Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Kaslin

Neither portrait (Obama, Michelle) looks presidential or reverential. Obama’s looks like one of those 1960s “groovy” kitsch work. More like paint-by-the-numbers. Michelle’s just looks amateurish.


27 posted on 02/13/2018 3:26:33 PM PST by MoochPooch (I'm a compassionate cynic.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: MoochPooch

I agree. Obama’s looks just plain silly (the flowers are apparently the state flower of Kenya and something else related to whatever is known of his past) and makes him look even whiter than he looked in person, while his wife’s portrait bares absolutely no resemblance to her, also makes her look white, and is simply poorly painted.

The artists were chosen for their color and their PC, of course, but unfortunately that doesn’t make up for their lack of ability. As I recall, W’s painter hated him and Republicans in general, something known to Bush at the time, but still did a good, professional portrait.


32 posted on 02/13/2018 3:36:57 PM PST by livius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies ]

To: MoochPooch

You said it.


39 posted on 02/13/2018 3:48:35 PM PST by Kaslin (Politicians are not born; they are excreted -Civilibus nati sunt; sunt excernitur. (Cicero)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson