Wednesday, January 27, 2010

Drive in movie...

A recent piece of art that I've done in Adobe Illustrator! I love this program but I'm limited in what I can do with it. Everything that I work on in this program turns out like this. Which is fine but I'd like to see how much further I can take it one day.
Hope you dig the image!

NEW Acrylic painting!

This one came rather quickly but the original is only 8 x 10 so it was easy to paint. I'm doing a series of these kind of creatures for the next few paintings and I will post the results here.
Hope you enjoy!

See you next post!

Sunday, January 24, 2010

Brand spankin' NEW Abstracts!

Two new Abstracts for your viewing and as usual they are both available as prints on!

My Latest Art Book for Sale EVERYWHERE!

My latest Art Book: "The Book of Doodles" is now available at any book store and on line book seller including and here's the link to go directly to that page:
Buy a copy for a friend's birthday and don't forget that Art makes a great Valentine's day present!
See you next post!


Friday, January 22, 2010

2010 Calendars!

Time's a waistin'... get your 2010 NEW YEAR before it gets too much later in the year. Have any one of these three fun and interestingly colorful calendars. A whole year of terrific art on your walls for such a tiny price. Each page/month's image is printed so well that one could frame each one at the end of the year! How cool would that be to have 12 cool images on your wall for just the price of a calendar?! Get 'em while the year is still young!

Happy January!

See you next post.


Thursday, January 21, 2010

Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky is also a big bag of shit!

Also, Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Senate Republican leader who filed the first lawsuit challenging the McCain-Feingold law, praised the court for "restoring the First Amendment rights" of corporations and unions. "By previously denying this right, the government was picking winners and losers,"

The Supreme Court is a Big Bag of Shit. Arise people of America!!

If corporations can give unlimited amounts ... it means that the public debate is significantly changed with the loudest voices being corporations.
Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Samuel Alito, Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas, and Anthony Kennedy are scumbags for doing this to the American people and you can blame them for what comes from this!

Court eases business, union election spending rule
Email this Story

Jan 21, 11:56 AM (ET)


WASHINGTON (AP) - The Supreme Court threw out a 63-year-old law designed to restrain the influence of big business and unions on elections Thursday, ruling that corporations may spend as freely as they like to support or oppose candidates for president and Congress. The decision could drastically alter who gives and gets hundreds of millions of dollars in this year's crucial midterm elections.
By a 5-4 vote, the court overturned two of its own decisions as well as the decades-old law that said companies and labor unions can be prohibited from using moneyfrom their general treasuries to produce and run their own campaign ads. The decision threatens similar limits imposed by 24 states.
It leaves in place a prohibition on direct contributions to candidates from corporations and unions.
Critics of the stricter limits have argued that they amount to an unconstitutional restraint of free speech, and the court majority agreed.

