100 days in office, coronated Messiah Arms outstretched, he wears crown of thorns

[samurai7]

Try not to vomit when you read this. :rolleyes:

On his 100th day in office, President Obama will be "crowned" in messianic imagery at New York City's Union Square.

Artist Michael D'Antuono's painting "The Truth" – featuring Obama with his arms outstretched and wearing a crown of thorns upon his head – will be unveiled on April 29 at the Square's South Plaza.

According to a statement released about the portrait, "The 30" x 54" acrylic painting on canvas depicts President Obama appearing much like Jesus Christ on the Cross: atop his head, a crown of thorns; behind him, the dark veil being lifted (or lowered) on the Presidential Seal. But is he revealing or concealing, and is he being crucified or glorified?"

Even the title of the piece, "The Truth," suggests a play on biblical themes, as Jesus said in John 14:6, "I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me."

Get "The Audacity of Deceit: Barack Obama's War on American Values" and learn about the looming hostile attack on Judeo-Christian values and freedoms Americans hold dear

"More than a presidential portrait," writes D'Antuono on a website touting the painting, "'The Truth' is a politically, religiously and socially-charged statement on our nation's current political climate and deep partisan divide that is sure to create a dialogue."

Like others in the news who have depicted Obama in Christ-like imagery, D'Antuono insists he isn't claiming the man is Messiah, but only inviting "individual interpretations."

http://worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=96138

:)) Do you love this? No matter how obvious, how blatant a liberal is. They will hit you over the head with something like this, and then cover their ass by saying it's "open to interpretation!"

:rolleyes::rolleyes:

Stalin didn't get propoganda like this! This is hilarious!

:)) :)) :))

[Late2TheParty]

If true, I'm thinking this is a parody/satire.

[Impenitent]

the messiah would never intentionally parody himself...

at least not without styrofoam pillars...

[Late2TheParty]

If true, I'm thinking this is a parody/satire.

I'll alter my previous statement - it's designed so that conservatives see it as the arrogance and ego of the left; liberals see it as parody and satire of the right; and the independents see it for what it is: an attempt by the artist to get attention and money.

Probably will be sucessful in its aim.

[samurai7]

I'll alter my previous statement - it's designed so that conservatives see it as the arrogance and ego of the left; liberals see it as parody and satire of the right; and the independents see it for what it is: an attempt by the artist to get attention and money.

Probably will be sucessful in its aim.

I'm sorry guys, you can spin this all you want. It's pretty obvious "the truth" as this artist wants to call it, is smack dab in what the guy painted.

:rolleyes:

[Sknyluv]

It's pretty obvious "the truth" as this artist wants to call it, is smack dab in what the guy painted.

:rolleyes:

As always, Art is up for interpretation ... but I don't think you're correct on this one.

[MADMAX]

and the libs will continue saying they only hear "the other side" refer to Obama as the Messiah.:rolleyes:

[samurai7]

As always, Art is up for interpretation ... but I don't think you're correct on this one.

As always liberals hide behind "interpretation" no matter how obvious anything is.

:)) :)) :))

[ModerateVoice]

This "art" reminds of of the uproar several years ago when "artist" Andres Serrano received $15,000 from the tax-funded National Endowment for the Arts for a photograph of a crucifix submerged in a glass of the artist's urine.
Interesting what some liberals consider to be "art."

[dizzzave]

PROTIP: The artist is trolling you.

[Hoobeedoo Bejesus]

I'm sorry guys, you can spin this all you want. It's pretty obvious "the truth" as this artist wants to call it, is smack dab in what the guy painted.

:rolleyes:

His intention was to get attention.

This thread is proof of his success.

[Sknyluv]

As always liberals hide behind "interpretation" no matter how obvious anything is.


Well, IMHO, to take this painting literally is intellectually lazy. I personally think the artist is taking a jab at Obama's own self-induced celebrity and further questions his own followers blind loyalty to him, as if he was in-fact the messiah. Placing him arms outstretched suggests to me that he is baring the sins of someone ... most likely those who place too much faith in his powers as president.

[margaretms]

At least when George W. Bush was painted with a cross, he had some help with it:

http://www.tapestryproductions.com/_productimages/121046.jpg

http://www.watsonswildlife.com/images3/praying_for_peace_RDCF.jpg

[BrittleBullet]

At least when George W. Bush was painted with a cross, he had some help with it:

http://www.tapestryproductions.com/_productimages/121046.jpg

http://www.watsonswildlife.com/images3/praying_for_peace_RDCF.jpg

Just...wow...

[samurai7]

His intention was to get attention.

This thread is proof of his success.

Yeah Yeah Yeah, and when liberals had a fit when George Bush even MENTIONED Jesus, what was that?

:rolleyes:

[samurai7]

Well, IMHO, to take this painting literally is intellectually lazy. I personally think the artist is taking a jab at Obama's own self-induced celebrity and further questions his own followers blind loyalty to him, as if he was in-fact the messiah. Placing him arms outstretched suggests to me that he is baring the sins of someone ... most likely those who place too much faith in his powers as president.

Didn't I tell you liberals would hide behind the "interpretation" thing no matter how obvious? :))

And if we notice the obvious it's because we are sooooooooooo stupid.

The Emperor has no clothes again but don't you dare point it out.

:)) :)) :))

[Hoobeedoo Bejesus]

At least when George W. Bush was painted with a cross, he had some help with it:

http://www.tapestryproductions.com/_productimages/121046.jpg

http://www.watsonswildlife.com/images3/praying_for_peace_RDCF.jpg

At least the piece in the OP was blatant satire.

That's just plain tacky. Can I order one painted on velvet with a gold frame?

[Hoobeedoo Bejesus]

Yeah Yeah Yeah, and when liberals had a fit when George Bush even MENTIONED Jesus, what was that?

:rolleyes:

I don't know, you tell me because I don't recall having such a fit.

[samurai7]

At least when George W. Bush was painted with a cross, he had some help with it:

http://www.tapestryproductions.com/_productimages/121046.jpg

http://www.watsonswildlife.com/images3/praying_for_peace_RDCF.jpg


Can we get a date on that?

[mdk190]

Good lord the right is becoming more and more pathetic with each passing day. Only the conservatives are claiming that Obama is the messiah. I do like that they find charisma and popularity amongst the people character flaws. Maybe if conservatives spent less time painting and more time with the affairs of the nation their party would be able to release a budget with numbers contain inside.

[margaretms]

At least the piece in the OP was blatant satire.

That's just plain tacky. Can I order one painted on velvet with a gold frame?

Yes. The two works demonstrate pretty clearly the difference between irony and sincerity in art.

[BrittleBullet]

At least the piece in the OP was blatant satire.

That's just plain tacky. Can I order one painted on velvet with a gold frame?

Maybe that one was satirical too.
If it was, consider my mind ****ing blown.

[samurai7]

At least the piece in the OP was blatant satire.

That's just plain tacky. Can I order one painted on velvet with a gold frame?

:))

DON'T YOU LOVE THIS! :))

It's OKAY when it's Obama. Liberals hide behind the cover of "satire."

But there is no date for this picture of Bush. I predicted liberals would photoshop one of Bush for a cover.

We have no date for that Bush picture. No artist taking credit. No background on when it was painted.

We are supposed to just take it as legit, and of course liberals instantly prove my point and bash it.

I can't thank liberals enough. PREDICTABLE AS EVER! :)) :)) :))

[samurai7]

Good lord the right is becoming more and more pathetic with each passing day. Only the conservatives are claiming that Obama is the messiah. I do like that they find charisma and popularity amongst the people character flaws. Maybe if conservatives spent less time painting and more time with the affairs of the nation their party would be able to release a budget with numbers contain inside.

Excuse me BUT IT WAS LIBERALS who first called Obama the messiah.

Just because we can PROVE IT makes liberals just unhinged. How UNFAIR of conservatives to laugh at liberal adulation of Obama.

:))

http://www.slate.com/id/2158578/

http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2008/02/barack-obamas-messiah-complex

IT WAS LIBERALS who called Obama the messiah. Conservatives are just laughing at it. And as usual, liberals are sore losers and never have a sense of humor when we laugh at their religious icons.

:)) :))

[margaretms]

:))

DON'T YOU LOVE THIS! :))

It's OKAY when it's Obama. Liberals hide behind the cover of "satire."

But there is no date for this picture of Bush. I predicted liberals would photoshop one of Bush for a cover.

We have no date for that Bush picture. No artist taking credit. No background on when it was painted.

We are supposed to just take it as legit, and of course liberals instantly prove my point and bash it.


You are wrong, of course. It is not a photo shopped picture. It's by Ron DiCianni; it's called "Praying for Peace"--and I first stumbled across it back in 2004 when I began posting at hannity.com. Someone had posted it here with a lot of pride. Ron does a lot of Christ-centered art. Do you have a problem with that?

http://www.rondicianni.com/

[BrittleBullet]

:))

DON'T YOU LOVE THIS! :))

It's OKAY when it's Obama. Liberals hide behind the cover of "satire."

But there is no date for this picture of Bush. I predicted liberals would photoshop one of Bush for a cover.

We have no date for that Bush picture. No artist taking credit. No background on when it was painted.

We are supposed to just take it as legit, and of course liberals instantly prove my point and bash it.

I can't thank liberals enough. PREDICTABLE AS EVER! :)) :)) :))

http://www.christcenteredmall.com/stores/art/dicianni/praying_for_peace.htm

[samurai7]

Yes. The two works demonstrate pretty clearly the difference between irony and sincerity in art.

No dear it doesn't.

A) My example has background, the date, and the author.

B) YOURS DOESN'T. All we have is a painting that for all we know was photoshopped this morning. No date, no background, no author. We don't know anything about it.

Want to try again?

:rolleyes:

[Hoobeedoo Bejesus]

:))

DON'T YOU LOVE THIS! :))

It's OKAY when it's Obama. Liberals hide behind the cover of "satire."

But there is no date for this picture of Bush. I predicted liberals would photoshop one of Bush for a cover.

We have no date for that Bush picture. No artist taking credit. No background on when it was painted.

We are supposed to just take it as legit, and of course liberals instantly prove my point and bash it.

I can't thank liberals enough. PREDICTABLE AS EVER! :)) :)) :))

It's been sold from the site it is on since at least November 28, 2004.

[Hoobeedoo Bejesus]

http://www.christcenteredmall.com/stores/art/dicianni/praying_for_peace.htm

Ahh 2003 even. Nice.

[samurai7]

Maybe that one was satirical too.
If it was, consider my mind ****ing blown.

How about blowing it enough to consider the differences like there is an actual newspaper article for mine, which gives the author the date, the background.

