Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: wirestripper
My anger about this is due to the fact that I thought I had accidently gone to DU when I saw the comments on this thread. I find that to be worrysome and somewhat surprising.

Depends on what you expect. If you expect us to be a bunch of art-prudes who blush every time we see a Rubens painting, then I am happy we disappointed you. If you expect us to be against the waste of 8000 dollars of federal money, applied in such a way as to cause the applier to be the butt of jokes from now until either 2004 or 2008, well, then, yes, that is what you can expect.

270 posted on 01/28/2002 10:17:43 AM PST by Lazamataz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 262 | View Replies ]


To: Lazamataz
"If you expect us to be against the waste of 8000 dollars of federal money, applied in such a way as to cause the applier to be the butt of jokes from now until either 2004 or 2008, well, then, yes, that is what you can expect."

I appreciate your clarity on this topic, and I quite agree this cover-up could have easily been nipped in the bud before it became such a big bust for the AG. And of course the ninnies would say tongue in cheek that they are only trying to help.

I have worries protesters will use this issue as a foundation for dissent by covering up publicly owned art and standing next to their work with signs correlating what they are doing with this action by the AG.

I have fears he left himself wide open by putting this art under cover.

312 posted on 01/28/2002 10:53:08 AM PST by Glutton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 270 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson