Creepiest "fine art" portrait of President Obama you will see all day

Discuss

178 Responses to “Creepiest "fine art" portrait of President Obama you will see all day”

  1. Antinous / Moderator says:

    Why is he wearing Perry Mason’s suit?

  2. petr says:

    no portrait of W?  didn’t he and Cheney do more to erode individual rights?

    • Mitchell Glaser says:

      Actually, the Obama administration has signed into law things that the Bush Administration would never have dared ask for, and allowed the TSA to become like an Orwellian reality TV show.

      • Antinous / Moderator says:

        I think that Bush’s effective repeal of habeas corpus was pretty monumental.

      • PhosPhorious says:

         Too bad that this “artwork” does not allude to any of that. . . conservatives are bent out of shape about Obama’s “socialism,” meaning universal healthcare.  They don;t give a damn about the abridgement of and abuse of civil rights.

        • jimh says:

          And sadly they are bent out of shape not because of critical thinking skills, but because Big Pharm and the insurance cartel have told them to be.

        • hymenopterid says:

          It’s only socialism when the government gives money to *poor* people.

          That’s why free healthcare is socialism, yet bank bailouts and farm subsidies are the American way.   

          • DataShade says:

            Yes, yes, Obama’s approved the extrajudicial assassination of American citizens, but what’s really important is your tribal hate for the red-staters.

          • Shane Simmons says:

            DataShade, I’d say both are important.  Well, not HATE for red-staters, but it’s fine to have a sense of despair because people throw a fit about mandatory insurance socialism, but not about the more costly Medicare Part D.  And, of course, throw a fit about Rush Limbaugh’s rights being taken away by people petitioning his sponsors, but taking rights away to hurt Muslims is peachykeen.

            Oh, and Paul Ryan’s budget cuts farm subsidies, and you’ll notice that people had a fit about bailouts…that happened during Obama’s Presidency. :->

        • DataShade says:

          Who’s “they?”  It should be self-evident at this point that most democrats don’t care either, as long it’s a democratic president  abridging and abusing.  “Doesn’t matter, had _rex_.”

        • Fnordius says:

          I only partially agree, as socialism was applied as an epithet first, and then those applying it began fishing for a reason. And of course it doesn’t matter to them if he throws them a bone in the civil rights, because the only real crime (which they will never, ever admit) is that he won and their guy McCain lost.

        • Mitchell Glaser says:

          Such as indefinite detention of American citizens without charges or trial, for one. Even Rove and Cheney didn’t think they could push that one through Congress. And Obama signed it, though he promised never to use it. Well he won’t be president for ever, whether he wins this year or not.

          • Gideon Jones says:

            Uh, indefinite detentions were OK’d by the courts a decade ago under the Bush administration.  The provisions Obama signed into law in the NDAA are actually more limited than what’s been legal for the past 10 years.  

            Moreover, as you point out, they were put into place against Obama’s will.  He didn’t want this, and he didn’t ask for it.  It was stuffed into the NDAA and he either had to sign it or veto the entire thing.  Something that would not have worked.

        • DataShade says:

          Read Glenn Greenwald’s columns.  It’s not even just the things he’s signed into law; at this point, Obama is de facto more authoritarian than Bush.

          Support for Israel and MEK’s terrorist attacks on Iran’s citizens.  Extrajudicial assassination of American citizens.  Rabid pursuit of whistleblowers.  War without Congressional authorization.  Secrecy in defiance of campaign pledges of transparency.  Putting Bradley Manning in solitary confinement for almost a year pre-trial because he shamed the administration; but putting a marine accused of murdering 16 civilians in gen pop.  The “six strikes” Copyright Alert System which was orchestrated by the Obama administration, and the “Operation in Our Sites” initiative to seize domain names based on unjustified suspicions.  The general erosion of Due Process in favor of Executive power.  The wholesale slaughter, by combat drones, of civilians in various Middle Eastern countries, in the name of War on Terror.

          Obama’s behavior – and that of his administration – should be a source of guilt to everyone who voted for him and shame for everyone who continues to support him.

