Comments posted organically
SelectSmart.com Homepage
Display Order:

Trump shot at rally
Crime by HatetheSwamp     July 13, 2024 3:37 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: oldedude (4 comments) [30 views]


Will anyone here be chagrined...
Religion by Ponderer     July 10, 2024 11:59 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: ROB3RT (38 comments) [447 views]


Axios article on Biden:
Politics by ROB3RT     July 7, 2024 12:26 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: oldedude (29 comments) [375 views]


Bernie Sanders backs Biden in New York Times essay: ‘He must win’
Politics by HatetheSwamp     July 13, 2024 12:21 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Donna (4 comments) [69 views]


Joe's Big Boy press conference predictions?
Media by HatetheSwamp     July 11, 2024 10:48 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: oldedude (22 comments) [211 views]


Threepeat! Something for the people who frequent the selectors.
Computers by Curt_Anderson     July 11, 2024 2:12 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Curt_Anderson (6 comments) [91 views]


Biden up 2 in PBS poll!
Politics by HatetheSwamp     July 13, 2024 4:25 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: (0 comments) [22 views]


A new Donald Trump. Relaxed. Mellow. During Hannity interview.
Media by HatetheSwamp     July 9, 2024 4:45 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: oldedude (22 comments) [201 views]


Joe's letter
President by HatetheSwamp     July 8, 2024 12:52 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Indy! (19 comments) [202 views]


Two interesting and consequential court decisions.
Law by Curt_Anderson     July 12, 2024 4:45 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Indy! (2 comments) [44 views]


Religion selectors, pages, etc.
Will anyone here be chagrined...
By Ponderer
July 10, 2024 11:59 am
Category: Religion

(0.0 from 0 votes)
Rules of the Post

SelectSmart.com SelectSmart.com SelectSmart.com


Rate this article
5 Stars
4 Stars
3 Stars
2 Stars
1 Star
0 Stars
(5=best, 0=poor)


... if a radical, right wing conservative Supreme Court and Project 2025-mad GQP Congress overthrows the constitutionality of same sex marriage? Thereby blowing the whole constitutional right of all citizens to equal protection under the law to smithereens?

Comments Start Below


The views and claims expressed by contributors are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views and beliefs of SelectSmart.com. Not every statement made here can be assumed to be a fact.
Comments on "Will anyone here be chagrined...":

  1. by HatetheSwamp on July 10, 2024 12:11 pm

    po,

    How can Congress overthrow the constitutionality of anyEFFINthing? Your question makes no sense.

    You need to attempt to ground the preferences and prejudices that you bring with you to every moment of your life.

    As the Eagles sang, "Don't let the sound of your own wheels drive you crazy."


  2. by Ponderer on July 10, 2024 12:38 pm

    Yeah we'll see. Won't we.

    Believe me, I've never been so hopeful that I am wrong about something as I am about what it appears obvious to me conservatives have planned for this country in my life.


  3. by HatetheSwamp on July 10, 2024 1:08 pm

    You need to take a chill pill.


  4. by Ponderer on July 10, 2024 2:21 pm

    And you need to keep such an embarrassingly ignorant opinion to yourself, Bill.

    You haven't got a fuckingclue. You haven't got afucking thing to loose in all this, Bill. No matter what Trump and the thousands of his personally anointed flying fascist monkeys he's going to insert into and replace our government with do to this country, you are resting secure in the belief that nothing he does will affect you to any appreciable way at all. Or to any of your people at all in any negative way.

    And you know... I am quite sure that you personally know people in your circle of friends who will be quite happy to see the draconian, theocratic, homophobic, xenophobic bullshit that evilfucking Golden Calf of yours is going to make happen to this country.


    Bet they came right to mind when you read that. Didn't they.


    Sure... YOU have no reasons to get more than a little tad concerned about the anti-LGBTQ/Civil Rights crowd getting a free pass to the Oval Office, a GOP-controlled Congress, and an activist, far right Supreme Court majority who answer to no one other than their Industry/Think Tank $ugar Daddies, and their warped and draconian, bigoted and depraved views of what America's Founders really intended this country to turn into.


