An Artist Protests Obamas Abuse of the Constitution (Video)
Author: Brian Bolduc
Artist & Narrator: Jon McNaughton
A man, crestfallen, is sitting on a bench in front of the White House, contemplating his countrys future. At his feet lie the causes of his distress: tattered dollars, representing a weak currency, and scraps of paper, symbolizing an abused Constitution. Behind and around him stand the 43 presidents of the United States, most of whom are outraged. One of them, James Madison, reaches pitifully for the ground, trying to collect the shards of American greatness. Unfortunately, he cant retrieve our founding document from the dust, for its beneath the foot of Barack Obama.
The title of this portrait is The Forgotten Man, and its creator is Jon McNaughton, a 42-year-old artist from Spanish Fork, Utah. McNaughton unveiled the piece last Tuesday with a video describing its origin and a website explaining its meaning. For a long time, I didnt know if I wanted to paint this picture, because I worried that it might be too controversial, McNaughton intones in the video. Now, however, hes courting controversy.
The Forgotten Man
A husband and father of six, McNaughton graduated in 1993 from Brigham Young University, where he studied art and design. Today, he runs the McNaughton Fine Art Company, which offers mostly landscapes and Biblical images for retail. McNaughton models his work after the French Barbizon Impressionists, artists in the mid19th century who painted scenes from the countryside in subtle shades. That said, theres nothing subtle about his latest creation.
McNaughton first conceived of the portrait after Obamacare became law in March. I was just frustrated with what was happening with Obama and the out-of-control spending, he tells NRO. As an artist, I thought this was a way to get my message out.
What is that message? I wondered, If the presidents of the past could speak to us today, what would they say to us? McNaughton explains. Clearly, they would oppose the unprecedented expansion of government. Yet the focus of the painting is the forgotten man the ordinary American. If that man doesnt get off his bench and try to change whats going on in our country . . . were on the verge of bankruptcy. That was the point I wanted to make, he says.
On McNaughtons website, you can move your cursor over the faces in the painting and read an idiosyncratic summation of each presidents tenure. Yes, each of them. For instance, George Washington, whos front and center, instituted the First Bank of the United States in 1791. But even Rutherford B. Hayes, whos in the nosebleed section, gets a blurb for increasing the governments supply of gold.
Working twelve-hour days, McNaughton spent five months researching the portrait, reading everything from Wikipedia to history books. I tried to focus on the fiscal spending of these different presidents and how it has to do with the devaluing of the dollar, he notes. I didnt go into civil rights or war.
His educational forays led him to some unconventional conclusions. For example, McNaughton criticizes the Founders for their fiscal profligacy. Our founding fathers werent adept at managing debt either, he writes on the website. In 1791, the national debt was a mere $75 million. But that is equivalent to $5.2 trillion in 2008 dollars. To be fair to the Founders, though, a revolutionary war is kind of expensive.
Despite McNaughtons good faith, the Left will censure him, and he knows it. He did his first overtly political portrait last October. Entitled One Nation under God, it shows Jesus Christ holding the Constitution while surrounded by figures from American history. The painting drove liberals bonkers. Comedian Bill Maher dubbed it Wheres Waldo for wing nuts.
I did go to the Huffington Post to see what they said, McNaughton reports. They reminded me of a junior-high-school locker room. They all want to outdo each other with the grossest comment they can think of.
Still, McNaughton thinks the opposition to this painting will be different. Whereas for the previous portrait, a viewer can accept Christs authority only on faith, in this one, the facts are the facts. The people who trash the painting say, Oh, its just another right-wing Republican. But I dont feel my position is very threatened. I feel that the truth is just behind me. If people object to the portrayal of Obama stepping on the Constitution, McNaughton reasons, hell tell them everything Obamas done to deserve being characterized that way.
McNaughton knows his political background makes him a target. A former state delegate for the Utah Republican party, he now considers himself an independent. He left the GOP because of George W. Bush, who ruined the Republican party. Accordingly, in the portrait, Bush eyes the suffering man from afar distant in location and in feeling.
But McNaughton also knows hes got a hit. Hes already sold several prints, and his video has racked up over 170,000 views on YouTube. His video for One Nation under God after spending almost a year online has garnered more than 3 million views. At the rate The Forgotten Man is going, he expects it to surpass its predecessor in popularity.
Theyre quite the conversation pieces. People will have one hanging in their house and people will come in and theres so much to talk about, McNaughton says. In The Forgotten Man, McNaughton groups the presidents into two categories: those who oppose Obamas actions, such as Washington and Madison, and those who support them, such as Franklin Roosevelt and Bill Clinton. Viewers routinely object to the placement of their favorites in either category. Its fun to have people talk about it, he says.
He hopes to keep them talking. McNaughton just started a third portrait, which he plans to release by the end of the year. This one will be more religious in tone at least, more religious than The Forgotten Man though he hints that Ive got one painting [in mind] that might be affected depending on whether Obama runs for reelection.
