people such policies cater to aren’t out to be healed by the Church, but to assault and influence and change the Church from within, doing their part for the “Gay” agenda.

      (And then come the nudists, I wish I was joking, but a priest has already laid the groundwork for nudists in the nude among us, when/if that is legalized.)

      • Michael Bauman says

        Ladder:

        Is this code for letting people get “married,” then “repent” and partake of the Mysteries while continuing in their secular legal “marriage” to a member of the same sex? Are those who hold that actual repentance entails the ending of such a “marriage” going to be classified as heretics?

        One can only come back if there is repentance (normally). Which would mean no longer remaining in a sinful and false fornication relationship. That is the standard for heterosexual.

        Repentance is always possible while we draw breath. The deeper the sin, the more consequences however.

      • “Is this code for letting people get “married,” then “repent” and partake of the Mysteries while continuing in their secular legal “marriage” to a member of the same sex? Are those who hold that actual repentance entails the ending of such a “marriage” going to be classified as heretics?”

        I don’t believe that is what it meant, however it is the fine points like this that need to be spelled out in these statements. What I have found is that those who wish to change the practices of the Church will maneuver around an opening or what is not clearly stated. They are not honest people, they don’t care what the Church has taught and practiced for millennium, nor do they believe it. They think they know better. . .

    • American Orthodox Christian says

      It’s important to point out that this statement on the homosexual marriage issue was put out by the ROCOR diocese of Chicago and Mid-America (http://www.synod.com/synod/eng2013/20130409_print_enchicagoresolution.html) — i.e., not to be confused with the OCA’s diocese of Chicago and the Midwest (due to the similarity of these dioceses’s names, they are easily confused).

      I don’t know if the OCA has put out any such similar statement, but to be clear, this statement was issued by ROCOR, not by the OCA.

      • Archpriest Andrei Alexiev says

        I applaud my hierarch,Bishop Peter of the Chicago ROCOR diocese and my brother priests for this pastorally correct statement.I did not attend said conference because I am currently servind a Serbian Orthodox parish for which I only receive a part time salary,hence I work full time to remain at my post.
        Mr.Bauman is quite right,we don’t allow the HETEROSEXUAL who is involved in an illicit relationship to partake of the Eucharist until he/she either terminates the relationship or marries in the church.