    You have the same problem that you've always had, Bill. Not a molecule of empathy in your entire being. You are blind to and uncaring of the complexity of all that is going on around you and whose lives get effected by your side's bigotry. You aren't even aware of what your own side is declaring and has been declaring for a long time that it wants to do to this country if given half a chance.

    Well Trump and currently your whole MAGA Republican party are already declaring, insinuating, joking, telegraphing, suggesting, whatever thefuck you want to call it... that they are gonna give them every chance they can possibly swindle out of the American people to do what they want. To turn this country into what they believe it should be. Civil rights and the Constitution can go fuckthemselves for all they care and have said they care.

    This is all of course... should the American voters give the MAGA Republican party the chance to give them the chance.


    So please refrain from the advice on how to emotionally deal with a likely impending democratic implosion of the country I have lived in my whole life.

    You deal with it however thefuck your political and spiritual dogma allows you to feel good about yourself, Bill. There's my advise to you.




  5. by HatetheSwamp on July 10, 2024 2:53 pm

    po,

    Honestly. Relax.

    I survey right-wing media daily. I'm a geezer news junkie. I have too much time on my hands. Trust me.

    No one of any significance on the right has any interest at all in repealing the Obergefell decision. No one. Not a single person.

    On the right, social conservatives' energy is focused on what's happening with abortion. Not LGBTQ issues.

    I know that you'll never do this, so trust me. If you watch two weeks of GUTFELD! and check out his guests, beside the three regulars?, between a third and a half are LGB people. The rising star at Fox News is that EFFIN gay Guy Curt never heard of. H£ck, he even hosted Fox and Friends t'other day!

    You really need to make a serious effort to connect to the real world.

    Donald Trump really was the most moderate GOP candidate for President in 024. And, he runs the party.

    No one who matters even a little bit is interested in overturning Obergefell...

    ...and the Supreme Court has made it clear that it wouldn't overturn it if it was asked. Almost certainly, it wouldn't even take such a case.

    I chastise you for getting your news from sources that fan the flames of the preferences and prejudices that you bring with you to every moment of your life. You are only hurting yourself.

    Trust me. I survey the thinking on the right every freakin friggin EFFINday.

    You're fine.


  6. by oldedude on July 10, 2024 4:19 pm
    In order to do that, there are about two dozen laws that have to be reversed, along with constitutional readings. None of which have been shown to be in any threat at all.

    The difference is that you're equating what's going on in schools, with the basic principles that have been established. No one questions equal rights. Or the ability for couples to have a life.

    What is questioned is hiding what they are teaching in schools from parents. And that has continually been trashed in the courts because of parental rights that have been established for generations and isn't finite. Along with parental "rights" come responsibilities, you can't beat your kids, you must provide a safe and secure environment for them. They have to have some sort of education that fits a "standard."

    AND, you have a lot of people (yes, even those evil conservatives) that support YOUR right under the constitution (life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness) the same as I have. That is an absolute with a lot of conservatives, and needless to say, virtually all liberals.


  7. by Ponderer on July 10, 2024 4:53 pm

    The conservative majority of the Supreme Court just gave the president of the United States immunity from prosecution for any crime that he commits and then declares was part of his official presidential duties. If any of such crimes are even discovered and brought up to him by the way.

    And I'm not supposed to justifiably expect literally anything out of these banana Republicans...?



  8. by ROB3RT on July 10, 2024 5:06 pm

    I have voted for the Democratic candidate in every presidential election since 1988. Even when I didn't like the candidate, I realized that Supreme Court seats were at stake -- as were our fundamental Constitutional rights.

    Unfortunately, a lot of left-leaning citizens decided to throw away votes on Ralph Nader in 2000, giving us John Roberts and Samuel Alito. Enough progressives voted for Jill Stein in 2016 to swing the electoral college to Trump, giving us Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Comey Barrett.

    Those five conservative seats could have all been moderate or liberal seats if liberals had held their noses and voted for the lesser of two evils.

    So, no, I will not be chagrined if SCOTUS overturns gay rights. That responsibility will fall on the shoulders of those who said they supported gay rights but threw their votes away.


  9. by oldedude on July 10, 2024 10:45 pm
    The conservative majority of the Supreme Court just gave the president of the United States immunity from prosecution for any crime that he commits and then declares was part of his official presidential duties. If any of such crimes are even discovered and brought up to him by the way.
    po- That's a bald faced LIE. You actually need to read the FACTS as much as you despise them.