    • eldritch says:

      Technically, the United States Constitution doesn’t deal with individual rights, but instead lays the framework of the government. Depicting the president burning the constitution ought to be suggesting that the president has usurped power from the other branches of the government, not that he’s eroded individual rights.

      What the “socialism” in the painting’s title has to do with any of that is beyond me.

      • Marja Erwin says:

        The bill of rights and the reconstruction amendments mostly concern individual rights and forbid – in theory – certain federal and state violations of individual rights. Thus it’s perfectly fair to say Bush and Obama have been destroying the constitution.

        Though I’m just as puzzled as to what socialism has to do with this. America is still under klepto-capitalism. Before that it was under slavery and mercantilism.

        • duc chau says:

           C’mon. It’s pretty obvious.

          It’s called “One Nation Under Socialism” and he’s holding the constitution as it burns and he’s pointing at it. HE’S  POINTING AT IT!!!!

          See?

          • Marja Erwin says:

            WHY ON EARTH is it called ‘One Nation Under Socialism’?

            HOW ON EARTH can someone associate Obama or burning the constitution with socialism?

    • Jim Bronaugh says:

      Bush got voted out. Do you really want Obama to be like Bush?  Just because Obama destroys the Constitution and our liberties in a different way than Bush did, doesn’t mean that it is okay to destroy our liberties. A police state is a police state no matter who runs it. Bush started the process, but Obama is carrying on with the crime. The rapist doesn’t steal your money, does that make him a good guy? Stop the theft and stop the rape. Lady liberty can’t take anymore.

      • Steve says:

        “Bush got voted out.” Really? I remember 8 years.

      • Fnordius says:

        Bush won both elections, and was prohibited by constitutional amendment from running for a third term. Much as I find he was one of the worst presidents the USA has ever had, it cannot be claimed that he was voted out.

        Unfortunately, that carelessness in your initial statement taints the rest of your opinion as well. Very emotional and vague, sort of like the crap painting that this blog entry is about, really.

    • Capital_7 says:

       Silly!  He and Cheney are white!  The teasackers have no problem with them!  It’s the dark skinned Kenyan Muslim Socialist Nazi that they hate so much.

      This is a not-bad illustration, fit for Rush’s newsletter or Breitbart.com.  It’s not in any way fine art.

  3. phor11 says:

    Where’s his painting of George W Bush burning the constitution, using the Patriot Act as kindling?

    • Theodore says:

       I have found it disheartening, how many people I run into both online and off, who hate president Obama for what he’s done to the Constitution and the rights of Americans, but who never voiced a single peep of complaint about Bush the Lesser, before or after his term in office.

      • millie fink says:

        I’ve complained about both. And all the more bitterly about Obama, because his betrayals have been so much more that, given his campaign rhetoric–bitter, burning betrayals.

      • V10_Rob says:

         And I am likewise choked at how many equate Bush II as the second coming of Hitler, while giving Obama total pass.  Tyranny is OK as long as it’s our guy that does it, and he makes our favorite train run on time.

        The eternal Bush vs Obama fight just serves to mask an even more disheartening fact: the destruction of the Constitution is a bipartisan effort.  GOPers can howl all they want about Obama passing laws to detain/torture/assassinate any American on a whim, but most of the Republicans in Congress voted in favor of the bills.

        People need to stop pretending that either party gives a damn about them.

        • mccrum says:

           Boy, what I’d give to have the trains run on time while all this was going on.  We get no rights *and* late trains.

  4. Burning it is the only way to reveal the secret treasure map!

  5. Commodore_Schmidlapp says:

    Can you imagine the gift to humanity who would actually buy that and display it?

      • Donald Petersen says:

        Heh.  I love that that particular Area Man dwells in Escondido.  ‘Sfunny ’cause it’s true.

        Anyway, I wouldn’t buy that particular objet d’arse, except maybe secondhand at a yard sale, but I’d totally hang it in my garage.  It tickles me no end.  Like my “Democrats for Nixon” bumper sticker, it reminds me of how insanely broad is the spectrum of human thought and dipshittitude.

