No, this is the liberal interpretation of the term "art". And they wonder why the average person doesn't get it:har:

Well despite the circle play of RW idiocy the first thing I thought when I saw that image was not "Truth" but "WTF is with the conservative who drew this?"

Well Im afraid you missed the mark. It was painted by libs for libs to 'celebrate' their newfound leader.

http://worldnetdaily.com/index.php?f...w&pageId=96138

The artists website http://www.dantuonoarts.com/ata.html

I want some of what you're smoking:D

Guess it was a moonbat who drew it for other moonbats in my view. Just so happens to call himself a liberal.

World Net Daily = No click from me

Artist website = I dont click on moonbat "GW,9/11,Moon landing, is an inside job. Al gore conspiricy, etc.." links so why ought I click on another moonbat's one?

:06:

This word moonbat I do not think it means what you think it means.

Here is the deal....whether lib, dem, indep....who cares....the painting was to create discussion. As we see here, it worked. Personally, I still believe there are a lot who are misguided on the whole Messiah fantasy created in Obama. Certainly, if some believe this is the second coming of Christ, I think Christ would show up without a teleprompter and blackberry. :O:

Nutjob Skizo etc..

If someone truly believes Obama is the messiah (Which is a RW myth of some deep liberals) they have the same mential issues (In my view) As those who think the moon landing is fake, Those who still think 9/11 was an inside job, or those who think Global Warming is an Al Gore Conspiricy.

Loons..

Now I understand what you are saying:yeah:

Just because muppets like Malkin have been using the word in their rants it doesn't change the meaning of the word .

Thats the idea , its what the artist was aiming for , the reaction perfectly illustrates the deep partisan divide the election of Obama represents .

Stop saying moonbat, people...

Go for "bats*** insane"...

Got anything to back that up or you just pulling it out of your rectum?

Read it for yourself , its already been posted and linked in this topic .
If you like you can put your own comment on the artists website where he has set up an account for people to do just that

I don't think you want to. Zachstar is obviously smoking the strongest stuff known to man. Guaranteed to damage your brain cells.

-S

I read the article and I went to the "artists" website, but I didn't interpret what I read in the same manner as you. Happens sometimes. In the end, we all know the "artist" really just wants attention anyway. He certainly got it and provoked exactly the reactions that he desired (on both sides of the aisle).

Funny how he's supposedly dramatizing something (partisanship) that he evidently disdains while inflaming the same.

Thanks for the advice. I only have 3 or 4 left, so I don't want to risk them.:DL

Its a perfect example from the classical movement of aesthetic relativism .
Wheras if you take that picture of Bush with his head bowed in the office with the ghosts of George and Abe its a classic example of propoganda art .

The fact that the piece has got exactly the reaction across the board that the artist seeks to illustrate shows that even though it is a crap picture it is good art

I thought we were discussing art here, not horse manure.:hmmm:

WHy do we need paintings anyway, sure photographs are more accurate.

PABLO! It doesn't look anything like her!

says you:har: