Fill/Stroke.com
We realize there are readers from all over the world here, so we apologize for this brief localized post. We’re in Arizona and have a large amount of readers from here. We also apologize to some readers who are bored with our current political posts. (And this certainly isn’t going to be the most interesting post you’ve ever read.) But, one more week and we can be back to less of that.
Really quickly: We have readers in California too. Though we won’t go over everything, we’d like to further extend our opposition to Proposition 8 which appears on the ballot there. Please, do not vote yes on this measure.
Now, for the main point of this post. There are 8 propositions this election cycle in Arizona. Most of the time, people aren’t really aware of them until they get in the booth. We just wanted to take a brief moment to give you more than a few minutes to decide what you think of these, and also, share our opinion (when we have one) on them.
Proposition 100:
From the Arizona Secretary of State web site: “This Initiative prohibits the government from charging any new tax on the sale or transfer of real property in Arizona. Currently, there are no real property sales or transfer taxes in Arizona. However, the government could enact a real property sale or transfer tax at any time. This Initiative would prohibit the enactment of any new real property sales or transfer tax by a constitutional amendment.”
Based on the language of the pro’s and cons of this ballot, it sounds like pre-emptive fear. The idea that “with the economy being bad, its only a matter of time before cities and counties start looking for more money”
But, it seems to also be preventing double taxation issues as well.
Here is a link to the full language as well as some additional arguments for and against: Prop 100
Proposition 101:
Passage of this proposition would result in an amendment to the Arizona Constitution stating that no law shall be passed that restrict’s a person’s freedom of choice of private health care systems or private plans, and that no one shall be penalized for opting not to participate in any particular health care system, plan or coverage
The main issue with this proposition is that the opponents of it say its possible that there may be a need for universal healthcare and this proposition is preventative to that possibility.
Propostion 102:
Only a union of one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in this state.
To be honest, this post originated out of a desire to openly protest this amendment to the Arizona constitution.
I will try to be calm in my language about this, but it gets me extremely worked up. I feel absolute disgust at those who would propose to vote yes on this measure. The idea of discriminating against people, simply based on your own religious beliefs is something to be ashamed of. And yes, there are no arguments that do not use religion as their primary opposition to gay marriage. No matter how its worded, at its core, this is a religious prejudice.
In Arizona, there is already a ban on this, which the courts ruled on in 2003. It is already a law and there is no need for a constitutional amendment. In 2006, this same measure was on the ballot, and I am proud of Arizona voters for voting against it. However, this time the campaign for this measure seems to have better funding, with more banners and billboards around Phoenix than before. Money that should’ve been spent on all of the many other fiscal problems happening in this area.
I went through the opposition arguments on the main page (I read the pro arguments as well, but was constantly nauseated by the ignorance within) Here are some of the best quotes:
The Arizona Constitution is not the place to change morality every time someone in the Arizona Legislature has an idea about what that morality should be. This legislative referendum has nothing to do with preserving the institution of marriage and everything to do with abuse of power by government.
__
Arizona voters defeated this measure just two years ago. Why? Because what it seeks to restrict is already against Arizona Law. So that’s not what this is about. What it really is meant to do is send a message to the rest of America that not every American is welcome in Arizona. It will impact citizens of every race, color, religion and gender. That’s wrong. And it’s not what we’re all about.
Phoenix is a city that values and respects diversity. That is why thousands of new residents continue to come here every month from all over the country. It adds to our economic vitality and will be even more important as we compete for highly-educated knowledge workers for our growing economy.
As Mayor, I have been focused on making our community safer, strengthening our economy and creating more educational opportunities for our children. We’re making great progress. Let’s not permit a hateful few to define us to the rest of our country by painting a target on a specific group of citizens.
I urge you to oppose these divisive tactics and vote no on Prop 102.
Phil Gordon, Mayor of Phoenix
__
Our elected officials in the Arizona Legislature are entrusted by the people to make decisions on issues of great importance to our community and to confront the real problems Arizonans face.
Instead, they have chosen to put the divisive, mean-spirited and discriminatory amendment on the ballot - again.
