Posted on 08/19/2016 5:30:29 AM PDT by luke1825
There is perhaps no better example of waste in the scandalous Veterans Administration than the millions spent on art instead of on care.
You could begin with the $670,000 spent on two sculptures at a California blind veterans rehabilitation center that the blind veterans cannot even see.
It may be ludicrous to point out that, as far as the Obama administration and the VA is concerned, it is the blind leading the blind. But that is the way it seems.
(Excerpt) Read more at lowellsun.com ...
It’s criminal.
Committees that select “art” for public display are the biggest bunch of gullible idiots on earth. They invariably pick the ugliest, most hideous crap they can find.
They should sell the paintings immediately.
What are they, ####ing nuts?!?!?!?
I hope Trump DESTROYS the federal payroll.
And the contract is awarded to a reputable artist, that’s also a donor to the Clintons?
Virginia spends way too much on its governor and former senators.
Yawn. Yes, Yawn. Not that it’s not despicable, but we’ve been hearing these stores of government waste for decades and nothing ever changes. They simply do not fear the People.
the purchase of art by the government is artist welfare
It’s perfectly obvious that Obama has put people in charge of the VA who are contemptuous of our veterans, who enjoy insulting them, who get off on spitting in their face and laughing while they do it.
Only a fool would think otherwise.
Of course, we live in a day in which the head of the VA could give a speech explicitly condemning US veterans as patsies and baby-killers, and everyone in the MSM would leap to their feet to justify those remarks and explain that they didn’t mean what they actually said.
Picking the most hideous “art” they can find is tantamount
to appearing “educated”, “erudite” and “sophisticated” in
the artsy-fartsy circles in which they travel.
The more hideous it is, the more expensive it is. One of
FANG’S relatives is a well-known “artist” in some circles.
This person HAS done some fairly good stuff; but is also
worthless in most practical areas. Taught art for a long
time until he got to the place where he would just fall
asleep in his classes and his bosses finally had to just
insist he retire. He is well into his mid-nineties. (He
always sort of lorded it over the rest of us “less talented”
family members; but was always there with bells on when
we cooked. I think I had maybe a bowl of soup at his house
once.) FANG finally cut off that relationship after the
same sort of backstabbing kept happening over the years.
He persisted in accusing FANG of “stealing” and caused him
a load of angst. I wouldn’t have tolerated it as long as
FANG did myself. It was stupid and not logical as FANG
worked and made PLENTY of money to buy what he wanted.
He kept trying with that dynamic as long as his dad lived
as his dad’s sibling was married to the “artist”.
I think I can say with some confidence that the “art” the VA bought using that money is mostly junk, even though I haven’t seen any of it. That said, there is a legitimate need for artwork and other decorative touches in hospitals, particularly those hospitals that treat veterans. Art, good art, brings humanity to a space, and tempers what can otherwise be an oppressive and overwhelming environment. Veterans in particular can suffer wounds that the non-military cannot truly understand, and some of those wounds aren’t physical. For someone like that, good art can be a true healing tool, and one that can be more effective than any doctor.
Were I ever given the opportunity to sit as the Secretary of the VA, my art policy would be to first purchase some artwork from veterans, because their artwork conveys experiences and messages that only other veterans can understand, but mix it in with good reproductions of classical works from most periods up to the late Romantic, and works from inspiring schools such as “Romantic Realism”, which are often hopeful and optimistic, something many hospital patients need to see.
Oh, and one other thought: I don’t know what the policy is for artwork in places like VA hospitals, but sculptures in a hospital for the blind make a LOT more sense than paintings. If the sculptures are sited where they can be touched, then I don’t have a problem with it.
However, if they’re fenced away, or are some oversized modernist abstract thing where most of the sculpture is unreachable, then yes, that would be pointless and a waste of money.
-—y art policy would be to first purchase some artwork from veterans——
That is a good thought
Although the VA is mentioned, the National Park service has a similar program that includes resident artists. It is all a patronage system to support starvin artists
The VA Salisbury, NC hospital recently put up a high,fancy wrought iron fence with brick pillars.
Reason?
Curb appeal?
/s
Such caring “administrators”. Let Veterans die of neglect yet spend money on decorations. These criminals should be arrested for their ghoulish disregard for those under their purported “care”. What a pathetic joke. Who are these idiots? What are their email addresses?
Our VA had its own police department with a full motor fleet, electric tricycles no one rides, officers in uniforms who literally do nothing all day long ... unless someone asks them for directions. The VA embodies the “if we don’t spend our budget we wont keep our budget” logic ... on steroids.
The reality is Obama and the Dems love the suffering and deaths of vets because the majority aren’t Democrat voters.
Nothing makes me sicker than that truism.
Yep, they are afraid of being ridiculed so they pretend to see the emperor’s new clothes.
And the dealer that represents the artist.
And there just might be a 'patron' with connections and an agenda.
I have a artist relative, she says the dealers typically take HALF, unless you are famous.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.