For all we know the GW picture was photoshopped this morning AS I PREDICTED IN THE OP would happen, to cover for the Obama art.

:rolleyes:

Excuse me for being so skeptical but it would not be the first time LIBERALS HAVE LIED, FAKED AND COVERED UP for their own. Liberals are now renowned for their honesty.

:rolleyes:

[BrittleBullet]

You are wrong, of course. It is not a photo shopped picture. It's by Ron DiCianni--and I first stumbled across it back in 2004 when I began posting at hannity.com. Someone had posted it here with a lot of pride. Ron does a lot of Christ-centered art. Do you have a problem with that?

http://www.rondicianni.com/

In the time it took samurai7 to put all the :)) in his posts, he could of just found out that info himself. It took literally less than a minute and I've never seen that painting before...

[Hoobeedoo Bejesus]

How about blowing it enough to consider the differences like there is an actual newspaper article for mine, which gives the author the date, the background.

For all we know the GW picture was photoshopped this morning AS I PREDICTED IN THE OP would happen, to cover for the Obama art.

:rolleyes:

Excuse me for being so skeptical but it would not be the first time LIBERALS HAVE LIED, FAKED AND COVERED UP for their own. Liberals are now renowned for their honesty.

:rolleyes:

Pssst.. http://www.christcenteredmall.com/stores/art/dicianni/praying_for_peace.htm

You can order your own from the Christ Centered Mall.

[margaretms]

Pssst.. http://www.christcenteredmall.com/stores/art/dicianni/praying_for_peace.htm

You can order your own from the Christ Centered Mall.

Liberal liars may have fabricated that Christ-Centered Mall. It's happened before.

[BrittleBullet]

Pssst.. http://www.christcenteredmall.com/stores/art/dicianni/praying_for_peace.htm

You can order your own from the Christ Centered Mall.

Only if it comes in velvet with a gold frame. ;)

[margaretms]

No dear it doesn't.

A) My example has background, the date, and the author.

B) YOURS DOESN'T. All we have is a painting that for all we know was photoshopped this morning. No date, no background, no author. We don't know anything about it.

Want to try again?

:rolleyes:

I accept your apology for being wrong and your suggestion that I was lying, so no worries.

[samurai7]

You are wrong, of course. It is not a photo shopped picture. It's by Ron DiCianni; it's called "Praying for Peace"--and I first stumbled across it back in 2004 when I began posting at hannity.com. Someone had posted it here with a lot of pride. Ron does a lot of Christ-centered art. Do you have a problem with that?

http://www.rondicianni.com/

Great! Can't thank you enough

Now when you can show me that art work being put up IN TIMES FREAKING SQUARE, you will have your argument.

Until then, you are trying to counter an obvious piece of propaganda for Obama that Rivals ANYTHING FOR STALIN PUT IN RED SQUARE with something you found on the internet by someone no one knows AND is no where close to anything being placed in TIMES SQUARE.

You got any pictures of GW on a cross etc, PUT UP IN TIMES SQUARE.

I await that one. :)) :)) :))

Everytime you guys think you got me you just don't know I'm letting you make my argument for me.

:)) :)) :))

[Beccaria]

At least when George W. Bush was painted with a cross, he had some help with it:

http://www.tapestryproductions.com/_productimages/121046.jpg

http://www.watsonswildlife.com/images3/praying_for_peace_RDCF.jpg

Big difference between trusting in Jesus-as the link you put up depicts-and being portrayed as Jesus. Even my 5 and 7 year olds, understand this.

As you demonstrate often, margaret, there is a difference between being intelligent and being wise.

[Hoobeedoo Bejesus]

Great! Can't thank you enough

Now when you can show me that art work being put up IN TIMES FREAKING SQUARE, you will have your argument.

Until then, you are trying to counter an obvious piece of propaganda for Obama that Rivals ANYTHING FOR STALIN PUT IN RED SQUARE with something you found on the internet by someone no one knows AND is no where close to anything being placed in TIMES SQUARE.

You got any pictures of GW on a cross etc, PUT UP IN TIMES SQUARE.

I await that one. :)) :)) :))

Everytime you guys think you got me you just don't know I'm letting you make my argument for me.

:)) :)) :))

It's posts like these that explain why I love controversial art so much.

[margaretms]

Big difference between trusting in Jesus-as the link you put up depicts-and being portrayed as Jesus. Even my 5 and 7 year olds, understand this.

As you demonstrate often, margaret, there is a difference between being intelligent and being wise.

I don't claim to be either one, but I do recognize the image of a cross clearly evident in that painting (look at the link to the larger image that I posted)--and President Bush at the center of it.

[samurai7]

Big difference between trusting in Jesus-as the link you put up depicts-and being portrayed as Jesus. Even my 5 and 7 year olds, understand this.

As you demonstrate often, margaret, there is a difference between being intelligent and being wise.

There is also a HUGE DIFFERENCE between some artwork on the internet and a painting hung as big as life in TIMES SQUARE.

It's just too hilarious. These libs think they've found some big example of the same thing, and they don't know they have utterly defeated their own argument.

Yeah, NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO difference between some little podunk picture on the internet and something huge 50 feet huge in Times Square. OH NOT AT ALL! :))

I mean what is the difference between hanging something like that for Obama in Times Square and hanging something like that for Stalin in Red Square or something like that for Mao in Tiamen Square?

NOT MUCH!

