If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Buzzfeed)   You remember that Anti-Obama painter? Well, he's at it again, and here is his latest masterpiece   (buzzfeed.com) divider line 649
    More: Stupid, President Obama, art world, Thomas Kinkade, Jon McNaughton, U.S. Constitution, Sean Hannity  
•       •       •

14102 clicks; posted to Politics » on 23 Jun 2012 at 6:00 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



649 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2012-06-23 04:05:22 PM
What's GWB doing with all those evil Demokrats? And I think JFK's getting ready to poke the protagonist in the ass.
 
2012-06-23 04:08:48 PM
Which founding father is that supposed to be praying? Bill Murray?
 
2012-06-23 04:12:18 PM
Looks like FDR finally dropped that "polio" thing. Stupid lib malingerer
 
2012-06-23 04:14:03 PM
I can't wait to see how this will be described as somehow racist. That will be fun to watch
 
2012-06-23 04:15:57 PM

cman: I can't wait to see how this will be described as somehow racist. That will be fun to watch


not racist.
Just moronic.
 
2012-06-23 04:19:20 PM

SilentStrider: cman: I can't wait to see how this will be described as somehow racist. That will be fun to watch

not racist.
Just moronic.


I would have said childish, but whatever.
 
2012-06-23 04:19:57 PM
How dare he use Hoban Washburn like that.
 
2012-06-23 04:21:41 PM
Who the hell is that person to the right of Lincoln and Reagan? Is that supposed to be Washington? And who is that kneeling down? Pat Robertson in a wig?
 
2012-06-23 04:23:48 PM
WE GET IT.

HE'S BLACK!
 
2012-06-23 04:25:01 PM

cman: I can't wait to see how this will be described as somehow racist. That will be fun to watch


Obama looking fearful with his hands up in a defensive posture, like a slave about to be beaten for disobeying his master, all but cowering from a proud white man with "Aryan" features is a pretty obvious narrative this racist artist is conveying here. Sheesh, open your eyes.
 
2012-06-23 04:26:14 PM

DamnYankees: Who the hell is that person to the right of Lincoln and Reagan? Is that supposed to be Washington?


I think it's F. Murray Abraham.
 
2012-06-23 04:26:21 PM
Look what I bought! And they gave me change!
 
2012-06-23 04:27:22 PM

poonesfarm: DamnYankees: Who the hell is that person to the right of Lincoln and Reagan? Is that supposed to be Washington?

I think it's F. Murray Abraham.


www.corporate-aliens.com

I absolve you.
 
2012-06-23 04:27:31 PM
I wonder if it's available on velvet?
 
2012-06-23 04:28:19 PM

St_Francis_P: I wonder if it's available on velvet?


If it were socially acceptable, I would drape myself in velvet.
 
2012-06-23 04:30:44 PM

cman: I can't wait to see how this will be described as somehow racist. That will be fun to watch


Not racist.

Lame. Weird. But not racist.
 
2012-06-23 04:34:31 PM

DamnYankees: If it were socially acceptable, I would drape myself in velvet.


They make recliners with a fridge in the side, just to complete the dream!
 
2012-06-23 04:47:07 PM

cman: I can't wait to see how this will be described as somehow racist. That will be fun to watch


nah, not racist - just propaganda.
 
2012-06-23 04:47:38 PM

cman: I can't wait to see how this will be described as somehow racist. That will be fun to watch


No doubt a few idiots will, but not many. Probably fewer than insisted the witch-doctor Obama wasn't racist.
 
2012-06-23 04:50:08 PM

cman: I can't wait to see how this will be described as somehow racist. That will be fun to watch


You have a really weird, twisted and distorted view of the world. It must be very unpleasant in your head.
 
2012-06-23 04:51:04 PM
John McNaughton, like Thomas Kinkade, but even more crass.
 
2012-06-23 04:52:31 PM
Nothing will top his One Nation Under Cthulhu

static.omglog.com
 
2012-06-23 04:53:44 PM

Lionel Mandrake: Nothing will top his One Nation Under Cthulhu

[static.omglog.com image 555x374]


Whoa. Now that's talent!
 
2012-06-23 04:56:25 PM

Lionel Mandrake: Nothing will top his One Nation Under Cthulhu


That's a classic. Someone with talent should do the rest of his work.
 
2012-06-23 04:57:40 PM
This picture is an example that earnestness is the complete opposite of irony
 
2012-06-23 05:04:59 PM
i.imgur.com
 
2012-06-23 05:09:08 PM

AzDownboy: This picture is an example that earnestness is the complete opposite of irony


Yes; he understands the importance of being earnest, but lacks any talent to express it.
 
2012-06-23 05:30:13 PM
Is that like the Anit-Christ?
 
2012-06-23 05:40:32 PM
He sold one of these to Sean Hannity for six figures? This man is a genius. This has inspired me to finish my magnum opus, "Obama taking a Dump on the Magna Carta".
 
2012-06-23 05:46:09 PM

Mentat: He sold one of these to Sean Hannity for six figures? This man is a genius. This has inspired me to finish my magnum opus, "Obama taking a Dump on the Magna Carta".


I have $53.40 that I can give you for it.
 
2012-06-23 05:53:15 PM

cman: I can't wait to see how this will be described as somehow racist. That will be fun to watch


For your convenience, I have put the appropriate rebuttal below.

Dr. Mojo PhD: I love how lunatic conservatives operate.

First, have registered (or better yet, ELECTED) Republicans send out crap like this:
i.imgur.com
(Watermelons on the White House lawn, sent by Los Alamitos Mayor Dean Grose, in March 2009, a scant two months after Obama was inaugurated -- I'm sure they were just criticizing 3.5 years of bad policy decisions, though)

And this:
i.imgur.com
(Obama Bucks, sent by Diane Fedele, the president of the Republican women's club in San Bernardino, in October 2008, a month before Obama was even elected -- I'm sure they were just criticizing 3.5 years of bad policy decisions, though)

Second, DON'T CALL OUT THESE RACIST ELEMENTS OF YOUR PARTY. Acknowledging they exist will foul the next few steps. You must pretend as if this never happened.

Third, allow liberals to rightly call this racist.

Fourth, criticize Obama on something not related to this. Then, to immediately shelter your statement from criticism, "predict" that liberals will call your criticism racist because they have a history of calling actual racism racist. Pretend that because a Republican sent out pictures of Obama as a lazy, watermelon-eating negro, this means liberals will view your argument in the same light. This automatically shelters you from criticism, instantly makes you the real victim, and turns you into Innocence Abused.

Instant win and totally not-transparent-at-all hug-bait that only works on people that exist in your echo chamber whose arguments are so fragile that not only can they not withstand critical examination, but you need to make yourself the victim to feel that any critical examination is unfair slurs against your character.

 
2012-06-23 05:53:37 PM

hillbillypharmacist: Mentat: He sold one of these to Sean Hannity for six figures? This man is a genius. This has inspired me to finish my magnum opus, "Obama taking a Dump on the Magna Carta".

I have $53.40 that I can give you for it.


SOLD
 
2012-06-23 05:55:24 PM
I don't know why Obama looks so frightened. Boris Becker isn't even an American. Who cares if he holds a copy of the Constitution?
 
2012-06-23 05:56:00 PM

FloydA: cman: I can't wait to see how this will be described as somehow racist. That will be fun to watch

You have a really weird, twisted and distorted view of the world. It must be very unpleasant in your head.


Liberals might play the race card, which sometimes slanders innocent people, but conservatives just LOVE the racist card, which provides cover for ALL racists every time they use it.
 
2012-06-23 05:57:48 PM

Mentat: He sold one of these to Sean Hannity for six figures? This man is a genius. This has inspired me to finish my magnum opus, "Obama taking a Dump on the Magna Carta".


If he's doing it only to separate rabid Obama-hating conservatives from their $$$, then yes, he is a genius. Consider the fact that a whole lotta stupid Teabaggers made Sarah Palin a millionaire by purchasing her ghostwritten books.

/occasional artist suddenly intrigued by the possibilities
 
2012-06-23 06:03:23 PM

SilentStrider: cman: I can't wait to see how this will be described as somehow racist. That will be fun to watch

not racist.
Just moronic.


So you are okay with the policies of our government shredding the Constitution while 0bama raises millions from Wall Street and socialist organizations?

Well, good to know that is how you feel.
 
2012-06-23 06:03:36 PM
Area Man Passionate Defender What He Imagines Constitution to Be
 
2012-06-23 06:05:30 PM

tenpoundsofcheese: So you are okay with the policies of our government shredding the Constitution while 0bama raises millions from Wall Street and socialist organizations


Is that what this painting implies? This guy is pretty good at fiction, then.
 
2012-06-23 06:06:19 PM
Hmmm...verrry interesting.

i45.tinypic.com
 
2012-06-23 06:07:16 PM
This guy just keeps on making the greatest paintings for my desktop.
Untill some guy photoshops it and makes it even greater.
 
2012-06-23 06:08:25 PM

Babwa Wawa: What's GWB doing with all those evil Demokrats? And I think JFK's getting ready to poke the protagonist in the ass.


Because GWB was a Democrat, wasn't he? All I ever hear from the Fark Independents was that he wasn't a real Republican...
 
2012-06-23 06:08:36 PM
Why is he holding Satan's Currency? Is he a slave to the Fed? Shouldn't he be depicted clutching a fist-full of reclaimed gold jewelry? OR, better yet, prying a gold grill from some race-neutral (because, he's not racist...) guy's mouth?

So disappoint.
 
Bf+
2012-06-23 06:12:03 PM
cman: I can't wait to see how this will be described as somehow racist.

The painting isn't racist.
You, on the other hand, may be racist just for being so hypersensitive to being called racist.
You racist.
 
2012-06-23 06:14:00 PM
tapping into a widespread libertarian distrust of Washington

yeah, well paintings aren't even in the Constitution
 
2012-06-23 06:16:02 PM
Political tripe aside, this guy is a rather decent artist.
 
2012-06-23 06:16:07 PM
Sure must pay better than clowns with big sad eyes...
 
2012-06-23 06:16:36 PM

DamnYankees: Who the hell is that person to the right of Lincoln and Reagan? Is that supposed to be Washington? And who is that kneeling down? Pat Robertson in a wig?


All the answers ye seek are contained within

My favorite part is Calvin Coolidge.
 
2012-06-23 06:16:56 PM
img254.imageshack.us
 
2012-06-23 06:17:08 PM
Not as bad as I thought it would be. Guy is a pretty good painter. If he can make a few bucks from it then good for him.

\I'm still looking for a good Clinton painting for my apartment
 
2012-06-23 06:17:28 PM

tenpoundsofcheese: M-O-O-N, that spells Zerobama.


It sure does, Tom. It sure does.
 
2012-06-23 06:18:52 PM

AdolfOliverPanties: I don't know why Obama looks so frightened. Boris Becker isn't even an American. Who cares if he holds a copy of the Constitution?


Is that Boris Becker?

/I thought it was Dennis Leary on three bottles of Nyquil.
 
2012-06-23 06:19:09 PM

FloydA: You have a really weird, twisted and distorted view of the world. It must be very unpleasant in your head.


To be fair, he made his cross so farking tall that when he nails himself to it every thread, he's barely getting enough oxygen.
 
2012-06-23 06:19:22 PM

tenpoundsofcheese: So you are okay with the policies of our government shredding the Constitution while 0bama raises millions from Wall Street and socialist organizations?


Why would Wall Street and socialist organization support the same dude?
 
2012-06-23 06:19:33 PM
Why is the guy holding a big wad of cash? The Constitution on one hand and a big wad of cash in the other?
 
2012-06-23 06:20:40 PM

hillbillypharmacist: tenpoundsofcheese: So you are okay with the policies of our government shredding the Constitution while 0bama raises millions from Wall Street and socialist organizations?

Why would Wall Street and socialist organization support the same dude?


Because Obama. Duh.
 
2012-06-23 06:20:49 PM
Who gave him that big wad of cash?
 
2012-06-23 06:21:21 PM
Is it me or does Obama not look so much frightened as he does "oh look out we got a badass over here.
 
2012-06-23 06:21:38 PM

tenpoundsofcheese: shredding the Constitution



Reagan is President again?
 
2012-06-23 06:21:38 PM

ZZ9 Plural Z Alpha: John McNaughton, like Thomas Kinkade, but even more crass.


And without all the brilliant talent.
 
2012-06-23 06:21:50 PM
 
2012-06-23 06:22:08 PM

cman: I can't wait to see how this will be described as somehow racist. That will be fun to watch


I would just say massively partisan, and incredibly vapid and thoughtless.
 
2012-06-23 06:22:12 PM
I'm not even sure what the picture is trying to convey. I guess that Obama is all "whoa, now hold up!", but it seems like a lot of mixed, muddled messages.
 
2012-06-23 06:22:41 PM

fusillade762: Who gave him that big wad of cash?


Billionaire Republicans? Citizens United ruling?
 
2012-06-23 06:24:12 PM

poonesfarm: Which founding father is that supposed to be praying? Bill Murray?


I thought it was Joe Biden.
 
2012-06-23 06:24:21 PM

Zeno-25: [i.imgur.com image 640x420]


The doll's eyes are a nice touch.
 
2012-06-23 06:24:48 PM
fusillade762: Who gave him that big wad of cash?

he earned it by selling his bootstraps
 
2012-06-23 06:25:19 PM
I like how you have to have a huge wad of $$$ to be empowered.
 
2012-06-23 06:25:25 PM
Both paintings feature the same "everyman" character, who in McNaughton's telling, has chosen to break off the chains of an oppressive federal government.

Ah yes, a white blonde guy with tons of money. It's the spitting image of the everyman of 21st century America.
 
2012-06-23 06:26:50 PM

AeAe: Why is the guy holding a big wad of cash? The Constitution on one hand and a big wad of cash in the other?


He's on Antiques Roadshow?
 
2012-06-23 06:27:35 PM
The Empowered Man is rather cute.

/i do him
 
2012-06-23 06:28:11 PM

RulerOfNone: Political tripe aside, this guy is a rather decent artist.


He might make realistic impressions of the people and things he's trying to depict in his painting, but that doesn't make him an artist. His work isn't challenging, it is, as you said, political tripe. And political tripe can never be art, as art can never be political tripe. Art can maybe, MAYBE, make a political statement, but it has to do so with some subtlety, and preferably in a way that challenges pre-conceived notions. This garbage only serves to reinforce pre-conceived notions.
 
2012-06-23 06:29:30 PM

RulerOfNone: Political tripe aside, this guy is a rather decent artist.


Well, part of being an artist is coming up with subject matter. I'd say he's a rather decent "painter". His subject matter is trite and populist. It's essentially what Thomas Kinkade would have been doing if he'd gone into figural painting.
 
2012-06-23 06:29:50 PM
Is he trying to be the next Kinkade? That's exactly what I want to see above Granny's couch.
 
2012-06-23 06:30:22 PM

Zeno-25: Both paintings feature the same "everyman" character, who in McNaughton's telling, has chosen to break off the chains of an oppressive federal government.

Ah yes, a white blonde guy with tons of money. It's the spitting image of the everyman of 21st century America.


Yeah, I noticed that. It's the same white guy who was sitting on the bench in despair as Obama haughtily stepped on the Constitution in the last painting. I want to see the painting between those two, where the guy smacked down Obama in a street fight to get the Constitution from him, and claimed his prize cash from the founding fathers, who had a large betting pool going.
 
2012-06-23 06:30:42 PM

Lionel Mandrake: Looks like FDR finally dropped that "polio" thing. Stupid lib malingerer


Like a typical Democrat he was just faking it so he could collect government benefits.
 
2012-06-23 06:31:17 PM
What I see in this man painting is a white man who wants to throw off the yoke of
government suppression so that he in turn can do even more to suppress the minorities
who are the cause of his irrational fears.
 
2012-06-23 06:31:20 PM

DamnYankees: poonesfarm: DamnYankees: Who the hell is that person to the right of Lincoln and Reagan? Is that supposed to be Washington?

I think it's F. Murray Abraham.

[www.corporate-aliens.com image 400x300]

I absolve you.


static.thehollywoodgossip.com


Very timely
 
2012-06-23 06:31:24 PM
I'm guessing this guy's most lucrative medium will be commemorative plates.
 
2012-06-23 06:31:41 PM
I interpret the expressions of the former presidents on the left as patronizing and sarcastic.

Also, Obama has huge hands, which may be an unintended compliment.
 
2012-06-23 06:31:46 PM

DamnYankees: Who the hell is that person to the right of Lincoln and Reagan? Is that supposed to be Washington? And who is that kneeling down? Pat Robertson in a wig?


I think it is supposed to be Jefferson?
 
2012-06-23 06:32:24 PM
Even though you don't agree with the sentiment the guy has serious artistic talent.
 
2012-06-23 06:32:26 PM

Babwa Wawa: What's GWB doing with all those evil Demokrats?


He's the token Repub so the artist can at least make some pretense of objectivity.
 
2012-06-23 06:32:48 PM

Gwendolyn: I think it is supposed to be Jefferson?


So not only a bad artist - but bad at history too?
 
2012-06-23 06:34:28 PM
That guy looks like Lucifer from Supernatural:

i140.photobucket.com
 
2012-06-23 06:35:17 PM

Action Seal: I interpret the expressions of the former presidents on the left as patronizing and sarcastic.

Also, Obama has huge hands, which may be an unintended compliment.


Or a fervent wish on the artist's part.
 
2012-06-23 06:35:21 PM
Kneeling Guy is obviously Jor-El
i232.photobucket.com
 
2012-06-23 06:35:35 PM

RulerOfNone: Political tripe aside, this guy is a rather decent artist.


Ooh! Ooh! You know who ELSE was a rather decent artist?

/Godwinrar
//I has it
 
2012-06-23 06:35:52 PM

AeAe: Why is the guy holding a big wad of cash? The Constitution on one hand and a big wad of cash in the other?


Because only wealthy people are the *real* Americans.
 
2012-06-23 06:36:32 PM

trotsky: Is he trying to be the next Kinkade? That's exactly what I want to see above Granny's couch.


I'll be surprised if my f-i-l hasn't replaced the Kinkade over his couch with one of these when we visit at Christmas.
 
2012-06-23 06:36:41 PM

dr_blasto: cman: I can't wait to see how this will be described as somehow racist. That will be fun to watch

Not racist.

Lame. Weird. But not racist.


I bet he's crying all the way to the bank.
 
2012-06-23 06:36:41 PM

trotsky: Is he trying to be the next Kinkade? That's exactly what I want to see above Granny's couch.


More like, "the product of Kinkade's one-night-stand with Michelle Bachmann."
 
2012-06-23 06:36:46 PM
So the empowered man has a wad of cash because of trickle down economics, bailouts for business, tax breaks for corporations and beating back the godless Hun Socialist? And he just bought the Constitution and has change left over? Or is he trying to flip the Constitution like an old house and sell it back to the corporations?

I'm confused.
 
2012-06-23 06:37:24 PM
Ronald Reagan
40th President, 1981-1989
National Debt: $2,857,430,960,187.32 trillion


So the debt under Reagan was $2,857,430,960,187,320,000,000,000,000?
 
2012-06-23 06:38:26 PM

trotsky: Is he trying to be the next Kinkade? That's exactly what I want to see above Granny's couch.


Well, I don't much care for the painting, but I suppose it would look better above Granny's cooch than those saggy old tittays.
 
2012-06-23 06:40:09 PM
The "artist"'s site with the mouse-overs is here.
 
2012-06-23 06:41:26 PM
I wanna know what that guy has in his pocket. Looks like he shoved a daily wage's worth of cheeseburgers in there. Or possibly a bunch of ferrets.
 
2012-06-23 06:42:11 PM

poonesfarm: cman: I can't wait to see how this will be described as somehow racist. That will be fun to watch

Obama looking fearful with his hands up in a defensive posture, like a slave about to be beaten for disobeying his master, all but cowering from a proud white man with "Aryan" features is a pretty obvious narrative this racist artist is conveying here. Sheesh, open your eyes.


And the second painting, with Obama gloating over all the chained white folks, panders to the deepest fear of racists.
 
2012-06-23 06:42:48 PM

balthan: The "artist"'s site with the mouse-overs is here.


Ooo Madison then. I like how the description goes on to talk about Madison's unhappiness like he's able to express it from the grave.
 
2012-06-23 06:43:21 PM
What's his fark name?
 
2012-06-23 06:43:38 PM

Mawson of the Antarctic: So the empowered man has a wad of cash because of trickle down economics, bailouts for business, tax breaks for corporations and beating back the godless Hun Socialist? And he just bought the Constitution and has change left over? Or is he trying to flip the Constitution like an old house and sell it back to the corporations?

I'm confused.


The man is a Real AmericanTM, so it's good when he has money. However, in one of the artist's other paintings, there is a lawyer who is portrayed as evil for holding a stack of cash. But of course, that lawyer must not have been a Real AmericanTM, and thus would be seen as undeserving of the money he is able to earn through his own efforts...for some reason...?
 
2012-06-23 06:43:45 PM

Zmog: I wanna know what that guy has in his pocket. Looks like he shoved a daily wage's worth of cheeseburgers in there. Or possibly a bunch of ferrets.

www.afrojacks.com
 
2012-06-23 06:45:01 PM
Not racist?

Apart from the fact that the only black or brown people in the picture are Obama And The Evil Plutocrats?
 
2012-06-23 06:45:15 PM

evoke: Even though you don't agree with the sentiment the guy has serious artistic talent.


His technical skills are quite good, but his story telling somehow manages to be both heavy handed and unclear at the same time.

You never needed liner notes to know what was going on in a Norman Rockwell painting.
 
2012-06-23 06:46:16 PM

Zmog: I wanna know what that guy has in his pocket. Looks like he shoved a daily wage's worth of cheeseburgers in there. Or possibly a bunch of ferrets.


The artist's site says it's a bible. And that the wad of cash is made of bills he picked up off the ground.

It also describes him as representing "every man, woman, and child of every color and creed who is an American".
 
2012-06-23 06:46:59 PM

Zeno-25: [creepy bush jumpstarting armageddon picture.jpg]


Why are the soldiers, er, pardon me...Holy American Christian Warriors, wearing knee pads? Planning on giving ole' W a hummer after kicking Hadji's ass?
 
2012-06-23 06:47:27 PM

Zmog: I wanna know what that guy has in his pocket. Looks like he shoved a daily wage's worth of cheeseburgers in there. Or possibly a bunch of ferrets.



The Empowered Man

He represents every man, woman and child of every color and creed who is an American. Like you and me, he hopes for a better life, to find the American dream of happiness and prosperity. But now, because of unconstitutional acts imposed upon the American people by our government we stand on the precipice of disaster. What will his opportunities be in the future? Will he ever have a chance to realize the American Dream?

Yes! He has got off his bench, ripped the Constitution out from under the feet of Obama and holds it up to the world. He is empowered to save our nation.

How? He understands the Constitution and liberties and laws therein. He also carries a Bible in his right coat pocket. He knows from where his true empowerment comes.

 
2012-06-23 06:48:01 PM

apoptotic: It also describes him as representing "every man, woman, and child of every color and creed who is an American".


But in a strange freak coincidence, he's a white male.

Yeah, that's the ticket.

Also, is he meant to represent gay people? Or are they still unworthy of equality?
 
2012-06-23 06:48:23 PM
Needs more crying bald eagle...maybe some 3 wolves thrown in for full effect.
 
2012-06-23 06:52:36 PM

apoptotic: It also describes him as representing "every man, woman, and child of every color and creed who is an American".


Pure coincidence he's depicted as a white Christian male.
 
2012-06-23 06:53:51 PM
Sorry, but nothing will top the original masterpiece of Jesus giving the Constitution to America. The thing about that that still makes it a favorite is the biologist with Satan at his back.
 
2012-06-23 06:56:22 PM

Sid_6.7: apoptotic: It also describes him as representing "every man, woman, and child of every color and creed who is an American".

But in a strange freak coincidence, he's a white male.

Yeah, that's the ticket.

Also, is he meant to represent gay people? Or are they still unworthy of equality?


Good question. Gay isn't a color, and I don't know if he'd consider homosexuality a creed. Maybe it would depend on whether they're carrying a bible in their right coat pocket. Obviously that means non-Christians can never be empowered, but I'm sure he'd see that as a feature, not a bug.
 
2012-06-23 06:57:29 PM
Do we have freedom when half the country pays taxes to support the other half?

I know it's just a talking point but lord that one trolls me proper every time. I guess children, retirees, housewives and the disabled need to start paying taxes and so this chump can skimp on his share.
 
2012-06-23 06:57:33 PM
Whar's his tactical holster? Whar?
 
2012-06-23 06:59:25 PM
So, he seems pretty direct in his criticism of GWB - does anyone have any links to his paintings from when GWB was President?
 
2012-06-23 07:00:00 PM
The Empowered Man has picked up the trashed documents that represented our Bill of Rights and placed them on the bench. No longer will they blow around on the ground like useless paper.

cdn.caughtoffside.com
 
2012-06-23 07:00:20 PM

trotsky: Is he trying to be the next Kinkade? That's exactly what I want to see above Granny's couch.


I initially read this as "above Granny's cooch".

Good place for it.
 
2012-06-23 07:01:00 PM

gingerjet: The Empowered Man is rather cute.

/i do him



Sure... now that he's got money.

You chicks are all alike.
 
2012-06-23 07:02:08 PM

Lionel Mandrake: Zmog: I wanna know what that guy has in his pocket. Looks like he shoved a daily wage's worth of cheeseburgers in there. Or possibly a bunch of ferrets.



The Empowered Man

He represents every man, woman and child of every color and creed who is an American. Like you and me, he hopes for a better life, to find the American dream of happiness and prosperity. But now, because of unconstitutional acts imposed upon the American people by our government we stand on the precipice of disaster. What will his opportunities be in the future? Will he ever have a chance to realize the American Dream?

Yes! He has got off his bench, ripped the Constitution out from under the feet of Obama and holds it up to the world. He is empowered to save our nation.

How? He understands the Constitution and liberties and laws therein. He also carries a Bible in his right coat pocket. He knows from where his true empowerment comes.


So he hides the True Power in his pocket while he holds up false idols in both hands? Where's your Christian principles, McNaughton?

/soniamdisappoint.jpg
 
2012-06-23 07:02:09 PM

apoptotic: AeAe: Why is the guy holding a big wad of cash? The Constitution on one hand and a big wad of cash in the other?

He's on Antiques Roadshow?


I LOL'd.
 
2012-06-23 07:03:13 PM
Looks ridiculous and I am amazed there are enough stupid people willing to buy this to drive the price to 5 figures.
 
2012-06-23 07:03:24 PM
His form's ok.. terrible perspective though

/post shop ergo plop
 
2012-06-23 07:03:41 PM
george bush sr said the constitution was just "a goddam piece of paper".
he was of course a member of the commucrat party.
 
2012-06-23 07:04:48 PM
Nothing says EMPOWERED MAN like modeling yourself after 18th century beliefs and lifestyles.
 
2012-06-23 07:05:26 PM

technicolor-misfit: gingerjet: The Empowered Man is rather cute.

/i do him


Sure... now that he's got money.

You chicks are all alike.


/gay
 
2012-06-23 07:07:29 PM

Dougie AXP: Is it me or does Obama not look so much frightened as he does "oh look out we got a badass over here.


i601.photobucket.com

You're welcome
 
2012-06-23 07:07:40 PM
Total Fascist, Nazi playbook in this "painting".
 
2012-06-23 07:08:37 PM

Snapper Carr: maybe some 3 wolves thrown in for full effect.


Quick and Dirty:

i140.photobucket.com
 
2012-06-23 07:08:47 PM

LincolnLogolas: Dougie AXP: Is it me or does Obama not look so much frightened as he does "oh look out we got a badass over here.

[i601.photobucket.com image 528x424]

You're welcome


fark. I'm drinking juice in front of my computer. That was a very dangerous thing to post.
 
2012-06-23 07:10:01 PM

cman: I can't wait to see how this will be described as somehow racist. That will be fun to watch


I keep saying that this blind hatred of Obama isn't because he's black. It's because he's a Democrat.

And as Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, and dozens (if not hundreds) of Republicans have already figured out, blind hatred Democrats is very VERY good for the bankbook.
 
2012-06-23 07:10:30 PM
Oh, and a bit off-topic but I've been wanting to say this for a while..

I'd bet my left one that the your founding fathers would hate the current Republican agitprop with the intensity of a thousand suns.
They were mostly Deists after all.

/feel better now :)
 
2012-06-23 07:11:38 PM

bulldg4life: Looks ridiculous and I am amazed there are enough stupid people willing to buy this to drive the price to 5 figures.


Because he paints The Truth; the raw truth you can usually only get at Free Republic, or in chain emails.
 
2012-06-23 07:11:49 PM

LincolnLogolas: Dougie AXP: Is it me or does Obama not look so much frightened as he does "oh look out we got a badass over here.



You're welcome


When I first looked, it seemed like the Prez was about to catch a brewski from someone "offscreen".
 
2012-06-23 07:12:43 PM

LincolnLogolas: Dougie AXP: Is it me or does Obama not look so much frightened as he does "oh look out we got a badass over here.

[i601.photobucket.com image 528x424]

You're welcome


You, sir or madam, owe me a new keyboard.
 
2012-06-23 07:13:35 PM

Sid_6.7: Snapper Carr: maybe some 3 wolves thrown in for full effect.

Quick and Dirty:

[i140.photobucket.com image 625x502]


That's fantastic.
 
2012-06-23 07:15:09 PM

The Evil That Lies In The Hearts Of Men: So, he seems pretty direct in his criticism of GWB - does anyone have any links to his paintings from when GWB was President?



