Saturday, March 26, 2011

Ready For Our Close-Up: Time To Fund Con Art

That's right - it's a crime (and a shame) the Right's con artists (conservative artists) have to keep making this point ourselves:
[If] some deep pocket conservative [could] pull together 90 of the most brilliant conservative creatives, [and] pay them a living wage,...we could BURY the left.
That's iOwnTheWorld's Big Fur Hat. I'm not sure what's up with his punctuation there, but he's responding to the news that - with 90 staff members and George Soros' money - the Liberal Media Matters is transforming itself into a “guerrilla warfare and sabotage” outfit, set to attack Fox News and a handful of conservative websites (BFH: "Please. Pick US! PICK US!!!!" - LOL) and Big Fur Hat is correct:

I've said many times the Right isn't utilizing it's artists, only to be met with some stupid cry that it's only out of self-interest that I'd even bring it up, when I can do the art above, and make music, and more. Any claim that I'm looking for a handout is bullshit - I'm an artist - and I want in this fight on my playing field.

But making the time to create good art takes money.

It's hilarious, and sad, the Right can find money for some lame Mary Katharine Ham thing, or Reason TV's expose's, or the many projects of Pajamas Media (which all play, pretty exclusively, to the conservative base) but - when it comes to being really creative - the Right can't find time or money for anything better than this:

And not only is that lame, but, even worse - they're happy to fund it! Like it's good! There is absolutely no reason for allowing that to be the face of the Right, or allowing the Left to dominate the arts, when there are creative conservatives out there - and conservatives with money - to get the ball rolling. It wouldn't even take 90 of us - the staff of iOwnTheWorld and TMR could handle the load alone! So TMR is joining iOwnTheWorld in calling out to "Trump, Koch, Murdoch", and Andrew Breitbart, Roger L. Simon (with that stupid hat) and all the rest - come along for the ride:

It's time to release the hounds!


  1. There is absolutely no reason for allowing that to be the face of the Right, or allowing the Left to dominate the arts, when there are creative conservatives out there - and conservatives with money - to get the ball rolling.

    There aren't many conservatives in the arts for the same reason that there aren't that many conservatives in academia or in social services - these are fields that you have to be passionate about, to have a calling for irrespective of financial reward. They aren't things people get into to get rich.

    Take a random poll of conservatives you know - what fields are most of them in? Odds are they're in business, or in fields like accounting or engineering - good, reliable, solid careers for people who don't like to take chances and want to be able to make long-term plans.

    You think your average conservative wants to subsist on a $13,000 associate professor salary with no possibility of tenure, or eke out a living as a starving artist waiting to see if they get this or that grant?

    That said, your idea of a conservative foundation is a good one. One wonders what sort of specific values you might have to promote for your patron though, and what their expected ROI will be.

    For example, there's plenty of room for people who want to promote teen abstinence in the world of Christian contemporary music.

    In much the same way, the Unification Church is surely getting its money worth when it continues to prop up the Washington Times (a money-losing venture which can't compete on the free market) decade after decade - just look at the Washington's Times' editorial pages.

    What would the return on investment be for some industry lobbyist or conservative PAC who decided to invest in the Crack Emcee? What would you promote (or oppose) for them in return? What would be in it for them, in other words?

    That is the question you need to answer. Is it your vision or theirs you feel a burning need to get out of your system and into the world?

    Would you want to be Crack Emcee the rapper on a sonic crusade against minimum wage and illegal aliens?

    Crack Emcee the hip hop producer whose burning passion in life is removing Federal oversight from Wall Street?

    Crack Emcee the "cool" alternative blogger who wants to make sure everyone knows that air pollution standards in California are much too strict and punish business unnecessarily?

    What would your angle be and how much direction would you actually be willing to take on this? (For one things you'd probably have to stop continually posting other people's copyrighted fetish pornography... Lobbyists and PAC people are a lot of things but they aren't stupid - that woud go over like a lead balloon)

  2. Yes to all of the above - just not directly. That's the problem with most right-wing/Christian art - too earnest and direct, not allowing the audience to, say, reach the conclusion abortion is bad as though THEY thought of it.

    Believe it or not, I have a plan - and a good one. Having done the music thing for most of my life (which got interrupted because my wife killed three people, not because I was done) the ROI would be substantial, both financially and culturally. Actually, any investor could look forward to changing individual lives and the country, dramatically, in ways unheard of on the right except in country music.

    Conservatism, most definitely, wouldn't ever be the same.

  3. This will not actually have success, I consider this way.