  10. by Indy! on July 11, 2024 1:06 am
    The D party - and the D party alone - lost (and gave away) those Supreme Clown picks, Robert. But since you’ve only been voting since 1988 - we can offer you one free Noob Pass for not understanding the big picture here.


  11. by Ponderer on July 11, 2024 7:37 am

    "The conservative majority of the Supreme Court just gave the president of the United States immunity from prosecution for any crime that he commits and then declares was part of his official presidential duties. If any of such crimes are even discovered and brought up to him by the way."

    "po- That's a bald faced LIE." -Hate

    No it isn't. Not really. Not at all.

    Whatever the specific wording of the ruling was, what I stated is what will happen if Trump becomes president again. What do you think Trump is going to do with that SS decision if he becomes president again? He is going to go ahead and commit any number of felonious crimes of corruption or treasonously outrageous crimes that he wants to (as he always has), and if he is caught having committed felonies and it is brought to light, he will launch right into his standard pattern...

    He will first claim that he didn't do it, he didn't do anything wrong. Then he will say that yeah, he did it. But what he did isn't even illegal at all... then finally... now... he'll get to say that he did it, and yeah maybe it's a crime, but he is the president and it was an official presidential act and all part of his official presidential duties. So he's immune from any prosecution. It's all part of his standard pattern of tactics we've seen over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over again. A pattern that you, again, have pigheadedly and blitheringly refused to open your eyes to and see.

    So now, he'll always have that "Get Out of Jail Free" card that the MAGA-Hat Supreme Whores just gave him to tack onto the end of his standard operating procedure when accused of doing anything wrong.

    What part of this scenario do you believe is mendaciously unlikely? How is any of this a lie?

    Nothing will be litigated while he's in office of course. Because he is a sitting president. And we won't be able to go after him when he's out of office, even if the Supreme Court's judgement didn't keep us from going after him, because he will never leave office again until Marines drag him outta there in a flag-draped coffin.

    This is exactly what a megalomaniacal, career criminal mob boss like him will do with that SS ruling. Even if he is taped by every network raping a six year-old girl on the White House lawn during the Easter egg hunt. He'll say that what he did to that girl was part of his official presidential duties.

    How can you possibly imagine that he would do anything differently?

    He's already trying to use the Supreme Whores' ruling to get out of all the other crimes he's already been caught red-handed committing and is being/has been tried for. I am doing nothing but stating what the obvious future logically holds. It's no more of a lie than predicting that the moon will continue to orbit the Earth.



  12. by HatetheSwamp on July 11, 2024 7:50 am

    "The conservative majority of the Supreme Court just gave the president of the United States immunity from prosecution for any crime that he commits...

    Bull$#!t.

    Where do you get your "news?"


  13. by HatetheSwamp on July 11, 2024 7:58 am

    Y'know po.

    I can't see any connection to reality in you're posting, but I will say that what you posted is pretty much bang on mainstream metaphorical Rachel thinking. I'm certain that you are sincere.

    As far as the election is concerned, from what I can tell, moderate and independent common sense voters consider what you think both insane and offensive.

    If you lot continue to say this stuff, I predict that Trump beats the Dem nominee at least 350-188 in the Electoral College and that GOPs will pick up about ten House seats and will hold the Senate 52-48.


  14. by Curt_Anderson on July 11, 2024 9:54 am
    This is an anonymous post

    Robert’s post is patently false on every level. The Ds - the party he admits to blindly supporting no matter what their policies - gave away all those seats (as I explained many times). Bob thinks he’s a political guru who has the answers and doesn’t realize he is the problem.


  15. by ROB3RT on July 12, 2024 1:05 pm

    I get it. People don't like to admit mistakes. When you throw away your vote on a protest candidate, it's embarrassing to admit to yourself that you screwed up. And there's a really strong temptation to blame someone else.

    But this is all very simple. Presidents nominate judges. Senators confirm them. Regular citizens like you and I vote for presidents and senators.