W. is his sacrificial lamb. He throws him halfway under the bus to show that he's non-partisan, but when he actually talks about Bush, he walks it back and blames it on the hardships Bush faced as a President (9-11, financial collapse, Katrina, etc.)

If you look at "The Forgotten Man" Bush appears much more reluctant to be standing with the Dems... He's looking back over his shoulder at the forgotten man like "but we should do something!"

It's basically the way all right-wingers treat Bush when faced trying to maintain intellectual integrity when complaining about "big government" and then having to acknowledge things like Medicare Part D, DHS, and the bank bailouts.

"Okay, fine... Then I don't like Bush neither!

(Yes, I do George! I don't mean it. I don't mean it one bit. I know you was only doin' what you had to do to protect this country! God bless you and keep you safe, Mr. President!!!)"
 
2012-06-23 07:15:54 PM
The funniest thing about that picture is that the man is holding dollar bills.

I bet you could take the talented, albeit insane, man who makes this art and back him into a logical corner within two seconds.
 
2012-06-23 07:16:02 PM

Gwendolyn: balthan: The "artist"'s site with the mouse-overs is here.

Ooo Madison then. I like how the description goes on to talk about Madison's unhappiness like he's able to express it from the grave.


If you click on Obama, you get a list of Unconstitutional things he's done that the artist doesn't like.
 
2012-06-23 07:16:06 PM
So the subject of this painting is a millionaire (symbolized by the guy having a fistful of money) holding the Constitution, essentially telling the presidents "I OWN YOU BIATCH!"?
 
2012-06-23 07:18:04 PM
Ehh. It's no David Dees.
 
2012-06-23 07:18:25 PM

gingerjet: technicolor-misfit: gingerjet: The Empowered Man is rather cute.

/i do him


Sure... now that he's got money.

You chicks are all alike.

/gay



You chicks boy-toys are all alike.
 
2012-06-23 07:18:52 PM

Great_Milenko: Zeno-25: [creepy bush jumpstarting armageddon picture.jpg]

Why are the soldiers, er, pardon me...Holy American Christian Warriors, wearing knee pads? Planning on giving ole' W a hummer after kicking Hadji's ass?



And they're all Aryan white
 
2012-06-23 07:20:26 PM
When are all the idiots going to realize that both parties work for the same team?
 
2012-06-23 07:21:05 PM

LincolnLogolas: Dougie AXP: Is it me or does Obama not look so much frightened as he does "oh look out we got a badass over here.

[i601.photobucket.com image 528x424]

You're welcome


Hahaha oh fark, the best.
 
2012-06-23 07:21:06 PM
I prefer his "Obama burning the constitution" picture, just because it makes Obama look so badass. I mean he's just standing there pointing at the burning constitution with a "what are you going to do about it" expression on his face. Who wouldn't vote for that man?
 
2012-06-23 07:21:20 PM

The Lone Gunman: cman: I can't wait to see how this will be described as somehow racist. That will be fun to watch

I keep saying that this blind hatred of Obama isn't because he's black. It's because he's a Democrat.

And as Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, and dozens (if not hundreds) of Republicans have already figured out, blind hatred Democrats is very VERY good for the bankbook.



But the angles they use for their hate are because he's black.

He's a Muslim

He wasn't born in America

He was radicalized in an Indonesian Madrassa

His mom was a single mother, a whore, a porn star

etc.

With Clinton, they went after things like investments, sexual escapades, etc. Never this personal.
 
2012-06-23 07:21:53 PM

puffy999: The funniest thing about that picture is that the man is holding dollar bills.

I bet you could take the talented, albeit insane, man who makes this art and back him into a logical corner within two seconds.


Those have to be silver certificates, because no one who uses Federal Reserve notes can possibly be empowered.
 
2012-06-23 07:21:55 PM

shanrick: [i.imgur.com image 640x364]


This is an awesome picture.
 
2012-06-23 07:22:17 PM
Economic historians have shown that Roosevelt's policies actually extended the Great Depression.

Great_Milenko: DamnYankees: Who the hell is that person to the right of Lincoln and Reagan? Is that supposed to be Washington? And who is that kneeling down? Pat Robertson in a wig?

All the answers ye seek are contained within

My favorite part is Calvin Coolidge.


Economic historians have shown that Roosevelt's policies actually extended the Great Depression.

The Great Depression started in 1929 and was at it's worst in 1933, about six months after FDR was inaugurated. Then, the New Deal caused massive growth in the GDP and fall in unemployment.

On the other hand, Sean Hannity was blaming the crippled economy on Obama BEFORE he was even inaugurated. So, wtf...let's just say we hate Democrats and leave it at that, shall we?
 
2012-06-23 07:23:40 PM

The Evil That Lies In The Hearts Of Men: So, he seems pretty direct in his criticism of GWB - does anyone have any links to his paintings from when GWB was President?


His criticisms of GWB probably started on the morning of November 5, 2008, as they did with MOST Republicans.
 
2012-06-23 07:23:49 PM

The Lone Gunman: Economic historians have shown that Roosevelt's policies actually extended the Great Depression.



wat
 
2012-06-23 07:24:30 PM
This is the prequel to the Cthulhu painting. The guy has already summoned and bound the ghosts of a lot of the country's founders, obtained the original constitution to symbolically represent the nation and bargain with it, and now he's looking to the sky at Great Cthulhu and selling him the USA for a handful of cash. Obama is rightly saying "hey buddy I wouldn't do that". But he's all like "No way I do what I want! I'm gonna be eaten first, fhtagn!
 
2012-06-23 07:26:44 PM
Bravo, to that dashing young Aryan!

24.media.tumblr.com

Beaten down, chained, seemingly crushed beyond repair... only to rise up victorious?

That's quite a triumph of the will.
 
2012-06-23 07:31:11 PM
washington, lincoln, and......reagan.

that's really all that needs said.
 
2012-06-23 07:32:40 PM

Garble: You never needed liner notes to know what was going on in a Norman Rockwell painting.


Well said.
 
2012-06-23 07:33:00 PM
i259.photobucket.com
 
2012-06-23 07:33:47 PM

The Lone Gunman: Economic historians have shown that Roosevelt's policies actually extended the Great Depression.


To tie it to another Roosevelt: if the Bull Moose Party had won in 1912, and possibly changed the dynamic so as to create Teddy's version of conservatism, the Great Depression would not have had 1/2 of the damage to the US, and it MAY have been better.

Granted, drought is drought, but a more naturally conservative approach to farming (instead of trying to force non-native crops onto the same land every year) may have alleviated some of the dust bowl. If Teddy's ilk had been in the White House during WWI, it's possible that America would have joined the war earlier and/or worked harder for a slightly more financially-reasonable Treaty of Versailles, which may have alleviated some of the problems in post-war Germany (and, subsequently, Europe).

Anyway, it's just wishful thinking... just as if McCain had defeated GWB in the 2000 Republican Primary, I think the entire would would have been a better place REGARDLESS of the winner of the 2000 election.
 
2012-06-23 07:37:26 PM

heap: washington, lincoln, and......reagan.

that's really all that needs said.



Yes, Reagan is always right there center square among "the good ones."

I imagine if Obama were to lose the election this guy would paint him on the ground writhing in agony as spirit Reagan guides Romney's sword to pierce Obama's heart.

Especially given that he's a Mormon.
 
2012-06-23 07:37:31 PM

heap: washington, lincoln, and......reagan.

that's really all that needs said.



Yes, one of them is not like the others.
 
2012-06-23 07:38:29 PM
I obviously don't need to go into how regulatory practices, trust busting, and other policies supported by Ted could have kept 1929 from happening to such a degree.
 
2012-06-23 07:39:13 PM

intelligent comment below: heap: washington, lincoln, and......reagan.

that's really all that needs said.


Yes, one of them is not like the others.


Yep, Lincoln was a Vampire hunter...I hear a pretty good one too.
 
2012-06-23 07:40:42 PM

gingerjet: The Empowered Man is rather cute.

/i do him


Looks like Mark Pellagrino (Jacob from LOST):

mediamikes.com
 
2012-06-23 07:41:45 PM

dr_blasto: cman: I can't wait to see how this will be described as somehow racist. That will be fun to watch

Not racist.

Lame. Weird. But not racist.


I'd buy the t-shirt.
 
2012-06-23 07:41:46 PM
THey are all shiat of course, but the one with the chains.. I mean WTF?
 
2012-06-23 07:42:19 PM
Came for "Fix old no new!"... still breathless in antici---
 
2012-06-23 07:44:37 PM
*wait for it*
 
2012-06-23 07:45:20 PM
I'm guessing Obama put these people in chains just to protect that chicken from getting brutally f*cked.

s3-ec.buzzfed.com
 
2012-06-23 07:48:09 PM
Someone should draw a picture of Jon McNaughton selling his artwork to members of the KKK, with a giant money sign drawing.

It would have all the subtly of McNaughton's work with the advantage of being true.
 
2012-06-23 07:50:04 PM
Rashnu: I'm guessing Obama put these people in chains just to protect that chicken from getting brutally f*cked.

what the hell are Kim Jong-il and Dinnerjacket doing back there?
 
2012-06-23 07:50:44 PM

WhoIsWillo: Someone should draw a picture of Jon McNaughton selling his artwork to members of the KKK, with a giant money sign drawing.

It would have all the subtly of McNaughton's work with the advantage of being true.


Jon McNaughton - 'Painter of Hate'
 
2012-06-23 07:50:48 PM

Rashnu: I'm guessing Obama put these people in chains just to protect that chicken from getting brutally f*cked.

[s3-ec.buzzfed.com image 625x416]


Yeah WTF is with the chicken? Is Obama having his money-shower ceremony in a cock-fighting ring?
 
2012-06-23 07:51:47 PM
LouDobbsAwaaaay: Yeah WTF is with the chicken?

It's for farking.
 
2012-06-23 07:52:16 PM
i512.photobucket.com
 
2012-06-23 07:53:18 PM
Why is the guy from Silent Hill stealing the constitution?
 
2012-06-23 07:54:10 PM
Say what you want about the guy's political leanings, he does have some talent. That's a very nicely done painting in a day and age when most political images are stupid black animal cartoons.

ultraholland: [i259.photobucket.com image 400x321]


Win.
 
2012-06-23 07:55:35 PM

apoptotic: It also describes him as representing "every man, woman, and child of every color and creed who is an American".


But of course. To him only 'libertarian' Aryan Christians are American.
 
2012-06-23 07:56:10 PM

Shaggy_C: That's a very nicely done painting in a day and age when most political images are stupid black animal cartoons.


the fact that it can't really be determined if it's a painting or a political cartoon kinda highlights its artistic merit.
 
2012-06-23 07:56:39 PM
ActualFarkal:
RulerOfNone: Political tripe aside, this guy is a rather decent artist.

Ooh! Ooh! You know who ELSE was a rather decent artist?

/Godwinrar
//I has it


Well, except I wouldn't characterize Hitler's work as "rather decent". I'd call it technically competent but dull, lacking in any emotional or evocative component whatsoever. At most it portrays a mawkish idealized sentimentality about his country that would mirror later Nazi attitudes.

iliketowastemytime.com
 
2012-06-23 07:58:07 PM

Rashnu: I'm guessing Obama put these people in chains just to protect that chicken from getting brutally f*cked.


Bonus points to the first guy to photoshop in the WNYW news crew.
 
2012-06-23 07:59:26 PM

No Such Agency: ActualFarkal:
RulerOfNone: Political tripe aside, this guy is a rather decent artist.

Ooh! Ooh! You know who ELSE was a rather decent artist?

/Godwinrar
//I has it

Well, except I wouldn't characterize Hitler's work as "rather decent". I'd call it technically competent but dull, lacking in any emotional or evocative component whatsoever. At most it portrays a mawkish idealized sentimentality about his country that would mirror later Nazi attitudes.

[iliketowastemytime.com image 640x417]


Hitler really sucked at drawing people, didn't he? The building in the background is really good (imo), but there isn't a single person in that painting that doesn't look farked up.
 
2012-06-23 07:59:33 PM
Am I the only one picking up a massive scent of ASD on this guy? Very poor language skills, his sentence construction is awkward and stilted, and he doesn't always know which word to use (Obama road to power?) Obsession with a single, poorly understood topic. But nevertheless, definite skill in a single area, which seems to inform all of his other communication.
 
2012-06-23 08:08:05 PM

LouDobbsAwaaaay: Hitler really sucked at drawing people, didn't he? The building in the background is really good (imo), but there isn't a single person in that painting that doesn't look farked up.


Yeah, the professors at the art school in Vienna suggested that he become a draftsman when they rejected his entrance application.
 
2012-06-23 08:09:10 PM
His vision of the "Everyman" looks like somebody I'd call the cops on if I saw him hanging around a playground.
 
2012-06-23 08:10:45 PM

No Such Agency: ActualFarkal:
RulerOfNone: Political tripe aside, this guy is a rather decent artist.

Ooh! Ooh! You know who ELSE was a rather decent artist?

/Godwinrar
//I has it

Well, except I wouldn't characterize Hitler's work as "rather decent". I'd call it technically competent but dull, lacking in any emotional or evocative component whatsoever. At most it portrays a mawkish idealized sentimentality about his country that would mirror later Nazi attitudes.

[iliketowastemytime.com image 640x417]


So what you're saying is, we should never elect Thomas Kinkade to higher office.
 
2012-06-23 08:11:29 PM

balthan: The "artist"'s site with the mouse-overs is here.


If you hold the cursor over George W's left nostril the site says it is a "Mystery Man. Who controls the man in the Oval Office? We each have our own opinion."
 
2012-06-23 08:12:34 PM
Of all modern Presidents, you only put one on the cheering side, and it's Reagan??

I'm also not sure why he loves Abraham Lincoln so much either. If you're a strict constructionist and don't like big-Government power, Lincoln should be one of your least favorite. He was the one who really started us on the path to Statism in the first place.
 
2012-06-23 08:14:50 PM

Lionel Mandrake: Zmog: I wanna know what that guy has in his pocket. Looks like he shoved a daily wage's worth of cheeseburgers in there. Or possibly a bunch of ferrets.



The Empowered Man

He represents every man, woman and child of every color and creed who is an American. Like you and me, he hopes for a better life, to find the American dream of happiness and prosperity. But now, because of unconstitutional acts imposed upon the American people by our government we stand on the precipice of disaster. What will his opportunities be in the future? Will he ever have a chance to realize the American Dream?

Yes! He has got off his bench, ripped the Constitution out from under the feet of Obama and holds it up to the world. He is empowered to save our nation.

How? He understands the Constitution and liberties and laws therein. He also carries a Bible in his right coat pocket. He knows from where his true empowerment comes.


While this art is serviceable in technical terms, when you need that much explanation, it's not good art because it can't possibly stand on its own.

And six months after Obama is out of office, his paintings will be worthless and the people who bought them are going to feel reasonably stupid.

But that won't happen until 2017, so whatever.
 
2012-06-23 08:15:35 PM

Kurohone: Am I the only one picking up a massive scent of ASD on this guy? Very poor language skills, his sentence construction is awkward and stilted, and he doesn't always know which word to use (Obama road to power?) Obsession with a single, poorly understood topic. But nevertheless, definite skill in a single area, which seems to inform all of his other communication.


Wouldn't that be more like Aspergers or maybe Savant syndrome?
 
2012-06-23 08:17:40 PM

No Such Agency: At most it portrays a mawkish idealized sentimentality about his country that would mirror later Nazi attitudes.


And it sold - cheaply and quickly - just like how it was produced, and how it was intended to sell. You might as well take a farking busker and critique his political views. It's just as irrelevant.

He could barely feed himself at the time, and he was in f*cking Vienna. Trying to sell ideologue "art" in that joint would have been like trying to sell lynch art in Harlem. To say nothing of the fact that he had no specific ideology to articulate at the time.

We don't need Hitler's art to prove his lack of feeling or insanity.
 
2012-06-23 08:17:41 PM

The Lone Gunman:
While this art is serviceable in technical terms, when you need that much explanation, it's not good art because it can't possibly stand on its own.

And six months after Obama is out of office, his paintings will be worthless and the people who bought them are going to feel reasonably stupid.

But that won't happen until 2017, so whatever.


propaganda counts as art though, doesn't it?
 
2012-06-23 08:17:56 PM

ultraholland: what the hell are Kim Jong-il and Dinnerjacket doing back there?


Politely applauding Obama alongside Putin, Hu Jintao, King Abdullah, and...Bernanke and Geithner?

LouDobbsAwaaaay: Yeah WTF is with the chicken? Is Obama having his money-shower ceremony in a cock-fighting ring?


I'm no allegoricist but I assume the fact that it's not in a pot is highlighting the disparity between Obama's promises and reality. (It's actually some oblique reference to the rooster in the NT that crowed as Peter denied Christ and how we're all in denial and need to wake up)
 
2012-06-23 08:19:23 PM

LouDobbsAwaaaay: Hitler really sucked at drawing people, didn't he? The building in the background is really good (imo), but there isn't a single person in that painting that doesn't look farked up.


My keeps getting drawn to the guy in the bottom midground carrying the bag. It looks like his leg is bending backwards.
 
2012-06-23 08:20:07 PM
"My eye", sorry.
 
2012-06-23 08:22:31 PM

vygramul: FloydA: cman: I can't wait to see how this will be described as somehow racist. That will be fun to watch

You have a really weird, twisted and distorted view of the world. It must be very unpleasant in your head.

Liberals might play the race card, which sometimes slanders innocent people, but conservatives just LOVE the racist card, which provides cover for ALL racists every time they use it.


I think you just won the race war. Good work.
 
2012-06-23 08:26:01 PM

robmilmel: DamnYankees: If it were socially acceptable, I would drape myself in velvet.

They make recliners with a fridge in the side, just to complete the dream!


O.o

farm6.staticflickr.com

I may never leave my seat again.
 
2012-06-23 08:26:20 PM

Virtuoso80: Of all modern Presidents, you only put one on the cheering side, and it's Reagan??

I'm also not sure why he loves Abraham Lincoln so much either. If you're a strict constructionist and don't like big-Government power, Lincoln should be one of your least favorite. He was the one who really started us on the path to Statism in the first place.



It's ironic that leaders of the Republican party today champion themselves as "the party of Jefferson Davis" but still desperately remind everyone Lincoln was a Republican.
 
2012-06-23 08:26:27 PM

vygramul: FloydA: cman: I can't wait to see how this will be described as somehow racist. That will be fun to watch

You have a really weird, twisted and distorted view of the world. It must be very unpleasant in your head.

Liberals might play the race card, which sometimes slanders innocent people, but conservatives just LOVE the racist card, which provides cover for ALL racists every time they use it.




Umm, it's the race card card. I called this a while back, so I got to name it.
 
2012-06-23 08:27:01 PM

intelligent comment below: The Lone Gunman: Economic historians have shown that Roosevelt's policies actually extended the Great Depression.


wat


This is according to the text when you put the cursor over FDR's face.

Obviously, this is F'n ridiculous.
 
2012-06-23 08:27:33 PM

Sid_6.7: Snapper Carr: maybe some 3 wolves thrown in for full effect.

Quick and Dirty:

[i140.photobucket.com image 625x502]


that made me lol!

who's that white guy supposed to be and he bought the constitution for a couple bucks like its for sale or something? Also id say every one of those people is responsible for the growth of executive power...
 
2012-06-23 08:30:19 PM
The artist is a little crazy. No, wait. He's really nuts.
 
2012-06-23 08:32:06 PM

Dwight_Yeast: gingerjet: The Empowered Man is rather cute.

/i do him

Looks like Mark Pellagrino (Jacob from LOST):

[mediamikes.com image 400x288]


Someone mentioned that earlier, except referemcing the actor's part on Supernatural.
 
2012-06-23 08:32:57 PM
Referencing, even.
 
2012-06-23 08:34:27 PM
I'm disappointed that Jesus doesn't make an appearance wearing the White Tree of Gondor on his robes.
 
2012-06-23 08:34:29 PM

DamnYankees: St_Francis_P: I wonder if it's available on velvet?

If it were socially acceptable, I would drape myself in velvet.


I'd love a picture when you do that, please.
 
2012-06-23 08:37:54 PM

ultraholland: LouDobbsAwaaaay: Yeah WTF is with the chicken?

It's for farking.


Came here to say that I'm starting to think that this guy is secretly trolling the right wingers, and that the chicken is his wink to everybody who gets the joke.
 
2012-06-23 08:38:08 PM

The Lone Gunman: Economic historians have shown that Roosevelt's policies actually extended the Great Depression.Great_Milenko: DamnYankees: Who the hell is that person to the right of Lincoln and Reagan? Is that supposed to be Washington? And who is that kneeling down? Pat Robertson in a wig?

All the answers ye seek are contained within

My favorite part is Calvin Coolidge.

Economic historians have shown that Roosevelt's policies actually extended the Great Depression.

The Great Depression started in 1929 and was at it's worst in 1933, about six months after FDR was inaugurated. Then, the New Deal caused massive growth in the GDP and fall in unemployment.

On the other hand, Sean Hannity was blaming the crippled economy on Obama BEFORE he was even inaugurated. So, wtf...let's just say we hate Democrats are dishonest and leave it at that, shall we?

 
2012-06-23 08:38:10 PM

Gwendolyn: trotsky: Is he trying to be the next Kinkade? That's exactly what I want to see above Granny's couch.

I'll be surprised if my f-i-l hasn't replaced the Kinkade over his couch with one of these when we visit at Christmas.


If he hasn't at least you'll know what to get him.

I have to admit, I really want One Nation Under Socialism. Obama just looks so presidential as he burns the Constitution.
 
2012-06-23 08:41:08 PM

ultraholland: [i259.photobucket.com image 400x321]


disco
 
2012-06-23 08:42:04 PM

Edsel: ultraholland: LouDobbsAwaaaay: Yeah WTF is with the chicken?

It's for farking.

Came here to say that I'm starting to think that this guy is secretly trolling the right wingers, and that the chicken is his wink to everybody who gets the joke.


That would be fairly awesome.
 
2012-06-23 08:42:07 PM

Edsel: ultraholland: LouDobbsAwaaaay: Yeah WTF is with the chicken?

It's for farking.

Came here to say that I'm starting to think that this guy is secretly trolling the right wingers, and that the chicken is his wink to everybody who gets the joke.


Actually, I take it back. If you go to the guy's website, you can find out the meaning of all the details. Turns out the guy is actually just a typically Teahadist loon:

The Rooster

I am reminded of the story of Peter in the New Testament. On the eve of Christ's crucifixion he denied Jesus three times. When he heard the cock crow it said he went and wept bitterly. (Matthew 26:75) As with Peter, Americans are in a state of denial. We must WAKE UP to our situation.
 
2012-06-23 08:43:02 PM

buckler: LouDobbsAwaaaay: Hitler really sucked at drawing people, didn't he? The building in the background is really good (imo), but there isn't a single person in that painting that doesn't look farked up.

My keeps getting drawn to the guy in the bottom midground carrying the bag. It looks like his leg is bending backwards.


The wheels on the box wagon being drawn by the horse are out of perspective, big time.
 
2012-06-23 08:44:26 PM

The Lone Gunman: Economic historians have shown that Roosevelt's policies actually extended the Great Depression.


Well, yeah. It kept people from starving to death, which would have taken care of unemployment numbers.
 
2012-06-23 08:47:37 PM

LincolnLogolas: Dougie AXP: Is it me or does Obama not look so much frightened as he does "oh look out we got a badass over here.

[i601.photobucket.com image 528x424]

You're welcome


DAMN YOU!

i.imgur.com
 
2012-06-23 08:48:12 PM

Great_Milenko: My favorite part is Calvin Coolidge.


So Calvin Coolidge cut taxes on the rich.... and we had the crash of 29.

Regan cut taxes on the rich.... and we had the crash of 87.

Bush cut taxes on the rich... and we had the crash of '08.

I'm starting to see a pattern here -- if you let the rich keep too much of their money, they fark up the economy. Therefore, we should tax them to death to prevent economic calamity.
 
2012-06-23 08:48:53 PM
Huh, poking around his site it looks like he's Mormon. He has a lot of paintings of LDS temples and Joseph Smith meeting the angels etc. This may explain a few things.
 
2012-06-23 08:50:30 PM

Kurohone: Am I the only one picking up a massive scent of ASD on this guy? Very poor language skills, his sentence construction is awkward and stilted, and he doesn't always know which word to use (Obama road to power?) Obsession with a single, poorly understood topic. But nevertheless, definite skill in a single area, which seems to inform all of his other communication.



You sound fat. And jealous. Why do you hate success? All you Socialists/Communists are alike.
 
2012-06-23 08:52:12 PM

LouDobbsAwaaaay: Rashnu: I'm guessing Obama put these people in chains just to protect that chicken from getting brutally f*cked.

[s3-ec.buzzfed.com image 625x416]

Yeah WTF is with the chicken? Is Obama having his money-shower ceremony in a cock-fighting ring?


It's supposed to be the cock that Peter heard or something. We must deny OUR LORD three times before dawn.

No, I have no idea what that has to do with Obama.
 
2012-06-23 08:52:48 PM

Ishkur: Great_Milenko: My favorite part is Calvin Coolidge.

So Calvin Coolidge cut taxes on the rich.... and we had the crash of 29.

Regan cut taxes on the rich.... and we had the crash of 87.

Bush cut taxes on the rich... and we had the crash of '08.

I'm starting to see a pattern here -- if you let the rich keep too much of their money, they fark up the economy. Therefore, we should tax them to death to prevent economic calamity.


No, it means that investment - real investment - is necessary for growth. Cutting tax rates only encourages speculation, which is unhealthy.

It's all about liquidity : If the market is too liquid, then it adjusts in reaction, causing a crash, and illiquidity.

If the government can gently reduce the liquidity of the market at the point where it starts to go wrong, then strong economic growth occurs.
 
2012-06-23 08:53:45 PM

Ishkur: Great_Milenko: My favorite part is Calvin Coolidge.

So Calvin Coolidge cut taxes on the rich.... and we had the crash of 29.

Regan cut taxes on the rich.... and we had the crash of 87.

Bush cut taxes on the rich... and we had the crash of '08.

I'm starting to see a pattern here -- if you let the rich keep too much of their money, they fark up the economy. Therefore, we should tax them to death to prevent economic calamity.


It's funny how taxing them "to death" still leaves them better off than 99.99% of Americans. It's almost like, regardless of the tax rate, they'll still have tons more money.
 
2012-06-23 08:53:55 PM

LouDobbsAwaaaay: Rashnu: I'm guessing Obama put these people in chains just to protect that chicken from getting brutally f*cked.

[s3-ec.buzzfed.com image 625x416]

Yeah WTF is with the chicken? Is Obama having his money-shower ceremony in a cock-fighting ring?


Well chickens are called cocks so it probably means the gays are going to get that poor innocent American citizen and violate his backdoor.
 
2012-06-23 08:55:10 PM

rubi_con_man: No, it means that investment - real investment - is necessary for growth. Cutting tax rates only encourages speculation, which is unhealthy.


Sadly, investment has become speculation for most financial institutions, and it's been the case for at least years.
 
2012-06-23 08:57:36 PM

technicolor-misfit: Bravo, to that dashing young Aryan!

[24.media.tumblr.com image 500x281]

Beaten down, chained, seemingly crushed beyond repair... only to rise up victorious?

That's quite a triumph of the will.


a re-birth of a nation?
 
2012-06-23 08:59:15 PM
Fun fact: Putin is seen in the background of "Wake up America", applauding. Yeah, I'm sure that reflects reality right now

In case you didn't know, I was being sarcastic
 
2012-06-23 08:59:41 PM

The Lone Gunman: Economic historians have shown that Roosevelt's policies actually extended the Great Depression.Great_Milenko: DamnYankees: Who the hell is that person to the right of Lincoln and Reagan? Is that supposed to be Washington? And who is that kneeling down? Pat Robertson in a wig?

All the answers ye seek are contained within

My favorite part is Calvin Coolidge.

Economic historians have shown that Roosevelt's policies actually extended the Great Depression.

The Great Depression started in 1929 and was at it's worst in 1933, about six months after FDR was inaugurated. Then, the New Deal caused massive growth in the GDP and fall in unemployment.

On the other hand, Sean Hannity was blaming the crippled economy on Obama BEFORE he was even inaugurated. So, wtf...let's just say we hate Democrats and leave it at that, shall we?


Technically they point the extension of the Great Depression of the slowing of the economy due to austerity measures being put into place way too soon.
 
2012-06-23 09:00:40 PM

The Iconoclast: buckler: LouDobbsAwaaaay: Hitler really sucked at drawing people, didn't he? The building in the background is really good (imo), but there isn't a single person in that painting that doesn't look farked up.

My keeps getting drawn to the guy in the bottom midground carrying the bag. It looks like his leg is bending backwards.

The wheels on the box wagon being drawn by the horse are out of perspective, big time.


He seems to have been a lot more comfortable with buildings and static objects than anything animated.
 
2012-06-23 09:01:46 PM
THIS IS WHAT REPUBLICANS REALLY BELIEVE
 
2012-06-23 09:02:01 PM

zerkalo: Fun fact: Putin is seen in the background of "Wake up America", applauding. Yeah, I'm sure that reflects reality right now

In case you didn't know, I was being sarcastic


I'm pretty liberal (especially by the standards where I live), and I love this guys artwork.

I don't think there is anything else as campy as the brilliant pieces this deranged nut has been able to entertain ourselves with.

I wonder if the guy knows that he's a laughing stock of the art community and the community as a whole outside of the insular Conservative/Tea Party groupthink?
 