Whether or not Obama runs, McNaughtons art has ensured that his message wont be ignored.
Then have the health care company take care of them?
You're asking me a question, Stone? I think not. You wouldn't answer my question on a previous thread. After that, you lost the privilege of me answering your questions. It's equitable.
On the previous thread, you asked me a question and I answered it. Then I asked you a question and all you did was refuse to answer mine until I had, to your satisfaction, answered your "setting parameter" questions. It wasn't equitable and I refused to play. I'm not playing now, either.
"Were you ever in the music or song writing business?" ... e_type_jagoff to Mudboy lol ..... AND ....... "But his decent into vile absurdity is still actually kind of sad and pitiful really" .... mad doggie
If someone want someone wants to come here and participate in the discussions. That is fine. But when they are participating and they tell the host to basically fuck off they aren't good enough to get an answer. Then they get the reaction they get.
"I really am sick to death of people wearing Christ on their sleeve while being so unwilling to have a modicum of compassion for the ill that would translate into assuring that they have access to medical care."
Exactly. Look at Stone's immature reaction to the HIV problem and his lack of compassion for sick - and mostly heterosexual people - in Africa.
He's quick to be judgmental and narrow minded. When he speaks, he sounds as intolerant and cruel as his stereotype he believes resembles the average Muslim in the world.
He talks the Christian line, but he does not walk the walk.
Traditionally, on these sites, the host isn't supposed to use their ability to ban to shape the discussion. You should have an admin name, and never discuss anything with that, and a discussion name. And then no one should know they are the same person.
Anyhoo, do whatever you like. It is amusing to me at least.
"Were you ever in the music or song writing business?" ... e_type_jagoff to Mudboy lol ..... AND ....... "But his decent into vile absurdity is still actually kind of sad and pitiful really" .... mad doggie
This world is full of religious intolerance, and the Christian contingent certainly has it's share of cultural jihadists.
Look at 'the Order,' a group of behind the scenes fundies that work to pass laws throwing people in prison or kill them if they are not Norman Rockwell portrait grade heterosexuals. Or the Ted Haggard sort of talk trash about gays and then get meth up the rear with the help of his male masseuse.
This is a world where it's not whether you are a decent person who believes into doing unto others as you would have them do unto you. To many people narrow minded about their faith, be it whatever major religion it is, the Golden Rule actually means,'he who has the gold makes the rules.'
This is sad. And I don't like extremists who are Muslims, Christians, Jews or whatever.
When they are wrong they need to be called on their B.S no matter who they are organizationally.
Stone the good 'Christian' deleted my truthful post about his Ziofundism and lack of following Jesus's teachings as shown by his behaviors. It's not like it's not here for everyone to see.
But when they are participating and they tell the host to basically fuck off they aren't good enough to get an answer. Then they get the reaction they get.
It sounded more like "what's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander" to me.
Suzanne is one of the nicest persons on the internet. She tries to be friendly to all - even in the face of overwhelming stupidity.
And if the internet pisses you off this much, maybe you shouldn't be on it. IN no way, shape or form was #15 a smart ass answer. It's Suzanne giving you an evenly stated yet resounding slap in the manner in which YOU "debate".
#43. To: Skip Intro, AKA Stone, Brian S, mininggold, Ferret Mike, War, All (#41)
Stone keeps busy keeping the site "pure". Why not try posting articles with "nigger", "darkie", and "Obama" in the title? Those always pass the Stone test.
Stone, it appears the crybaby forum rejects need a hug!
Jesus was a healer. Would He say "tough shit" to someone who needed health care? Would He state that people should be healed by any means necessary?
Jesus said, Physician, heal yourself.
I really am sick to death of people wearing Christ on their sleeve while being so unwilling to have a modicum of compassion for the ill that would translate into assuring that they have access to medical care.
Oh ARE you now??
I'm sick to death of Atheist-Socialists claiming to be Bible scholars and willing to steal from others to "prove" their own "compassion."
You know NOTHING of "Christian Compassion" and charity you flaming phony jackass.
Now go open up your purse and donate 60% of your net wealth and back up your own personal "compassion," Santa Marx. No? Not willing to?? No sh*t.
Apparently, it's absolutely wrong, wrong, wrong that kids with pre-existing conditions can now get health coverage. It ain't fittin'...It just ain't fittin'
You really should educate yourself to the alternatives to BIG BROTHER stepping in and taking over Suzanne, no one, especially me, wants to see any child turned down for for healthcare, yourr argument sucks, and it's a lie.
Not much "fretting" on the part of socialists like you when the "solution" is THEFT.
Any "solution" besides theft, Santa Marx? (that is besides blaming Christians who oppose more confiscatory taxation, and of whom ALREADY provide MORE charity to any group in the world by Light Years)
Oh that's right...It's to STEAL from others...to pay for those (including Illegal Invaders) who already STEAL from American taxpayers. That's called DOUBLE-THEFT.