        And in my darker moments after reading too much Glenn Greenwald, I’ll stare balefully at the painting and consider how the artist got so much right for completely the wrong reasons…

    • Fnordius says:

      I think that’s the real story: guys like this “artist” are basically panderers who are out to make a buck. They hear about rich guys like the Koch brothers and the other millionaire sugar daddies, and figure these guys are unhinged enough and rich enough to buy their crap.

      That said, this painting really is pedestrian, bland and not really interesting from a purely aesthetic point of view. No wonder the guy is trying to sell it online, as not even those shopping mall art “galleries” would be interested in trying to sell this dog.

      • Ipo says:

         It is plainly not good. 
        Rob’s caricature of VanderSloot was a better likeness. 
        That’s flaming not burning. 

  6. phisrow says:

    I am continually baffled by people who are allegedly concerned by Obama’s loose constitutional adherence; but who persist in thinking that his occasional failure to capitulate entirely to the demands of the upper tax brackets is the determining factor.

    Frankly, I find it very hard indeed to think well of people who yawn at our delightsome network of gulags and spooks; but bemoan the end of America and all things good when the slight possibility of a return to an approximately Clinton-era tax structure arises…

    • R_Young says:

      Taxes are armed robeery! I won’t pay no monies to our Socialism, evil Muslim president! He’s not even president I haven’t seen his birth certificate!

      Sorry, I try not to be bitter, and I recognize that plenty of people don’t like Obama for legitimate reasons, but **damn** right-winger get deranged about Obama. You’d think he honest-to-god started just nationalizing whole industries.
      Evil Obama: “Hell care? Ho-ho-ho, you think you should have health care? I think the government can do a better job of that, I’ll just pass a law giving my lawyers control of all the hospitals. Free/Forced contraception for all! Now it’s so much easier having a kid, since we decide who can have one! Ho-ho-ho!”

      I have no idea why my Evil-Obama character was acting like Santa Claus, but you get the point.

    • Shane Simmons says:

      That’s actually what I get the most frustrated at.  I can sort-of understand why some of ‘em would restrain themselves from complaining about real Constitutional abuses on Obama’s watch, because they’d eventually have to admit that it’s a bipartisan thing, and that they’d have to admit that they were wrong to defend the Bush-area abuses in the name of fighting terror.

      Actually, more generically, that’s one of my biggest gripes with the extreme right folks; with so many things to actually be upset at Obama over, they get upset over shit like his fictional immigrant status, his daughter going to Oaxaxa, Michelle somehow forcing school kids to eat healthy food, and so on.  People, there are real issues to be pissed about.  If Michelle taking on childhood obesity as her First Lady project is socialism, I shudder to think what that made Just Say No.

  7. I like how his signature looks like a death metal band logo.

  8. Russ Northrup says:

    Giclée == Inkjet printed.

  9. Gemma says:

    Wouldn’t a pond extinguish the fuse? (Fizzle goes the dynamite!)

  10. Allan Self says:

    I wonder what the artist is trying to say with this painting?  I’ll bet he’s concerned about due-process free assassinations and warrant-less surveillance. 

  11. Andy Havens says:

    If he wants to burn the Constitution, and he’s doing so… why does he look so sad? Shouldn’t he be happy? Maybe roasting ‘mallows for a s’more or sumfin? Also, what’s he pointing at? The fire? Fire has a delightful way of bringing attention to itself… you know… that burny-light thing.

    I’m just confused by this. Now… if it was a gleeful Obama, roasting treats on a burning Constitution, and pointing at something else (Israel! Death Panels! Bird Flu!) to distract us… that I’d buy.

  12. patrick iche says:

    Giclée is the french for squirt. Inkjet is said “jet d’encre” in french.

  13. kedaron says:

    Destroy freedom of religion – CHECK
    Destroy freedom of speech – Harry Reid is working on that with SOPA/ACTA
    Give him one more term and he will finish the job.