2012-06-23 09:04:53 PM

HMS_Blinkin: RulerOfNone: Political tripe aside, this guy is a rather decent artist.

He might make realistic impressions of the people and things he's trying to depict in his painting, but that doesn't make him an artist. His work isn't challenging, it is, as you said, political tripe. And political tripe can never be art, as art can never be political tripe. Art can maybe, MAYBE, make a political statement, but it has to do so with some subtlety, and preferably in a way that challenges pre-conceived notions. This garbage only serves to reinforce pre-conceived notions.


Art can MAYBE make a political statement? Entire artistic movements, such as Dada and Surrealism, were created as political statements.
 
2012-06-23 09:05:43 PM

Mrtraveler01: zerkalo: Fun fact: Putin is seen in the background of "Wake up America", applauding. Yeah, I'm sure that reflects reality right now

In case you didn't know, I was being sarcastic

I'm pretty liberal (especially by the standards where I live), and I love this guys artwork.

I don't think there is anything else as campy as the brilliant pieces this deranged nut has been able to entertain ourselves with.

I wonder if the guy knows that he's a laughing stock of the art community and the community as a whole outside of the insular Conservative/Tea Party groupthink?


To be free, that groupthink represents about 20% of Americans. This guy is laughing all the way to the bank.
 
2012-06-23 09:06:47 PM
resturant art + freedom of speech=no need to get panties in a wad
 
2012-06-23 09:08:32 PM

clowncar on fire: resturant art + freedom of speech=no need to get panties in a wad


The kids placemat at Perkin's is more enlightening than the crap this guy makes.
 
2012-06-23 09:08:57 PM
it's like a Twilight Zone where Norman Rockwell had syphillis
 
2012-06-23 09:14:16 PM
24.media.tumblr.com
 
2012-06-23 09:18:38 PM
The guy should love Obama. Without the shtick he'd be painting crappy landscapes hanging in some Motel 6.
 
2012-06-23 09:21:24 PM
www.speakinggump.com

Ya, as Garble and Hobodeluxe noted, he's going for a neocon Norman Rockwell vibe, but is appropriately fuddled and befuddled. His rendering skills put Kinkade to shame, but make N Rockwell look like a Michelangelo.(and I'm not to keen on Rockwell's oeuvre).

That cargo pocket is big enough to hold a bomb.

/ almost said "corpus"
// I always feel like someone's watching me.
 
2012-06-23 09:22:18 PM
-pation!
 
2012-06-23 09:23:36 PM

Edsel: ultraholland: LouDobbsAwaaaay: Yeah WTF is with the chicken?

It's for farking.

Came here to say that I'm starting to think that this guy is secretly trolling the right wingers, and that the chicken is his wink to everybody who gets the joke.


I don't think so. I think that he was expecting that the first two things that would come to mind when you think of chickens randomly wandering around would be 1) third world countries or 2) communes full of socialist hippies, and either one would fit his "Obama has destroyed the US" narrative.
 
2012-06-23 09:24:47 PM

runcible spork: [www.speakinggump.com image 640x847]

Ya, as Garble and Hobodeluxe noted, he's going for a neocon Norman Rockwell vibe, but is appropriately fuddled and befuddled. His rendering skills put Kinkade to shame, but make N Rockwell look like a Michelangelo.(and I'm not to keen on Rockwell's oeuvre).

That cargo pocket is big enough to hold a bomb.

/ almost said "corpus"
// I always feel like someone's watching me.


I've always been a fan of Rockwell, but the big difference is that you don't need a website to explain what's going on here.
 
2012-06-23 09:25:12 PM
* "...muddled and befuddled."
 
2012-06-23 09:25:17 PM

LockeOak: I'm disappointed that Jesus doesn't make an appearance wearing the White Tree of Gondor on his robes.


He was in the original sketch, but the artist ran out of room on the canvas. The artist also had to cut out Kid Rock and Dale giving each other a high-five.
 
2012-06-23 09:26:06 PM

apoptotic: Edsel: ultraholland: LouDobbsAwaaaay: Yeah WTF is with the chicken?

It's for farking.

Came here to say that I'm starting to think that this guy is secretly trolling the right wingers, and that the chicken is his wink to everybody who gets the joke.

I don't think so. I think that he was expecting that the first two things that would come to mind when you think of chickens randomly wandering around would be 1) third world countries or 2) communes full of socialist hippies, and either one would fit his "Obama has destroyed the US" narrative.


Scroll down a bit in the thread. According to his website, it's a biblical reference to the rooster crowing at Christ's death.
 
2012-06-23 09:27:17 PM
My rebuttal:


celebrity-photos.elliottback.com
 
2012-06-23 09:28:08 PM

Edsel: apoptotic: Edsel: ultraholland: LouDobbsAwaaaay: Yeah WTF is with the chicken?

It's for farking.

Came here to say that I'm starting to think that this guy is secretly trolling the right wingers, and that the chicken is his wink to everybody who gets the joke.

I don't think so. I think that he was expecting that the first two things that would come to mind when you think of chickens randomly wandering around would be 1) third world countries or 2) communes full of socialist hippies, and either one would fit his "Obama has destroyed the US" narrative.

Scroll down a bit in the thread. According to his website, it's a biblical reference to the rooster crowing at Christ's death.


Yeah it looks like I posted prematurely. As a godless heathen, the biblical reference didn't occur to me.
 
2012-06-23 09:28:47 PM

LincolnLogolas: Dougie AXP: Is it me or does Obama not look so much frightened as he does "oh look out we got a badass over here.

i601.photobucket.com

You're welcome


Damnit, this is excellent.
 
2012-06-23 09:30:44 PM
Wait a minute!!!! WAIT A MINUTE!!! His farking paintings sell for SIX FIGURES?

Screw hentai! From now on I'm doing paintings of ramming his fist up George Washington's ass and pulling out a fetus which he then rapes while wearing the Declaration of Independence as a condom.

Oh wait... that's still hentai.
 
2012-06-23 09:32:45 PM

The Lone Gunman: I've always been a fan of Rockwell, but the big difference is that you don't need a website to explain what's going on here.



I should clarify: he's fine as an illustrator, but not as an "artist." Probably precisely because his messages are utterly unambiguous, not to mention overly idealistic. Then again, his time was long before mine and I may be too postmodern-cynical for that sort of naïvete.
 
2012-06-23 09:34:53 PM

Ghastly: Wait a minute!!!! WAIT A MINUTE!!! His farking paintings sell for SIX FIGURES?



I was hoping that included the two after the decimal point.

Ghastly: Screw hentai! From now on I'm doing paintings of ramming his fist up George Washington's ass and pulling out a fetus which he then rapes while wearing the Declaration of Independence as a condom.

Oh wait... that's still hentai.



That's totally realistic though. Except that as far as we know Washington didn't have a uterus. Otherwise, all ok.
 
2012-06-23 09:36:54 PM

The Lone Gunman: runcible spork: [www.speakinggump.com image 640x847]

Ya, as Garble and Hobodeluxe noted, he's going for a neocon Norman Rockwell vibe, but is appropriately fuddled and befuddled. His rendering skills put Kinkade to shame, but make N Rockwell look like a Michelangelo.(and I'm not to keen on Rockwell's oeuvre).

That cargo pocket is big enough to hold a bomb.

/ almost said "corpus"
// I always feel like someone's watching me.

I've always been a fan of Rockwell, but the big difference is that you don't need a website to explain what's going on here.


You don't need really need a website to explain what's going on here either, it's pretty simple: Liberals bad. Obama bad. America good.

Any questions?
 
2012-06-23 09:42:44 PM

Ghastly: Wait a minute!!!! WAIT A MINUTE!!! His farking paintings sell for SIX FIGURES?

Screw hentai! From now on I'm doing paintings of ramming his fist up George Washington's ass and pulling out a fetus which he then rapes while wearing the Declaration of Independence as a condom.

Oh wait... that's still hentai.


Don't let that stop you.
 
2012-06-23 09:43:02 PM

Ghastly: Screw hentai! From now on I'm doing paintings of ramming his fist up George Washington's ass and pulling out a fetus which he then rapes while wearing the Declaration of Independence as a condom.


Dude, you gotta be more PG than that. Think of something teabaggers love, then show Obama destroying it. It doesn't have to be based on any facts or have any grounding in reality. If you need help, watch this as inspiration.
 
2012-06-23 09:56:21 PM
Oh man, this Obama guy is truly history's greatest monster:

Unconstitutional?

You signed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. But now we can see that the administration's trillion-dollar stimulus plan clearly is not working. Both the Constitution and history are witnesses that testify that the Stimulus Plan is both a federal usurpation of power and economically misguided. It may very well cause another "catastrophe." You said that this plan would create jobs immediately and keep the unemployment rate below eight percent. We are now at about 9.5%. Americans are asking, "Where are the jobs?" With 14.6 million people officially jobless, and 5.9 million who have stopped looking but say they want a job, and 8.5 million who are working part time but would like to work full time, you end up with nearly 30 million Americans who cannot find the work they want and desperately need. The ARRA is primarily designed not to stimulate the economy, but to build the size and scope of government. Government spending plans do not stimulate the economy. They are based on the idea that feeding "new" money into the economy will create economic growth. But the money isn't new.it's either taxed or borrowed. It's essentially redistributed from one group of people to another, and no new money is created. And also, State governors, looking down the gun barrel of long-term spending forced on them by your "stimulus" plan, are saying they will refuse to take the money. This is a Constitutional confrontation between the federal government and the states unlike any in our time.

You signed the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act into law. The federal government is now forcing Americans to buy health insurance. Even with the disapproval of the American majority you pushed through what we call "Obamacare." Over 27 states are now suing the federal government over your health reform law. This law began the process to socialize America's health care system. It forces Americans to buy health insurance from a private company against our will.

You appointed over thirty Czars without any Congressional oversight to control every aspect of the country.

You intervened in the troubled automotive industry, renewing loans for General Motors and Chrysler Corporation to continue operations while reorganizing. Over the following months the White House set terms for both firms' bankruptcies, including reorganization of GM giving the U.S. government a temporary 60% equity stake in the company. Where in the Constitution does it say the government can do that?

You signed into law the popular Car Allowance Rebate System, known popularly as "Cash for Clunkers." In the middle of our country's worst financial crisis you give out freebees with taxpayer dollars?

You used your executive powers to shakedown British Petroleum after the oil leak catastrophe in the Gulf to create the $20-billion escrow (slush!) fund without any law, legal controls, or binding rules to guide it on how and how much those injured materially by the oil spill (and whom among them) will be paid.

You attacked Libya without consulting Congress to declare war. We were not being attacked and it was an unprovoked act of aggression.

You signed the NDAA.. All though it was necessary to pass a military budget, the disregard for the Fourth Amendment is stunning. Where is the Supreme Court on this one?

You believe that the Constitution is a living, breathing document. I thought that the only way to change the Constitution was to amend it? It's not all your fault, Mr. President. If Congress and the Supreme Court did their job properly you would have been checked and balanced.
 
2012-06-23 10:00:22 PM

Jonathan Hohensee: GWOT


OK, you SEEM Like a troll, but these just caught my eye:

You attacked Libya without consulting Congress to declare war. We were not being attacked and it was an unprovoked act of aggression.

You signed the NDAA.. All though it was necessary to pass a military budget, the disregard for the Fourth Amendment is stunning. Where is the Supreme Court on this one?


Where were YOU when Bush did the exact same thing, but worse? In Libya, we were actually ASKED to fight, and the NDAA is nowhere NEAR as bad as the PATRIOT ACT.
 
2012-06-23 10:01:19 PM
Save us, white, Christian man, you're our only hope!

My favorite part is the chicken, presumably the one the repubs keep f*cking.
 
2012-06-23 10:02:38 PM
runcible spork:

Ghastly:
Screw hentai! From now on I'm doing paintings of ramming his fist up George Washington's ass and pulling out a fetus which he then rapes while wearing the Declaration of Independence as a condom.

Oh wait... that's still hentai.

That's totally realistic though. Except that as far as we know Washington didn't have a uterus. Otherwise, all ok.


*Uhm, not even a radical retroverse anal uterus. FTFM?
 
2012-06-23 10:04:22 PM

Great_Milenko: DamnYankees: Who the hell is that person to the right of Lincoln and Reagan? Is that supposed to be Washington? And who is that kneeling down? Pat Robertson in a wig?

All the answers ye seek are contained within

My favorite part is Calvin Coolidge.


Yeah, but where all de white women at?
 
2012-06-23 10:04:31 PM
I give up. I've looked and looked, but I can't find Waldo.
 
2012-06-23 10:04:58 PM

Ghastly: Wait a minute!!!! WAIT A MINUTE!!! His farking paintings sell for SIX FIGURES?

Screw hentai! From now on I'm doing paintings of ramming his fist up George Washington's ass and pulling out a fetus which he then rapes while wearing the Declaration of Independence as a condom.

Oh wait... that's still hentai.



[zip]

Go on....
 
2012-06-23 10:05:07 PM

I should be in the kitchen: Save us, white, Christian man, you're our only hope!

My favorite part is the chicken, presumably the one the repubs keep f*cking.


"Chad - you're a white man - what should we do?"
 
2012-06-23 10:06:10 PM
I like it. Truth in oils.
 
2012-06-23 10:07:19 PM

Jonathan Hohensee: You believe that the Constitution is a living, breathing document. I thought that the only way to change the Constitution was to amend it? It's not all your fault, Mr. President. If Congress and the Supreme Court did their job properly you would have been checked and balanced.


Criminy, even the strict constitutionalists in the Supreme Court and elsewhere understand that the document needs to be interpreted. Your copypasta is a black hole of derp which does not deserve to be dissected and thoroughly counterargued, even though it cries out for such treatment.
 
2012-06-23 10:11:09 PM

Edsel: Edsel: ultraholland: LouDobbsAwaaaay: Yeah WTF is with the chicken?

It's for farking.

Came here to say that I'm starting to think that this guy is secretly trolling the right wingers, and that the chicken is his wink to everybody who gets the joke.

Actually, I take it back. If you go to the guy's website, you can find out the meaning of all the details. Turns out the guy is actually just a typically Teahadist loon:

The Rooster

I am reminded of the story of Peter in the New Testament. On the eve of Christ's crucifixion he denied Jesus three times. When he heard the cock crow it said he went and wept bitterly. (Matthew 26:75) As with Peter, Americans are in a state of denial. We must WAKE UP to our situation.


I am so farking tired of all the Teahadists exhortations for me to WAKE UP, AMERICA! It's lame. They really think I'm unaware of current events. I think they're poorly educated and reactionary. And chicken-farkers.
 
2012-06-23 10:18:27 PM

tony41454: I like it. Truth in oils.


Yeah - but you're f**ked up, and most people aren't like you.
 
2012-06-23 10:23:26 PM

apoptotic: Edsel: apoptotic: Edsel: ultraholland: LouDobbsAwaaaay: Yeah WTF is with the chicken?

It's for farking.

Came here to say that I'm starting to think that this guy is secretly trolling the right wingers, and that the chicken is his wink to everybody who gets the joke.

I don't think so. I think that he was expecting that the first two things that would come to mind when you think of chickens randomly wandering around would be 1) third world countries or 2) communes full of socialist hippies, and either one would fit his "Obama has destroyed the US" narrative.

Scroll down a bit in the thread. According to his website, it's a biblical reference to the rooster crowing at Christ's death.

Yeah it looks like I posted prematurely. As a godless heathen, the biblical reference didn't occur to me.


the only Biblical reference that I can remember about the time of the crucifixion was that he told Peter that he would deny him 3 times that night (before the cock crows twice)
so it wasn't at his death but before they took him away.
 
2012-06-23 10:26:39 PM
Fark ladies and Fark gentleman, I give you my latest artistic work. I call it "Begging Him to Read." The bidding will start at 100K.

img191.imageshack.us
 
2012-06-23 10:29:33 PM
i34.photobucket.com
 
2012-06-23 10:31:47 PM
It took long enough for the requisite "Exercising your freedom of speech to criticize bad 'art' is a violation of that 'artist's' freedom of speech!" post
 
2012-06-23 10:34:06 PM
OK, this guy clearly saw the Obama and unicorn painting and decided that the joke was hilarious.

My theory is that he's probably a normal enough person politically (albeit probably genuinely at least slightly conservative given how well he 'gets it') that was doing this shiat as a satire, and then when ridiculous quantities of money started rolling in he blinked, shrugged, and decided to stay in character for a couple decades Colbert-style.

I know there's some Poe's law grey area here, but the whole thing strikes me as less Conservapedia (a genuine attempt at crazy that went off the rails to become self-parody) and more Christwire (straight-up sarcasm misread as genuine crazy).
 
2012-06-23 10:34:19 PM

Jonathan Hohensee: You signed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act


It didn't work because it was hamstrung by Senate Republicans. Had it been as strong as economists said it needed to be in order to work, the GOP would have killed it by filibuster because f*ck Obama.

Jonathan Hohensee: You signed the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act into law


Most of the people who oppose "Obamacare" only oppose the "Obama" part and are in favor of its provisions, such as being able to keep your kids on your health plan until they turn 26 and not having coverage deined due to pre-existing conditions.

Jonathan Hohensee: You appointed over thirty Czars without any Congressional oversight to control every aspect of the country.


And how many czars were installed by Reagan, Bush The Merely Okay, Clinton and Bush The Terrible?

Jonathan Hohensee: You intervened in the troubled automotive industry, renewing loans for General Motors and Chrysler Corporation to continue operations while reorganizing. Over the following months the White House set terms for both firms' bankruptcies, including reorganization of GM giving the U.S. government a temporary 60% equity stake in the company. Where in the Constitution does it say the government can do that?


Something, something, general welfare....

Would you rather Obama had let GM and Chrysler go tits-up and have thousands or tens of thousands of people lose their jobs?

Jonathan Hohensee: You signed into law the popular Car Allowance Rebate System, known popularly as "Cash for Clunkers." In the middle of our country's worst financial crisis you give out freebees with taxpayer dollars?


Okay, that one I'll grant, since it probably could have been handled a little bit better than it was. Still, the money its participants saved by not having to spend extra money on gas and maintenance for their old beaters is money they can put into the economy (to help the rest of the country) or into their savings accounts and/or towards their other bills (helping themselves, and thus their ability to contribute to the economic recovery)

Jonathan Hohensee: You used your executive powers to shakedown British Petroleum after the oil leak catastrophe in the Gulf to create the $20-billion escrow (slush!) fund without any law, legal controls, or binding rules to guide it on how and how much those injured materially by the oil spill (and whom among them) will be paid.


You'd rather BP not have been punished for the Deepwater Horizon disaster at all? (I mean beyond the billions of dollars' worth of oil spilled because they wanted to save a few hundred dollars by cutting funding for safety equipment)

Jonathan Hohensee: You attacked Libya without consulting Congress to declare war. We were not being attacked and it was an unprovoked act of aggression.


Bush attacked Iraq without consulting Congress to declare war. We were not being attacked and it was an unprovoked act of aggression. And the US involvement was limited to helping the French-led NATO coalition with logistics for their close-air support mission for the Libyan rebels' uprising -- there was not a single pair of American boots on the ground, apart from the CIA ghosts who were already there and would have been there regardless of whether or not there was a rebellion.

And you seem to have "accidentally" forgotten to mention that most (if not all) of the people complaining about that are the exact same people who were complaining that Obama WASN'T attacking Libya.

Jonathan Hohensee: You signed the NDAA.. All though it was necessary to pass a military budget, the disregard for the Fourth Amendment is stunning. Where is the Supreme Court on this one?


The Fourth Amendment-raping language was put into the bill by Senate Republicans on threat of filibuster. It's called a poison pill - adding an abhorrent rider to a must-pass bill, so that the other side would be lambasted for either killing the must-pass bill or (as you are doing) passing the bill with the abhorrent add-on.

SCOTUS will have an opinion on this one when (and if) they hear a case to which this bill could conceivably be even tangentially applied.

Jonathan Hohensee: You believe that the Constitution is a living, breathing document. I thought that the only way to change the Constitution was to amend it? It's not all your fault, Mr. President. If Congress and the Supreme Court did their job properly you would have been checked and balanced.


The President is not a dictator. The only laws he can create are the ones that get passed by Congress first, and given that the official policy of the party which controls Congress is literally "Defeat Obama at all costs!", there's no reason why you could possibly say that he hasn't been checked and balanced.

And since you're almost certainly gonna retort with the tired old "The Democrat Party has the majority in the Senate!!!1!" canard, let me just say that:

THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY HAS NOT HAD A FILIBUSTER-PROOF MAJORITY FOR MORE THAN 6 MONTHS OF OBAMA'S PRESIDENCY!
 
2012-06-23 10:34:59 PM
img560.imageshack.us
 
2012-06-23 10:36:54 PM

jso2897: tony41454: I like it. Truth in oils.

Yeah - but you're f**ked up, and most people aren't like you.


Oh, now, I'm sure he's just a concerned patriot, a rugged individualist, a Bootstrap-a-teer, if you will. All the real americans are doing it these days. You should just give up your soci-communistic leanings and join the winning side. Besides, our team has chickens. And Jesus.
 
2012-06-23 10:43:04 PM
"Someone please tell me he's waving a copy from the museum shop and not the real thing. It shouldn't be touched with bare hands."
 
2012-06-23 10:43:14 PM

I should be in the kitchen: Save us, white, Christian man, you're our only hope!

My favorite part is the chicken, presumably the one the repubs keep f*cking.


In fact, here's a picture of the aftermath of the last TEA-Party rally:

www.bitlogic.com
 
2012-06-23 10:47:39 PM

King Something: Jonathan Hohensee:



[snipped]

Bravo to you for taking even a short amount of time to respond to that [bait?]!

Also, that democratic filibuster-proof majority was in the first six months of the administration, when it would have been unseemly and impolitic to ram through partisan legislation.

/ I wonder if the Cash-for-Clunkers had any effect on overall automobile emissions?
 
2012-06-23 10:51:59 PM

The Lone Gunman: runcible spork: [www.speakinggump.com image 640x847]

Ya, as Garble and Hobodeluxe noted, he's going for a neocon Norman Rockwell vibe, but is appropriately fuddled and befuddled. His rendering skills put Kinkade to shame, but make N Rockwell look like a Michelangelo.(and I'm not to keen on Rockwell's oeuvre).

That cargo pocket is big enough to hold a bomb.

/ almost said "corpus"
// I always feel like someone's watching me.

I've always been a fan of Rockwell, but the big difference is that you don't need a website to explain what's going on here.


It's true. That guy is clearly standing up at the local town hall meeting that his Congressman is holding in order to declaim the Pledge of Allegiance at the top of his lungs in protest of foreigners like the Islamo-Nazi in Chief putting their government hands all over his Medicare and HE JUST WANTS HIS COUNTRY BACK.

It's called artistic subtlety people.
 
2012-06-23 10:56:18 PM

runcible spork: / I wonder if the Cash-for-Clunkers had any effect on overall automobile emissions?


It was far too limited in scope to make any real difference in emissions. The potential environmental effect was sort of a bonus, the primary reason for the program was to give the auto industry a shot in the arm, sort of an indirect mini-bailout, not to placate the Lorax.

It sorta had some effect there, but obviously didn't make a major difference on those grounds either.

Overall a well-intended program that didn't hurt, but not what you'd call a roaring success either.
 
2012-06-23 10:58:08 PM

cman: I can't wait to see how this will be described as somehow racist. That will be fun to watch


You see that ONE black guy? Token.
Also, one of those documents was Obamacare. Nice to know that he saved it.
 
2012-06-23 11:02:30 PM

runcible spork: [rockwell freedom of speech.jpg]

For fark's sake, that of course should have read "...not too keen..."

/what credibility?

themadtupper:

It's true. That guy is clearly standing up at the local town hall meeting that his Congressman is holding in order to declaim the Pledge of Allegiance at the top of his lungs in protest of foreigners like the Islamo-Nazi in Chief putting their government hands all over his Medicare and HE JUST WANTS HIS COUNTRY BACK.

It's called artistic subtlety people.



But, but... that was over a decade before they shoehorned "...under God" into the pledge, so that means... uhm... the moon landing was faked?
 
2012-06-23 11:02:36 PM
The main conservative talk channel on Sirius/XM has a morning show helmed by Mike Church who basically thinks that Lincoln is the anti-christ and destroyed the country. He's followed by Beck, Wilkow, Hannity, Levin on weekdays.

Maybe some kind of GWB+Wison and a pick to be named later could be traded for Abraham.
 
2012-06-23 11:02:58 PM

runcible spork: Also, that democratic filibuster-proof majority was in the first six months of the administration


The Democratic filibuster-proof majority lasted from the time Al Franken was seated on July 7, 2009 and the time Ted Kennedy died on August 25, 2009. The "filibuster-proof" majority also counted two Independents, neither of whom were guaranteed lockstep democratic votes. As far as I can tell, Kennedy's last vote was in March of 2009, meaning that in fact the Democrats never had 60 members (or even 58 members and 2 Independents) during any of Obama's term.
 
2012-06-23 11:03:40 PM

Jim_Callahan: runcible spork: / I wonder if the Cash-for-Clunkers had any effect on overall automobile emissions?

It was far too limited in scope to make any real difference in emissions. The potential environmental effect was sort of a bonus, the primary reason for the program was to give the auto industry a shot in the arm, sort of an indirect mini-bailout, not to placate the Lorax.

It sorta had some effect there, but obviously didn't make a major difference on those grounds either.

Overall a well-intended program that didn't hurt, but not what you'd call a roaring success either.



Kind of what I assumed. Thanks!
 
2012-06-23 11:05:38 PM

Zeno-25: [i.imgur.com image 640x420]

full size


And next week some liberal will sneeringly point out how they have their patriotism questioned and I'll remember that picture, and chuckle.

Feel free to cry and howl about Bush but don't post pictures that include our military portrayed as some kind of evil bunch of jack booted thugs killing civilians and expect us to actually take you seriously when you start crying because somebody accurately called you unpatriotic.
 
2012-06-23 11:08:27 PM
He's getting better in the composition department.
 
2012-06-23 11:09:00 PM

themadtupper: runcible spork: Also, that democratic filibuster-proof majority was in the first six months of the administration

The Democratic filibuster-proof majority lasted from the time Al Franken was seated on July 7, 2009 and the time Ted Kennedy died on August 25, 2009. The "filibuster-proof" majority also counted two Independents, neither of whom were guaranteed lockstep democratic votes. As far as I can tell, Kennedy's last vote was in March of 2009, meaning that in fact the Democrats never had 60 members (or even 58 members and 2 Independents) during any of Obama's term.


How soon I forget!
~
Also, even without factoring in the Independents, as a general rule there's too much diversity (especially including red (?) dog (blue-dog?) democrats) for them to ever vote in lockstep fashion.

/ one fish, two fish
 
2012-06-23 11:09:02 PM

themadtupper: The Democratic filibuster-proof majority lasted from the time Al Franken was seated on July 7, 2009 and the time Ted Kennedy died on August 25, 2009. The "filibuster-proof" majority also counted two Independents, neither of whom were guaranteed lockstep democratic votes. As far as I can tell, Kennedy's last vote was in March of 2009, meaning that in fact the Democrats never had 60 members (or even 58 members and 2 Independents) during any of Obama's term.


Facts don't matter to people like the ones you are trying to reach. I appreciate what you're doing; it's noble work, but it won't change anyone's mind.
 
2012-06-23 11:11:44 PM

LoneWolf343: He's getting better in the composition department.



You are generous. But it is relative, so yes.
 
2012-06-23 11:12:28 PM
i.imgur.com
 
2012-06-23 11:12:53 PM
subbooks.com
 
2012-06-23 11:14:09 PM

I Browse: My rebuttal:


[celebrity-photos.elliottback.com image 450x577]


I never noticed before, but the anatomy on that image is way farked up.
 
2012-06-23 11:16:46 PM

randomjsa: And next week some liberal will sneeringly point out how they have their patriotism questioned and I'll remember that picture, and chuckle.

Feel free to cry and howl about Bush but don't post pictures that include our military portrayed as some kind of evil bunch of jack booted thugs killing civilians and expect us to actually take you seriously when you start crying because somebody accurately called you unpatriotic.



You sound mad bro. Maybe you should walk out of your forward operating base and shoot up a few Afghanis to relieve some stress.
 
2012-06-23 11:17:49 PM
This wouldn't work in reverse. No liberal would be stupid enough to pay six figures for a painting of George Bush.
 
2012-06-23 11:19:10 PM

Virtuoso80: Of all modern Presidents, you only put one on the cheering side, and it's Reagan??

I'm also not sure why he loves Abraham Lincoln so much either. If you're a strict constructionist and don't like big-Government power, Lincoln should be one of your least favorite. He was the one who really started us on the path to Statism in the first place.


To avoid being called racist!

No, actually it's just because Lincoln was the last Republican that everyone liked that they can lay claim to. They could go for Trust-bustin' Teddy except they LIKE giant corporate conglomerates and destroying the environment now.
 
2012-06-23 11:21:37 PM

intelligent comment below: randomjsa: And next week some liberal will sneeringly point out how they have their patriotism questioned and I'll remember that picture, and chuckle.

Feel free to cry and howl about Bush but don't post pictures that include our military portrayed as some kind of evil bunch of jack booted thugs killing civilians and expect us to actually take you seriously when you start crying because somebody accurately called you unpatriotic.


You sound mad bro. Maybe you should walk out of your forward operating base and shoot up a few Afghanis to relieve some stress.


Seriously. I have no idea how he got that interpretation of the image. Unless, you know, he isn't very good with analysis.
 
