It's been said before and it has been said again - there is too much news coverage resulting in our paying far too much attention to issues which are perhaps not worth our time. Political candidates are a case in point. Endless discussion ensues about their every statement and every vote they do or do not get. It is not necessary that we have this level of discussion and it is not worth the time it takes to listen to it. If news media did not have 24 hour a day coverage they would not feel compelled to discuss such minutia and instead we might get more important news coverage. Philosophers as far back as Plato have pointed out that we look for experts to take care of our health, to build our houses, people who have studied and prepared themselves to do these tasks. Why should we look for less in our political leaders? The ability to get votes does not guarantee the ability to run government. And Newt Gingrich isn't even capable of getting votes! One way to diminish unwanted behavior is to ignore it. If our news media ignored the unqualified (yes this is a value judgment that I am not sure I am really qualified to make) people running for office, they would not have a voice and would not be able to effectively campaign. But this would be undemocratic, wouldn't it? We are all allowed a voice in our democracy. So let's all speak up. But let's not all think that we have the ability to run the country, even if we do have a PhD in history and/or even if we do claim to represent the common people. I let my elitist bias out here by saying, as have philosophers through the ages, that democracy means that all should have equal opportunities offered to them, not that all people are equal and qualified to perform every job.
Once again the question of is it art arises. 
In this case the object is a Larry Rivers sculpture of legs hanging in a tree in Sag Harbor Long Island where it has hung for 4 years and has been in dispute for at least half that time. Larry Rivers died in 2010. His art commands high prices so this piece probably has value. It is being argued that it should not be considered art but rather a structure and thus should be removed under village zoning codes. Acceptance of this piece as art is a true case of the theory of institutional art, as judged by the prices that Rivers' work sells for. Too bad we just can't decide on the basis of is it attractive and appropriately displayed. In that case I think the piece might have to go, at least out of the tree. To me it just looks dumb hanging there.
My art:
Here is Abraham Lincoln wearing the scarf (which did end up to be 12 feet long) that I worked on in class. I think it suits him well. I hope to have photos of more sculptures wearing this scarf in the future, maybe even the Thinker. I probably need to get permission before I start messing with him though.