    • h4x0r says:

       I don’t see any laws on the books forbidding the worship of imaginary deities or zombie carpenters. Now, there are a lot of people who want to keep blowhards like yourself from legislating religion and morals and forcing all others to live by those same beliefs. ….and rightly so.

    • Russell Klein says:

      Except the President hasn’t really done anything to destroy freedom of religion; although I am interested in how you think he has.

      And while it is fun to blame Harry Reid don’t forget SOPA/ACTA was pushed by good old Lamar Smith (R) from Texas.

    • “Destroy freedom of religion” is such an awesome hyperbole, I’m afraid I have to demand you give me more specifics. They’ll either be life-changingly enlightening or pants-wettingly hilarious.

      • kedaron says:

        You may be aware that Obama is removing religious exemptions that the Catholic Church and other religious institutions have had until now.  

        • Russell Klein says:

          No and Yes.

          Obama is not pushing to remove religious exemptions from the Catholic Church ( I am assuming you are talking about birth control) but he is pushing to remove religious exemptions from organizations affiliated with the Catholic Church.  There is a difference between the two, one is a church and one is not.

        • Gideon Jones says:

          Numerous states, most of the country in fact, have had the same law in place at the state level for decades.  It’s been challenged by the Catholic Church before, and they’ve lost before, because being a church does not exempt you from US laws that conflict with your religion.  This is not a new concept, it’s always been that way.

          Additionally, in 2000 the EEOC ruled that providing preventative care for men but not women was a violation of the Civil Rights Act’s sexual discrimination clause, a decision later upheld by the courts, effectively extending these state laws nationwide.  

          All the Obama rule change does is tell insurance companies that they need to actually follow that previous ruling, and not charge co-pays for preventative care.

          In short, it changes almost nothing. This whole kerfuffle is purely an election year ploy that backfired badly on the Catholic Bishops and GOP.

        • duc chau says:

          They’re no longer allowed to rape young boys?

        • headcode says:

          People are still free to continue worshipping the mythical being of their choice.  Removing a tax exemption is hardly destroying freedom of religion.  I wish that people who are so concerned about freedom of religion would remember that freedom of religion means freedom FROM religion as well.

        • wysinwyg says:

          That law applies to the Catholic church as an employer.  Not as a religious institution.

          Let me try to put this the simple way.  Suppose the Catholic church wanted to hire children 9-12 years old as janitors in Catholic hospitals.  Suppose the federal government steps in and stops them because…child labor is illegal according to federal employment regulations.  Is that “destroying religious freedom in the U.S.”?

          Let’s try another one.  Suppose the Catholic church decides all employees of Catholic-affiliated organizations should be paid in “Pope Bucks” which are only redeemable in special Catholic dispensaries and are not exchangeable for U.S. currency.  And let’s say, once again, that the federal government steps in and points out that according to federal employment statutes you cannot pay employees in scrip.  Is that “destroying religious freedom in the U.S.”?

          Of course not.  Because these regulations affect only how the Catholic church treats its employees and not what or how any particular Catholic worships. 

          The law in question protects the religious liberty of employees by ensuring that the Catholic church cannot use its leverage as an employer to force them to conform to the arbitrary and insidious beliefs of Catholicism.

        • Oh, look, that thing you described in incredibly melodramatic and extreme terms turned out to have nuance. Well, color me completely unastonished.

    • Navin_Johnson says:

      “Destroy freedom of religion – CHECK”  

      Pffft.  Have you no shame, or self respect?

    • princeminski says:

      Jesus Christ. So to speak.

  14. How about the fact that those flames would be burning the f*ck out of his right hand!?!?

    (oh and if this guy actually ends up selling even one of these things, I am going to have to seriously rethink my artistic vision. j/k)

  15. Russell Klein says:

    I think it’s pretty awesome that we live in a country where someone can paint that … although I think it’s pretty sad we live in a country where people don’t really understand what socialism is.

    • CountZero says:

      You should check out the replies to even vaguely political posts on MacDailyNews. Truly terrifying how utterly ignorant so many people are about ‘socialism’ and ‘communism’.
      I blame the parents myself.