But don't expect liberals to admit they've lost. Expect them to go on insisting that one little photo on the internet is the same thing.

That won't surprise me one bit.

:)) :)) :))

[samurai7]

It's posts like these that explain why I love controversial art so much.

And it explains why I love baiting liberals so much.

It's so easy! :)) All I have to do is let liberals be liberals, and they will do the job for me. :))

It's like Rush Limbaugh doing a caller abortion. Just do it and liberals will do the predictable and do the rest for you.

:)) :)) :))

[Hoobeedoo Bejesus]

And it explains why I love baiting liberals so much.

It's so easy! :)) All I have to do is let liberals be liberals, and they will do the job for me. :))

It's like Rush Limbaugh doing a caller abortion. Just do it and liberals will do the predictable and do the rest for you.

:)) :)) :))

Bigger font, please.

[margaretms]

There is also a HUGE DIFFERENCE between some artwork on the internet and a painting hung as big as life in TIMES SQUARE.

It's just too hilarious. These libs think they've found some big example of the same thing, and they don't know they have utterly defeated their own argument.

Yeah, NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO difference between some little podunk picture on the internet and something huge 50 feet huge in Times Square. OH NOT AT ALL! :))

I mean what is the difference between hanging something like that for Obama in Times Square and hanging something like that for Stalin in Red Square or something like that for Mao in Tiamen Square?

NOT MUCH!

But don't expect liberals to admit they've lost. Expect them to go on insisting that one little photo on the internet is the same thing.

That won't surprise me one bit.

:)) :)) :))

You may want to reread your own OP: the Obama painting is not in Times Square.

[samurai7]

In the time it took samurai7 to put all the :)) in his posts, he could of just found out that info himself. It took literally less than a minute and I've never seen that painting before...

But then I wouldn't have the fun of stompin' ya all.

See my posts about the difference between Times Square an some site on the internet.

:)) :))

[samurai7]

You may want to reread your own OP: the Obama painting is not in Times Square.

Oh my bad. UNION SQUARE! :rolleyes:

:))

Same thing freaking applies whether it's Union Square, Times Square or Red Square.

DO YOU HAVE AN EXAMPLE OF THE SAME THING HAPPENING FOR POOR OLD GEORGE??????

I await the crickets.

:))

[Beccaria]

I don't claim to be either one, but I do recognize the image of a cross clearly evident in that painting (look at the link to the larger image that I posted)--and President Bush at the center of it.

Bush is being portrayed in that pic as being in prayer to God. Not being portrayed AS God, like this artist is doing.

While I had problems with Bush on some of his left-leaning stances, he did seem to have a real faith in God. Whether he actually does or not, I don't know. But unlike his predecessor and his successor, his faith did not seem to be something to be kept in the closet when "real life" came into play.

Heaven forbid a faith actually be a faith.

[Hoobeedoo Bejesus]

But then I wouldn't have the fun of stompin' ya all.

See my posts about the difference between Times Square an some site on the internet.

:)) :))

I'll give you a dollar if you can find one Obama supporter who likes the piece in question because it portrays him as the Messiah they believe him to be.

Really, a whole dollar, just for you.

[margaretms]

Oh my bad. UNION SQUARE! :rolleyes:

:))

Same thing freaking applies whether it's Union Square, Times Square or Red Square.

DO YOU HAVE AN EXAMPLE OF THE SAME THING HAPPENING FOR POOR OLD GEORGE??????

I await the crickets.

:))

On this we can all agree: Ron DiCianni's "Praying for Peace" has not been displayed prominently in New York City's Union Square.

[Sknyluv]

Didn't I tell you liberals would hide behind the "interpretation" thing no matter how obvious? :))

And if we notice the obvious it's because we are sooooooooooo stupid.

The Emperor has no clothes again but don't you dare point it out.


No, I don't think you're stupid ... just partisan to a fault and downright lazy.

If you read my interpretation it completely puts Obama and his followers in a bad light. Doesn't that kind of thing get your rocks off?

[Rurudyne]

At least when George W. Bush was painted with a cross, he had some help with it:

http://www.tapestryproductions.com/_productimages/121046.jpg

http://www.watsonswildlife.com/images3/praying_for_peace_RDCF.jpg
"Therefore, since we have so great a cloud of witnesses surrounding us, let us also lay aside every encumbrance, and the sin which so easily entangles us, and let us run with endurance the race that is set before us;" Hebrews 12:1 (NAS)

There is a HUGE difference between portraying a man humble before God and portraying a mere man burdened by the iconography of God — yet it is a distinction that seems lost on some people.

It is true that this painting of President Bush may have no greater merit than those of Dale Earnhart Jr. driving on up to Heaven; but, it does not commit intentional offenses against the faith for it does not portray the President as an object of veneration (as the picture of President Obama does) ... unless his portrayal as a man of faith is what is offensive in the first place (and many people are offended by such).

Even the notion — here somewhat (yet not fully on account of the clear indication of Who the president is praying to — and it isn't Washington or Lincoln) adopted to America from its original context — that those who were once alive still bear witness of us in the here and now is found in scriptures.

[samurai7]

I'll give you a dollar if you can find one Obama supporter who likes the piece in question because it portrays him as the Messiah they believe him to be.

Really, a whole dollar, just for you.

Then why are you guys in here DEFENDING the piece.

Why aren't you all with me laughing at it and saying it's an example of the laughable adulation of Obama.

Your actions speak a lot louder than your words.

