Former President Bush pays tribute to immigrants in new book

AP ^ | Aug 6 2020 | HILLEL ITALIE

[fieldmarshaldj]

Remember “The Producers” ?

Think “Springtime for ———”...

[Bob434]

nope- doesn’t ring a bell-

[fieldmarshaldj]

Hmm... Well, that castle painting was done by none other than Adolf Hitler hisself.

[Bob434]

seriously? Didn’t realize he was an artist- he shoudla stuck to art- looked to be pretty talented from what i could tell from the small photo of it- it appeared he had some training-

[fieldmarshaldj]

Supposedly some Jewish art patron or some such turned down his work (well before politics), and he vowed to get even. He sure showed them !

=covers face=

[Bob434]

he certainly was a sick twisted individual- wish he had just stuck to art-

[fieldmarshaldj]

Yeah, would’ve been a lot better for humanity if he stuck to landscapes.

[GOPsterinMA]

“muff cabbage“

hehehehehehehehehe!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[ZagFan]

$250 for the deluxe edition??? Who would spend that on a bunch of paintings of people we’ve never heard of?

[central_va]

Of course W knows the difference between lawful immigrants who positively contribute to lowering the prevailing wages of American workers

Fixed it.

[central_va]

Hitler excelled at paint landscapes and architecture but his human forms were cartoonish so German and Austrian art schools rejected him.

[rintintin]

Still defending Bush I see.

He isn’t defending you. He’s defending “immigrants” to take your job.

[Ezekiel]

Well, my post wasn’t about the economic/employment policy causes and effects which have many problems. “Legal” doesn’t even mean rightful, only that the government gives a green light. It was about the character of individual people.

One type arrives to work and contribute (even if policy should keep the door locked tight), the other is minded to loot, pillage, and destroy. That’s what is conveniently never distinguished by the “pay tribute to the immigrants” crowd. They won’t even separate legal from criminal illegal aliens. All the same in the world they desire to foist upon others, because who are we to judge blah blah.

In fact, the title reveals the truth of the operation, that We the People are supposed to *pay tribute* to the Barbary Pirates er “immigrants.” And here’s Bendover Bush to lead the way down with his nice little portraits.

[dfwgator]

There was another world leader that painted better.

He could paint an entire apartment in one afternoon....TWO COATS!

[dfwgator]

who was that?

Some guy named "Schickelgruber".

[Bob434]

Picasso was actually a classically trained artist, and a pretty good one too, before he got into his bizarre paintings

I’ll have to look up hitler’s paintings- kinda creeped out about it though=- but i wasn’t even aware he painted- curious to see his work- the painting posted in the thread was pretty cool-

[Bob434]

hmm another first for me- had to look that up-

SickoGrubbie would be more appropriate

[Richard Kimball]

Picasso was actually a classically trained artist, and a pretty good one too, before he got into his bizarre paintings

Picasso painting when he was 14.

My theory is that Picasso was a political operative more than an artist. Destroying the beauty of art was one of the communist goals. Picasso's paintings became valuable, not because there was great demand for them, but because rich people paid far more than market value for them.

Looking at Bush's paintings, sorry, but they suck.

Not even sure if he really paints them, cause I don't believe anything the press says, but the brush work is clumsy, facial anatomy is just bad. It's not cubist or impressionist, it's the inability to have the eyes recess properly and follow the curvature of the skull. Color is always iffy on a computer, but the skin tones look horribad.

Back to Picasso as a political agent:

What Picasso was doing in Europe was a precursor to what the Nazis/Marxists in the US did here after WWII. The OSS imported 10,000 Nazis and gaver them new identities. Supposedly, these were scientists for the space program, but shortly afterwards, the OSS changed it's name to the CIA. Harry Truman said to only import people who weren't involved in war crimes, but the OSS ignored him and scrubbed records to get people in. A lot of them probably ended up in the OSS/CIA.

Nelson Rockefeller and the CIA used the Museum of Modern Art to push Abstract Expressionism as the new "American" Art. Their loss leader was Jackson Pollack, an alcoholic from Wyoming, but most of the Abstract Expressionists were Russian Jews.

The public never accepted Abstract Expressionism, but the NY Times pushed it hard, and the Museum of Modern Art paid millions for the paintings, even though they weren't bidding against anyone. Why? A painting may suck, but if someone is paying a million dollars for it, you've gotta look.

Before the CIA/Rockefeller/NYTimes/MOMA push, painters like Edward Hopper were the big names.

I think Hopper is the guy Bush is trying to copy. Notice the broad brush strokes and limited palette. However, Hopper knows what he's doing. The limited palette is used to enhance the mood. Bush doesn't know what he's doing with the palette. Hopper didn't have a lot of detail in his work, but the strokes that are there are correct. The perspective works. The body language tells a story.

This is a rehabilitation attempt for Bush. Like Jimmy Carter and Dan Rather, they're doing everything they can to make them less detestable to the average person.

[Bob434]

the picasso painting you posted is pretty good- I’m not a fan of the colors used, but still, it’s done in a classical almost Rembrant style-

The composition seems a little off to me (Going by 1/3 rules- even golden spiral rule), but i like the atmosphere, the moodiness of it- and it’s pretty spot on anatomically- Amazing that he painted that well at 14

I do like some of his cubist and abstract work- but only just some of it- Even his abstract stuff followed rules of art- despite some claiming they broke free from rules- they did not- you can find the ‘rules’ of composition and color theory still applied to them- I can appreciate branching out from traditional, but only to a certain extent-

(Big fan of hopper- loved some of the fauvist works, and impressionists, and painters like Van Gogh too)

Yes, Bush’s paintings are very amateurish- If I were him I’d be embarrassed to even show them- sure, they show likenesses, but that’s about it- everything is done in just an amateurish manner- Same with Jim Carey too- fairly amateurish (More advanced than Bush though)- although he does experiment sorta ok with color- better than Bush- but his subject matter is very amateurish and uninspiring- more reminiscent of hobby drawings done in school notebooks while bored in class than actual art-

[Bob434]

And yes, I can see some areas of hopper influence in bush’s work- also another painter’s style a little bit- but can’t recall right now- Maybe pop artist Alex Katz? (Sp?)

I never really cared for pop art like that- or what some call ‘outsider art’ (IE eschewing traditional learning of the art- although george apparent was tutored-)- outsider art seems too like bad ‘folk art’ for my taste- (Though some folk art i really like and appreciate)

George’s paintings, while amateurish, do have a quality that kinda grows on a person though- but his inexperience is very evident