"The censorship we now confront is vast in its reach," Justice Anthony Kennedy said in his majority opinion, joined by his four more conservative colleagues.
Strongly disagreeing, Justice John Paul Stevens said in his dissent, "The court's ruling threatens to undermine the integrity of elected institutions around the nation."
Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer and Sonia Sotomayor joined Stevens' dissent, parts of which he read aloud in the courtroom.
The justices also struck down part of the landmark McCain-Feingold campaign finance bill that barred union- and corporate-paid issue ads in the closing days of election campaigns.
Advocates of strong campaign finance regulations have predicted that a court ruling against the limits would lead to a flood of corporate and union money in federal campaigns as early as this year's congressional elections.
"It's the Super Bowl of bad decisions," said Common Cause president Bob Edgar, a former congressman from Pennsylvania.
The opinion goes to the heart of laws dating back to the Gilded Age when Congress passed the Tillman Act in 1907 banning corporations from donating money directly to federal candidates. Though that prohibition still stands, the same can't be said for much of the century-long effort that followed to separate politics from corporate money.
The decision's most immediate effect is to permit corporate and union-sponsored political ads to run right up to the moment of an election, and to allow them to call for the election or defeat of a candidate. In presidential elections and in highly contested congressional contests, that could mean a dramatic increase in television advertising competing for time and public attention.
In the long term, corporations, their industry associations and labor unions are free to tap their treasuries to assist candidates, although the spending may not be coordinated with the candidates.
"It's going to be the Wild Wild West," said Ben Ginsberg, a Republican attorney who has represented several GOP presidential campaigns. "If corporations and unions can give unlimited amounts ... it means that the public debate is significantly changed with a lot more voices and it means that the loudest voices are going to be corporations and unions."
Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Senate Republican leader who filed the first lawsuit challenging the McCain-Feingold law, praised the court for "restoring the First Amendment rights" of corporations and unions. "By previously denying this right, the government was picking winners and losers," McConnell said.
The case does not affect political action committees, which mushroomed after post-Watergate laws set the first limits on contributions by individuals to candidates. Corporations, unions and others may create PACs to contribute directly to candidates, but they must be funded with voluntary contributions from employees, members and other individuals, not by corporate or union treasuries.
Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Samuel Alito, Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas joined Kennedy to form the majority in the main part of the case.
Roberts, in a separate opinion, said that upholding the limits would have restrained "the vibrant public discourse that is at the foundation of our democracy."
Kennedy, who dissented from the rulings the court overturned Thursday, said, "No sufficient government interest justifies limits on the political speech of nonprofit or for-profit corporations."
Stevens, in a 90-page opinion that dwarfed Kennedy's, complained that the court majority overreached by throwing out earlier Supreme Court decisions that had not been at issue when this case first came to the court.
"Essentially, five justices were unhappy with the limited nature of the case before us, so they changed the case to give themselves an opportunity to change the law," Stevens said.
The case began when a conservative group, Citizens United, made a 90-minute movie that was very critical of Hillary Rodham Clinton as she sought the Democratic presidential nomination. Citizens United wanted to air ads for the anti-Clinton movie and distribute it through video-on-demand services on local cable systems during the 2008 Democratic primary campaign.
But federal courts said the movie looked and sounded like a long campaign ad, and therefore should be regulated like one.
The movie was advertised on the Internet, sold on DVD and shown in a few theaters. Campaign regulations do not apply to DVDs, theaters or the Internet.
The court first heard arguments in March, then asked for another round of arguments about whether corporations and unions should be treated differently from individuals when it comes to campaign spending.
The justices convened in a special argument session in September, Sotomayor's first. The conservative justices gave every indication then that they were prepared to take the steps they did on Thursday.
The justices, with only Thomas in dissent, did uphold McCain-Feingold requirements that anyone spending money on political ads must disclose the names of contributors. The justices filed five separate opinions totaling 176 pages.

Monday, January 18, 2010

Brand New Acrylic Painting for 2010!

This is the first of a new batch of paintings for 2010! I hope to have more to show soon! Enjoy!
This painting is also available as a print on
Hope you are having a great 2010 so far!!
See you next post!

Saturday, January 16, 2010

Some NEW Abstracts for January!

This is turning out to be a very creative month with more Abstracts, Lowbrow/Surreal acrylic paintings and art for my graphic novel,... which I will post more of soon. Hope you are having a good January 2010!
See you next post!

Friday, January 15, 2010

Graphic Novel Sneak peeks...

Here is some pages from my graphic novel! The only images I'm leaking out are ones that form nightmare sequences otherwise I give away too much of the story. I knocked out ten pages in the first week of 2010 but have been working on other things this last week. I hope to show more soon!

Sunday, January 10, 2010

More New Abstracts for 2010!

All of these new abstracts are available on as prints. Sorry I haven't posted more in the last week. I've been thinking over plans for the coming year. Now I have to move on all the plans that I've laid out. Lots to be done this new dacade/year! Hope everyone is well and enjoying the new year so far!
See you next post!

Sunday, January 3, 2010

First two NEW Abstracts for 2010!!!

I got on a bit of a roll for the first few days of the new year/decade and produced two fun filled Abstracts that are sure to make it into the 2011 calendar and into my next Art Book, which will be all about the Abstracts I've done in the last year!
Happy New Year to everyone!
Many people I know have had something of a struggle in 2009. Here are some wonderful new year wishes from the remarkable writer Neil Gaiman that are too good not to share:

May your coming year be filled with magic and dreams and good madness. I hope you read some fine books and kiss someone who thinks you’re wonderful, and don’t forget to make some art – write or draw or build or sing or live as only you can. May your coming year be a wonderful thing in which you dream both dangerously and outrageously. I hope it’ll make something that didn’t exist before you made it, that you will be loved and you will be liked and you will have people to love and to like in return. And most importantly, because I think there should be more kindness and more wisdom in the world right now – I hope that you will, when you need to be, be wise and that you will always be kind. And I hope that somewhere in the next year you surprise yourself.