2012-06-23 11:22:04 PM

Tellingthem:
\I'm still looking for a good Clinton painting for my apartment


oi45.tinypic.com
 
2012-06-23 11:23:20 PM

intelligent comment below: randomjsa: And next week some liberal will sneeringly point out how they have their patriotism questioned and I'll remember that picture, and chuckle.

Feel free to cry and howl about Bush but don't post pictures that include our military portrayed as some kind of evil bunch of jack booted thugs killing civilians and expect us to actually take you seriously when you start crying because somebody accurately called you unpatriotic.


You sound mad bro. Maybe you should walk out of your forward operating base and shoot up a few Afghanis to relieve some stress.


What an Afghani might look like:

upload.wikimedia.org

What an Afghan pointing at Afghanis might look like:

upload.wikimedia.org
 
2012-06-23 11:24:11 PM

runcible spork: King Something: Jonathan Hohensee:

[snipped]

Bravo to you for taking even a short amount of time to respond to that [bait?]!

Also, that democratic filibuster-proof majority was in the first six months of the administration, when it would have been unseemly and impolitic to ram through partisan legislation.

/ I wonder if the Cash-for-Clunkers had any effect on overall automobile emissions?


Actually it was the second six months, not the first. Norm Coleman kept appealing the recount to keep Al Franken out of the Senate until July 2009, Ted Kennedy died a month later, and his temporary replacement was only in office until Scott Brown defeated that Yankees fan who phoned in her campaign.

And even then, Joe Lieberman and the blue dog Democrats were part of their delegation of 60.
 
2012-06-23 11:24:14 PM

randomjsa: Zeno-25: [i.imgur.com image 640x420]

full size

And next week some liberal will sneeringly point out how they have their patriotism questioned and I'll remember that picture, and chuckle.

Feel free to cry and howl about Bush but don't post pictures that include our military portrayed as some kind of evil bunch of jack booted thugs killing civilians and expect us to actually take you seriously when you start crying because somebody accurately called you unpatriotic.


This coming from the guy who hoped democrats die in terrorist attacks for disagreeing with anything Glorious King George W Jesus believed was right. Hilarious. Its really cute how you believe your hatred of everyone to the left of you is somehow justified...no wait, its pathetic. Now go back to being your usual post-and-run cowardly self.
 
2012-06-23 11:27:15 PM

TheBigJerk: No, actually it's just because Lincoln was the last Republican that everyone liked that they can lay claim to. They could go for Trust-bustin' Teddy except they LIKE giant corporate conglomerates and destroying the environment now.


I would say "why not Eisenhower" but I guess that's the same issue as Roosevelt. Kinda hard to find a match for the current GOP's escalation from hawkish to straight-up serial killer mentality in history outside of Lincoln. I mean, there's Jackson but he was before Republicanism was a thing.

Lincoln's also convenient because he's a pretty close policy cousin to GW Bush, which makes certain arguments easier.

//Sadly, I made the mistake of studying real history 'n shiat, so I'm not part of the Everybody that likes Lincoln. I don't have a personal hatred for the guy or anything, but he was authoritarian to the verge of nearly turning the half of the country he controlled into a military Junta and a number of his decisions were borderline incompetent at best.
 
2012-06-23 11:28:00 PM

King Something: runcible spork: King Something: Jonathan Hohensee:

[snipped]

Bravo to you for taking even a short amount of time to respond to that [bait?]!

Also, that democratic filibuster-proof majority was in the first six months of the administration, when it would have been unseemly and impolitic to ram through partisan legislation.

/ I wonder if the Cash-for-Clunkers had any effect on overall automobile emissions?

Actually it was the second six months, not the first. Norm Coleman kept appealing the recount to keep Al Franken out of the Senate until July 2009, Ted Kennedy died a month later, and his temporary replacement was only in office until Scott Brown defeated that Yankees fan who phoned in her campaign.

And even then, Joe Lieberman and the blue dog Democrats were part of their delegation of 60.


People who complain about nothing getting done during the very brief Democratic super-majority are either willfully ignorant or don't understand how the Democrats are not a unified party like the Republicans.
 
2012-06-23 11:30:05 PM
I like how golden and white the central character of the painting is, and how Obama is like "Oh no!"
 
2012-06-23 11:35:31 PM

themadtupper: intelligent comment below: randomjsa: And next week some liberal will sneeringly point out how they have their patriotism questioned and I'll remember that picture, and chuckle.

Feel free to cry and howl about Bush but don't post pictures that include our military portrayed as some kind of evil bunch of jack booted thugs killing civilians and expect us to actually take you seriously when you start crying because somebody accurately called you unpatriotic.


You sound mad bro. Maybe you should walk out of your forward operating base and shoot up a few Afghanis to relieve some stress.

What an Afghani might look like:

[upload.wikimedia.org image 640x268]

What an Afghan pointing at Afghanis might look like:

[upload.wikimedia.org image 250x297]



I love playing semantics!

Afghani may refer to:

Afghan afghani, official currency of Afghanistan.
An Afghan, a person or thing of, from, or related to Afghanistan
The Pashto language, which is also referred to as Afghani or Afghani language
Jamal al-Din al-Afghani, a Muslim nationalist and modernist in the late 19th century
 
2012-06-23 11:35:46 PM

runcible spork: Also, even without factoring in the Independents, as a general rule there's too much diversity (especially including red (?) dog (blue-dog?) democrats) for them to ever vote in lockstep fashion.


I had this discussion with some people. One of the key factors that makes it easier to get lockstep from the GOP these days is that all they want to do is NOTHING. When you're dealing with people that actually want to do something, but aren't completely in agreement on exactly how to do it, it shows up as not being on the same page.

Ex) 7 people at a house. "What should we do tonight?" one of them asks. Three say they don't want to do anything, two say they want to see a movie, and two say they want to go to a bar. Who wins the vote? The people that want to do nothing, even though the number of people that want to do something outnumber them 4-3.

And before some f*cking troll comes back with "durr, then the two that want to see the movie should see the movie, two go to the bar, and everyone happy duurrrr." it's just an example, and we can't do that with legislation.
 
2012-06-23 11:36:38 PM

Jim_Callahan: I don't have a personal hatred for the guy or anything, but he was authoritarian to the verge of nearly turning the half of the country he controlled into a military Junta and a number of his decisions were borderline incompetent at best.



Yeah, the nerve of that guy for reacting to the Confederacy taking up arms against the Constitution and the states.
 
2012-06-23 11:36:55 PM
I've finally figured out who the Empowered Man looks like, and it's terrifying.

www1.pictures.zimbio.com
 
2012-06-23 11:37:57 PM
img.photobucket.com
 
2012-06-23 11:38:39 PM

Jim_Callahan: Sadly, I made the mistake of studying real history 'n shiat


So you're one of them edgucated libural elitists then? Why you hate Murika, whie?
 
2012-06-23 11:39:50 PM
I just want to know, how is that any different from this, except for your political perspective:

ttoes.files.wordpress.com

Go on, give me a rational, non emotional, non name calling explanation, without calling me racist, etc
 
2012-06-23 11:40:48 PM

verbaltoxin: King Something: runcible spork: King Something: Jonathan Hohensee:

[snipped]

Bravo to you for taking even a short amount of time to respond to that [bait?]!

Also, that democratic filibuster-proof majority was in the first six months of the administration, when it would have been unseemly and impolitic to ram through partisan legislation.

/ I wonder if the Cash-for-Clunkers had any effect on overall automobile emissions?

Actually it was the second six months, not the first. Norm Coleman kept appealing the recount to keep Al Franken out of the Senate until July 2009, Ted Kennedy died a month later, and his temporary replacement was only in office until Scott Brown defeated that Yankees fan who phoned in her campaign.

And even then, Joe Lieberman and the blue dog Democrats were part of their delegation of 60.

People who complain about nothing getting done during the very brief Democratic super-majority are either willfully ignorant or don't understand how the Democrats are not a unified party like the Republicans.


Hence my mentioning of Lieberman and the blue dogs.

The Democrats would need to have something like 67 seats in order to be able to get the 60 votes necessary to allow their bills to come up for an up-or-down vote. Which means that unless the Democrats retake the House, sweep the Senate side of the election and Obama wins reelection, there's still gonna be some partisan gridlock until at least 2014.

/at least Lieberman's not running for reelection
//he got kicked out of the party he founded when he got primaried by the Democrats in either 2006 or 2000
 
2012-06-23 11:42:12 PM

Don't Troll Me Bro!: runcible spork: Also, even without factoring in the Independents, as a general rule there's too much diversity (especially including red (?) dog (blue-dog?) democrats) for them to ever vote in lockstep fashion.

I had this discussion with some people. One of the key factors that makes it easier to get lockstep from the GOP these days is that all they want to do is NOTHING. When you're dealing with people that actually want to do something, but aren't completely in agreement on exactly how to do it, it shows up as not being on the same page.

Ex) 7 people at a house. "What should we do tonight?" one of them asks. Three say they don't want to do anything, two say they want to see a movie, and two say they want to go to a bar. Who wins the vote? The people that want to do nothing, even though the number of people that want to do something outnumber them 4-3.

And before some f*cking troll comes back with "durr, then the two that want to see the movie should see the movie, two go to the bar, and everyone happy duurrrr." it's just an example, and we can't do that with legislation.



Reminds me trying to get everyone to decide on a restaurant. Some people first claim "anything" then finally the vote comes up and they deny everything. They're future senators for sure.
 
2012-06-23 11:42:13 PM
"Sticking the Constitution up your butt does not make you an Empowered Man."

worthopedia.s3.amazonaws.com

/ kinky
 
2012-06-23 11:42:41 PM

Death_Poot: I just want to know, how is that any different from this, except for your political perspective:

[ttoes.files.wordpress.com image 640x909]

Go on, give me a rational, non emotional, non name calling explanation, without calling me racist, etc


The one in TFA is mediocre at best, and certainly not iconic.
 
2012-06-23 11:43:40 PM

Death_Poot: I just want to know, how is that any different from this, except for your political perspective:

[ttoes.files.wordpress.com image 640x909]

Go on, give me a rational, non emotional, non name calling explanation, without calling me racist, etc



How is it any different? Well for starters it's not just an artistic representation of a candidate with his slogan.
 
2012-06-23 11:45:27 PM

Dalrint: Why is the guy from Silent Hill stealing the constitution?


You see that guy right behind The Constitution? Pyramid Head. That's why his face is covered.
 
2012-06-23 11:46:28 PM

Death_Poot: I just want to know, how is that any different from this, except for your political perspective:

[ttoes.files.wordpress.com image 640x909]

Go on, give me a rational, non emotional, non name calling explanation, without calling me racist, etc


This one is easy. The Republicans are hell-bent on dismantling the country and selling it to the highest bidder. For over a decade, they have subverted elections and continually disregarded the spirit of the representative republic we inherited.

The paintings in question are indicative of the kind of person who has never ever thought about anything ever and has never cracked a book and doesn't care whether or not what he believes is true. The Obama image is not evil, twisted propaganda that appeals to racists and the feeble-minded. It's an example of the simple and traditional "vote for me" imagery most candidates employ.
 
2012-06-23 11:47:41 PM

Death_Poot: I just want to know, how is that any different from this, except for your political perspective:

[ttoes.files.wordpress.com image 640x909]

Go on, give me a rational, non emotional, non name calling explanation, without calling me racist, etc




Here's one:

Because one is explicitly campaign material, makes no pretensions to "art," and does not have confused and shaky ideological and philosophical symbolism.
 
2012-06-23 11:52:05 PM

gimmegimme: Death_Poot: I just want to know, how is that any different from this, except for your political perspective:

[ttoes.files.wordpress.com image 640x909]

Go on, give me a rational, non emotional, non name calling explanation, without calling me racist, etc

This one is easy. The Republicans are hell-bent on dismantling the country and selling it to the highest bidder. For over a decade, they have subverted elections and continually disregarded the spirit of the representative republic we inherited.

The paintings in question are indicative of the kind of person who has never ever thought about anything ever and has never cracked a book and doesn't care whether or not what he believes is true. The Obama image is not evil, twisted propaganda that appeals to racists and the feeble-minded. It's an example of the simple and traditional "vote for me" imagery most candidates employ.


You're still talking from political perspective.....apart from the obama painting being adopted as a campaign tool, there is no difference

Also, regarding your first sentence, you are drinking the koolaid.....the D's and R's are both sides of the same coin....we are being played for suckers.
 
2012-06-23 11:52:53 PM

Death_Poot: I just want to know, how is that any different from this, except for your political perspective:

[ttoes.files.wordpress.com image 640x909]

Go on, give me a rational, non emotional, non name calling explanation, without calling me racist, etc


It's the same as the difference between a 99 cent hamburger from McDonald's and one of those 5-pound bacon and cheese smothered behemoth burgers from the place where the waitresses dress like nurses.
 
2012-06-23 11:54:18 PM

Great_Milenko: DamnYankees: Who the hell is that person to the right of Lincoln and Reagan? Is that supposed to be Washington? And who is that kneeling down? Pat Robertson in a wig?

All the answers ye seek are contained within

My favorite part is Calvin Coolidge.


Well that's just amazing. By which I mean I want to pull my eyes out.
 
2012-06-23 11:54:29 PM

Don't Troll Me Bro!: Jim_Callahan: Sadly, I made the mistake of studying real history 'n shiat

So you're one of them edgucated libural elitists then? Why you hate Murika, whie?



The correct spelling is "edjumicated."

Don't Troll Me Bro!:
I had this discussion with some people. One of the key factors that makes it easier to get lockstep from the GOP these days is that all they want to do is NOTHING. When you're dealing with people that actually want to do something, but aren't completely in agreement on exactly how to do it, it shows up as not being on the same page.

Ex) 7 people at a house. "What should we do tonight?" one of them asks. Three say they don't want to do anything, two say they want to see a movie, and two say they want to go to a bar. Who wins the vote? The people that want to do nothing, even though the number of people that want to do something outnumber them 4-3.

And before some f*cking troll comes back with "durr, then the two that want to see the movie should see the movie, two go to the bar, and everyone happy duurrrr." it's just an example, and we can't do that with legislation.


What kills me is that the Republicans (in government) are so arrogant as to tout their obstructionist agenda. No pretense whatsoever of cooperation, compromise, rational discussion, et cetera. And, by inference, intelligence. Perhaps it's effective and intelligent or clever in that respect, but it isn't "intelligent."
 
2012-06-23 11:54:35 PM

Death_Poot: You're still talking from political perspective.....apart from the obama painting being adopted as a campaign tool, there is no difference

Also, regarding your first sentence, you are drinking the koolaid.....the D's and R's are both sides of the same coin....we are being played for suckers.


So who are you voting for in the upcoming election?
 
2012-06-23 11:55:15 PM
"The paintings in question are indicative of the kind of person who has never ever thought about anything ever and has never cracked a book and doesn't care whether or not what he believes is true"

This is true for both sides..................tell a lie often enough, and it will be believed. We on both sides are being played for fools.
 
2012-06-23 11:55:49 PM

Fluorescent Testicle: I've finally figured out who the Empowered Man looks like, and it's terrifying.

[www1.pictures.zimbio.com image 360x240]


O'Keefe looks more feminine, IMO...
i860.photobucket.com
 
2012-06-23 11:56:12 PM

Fluorescent Testicle: I've finally figured out who the Empowered Man looks like, and it's terrifying.


Smeagol?
 
2012-06-23 11:56:30 PM

verbaltoxin: People who complain about nothing getting done during the very brief Democratic super-majority are either willfully ignorant or don't understand how the Democrats are not a unified party like the Republicans


WHAT. But I've been assured by both trolls and idiots that it is the DEMONCRATS that are the unified party that brokes no dissent while the republcians are the big open tent that llows everyone and that anyone who says otherwise is a libtard or a phino.
 
2012-06-23 11:56:36 PM
That took two months to finish? I wonder how long he spent on her upper lip?
 
2012-06-23 11:56:42 PM

Ringshadow: Death_Poot: You're still talking from political perspective.....apart from the obama painting being adopted as a campaign tool, there is no difference

Also, regarding your first sentence, you are drinking the koolaid.....the D's and R's are both sides of the same coin....we are being played for suckers.

So who are you voting for in the upcoming election?


I honestly don't know, probably my cat.......
 
2012-06-23 11:57:12 PM

Death_Poot: gimmegimme: Death_Poot: I just want to know, how is that any different from this, except for your political perspective:

[ttoes.files.wordpress.com image 640x909]

Go on, give me a rational, non emotional, non name calling explanation, without calling me racist, etc

This one is easy. The Republicans are hell-bent on dismantling the country and selling it to the highest bidder. For over a decade, they have subverted elections and continually disregarded the spirit of the representative republic we inherited.

The paintings in question are indicative of the kind of person who has never ever thought about anything ever and has never cracked a book and doesn't care whether or not what he believes is true. The Obama image is not evil, twisted propaganda that appeals to racists and the feeble-minded. It's an example of the simple and traditional "vote for me" imagery most candidates employ.

You're still talking from political perspective.....apart from the obama painting being adopted as a campaign tool, there is no difference

Also, regarding your first sentence, you are drinking the koolaid.....the D's and R's are both sides of the same coin....we are being played for suckers.



Death_Poot, please pick one of the other responses to reply to. You know, one of those that actually addressed your request?
 
2012-06-23 11:58:51 PM
Why is Captan Kangaroo kneeling in that painting?
 
2012-06-23 11:58:58 PM

Death_Poot: Also, regarding your first sentence, you are drinking the koolaid.....the D's and R's are both sides of the same coin....we are being played for suckers.



Oh great, another Fark Independent "Both sides are bad" troll
 
2012-06-23 11:59:05 PM

Death_Poot: gimmegimme: Death_Poot: I just want to know, how is that any different from this, except for your political perspective:

[ttoes.files.wordpress.com image 640x909]

Go on, give me a rational, non emotional, non name calling explanation, without calling me racist, etc

This one is easy. The Republicans are hell-bent on dismantling the country and selling it to the highest bidder. For over a decade, they have subverted elections and continually disregarded the spirit of the representative republic we inherited.

The paintings in question are indicative of the kind of person who has never ever thought about anything ever and has never cracked a book and doesn't care whether or not what he believes is true. The Obama image is not evil, twisted propaganda that appeals to racists and the feeble-minded. It's an example of the simple and traditional "vote for me" imagery most candidates employ.

You're still talking from political perspective.....apart from the obama painting being adopted as a campaign tool, there is no difference

Also, regarding your first sentence, you are drinking the koolaid.....the D's and R's are both sides of the same coin....we are being played for suckers.


Democrats want to make out with your girlfriend. Republicans want to kidnap your mother and your wife in the middle of the night and sell them to a rich Middle Eastern sheik and strap you into a chair so they can force you to watch every step they take into sex slavery. All the while, Republicans are tossing softballs at your scrotum and force-feeding you deep-fried Snickers bars so they will get more entertainment out of chaining you to a treadmill that provides electricity to the fark machine your daughter is strapped into.

I'm going to go with the Democrats.
 
2012-06-24 12:00:08 AM

Death_Poot: I just want to know, how is that any different from this, except for your political perspective:

[ttoes.files.wordpress.com image 640x909]

Go on, give me a rational, non emotional, non name calling explanation, without calling me racist, etc


It's like a fun contest. I'll give it a try:

One of them is a picture of a candidate and a one word slogan. The message seems to be "vote for Barack Obama for change."

The other is a picture of an everyman holding the Constitution in one hand, and a stack of money in the other hand, while some presidents stand behind him applauding, cheering, and praying, and other presidents recoil in horror and look down in shame. The message seems to be "Respect the Constitution and you'll make a lot of money while making the good presidents happy and making the bad presidents horrified and ashamed."

/9/10
 
2012-06-24 12:01:09 AM

runcible spork: Death_Poot: gimmegimme: Death_Poot: I just want to know, how is that any different from this, except for your political perspective:

[ttoes.files.wordpress.com image 640x909]

Go on, give me a rational, non emotional, non name calling explanation, without calling me racist, etc

This one is easy. The Republicans are hell-bent on dismantling the country and selling it to the highest bidder. For over a decade, they have subverted elections and continually disregarded the spirit of the representative republic we inherited.

The paintings in question are indicative of the kind of person who has never ever thought about anything ever and has never cracked a book and doesn't care whether or not what he believes is true. The Obama image is not evil, twisted propaganda that appeals to racists and the feeble-minded. It's an example of the simple and traditional "vote for me" imagery most candidates employ.

You're still talking from political perspective.....apart from the obama painting being adopted as a campaign tool, there is no difference

Also, regarding your first sentence, you are drinking the koolaid.....the D's and R's are both sides of the same coin....we are being played for suckers.

Death_Poot, please pick one of the other responses to reply to. You know, one of those that actually addressed your request?


I did specifically address his request. I will admit that I embellished a little because I'm getting the feeling that Death Poot doesn't read many opinions that conflict with his own.
 
2012-06-24 12:04:05 AM

Death_Poot: gimmegimme: Death_Poot: I just want to know, how is that any different from this, except for your political perspective:

[ttoes.files.wordpress.com image 640x909]

Go on, give me a rational, non emotional, non name calling explanation, without calling me racist, etc

This one is easy. The Republicans are hell-bent on dismantling the country and selling it to the highest bidder. For over a decade, they have subverted elections and continually disregarded the spirit of the representative republic we inherited.

The paintings in question are indicative of the kind of person who has never ever thought about anything ever and has never cracked a book and doesn't care whether or not what he believes is true. The Obama image is not evil, twisted propaganda that appeals to racists and the feeble-minded. It's an example of the simple and traditional "vote for me" imagery most candidates employ.

You're still talking from political perspective.....apart from the obama painting being adopted as a campaign tool, there is no difference

Also, regarding your first sentence, you are drinking the koolaid.....the D's and R's are both sides of the same coin....we are being played for suckers.


You didn't ask him to be non-political, bring those goalposts back
 
2012-06-24 12:07:19 AM

gimmegimme: runcible spork:

I did specifically address his request. I will admit that I embellished a little because I'm getting the feeling that Death Poot doesn't read many opinions that conflict with his own.



Sorry, I dispensed with subtlety to point out that D_P chose the only response (from quite a few) that made it somewhat easy to pick at. And he worked on it more than once, still ignoring the others.
 
2012-06-24 12:10:33 AM

runcible spork: gimmegimme: runcible spork:

I did specifically address his request. I will admit that I embellished a little because I'm getting the feeling that Death Poot doesn't read many opinions that conflict with his own.

Sorry, I dispensed with subtlety to point out that D_P chose the only response (from quite a few) that made it somewhat easy to pick at. And he worked on it more than once, still ignoring the others.


I'm sorry, too. I'm in an ornery mood. The many other responses to his exceedingly silly question were much more restrained and intelligent.

Hey, Death Poot. Why not respond to the others who rose to the challenge you issued?
 
2012-06-24 12:11:31 AM
Did anyone else explore the rest of his art? Lots of LDS stuff. As someone mentioned before or inferred it does seem as if he has some ADS going on, or perhaps, and since this IS the politics tab I will put it out there, some Romney Like Programing was involved. It has been mentioned time and time again that Romney's indifferent behavior is common with members of the LDS Church. By extension that would explain this guy, his art and his rather verbose explanations of his art as well as his answers to any perceived criticism that he may face regarding it. He claims that he has no political message and I believe that he honestly believes it in the same way that a blind person believes that the only color in the world is "darkness," that's what he has been led to believe all his life therefore it must be true, and anyone that doesn't believe the same, well there is something wrong with them.
 
2012-06-24 12:12:13 AM

Garble: AeAe: Why is the guy holding a big wad of cash? The Constitution on one hand and a big wad of cash in the other?


That escaped me too.

Because only wealthy people are the *real* Americans.

This was my best guess. ?
 
2012-06-24 12:17:42 AM

Fuggin Bizzy: Garble: AeAe: Why is the guy holding a big wad of cash? The Constitution on one hand and a big wad of cash in the other?

That escaped me too.

Because only wealthy people are the *real* Americans.

This was my best guess. ?


Maybe those were tips from the ex-Presidents around him?
 
2012-06-24 12:19:51 AM

Death_Poot: ...apart from the obama painting being adopted as a campaign tool, there is no difference.



If you honestly cannot discern a difference other than that between the two, then I'm afraid you lack subtlety in a variety of areas: formal expression, representation, composition, purpose, etc.

scruffy1: ... He claims that he has no political message and I believe that he honestly believes it in the same way that a blind person believes that the only color in the world is "darkness," that's what he has been led to believe all his life therefore it must be true, and anyone that doesn't believe the same, well there is something wrong with them.



C'mon, even a blind person with a smidgen on awareness is able to appreciate that just because they are physically unable to perceive something that is eminently provable doesn't mean that they can't accept its objective veracity. Unless... did you mean a blind person deprived of contact with sighted people?
 
2012-06-24 12:21:31 AM
So I posted on this douchebag's Facebook, telling him that he's like Norman Rockwell reborn...without any taste, grace or human decency. I suggest y'all take a moment to stop by his Facebook page and let him know what you think of his art as well.
 
2012-06-24 12:22:02 AM

Death_Poot: I just want to know, how is that any different from this, except for your political perspective:

[ttoes.files.wordpress.com image 640x909]

Go on, give me a rational, non emotional, non name calling explanation, without calling me racist, etc


I love how conservatives like to perpetuate the myth that they're called racist for anything other than racism.
 
2012-06-24 12:23:56 AM

thatguyoverthere70: Death_Poot: I just want to know, how is that any different from this, except for your political perspective:

[ttoes.files.wordpress.com image 640x909]

Go on, give me a rational, non emotional, non name calling explanation, without calling me racist, etc

It's like a fun contest. I'll give it a try:

One of them is a picture of a candidate and a one word slogan. The message seems to be "vote for Barack Obama for change."

The other is a picture of an everyman holding the Constitution in one hand, and a stack of money in the other hand, while some presidents stand behind him applauding, cheering, and praying, and other presidents recoil in horror and look down in shame. The message seems to be "Respect the Constitution and you'll make a lot of money while making the good presidents happy and making the bad presidents horrified and ashamed."

/9/10


One is of Barack Obama and features his slogan. The other has a bunch of zombies factored in for some unfathomable reason.
 
2012-06-24 12:24:00 AM
Fark that stupid shiat...check out the Kate Upton jiggly bikini clips in the same article!!!
 
2012-06-24 12:29:58 AM

I Browse: My rebuttal:


[celebrity-photos.elliottback.com image 450x577]


Meh, there have been better (evoking Kennedy):

img171.imageshack.us

Still the same idea, though: ideals through bad art. Example 1:

img205.imageshack.us

For all the idiots glomming onto this guy's paintings, 50 million more looked at that and thought Obama was going to "change the world."

Idiots abound.
 
2012-06-24 12:31:40 AM
Man, Norman Rockwell really needs to stop snorting lines of pixie sticks and crushed cialis off Rush's flaccid cock.
 
2012-06-24 12:38:13 AM

skepticultist: So I posted on this douchebag's Facebook, telling him that he's like Norman Rockwell reborn...without any taste, grace or human decency. I suggest y'all take a moment to stop by his Facebook page and let him know what you think of his art as well.


You sure showed him.
 
2012-06-24 12:38:57 AM

Lsherm: I Browse: My rebuttal:


[celebrity-photos.elliottback.com image 450x577]

Meh, there have been better (evoking Kennedy):

[img171.imageshack.us image 509x639]

Still the same idea, though: ideals through bad art. Example 1:

[img205.imageshack.us image 300x449]

For all the idiots glomming onto this guy's paintings, 50 million more looked at that and thought Obama was going to "change the world."

Idiots abound.


Imagine what could happen if Republicans ditched their literal and stated goal of preventing the President from improving the country and economy!

I'm not kidding....they literally put money and politics over the country they claim to care about but clearly don't.
 
2012-06-24 12:40:51 AM
King Something: Most of the people who oppose "Obamacare" only oppose the "Obama" part and are in favor of its provisions, such as being able to keep your kids on your health plan until they turn 26 and not having coverage deined due to pre-existing conditions.



Bears repeating. IIRC way back when this cut-off-nose-to-spite-face backlash started erupting, there was a poll where people were asked one by one the main provisions of Obamacare... then asked if they supported Obamacare. Funny thing, you know... lots and lots of people who said they supported each individual provision (or a majority) went crazy when they were put all together.

The administration *REALLY* let that get away from them and now it's too damn late.

Then again, they should've held out for the single effing pay option too.

But the on-insurance-until-26 is helping out a large, large number of young folks who aren't terribly likely to get insurance at whatever crappy job they manage to find in this economy (usually while still in school with aid going way down). Better yet are those who are starting their own businesses because they have a safety net as far as insurance goes and have a little bit of breathing room.

When you spend all your time at a job you hate but that gives you benefits, it's hard to nurture that entrepreneurial spirit that people keep giving BS lines about nurturing and attracting. F--k, it's hard to find the time and impossible to totally dedicate yourself to it if you're worried about ending up in the ER and having to declare bankruptcy.
 
2012-06-24 12:40:57 AM

taxandspend: Osama Bin Laden is dead. Gays can serve in the military without fear of being kicked out. The economy is recovering. That's all the change I need for one term. Would have had more if not for the party of no.


Yes, but everything isn't perfect yet so he's a failure and those millions of millions of strawmen people I can't cite right now who thought he was a wizard look foolish.
 
2012-06-24 12:46:20 AM
So lack of pic posting leads to alts.
 
2012-06-24 12:49:03 AM

Death_Poot: I just want to know, how is that any different from this, except for your political perspective:

[ttoes.files.wordpress.com image 640x909]

Go on, give me a rational, non emotional, non name calling explanation, without calling me racist, etc


The difference is one is supposed to be a positive message about getting America working again, and the other is supposed to be a negative message about how much Obama hates the Constitution.