:)) :)) :))


(Can I play some people like a fiddle, or what???????? ) :))

Like I said, PREDICTABLE. :))

[Sneaky SF Dude]

At least when George W. Bush was painted with a cross, he had some help with it:

http://www.tapestryproductions.com/_productimages/121046.jpg

http://www.watsonswildlife.com/images3/praying_for_peace_RDCF.jpg

Are you really trying to compare those two paintings?

[BrittleBullet]

You may want to reread your own OP: the Obama painting is not in Times Square.

Also its not 50 feet huge.
Its 30 x 50 inches.

[Hoobeedoo Bejesus]

No, I don't think you're stupid ... just partisan to a fault and downright lazy.

If you read my interpretation it completely puts Obama and his followers in a bad light. Doesn't that kind of thing get your rocks off?

That's why I love this piece so much.

It makes fun of Obama followers while at the same time insulting those who hate him as well.

Genius.

[samurai7]

No, I don't think you're stupid ... just partisan to a fault and downright lazy.

If you read my interpretation it completely puts Obama and his followers in a bad light. Doesn't that kind of thing get your rocks off?

Yet, we are LAZY if we conservatives also see this in a bad light? :rolleyes:

Does this boil down to, "I can call him anything I want, but don't you DARE do the same thing!"

:)) :))

[samurai7]

Also its not 50 feet huge.
Its 30 x 50 inches.

Great, show me the GW painting that was also there in like manner.

I'm still a awaiting.

[Hoobeedoo Bejesus]

Then why are you guys in here DEFENDING the piece.

Why aren't you all with me laughing at it and saying it's an example of the laughable adulation of Obama.

Your actions speak a lot louder than your words.

:)) :)) :))


(Can I play some people like a fiddle, or what???????? ) :))

Like I said, PREDICTABLE. :))

What actions? This is an Internet message board. All we have is words.

[samurai7]

That's why I love this piece so much.

It makes fun of Obama followers while at the same time insulting those who hate him as well.

Genius.

While liberals spin and spin.

:)) :))

[margaretms]

There is a HUGE difference between portraying a man humble before God and portraying a mere man burdened by the iconography of God — yet it is a distinction that seems lost on some people.

And--with all respect, Rurudyne, cuz I love ya, dawg--there's a cross in Ron's painting, and President Bush is clearly portrayed at the center of it. I don't know why this seems to be lost on people.

[Johnt63]

I am an Art student at a University. Graphic Arts and possibly illustration, and I am currently in a required class that has these freaky students doing things like this. It is simply a way to get noticed. They are doing it so people will view their work. Which in this economic times may be prudent if you can live with painting and looking at Obama for hours on end...

I am sure Obama enjoys this as narcissitic (sp) as he is. Scary part is a lot of people think he IS almost messiah like.

sigh....:wall:

[margaretms]

also its not 50 feet huge.
Its 30 x 50 inches.

lol.

[Sneaky SF Dude]

And--with all respect, Rurudyne, cuz I love ya, dawg--there's a cross in Ron's painting, and President Bush is clearly portrayed at the center of it. I don't know why this seems to be lost on people.

You're embarrassing yourself. You're better than this.

[Mustang JEB]

Sam always finds interesting things to read..:lol:

[Sknyluv]

Yet, we are LAZY if we conservatives also see this in a bad light? :rolleyes:

Does this boil down to, "I can call him anything I want, but don't you DARE do the same thing!"

:)) :))

No we ... just you. I just find your interpretation lazy. It's based on nothing more than your predetermined partisan views and nothing about the actual painting.

But again, you're free to have your opinions about it, I just think they're wrong.

[ksdb]

Big difference between trusting in Jesus-as the link you put up depicts-and being portrayed as Jesus. Even my 5 and 7 year olds, understand this.

As you demonstrate often, margaret, there is a difference between being intelligent and being wise.
It is huge difference ... plus Bush is sincere about faith. We have no idea where Obama really stands.

[samurai7]

Are you really trying to compare those two paintings?

They tried, but leave it to liberals not to notice the differences.

While Obama is portrayed as Christ, Bush is only praying to him.

While Obama's painting is in Times Square (Oops I mean Union! :)) ) Bush's is on the internet at a site I've never heard of.

While Obamoids hide behind the predictable "oh it's open to interpretation," the artist of the Bush painting doesn't have to show such cowardice.

While Obamoids claim you must not be intellectual if you notice the obvious about the Obama painting (the Emporer HAS NOT CLOTHES), no one is claiming you have to be sooooooooooo schmart to understand the Bush painting. Just understand faith.

All of this, don't expect liberals to notice. They are, if anything, laughably predictable.

:)) :)) :))

[Sknyluv]

While liberals spin and spin.

:)) :))

How exactly is that spin? and what you're doing, not spin?

[mozalf]

My, my, my there seems to be a lot of Christian-bashing slipping in under the radar with the current media. Sinking to new depths, are we?

[penner01]

Good lord the right is becoming more and more pathetic with each passing day. Only the conservatives are claiming that Obama is the messiah. I do like that they find charisma and popularity amongst the people character flaws. Maybe if conservatives spent less time painting and more time with the affairs of the nation their party would be able to release a budget with numbers contain inside.OMG....tending the affairs of the nation - that is hilarious. Like your congress that spent 2 years doing nothing but trying to find ways to screw Bush. And calling Obama the messiah is a characterization of how the left treats him. Seeing the minions fawn over the guy starts the bile rising.