  16. IronyElemental says:

    I like how he’s pointing at the fire. “See? I’m BURNING it.”

  17. LogrusZed says:

    Patriot Act is still in place and the DEA is raiding medicinal pot growers but hey gay folks can go die for bullshit now so it’s all cool.

  18. RHK says:

    That’s actually his long form birth certificate – the picture’s  been ‘shopped.

  19. n8zilla says:

    he seems like a good enough painter. too bad he’s not very good at understanding the definition of fairly simple words like “socialism”

  20. EvilTerran says:

    Ah, McNaughton. Best known for this *other* work of creepy, revisionist “patriotism”:

    http://www.mcnaughtonart.com/artwork/view_zoom/353

    … although at least that one led to a rather splendid parody:

    http://i.imgur.com/WUH0b.jpg

    • Antinous / Moderator says:

      Shit. I never get invited to the best parties.

    • hymenopterid says:

      It’s like Jack Chick meets Thomas Kinkade.

    • Kevin Pierce says:

      I like his angle – paint bullshit and then fleece tea baggers for “heirloom” quality schmaltz.

    • princeminski says:

      Oh, this is *that* guy! Well, fuck him and the horse he rode in on. I like how he defends the group shot referenced above: “This is not a Republican painting.” ‘Cause it’s got JFK in it. Wotta douche. The parody, on the other hand, is awesome beyond belief and I wanna paper my ‘rec room with giclees of it.

  21. light_saber says:

    I don’t know, Xeni.

    I call your Obama-burning-a-Constitution… 

    And I raise, with…

    OBAMA ENSLAVING WHITE PEOPLE — WHILE MONEY RAINS DOWN ON HIM!!!!

    http://www.mcnaughtonart.com/artwork/wake_up_america_zoom 

    Ok, there is one black man being enslaved, too, but that just shows you how bad Obama, the Anti-Reagan, really is.

    And, yes, there’s a video because of course there is:
    http://youtu.be/oRxMQhn0WAg

    • Mark Dow says:

      Fantastic. Deeply satisfying to mouse over Jesus Christ.

      • Mark Dow says:

        And can you find Waldo (hint, he looks like Satan)?

        • Donald Petersen says:

          I can spot neither Waldo nor Christ, but it sure looks like a slightly stout Stephen Colbert who Wants His Country Back.

      • Antinous / Moderator says:

        Maybe I’m reading too much into it, but when Jesus looks that fuckable, I see subtext.

      • teapot says:

        It’s so cute when people think having those little ‘zoom’ images on their website somehow stops us from getting to the high-res image. Pity this guy is a junk artist or I’d be Giclée-ing myself some A3 copies on the office printer.

        • Kimmo says:

          Yeah, cute is the word : )

          No hi-res copy of this one though.

          Perhaps you prefer my lo-res photochopping to his fine art ; )

          (repost of second version)

    • chenille says:

      I like the statements he provides with the paintings. Because the message of showing the president showered in money while he throws the public into chains is really too subtle without one, you know?

    • Brainspore says:

      I don’t know why, but I like the idea that the only one in that painting who is truly free is the chicken. Maybe because free range chicken is obviously part of some vast liberal conspiracy.

    • bcsizemo says:

      Pst.  Everyone knows it’s faster to cut your hand off than cut the chain.  Besides then you disability.

  22. Mister44 says:

    A bit crass – but I don’t find it creepy in the least. I am sure when hes burning copies of the Constitution that is exactly how he looks. Exactly.

  23. Aaron Swain says:

    He appears to be wearing David Byrne’s big suit from Stop Making Sense.  The symbolism eludes me…..

  24. BrotherPower says:

    This guy puts the “B” in “subtle.”

  25. Painting-Obama looks a bit sad to me. Maybe he’s pointing to the burning Constitution, saying “See? See what Congress is doing? I tried. I really, really tried. But you keep voting in these incumbents who have staring contests with each other and who propose crazy laws like SOPA and PIPA.”