Voters already rejected this in 2006.
Why isn’t the legislature addressing the urgent issues of Arizonans, such as jobs, education, the economy, and the cost of gas, food and health care?
It is time we demanded real action on real problems.
I urge you to join me - vote no AGAIN on Prop 102.
United States Representative Raúl M. Grijalva, District 7, Tucson
Tanner Woodford, Adria Robles-Morua and I, Mark Dudlik strongly strongly urge you to vote No on this measure.
Several Links:
Full Language: Prop 102
Also: AZtogether.org
Proposition 105
Currently, a ballot initiative that gets the support of at least half the people who vote is approved. Proposition 105 would require a majority of all those registered, not just a majority of those who vote, for any measure that increases taxes, fees or involves additional government spending.
Sadly, I must relate this ballot measure to a fantasy baseball story. Recently a bad trade was proposed. The league votes on the trades, and if 6 of 10 teams not involved in the trade vote “No”, the trade is rejected. On this most recent trade, only 5 people were active enough to vote at all. All 5 said “No!” but the other 5, not being active, were basically counted as a “yes” vote, and the trade went through.
This measure basically makes it so this scenario could often happen, where even though the people who showed up to vote have decided the issue one way, those registered to vote but who didn’t show up, count as a “no” vote. (opposite results from the baseball example, but you get the idea)
I’m voting no on this.
Full language: Prop 105
Proposition 200
Currently payday loan businesses are regulated by the State. This licensing program is set to terminate on July 1, 2010. Proposition 200 would repeal the program’s termination date. The Payday Loan Reform Act would preserve this financing option for those who choose to use it, and also alter the procedures by which payday loan businesses operate including limiting the number and frequency of loans that can be made to one person and reducing loan fees that can be charged.
Don’t really have an opinion on this one
Full language: Prop 200
Proposition 201
If passed the “Homeowners’ Bill of Rights” would require a minimum 10-year warranty on new homes, allow a homeowner to participate in the selection of contractors to do repairs, and allows homeowners to sue home builders without being responsible for the builders’ attorney costs. Home buyers would have the right to cancel within 100 days and get back most of their deposit.
No opinion on this one either.
Full language: Prop 201
Proposition 202
If passed the “Stop Illegal Hiring” Act would revoke the business license of employers who knowingly or intentionally hire illegal immigrants. This initiative also increases penalties for identity theft, as illegal immigrants often use stolen identities to conceal their undocumented status. Fines collected as a result of this initiative will be distributed to schools and hospitals to help deal with the financial burden placed on Arizona because of illegal immigration.
We do not support prop 202. We do support regulation that protects both honest employers and legal citizens, we also support legislation that can help ease the desire of immigrants to come to the US for, often temporary, stays as employees. We also support legislation that punishes employers that try to exploit illegal immigration without care for the humans affected. This bill does not do enough for any of the previous concerns.
Full language: Prop 202
Proposition 300
A five-member, bi-partisan Commission comprised of citizens was appointed by the Governor, the President of the Senate, the Speaker of the House and the Arizona Chief Justice. They unanimously agreed to recommend via Proposition 300 that the salaries of legislators should be raised from $24,000 to $30,000 per year.
Can’t really care about this. 6,000 x 5 = $30,000. Vote yes, big deal. Take the money from the extra Prop 102 ad campaign funds.
Full language: Prop 300
Thanks everyone, hope this was useful to you.
I was born in November of 1983. May 31st, 1983 the Philadelphia 76ers completed a sweep of the Los Angeles Lakers, bringing home the last championship the city of Philadelphia would see for over 25 years. My entire life, I have never been able to say that my home town teams have won a championship (and I’m sorry Mom, the Bon Jovi owned Philadelphia Soul Arena Football Championship will never count.)
However, that drought ended tonight when the Phillies won the world series.
“This is FUCKING BEAUTIFUL!”
Oh to be in Philly tonight…
No comments. Posted by md in sports on 29 October 2008.
ObamaBats: 24 True Type Dingbats
Jeff Domke presents ObamaBats.