    Social conservatives understand this. They had a 50-year game plan to overturn Roe v. Wade one election at a time. Sure, social conservatives sometimes vote for third-party candidates for local offices and governor, but they cast their votes for pro-life Republicans for Senate and President so they can get the judges they want. They understand how this works. Unfortunately, a lot of lefties don't.

    That's why the Supreme Court is about to take away your cherished rights. Because folks on the left threw away their votes on Ralph Nader and Jill Stein instead of voting for people who could actually win elections and nominate liberal justices.

    Yeah, I've heard all the lame excuses, blaming the political system, or Democratic Party leaders, or the electoral college. It's all BS. We as voters can't control any of that. The one thing we can control is our vote. As Republican voters have shown, it's a powerful weapon. Try to use it wisely next time.


  16. by HatetheSwamp on July 12, 2024 3:28 pm

    Rob3rt,

    I don't know what you knew of Curt from before but he's become an unabashed Good German for "that feckless dementia-ridden piece of crap" and for all things Democrat. It's pretty brainless and impulsive.

    Curt's been hiding out on Joe since the debate so that might have changed, but before, as po'd say, oy freakin friggin EFFINvey! He's still a first-rate reactionary with the Dems. The restrooms at the DNC headquarters don't stink, if you ask Curt.


  17. by Curt_Anderson on July 12, 2024 3:58 pm
    HtS,
    I've been absent but not hiding out. I've been consumed developing this new game
    Threepeat! which I've mentioned here. Indy had a helpful comment causing me to rewrite the instructions.

    I also had landlord responsibilities to deal with.

    As you know, I wrote that Biden should drop out. Did you see the latest RCP polls? I am glad to see polling on Trump vs. Harris and Newsom.


  18. by HatetheSwamp on July 12, 2024 5:14 pm

    RCP Trump +2.9


  19. by Indy! on July 12, 2024 6:34 pm
    You’re even more out of touch than I suspected, Robert - still repeating the 1980s D talking points. If you want to know which votes embarrass me? Just ask and I’ll give you the full list…

    1) Walter Mondale 1984
    2) John Kerry 2004
    3) Obama 2012

    Jill Stein?
    Ralph Nader?

    Never voted for either one. 😘


  20. by ROB3RT on July 12, 2024 7:19 pm

    I never asked which votes embarrass you and I don't care.

    This thread started with someone blaming Republicans for taking away gay rights. Conservatives didn't take them away. Lefties surrendered those rights by either failing to vote or throwing their votes away on third-party protest candidates.

    Conservatives vote strategically for candidates who can advance their priorities. That's why they have been successful in appointing and confirming right-wing judges. Left-leaning voters could learn something from this.


  21. by Indy! on July 12, 2024 8:35 pm
    The Rs also get stuff for their votes - Roe overturned, 10 Commandments in classrooms, etc. Ds get excuses for theirs. But keep beating your head against that same wall - sooner or later the wall or your head will give.


  22. by ROB3RT on July 12, 2024 10:30 pm

    Congratulations, Indy! I'm glad you're finally seeing the light.

    Yes, when conservatives vote for Republicans, those Republican presidents and senators appoint and confirm conservative judges who overturn Roe, put the 10 Commandments in classrooms and advance many other conservative priorities.

    When left-leaning folks vote for Democrats for President and Senate, they get liberal justices like Breyer and Ginsburg (under Clinton), Sotomayor and Kagan (under Obama) and Jackson (under Biden).

    If the folks who voted for Ralph Nader and Jill Stein had instead voted to elect (and re-elect) Gore and Hillary, we would have a solid liberal majority on the Court. Roe would still be the law of the land. Citizens United would have never have happened. We would have sane gun-control laws. There would be no 10 Commandments in the schools. Donald Trump would no longer have immunity.

    These are the stakes. Conservatives have proved you can fundamentally change the law of the land by voting for candidates who will appoint judges that advance their priorities. Conservatives don't waste their votes on protest candidates. That's why they're successful. When will liberals learn?