Another big difference is that this is only one in a SERIES of paintings about how much Obama hates the Constitution.
 
2012-06-24 12:51:53 AM

puffy999: The funniest thing about that picture is that the man is holding dollar bills.

I bet you could take the talented, albeit insane, man who makes this art and back him into a logical corner within two seconds.


One thing I would love to ask him in person:

"In your most famous painting (with Jesus and the Constitution), your website says when you hover the mouse over Thomas Jefferson that he intended the 'wall of separation between Church and State' that he wrote about to be taken as a wall that only blocks the government from controlling or interfering with religion, not the other way around.

"Okay, you're an artist, right? Here's a blank piece of paper. Draw a sketch of this wall (not door, gate, turnstile, ramp, or whatever: Jefferson specifically called it a wall! Double-you, Aye, Ell, Ell, wall!) that could've been constructed using any technology that Jefferson would've known about, that blocks passage only from one side to the other, but freely allows passage in the opposite direction."
 
2012-06-24 12:52:41 AM

runcible spork: Death_Poot: ...apart from the obama painting being adopted as a campaign tool, there is no difference.

If you honestly cannot discern a difference other than that between the two, then I'm afraid you lack subtlety in a variety of areas: formal expression, representation, composition, purpose, etc.

scruffy1: ... He claims that he has no political message and I believe that he honestly believes it in the same way that a blind person believes that the only color in the world is "darkness," that's what he has been led to believe all his life therefore it must be true, and anyone that doesn't believe the same, well there is something wrong with them.

C'mon, even a blind person with a smidgen on awareness is able to appreciate that just because they are physically unable to perceive something that is eminently provable doesn't mean that they can't accept its objective veracity. Unless... did you mean a blind person deprived of contact with sighted people?


Yes I shoulda specified that part.
 
2012-06-24 12:56:31 AM

skepticultist: So I posted on this douchebag's Facebook, telling him that he's like Norman Rockwell reborn...without any taste, grace or human decency. I suggest y'all take a moment to stop by his Facebook page and let him know what you think of his art as well.


To what end? It wouldn't make me feel better and if I were him I'd say 'Sorry, I cant hear you over the large piles of money being dumped in my lap.'

Like I've said, hating Democrats is one of the most profitable ventures out there.
 
2012-06-24 12:57:42 AM

Fista-Phobia: So lack of pic posting leads to alts.


www.empireonline.com

Alts lead to confusion...

Confusion leads to fear...

Fear leads to erectile dysfunction...

Erectile dysfunction is the path to the dark side.
 
2012-06-24 12:59:35 AM
I'm the libiest lib that ever libed and I think that a collection of those would be an interesting cover for my walls. I'd get a good background color for the walls and hang them up. They'd make great discussion pieces when we have guests over.

I don't know if I'd have 'Obama burning the Constitution' or 'Jesus Holding the Constitution' above my TV/faux-fireplace and, thus, my centerpiece.
 
2012-06-24 01:05:21 AM
I like this one it's like a where's waldo, except you find the brown guy (who's not Obama).
s3-ec.buzzfed.com
 
2012-06-24 01:07:24 AM

Death_Poot: I just want to know...



Also:

img205.imageshack.us25.media.tumblr.com

That's another critical difference. Has to do with purpose and use.
 
2012-06-24 01:08:37 AM

gimmegimme: Fista-Phobia: So lack of pic posting leads to alts.

[www.empireonline.com image 355x400]

Alts lead to confusion...

Confusion leads to fear...

Fear leads to erectile dysfunction...

Erectile dysfunction is the path to the dark side.


But I promise I'll return to complete my training!
 
2012-06-24 01:09:29 AM
4.bp.blogspot.com
 
2012-06-24 01:10:25 AM
img716.imageshack.us
 
2012-06-24 01:13:01 AM

Rich Cream: [img716.imageshack.us image 494x457]


HA!
 
2012-06-24 01:14:01 AM

ultraholland: Rashnu: I'm guessing Obama put these people in chains just to protect that chicken from getting brutally f*cked.

what the hell are Kim Jong-il and Dinnerjacket doing back there?


It's to show that Obama is a Communist Islamofascist Royalist (saw a Saudi royal in there as well).
 
2012-06-24 01:14:51 AM

runcible spork: Death_Poot: I just want to know...

Also:

[img205.imageshack.us image 50x75][25.media.tumblr.com image 93x75]

That's another critical difference. Has to do with purpose and use.



Whoops, used a "HOPE" version instead of the "CHANGE" version in the original comment. Doesn't matter, that would have been legible too. And just imagine if I'd resized them to the same area rather than height!
 
2012-06-24 01:19:18 AM

Don't Troll Me Bro!: Jim_Callahan: Sadly, I made the mistake of studying real history 'n shiat

So you're one of them edgucated libural elitists then? Why you hate Murika, whie?


To be fair, before I started hanging out here I always assumed that basic civics and a working knowledge of at least US history pre-WW2 was standard. So I'm really only evaluating my education as thorough in context, not claiming to be a master historian or anything.

But, yeah, I have the PhD (albeit not in liberal arts) and am a registered Democrat and a de facto Rochdale Socialist (not the same as Marxism, which is what's usually used to mark the "far left").

intelligent comment below: Yeah, the nerve of that guy for reacting to the Confederacy taking up arms against the Constitution and the states.


Forgive me for not being particularly fond of a guy that literally sent the army to burn down a number of newspapers that published negative opinion pieces on his administration. Or praising the brilliant policy of not really coordinating war strategy at the national level and leaving it to a dozen generals to ad lib, extending the war for years longer than it should have lasted, and then finally settling on the guy that essentially threw bodies into the meat grinder until they jammed it to do the final push.

I know Lincoln was there when the stuff ended and got some PR bonus points for dying in office, but frankly the north mostly won the war in spite of his administration, not because of.
 
2012-06-24 01:20:39 AM

Fista-Phobia: Rich Cream: [img716.imageshack.us image 494x457]

HA!


I don't get it.

There is no spoon?
 
2012-06-24 01:21:09 AM

Lionel Mandrake: Zmog: I wanna know what that guy has in his pocket. Looks like he shoved a daily wage's worth of cheeseburgers in there. Or possibly a bunch of ferrets.



The Empowered Man

He represents every man, woman and child of every color and creed who is an American. Like you and me, he hopes for a better life, to find the American dream of happiness and prosperity. But now, because of unconstitutional acts imposed upon the American people by our government we stand on the precipice of disaster. What will his opportunities be in the future? Will he ever have a chance to realize the American Dream?

Yes! He has got off his bench, ripped the Constitution out from under the feet of Obama and holds it up to the world. He is empowered to save our nation.

How? He understands the Constitution and liberties and laws therein. He also carries a Bible in his right coat pocket. He knows from where his true empowerment comes.


Thats hilarious, because a good chunk of the 10 commandments are incompatible with the US Constitution, and many of whats left are meant for the states to handle.
 
2012-06-24 01:25:08 AM

vygramul: Fista-Phobia: Rich Cream: [img716.imageshack.us image 494x457]

HA!

I don't get it.

There is no spoon?


It's all ball bearings nowadays.
 
2012-06-24 01:25:56 AM

Jim_Callahan: To be fair, before I started hanging out here I always assumed that basic civics and a working knowledge of at least US history pre-WW2 was standard. So I'm really only evaluating my education as thorough in context, not claiming to be a master historian or anything.


You'll be pleased to know that a knowledge of US history post-WW2 is also also non-standard for most Americans
 
2012-06-24 01:32:25 AM

Lsherm:
For all the idiots glomming onto this guy's paintings, 50 million more looked at that and thought Obama was going to "change the world."

Idiots abound.


Actually, most of us looked at the opposition and recoiled in abject horror.
 
2012-06-24 01:32:38 AM

hillbillypharmacist: Why would Wall Street and socialist organization support the same dude?


Because socialist policies benefit the top 0.01%
 
2012-06-24 01:34:07 AM
Wait... so all I have to do is paint some moronic shiat that will appeal the baser instincts of conservatives and slap a huge price tag on it and I'll be rich? hmmm... might just have to do that.
 
2012-06-24 01:35:18 AM

vygramul: Fista-Phobia: Rich Cream: [img716.imageshack.us image 494x457]

HA!

I don't get it.

There is no spoon?


Or there's that article about the secret service taking away cutlery before he appeared at a function today.
 
2012-06-24 01:39:40 AM

Lsherm: For all the idiots glomming onto this guy's paintings, 50 million more looked at that and thought Obama was going to "change the world."

Idiots abound.



Who would have thought Republicans obstructing government makes sure nothing get done?
 
2012-06-24 01:42:11 AM

Paul Baumer: Do we have freedom when half the country pays taxes to support the other half?

I know it's just a talking point but lord that one trolls me proper every time. I guess children, retirees, housewives and the disabled need to start paying taxes and so this chump can skimp on his share.


Pesky facts and figures.
 
2012-06-24 01:42:32 AM

Ed Grubermann: Lsherm:
For all the idiots glomming onto this guy's paintings, 50 million more looked at that and thought Obama was going to "change the world."

Idiots abound.

Actually, most of us looked at the opposition and recoiled in abject horror.


Agreed. For some of us Obama wasn't the answer. He was just the choice that wasn't nearly as bad. It will be like that in November.
 
2012-06-24 01:43:35 AM

Death_Poot: I just want to know, how is that any different from this, except for your political perspective:

[ttoes.files.wordpress.com image 640x909]

Go on, give me a rational, non emotional, non name calling explanation, without calling me racist, etc


That picture one is iconic. This isn't. Observe it's simplicity in comparison to the maelstrom of "symbolism" in the more conservative paintings. These paintings are noisy in their subject matter, dreary in their color schemes. The morass of elements in these paintings mix together into a bland sea of grey. The Change poster is stark, high-contrast, and yet deep in emotion.

tl:dr Less is more.

/sorry, I sometimes get melodramatic when talking about art.
 
2012-06-24 01:43:56 AM

SouthernFriedYankee: Paul Baumer: Do we have freedom when half the country pays taxes to support the other half?

I know it's just a talking point but lord that one trolls me proper every time. I guess children, retirees, housewives and the disabled need to start paying taxes and so this chump can skimp on his share.

Pesky facts and figures.


Because federal income taxes are the only taxes people pay*.


*if you are so ignorant that retarded people think you are stupid.
 
2012-06-24 01:44:06 AM

Jim_Callahan: To be fair, before I started hanging out here I always assumed that basic civics and a working knowledge of at least US history pre-WW2 was standard.


Yeah, the internet will shatter one's faith in the human condition, that's for sure. And what's really sad is that this is the best internet forum I've found in terms of people that actually understand things, excluding professional organization websites.
 
2012-06-24 01:45:15 AM

Mrfusticle: I'd bet my left one that the your founding fathers would hate the current Republican agitprop with the intensity of a thousand suns.
They were mostly Deists after all.


I agree.

/Deist
 
2012-06-24 01:56:47 AM
This guy can't even follow the same damn visual metaphors.

In the first pic, the guy is ignoring the cash as he cuts free of the system. In the second pic he clearly has a stack of cash in his hands.

Perhaps he is simply illustrating the duality of nature that tea party patriots feel when cashing their social security checks, all the while biatching about the government and how evil it is.
 
2012-06-24 02:01:25 AM

rubi_con_man: If the government can gently reduce the liquidity of the market at the point where it starts to go wrong, then strong economic growth occurs.


Ironically, the Chinese communists avoided a crash by raising interest rates a bit, but what they really did was raise the margin requirements on the banks; actually they raised them a few times during the blowing of the worldwide real estate bubble. They suffered to an extent when all the western private-central-bank countries went blooey, but because they didn't let speculation get out of hand, it didn't hurt them nearly as bad.

How sad, that communists understood this better than supposed capitalists. Then again, what we have is crony capitalism, aka corporatism. Our bunch of thieves understood it - they simply didn't care.
 
2012-06-24 02:03:09 AM

runcible spork: And just imagine if I'd resized them to the same area rather than height!



img205.imageshack.us25.media.tumblr.com
25.media.tumblr.com

(3750 pixel2, 3864 pixel2, 3740 pixel2)


/ yes, I'm off on my own track.
 
2012-06-24 02:04:10 AM

cman: I can't wait to see how this will be described as somehow racist. That will be fun to watch


Pathetic troll.
 
2012-06-24 02:10:31 AM
SouthernFriedYankee: Ironically, the Chinese communists avoided a crash by raising interest rates a bit, but what they really did was raise the margin requirements on the banks; actually they raised them a few times during the blowing of the worldwide real estate bubble. They suffered to an extent when all the western private-central-bank countries went blooey, but because they didn't let speculation get out of hand, it didn't hurt them nearly as bad.

How sad, that communists understood this better than supposed capitalists. Then again, what we have is crony capitalism, aka corporatism. Our bunch of thieves understood it - they simply didn't care.


And how different is corporatism from fascism when corporations are legally empowered to practically buy government? >shudder<
 
2012-06-24 02:15:15 AM

SouthernFriedYankee: Paul Baumer: Do we have freedom when half the country pays taxes to support the other half?

I know it's just a talking point but lord that one trolls me proper every time. I guess children, retirees, housewives and the disabled need to start paying taxes and so this chump can skimp on his share.

Pesky facts and figures.


None of which really abnegate the point - people who make little to no income but have a federal tax filing requirement aren't some cabal of freeloaders - they are simply people who make little to no income. I don't really see them as some sort of privileged class that are undertaxed to the detriment of our society. The implication of such a statement is clear though, that some folk actually believe this to be the case. Do you think taxes ought be levied on this class of people, and if so to what extent?
 
2012-06-24 02:20:01 AM

intelligent comment below: Oh great, another Fark Independent "Both sides are bad" troll


So disagreeing with leftism makes one a troll, and eveything one says "derp."

Ok. As long as I understand your logic, and your debate skills.

I will offer concrete facts to support my position, thankyouverymuch:

Estonia I

Estonia II

Estonia III

I wish I had another example than this one country, but unfortunately, everyone else is trying the same old Keynesian stuff which is not going to work. When another country decides to get a clue, I'll let you know. You won't listen, I imagine, but I'll still let you know.
 
2012-06-24 02:24:27 AM

runcible spork: And how different is corporatism from fascism when corporations are legally empowered to practically buy government? >shudder<


Exactly. There is no difference, but to use the word fascism conjures up images that promptly raise cries of "Godwin!!!!11!!1!"
 
2012-06-24 02:24:28 AM

Mr.Tangent: I like this one it's like a where's waldo, except you find the brown guy (who's not Obama).
[s3-ec.buzzfed.com image 625x416]


Dude is about to hacksaw himself in the junk. Also, shouldn't someone be f*cking that chicken (rooster)?
 
2012-06-24 02:27:44 AM
Guy's been huffing too much paint thinner.
 
2012-06-24 02:33:51 AM

Paul Baumer: None of which really abnegate the point - people who make little to no income but have a federal tax filing requirement aren't some cabal of freeloaders - they are simply people who make little to no income. I don't really see them as some sort of privileged class that are undertaxed to the detriment of our society. The implication of such a statement is clear though, that some folk actually believe this to be the case. Do you think taxes ought be levied on this class of people, and if so to what extent?


No, not a cabal of freeloaders. However, the fact that they don't actually pay into the system means they have little to no incentive to want to see the system run in an economically responsible fashion. That's not a good state of affairs, when we're talking about close to half of the citizenry, is it?

It's not a question of wanting to tax the poor*; not only is that a rather cruel idea, but they don't have any money - that's sorta the definition of being poor, right? I've turned over in my head for a long time the question of how to keep people who aren't paying taxes from being able to have a say in how taxes are spent, as there's a complete conflict of interest there. But I haven't come up with anything even remotely feasable.

*Interestingly enough, taxing the crap out of cigarettes, fast food and so forth "because they're bad for you" hits the poor disporportionately hard, and most of the folks advocating those taxes are democrats and other self-identified progressives. I think those sorts of tax policies are also total crap.
 
2012-06-24 02:41:54 AM
Phukking morons. How much bath salts are they consuming that makes them believe a Tea Party Romney world is going to help anyone in the United States except for those who already HAVE "theirs"?
 
2012-06-24 02:46:39 AM

runcible spork: And how different is corporatism from fascism when corporations are legally empowered to practically buy government? >shudder<


Corporatism IS Fascism. That was Mussolini's original term for it when he organized the Italian labor force into non-competitive syndicates.
 
2012-06-24 02:47:06 AM

No Such Agency: ActualFarkal:
RulerOfNone: Political tripe aside, this guy is a rather decent artist.

Ooh! Ooh! You know who ELSE was a rather decent artist?

/Godwinrar
//I has it

Well, except I wouldn't characterize Hitler's work as "rather decent". I'd call it technically competent but dull, lacking in any emotional or evocative component whatsoever. At most it portrays a mawkish idealized sentimentality about his country that would mirror later Nazi attitudes.

[iliketowastemytime.com image 640x417]



NoSuch, I read your comment in Patrick Bateman's voice.
 
2012-06-24 02:53:45 AM

Ishkur: runcible spork: And how different is corporatism from fascism when corporations are legally empowered to practically buy government? >shudder<

Corporatism IS Fascism. That was Mussolini's original term for it when he organized the Italian labor force into non-competitive syndicates.



I admit I'm not a political wonk (thank goodness!) and also that Wikipedia isn't the best authority, but they seem to indicate that fascism is a type of corporatism.
 
2012-06-24 02:56:47 AM

Sabyen91: cman: I can't wait to see how this will be described as somehow racist. That will be fun to watch

Pathetic troll.


You must be new to Fark. If you approve of anything that is anti-Obama, then you're a racist. You must conform, citizen.
 
2012-06-24 02:59:05 AM

Ishkur: runcible spork: And how different is corporatism from fascism when corporations are legally empowered to practically buy government? >shudder<

Corporatism IS Fascism. That was Mussolini's original term for it when he organized the Italian labor force into non-competitive syndicates.


Nuh-uh, fascism is... Like... Arugula death-panels and stuff!
 
2012-06-24 03:08:23 AM

Jim_Callahan: Sadly, I made the mistake of studying real history 'n shiat


Right. Sure. Just like Republicans are "Real Americans."
 
2012-06-24 03:09:12 AM

runcible spork: Jim_Callahan: runcible spork: / I wonder if the Cash-for-Clunkers had any effect on overall automobile emissions?

It was far too limited in scope to make any real difference in emissions. The potential environmental effect was sort of a bonus, the primary reason for the program was to give the auto industry a shot in the arm, sort of an indirect mini-bailout, not to placate the Lorax.

It sorta had some effect there, but obviously didn't make a major difference on those grounds either.

Overall a well-intended program that didn't hurt, but not what you'd call a roaring success either.

Kind of what I assumed. Thanks!


Might have helped lower the amount of oil the US imports, which has dropped a fair amount lately.
 
2012-06-24 03:11:44 AM

runcible spork: I admit I'm not a political wonk (thank goodness!) and also that Wikipedia isn't the best authority, but they seem to indicate that fascism is a type of corporatism.


Basically, corporatism is the word currently used to describe fascism without drawing the ire of the folks who scream "Godwin!!" at every opportunity. You are probably correct in your observation in an absolute sense; however, Mussolini did use the word when creating the system that we now call fascism. And we have to be able to use this term and discuss this concept now, as it's what's being done to us: the unholy alliance of big big business and big big government, rigging the game completely so that them's what already gots it all gets all the rests of it, too.
 
2012-06-24 03:16:07 AM

Jim_Callahan: extending the war for years longer than it should have lasted


Ah, right. The Civil War should have lasted... six months.
 
2012-06-24 03:16:26 AM
The best (and most revealing) part of the painting is how the Constitution is used as a symbol instead of an actual document. Instead of reading it, the man holds it up like Peter Cushing would hold up a cross in a Hammer film. The words mean nothing, only the power inherited by the paper because....well, isn't important, isn't it? It's a stunning display of the ignorance that right-wingers hold now that they realize Christianity has been tarnished with pathetic bigotry: they don't realize that the Constitution's real power comes from what is written on it, but instead that it exists and therefore is somehow important. Notice that the Perfect Man there--complete in his casual workwear and glory--doesn't read it at all. He's off looking up while holding a few bucks. Without the pathetic pandering in the background, the main focus of the painting is insulting and very enlightening. Why is the man empowered? Is it because he uses the symbol of the Constitution? Is it because he has a few bucks in hand? He's not really that empowered if you look at him in the context of the painting.
 
2012-06-24 03:18:00 AM
orrinjohnson.com

PRIME / HOT ROD for 2012


/till all are one
 
2012-06-24 03:18:40 AM

Death_Poot: Also, regarding your first sentence, you are drinking the koolaid.....the D's and R's are both sides of the same coin....we are being played for suckers.


That would be factually incorrect.
 
2012-06-24 03:20:31 AM

SouthernFriedYankee: runcible spork: I admit I'm not a political wonk (thank goodness!) and also that Wikipedia isn't the best authority, but they seem to indicate that fascism is a type of corporatism.

Basically, corporatism is the word currently used to describe fascism without drawing the ire of the folks who scream "Godwin!!" at every opportunity. You are probably correct in your observation in an absolute sense; however, Mussolini did use the word when creating the system that we now call fascism. And we have to be able to use this term and discuss this concept now, as it's what's being done to us: the unholy alliance of big big business and big big government, rigging the game completely so that them's what already gots it all gets all the rests of it, too.



Sort of related to the Godwin!™ cri de couer, Obama has been called -- what? -- just about everything from fascist to socialist to communist and who knows what else (dictator? cosplayer?), often by the same group simultaneously. I mean, I'm fairly ignorant on such matters, but these are people who are apparently very politically engaged. It's quite frightening.
 
2012-06-24 03:29:20 AM

Guntram Shatterhand: The best (and most revealing) part of the painting is how the Constitution is used as a symbol instead of an actual document. Instead of reading it, the man holds it up like Peter Cushing would hold up a cross in a Hammer film. The words mean nothing, only the power inherited by the paper because....well, isn't important, isn't it? It's a stunning display of the ignorance that right-wingers hold now that they realize Christianity has been tarnished with pathetic bigotry: they don't realize that the Constitution's real power comes from what is written on it, but instead that it exists and therefore is somehow important. Notice that the Perfect Man there--complete in his casual workwear and glory--doesn't read it at all. He's off looking up while holding a few bucks. Without the pathetic pandering in the background, the main focus of the painting is insulting and very enlightening. Why is the man empowered? Is it because he uses the symbol of the Constitution? Is it because he has a few bucks in hand? He's not really that empowered if you look at him in the context of the painting.



Ya, he could just as well be holding up his little wad* with the Constitution gripped in his lowered hand. Interchangeable! But even better is that he's packing a concealed weapon: the Bible in his right[eous] pocket! I'd speculated earlier that it could be a bomb, but the painting's explanatory page indicates it's the other thing.

/ Hm, maybe there is something more to it, with the right and left. Constitution in raised right hand = good; dollars in his lowered left hand = bad? ... Nah, McNaughton's obviously way too fond of money.
* don't say it.
 
2012-06-24 03:31:14 AM

Jim_Callahan: I know Lincoln was there when the stuff ended and got some PR bonus points for dying in office, but frankly the north mostly won the war in spite of his administration, not because of.


I also like knowing that Lincoln should have had 21st century tactical knowledge. If you're going to blame him for not being as in-tune with what's happening on the front lines in the early 1860s as we are today, then you should also be giving him credit for, say, spreading the use of embalming. Revisionist history and all.

Seriously, "war" throughout the world was a major cluster fark. For crying out loud, World War I was trench warfare that lasted YEARS (but could have been won virtually overnight had there been faster advances in aviation if you want to get nitpicky [revisionist history and all]... WHY DIDN'T THE WRIGHT BROTHERS HIRE HENRY FORD TO PRODUCE PLANES ON A PRODUCTION LINE?!) and that was 50 years later than the Civil War. I mean, many battles and even wars have been won because of everything other than military strategy.

Clearly the history books often do not paint our former leaders in a negative light. Many were slaveowners, beat their women and children, or supported horrendous policies that put citizens and non-citizens in harm's way at home and abroad. Hell, just look at CURRENT/RECENT events, and the pass a prior President was given for atrocities committed under our national flag across the world.

Lincoln is remembered in a more positive light than he otherwise would have been due to his death (unless, as some suggest, he would have lived on and been able to rebuild the nation without a bone to pick with the south, as his successor certainly did), but he also went through something no other President has seen, and he did so before America became the "greatest country in the world."
 
2012-06-24 03:33:14 AM

King Something: Jonathan Hohensee: You appointed over thirty Czars without any Congressional oversight to control every aspect of the country.

And how many czars were installed by Reagan, Bush The Merely Okay, Clinton and Bush The Terrible?


Complaints about the whole czar thing are REALLY stupid. It goes back to Roosevelt. Though the practice does seem to be getting more popular.

Ronald Reagan R 1981-1989 - 1
George H. W. Bush R 1989-1993 - 2
Bill Clinton D 1993-2001 - 8
George W. Bush R 2001-2009 - 33
Barack Obama D 2009-? - 38
 
2012-06-24 03:45:10 AM

SouthernFriedYankee: So disagreeing with leftism makes one a troll, and eveything one says "derp."


No, it's the bolded word right there that makes you a derp-spouting troll.

That, and your username kinda gives it away.
 
2012-06-24 03:57:30 AM

Keizer_Ghidorah: [orrinjohnson.com image 500x667]

PRIME / HOT ROD for 2012

/till all are one


Now that's nice work.

(I'm at work, so I can't open the original link, nor view many of the in-thread images)
 
2012-06-24 04:19:30 AM

runcible spork: I admit I'm not a political wonk (thank goodness!) and also that Wikipedia isn't the best authority, but they seem to indicate that fascism is a type of corporatism.


Well, personally, I like to call it Authoritarian Capitalism, but that's the problem with a crowd-sourced information hub: Inconsistency.

The issue is that they are different systems describing different sectors of human organization. Corporatism proper is a socio-economic platform while Fascism is a socio-political ideology. There's some overlap, but it's more proper to say that Fascism likes to incorporate Corporatist policies, not the other way around.

This is something that people seem to misunderstand a lot -- the difference between political, economic and social systems and how they react to each other when working in concert. Democracy is a political system; its antagonist is Despotism. Capitalism is an economic system; its antagonist is Socialism. Communism is a social ideology; its antagonist is actually Anarchy. And so on.

Now, Capitalism can work under any political system, but it is actually happiest in a non-democratic society, preferably a benign dictatorship. It requires political stability -- a strong centralized government that won't get in its way -- and a compliant and orderly populace. The streets need to be calm, dissent must be discouraged, disorder repressed, little time must be wasted on politics, debates, elections and inefficient legislatures as these are a distraction from the real goal of making a pretty penny. The populace also need to understand that so long as they don't challenge the system, they will be free to amass wealth and pass it on to their children.

The only system in the history of mankind that really let Capitalism stretch its wings, test the fullest extent of its cold, methodical logic and let it run unimpeded through the world to horrifying extremes was Fascism. Capitalism was content under Hitler, happy under Mussolini, very happy under Franco and delirious under Pinochet.

Capitalism is good. Too much Capitalism is farking scary.
 
2012-06-24 04:30:20 AM

Ishkur:

Well, personally, I like to call it Authoritarian Capitalism, but that's the problem with a crowd-sourced information hub: Inconsistency.



Hmm, which is not exactly the same as democracy, or mob rule. But I'm wandering afield.

The issue is that they are different systems describing different sectors of human organization. Corporatism proper is a socio-economic platform while Fascism is a socio-political ideology. There's some overlap, but it's more proper to say that Fascism likes to incorporate Corporatist policies, not the other way around.

This is something that people seem to misunderstand a lot -- the difference between political, economic and social systems and how they react to each other when working in concert. Democracy is a political system; its antagonist is Despotism. Capitalism is an economic system; its antagonist is Socialism. Communism is a social ideology; its antagonist is actually Anarchy. And so on.

Now, Capitalism can work under any political system, but it is actually happiest in a non-democratic society, preferably a benign dictatorship. It requires political stability -- a strong centralized government that won't get in its way -- and a compliant and orderly populace. The streets need to be calm, dissent must be discouraged, disorder repressed, little time must be wasted on politics, debates, elections and inefficient legislatures as these are a distraction from the real goal of making a pretty penny. The populace also need to understand that so long as they don't challenge the system, they will be free to amass wealth and pass it on to their children.

The only system in the history of mankind that really let Capitalism stretch its wings, test the fullest extent of its cold, methodical logic and let it run unimpeded through the world to horrifying extremes was Fascism. Capitalism was content under Hitler, happy under Mussolini, very happy under Franco and delirious under Pinochet.


Which prompts the question, which economic system is most suited for a democracy?

Capitalism is good. Too much Capitalism is farking scary.

I can get behind that.

Thanks for the lecture (no sarcasm)!
 
2012-06-24 05:15:53 AM

runcible spork: Which prompts the question, which economic system is most suited for a democracy?


Syndicalism.

Understand that one thing Democracy has going for it that has never even been brought up in all the theorizing thought of all the systems in the past is general tolerance, dignity and respect for minority classes, to the point where most modern Democracies see it as an important political component to go out of their way to protect them. This is a completely new valueset in political theory, only come about due to the empowerment of women in the last century. All systems in the past reserved their theories for elites; there was always an exploitable and undesirable underclass forced to do the work that was too hazardous or difficult, for whom the enlightened ideologies did not apply.

