Jeff Koons'

The Balloons Of Mr. Koons.

Jeff Koons’s 1986 stainless steel sculpture Rabbit fetched $91.1 million.

Jeff Koons has reclaimed his title as the living artist with the world’s most expensive artwork sold at auction. The triumph comes after Christie sold his 1986 stainless steel sculpture Rabbit for over $90 million at it’s Post-War and Contemporary Art sale in New York. Congratulations, but.

When appreciation for art ends and
Insanity starts?


Whether it’s via auction or private sales, artworks by big-name artists have drawn record-breaking prices. Take a look at the short list below. The sums of money involved in those transactions are insane and, frankly speaking, I don’t think that people who pay that much, do it out of love of art. I think it’s an adrenaline rush for them. Hunting White Rhinos isn’t legal anymore, so why not to drop a hummer on Jackson Pollock’s painting. The guy with the biggest trophy wins.

Leonardo da Vinci
Salvator Mundi (Savior of the World)
$450 million (auction)

Willem de Kooning
Interchange
$300 million (private sale)

Paul Cézanne
The Card Players
$250 to $300 million (private sale)

Paul Gauguin
Nafea Faa Ipoipo
$210 million (private sale)

Jackson Pollock
Number 17A
$200 million (private sale)

So, ultra-wealthy collector looks at the art market like it is an African safari, seeking a trophy to hang on the wall in his mansion’s 25,000 sq foot living room. Others are investors, (again, not art lovers) set on resale profit. For them, it’s a stock market, they don’t care what they buy as long as they can make money. And of course, art museums. They believe that adding a couple of big names to their gallery will bring in the crowds.

Is Jeff Koons’s work really that good?


Good enough to bring 91.1 million dollars for shiny 3 feet tall stainless steel bunny (or $58.4M for Balloon Dog (Orange))?

No, it is not.

Some people will disagree with me, and many will be angry at me, for the audacity to criticize what some view as pioneering and of primary art-historical importance.
But, guess what, I’m not criticizing his work, I’m defending it. I believe that by dropping such insane sums of money on art, people degrade that art. By paying tens, or even hundreds of millions of dollars for work of art, one transforms it into an ordinary commodity. It isn’t painting or sculpture anymore; it is just long string of digits which blurs the viewer’s mind, and in effect, destroys one’s ability to interact with it. If you walked into a museum or art gallery to see 90 million dollar sculpture, you are there for wrong reasons.

 I don’t like that art has became a status symbol for a handful of billionaires. One pays $30 million for a painting, then some other pays 50M for something else, then we read in news papers that Sothelby’s sold Paul Cézanne for 200M and so on.

Finally, there’s Salvator Mundi by Leonardo da Vinci. With 450 million dollar price tag (Four Hundred and Fifty Million Dollars)… I know who Leonardo da Vinci was, but 450 mils for a painting, I think it is a little excessive. Off course, as usual, there’s a simple explanation to this madness, and I (thank to my extensive contacts among art dealers 😉 ) know the answer.

The need to be number one.


In my humble opinion, people who spend tens/hundreds of millions of dollars on art do it not out of love of it, but because of their need for competition, and that’s something I can easily understand. I understand the need to be number one, the need to be a winner and right now 450,000,000 is the winning number.
The gentleman who’s bought da Vinci’s painting got the main prize, and I think he’s going to keep it for a long while. The reason why his number one position is not going to be in danger in any foreseeable future is because of the rules of the game. One can’t just drop a ton of money on any piece of garbage that someone put out for sale. It has to be something that, when paying such an insane amount of money, will not make one look like an idiot.
Spending $450 million on Leonardo da Vinci painting, (the only privately owned da Vinci in the world) by the rules of the game is perfectly O.K., and because there’s nothing else comparable to it, waiting to be bought, there’s no reason for the owner of Salvator Mundi to worry about losing his position.

Finishing touch.

It looks like I have finally finished this post.

Now I’m going to walk to my local Antiques and Collectibles store and buy something I’v been eyeing for quite some time – 3 feet tall Gnome figure with a price tag of $50 (I think I can knock it down to $45). I intend to install the little guy at my front lawn for everyone to see.

That, ladies and gentlemen, is the proper way to express real love for art.

Thank You For Reading

Hate Speech Soph

BuzzFeed Launched Full Fledged Marketing Campaign For “Far-Right, Foul-Mouthed, Red-Pilling” YouTube Star.

Joe Bernstein (BuzzFeed) Took on 14-Year-Old Girl and Got His Ass Kicked.