    But that’s just me.

  26. Brainspore says:

    “THREE-FIFTHS MY ASS!!”

  27. Ito Kagehisa says:

    How come there’s no George W. Bush and Ronald Reagan smiling gleefully in the background? 

    • I’m not sure the artist depicted either of the Bushes in any of his paintings. Maybe he’s ashamed?

      • Donald Petersen says:

        Check out his painting
        “The Forgotten Man.” 
         That’s the one wherein the same depressed white dude in the parka who’s sawing off his chain in the “Wake Up, America” painting is moping on a park bench while all the Presidents, past and present, look on.  And Obama is sorta staring off into the distance with the Constitution stuck under his foot like a gum wrapper.  James Madison is aghast, as if Obama had crushed a kitten’s skull underneath his heel, and while tyrants like Teddy Roosevelt, FDR, and Bill Clinton applaud, actual patriotic Presidents like Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, and (of course) Reagan gesture compassionately toward The Forgotten Dude, whose prospects are bleak and spirits trampled.

        And McNaughton hastens to point out this:

        It is not a partisan painting. I take no favoritism of Republicans or Democrats. Both parties are guilty.

        Anyway, both Bushes are present.  The younger one looks slightly concerned about Forgotten Dude’s plight, and is beginning to raise a hand as if to point, but can’t quite bring himself to commit.

        This would be awesome if airbrushed onto the side of a van.

        • Antinous / Moderator says:

          If you mouse over Reagan, it IDs him as Ulysses S. Grant.

          • Donald Petersen says:

            Depends on your approach.  From the left, you’ll hit either Grant or Pierce first, and from the right you’ll hit either Garfield or Adams.  Those four each have a mini-bio that pops up, showing the national debt under their Administrations.  McNaughton doesn’t include one for Reagan.  Gee, what a puzzling oversight.

  28. thequickbrownfox says:

    Very poor attempt to emulate the severity of Neapolitan Baroque painter Salvator Rosa. http://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/paintings/salvator-rosa-philosophy

  29. atimoshenko says:

    I have the version with the horns, the pointed tail and the goat legs.

  30. Lurking_Grue says:

    Strange… why does this artist hate America so much?

  31. Stefan Jones says:

    Someday crap like this will be hot collectables, bought by hipsters for their ironic value.

    I can picture a gallery showing,  to whose opening party a senile and utterly cluesss McNaughton is invited for entertainment value.

  32. flounder says:

    “When I paint a patriotic painting…its like throwing a stick of dynamite in the pond!” The painter obviously hates fish. Socialist fish.

  33. Art says:

    Politics aside….it’s a cheesy painting…uh…. I mean ink jet copy of a cheesy painting.

  34. Dan Allosso says:

    But how easy was that to paint?  He just took the Jesus-holding-the-Constitution part of his big theocracy mural and substituted Obama’s face — and Perry Mason’s suit.  Really, THAT’S the mystery.  Maybe Mason was a Mason — or a socialistic Illuminati (Illuminatus?) like the guys who tried to take over America when Jefferson was running for president.  I’m just saying’…

  35. Maverick says:

    That’s not quite right. What W actually left him was the Constitution wrapped around a pile of dog shit, aflame.

    • VicqRuiz says:

      There’s a lot of truth in that.  But I rather suspect most Obama voters thought he would apply a fire extinguisher, rather than a gallon of lighter fluid.

  36. Chris Connors says:

    Our Artiste friend has a recurring theme with Constitutional Fetishism. He strikes me as something less than dedicated to facts and reason in this video: 
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4KGlBHyVeYU 

  37. Julian says:

    The troglodytic, hysterical right-wingers are really good at painting their enemies as holding the beliefs that they, themselves, espouse (whether they know it or not, or admit to it or not)…

  38. hypersomniac says:

    So the Bible Belt still thinks Yeshua bin Yosef was an Aryan dreamchild, eh?

  39. VicqRuiz says:

    For those of you who are Obama voters:

    When you marked the box for him in 2008, where did you think the country would be in 2012?

