Oh, wait, no it's not. He didn't do one.

The guy is an idiot and a bigot. And a shitty propagandist and artist:

[IMG][/IMG]

was it Bush who signed NDAA "with reservations"?

just because the republicans are far, far, far worse, doesn't mean we should ignore facts.

You are right though we shouldnt ignore "all" of the facts but oddly some people still insist on cherry picking which facts to present in their arguments

that prohibits Socialism or socialist policies and thus such policies wouldn't necessarily be unConstitutional.

Perhaps it isn't just facts we should "ignore", if you catch my drift. Hope you find a home soon.

...That I know I'm a shitty artist and a hyperbolic propagandist who screeches for nobody except myself and the basic decency I think all people deserve.

That guy? He's a chump working for The Man.

It was a real "piece of work."

This guy isn't an "artist," he's a copycat -- he doesn't even have the cleverness of the artful photoshopper.

Because it's really not wrong. The painting may as well have the hands of President Obama's four predecessors on it as well. He certainly didn't start the extra-constitutional activities but he's not going out of his way to end many of them either.

The imagery is wrong in the way it is intended and perceived by the right wing. "Socialism" certainly isn't the problem but that doesn't mean there is no problem.

Anyways, I won't be framing and hanging this mediocre piece anytime soon. I still have my "Hope" poster.

exemplifies that this "painting" only has to do with propagating hate against the first African American President.

The reason it "didn't" have the hands of the four predecessors is because the point was never about the Constitution. It was to equate "this" president as someone to hate. The disrespect that has been shown to President Obama by the news media, the republicans, and the acceptance of racism by the general populous only points to a bleak future for the country

But that doesn't mean that those of us with the ability to think past his idiotic message can not and should not do so.

and not their petty ideology's and watch how quickly these problems are resolved. VOTE A STRAIGHT DEMOCRATIC BALLOT!

I have an idea, McNothing . . . why don't you ASK an actual socialist if President Obama IS one? I'm sure she'll give you the answer, right after she's recovered from doubling over laughing.

Socialists institute a progressive tax system, which means taxing the wealthy, which Obama steadfastly refuses to do.

Socialists would institute Universal Health Care or some kind of single/multi-payer system, not throw the American people to the Humana/Wellpoint/Cigna crapcake we have now.

Socialists would institute a universal higher education program, not throw a six-digit anvil of debt on the backs of our young.

There's no real socialism in this country. Our "socialism" primarily consists of bailing out unbridled capitalism when it inevitably fails every seven years. Our social safety nets are fucking terrible compared to other industrialized nations. The only "SOSHULIZM" happening in this country is flowing UPward and to the Pentasewer, not "Trickling Down".

consider anyone to the left of Temujin one.

Don't know what the word means.


Or the words "Plutocracy" or "Fascist".

"Socialists institute a progressive tax system, which means taxing the wealthy, which Obama steadfastly refuses to do."

You did know that only the congress and senate can raise taxes and that no president can issue an order to do so nor has Obama said no to raising income taxes on those earning higher incomes?
So how exactly does your claim make any sense in light of those actual facts.................at all?

I'm sure it was just an oversight, but the look on Obama's face is absolutely demonic, so it's a wash.

I've seen this nutjob's work before, and I'm glad to see he's been keeping himself busy since his painting that shows Reagan as a saintly figure among liberal sinners. He claims not to be partisan and goes out of his way to avoid darker pigments when illustrating his role models.

What an ass.

I'll bet his parents collect their social security and medicare checks every month...

What a waste of talent. Religious fervor in paintings where personages are depicted as godlike or satanic ruins everything about them. It's really kind of sickening isn't it?

I'm torn by his wasted talent. He's creating bs political cartoons fit for Rush. like if Michelangelo carved marble toilets.

I don't believe there is any point in pretending he isn't talented. While agreeing completely with the critic, I wonder about someone's general sincerity if they say his technique is poor. Maybe its just a sore area for me as I'm you know, amazingly talented and have always been torn up at critiques.

What is endearing, memorable, and even unique about his technique? I've seen billboards with more interesting technique. It's like one of those blond-haired, blue robed Jesus paintings you see in so many cheap bibles. Very art-school. Not mature or expressive at all. Sorta competent is all it is. Average commercial art. I mean, look at the hand holding the Constitution: so many sausages, not a hand with fingers. Notice how the fire emits no light.