  23. by Indy! on July 13, 2024 12:41 am
    That’s the D talking points which we would expect from a paid D operative like yourself (unless I’m still giving you too much credit and you’re doing all this Hillary et al butt kissing for free). The reality is the Ds gave away the Court themselves as I’ve already explained to you and the other low information voters more than once. The people who do not vote D are not the problem. They didn’t have a voice to tell RGB to retire under a D. They tried to tell you hardheads Hillary couldn’t beat the game show host. You guys didn’t listen. Now you’re falling back on the same trite, pathetic political noob nonsense that created the problem in the first place. The funniest part being you still do not understand the Ds are complicit- that this is what their masters wanted. Nothing happens by accident in US politics, Bob - everything is choreographed and made possible by chumps like you. You are the problem. You give away your vote and ask for nothing but more excuses in return - which the Ds gladly take while laughing at you behind closed doors.

    And Bobber - before we forget - remember we gave the Ds EVERYTHING. They had the WH, solid manorities in both houses and a “liberal” Court. What did we get for two decades of doing the Ds dirty work for them? The GOP healthcare plan. So why on earth would anyone support these worthless con artists? Bottom line? It’s right in front of your face and the faces of the rest of the low info (read: D) voters… you’re just too embarrassed to admit you’ve been buying into a lie for the last 34 years. Time to grow up, son. 😌


  24. by HatetheSwamp on July 13, 2024 4:06 am

    Rob3rt,

    If the folks who voted for Ralph Nader and Jill Stein had instead voted to elect (and re-elect) Gore and Hillary, we would have a solid liberal majority on the Court.

    The thing is, I think that Dem voters did vote for AlGore and Hillary. But, when Dems nominate candidates who are unattractive to independent voters, Dems have to deal with the consequences.

    Indy and pb have been pointing out for, as po'd say, EFFINyears, that the Dems rigged the 016 primaries to foist Hillary on a hapless electorate which elected Trump. That's the fault of Dem corruption.


  25. by Curt_Anderson on July 13, 2024 7:04 am
    HtS,
    You just repeated one of the greatest political myths in history. There not only is no evidence that the 2016 primaries were rigged, there is no logical explanation as to how it could be done.


  26. by Donna on July 13, 2024 7:25 am

    Robert: I've been in so many conversations like the one you're having with Indy. Of course what you wrote is ironclad logic. Americans who live in contested states who vote for alternate party candidates in general elections don't do logic. I stopped wasting my time arguing with them several years ago because it's a colossal waste of time.



  27. by HatetheSwamp on July 13, 2024 7:54 am

    Donna,

    Am I right? You voted for Jill in 016?


  28. by Donna on July 13, 2024 7:57 am

    Yeah. California wasn't a contested state. I have no problems with voting third party when it doesn't matter.


  29. by Indy! on July 13, 2024 9:30 am
    LOL! You need to look up ironclad in a dictionary, Donna. Ds have been playing that stupid “we deserve your vote no matter what” bullshit my entire life and what has it accomplished for PROGRESSIVE policy? Even when the Ds have everything they accomplish nothing. Why do you think less than 1/3 of the country is willing to even call themselves Ds? How did your party get THAT embarrassing? Answer: Years of failure and capitulation. Indy and his indie friends are not the problem - you and Robert and Curt covering for the lies, cheating and ABSOLUTELY HORRID choices for candidates did.


  30. by Indy! on July 13, 2024 9:34 am
    oh and let’s not forget the HILARIOUS HYPOCRISY of Donna voting Stein herself and crying her crocodile tears if anyone else did the same.*. She obviously doesn’t even buy her OWN bullshit.

    *Thanks peebs!


  31. by oldedude on July 13, 2024 11:10 am
    Donna- I think there's a huge difference between a swing state (even like FL which only swung a few years ago) and a CA. Obviously, a vote for Stein in CA is almost an expectation. I would expect the CA state dems may actually note that (and the districts) to see where those folks are to maybe run someone like Stein in local districts. Where in FL or AZ, it's stupid and a wasted vote, especially in an election like this one. A vote for Stein (just as an example) helps no one. There aren't enough votes for them to make anyone take note.


  32. by ROB3RT on July 13, 2024 11:32 am

    I'm not going to bother with the insults. They're a sign that you're getting emotional and running out of ideas. But I will address one of the comments you made:

    Ds have been playing that stupid “we deserve your vote no matter what” bullshit my entire life and what has it accomplished for PROGRESSIVE policy?