Soph who?
Just a few days ago I didn’t even know that this girl existed, and now I do, thanks to BuzzFeed News reporter Joseph Bernstein who decided to write an article titled YouTube’s Newest Far-Right, Foul-Mouthed, Red-Pilling Star Is A 14-Year-Old Girl. The reason for the writing was a video titled Be Not Afraid created by vlogger going by the name Soph, which she posted on her popular YouTube channel which at that time had over 800K subscribers. As a result of his article the video has been deleted by YouTube but her channel has gained a further 100,000 subscribers, and is less than 50,000 away from reaching one million.

Read:
Mr Joseph Berstein’s article
Watch:
Interview on Red Ice TV
Interview on InfoWars
Soph on line (updated Sep 3, 2019):
https://youtube.com/ltcorbis (channel deleted by YouTube)
https://freespeech.tv/watch/show/soph
https://bitchute.com/channel/RXA1oESU…
https://twitter.com/sewernugget
https://patreon.com/corbis
(page removed by Patreon)
https://newproject2.com/soph
https://gab.com/sewernugget


“You could beg me kicking and screaming to stop disseminating the ideas I believe in, and it wouldn’t make a fucking difference. Not only am I inoculated to that bullshit, most of Gen Z is too. Millennials grew up with MTV and nowadays watch Colbert. We, on the other hand, grew up with the internet, so we have no centralized source of information that controls what we think. We filter out the truth for ourselves; we’re not lazy. No one is brainwashing kids. Kids are simply learning from having free access to information, and there’s nothing you can do about it.”

Soph

So, who is Soph (ltCorbis) and what happened?

She is a 14-year-old girl who a few years back (on August 10th, 2016) started the LtCorbis YouTube channel where now, with the help of mature humor (way to mature for a young teenager) and lots of profanities, she shares her surprisingly well-articulated opinions on life and politics. That, for some reason, made a grown man, Mr. Bernstein, to write a nearly 2000-word article attacking her and calling for YouTube to censor her channel.

In his article Mr. Bernstein complains about Soph spewing hatred toward Muslims, anti-black racism, Byzantine fearmongering about pedophilia, tissue-thin incel evolutionary psychology, and reflexive misanthropy that could have been copied and pasted from a thousand different 4chan posts. (I’ll be honest with you, I have no idea what this means – My grasp on the English language isn’t tight enough – but I can see that Mr. Bernstein is a little troubled because of all that hatred Soph is projecting on her channel subscribers).

Hate is wrong. Hate is counterproductive. Being hateful has never helped anyone in achieving anything worth achieving. The problem is that Mr. Bernstein doesn’t see the difference between hate and satire or sarcasm. Making fun of something or someone doesn’t make you a hateful person.

I’m an optimist (it runs in my family), and I’m sure that if Mr. Bernstein will calm down and take a second look at Soph’s videos, he’ll see them for what they are – satires. After all, he too – once in a while – likes to add some witty humor to his tweets.

Kill a straight white man on your way to work tomorrow.

Its an excellent example of a joke (screenshot below) which could be misunderstood by people who take themselves a little too seriously… Of course, I don’t think he was serious about killing anyone (at least I hope he was not).

The ad campaign is going strong.

So far the attempt of pushing Soph off the Internet into oblivion didn’t work, Instead of losing popularity she’s gaining supporters. Thanks to all that free publicity, her YouTube channel is approaching one million subscribers.
It is not the first time when an attempt to block a creator from access to a potential audience or to block the audience from access to a creator’s work has backfired. Producers of movie Unplanned had faced a similar situation where so-called mainstream media outlets refused to advertise the film citing controversial content as a reason of refusal. As a result, the movie got a ton of free publicity and at the end turned to be a commercial success.

Thank You For Reading

Political Crash William Barr

Why Are Democrats Forcing Attorney General William Barr To Break The Law?

William Barr Cited for Contempt of Congress.

The House Judiciary Committee voted Wednesday (May 8, 2019) to hold Attorney General William Barr in contempt over the Justice Department’s refusal to comply with Democrats’ subpoena for special counsel Robert Mueller’s unredacted report complete with grand-jury testimony.

But,

In the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. Rule 6 states:
Unless these rules provide otherwise, the following persons must not disclose a matter occurring before the grand jury:
(i) a grand juror;(ii) an interpreter;
(iii) a court reporter;(iv) an operator of a recording device;
(v) a person who transcribes recorded testimony;
(vi) an attorney for the government; or
(vii) a person to whom disclosure is made under Rule 6(e)(3)(A)(ii) or (iii).”