This is why Capitalism does not like modern Democracy. It's not interested in human care, social issues, or the general health and well-being of the populace. Capitalism's goal is to amass capital, and it considers all things expendable -- including human life -- in pursuit of this aim. That makes it utterly and inhumanly amoral. People always seem to forget this: Capitalism has absolutely no ethical value. It will push its own mother into the street to pick up a nickel, but it will feed the poor for a tax writeoff.

Democracy did not start out this way. Early Democracies permitted slavery, profited off migrant cheap labor and sponsored aggressive mercantilism, and propped up a series of cruel, capitalist oligarchies that treated their own working classes like a dump truck full of dirt. There were no child labor laws, health regulations or safety standards. These things were not seriously addressed on a pertinent national until women began influencing democratic discourse.

And now that they are essential valuesets, Capitalism is struggling with this very uncomfortable partnership. The solution, then, is to cast it away and adopt a new economic platform more in line with the values of modern Democracy, where civility, care, health and well-being are the goals, not profit.

That might require a world war or two, however. Capitalism does not like going without a fight. And it has the resources to make one.
 
2012-06-24 05:26:33 AM
Ishkur:
Syndicalism.

[ ... ]



Crap. that all sounds a lot more difficult than snarking at a clumsy idealogue with dubious symbology. I'm hungry and tired, but it may be too late to go to sleep.
 
2012-06-24 05:54:04 AM
Samuel Morse would've probably loved this guy. Yes, that Samuel Morse.
 
2012-06-24 06:05:16 AM
jso2897

2012-06-23 10:18:27 PM
tony41454: I like it. Truth in oils.

Yeah - but you're f**ked up, and most people aren't like you.


Not as farked up as someone who would vote for an untested, untried, unvetted community organizer to run the United States. Now THAT'S farked up! And come this November you will see that most people ARE like me.
 
2012-06-24 06:12:32 AM
What do you call a radical liberal 100 years after he dies? A conservative....
 
2012-06-24 06:19:19 AM

tony41454: Not as farked up as someone who would vote for an untested, untried, unvetted community organizer to run the United States.


Remember: That untested, untried, unvetted community organizer was running against a 72 year old in ailing health who picked, as his running mate, an appallingly ignorant, delusional, and fundamentally unintelligent and unsophisticated moronic simpleton.
 
2012-06-24 06:35:12 AM
HeartBurnKid:
So what you're saying is, we should never elect Thomas Kinkade to higher office.

Given that he's dead, certainly not.
 
2012-06-24 06:51:42 AM
As I type, it's at post 420. Oddly appropriate.

Freedom of Speech, biatches. This is what it's about. It's about letting people have their say, even if it DOESN'T agree with your weltanschauung. Uh, no, actually, it's ESPECIALLY if it doesn't agree with your weltanschauung.

/ Haven't read any comments yet -- sitting around eating worms waiting with baited breath.
 
2012-06-24 07:04:11 AM
vygramul:
(Watermelons on the White House lawn, sent by Los Alamitos Mayor Dean Grose, in March 2009, a scant two months after Obama was inaugurated -- I'm sure they were just criticizing 3.5 years of bad policy decisions, though)

What is it with you morons? Do you share a single diseased brain? Finding a couple jackasses who don't like Obama, and are racist does not mean that everyone who doesn't like Obama is racist.

Along similar lines, Obama's approval rating started at 60%, and has now fallen to about 45%. According to you, that means that 15% of the electorate just noticed that Obama isn't white. To a racist, it's all about race.
 
2012-06-24 07:07:18 AM
Jon McNaughton is to David Dees as Glenn Beck is to Alex Jones.
 
2012-06-24 07:18:29 AM

tony41454: jso2897

2012-06-23 10:18:27 PM
tony41454: I like it. Truth in oils.

Yeah - but you're f**ked up, and most people aren't like you.

Not as farked up as someone who would vote for an untested, untried, unvetted community organizer to run the United States. Now THAT'S farked up! And come this November you will see that most people ARE like me.


You seriously think someone can receive the Presidential nomination of one of the major parties without having been vetted, by that party, as well as by the federal government itself?
 
2012-06-24 07:18:29 AM

tony41454: jso2897

2012-06-23 10:18:27 PM
tony41454: I like it. Truth in oils.

Yeah - but you're f**ked up, and most people aren't like you.

Not as farked up as someone who would vote for an untested, untried, unvetted community organizer to run the United States. Now THAT'S farked up! And come this November you will see that most people ARE like me.


Your post made me chuckle.
 
2012-06-24 07:18:36 AM
Tellingthem:
\I'm still looking for a good Clinton painting for my apartment

Here...

cigarmafia.webs.com
Former President Clinton and the First Humidor
 
2012-06-24 07:27:43 AM

GeneralJim: vygramul: (Watermelons on the White House lawn, sent by Los Alamitos Mayor Dean Grose, in March 2009, a scant two months after Obama was inaugurated -- I'm sure they were just criticizing 3.5 years of bad policy decisions, though)
What is it with you morons? Do you share a single diseased brain? Finding a couple jackasses who don't like Obama, and are racist does not mean that everyone who doesn't like Obama is racist.

Along similar lines, Obama's approval rating started at 60%, and has now fallen to about 45%. According to you, that means that 15% of the electorate just noticed that Obama isn't white. To a racist, it's all about race.


Don't be stupid. Pointing out a few of the obvious bigots who don't like Obama is not the same as saying that everyone who doesn't like Obama is a bigot.
 
2012-06-24 07:28:56 AM

Jorn the Younger: tony41454: jso2897

2012-06-23 10:18:27 PM
tony41454: I like it. Truth in oils.

Yeah - but you're f**ked up, and most people aren't like you.

Not as farked up as someone who would vote for an untested, untried, unvetted community organizer to run the United States. Now THAT'S farked up! And come this November you will see that most people ARE like me.

You seriously think someone can receive the Presidential nomination of one of the major parties without having been vetted, by that party, as well as by the federal government itself?


Here's the problem.
 
2012-06-24 07:36:54 AM
What do you people mean when you say that the President is "unvetted"?
 
2012-06-24 07:37:26 AM
I don't remember Obama having hands larger than his head, but the rest of the painting is photo realistic, so I'll have to give this patriot the benefit of the doubt.
 
2012-06-24 07:42:14 AM
runcible spork:
Criminy, even the strict constitutionalists in the Supreme Court and elsewhere understand that the document needs to be interpreted. Your copypasta is a black hole of derp which does not deserve to be dissected and thoroughly counterargued, even though it cries out for such treatment.

"Interpreted?" Okay, show me where first-term abortions are even mentioned in the Constitution.

And, the Second Amendment... Just how does ". . . the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed" mean that the government needs to closely regulate guns?

All too often, "interpreting the Constitution" means "getting around the Constitution." The Founders left VERY clear explanations of what they meant, just in case anyone wasn't clear after reading the Constitution, and Bill of Rights. A hint: The Second Amendment is NOT about hunting or self-defense.
 
2012-06-24 07:42:45 AM

Death_Poot: Go on, give me a rational, non emotional, non name calling explanation, without calling me racist, etc


That's a campaign poster. The painting in TFA is (supposed to be) a complex allegory.

One is simple and direct. The other is a programmatic nightmare that would embarrass the worst salon painters of the 19th century.

/generally speaking, art shouldn't need a long written explaination so you can understand what you're looking at
//unless it's Marcel Duchamp
 
2012-06-24 07:42:47 AM

ZipSplat: What do you people mean when you say that the President is "unvetted"?


You may not get an answer, as those informative chain emails don't generally include definitions. I think they imagine his name was picked out of a fish-bowl.
 
2012-06-24 07:47:18 AM

WhyteRaven74: Samuel Morse would've probably loved this guy. Yes, that Samuel Morse.


Morse was a better painter and a far crazier political crackpot than this guy.

Morse's masterpiece:

americangallery.files.wordpress.com
 
2012-06-24 07:47:56 AM
Death_Poot:
I just want to know, how is that any different from this, except for your political perspective:

[ttoes.files.wordpress.com image 640x909]

Go on, give me a rational, non emotional, non name calling explanation, without calling me racist, etc

The "Change" poster isn't art, it's GRAPHIC art. (NTTAWWT) Both are propaganda.
 
2012-06-24 07:50:23 AM

Death_Poot: "The paintings in question are indicative of the kind of person who has never ever thought about anything ever and has never cracked a book and doesn't care whether or not what he believes is true"

This is true for both sides..................tell a lie often enough, and it will be believed. We on both sides are being played for fools.


Granting that, the two works are still very different. The obama poster is simple electioneering. It says: "Look at me! I am the wise and beautiful Obama! Bask in my awesomeness, and vote for me!"
It's a pretty standard campaign poster.
The other belongs im one of those exibits of art by mad people. It is a bizarre pastiche of paranoid-schizophrenic imagery, that speaks to nothing but the artist's mental illness.
None of this says anything at all about the "sides" involved, and those who have tried to draw such inferences are either trolling you or being very foolish. This isn't about Democrats or Republicans - it's about a crazy painter.
All his works that I have seen have that same lurid, waking-nightmare sense of unwholesome presence, and the same paranoid symbolism. I get no political message from his work - only the virulence of his madness. It's not an issue of "content" - not to me, anyway.
 
2012-06-24 07:53:01 AM

St_Francis_P: ZipSplat: What do you people mean when you say that the President is "unvetted"?

You may not get an answer, as those informative chain emails don't generally include definitions. I think they imagine his name was picked out of a fish-bowl.


I have a feeling it means "David Axelrod didn't anticipate every possible conspiracy theory which could be fabricated about the President and prevent us from spreading them and feeling dumb after the fact. Therefore the President is 'unvetted'."
 
2012-06-24 08:11:16 AM

GeneralJim: The "Change" poster isn't art, it's GRAPHIC art. (NTTAWWT) Both are propaganda.


Grow up. They're both illustrations, which are arguably "art," if not "Art.".
 
2012-06-24 08:12:14 AM

GeneralJim: And, the Second Amendment... Just how does ". . . the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed" mean that the government needs to closely regulate guns?


Let me guess, you think background checks are unconstitutional right?
 
2012-06-24 08:13:08 AM

GeneralJim: Death_Poot: I just want to know, how is that any different from this, except for your political perspective:

[ttoes.files.wordpress.com image 640x909]

Go on, give me a rational, non emotional, non name calling explanation, without calling me racist, etc
The "Change" poster isn't art, it's GRAPHIC art. (NTTAWWT) Both are propaganda.


Isn't graphic art a form of art?

Never mind, look at who I'm talking to.
 
2012-06-24 08:15:50 AM
People who have their shiat together don't become professional artists. The skilled ones honed their craft during massive swaths of time granted to them by their unimportance.
 
2012-06-24 08:16:41 AM

runcible spork: GeneralJim: The "Change" poster isn't art, it's GRAPHIC art. (NTTAWWT) Both are propaganda.

Grow up. They're both illustrations, which are arguably "art," if not "Art.".


Funny thing about the Obama posters: Shepard Fairey created the image entirely on his own (if you know his work, it goes along with stuff he's been doing for decades), with no intention of it being a campaign poster. When the Obama people caught wind of it, they immediately asked if they could use it and Fairy said yes.

Fairey's recognized artist who's had museum and gallery shows, so the poster is actually a case of a "fine" artist's work being co-oped and used for commercial purposes.
 
2012-06-24 08:23:01 AM

Dwight_Yeast: Funny thing about the Obama posters: Shepard Fairey created the image entirely on his own (if you know his work, it goes along with stuff he's been doing for decades), with no intention of it being a campaign poster. When the Obama people caught wind of it, they immediately asked if they could use it and Fairey said yes.

Fairey's recognized artist who's had museum and gallery shows, so the poster is actually a case of a "fine" artist's work being co-oped and used for commercial purposes.



That's true, but I don't consider the bulk of what he does -- in and of itself -- to be beyond illustration or graphic art. The "art" element, for him, is in milieu and implementation. Ditto for Banksy and others. "Conceptual art" is just as critical a component of their work.
 
2012-06-24 08:23:32 AM

cman: I can't wait to see how this will be described as somehow racist. That will be fun to watch


Straw man.

From a purely technical standpoint, this is an illustration, not art. It contains no aesthetic value, nothing of interest in terms of color, light or brushwork. It could as easily have been stitched together in Photoshop, but the use of traditional painting technique gives it a veneer of respectability and uniqueness (ironic because the bulk of the profits from this painting will be made by selling reproductions). Frankly, the average romance novel cover illustrator could have done a better job.

McNaughton is a hack. That is the essence of his success.
 
2012-06-24 08:24:03 AM
It's a shame this guy is too much of a moron to put his skills to some interesting use. He's actually not half bad.
 
2012-06-24 08:30:06 AM

runcible spork: That's true, but I don't consider the bulk of what he does -- in and of itself -- to be beyond illustration or graphic art. The "art" element, for him, is in milieu and implementation. Ditto for Banksy and others. "Conceptual art" is just as critical a component of their work.


Street Art, like Performance Art, hoped create art without anything tangible left over that could be treated as a commodity. In both cases, this has failed miserably.

And Warhol's introduction of mass-production printing processes and graphic "Pop" art into the fine art world means that from a theoretical point of view, Fairey and Banksy's work is fine art, whether they want it to be or not.
 
2012-06-24 08:30:59 AM
Jorn the Younger:
You seriously think someone can receive the Presidential nomination of one of the major parties without having been vetted, by that party, as well as by the federal government itself?

Yes, yes I do.

Apparently, the press is the quasi-official vetting process for the Presidency. And, in 2008, they were essentially TOTALLY in the bag for Obama. As a single example, did you not note that a couple of months ago, more than three years into Obama's Presidency, news of his membership in the "Choom Gang" came out? With all the documentary evidence, including numerous pictures, which came out immediately after this announcement, which seems to indicate that the information had been collected, and not mentioned.

Hell, I had a Top Secret clearance, and before I got it, investigators talked to my elementary school teachers. Wouldn't you think Presidential candidates would have to go through the same process, AT A MINIMUM, since the President has a Way-the-fark-above-top-secret clearance?

And, how about that little gem from Indonesia in Obama's Occidental College transcript, showing little Barry Soetoro, the adopted son of Lolo Soetoro, to be a Muslim student of Indonesian citizenship? It would make sense that Lolo (which means "crazy" in Hawai'ian) would change his adopted son's citizenship along with his last name. Also, Indonesian schools only allow Indonesian citizens to attend.

Now, if his adopted father changed his citizenship to Indonesian, Obama could have regained American citizenship by simply filing a paper. There is no evidence that he did that. Further, there is no evidence that he changed his name back to his birth name. That would mean that a foreign citizen has usurped the Presidency under an assumed name. That's the kind of information that would come out of a thorough vetting process.

Now, it is possible that Lolo Soetoro lied on the school admissions forms, and Obama never was legally named Barry Soetoro, and never surrendered his citizenship. If he had been vetted, we would know the answer to whether his Indonesian citizenship and name were faked. But, as far as I know, nobody has searched the Indonesian records to see if he was naturalized. So, no, he wasn't vetted.

The form in question:

fellowshipofminds.files.wordpress.com


Discussion of it HERE.
 
2012-06-24 08:32:38 AM

ZipSplat: Also, speaking of stupid things Republicans do, why the fark has this picture been on Fark for like three months now?


I like to think of hot blonde chicks being Democrat values, but to each his own.
 
2012-06-24 08:35:43 AM

GeneralJim: Jorn the Younger: You seriously think someone can receive the Presidential nomination of one of the major parties without having been vetted, by that party, as well as by the federal government itself?
Yes, yes I do.

Apparently, the press is the quasi-official vetting process for the Presidency. And, in 2008, they were essentially TOTALLY in the bag for Obama. As a single example, did you not note that a couple of months ago, more than three years into Obama's Presidency, news of his membership in the "Choom Gang" came out? With all the documentary evidence, including numerous pictures, which came out immediately after this announcement, which seems to indicate that the information had been collected, and not mentioned.

Hell, I had a Top Secret clearance, and before I got it, investigators talked to my elementary school teachers. Wouldn't you think Presidential candidates would have to go through the same process, AT A MINIMUM, since the President has a Way-the-fark-above-top-secret clearance?

And, how about that little gem from Indonesia in Obama's Occidental College transcript, showing little Barry Soetoro, the adopted son of Lolo Soetoro, to be a Muslim student of Indonesian citizenship? It would make sense that Lolo (which means "crazy" in Hawai'ian) would change his adopted son's citizenship along with his last name. Also, Indonesian schools only allow Indonesian citizens to attend.

Now, if his adopted father changed his citizenship to Indonesian, Obama could have regained American citizenship by simply filing a paper. There is no evidence that he did that. Further, there is no evidence that he changed his name back to his birth name. That would mean that a foreign citizen has usurped the Presidency under an assumed name. That's the kind of information that would come out of a thorough vetting process.

Now, it is possible that Lolo Soetoro lied on the school admissions forms, and Obama never was legally named Barry Soetoro, and never surrendered ...


You're on the Derp Side of the Moon today aren't you?

How didn't I see this before?
 
2012-06-24 08:38:07 AM
You guys just had to pull GeneralJim's finger, didn't you?
 
2012-06-24 08:40:26 AM

St_Francis_P: You guys just had to pull GeneralJim's finger, didn't you?


Except when I pull GeneralJim's finger, I get something less enlightening than a fart.
 
2012-06-24 08:43:34 AM
jcooli09:
Don't be stupid. Pointing out a few of the obvious bigots who don't like Obama is not the same as saying that everyone who doesn't like Obama is a bigot.

Not in itself. But, look at the context of the post, and Viagrinal was saying just that. His post is HERE, and details a complicated conspiracy theory about how Republicans are racist because they claim that calling them racist if they don't like Obama doesn't make sense. Well, that's how I interpret the screed. But, I'm not a mental health professional, so if you want a definitive interpretation, find a professional.
 
2012-06-24 08:45:59 AM

Dwight_Yeast: runcible spork: That's true, but I don't consider the bulk of what he does -- in and of itself -- to be beyond illustration or graphic art. The "art" element, for him, is in milieu and implementation. Ditto for Banksy and others. "Conceptual art" is just as critical a component of their work.

Street Art, like Performance Art, hoped create art without anything tangible left over that could be treated as a commodity. In both cases, this has failed miserably.

And Warhol's introduction of mass-production printing processes and graphic "Pop" art into the fine art world means that from a theoretical point of view, Fairey and Banksy's work is fine art, whether they want it to be or not.



Or, more important, whether I want it to be or not.

Effing Warhola. *sigh* I dearly hope D Hirst represents the apotheosis and terminus of that conceit.
 
2012-06-24 08:47:50 AM
Dwight_Yeast:
/generally speaking, art shouldn't need a long written explaination so you can understand what you're looking at
//unless it's Marcel Duchamp

* SNERK * Nice, very nice.
 
2012-06-24 08:50:19 AM

HMS_Blinkin: RulerOfNone: Political tripe aside, this guy is a rather decent artist.

He might make realistic impressions of the people and things he's trying to depict in his painting, but that doesn't make him an artist. His work isn't challenging, it is, as you said, political tripe. And political tripe can never be art, as art can never be political tripe. Art can maybe, MAYBE, make a political statement, but it has to do so with some subtlety, and preferably in a way that challenges pre-conceived notions. This garbage only serves to reinforce pre-conceived notions.


You must love Guernica.
 
2012-06-24 08:52:17 AM

GeneralJim: Jorn the Younger: You seriously think someone can receive the Presidential nomination of one of the major parties without having been vetted, by that party, as well as by the federal government itself?
Yes, yes I do.
green derp redacted.


Link

Link

Birther screeds? Man you really need to take your pills jim.
 
2012-06-24 08:55:00 AM

GeneralJim: Jorn the Younger: You seriously think someone can receive the Presidential nomination of one of the major parties without having been vetted, by that party, as well as by the federal government itself?
Yes, yes I do.

Apparently, the press is the quasi-official vetting process for the Presidency. And, in 2008, they were essentially TOTALLY in the bag for Obama. As a single example, did you not note that a couple of months ago, more than three years into Obama's Presidency, news of his membership in the "Choom Gang" came out? With all the documentary evidence, including numerous pictures, which came out immediately after this announcement, which seems to indicate that the information had been collected, and not mentioned.

Hell, I had a Top Secret clearance, and before I got it, investigators talked to my elementary school teachers. Wouldn't you think Presidential candidates would have to go through the same process, AT A MINIMUM, since the President has a Way-the-fark-above-top-secret clearance?

And, how about that little gem from Indonesia in Obama's Occidental College transcript, showing little Barry Soetoro, the adopted son of Lolo Soetoro, to be a Muslim student of Indonesian citizenship? It would make sense that Lolo (which means "crazy" in Hawai'ian) would change his adopted son's citizenship along with his last name. Also, Indonesian schools only allow Indonesian citizens to attend.

Now, if his adopted father changed his citizenship to Indonesian, Obama could have regained American citizenship by simply filing a paper.

And here's where I stopped reading. A minor who is an American citizen does not lose or surrender their American citizenship because they have gained an additional citizenship through their parents.

I guess you can believe it if you want to, I'll be sitting over here laughing at you.

//Triple-citizen

 
2012-06-24 08:55:38 AM

Cataholic: HMS_Blinkin: RulerOfNone: Political tripe aside, this guy is a rather decent artist.

He might make realistic impressions of the people and things he's trying to depict in his painting, but that doesn't make him an artist. His work isn't challenging, it is, as you said, political tripe. And political tripe can never be art, as art can never be political tripe. Art can maybe, MAYBE, make a political statement, but it has to do so with some subtlety, and preferably in a way that challenges pre-conceived notions. This garbage only serves to reinforce pre-conceived notions.

You must love

Guernica.


Actually, I bet the word he was looking for is "pedestrian." Perhaps also [questionably] "functional."
 
2012-06-24 09:00:09 AM

GeneralJim: vygramul: (Watermelons on the White House lawn, sent by Los Alamitos Mayor Dean Grose, in March 2009, a scant two months after Obama was inaugurated -- I'm sure they were just criticizing 3.5 years of bad policy decisions, though)
What is it with you morons? Do you share a single diseased brain? Finding a couple jackasses who don't like Obama, and are racist does not mean that everyone who doesn't like Obama is racist.

Along similar lines, Obama's approval rating started at 60%, and has now fallen to about 45%. According to you, that means that 15% of the electorate just noticed that Obama isn't white. To a racist, it's all about race.


Your reading comprehension really approaches zero if you thinkthat the conclusion of that post is that you're all racists.

What an amazing farktard you are.
 
2012-06-24 09:01:05 AM

Death_Poot: I just want to know, how is that any different from this, except for your political perspective:

[ttoes.files.wordpress.com image 640x909]

Go on, give me a rational, non emotional, non name calling explanation, without calling me racist, etc


One is advocating a presidential candidate. The other is accusatory, pandering, historically specious, simplistic, leading, divisive, and downright nonsensical; not to mention poorly executed and amateurish, lacking any notable display of skill or understanding of contrast, perspective, anatomy, shadow, or light and color.
 
2012-06-24 09:02:11 AM

runcible spork: Effing Warhola. *sigh* I dearly hope D Hirst represents the apotheosis and terminus of that conceit.


My money is on Hirst being the Bouguereau of our age. He was the first artist to see his work sell at auction for $1 million, and it took until the 1980s for his work to reach that mark again.
 
2012-06-24 09:10:29 AM

Death_Poot: I just want to know, how is that any different from this, except for your political perspective:

[ttoes.files.wordpress.com image 640x909]

Go on, give me a rational, non emotional, non name calling explanation, without calling me racist, etc


One is a tool that is used to further a radical political agenda.

The other is a campaign poster.
 
2012-06-24 09:11:30 AM

jcooli09: GeneralJim: vygramul: (Watermelons on the White House lawn, sent by Los Alamitos Mayor Dean Grose, in March 2009, a scant two months after Obama was inaugurated -- I'm sure they were just criticizing 3.5 years of bad policy decisions, though)
What is it with you morons? Do you share a single diseased brain? Finding a couple jackasses who don't like Obama, and are racist does not mean that everyone who doesn't like Obama is racist.

Along similar lines, Obama's approval rating started at 60%, and has now fallen to about 45%. According to you, that means that 15% of the electorate just noticed that Obama isn't white. To a racist, it's all about race.

Don't be stupid. Pointing out a few of the obvious bigots who don't like Obama is not the same as saying that everyone who doesn't like Obama is a bigot.


The
"It must be racism, what's not to like about Obama's policies' theme is well established as a Democratic party campaign theme and among liberal farkers.

Truth is, Obama is losing the constitutional challenges. Obama said a couple years ago that he couldnt offer amnesty to a million illegal immigrants because its against the law. Now he doesnt care, because when SCOTUS strikes it down, he scores big points with Latino voters in an election year. Even the liberal justices are going against him. Example: 9-0 decision against EEOC in a lawsuit attacking a church's employment practices.
 
2012-06-24 09:12:30 AM

vygramul: What an amazing farktard you are.


Don't engage him.
 
2012-06-24 09:13:01 AM

Animatronik: Truth is, Obama is losing the constitutional challenges. Obama said a couple years ago that he couldnt offer amnesty to a million illegal immigrants because its against the law. Now he doesnt care, because when SCOTUS strikes it down, he scores big points with Latino voters in an election year. Even the liberal justices are going against him. Example: 9-0 decision against EEOC in a lawsuit attacking a church's employment practices.


Yeah that Hannity clip only showed half of what Obama was saying. FOX News tends to be dishonest like that.
 
2012-06-24 09:13:57 AM

GeneralJim: Now, if his adopted father changed his citizenship to Indonesian, Obama could have regained American citizenship by simply filing a paper. There is no evidence that he did that. Further, there is no evidence that he changed his name back to his birth name. That would mean that a foreign citizen has usurped the Presidency under an assumed name. That's the kind of information that would come out of a thorough vetting process.

Now, it is possible that Lolo Soetoro lied on the school admissions forms, and Obama never was legally named Barry Soetoro, and never surrendered his citizenship. If he had been vetted, we would know the answer to whether his Indonesian citizenship and name were faked. But, as far as I know, nobody has searched the Indonesian records to see if he was naturalized. So, no, he wasn't vetted.


Ok, I read the rest of it (wanted a chuckle). Would you be able to provide a link to the documentation of Barack Obama changing his name to Barry Soetoro within the American system? Do you have a copy of his social security card with that name, or anything like that?

Also, I enjoy that you shamelessly reveal your position that because nobody flagged you down and told you about something, it can't possibly have happened.

Obama wasn't just vetted by the Democrats and by the Feds, you moron, he was vetted by the Republicans as well. If there were _any_ truth to any of this bullshiat, McCain would have brought it up during the election. Or would you assert that McCain, and his entire campaign staff, were in on the conspiracy?

So why didn't this "truth" come out before? I'd assume because it took this long for the "intrepid investigator" who "discovered" it to get a cracked copy of photoshop to work.

And so you know, I'm not the only one laughing at you. The assholes who feeding you this bullshiat are laughing at you too. They can't get over how eagerly you eat this shiat up.
 
2012-06-24 09:16:13 AM

Animatronik: The
"It must be racism, what's not to like about Obama's policies' theme is well established as a Democratic party campaign theme and among liberal farkers.


Yes dear, we see you up on that cross. Now get down and let everyone else have a turn too.

I don't think critics of Obama are racist. But when they keep insisting that he's a Kenyan/Indonesian muslim usurper who hates anyone not black, how the hell am I not supposed to view that in a racist way?

That said, most critics aren't racist. They may be idiots when they insists that he's a radical leftist, communist, socialist, fascist...but they're not racists for the most part.
 
2012-06-24 09:16:32 AM

LincolnLogolas: Dougie AXP: Is it me or does Obama not look so much frightened as he does "oh look out we got a badass over here.

[i601.photobucket.com image 528x424]

You're welcome


+1 well done
 
2012-06-24 09:18:51 AM

Mrtraveler01: Animatronik: The
"It must be racism, what's not to like about Obama's policies' theme is well established as a Democratic party campaign theme and among liberal farkers.

Yes dear, we see you up on that cross. Now get down and let everyone else have a turn too.

I don't think critics of Obama are racist. But when they keep insisting that he's a Kenyan/Indonesian muslim usurper who hates anyone not black, how the hell am I not supposed to view that in a racist way?

That said, most critics aren't racist. They may be idiots when they insists that he's a radical leftist, communist, socialist, fascist...but they're not racists for the most part.


That's not fair, half of Obama's critics are thoughtful, intelligent, reasonable people, who critique his policy positions, and provide support for their arguments.

//Most of them are critizing him from his Left, but still
 
2012-06-24 09:19:33 AM

wildcardjack: "Someone please tell me he's waving a copy from the museum shop and not the real thing. It shouldn't be touched with bare hands."


Yeah, this is to me what Obama (with his giant Play-doh hands) looks like he's trying to communicate. "Woah, woah, buddy, be careful with that! It's an important historical document!" The presidents behind Obama are sighing and thinking, "It's too late; it's already been tainted," while Lincoln, et al., are laughing it up because they've always hated the Constitution anyway. Or something.

/not sure I'm getting the artist's intent quite right
 
2012-06-24 09:19:59 AM

runcible spork: [www.speakinggump.com image 640x847]

Ya, as Garble and Hobodeluxe noted, he's going for a neocon Norman Rockwell vibe, but is appropriately fuddled and befuddled. His rendering skills put Kinkade to shame, but make N Rockwell look like a Michelangelo.(and I'm not to keen on Rockwell's oeuvre).

That cargo pocket is big enough to hold a bomb.

/ almost said "corpus"
// I always feel like someone's watching me.