Let's look at his "Jesus w/Constitution" painting... Again, more sausages holding the Constitution. I question the drapery of Jesus' robe around the knees. Does the golden robe have long sleeves to the floor or not? Just on Jesus' left arm? not the right? Is the light coming from Jesus' head? It appears to be so on the figures in the foreground, but it appears to be coming from the right on the figures in the background. Ben Franklin seems to be huge compared to the WWI soldier to the left of him....

shall we go on?

Not art with a capital "A".

“There are numerous symbols and subtleties in this painting, and I’m not ready to reveal all of them,” McNaughton said.

Shouldn't the painting reveal them itself?

art as an acceptable response to disapproval of said art. As one artist friend once said to me after some right winger tried to destroy a painting they deemed to be sacrilegious: a world in which it is appropriate to destroy art with which one disagrees is a world that will soon be devoid of art.

What this painting needs is what most posters here are doing: criticism and rebuttal.

Corporations making record profits is socialism? I wish we had socialism here.

as fast as I could to a Northern European socialist nation. USA USA USA, sucks.

I've decided to stay, and use Satyagraha and non-violence to reclaim our nation. I hope you'll consider doing the same.

Aristotle said art is derived from truth, one step from reality. Not so this work!

Satire? Nah, satire also requires some truth at core.

Comedy? Umm, not funny.

So, trash? Yes!

Conservatives make terrible creatives because they are scared of anything new:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/09/110903142411.htm
""Our findings imply a deep irony," wrote the authors, who also include Jennifer Mueller of the University of Pennsylvania and Shimul Melwani of the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. "Revealing the existence and nature of a bias against creativity can help explain why people might reject creative ideas and stifle scientific advancements, even in the face of strong intentions to the contrary."

Art requires nonrigid thinking, well beyond the capacity of conservatives.

"Suit the action to the word, the word to the action, with this
special observance, that you o'erstep not the modesty of nature:
for any thing so o'erdone is from the purpose of playing, whose
end, both at the first and now, was and is, to hold as 'twere the
mirror up to nature: to show virtue her feature, scorn her own
image, and the very age and body of the time his form and
pressure"
Hamlet Act 3, scene 2, 17–24

Probably too static to even be successful as a comic book.

Young Turks: Conservative Clown Paints Jesus, Satan and the Liberals
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x387468

After seeing a few of this clown's assprints, it makes you long for smiling Chinese peasants bringing in the harvest beneath the beneficent gaze of Chairman Mao.

there's approximately 3,500 political cartoons published every day with more trenchant commentary than that painting.

Hope the Koch's pay this guy lots of money for that silly painting.

white guy in black face!

These people have no idea what socialism is.

wysiwyg

..and calling this person an 'artist' is like saying that those guys who sew those white costumes with the pointy hoods are 'fashion designers'..

could face six months in prison, a year of supervised release and a $5,000 fine. He will be sentenced in July.

Yeesh, another Boris Vallejo type hack-painter in the making...

he doesn't even have the gonads to admit he's a political conservative...

Where was this guy when Bush was shredding the Constitution?

McNaughton's glorified editorial cartoons make no sense at all in their interpretation of reality or history. He caters to the ignorant and apparently he's doing fairly well at it.

...you know, the usual.

told him obama is a socialist; therefore, obama is a socialist. They don't have to make any valid points why obama is a socialist-they just have to keep repeating he's a socialist. When in reality, obama is a corporatist, like little boots, clinton, reagan. Some just care about the proles a little more than others.

The rich get to communalize with their corporate funded think tanks socializing their losses and only capitalizing on the poor for bigger profits.

I was absent from Civics class the day they talked about socialism and the constitution being mutually exclusive. Although this seems to be a common understanding. I sometimes think Obama and the constitution are mutually exclusive, though, but I do have a suspicion that he does know better in his heart of hearts.

And I don't mean the name, that means nothing to me. I mean "the guy who made that 'Jesus delivers the Constitution while the guys who wrote it and left him out, assorted soldiers, and some token you-know-whats look on reverently, and the liberals at the bottom right cower in shame' painting" (as seen in a post above, without the correcting word balloons).

Clearly, the description made it right up his alley. Asteroid stirkes have more subtlety than this guy.

They are anything but subtle.

Is there anyone who'd like to do a painting of Jesus whacking Jon McNaughton upside the head with a baseball bat?