    Don’t forget to take into account that he had veto-proof majorities in both houses of Congress for the first two years.

    • Antinous / Moderator says:

      Don’t forget to take into account that he had veto-proof majorities in both houses of Congress for the first two years.

      Have you not heard of something called a filibuster?

      • VicqRuiz says:

        Yes. it’s James Madison’s gift to America when there’s a Republican in the White House, and a crippling excresence concocted by dead white guys when a Democrat holds the office.

        • Antinous / Moderator says:

          Please compare use of the filibuster by Democrats versus Republicans in the last five decades.

      • Donald Petersen says:

        Well, for a minute or two there, he had a filibusterbusting 60-vote supermajority that, had the parties been reversed, would probably have resulted in us living in a Cheney/Buchanan/Rove/Santorum-tickling paradise/hellscape.  A lot of good might have been accomplished during that window, had Democrats anything like the discipline the Republicans had under Bill Frist and Trent Lott.  Come to look it up, turns out there were two windows: 7/07/09 – 8/25/09, and 9/25/09 – 2/04/10.

        Then again, the Democrats cover an awfully broad swath on the ideological spectrum these days, especially compared to these 21st century Republicans.  I guess we’re lucky they passed Lily Ledbetter and SCHIP.  And Dodd-Frank, for what that was worth.  Without a public option (let alone being single-payer), I won’t dignify Health Care Reform with a mention.

        Ah, 111th Congress.  You could have been great. Other than repealing DADT, you were mostly a big tease.

    • skyhawk1 says:

      Um no. Because blue dog dems (i.e. Rethug-lite) decided they wanted to flex their muscles. 

  40. sean says:

    I remember that scene! It was when he burned that Constitution at the democratic convention! Except he was smiling, not making a scary face. We all cheered and cheered because we hate freedom!

  41. Garrett Eaton says:

    Funny, when I saw the painting I assumed there was a “liberal” motivation to the content (based on infringement of personal liberties that Obama has continued).  I’m disappointed that this is just run-of-the-mill right-wing crackpottery.

  42. kuliphex says:

    I’ve seen that look before.  It’s your 10th grade history teacher demanding to know which right-wing student hates him so much that they had to set fire to his personally autographed copy of the Constitution.  Indefinite detention for suspects is sure to follow.

  43. MandoZink says:

    $345!! Wow!!  I tried. I really did. For years I considered maybe the best way to make some easy bucks was to come up with some overpriced (even if only slightly) memorial works, or trinkets, that I could sell to either staunch Conservatives or uppity Christians. Fleece those who make life a bit of a hell for decent people who have to put up with it. Oddly, I would feel pangs of guilt at some point and redirect my focus to a more intellectual pursuit. Now I’m over that. Last night I was admiring a very well-preserved Bush-Cheney sticker, still on the bumper. Now I want to produce bumper stickers that will not come off, with extremely durable, morally correct, liberal messages. Of course, over THAT message I would print a second highly conservative, morally offensive message that neocons would love, using ink that will wear off in a few weeks. The initial message would have to be good – one they would fork over money for in a flash.
    I always loved to see those “My Flag’s Colors Don’t Run” bumper stickers where the colors had actually run off the sticker and down the bumper.

    • Donald Petersen says:

      I previously mentioned my old “Democrats for Nixon” bumper sticker.  I had a second one that, in a fit of gleeful perversity, I affixed to the bumper of my Toyota truck about ten years ago.  Since the sticker, being over 30 years old at the time, was completely unlaminated, my ironic waggish sticker’s message faded to utter illegibility within six weeks, but the rest of the sticker remains stubbornly stuck to that same damn bumper a decade later.  My niece, who inherited the truck from me, ended up covering it with a Spongebob sticker.

      Goes to show.  There are some things one shouldn’t even joke about without risking cosmological comeuppance.