I'm not a huge fan of Rockwell either but I agree that anyone who tries and compares these two is an idiot.
 
2012-06-24 09:21:56 AM
This guy isn't big on subtlety, is he?
 
2012-06-24 09:25:17 AM

Tommy Moo: This guy isn't big on subtlety, is he?


It's time to go on the attack against socialism and the Kenyan usurper; but mainly, time to cash in shamelessly on confused and stupid people.
 
2012-06-24 09:26:32 AM
Oh, grrr! I responded to this much earlier but apparently forgot to do the double-submission thing. Probably not worth re-creating it, seeing what kind of Farkommenter you are, but it should only take a couple of minutes, so why not?

GeneralJim: runcible spork: Criminy, even the strict constitutionalists in the Supreme Court and elsewhere understand that the document needs to be interpreted. Your copypasta is a black hole of derp which does not deserve to be dissected and thoroughly counterargued, even though it cries out for such treatment.

"Interpreted?" Okay, show me where first-term abortions are even mentioned in the Constitution.



Why don't you show me where the Constitution mentions abortion of any sort? Do you mean to suggest that government shouldn't have anything to say about abortion in general, because I wonder how that squares with your views. Or, show me where the Constitution indicates how to account for such "unborn citizens." If a slave was three-fifths of a citizen, how should one calculate the proportional personhood of a fetus? How about where it explicitly says that "life" begins when sperm meets ovum?

And, the Second Amendment... Just how does ". . . the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed" mean that the government needs to closely regulate guns?

Because "arms" is open to interpretation.

All too often, "interpreting the Constitution" means "getting around the Constitution." The Founders left VERY clear explanations of what they meant, just in case anyone wasn't clear after reading the Constitution, and Bill of Rights. A hint: The Second Amendment is NOT about hunting or self-defense.

Maybe something about a militia? They weren't very clear about that.

Can you honestly assert that Roberts, Scalia & Co. are not what's commonly called "activist judges" (and by extension, hypocrites), especially after rulings such as Citizens United?

Are you also suggesting that the rich and venerable field of Constitutional scholarship is unnecessary because the Constitution functions essentially as a cookbook for government? Do you think that the framers were so shortsighted so as to be unaware that the world -- technology, medicine, religious dogma, social mores, et cetera -- would not change in the years after the adoption of the founding document? That amendments would be necessary for every new wrinkle?
 
2012-06-24 09:28:36 AM

The Great EZE: Death_Poot: I just want to know, how is that any different from this, except for your political perspective:

[ttoes.files.wordpress.com image 640x909]

Go on, give me a rational, non emotional, non name calling explanation, without calling me racist, etc

It's the same as the difference between a 99 cent hamburger from McDonald's and one of those 5-pound bacon and cheese smothered behemoth burgers from the place where the waitresses dress like nurses.


If you tell me where this place is, you will risk my full wrath.
 
2012-06-24 09:28:45 AM

Animatronik: The
"It must be racism, what's not to like about Obama's policies' theme is well established as a Democratic party campaign theme and among liberal farkers.

Truth is, Obama is losing the constitutional challenges. Obama said a couple years ago that he couldnt offer amnesty to a million illegal immigrants because its against the law. Now he doesnt care, because when SCOTUS strikes it down, he scores big points with Latino voters in an election year. Even the liberal justices are going against him. Example: 9-0 decision against EEOC in a lawsuit attacking a church's employment practices.


OK, first off, he's not giving these people amnesty, he's only directed DHS to stop processing deportations on the people in question. It's something that could easily be changed if/when a new President is elected (unless it's changed legislatively, such as the DREAM Act). I'm sorry you don't realize this (as it doesn't make for as strong an attack against the President), but there is no actual amnesty being given at this time.

And after reading the info about that EEOC case, I believe that many of the so-called 'liberal' justices agreed with the decision based on a narrow ruling (i.e. it will only come into play in a very narrow set of circumstances). However, knowing that the Roberts court has been about very broad applications of law, I'm sure that if a church in the future decides to place a wide swath of employment positions under the 'ministerial exception' rule, and another case is brought to them based on that, the SCOTUS will be more than happy to take the original narrow ruling and open it wide enough to pass a supertanker through it.
 
2012-06-24 09:28:50 AM

Tommy Moo: This guy isn't big on subtlety, is he?



Whom? McNaughton, GeneralJim ... (stretching back now) ... Death_Poot?
 
2012-06-24 09:30:40 AM
I very much wanted to take his previous masterpiece wherein "President" Fartbongo is setting fire to the Constitution and replace his hands with oversized foam hand and/or the Hamburger Helper mascot, but my ancient copy of Photoshop is not cooperating with me this morning.
 
2012-06-24 09:33:01 AM

Lsherm: I Browse: My rebuttal:


[celebrity-photos.elliottback.com image 450x577]

Meh, there have been better (evoking Kennedy):

[img171.imageshack.us image 509x639]

Still the same idea, though: ideals through bad art. Example 1:

[img205.imageshack.us image 300x449]

For all the idiots glomming onto this guy's paintings, 50 million more looked at that and thought Obama was going to "change the world."

Idiots abound.


Well he changed things for young latino immigrants and gay people. Also, change/improved the US's reputation around the world. The world has changed dramatically also. The real idiots (Conservatives) feared Obama was going to change things much more. They had more faith in the slogan than Liberals..
 
2012-06-24 09:37:43 AM

GeneralJim: Jorn the Younger: You seriously think someone can receive the Presidential nomination of one of the major parties without having been vetted, by that party, as well as by the federal government itself?
Yes, yes I do.

Apparently, the press is the quasi-official vetting process for the Presidency. And, in 2008, they were essentially TOTALLY in the bag for Obama. As a single example, did you not note that a couple of months ago, more than three years into Obama's Presidency, news of his membership in the "Choom Gang" came out? With all the documentary evidence, including numerous pictures, which came out immediately after this announcement, which seems to indicate that the information had been collected, and not mentioned.

Hell, I had a Top Secret clearance, and before I got it, investigators talked to my elementary school teachers. Wouldn't you think Presidential candidates would have to go through the same process, AT A MINIMUM, since the President has a Way-the-fark-above-top-secret clearance?

And, how about that little gem from Indonesia in Obama's Occidental College transcript, showing little Barry Soetoro, the adopted son of Lolo Soetoro, to be a Muslim student of Indonesian citizenship? It would make sense that Lolo (which means "crazy" in Hawai'ian) would change his adopted son's citizenship along with his last name. Also, Indonesian schools only allow Indonesian citizens to attend.

Now, if his adopted father changed his citizenship to Indonesian, Obama could have regained American citizenship by simply filing a paper. There is no evidence that he did that. Further, there is no evidence that he changed his name back to his birth name. That would mean that a foreign citizen has usurped the Presidency under an assumed name. That's the kind of information that would come out of a thorough vetting process.

Now, it is possible that Lolo Soetoro lied on the school admissions forms, and Obama never was legally named Barry Soetoro, and never surrendered ...


I guess Top Secret clearances don't have any basic intelligence requirements.

/people with TS don't typically advertise it
 
2012-06-24 09:43:19 AM

mrshowrules: The Great EZE: Death_Poot: I just want to know, how is that any different from this, except for your political perspective:

[ttoes.files.wordpress.com image 640x909]

Go on, give me a rational, non emotional, non name calling explanation, without calling me racist, etc

It's the same as the difference between a 99 cent hamburger from McDonald's and one of those 5-pound bacon and cheese smothered behemoth burgers from the place where the waitresses dress like nurses.

If you don't tell me where this place is, you will risk my full wrath.


FTFM
 
2012-06-24 09:45:00 AM

Jorn the Younger: That's not fair, half of Obama's critics are thoughtful, intelligent, reasonable people, who critique his policy positions, and provide support for their arguments.

//Most of them are critizing him from his Left, but still



Hee-hee!
 
2012-06-24 09:48:04 AM

Dwight_Yeast: runcible spork: Effing Warhola. *sigh* I dearly hope D Hirst represents the apotheosis and terminus of that conceit.

My money is on Hirst being the Bouguereau of our age. He was the first artist to see his work sell at auction for $1 million, and it took until the 1980s for his work to reach that mark again.



Ugh. The thought of a Hirst revival.
 
2012-06-24 09:51:35 AM

ZipSplat: why the fark has this picture been on Fark for like three months now?


I don't mind looking at it day in and day out. Seriously - smiling pretty girl, well-done tat - you could do worse. It's way better than the semi-retarded indignant red trucker-cap teabagger guy. I'm kinda glad he's disappeared from the main page.
 
2012-06-24 09:57:52 AM

runcible spork: Dwight_Yeast: runcible spork: Effing Warhola. *sigh* I dearly hope D Hirst represents the apotheosis and terminus of that conceit.

My money is on Hirst being the Bouguereau of our age. He was the first artist to see his work sell at auction for $1 million, and it took until the 1980s for his work to reach that mark again.

Ugh. The thought of a Hirst revival.


Eh, we'll be dead long before it happens. I recently read a history of one of the lesser New York auction houses, written in the 1960s, and the author makes a great deal out of the fact that there were a whole raft of popular late 19th artists whose work was basically unsalable by the 1930s. Most of them are still forgotten. Bouguereau gets something of a pass in my book, as he was amazingly talented as a painter. Sadly, he used those talents for evil instead of good.
 
2012-06-24 10:02:19 AM
Boy howdy did this thread attract all the D-grade trolls.
 
2012-06-24 10:03:07 AM

SouthernFriedYankee: intelligent comment below: Oh great, another Fark Independent "Both sides are bad" troll

So disagreeing with leftism makes one a troll, and eveything one says "derp."

Ok. As long as I understand your logic, and your debate skills.

I will offer concrete facts to support my position, thankyouverymuch:

Estonia I

Estonia II

Estonia III

I wish I had another example than this one country, but unfortunately, everyone else is trying the same old Keynesian stuff which is not going to work. When another country decides to get a clue, I'll let you know. You won't listen, I imagine, but I'll still let you know.


So your single example is Estonia? It has a population of around 1.3 million. More people and born and die in the US every year than Estonia has total citizens. It has an economy smaller than a number of our states. The GDP of Washington, DC, with a population about half the size, is about ten times as large.

Oh, and from Wikipedia:

Between 2007 and 2013, Estonia receives 53.3 billion kroons (3.4 billion euros) from various European Union Structural Funds as direct supports by creating the largest foreign investments into Estonia ever.[147] Majority of the European Union financial aid will be invested into to the following fields: energy economies, entrepreneurship, administrative capability, education, information society, environment protection, regional and local development, research and development activities, healthcare and welfare, transportation and labour market.[148]

They received massive external investment in the time period during which they supposedly achieved stunning economic success due to cutting government spending.

Your argument is crap.
 
2012-06-24 10:04:34 AM
His "everyman" looks like Bill Gates with contact lenses.


cman: I can't wait to see how this will be described as somehow racist. That will be fun to watch


Aw, punkin. You try so very hard, don't you? And all you've got to show for it is a bowl of soggy cereal.
 
2012-06-24 10:04:36 AM

Ishkur: Syndicalism.


Damn you. Now I want to play Kaiserreich.
 
2012-06-24 10:08:52 AM

Dwight_Yeast: runcible spork: Dwight_Yeast: runcible spork: Effing Warhola. *sigh* I dearly hope D Hirst represents the apotheosis and terminus of that conceit.

My money is on Hirst being the Bouguereau of our age. He was the first artist to see his work sell at auction for $1 million, and it took until the 1980s for his work to reach that mark again.

Ugh. The thought of a Hirst revival.

Eh, we'll be dead long before it happens. I recently read a history of one of the lesser New York auction houses, written in the 1960s, and the author makes a great deal out of the fact that there were a whole raft of popular late 19th artists whose work was basically unsalable by the 1930s. Most of them are still forgotten. Bouguereau gets something of a pass in my book, as he was amazingly talented as a painter. Sadly, he used those talents for evil instead of good.



Mayyyyyyybe if his will stipulates that his body be placed in a vitrine filled with formaldehyde..."The Physical Impossibility of Life in the Body of Someone Dead"?.

And yes, Bouguereau is very good technically.
 
2012-06-24 10:09:09 AM
Good painter, Though he didn't get Bamas ears near big enough
 
2012-06-24 10:21:52 AM

LoneWolf343: That picture one is iconic. This isn't. Observe it's simplicity in comparison to the maelstrom of "symbolism" in the more conservative paintings. These paintings are noisy in their subject matter, dreary in their color schemes. The morass of elements in these paintings mix together into a bland sea of grey. The Change poster is stark, high-contrast, and yet deep in emotion.


You know what, you're ridiculously onto something. I knew that style evicted something, but couldn't quite put my finger on it until you made this comment.

www.marxists.org
www.marxists.org
www.mcnaughtonart.com

Links be hawt yo.
 
2012-06-24 10:25:11 AM

Ishkur: runcible spork: Which prompts the question, which economic system is most suited for a democracy?

Syndicalism.



rufustaylor.co.uk

I always thought they were saying Anarcho-Cynicalist
 
2012-06-24 10:35:48 AM

GeneralJim: DERRRRP


Still farkin' that "American citizenship law is subordinate to Indonesian citizenship law on American soil" chicken, eh?

Because last I checked, parents cannot ever renounce American citizenship on behalf of their minor children -- not even sovereign-to-themselves almighty Indonesian citizens (8 USC S1481), American citizenship law allows for dual nationality and dual citizenship (upon which is no Constitutional barrier hinged to serving as president), and so does Indonesian citizenship law for minor children.

So even if everything you just said happened to be the complete, whole truth (which it isn't in the first place), Obama was still eligible to run, and eligible to serve, as President.
 
2012-06-24 10:41:31 AM

Mrtraveler01: zerkalo: Fun fact: Putin is seen in the background of "Wake up America", applauding. Yeah, I'm sure that reflects reality right now

In case you didn't know, I was being sarcastic

I'm pretty liberal (especially by the standards where I live), and I love this guys artwork.

I don't think there is anything else as campy as the brilliant pieces this deranged nut has been able to entertain ourselves with.

I wonder if the guy knows that he's a laughing stock of the art community and the community as a whole outside of the insular Conservative/Tea Party groupthink?


I can support this. Its like he's the Art Frahm* of politics. Warning link slightly NSFW. And celery.

Art Frahm was a marginally talented artist who kept recycling the same incomprehensible tropes in his paintings in the 1950s, which when viewed snarkily later have a certain charm to them. Which I suspect McLaughlin's will have in years to come. Because they're incomprehensible and weird and show single-minded dedication... once the subject matter fades, there's much campy humor to be had.
 
2012-06-24 10:44:09 AM
Let's see what happens when I drop this in here:

pics.livejournal.com
 
2012-06-24 10:44:23 AM

Generation_D: Its like he's the Art Frahm* of politics.


I'd say he's more like the Rob Liefeld of politics. Crass, exploitative "art" that completely ignore reality in favor of fueling adolescent-minded fantasy.

At least McNaughton can draw feet.
 
2012-06-24 10:44:54 AM
I love how they show Lincoln applauding while he's the one who suspended haebeus corpus, moved us to fiat currency, and violently put down the Confederate rebellion these assholes jerk off to. He should be on the other side, but Republicans have Reagan and what they imagine the founding fathers to be like as the only presidents who are on the side they think they are on.
 
2012-06-24 10:46:28 AM
Oh and Washington violently put down a tax rebellion too. It's too funny watching these tards invent history and shoehorn folks into their stupid fake libertarian philosophy.
 
2012-06-24 10:49:28 AM

Animatronik: jcooli09: GeneralJim: vygramul: (Watermelons on the White House lawn, sent by Los Alamitos Mayor Dean Grose, in March 2009, a scant two months after Obama was inaugurated -- I'm sure they were just criticizing 3.5 years of bad policy decisions, though)
What is it with you morons? Do you share a single diseased brain? Finding a couple jackasses who don't like Obama, and are racist does not mean that everyone who doesn't like Obama is racist.

Along similar lines, Obama's approval rating started at 60%, and has now fallen to about 45%. According to you, that means that 15% of the electorate just noticed that Obama isn't white. To a racist, it's all about race.

Don't be stupid. Pointing out a few of the obvious bigots who don't like Obama is not the same as saying that everyone who doesn't like Obama is a bigot.

The
"It must be racism, what's not to like about Obama's policies' theme is well established as a Democratic party campaign theme and among liberal farkers.


only after Republicans refused to admit anything like Obamabucks was racist. Do YOU think the Obamabucks pic is racist?

Obama said a couple years ago that he couldnt offer amnesty to a million illegal immigrants because its against the law.

See, this is where FOXNews has you fooled. And even though I can prove it, it won't change your mind. Why? For the same reason God doesn't bother letting a dead man go back to earth and warn his brothers. They simply won't believe him.


The FULL clip of Obama has him saying the exact opposite of what you were shown on TV.
 
2012-06-24 10:54:36 AM

PC LOAD LETTER: Oh and Washington violently put down a tax rebellion too. It's too funny watching these tards invent history and shoehorn folks into their stupid fake libertarian philosophy.


And Washington put down the Whiskey Rebellion specifically to drive home the point that the Federal government has the right to impose taxes.
 
2012-06-24 10:59:32 AM

Zeno-25: [i.imgur.com image 640x420]

full size


THAT, I think, is one of the finest creative representations in the political realm I've ever seen. I know it's a few years old, but it's still amazingly potent.

You could easily replace Dumbya with Obama at this stage in the game. Which makes it all the more depressing, to me.

We are getting so farking played.
 
2012-06-24 11:00:49 AM

Dwight_Yeast: PC LOAD LETTER: Oh and Washington violently put down a tax rebellion too. It's too funny watching these tards invent history and shoehorn folks into their stupid fake libertarian philosophy.

And Washington put down the Whiskey Rebellion specifically to drive home the point that the Federal government has the right to impose taxes.


And Washington himself distilled whiskey! Its almost like he didn't want the competition. Whar Whiskey Tax Whar!!!!
 
2012-06-24 11:16:11 AM

PC LOAD LETTER: Oh and Washington violently put down a tax rebellion too. It's too funny watching these tards invent history and shoehorn folks into their stupid fake libertarian philosophy.


Bzzt. Wrong. The federal government ran on prayer and heterosexuality back then, so money wasn't necessary. Plus, your average citizen could schedule a face-to-face meeting with Washington if he wanted. Now that's small government!
 
2012-06-24 11:16:24 AM

technicolor-misfit: Bravo, to that dashing young Aryan!

[24.media.tumblr.com image 500x281]

Beaten down, chained, seemingly crushed beyond repair... only to rise up victorious?

That's quite a triumph of the will.


Now that you mention it he kind of reminds me of the Nazi youth singing "Tomorrow Belongs To Me" in Cabaret.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bs5bnVoZK4Q

What the Rebublicans need is more sing alongs.
 
2012-06-24 11:20:53 AM

PC LOAD LETTER: I love how they show Lincoln applauding while he's the one who suspended haebeus corpus, moved us to fiat currency, and violently put down the Confederate rebellion these assholes jerk off to. He should be on the other side, but Republicans have Reagan and what they imagine the founding fathers to be like as the only presidents who are on the side they think they are on.


It actually does make sense: the Republicans have shown that all of the things they trumpet mean nothing. They just want their side to win despite not being able to define what 'their' side is outside of a few grunts.
 
2012-06-24 11:22:39 AM

phenn: Zeno-25: [i.imgur.com image 640x420]

full size

THAT, I think, is one of the finest creative representations in the political realm I've ever seen. I know it's a few years old, but it's still amazingly potent.

You could easily replace Dumbya with Obama at this stage in the game. Which makes it all the more depressing, to me.

We are getting so farking played.


Really? I think it's just as kitschy and over-the-top as the "art" of the moran in the article.

And seriously, let's stop with this silly false equivalence. I'm sorry Obama hasn't dismantled the military industrial complex, but we all know that his administration has been vastly different from a hypothetical 3rd term of Bush.
 
2012-06-24 11:24:17 AM
intelligent comment below 2012-06-23 07:21:20 PM



But the angles they use for their hate are because he's black.

He's a Muslim

He wasn't born in America

He was radicalized in an Indonesian SINGAPORE Madrassa



hey there didja forget that one?
 
2012-06-24 11:37:19 AM

The Name: phenn: Zeno-25: [i.imgur.com image 640x420]

full size

THAT, I think, is one of the finest creative representations in the political realm I've ever seen. I know it's a few years old, but it's still amazingly potent.

You could easily replace Dumbya with Obama at this stage in the game. Which makes it all the more depressing, to me.

We are getting so farking played.

Really? I think it's just as kitschy and over-the-top as the "art" of the moran in the article.

And seriously, let's stop with this silly false equivalence. I'm sorry Obama hasn't dismantled the military industrial complex, but we all know that his administration has been vastly different from a hypothetical 3rd term of Bush.


Personally, I didn't find it to be kitschy. I found it to be a rather accurate illustration.

So far as the third term of Bush is concerned, I honestly believe we are living it. Drones. Kill lists. No Habeas Corpus. No Quo Warranto. Rendition. etc.

Honestly, nothing's changed. Except, perhaps, the speed by which our government is doing dreadful shiat.
 
2012-06-24 11:49:38 AM
You ever notice Republicans are overwhelmingly old, white, fat and male?

Yeah.
 
2012-06-24 11:53:54 AM

God-is-a-Taco: Tellingthem:
\I'm still looking for a good Clinton painting for my apartment

[oi45.tinypic.com image 351x614]


So much win.

Anyone know where one could purchase that in poster form?
 
2012-06-24 11:56:07 AM

Lsherm: I Browse: My rebuttal:


[celebrity-photos.elliottback.com image 450x577]

Meh, there have been better (evoking Kennedy):

[img171.imageshack.us image 509x639]

Still the same idea, though: ideals through bad art. Example 1:

[img205.imageshack.us image 300x449]

For all the idiots glomming onto this guy's paintings, 50 million more looked at that and thought Obama was going to "change the world."

Idiots abound.


My point exactly.............................
 
2012-06-24 11:56:10 AM
This is just more proof that Republicans will willingly sink this ship so they can drown our captain.
 
2012-06-24 12:06:30 PM

mrshowrules: I guess Top Secret clearances don't have any basic intelligence requirements.

/people with TS don't typically advertise it


I had a TS//SCI, I still maintain a Secret. It's not a big deal. There are entire forums for people with TS clearances to talk about job prospects, maintaining their clearance, etc. I put it on resumes that I send out into the ether for postings on craigslist.

It's really not a big deal.
 
2012-06-24 12:11:43 PM

Death_Poot: I just want to know, how is that any different from this, except for your political perspective:



Go on, give me a rational, non emotional, non name calling explanation, without calling me racist, etc


The "Change" picture doesn't make any specific accusations about the other party, for one.
 
2012-06-24 12:12:24 PM

tony41454: jso2897

2012-06-23 10:18:27 PM
tony41454: I like it. Truth in oils.

Yeah - but you're f**ked up, and most people aren't like you.

Not as farked up as someone who would vote for an untested, untried, unvetted community organizer to run the United States. Now THAT'S farked up! And come this November you will see that most people ARE like me.


You should go back to praising Ted Nugent for issuing death threats, at least you were honest with your unhinged hatred for Obama then.
 
2012-06-24 12:13:45 PM

gimmegimme: Fista-Phobia: So lack of pic posting leads to alts.

images2.wikia.nocookie.net

Alts lead to confusion...

Confusion leads to fear...

Fear leads to erectile dysfunction...

Erectile dysfunction is the path to the dark side.


Don't be an Alt
 
2012-06-24 12:21:01 PM

Descartes: I like to think of hot blonde chicks being Democrat values, but to each his own.


Fuggin Bizzy: I don't mind looking at it day in and day out. Seriously - smiling pretty girl, well-done tat - you could do worse. It's way better than the semi-retarded indignant red trucker-cap teabagger guy. I'm kinda glad he's disappeared from the main page.


It's less about a blonde woman, more about stagnant content. It's super-annoying to go to some newspaper website and see old-ass generic appeal human interest/celebrity gossip stories on some rotation for months on end in their "You might also like..." spot.

Now Fark, care of UPI, is doing that.
 
2012-06-24 12:24:05 PM

King Something: Jonathan Hohensee: You signed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act

It didn't work because it was hamstrung by Senate Republicans. Had it been as strong as economists said it needed to be in order to work, the GOP would have killed it by filibuster because f*ck Obama.

Jonathan Hohensee: You signed the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act into law

Most of the people who oppose "Obamacare" only oppose the "Obama" part and are in favor of its provisions, such as being able to keep your kids on your health plan until they turn 26 and not having coverage deined due to pre-existing conditions.

Jonathan Hohensee: You appointed over thirty Czars without any Congressional oversight to control every aspect of the country.

And how many czars were installed by Reagan, Bush The Merely Okay, Clinton and Bush The Terrible?

Jonathan Hohensee: You intervened in the troubled automotive industry, renewing loans for General Motors and Chrysler Corporation to continue operations while reorganizing. Over the following months the White House set terms for both firms' bankruptcies, including reorganization of GM giving the U.S. government a temporary 60% equity stake in the company. Where in the Constitution does it say the government can do that?

Something, something, general welfare....

Would you rather Obama had let GM and Chrysler go tits-up and have thousands or tens of thousands of people lose their jobs?

Jonathan Hohensee: You signed into law the popular Car Allowance Rebate System, known popularly as "Cash for Clunkers." In the middle of our country's worst financial crisis you give out freebees with taxpayer dollars?

Okay, that one I'll grant, since it probably could have been handled a little bit better than it was. Still, the money its participants saved by not having to spend extra money on gas and maintenance for their old beaters is money they can put into the economy (to help the rest of the country) or into their savings accounts and/or towards their ot ...


I probably should had mentioned that this was the PAINTER'S statement on Obama's depiction in his painting.
 
2012-06-24 12:43:10 PM
Obama has czars? This proves he's a communist!
 
2012-06-24 12:55:07 PM

Ghastly: Wait a minute!!!! WAIT A MINUTE!!! His farking paintings sell for SIX FIGURES?

Screw hentai! From now on I'm doing paintings of ramming his fist up George Washington's ass and pulling out a fetus which he then rapes while wearing the Declaration of Independence as a condom.

Oh wait... that's still hentai.


Ok, I've always liked your posts, but this made me just favorite you
 
2012-06-24 01:25:32 PM
i50.tinypic.com
 
2012-06-24 01:39:34 PM

runcible spork: Ghastly: Wait a minute!!!! WAIT A MINUTE!!! His farking paintings sell for SIX FIGURES?

I was hoping that included the two after the decimal point.

Ghastly: Screw hentai! From now on I'm doing paintings of ramming his fist up George Washington's ass and pulling out a fetus which he then rapes while wearing the Declaration of Independence as a condom.

Oh wait... that's still hentai.

That's totally realistic though. Except that as far as we know Washington didn't have a uterus. Otherwise, all ok.



You've never heard of assbabies, obviously.
 
2012-06-24 01:46:24 PM

Jim_Tressel's_O-Face: Boy howdy did this thread attract all the D-grade trolls.


It's like a strip club in Metarie, LA, at 12:30 pm.

/don't ask me how I know
 
2012-06-24 02:02:05 PM
Reminds me of this person:


www.gonemovies.com
 
2012-06-24 02:09:15 PM

Jonathan Hohensee: The ARRA is primarily designed not to stimulate the economy, but to build the size and scope of government.


Rwers always assert this and it's simply untrue. They seem to have it in their wee heads that liberals desire bigger government instead of better government. Fact is the size of government size has stayed largely the same under Obama. It should also be noted that the size of government has mostly shrunk or stayed the same under Democratic administrations and grown larger under the GOP for the last thirty years making the entire underlying premise patently untrue.

Not gonna bother deconstructing the rest of that litany of derp as others have already done so but I felt that point needed a mention.

/Still can't wrap my head around anyone paying 6 figures for one of those absurd paint-by-numbers political cartoons painted by an obvious religious whackjob.
//I mean I knew Sean Hannitty wasn't the sharpest tool in the shed but really?
 
2012-06-24 02:14:12 PM

mrshowrules: mrshowrules: The Great EZE: Death_Poot: I just want to know, how is that any different from this, except for your political perspective:

[ttoes.files.wordpress.com image 640x909]

Go on, give me a rational, non emotional, non name calling explanation, without calling me racist, etc

It's the same as the difference between a 99 cent hamburger from McDonald's and one of those 5-pound bacon and cheese smothered behemoth burgers from the place where the waitresses dress like nurses.

If you don't tell me where this place is, you will risk my full wrath.

FTFM


That's better. I'm surprised you've never heard of it. It's the official restaurant of Fark.com
 
2012-06-24 02:18:16 PM

The Great EZE: That's better. I'm surprised you've never heard of it. It's the official restaurant of Fark.com


Shenanigan's?
 
2012-06-24 02:32:35 PM

Dr.Zom: [img.photobucket.com image 336x390]


Wait...he couldn't be arsed to name Bush?
 
2012-06-24 02:42:45 PM

No Such Agency: ActualFarkal:
RulerOfNone: Political tripe aside, this guy is a rather decent artist.

Ooh! Ooh! You know who ELSE was a rather decent artist?

/Godwinrar
//I has it

Well, except I wouldn't characterize Hitler's work as "rather decent". I'd call it technically competent but dull, lacking in any emotional or evocative component whatsoever. At most it portrays a mawkish idealized sentimentality about his country that would mirror later Nazi attitudes.

[iliketowastemytime.com image 640x417]


I find his creations to be somewhat oppressive.
 
2012-06-24 02:47:28 PM
How much of a right wing Hitler-kisser do you have to be to diss FDR?
 