[samurai7]

No we ... just you. I just find your interpretation lazy. It's based on nothing more than your predetermined partisan views and nothing about the actual painting.

But again, you're free to have your opinions about it, I just think they're wrong.

Of course! It's sooooooooooooooooo lazy to notice the freaking obvious!

Come on. Give us a Bush painting like this in Times SQuare (oops I meant Union again) and then tell us we are lazy to notice it, too!

:)) :))

[Sneaky SF Dude]

Good lord the right is becoming more and more pathetic with each passing day. Only the conservatives are claiming that Obama is the messiah. I do like that they find charisma and popularity amongst the people character flaws. Maybe if conservatives spent less time painting and more time with the affairs of the nation their party would be able to release a budget with numbers contain inside.

When charisma and popularity become slavish cult behavior required by an egomaniac and populism they are indeed flaws.

[Rurudyne]

And--with all respect, Rurudyne, cuz I love ya, dawg--there's a cross in Ron's painting, and President Bush is clearly portrayed at the center of it. I don't know why this seems to be lost on people.
Yes. But President Bush is not on that cross nor are his arms positioned as if he were. Washington and Lincoln aren't holding him up either, only assuming a posture common to people praying with someone. I'm not going to say the painting has any merit (blending the Seal of the US and the cross is disrespectful of the latter); yet, I'm not going to compare it to this recent fanwank of a POTUS.

The two really don't compare: President Bush is shown in prayer; President Obama is essentially shown as if he was suffering.

[margaretms]

It is huge difference ... plus Bush is sincere about faith. We have no idea where Obama really stands.


WARREN: The first one is Christianity. Now, you’ve made no doubts about your faith in Jesus Christ. What does that mean to you? What does it mean to you to trust in Christ? And what does that mean to you on a daily basis? What does that really look like?

OBAMA: As a starting point, it means I believe in — that Jesus Christ died for my sins, and that I am redeemed through him. That is a source of strength and sustenance on a daily basis. Yes, I know that I don’t walk alone. And I know that if I can get myself out of the way, that I can maybe carry out in some small way what he intends. And it means that those sins that I have on a fairly regular basis, hopefully will be washed away.

Do you think he's lying?

[Hoobeedoo Bejesus]

Do you think he's lying?

Bush was sincere about faith. Sincere about using it as a tool to get more votes!

[ksdb]

Do you think he's lying?

I think it's distinctly possible, yes.

[Sknyluv]

Of course! It's sooooooooooooooooo lazy to notice the freaking obvious!


Kinda. But hey, I take it back ... It's art. You're entitled to your opinion, and ultimately I shouldn't say you're wrong. I just think you should look a little deeper into it.

[penner01]

"Therefore, since we have so great a cloud of witnesses surrounding us, let us also lay aside every encumbrance, and the sin which so easily entangles us, and let us run with endurance the race that is set before us;" Hebrews 12:1 (NAS)

There is a HUGE difference between portraying a man humble before God and portraying a mere man burdened by the iconography of God — yet it is a distinction that seems lost on some people.

It is true that this painting of President Bush may have no greater merit than those of Dale Earnhart Jr. driving on up to Heaven; but, it does not commit intentional offenses against the faith for it does not portray the President as an object of veneration (as the picture of President Obama does) ... unless his portrayal as a man of faith is what is offensive in the first place (and many people are offended by such).

Even the notion — here somewhat (yet not fully on account of the clear indication of Who the president is praying to — and it isn't Washington or Lincoln) adopted to America from its original context — that those who were once alive still bear witness of us in the here and now is found in scriptures.Very nicely said.

[Hoobeedoo Bejesus]

We need some Serrano or Mapplethorpe in here to really get things stirred up.

[Guild-Sfire]

As always, Art is up for interpretation ... but I don't think you're correct on this one.


D'Antuono insists that this piece is a mirror; reflecting the personal opinions and emotions of the viewer; that "The Truth" like beauty is in the eyes of the beholder. D'Antuono expects that individual interpretations will vary as widely as they do in the political arena.

http://sev.prnewswire.com/art/20090424/NY0498524042009-1.html

[Sknyluv]

http://sev.prnewswire.com/art/20090424/NY0498524042009-1.html

Yep. Came to my senses. See Post #76.

[Rurudyne]

I think it's distinctly possible, yes.
Indeed, considering that one of the positions of Cone-style 'black liberation theology' — said 'theology which is advocated at least in part by Mr.Wright's congregation — is (as per James Cone's published statements) that unless God is onboard with black people and against white people then blacks should reject His love.

President Obama may be sincere ... yet you cannot produce good fruit from a bad tree. If the tree in question (the doctrines of that congregation) is one planted by James Cone I cannot help but wonder how it could be a good tree at all. As such, sincerity may mean nothing.

[BrittleBullet]

As of yesterday, the unveiling of the painting was canceled due to public outrage:
http://sev.prnewswire.com/entertainment/20090427/NY0594927042009-1.html

[ksdb]

As of yesterday, the unveiling of the painting was canceled due to public outrage:
http://sev.prnewswire.com/entertainment/20090427/NY0594927042009-1.html

Hmnmm, guess he couldn't handle 'The Truth.'

[Guild-Sfire]

And it explains why I love baiting liberals so much.



http://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e200/guild-sfire/QFT.gif

[BrittleBullet]

Hmnmm, guess he couldn't handle 'The Truth.'