    No, Democrats don't deserve anyone's vote. But if you support left-leaning priorities -- such as reproductive rights and gay rights -- there's only one party that can both win elections and appoint and confirm judges that support those rights. That's the Democratic Party. If you can't bring yourself to vote for Democrats, then you get to suffer the consequences, which is a Supreme Court packed with conservatives.

    This is about personal responsibility. We can't control what national leaders do, or the structure of the electoral system, when judges decide to retire or all the other things you keep bringing up. The one thing we can control is our vote. If you and others value your constitutional rights, you need to look at which party nominates and confirms the judges who best represent those values and vote for that party.

    And if you can't do that, don't whine when the Supreme Court takes your cherished rights away.

    Conservative voters have figured this out. They do not waste their votes on third party protest candidates. That is why they have been successful in dragging the court to the right. They will continue to be successful until people on the left wise up.


  33. by ROB3RT on July 13, 2024 11:55 am
    Donna wrote:

    Yeah. California wasn't a contested state. I have no problems with voting third party when it doesn't matter.


    With all due respect, you're part of the problem. In 2016, you should have been able to see the vast difference between Hillary and Trump. Trump said he would nominate Supreme Court justices from a list provided by the far-right Federalist Society. Hillary said she would nominate judges that supported reproductive rights, gay rights and other left-leaning priorities.

    Couldn't you see that difference? Wasn't it meaningful to you? Didn't you feel an obligation to help the candidate who supported the rights you valued? How about phone banking? How about urging progressives in swing states to support the candidate who will protect gay and reproductive rights? There are a hundred things you could have done. Voting for Jill Stein wasn't one of them.

    And now we're at another point in time, eight years later. I hope Biden will be replaced on the ticket. But if he's not, I'm going to do everything I can to see that he's elected so that he can protect all of the advances we've made over the past four years and nominate judges that reflect my values. What will you do?


  34. by Curt_Anderson on July 13, 2024 12:24 pm
    Most of the time voting for a third party presidential candidate won't affect the outcome. If a person is voting in a solid blue or solid red state voting for the independent, Green, Libertarian or even writing in your name won't really matter. I live in a very blue state and I wouldn't vote for a third party candidate because I don't like to encourage them.

    If you vote in a swing state in might matter. For example, in 2000 Bush beat Gore by 537 votes in Florida which decided the election. If there were 538 Nader Green Party voters who decided that Gore wasn't environmentally attuned enough, they are each 1/538ths responsible for Samuel Alito and John Roberts being on the court. They are also 1/538ths responsible for SCOTUS being a six-three conservative majority instead of a five-four liberal majority.

    Of course Florida voters who wanted Gore to win and stayed home also bear responsibility. If you are a voter in a swing state you have a greater responsibility as a voter in the presidential election. All voters have responsibility take their vote seriously in regards to down ballot candidates: if not Congressional candidates, local candidates.


  35. by Donna on July 13, 2024 2:13 pm

    Robert, if I thought that Hillary had even a remote chance of losing California, I would have voted for her. That should have been crystal clear to you from what I wrote. Attack people here who should be attacked. I'm not the problem.


  36. by ROB3RT on July 13, 2024 3:37 pm

    Donna:

    I am attacking the people who should be attacked.

    I don't blame Republicans for taking away gay rights, trans rights, reproductive rights. They told us what they were going to do. I blame the folks on the left who saw what the Republicans were promising and didn't take the threat seriously.

    I saw that Hillary was the only person standing in the way of an extreme right-wing court. I voted to protect your rights. I donated money. I knocked on doors. I phone banked. What did you do?


  37. by Donna on July 13, 2024 3:52 pm

    On social medua, I tried to convince Hillary haters on the left who lived in contested states to vote for her.


  38. by ROB3RT on July 13, 2024 3:57 pm

    Really? Because I seem to recall you bashing her over and over in this forum.


Go To Top

Comment on: "Will anyone here be chagrined..."


* Anonymous comments are subject to approval before they appear. Cookies Consent Policy & Privacy Statement. All Rights Reserved. SelectSmart® is a registered trademark. | Contact SelectSmart.com | Advertise on SelectSmart.com | This site is for sale!

Find old posts & articles

Articles by category:

SelectSmart.com
Report spam & abuse
SelectSmart.com home page