2012-06-24 02:55:20 PM

ZipSplat: mrshowrules: I guess Top Secret clearances don't have any basic intelligence requirements.

/people with TS don't typically advertise it

I had a TS//SCI, I still maintain a Secret. It's not a big deal. There are entire forums for people with TS clearances to talk about job prospects, maintaining their clearance, etc. I put it on resumes that I send out into the ether for postings on craigslist.

It's really not a big deal.


I wouldn't hire anyone advertising there TS clearance on their resume.
 
2012-06-24 03:08:31 PM

Death_Poot: I just want to know, how is that any different from this, except for your political perspective:

[ttoes.files.wordpress.com image 640x909]

Go on, give me a rational, non emotional, non name calling explanation, without calling me racist, etc


Nothing is different if you strip out political perspective because EVERYTHING is politicized. One could be a farking stick figure and "political perspective" means the stick figure somehow represents a political point so even the objective analysis of the art quality is subjective.

The weather is political, GRAVITY is political, thanks to the Republicans EVERYTHING IS POLITICAL.

But when you strip out that sophistry it's because one has a message that is stupid and misrepresents both history and current events while one is a campaign slogan which, at worst, exaggerates a political position. And one has better art, but one has a clearer message.
 
2012-06-24 03:17:27 PM

mrshowrules: I wouldn't hire anyone advertising there TS clearance on their resume.


Well you don't seem to be very familiar with clearances in general, so I doubt the types of resumes you read are geared toward that type of job. But FYI going forward, if you've had a clearance that isn't the kind of thing one would omit from a resume. That's not someone divulging too much information, that's you being unfamiliar with clearance etiquette.

It really doesn't matter whether or not someone advertises that they have, had, or will be receiving a clearance. It just means that the Federal Government has looked into your background and deemed you suitable to be in the vicinity of information it considers sensitive. That can mean you're the guy eavesdropping on top-level Chinese diplomatic traffic, or the guy serving that guy mashed potatoes in the Ft. Meade food court, and anywhere in between, or above, or below. It just means that in the government's eyes, you're a trustworthy person.
 
2012-06-24 03:22:34 PM

King Something: Bush attacked Iraq without consulting Congress to declare war.


King Something: And how many czars were installed by Reagan, Bush The Merely Okay, Clinton and Bush The Terrible?


Okay, look. I didn't like Bush, and I voted for Obama because the alternative sucked, but,saying "Bush did the same thing" does not make it okay. Stop it. Saying "But all the other kids are doing it too.." didn't work as a child, and it certainly doesn't work as president of the farking United States.
 
2012-06-24 03:24:44 PM

Fluorescent Testicle: No, it's the bolded word right there that makes you a derp-spouting troll.


Honesty = derp. Got it.
 
2012-06-24 03:26:39 PM
honesty + derp = herpes?
 
2012-06-24 03:31:05 PM

Death_Poot: I just want to know, how is that any different from this, except for your political perspective:

[ttoes.files.wordpress.com image 640x909]

Go on, give me a rational, non emotional, non name calling explanation, without calling me racist, etc


It's not a negative criticism.

/what do I win?
 
2012-06-24 03:32:25 PM

ZipSplat: mrshowrules: I wouldn't hire anyone advertising there TS clearance on their resume.

Well you don't seem to be very familiar with clearances in general, so I doubt the types of resumes you read are geared toward that type of job. But FYI going forward, if you've had a clearance that isn't the kind of thing one would omit from a resume. That's not someone divulging too much information, that's you being unfamiliar with clearance etiquette.

It really doesn't matter whether or not someone advertises that they have, had, or will be receiving a clearance. It just means that the Federal Government has looked into your background and deemed you suitable to be in the vicinity of information it considers sensitive. That can mean you're the guy eavesdropping on top-level Chinese diplomatic traffic, or the guy serving that guy mashed potatoes in the Ft. Meade food court, and anywhere in between, or above, or below. It just means that in the government's eyes, you're a trustworthy person.


I decided long ago that wouldn't work anywhere that required an existing TS prior to hiring. I would work for an employer that would require me to apply for a clearance (and fire/re-assign me if I didn't get it).

Pretty much universally, those that required a clearance prior to acceptance of the job cared more for the clearance than the competence of their employees, and the fact that they refused to pay the money to clear their employees meant that they had no interest in investing in them. They were pure body shops - "I need someone with a pulse to show up someplace and do something." As a result, I found that the competence of the workers at those shops to be markedly worse than those places that will hire then clear their employees.

Soooo, long story short, I've left my clearance off my resume for some time now. If someone asks me whether I can be cleared, then I'll tell them I have a clearance, who did the investigation, and where it's parked. But I'd have to be pretty hungry to take a job that requires an active clearance prior to my joining the firm - the dunce levels at those joints are too high for my liking.
 
2012-06-24 03:43:08 PM
I love how painfully obvious it is that this moron has never actually read the Constitution or the Bill of Rights.
 
2012-06-24 03:44:15 PM

Flappyhead: I love how painfully obvious it is that this moron has never actually read the Constitution or the Bill of Rights.


He couldn't draw it if he hadn't read it, duh.
 
2012-06-24 03:45:45 PM

mrshowrules: ZipSplat: mrshowrules: I guess Top Secret clearances don't have any basic intelligence requirements.

/people with TS don't typically advertise it

I had a TS//SCI, I still maintain a Secret. It's not a big deal. There are entire forums for people with TS clearances to talk about job prospects, maintaining their clearance, etc. I put it on resumes that I send out into the ether for postings on craigslist.

It's really not a big deal.

I wouldn't hire anyone advertising there TS clearance on their resume.


There are jobs that require you to already have a TS. You HAVE to put it on your resume that you have the qual. Now, which *COMPARTMENTS* is an entirely different story.
 
2012-06-24 03:50:14 PM

Sid_6.7: They received massive external investment in the time period during which they supposedly achieved stunning economic success due to cutting government spending.

Your argument is crap.


Greece and other countries have recieved massive external investment, also. So of course, they're all doing just as well as Estonia.
 
2012-06-24 04:17:20 PM
Sid_6.7

Oh, and how much $$$ have we borrowed from China, Japan and so forth? Has that huge amount of cash being put into our economy resulted in a decent rate of growth?

Did the trillion+ worth of stimulus that Obama authorized result in the economy reviving? What is GDP lately?

The point is that the public sector does not create wealth, it consumes it. Injections of cash do not magically produce growth; setting aside all talk of corruption, look as Solyndra. How much cash? And how well did that work out? If the cash is not used efficiently, it does no good. And the public sector will always be less efficient than the private sector, because without the profit motive and the threat of bankruptcy, there's little motivation to be efficient.

I don't have a problem with a public sector existing, unlike a lot of the folks you're used to arguing with. There are certain aspects of society which are best handled by a government. The idea, floated by the Libertarians, that we have no police and have private security compnies handle that, is totally unrealistic. My point is quite simply that the actual size of government needs to be reduced, and when this actually happens, the resulting lessening of the drain on the private sector allows it space and resources to grow. I don't want Granny starving in the street, but cradle-to-grave is unrealistic. I don't want the military dismantled, but I want us to stop spending billions to police the whole world. The public sector is out of control spending-wise, and it needs to be cut back. Not the rate of growth slowed - the actual dollar amounts it spends truly reduced.

Why is this so hard to understand?

The huge obsticle is that the politicians of both parties can be counted on to cut things we actually need, and preserve the bloat that profits their cronies. It's like school boards cutting music and art, instead of trimming the bloated bureaucracy. We can't have a music program, but we sure do need three or four deputy assistant vice principals. On this issue, I'm with the leftists/progressives/ whatever you call yourselves.

If we can significantly reduce government spending without doing so at the expense of the general public, we will see the economy become robust, and grow again. If we don't do this, we're going to limp along until the whole thing collaspes under its own weight.
 
2012-06-24 04:19:35 PM

Death_Poot: I just want to know, how is that any different from this, except for your political perspective:


Well, one is based on a positive message, and one is based on a metric ton of butt-hurt.
 
2012-06-24 04:23:38 PM

Lando Lincoln: Death_Poot: I just want to know, how is that any different from this, except for your political perspective:

Well, one is based on a positive message, and one is based on a metric ton of butt-hurt.



You must be kidding. That guy dern't know from metric.
 
2012-06-24 04:28:08 PM

phenn: Zeno-25: [i.imgur.com image 640x420]

full size

THAT, I think, is one of the finest creative representations in the political realm I've ever seen. I know it's a few years old, but it's still amazingly potent.

You could easily replace Dumbya with Obama at this stage in the game. Which makes it all the more depressing, to me.

We are getting so farking played.


I know. I love to see the partisans on both sides still swearing up and down that "their side" wants to fix things, and hurling insults at anyone who says otherwise.

We can argue about HOW to fix things, but there's little doubt that neither political party currently wants to do so. And my assertion is that we've got to get more of the citizens to realize that, before we're going to make any real progress toward improvement.
 
2012-06-24 04:37:12 PM
runcible spork:
GeneralJim: The "Change" poster isn't art, it's GRAPHIC art. (NTTAWWT) Both are propaganda.

Grow up. They're both illustrations, which are arguably "art," if not "Art.".

Grow up? I have. I have a different definition of "art" than you have; deal. For example, I don't consider any of the following to be "art," although some people do:

Soup can

Giant Flashlight

Atomized Jet Engine

Throwing paint into a jet exhaust

The bronzed crap of celebrity crotchfruit

Most any crap (sometimes literal) from Jackson Pollock

Overhyped, predictable excuses for artistic endeavor, however international
 
2012-06-24 04:44:09 PM
Mrtraveler01:
GeneralJim: And, the Second Amendment... Just how does ". . . the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed" mean that the government needs to closely regulate guns?

Let me guess, you think background checks are unconstitutional right?

Of course not, dumbass. Convicted felons should never be able to carry weapons, or even vote, if you ask me. Heck, even admitted felons, like Bill Clinton.

How do you do it? I think you have LITERALLY not made a single correct guess to date. Why don't you try something VERY simple, like "Let me guess, you support the First Amendment, too" just to break your losing streak? Batting .000 is just sad.
 
2012-06-24 04:44:31 PM

SouthernFriedYankee: The point is that the public sector does not create wealth, it consumes it.


Even supply-side economics says that government can do some things to positively influence GDP. Investing in infrastructure, education, and R&D are all things that improve GDP and are best done by government. This isn't to say a state school can ever be as good as a private school. UVA's Darden Business School, as great as it is, simply isn't going to be as good as the University of Chicago's Booth School. But everyone benefits from an entire public that is educated, but no private wealth has a vested interest in educating the public. So government creates the public school system.

While I agree in principal that we have things to do, I disagree with many of the specifics coming from the right.
 
2012-06-24 05:08:46 PM

GeneralJim: Grow up? I have. I have a different definition of "art" than you have; deal. For example, I don't consider any of the following to be "art," although some people do:

Soup can
Giant Flashlight
Atomized Jet Engine
Throwing paint into a jet exhaust
The bronzed crap of celebrity crotchfruit
Most any crap (sometimes literal) from Jackson Pollock
Overhyped, predictable excuses for artistic endeavor, however international

Predictable postwar and postmodern stuff.


Gotcha. So you consider barely competent hackwork, the product of a muddled artistic sensibility (nb: I am not referencing McNaughton's political iconography -- such as it is -- here), to be superior artistically to some works from the latter half of the 20th century that are for the most part considered philosophically and artistically groundbreaking. Not that I care for a lot of them either, mind you, but I can acknowledge and understand their significance.

Uhm, "deal." And. Grow. Up.
 
2012-06-24 05:13:21 PM
Mrtraveler01:
GeneralJim: Death_Poot: I just want to know, how is that any different from this, except for your political perspective:

[ttoes.files.wordpress.com image 640x909]

Go on, give me a rational, non emotional, non name calling explanation, without calling me racist, etc

The "Change" poster isn't art, it's GRAPHIC art. (NTTAWWT) Both are propaganda.

Isn't graphic art a form of art?

Never mind, look at who I'm talking to.

Well, here's your problem right here... You simply think that nobody who is not a mental clone of your own grotesquely limited viewpoint has nothing to offer. Hey, dumbass, EVERY time you grow, mentally, it will be at the prompting of someone with different viewpoints. You're stunted.

And, dividing the walls in a room with a molding and making the upper and lower parts different colors is "graphic art." I don't think it rises to the level of art. Not that graphic art CANNOT rise to the level of actual art. Let me just grab a simple image at random... ah, here we go:


s3.amazonaws.com

Now, that's art... It's not just a colored high-contrast photo. And, before you ask, photographs can be art, but are not necessarily art. Don't MAKE me give you examples...

Remove your red-colored glasses ('cause if you don't, it will be invisible) to see something that I also do not consider art, for the same reasons, but which will not trigger your knee-jerk leftist worldview:


i48.tinypic.com
 
2012-06-24 05:23:22 PM

GeneralJim: Mrtraveler01: GeneralJim: Death_Poot: I just want to know, how is that any different from this, except for your political perspective:

[ttoes.files.wordpress.com image 640x909]

Go on, give me a rational, non emotional, non name calling explanation, without calling me racist, etc

The "Change" poster isn't art, it's GRAPHIC art. (NTTAWWT) Both are propaganda.

Isn't graphic art a form of art?

Never mind, look at who I'm talking to.
Well, here's your problem right here... You simply think that nobody who is not a mental clone of your own grotesquely limited viewpoint has nothing to offer. Hey, dumbass, EVERY time you grow, mentally, it will be at the prompting of someone with different viewpoints. You're stunted.

And, dividing the walls in a room with a molding and making the upper and lower parts different colors is "graphic art." I don't think it rises to the level of art. Not that graphic art CANNOT rise to the level of actual art. Let me just grab a simple image at random... ah, here we go:

[s3.amazonaws.com image 640x497]
Now, that's art... It's not just a colored high-contrast photo. And, before you ask, photographs can be art, but are not necessarily art. Don't MAKE me give you examples...

Remove your red-colored glasses ('cause if you don't, it will be invisible) to see something that I also do not consider art, for the same reasons, but which will not trigger your knee-jerk leftist worldview:

[i48.tinypic.com image 320x320]


See, this is the problem with the art world. People like GJ who think that their definition of art is the only correct one.
 
2012-06-24 05:25:15 PM

St_Francis_P: AzDownboy: This picture is an example that earnestness is the complete opposite of irony

Yes; he understands the importance of being earnest, but lacks any talent to express it.


Sees what you did:
perpenduum.com
 
2012-06-24 05:27:38 PM

HeartBurnKid: No Such Agency: ActualFarkal:
RulerOfNone: Political tripe aside, this guy is a rather decent artist.

Ooh! Ooh! You know who ELSE was a rather decent artist?

/Godwinrar
//I has it

Well, except I wouldn't characterize Hitler's work as "rather decent". I'd call it technically competent but dull, lacking in any emotional or evocative component whatsoever. At most it portrays a mawkish idealized sentimentality about his country that would mirror later Nazi attitudes.

[iliketowastemytime.com image 640x417]

So what you're saying is, we should never elect Thomas Kinkade to higher office.


Awww, and I have a bunch of Zombie Kinkade for president pins.

/he's the painter of lights at the end of the tunnel
 
2012-06-24 05:39:51 PM

GeneralJim: Mrtraveler01:

GeneralJim: And, the Second Amendment... Just how does ". . . the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed" mean that the government needs to closely regulate guns?

Let me guess, you think background checks are unconstitutional right?


Of course not, dumbass. Convicted felons should never be able to carry weapons, or even vote, if you ask me. Heck, even admitted felons, like Bill Clinton.


So, you admit that the 2nd amendment does not confer an absolute right.
 
2012-06-24 05:42:13 PM
GeneralJim: Well, here's your problem right here... You simply think that nobody who is not a mental clone of your own grotesquely limited viewpoint has nothing to offer. Hey, dumbass, EVERY time you grow, mentally, it will be at the prompting of someone with different viewpoints. You're stunted.
green
And, dividing the walls in a room with a molding and making the upper and lower parts different colors is "graphic art." I don't think it rises to the level of art. Not that graphic art CANNOT rise to the level of actual art. Let me just grab a simple image at random... ah, here we go:
it's
[s3.amazonaws.com image 640x497]
Now, that's art... It's not just a colored high-contrast photo. And, before you ask, photographs can be art, but are not necessarily art. Don't MAKE me give you examples...

always
Remove your red-colored glasses ('cause if you don't, it will be invisible) to see something that I also do not consider art, for the same reasons, but which will not trigger your knee-jerk leftist worldview:
greeen!
[i48.tinypic.com image 320x320]


Oh my. You're like a one-man show. You barely need anyone else here. I'm in awe of your metafictitious post-meta-recursive™ performance and retract nearly everything I've said to you thus far.
 
2012-06-24 06:00:23 PM

SouthernFriedYankee: intelligent comment below: Oh great, another Fark Independent "Both sides are bad" troll

So disagreeing with leftism makes one a troll, and eveything one says "derp."

Ok. As long as I understand your logic, and your debate skills.

I will offer concrete facts to support my position, thankyouverymuch:

Estonia I

Estonia II

Estonia III

I wish I had another example than this one country, but unfortunately, everyone else is trying the same old Keynesian stuff which is not going to work. When another country decides to get a clue, I'll let you know. You won't listen, I imagine, but I'll still let you know.


So if you follow...as you call it...'leftism', does that make you a leftismist?

And if you base your magic spells on people who are 'leftismists' is that leftismisticysm?

And would that make you a leftismisticysmist?
 
2012-06-24 06:17:47 PM

jcooli09: tony41454: jso2897

2012-06-23 10:18:27 PM
tony41454: I like it. Truth in oils.

Yeah - but you're f**ked up, and most people aren't like you.

Not as farked up as someone who would vote for an untested, untried, unvetted community organizer to run the United States. Now THAT'S farked up! And come this November you will see that most people ARE like me.

Your post made me chuckle.


I love how people chide Obama for being a community organizer (and I'm still waiting to hear why that's a negative) and then accuse him of being 'out of touch'.

It's usually the same people who say he's a secret Muslim who was influenced by a crazy Christian minister for 20 years.
 
2012-06-24 06:18:15 PM

SouthernFriedYankee: Greece and other countries have recieved massive external investment, also. So of course, they're all doing just as well as Estonia.


Do you really want to try to build an argument on that logic?
 
2012-06-24 06:31:26 PM

ZipSplat: mrshowrules: I guess Top Secret clearances don't have any basic intelligence requirements.

/people with TS don't typically advertise it

I had a TS//SCI, I still maintain a Secret. It's not a big deal. There are entire forums for people with TS clearances to talk about job prospects, maintaining their clearance, etc. I put it on resumes that I send out into the ether for postings on craigslist.

It's really not a big deal.


But is it a big deal?
 
2012-06-24 06:32:03 PM

vygramul: SouthernFriedYankee: The point is that the public sector does not create wealth, it consumes it.

Even supply-side economics says that government can do some things to positively influence GDP. Investing in infrastructure, education, and R&D are all things that improve GDP and are best done by government. This isn't to say a state school can ever be as good as a private school. UVA's Darden Business School, as great as it is, simply isn't going to be as good as the University of Chicago's Booth School. But everyone benefits from an entire public that is educated, but no private wealth has a vested interest in educating the public. So government creates the public school system.

While I agree in principal that we have things to do, I disagree with many of the specifics coming from the right.


'zactly. The right looks at the economy like "hey, the only part of a cow I like is the meat. Why do I have to pay for this animal to have such undesireable and unnecessary things as eyes, a tongue, teeth, a tail, skin, and the massive bundle of waste that is its internal organs? Can't we just get prime rib without all of this underlying support structure? Also, prime rib should be the same price as ground chuck. I don't want to punish deliciousness. And I'm going to oppose any regulations to prevent butchers and grocers from taking as much they want. They shouldn't have to abide by special rules just because they are in a much better position to make dibs on quality cuts. That's not the government's business. Also, they're my connection to good beef."

//The analogy started to stretch, but it felt good.
 
2012-06-24 06:48:08 PM

SouthernFriedYankee: I wish I had another example than this one country, but unfortunately, everyone else is trying the same old Keynesian stuff which is not going to work.


Yeah, that Keynesian stuff is pretty old, all right. As in, dates all the way back to the last third or so of Genesis. You know, the system that God inspired Joseph to advise Pharaoh to use to build up a surplus and infrastructure through involuntary taxation for Egypt during the seven years of plenty that Pharaoh dreamed about and Joseph interpreted, to not only last them through the seven years of famine that would follow according to the same dream, but enable them to profit mightily by selling food to other nations during said famine?

That is straight-up full-cycle "Keynesian stuff." You are right, though, that the version that all too many nations (including us) practice is not going to work, and the reason it doesn't is because we don't do the full cycle. Doing only ½ of the cycle is worse than doing none of it. It only works if you do the whole thing.
 
2012-06-24 07:05:03 PM

COMALite J: That is straight-up full-cycle "Keynesian stuff." You are right, though, that the version that all too many nations (including us) practice is not going to work, and the reason it doesn't is because we don't do the full cycle. Doing only ½ of the cycle is worse than doing none of it. It only works if you do the whole thing.


I'm not sure why you think that. I understand why Krugman would say it wasn't big enough, but doing "half" shouldn't be worse than doing nothing.
 
2012-06-24 07:10:08 PM
For the last time, everybody, he wasn't born in Keynesya!!
 
2012-06-24 07:16:44 PM
This artist reminds me of, quite possibly, the greatest story ever done by The Onion.

Area Man Passionate Defender Of What He Imagines Constitution To Be
 
2012-06-24 07:21:27 PM
I think it's fitting that the man holding the Constitution also has money in his hand. It represents the idea that money is speech and that our government is bought and paid by the 1%. I think those are principles we can all believe in.
 
2012-06-24 07:36:05 PM

vygramul: COMALite J: That is straight-up full-cycle "Keynesian stuff." You are right, though, that the version that all too many nations (including us) practice is not going to work, and the reason it doesn't is because we don't do the full cycle. Doing only ½ of the cycle is worse than doing none of it. It only works if you do the whole thing.

I'm not sure why you think that. I understand why Krugman would say it wasn't big enough, but doing "half" shouldn't be worse than doing nothing.


Because we do the bit where you spend a bunch of money in lean times, but not the bit where you save up in times of plenty. And both sides do it; the only difference is what they spend it on (the Democrats spend it on social services, the Republicans spend it on military and corporate welfare).
 
2012-06-24 07:46:09 PM

HeartBurnKid: vygramul: COMALite J: That is straight-up full-cycle "Keynesian stuff." You are right, though, that the version that all too many nations (including us) practice is not going to work, and the reason it doesn't is because we don't do the full cycle. Doing only ½ of the cycle is worse than doing none of it. It only works if you do the whole thing.

I'm not sure why you think that. I understand why Krugman would say it wasn't big enough, but doing "half" shouldn't be worse than doing nothing.

Because we do the bit where you spend a bunch of money in lean times, but not the bit where you save up in times of plenty. And both sides do it; the only difference is what they spend it on (the Democrats spend it on social services, the Republicans spend it on military and corporate welfare).


Oh, well, yes, I see what you mean. You're saying we don't do the full income-smoothing that Keynes calls for. Absolutely true.
 
2012-06-24 07:50:26 PM

AdolfOliverPanties: I don't know why Obama looks so frightened. Boris Becker isn't even an American. Who cares if he holds a copy of the Constitution?


I think he's just gained sentience and feels keenly the stain to his honor after being painted into that thing.

/Seppku should come next
//Seriously, I saw that and I'm still halfway laughing.
 
2012-06-24 07:54:03 PM

vygramul: Oh, well, yes, I see what you mean. You're saying we don't do the full income-smoothing that Keynes calls for. Absolutely true.


Ayup. Keynesian economics in busts and Austrian economics in booms is quite possibly the worst iteration of any possible economic policy (within the context of liberal democratic politics, anyhow) that you could possibly conceive. I can't understand how anyone with the least, most elementary, fundamental understanding of economics can not call this B.S. out.
 
2012-06-24 07:57:35 PM

GeneralJim: And, the Second Amendment... Just how does ". . . the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed" mean that the government needs to closely regulate guns?



That's not what the 2nd Amendment says.

Why do you leave out the most important part?

A well regulated militia...
 
2012-06-24 08:05:26 PM

mrshowrules: ZipSplat: mrshowrules: I guess Top Secret clearances don't have any basic intelligence requirements.

/people with TS don't typically advertise it

I had a TS//SCI, I still maintain a Secret. It's not a big deal. There are entire forums for people with TS clearances to talk about job prospects, maintaining their clearance, etc. I put it on resumes that I send out into the ether for postings on craigslist.

It's really not a big deal.

I wouldn't hire anyone advertising there TS clearance on their resume.



They're all applying for government contractor jobs, easy government handouts doing nothing computer tech jobs. Anyone who applies for a job not requiring TS does indeed deserve to stay unemployed. Monkeys in the military can easily get TS clearance.
 
2012-06-24 08:06:35 PM

SouthernFriedYankee: If we can significantly reduce government spending without doing so at the expense of the general public, we will see the economy become robust, and grow again. If we don't do this, we're going to limp along until the whole thing collaspes under its own weight.



Please back this economics claim up with citations and past history
 
2012-06-24 08:07:51 PM

GeneralJim: Of course not, dumbass. Convicted felons should never be able to carry weapons, or even vote, if you ask me. Heck, even admitted felons, like Bill Clinton.



So it's okay to take away Constitutional rights from some people but not others? Interesting argument you have there, care to back this up with some section of the Constitution allowing such a practice?
 
2012-06-24 08:09:32 PM

intelligent comment below: GeneralJim: And, the Second Amendment... Just how does ". . . the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed" mean that the government needs to closely regulate guns?


That's not what the 2nd Amendment says.

Why do you leave out the most important part?

A well regulated militia...


Oh here we go again. Gun control is one of the big issues I have with the left in an otherwise agreeable relationship. Look, if you want to pass a Constitutional amendment to change the Second Amendment, do that. But you're trying to pretend that in the 1780's, immediately after the Revolutionary War period, that the authors of the Second Amendment intended that gun ownership be restricted to formal members of an organized militia, you are off your goddamn rocker and off into "WHARS THE BIRTH CERTIFKAT??? NOE TEH REAL WAN!!!!" realms of daftness.

The second amendment is saying, in contemporary terms, that militias are necessary, and therefore the right of people to keep and bear arms, clearly for the purposes of building a militia, will not be infringed.
 
2012-06-24 08:09:53 PM

vygramul: Even supply-side economics says that government can do some things to positively influence GDP. Investing in infrastructure, education, and R&D are all things that improve GDP and are best done by government. This isn't to say a state school can ever be as good as a private school. UVA's Darden Business School, as great as it is, simply isn't going to be as good as the University of Chicago's Booth School. But everyone benefits from an entire public that is educated, but no private wealth has a vested interest in educating the public. So government creates the public school system.


I'm not one to advocate that government not do any such things. But the Federal government really has no reason to be involved in K-12 education. They're too far away to be in any way an efficient participant in the process. The state governments should only be minimally involved, for a lesser version of the same reason. If you don't like the way a school district is run, don't live there. If you find you must, work at the local level to change it. One of the strengths of a free market, limited government system is that it can harness an individual's self interest to serve the greater good; that doesn't only apply economically. The parent who works to improve the crappy school system benefits all the kids, not just their own. But it's a lot harder to correct problems that come out of bad DC policy than those which originate from local laws.

While I agree in principal that we have things to do, I disagree with many of the specifics coming from the right.

I do too, although probably not all of the same ones you do. As I've noted elsewhere:
Again, I come back to cutting the power of the government to be able to write endless regulations, and then carve out loopholes for the highest bidders. The more power the government has, the more able it is to advance the aims and agendas of the most ruthless among us. Anarchy does not work, but neither does collectivism. "Just enough power to provide an orderly and free society to as many as possible, and no more" is my stance on government in general.
 
2012-06-24 08:31:55 PM

ZipSplat: Oh here we go again. Gun control is one of the big issues I have with the left in an otherwise agreeable relationship. Look, if you want to pass a Constitutional amendment to change the Second Amendment, do that. But you're trying to pretend that in the 1780's, immediately after the Revolutionary War period, that the authors of the Second Amendment intended that gun ownership be restricted to formal members of an organized militia, you are off your goddamn rocker and off into "WHARS THE BIRTH CERTIFKAT??? NOE TEH REAL WAN!!!!" realms of daftness.

The second amendment is saying, in contemporary terms, that militias are necessary, and therefore the right of people to keep and bear arms, clearly for the purposes of building a militia, will not be infringed.



Your knowledge of history is frightening. Seems like the hobby of liking guns has blinded you to the reality and history of the country.

I'm not making the argument guns shouldn't be legal, but the context in which the amendment was written was strictly to make sure state militia aged men would not be able to be disarmed by the federal government.

These people were part of the state militias that today make up the national guard and police forces.

Absolutely nothing to do with the idea the NRA drilled into gun nuts since birth how your hobby should be covered.
 
2012-06-24 08:38:56 PM

AeAe: fusillade762: Who gave him that big wad of cash?

Billionaire Republicans? Citizens United ruling?


That's what I was thinking. The message to me seems to be that our nation's values (the Constitution) are for sale.
 
2012-06-24 08:44:16 PM

intelligent comment below: but the context in which the amendment was written was


The context in which it was written is mostly irrelevant, or else the 4th amendment wouldn't apply to computer files.

This has been ruled on already by SCOTUS. The "Militia" bit isn't exclusionary (meaning that you don't have to be a member of a militia to bear arms).

Who summoned you, anyways?