I'm pretty sure he was going for this kind of reaction all along.

[Hoobeedoo Bejesus]

I'm pretty sure he was going for this kind of reaction all along.

He did well. His name is now more popular than it was before and that piece is now worth much much more.

[ksdb]

Indeed, considering that one of the positions of Cone-style 'black liberation theology' — said 'theology which is advocated at least in part by Mr.Wright's congregation — is (as per James Cone's published statements) that unless God is onboard with black people and against white people then blacks should reject His love.

President Obama may be sincere ... yet you cannot produce good fruit from a bad tree. If the tree in question (the doctrines of that congregation) is one planted by James Cone I cannot help but wonder how it could be a good tree at all. As such, sincerity may mean nothing.

For me, his affiliation with the church looks extremely forumlaic for personal advancement. He needed street credibility with the African-American community and Wright's church provided an expedient vehicle for gaining that credibility. His interest in the church and Christianity reminds me of this piece of scripture:

And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by men. I tell you the truth, they have received their reward in full. But when you pray, go into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you. And when you pray, do not keep on babbling like pagans, for they think they will be heard because of their many words. Do not be like them, for your Father knows what you need before you ask him" (Matthew 6:5-8).

[Sknyluv]

Hmnmm, guess he couldn't handle 'The Truth.'

He shouldn't have apologized to people who don't have enough faith in their own religious beliefs.

[ksdb]

I'm pretty sure he was going for this kind of reaction all along.
In some respects, it was a pretty conventional design for evoking outrage. The part that seemed weird was the Bill Cosby smirk that he put on Obama's face.

[Guild-Sfire]

Yep. Came to my senses. See Post #76.

I find it interesting that the artist pretty much expected the kind of reaction he is getting......a wide variety of interpretations.

He just might sell a few paintings......

I thought cons were on favor of capitalism. :think:

[ksdb]

He shouldn't have apologized to people who don't have enough faith in their own religious beliefs.

I'm sure they have plenty of faith and they prefer not to have it mocked. What's wrong with expecting a little more respect and dignity for the dominant religion in this country??

[BrittleBullet]

He did well. His name is now more popular than it was before and that piece is now worth much much more.

I wonder how much notoriety and money my painting of Obama coming down from Mt. Sinai holding the Ten Commandments will get me...

[Rurudyne]

For me, his affiliation with the church looks extremely forumlaic for personal advancement. He needed street credibility with the African-American community and Wright's church provided an expedient vehicle for gaining that credibility. His interest in the church and Christianity reminds me of this piece of scripture:
Well, yes. There is that.

Still, in 20 years that obviously expedient political maneuver may have had results that are now not simply expedient. That's why I try to focus on that nature of what doctrines said congregation strongly appears to enjoin.

[Sknyluv]

I'm sure they have plenty of faith and they prefer not to have it mocked. What's wrong with expecting a little more respect and dignity for the dominant religion in this country??

I would just hope people would have more determination in their faith to let something as trivial as this get under their skin.

Just because a religion is dominant doesn't mean it deserves respect.

[BrittleBullet]

In some respects, it was a pretty conventional design for evoking outrage. The part that seemed weird was the Bill Cosby smirk that he put on Obama's face.

True. Anything depicting someone as Christ is bound to bring controversy. It'll be even more so if that person is the current president who has been dubbed "the messiah".
Maybe he was also trying to offend Cosby fans while he was at it.

[Sknyluv]

I wonder how much notoriety and money my painting of Obama coming down from Mt. Sinai holding the Ten Commandments will get me...

Depends on how much you outrage the far right.

[Guild-Sfire]

I'm pretty sure he was going for this kind of reaction all along.

His other stuff is quite good as well.....

Just not controversial.
http://www.dantuonoarts.com/port.html

[ksdb]

True. Anything depicting someone as Christ is bound to bring controversy. It'll be even more so if that person is the current president who has been dubbed "the messiah".
Maybe he was also trying to offend Cosby fans while he was at it.

Without the teleprompter, the Messiah is a bit Mushmouth-esque, so perhaps it makes some sense to have the Cosby smirk.

[BrittleBullet]

Without the teleprompter, the Messiah is a bit Mushmouth-esque, so perhaps it makes some sense to have the Cosby smirk.

:))

[BrittleBullet]

His other stuff is quite good as well.....

Just not controversial.
http://www.dantuonoarts.com/port.html

He's definitely talented.

[Rurudyne]

I wonder how much notoriety and money my painting of Obama coming down from Mt. Sinai holding the Ten Commandments will get me...
Fundamentally out of context even for Americana. Moses was the agent through whom the Law was given. President Obama is one to undermine the US Constitution at nearly every turn. I would not even compare President Lincoln to Moses on that account.

[ksdb]

His other stuff is quite good as well.....

Just not controversial.
http://www.dantuonoarts.com/port.html

The Johnny Cash painting would have been a good one to emulate with Obama.

[Rurudyne]

The Johnny Cash painting would have been a good one to emulate with Obama.
Only if it's one of him on his way TO Folsom Prison. ;)

[BrittleBullet]

Fundamentally out of context even for Americana. Moses was the agent through whom the Law was given. President Obama is one to undermine the US Constitution at nearly every turn. I would not even compare President Lincoln to Moses on that account.

The tablets would have the words hope and change inscribed on them.
It'd be sure to bring some controversy and some money.
Unfortunately, my brother was the one who received all the artistic genes.