I’m proud to announce and share the ObamaBats! A collection of 24 high-quality dingbats featuring Barack Obama and various design elements. This collection is completely free for download, upload, distribution, use and modification. Use these dingbats to start creating your own Obama paraphernalia today!
No comments. Posted by tanner in branding, interwebs, politics on 29 October 2008.
Burlesque of NA’s obama test prints
OMG Posters! reports that Burlesque of NA will be selling a bunch of Obama test prints. They are all 20″ x 26″, and will be priced at $75-$300. They will go on sale tomorrow 30 October, at 2pm CST. Visit BurlesqueDesign.com to order.
Burlesque Design has decided to offer up a bunch of Barack Obama related test prints for sale online. In case you didn’t know, Burlesque did the printing for the entire Upper Playground Obama print campaign, almost 20 designs total, so there will be a lot of variety.
Has anyone else noticed an obsession with test prints in the poster art community? Its a cool concept, but it leaves me wondering how planned they are. At some point, does the artist stop layering ink onto a test print because it looks ‘finished’? If so, does it matter?
3 comments. Posted by tanner in craft, poster on 29 October 2008.
The closest elections in recent history
Good Magazine presents: the closest elections in recent history. (Thx PTRBKR)
No comments. Posted by tanner in information design, politics, visualization on 29 October 2008.
Fo Sho: Second Annual Fourth Year Poster Show at ASU
Fo Sho, the second annual exhibition of posters collected internationally and domestically by fourth year Visual Communication Design students at ASU, will be taking over the College of Design at Arizona State University this November. Additionally, select pieces will be sold via silent auction, to fundraise for a senior class thesis show occurring at the end of the Spring semester.
NOV17/ NOV28, 8a-5p : Poster Show
NOV17, MON 6-10p : Silent Auction + Opening Reception
College of Design Gallery 850 South Forest Mall / Tempe, Arizona
(Designer list following the jump.)
Visit the website, download the press release. Read more. →
No comments. Posted by tanner in exhibition, poster, silkscreen on 25 October 2008.
Some new red modern furniture at Red Modern Furniture (exclusive)
Red Modern Furniture, on Camelback in Phoenix, writes in with some newly acquired modern furniture. If you’re in the area, I highly recommend stopping by and admiring their beautifully restored work.
Eames LCW. “It’s actually a newer model, but we have been getting a lot of great vintage original Eames pieces in.” Read more. →
No comments. Posted by tanner in furniture, submission, vintage on 24 October 2008.
Most recent pro-Obama commercial from the “wassup” guys:
Its been eight long years since the boys said wassup to each other. Even with the effects of a down economy and imminent change in the White House, the boys are still able to come together and stay true to what really matters.
No comments. Posted by tanner in politics on 24 October 2008.
Friend of the magazine, Daniel Miessler, (I’ve always wanted to say that) has posted a great little video pointing out Mccain’s fall from sanity since 2000, and how drastically his opinions have changed since then.
Clips of it have made an appearance on The Daily Show and other outlets, and Daniel suggests spreading the video and so we’re doing just that.
No comments. Posted by md in politics on 24 October 2008.
Thank you Maribel for sharing this awesome post via Animal.
The first thing I do when I get a new magazine is go through it and, simmering with rage, remove all of the fucking annoying business reply cards, rip them into pieces, and slam the pieces into my trashcan. So for an advertiser to produce one of these promo cards that not only doesn’t piss me off, but gains my praise, is a once in a lifetime event. The clever advertiser here is Styx men’s underwear, a Czech company. Their product benefit? The backsides of their underwear are made from one piece so no fabric ever gets stuck up my crack. Or as the translated copy reads: “This is the only time when we are getting into your ass.” Now, I’m not sure I believe their claim, because I think all makes and styles of underwear sooner or later become the meat in your cheek sandwich. I also don’t know what magazine actually let Styx run a double-page spread of a man’s spread behind. But I’m a critic of ad ideas, not a journalist. And this is one fine piece of assvertising.
This has made my day.
1 comment. Posted by adria in advertisement, comedy on 24 October 2008.