      • MandoZink says:

        I had just turned old enough to to vote against Nixon’s second term. I was a bit bummed, but I’ll never forget his resignation. Our entire historic neighborhood, called Old Louisville, was full of hippies. We all hit the sidewalks and celebrated. “Honk If You Love Nixon” and “Honk If You Love Jesus” were common stickers at the time, but my favorite was “Slam On Your Brakes If You’re Stoned”.

      • IronEdithKidd says:

        They don’t sell Goo Gone where you live?  It eats sticker glue for breakfast.

  44. VicqRuiz says:

    Under socialism, profitable enterprises are run so that their profits are shared with their workers, and with the nation.

    Under Obama-ism, failed enterprises are kept alive, zombie-fashion, with dollars extracted from the public, or borrowed from foreign countries.

    Therefore Barack Obama, whatever his other failings, is NOT a socialist.

    • Russell Klein says:

      Obamaism doesn’t sound scary enough … ohh I got it; Corporate Zombie-ism.

    • Kimmo says:

      What insane paradigm holds socialism as a failing?

      Wait, I know – the one that’s deluding most Americans into letting their country become a political cesspit.

      • Ito Kagehisa says:

        What insane paradigm holds socialism as a failing?

        One that does not like either overpopulation or state-administered birth control?

        I can probably think of others, but it’s hard, because I grew up in a socialist nation (The United States of America) so it seems a normal of affairs to me.

  45. voiceinthedistance says:

    I’m redecorating, and am trying to decide what color slipcovers and drapes would really set this off.  

    I sure hope it comes sofa size.

  46. Regicide says:

    It’s shocking how incapable conservative culture is of handling multiple (or even single?) levels of abstraction or metaphor. This is a representational painting (by a competent craftsman), of the president, in a presidential suit, holding a burning Constitution, AND HE’S POINTING AT THE FLAMES!

    ‘Look at this! Look at the flames! You think anyone else would’ve done that? Nope. People like YOU don’t want the destruction of everything you believe you value. See my angry black face? Uh huh.’

    There probably were some shoddy left-wing painters who did similar pieces of Bush using the Declaration of Independence as toilet paper, but the different is: reasonable conservatives will apologize for the hatefulness of the piece, while reasonable liberals will do that AND express shame that they agree politically with such clumsy practitioners of “art”.

    Stephanie Meyer may in all seriousness be the right’s most deep-thinking artisan (while being a worse writer than Naughton is a painter), and, of course, I don’t think most of her fans have any clue what her books are actually alluding to.

  47. Stephan says:

    I think this McNaughton guy is a master troll. And I have to give him credit for that.

  48. Matt Toler says:

    Deep. I wonder what it could mean? 

    … and Powdered Toast Man did this first. 

  49. skyhawk1 says:

    And yet rethugs are restricting women’s rights,  and still playing the tax-cut trickle- down songs. If Obama’s a socialist, then Retpubs are fascists pure and simple. Maybe someone should consider a portrait of Reagan in a brown shirt.

  50. R_Young says:

    [Announcers Voice] Alright everyone, let’s play America’s fastest growing game show, match the skin color of the first century middle-eastern Jews in a conservative painting!  Jimmy, you’re up first.  What color do you think it’s going to be?!”

    Jimmy: “…uh, Olive?”

    ERRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRN*airhorn*
    Announcer: “Sorry!  We aren’t counting the anachronistic celebrity cameos!”Seriously though; they are all white.  Check for yourself: http://www.mcnaughtonart.com/page/view_thumbnails/Religious

  51. Petzl says:

    A. It’s a terrible likeness.
    B. He’s either a Teapartier or an OWS being “ironic” (ie, OWS would call Obama fascist)
        B1. I’m guessing the former because he’s from Utah, all his other art is one hair better than a Kinkade.
    C. Why is this trash in boingboing?

    • Donald Petersen says:

      C. Why is this trash in boingboing?

      Philistine.  This is Fine Art.  It sez so, right on McNaughton’s own website.

  52. Christopher says:

    I’m sorry, I’m deeply offended by this. I don’t recall ever seeing Fred Armisen burn the Constitution, and I resent the implication that he’s done it.

  53. I like this version better.

Leave a Reply