[ksdb]

Only if it's one of him on his way TO Folsom Prison. ;)

GITMO would be more poetic.

[Roberts_the_man]

Good lord the right is becoming more and more pathetic with each passing day. Only the conservatives are claiming that Obama is the messiah. I do like that they find charisma and popularity amongst the people character flaws. Maybe if conservatives spent less time painting and more time with the affairs of the nation their party would be able to release a budget with numbers contain inside.

Actually that is not true...

We just know better.

Farakhan specifically called Barry the messiah w/in the last 120 days.

So is Farakhan a conservative? :))


Pelosi? :)) :))


There were no paintings with halos around Barry's head before and during the GE? :)) :)) :))


LOL deflection!

[RTchoke]

And--with all respect, Rurudyne, cuz I love ya, dawg--there's a cross in Ron's painting, and President Bush is clearly portrayed at the center of it. I don't know why this seems to be lost on people.

The fact that there is a cross in the Bush painting is not lost on anyone. What appears to be lost by YOU however, is that in the Bush painting he is depicted in prayer with a cross behind him. In the 0bama painting he is depicted in a position suggested of Jesus himself nailed to the cross complete with crown of thorns.

That you would think you could even compare the two as being in the same is rather lame.

[Imperialparadox]

I have to give the artist credit, I imagine the majority of people he is making fun of don't even recognize that they are the butt of the joke.

[toreyj01]

I rather like the painting, its quite evocative.

To each his own, I don't see this as idolic, but as a commentary.

[RTchoke]

I have to give the artist credit, I imagine the majority of people he is making fun of don't even recognize that they are the butt of the joke.

:rolleyes:

[jimmyc123]

Excuse me BUT IT WAS LIBERALS who first called Obama the messiah.

Just because we can PROVE IT makes liberals just unhinged. How UNFAIR of conservatives to laugh at liberal adulation of Obama.

:))

http://www.slate.com/id/2158578/

http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2008/02/barack-obamas-messiah-complex

IT WAS LIBERALS who called Obama the messiah. Conservatives are just laughing at it. And as usual, liberals are sore losers and never have a sense of humor when we laugh at their religious icons.

:)) :))

The Slate article makes fun of the way Obama is portrayed as the second coming and the Mother Jones article claims that Obama has a Messianic Complex. Neither call Obama the messiah.

[BrittleBullet]

The fact that there is a cross in the Bush painting is not lost on anyone. What appears to be lost by YOU however, is that in the Bush painting he is depicted in prayer with a cross behind him. In the 0bama painting he is depicted in a position suggested of Jesus himself nailed to the cross complete with crown of thorns.

That you would think you could even compare the two as being in the same is rather lame.

Besides President Bush praying, two presidents that are considered amongst the greatest ever by most, are depicted praying next to him. Also there's an aura behind President Bush, giving him a holy kind of thing going.
It suggest that Bush has been chosen to act under God's close supervision to make sure His will is done on Earth.
That's my interpretation of it anyway.
That's the beauty of art.

[supreme_war_Pig]

I'll alter my previous statement - it's designed so that conservatives see it as the arrogance and ego of the left; liberals see it as parody and satire of the right; and the independents see it for what it is: an attempt by the artist to get attention and money.

Probably will be sucessful in its aim.

I think you nailed it right on the head. I just get tired of all of this Messiah crap. Nobody really thinks he is the Messiah, that's just right wing narrative. And then....this. :rolleyes:

[Sneaky SF Dude]

Libs crack me up. Look at them rationalizing the painting on here. "Well, you aren't looking at it deep enough!" "Well we all see art differently!" LOL

You can look at it all day long, you'll never see a sail boat in there...:D

Silly libs...

[tocsinia]

If Obama does not believe that he is "the one", he should apologize to the public.
Simple.
Call it art if he wants, but say that he feels it evokes an image of himself that he does not condone. He realizes that it is insensitive to Christians all over the world, just as he can find it within himself to apologize for everything else this country has ever done, in the world arena.
Either, 1. (a) He knows of the painting, and is a hypocrite to allow himself to be equated with the Messiah, (of any religion, but he professed Christianity.) (b) Or, he really does have a Messiah complex. That could be treated medically with drugs and therapy. (c) A combination where it's alright to offend more than 72% of the nation's Christians..
Or, 2. He truly is not aware of this. If that is the case, this nation is in for a long ride downhill.

God is big enough to handle whatever is thrown at Him. I don't care about Republican nametags or what becomes of the land where I was born. I do care about how my children will be able to raise their families in an atmosphere of financial and spiritual oppression, hypocrisy and lack of self-control.

[Roberts_the_man]

I think you nailed it right on the head. I just get tired of all of this Messiah crap. Nobody really thinks he is the Messiah, that's just right wing narrative. And then....this. :rolleyes:


You're right Farakhan is a nobody and he is just the leader of the NOI who wouldn't believe what nobody Farakhan said anyway...

Yeah and Pelosi the right winger called him some Jesus related connotation back in the campaign and all us right wingers
followed her right winger lead! :)) :)) :))





"Then this" revised history was so much fun. :rolleyes:

[JudasGoat]

Yeah Yeah Yeah, and when liberals had a fit when George Bush even MENTIONED Jesus, what was that?

:rolleyes:

that's because he believes in Jesus. To get their support you need to insult or denegrate Jesus, that's when it's appropriate to bring Him up...