And

In addition to above, Rule 7 (Contempt) States:
A knowing violation of Rule 6, or of any guidelines jointly issued by the Attorney General and the Director of National Intelligence under Rule 6, may be punished as a contempt of court.

So,

AG Barr has a choice; contempt of court or contempt of Congress. In case of contempt of court, it’s simple. Courts/judges have sharp teeth, and they can bite your head off.
In case of contempt of Congress, Assistant Attorney General for Legislative Affairs Stephen E. Boyd has explained in his letter to Judiciary Chairman Jerrold Nadler that:
“(T)he Attorney General could not comply with your subpoena in its current form without violating the law, court rules, and court orders, and without threatening the independence of the Department of Justice’s prosecutorial functions. Rule 6(e) contains no exception that would permit the Department to provide grand-jury information to the Committee in connection with its oversight role.”

In brief.

Providing unredacted (containing grand-jury information) Mueller Report to the committee – BAD.
Preventing unredacted report from being seen (as law requires) – GOOD.

One may wonder why…

…if releasing the (unredacted) grand-jury testimony is illegal, every member of Congress who has voted to hold General Attorney W. Barr in contempt of Congress, has not been charged with solicitation to commit a felony?

Disclaimer:
I’m not a lawyer, and I don’t play one on TV. I’m just trying to use a little of common sense.

Thank You For Reading

Question: How Safe Are Gun Free Zones?


What is A Gun Free Zone?

Short answer:
Gun-free zones are defined as places where general citizens can’t carry guns.

A little longer definition:
A Gun Free Zone is an area defined by people with guns (your government) as space where you, law-abiding citizen, are not allowed to enter unless you agree to disarm yourself (which in effect will horribly lower your ability of self-defense) and in the same time, they do not guarantee your safety.

Addendum:
So, if some psycho will get upset because his favorite “Game of Thrones” character didn’t accept his barbecue invitation, and will decide to enter The Zone and blow your (or someone else’s) brains out, you won’t be able to do anything about it.


Guns don’t scare me. Stupid people with guns scare me.

Some character in “Death Wish” movie.

Examples of
Gun Free Zones:

  • Places where only members of police or military police are allowed to carry firearms.
  • Areas, where it is illegal to carry a permitted concealed handgun.
  • Places that are posted as not allowing licensed concealed handgun.
  • Places where by law permit holders are banned.
  • Places where general citizens are not allowed to obtain permits. Permits are either not issued at all to citizens or to only a small selective segment (so-called may issue laws).

Read the full report on the Crime Prevention Research Center page.

We don’t need gun free zones.

That’s what happens when intended victims refuse to be victims and have lots of firepower… This is NOT a gun free zone.

Scene from “Code of Silence”
Starring Chuck Norris.

This scene was inspired by an actual event in a Chicago bar, owned by a retired Cop and was a Cop hangout in Beverly neighborhood.

Vermont is one of the five safest states in the country. In Vermont, citizens can carry a firearm without getting permission (no state permit is required to possess a rifle, shotgun, or handgun) without paying a fee (no permit is required to purchase a rifle, shotgun, or handgun) or, as of May 14, 2019, without going through any kind of government-imposed waiting period, and yet for ten years in a row, Vermont has remained one of the top-five, safest states in the union.

Gun laws have been proven without question to NOT prevent or reduce crime. Law-abiding gun owners, on the other hand, has been shown to do just that.

Answer
Gun free zones are incredibly safe
(for criminals)

So, ladies and gentlemen, live your lives as usual but don’t forget to carry your “Dirty Harry Gear.”

Thank You For Reading

Liberal Asks Man ‘When Was America Great,’ And Gets The Response She Deserves.

The man’s answer to the protester’s snarky query was quite possibly better and of deeper substance than any heard by most of the supposed intellectuals and highly intelligent pundits commonly seen pontificating on cable news. (Read the rest of the story).

What she’s saying about ‘this nation is horrible,’ basically saying ‘this nation is full of racists’ and I should be stupid enough to believe that when I’m sitting right here and see people who are nice of all colors that do things and work together, and this fool wants to take us back to a time when everybody hated each other.

Ricardo Caldwell

From The Smoking Curator.
It was a pleasure to listen to this gentlemen. It’s always refreshing when someone who loves our country takes on so-called intellectuals and effortlessly exposes their ignorance.

Thank You For Reading