JUSTICE COVERS 'NUDE' STATUES

DRUDGE ^ | 01/28/02

[Tumbleweed_Connection]

Fed up with having his picture taken during events in the Justice Department's Great Hall in front of semi-nude statues, Attorney General John Ashcroft has reportedly ordered massive draperies to conceal the offending figures -- which have been displayed since the 1930s!

The draperies were installed last week at a cost of just over $8,000, reports ABCNEWS.com's Beverley Lumpkin.

At the center of the controversy: two enormous and stylized but largely naked aluminum statues.

The female figure represents the Spirit of Justice; the male on the right is the Majesty of Justice. The male is clad in only a cloth draped over his essential parts; the female wears a sort of toga-style garment, but one breast is entirely exposed.

Last November, during a press conference announcing new challenges of fighting terrorism, Ashcroft was photographed with the naked breast right over his shoulder!

The snap ran in major papers.

Developing...

[southern rock]

No, I do not beleive children belong in art museams where nudity is on display. At least not until they are old enough or curious enough to have snuck a peak at their first girlie mag. :) I must be a regular barbarian at the gate. An old fart at 31. Oh well.

Still, my point is, as stated above, I do not understand the mentality of someone who goes through all the work and trouble of creating a statue, and then deliberately decides to make it naked. Why? I wish I had the talent to create such a thing, but I would sculpt it with clothes on. Sorry.

[Dane]

Honestly how do you sleep at night? Your version of reality is so confused, you are a walking contradiction. And a pretty damn lazy student of logic as well.

Yes, you have earned the mantle of the FR village idiot

That coming from you, I will take as a badge of honor.

[CyberAnt]

Not funny Laz!! And ... definitely not an accurate depiction of America to immigrants.

[sweetliberty]

ROTFL!!

[zoyd]

No, I do not beleive children belong in art museams where nudity is on display. At least not until they are old enough or curious enough to have snuck a peak at their first girlie mag. :) I must be a regular barbarian at the gate. An old fart at 31. Oh well. Still, my point is, as stated above, I do not understand the mentality of someone who goes through all the work and trouble of creating a statue, and then deliberately decides to make it naked. Why? I wish I had the talent to create such a thing, but I would sculpt it with clothes on. Sorry.

Pal, you've got some major issues.

I guess I can consider myself lucky that I wasn't permanently scarred from visiting the Louvre with my family when I was 10.

You might wanna change your name from "Southern Rock" to "Southern Dork".

I cannot believe you think the first exposure kids should have to nudity should be from 'sneaking a peek' at a nudie mag, as opposed to viewing great Art. Your priorities seem a little odd.

[ATOMIC_PUNK]

Hey woman can breast feed in public And this is fine art sheesh......ASHY must've been a BOTTLE BABY!

[Tumbleweed_Connection]

He needs a $3 ski mask for his head when he uses that spot. Leave our national heritage as it is, we are lucky Clinton didn't rent it to another nation.

[zoyd]

What everyone seems to have overlooked is that it's not just JA that is 'offended' by this statue -- hardcore feminists don't like the statue either -- some consider it degrading or even offensive.

I say we keep it exposed because it kills two birds with one stone: it ticks off moralists like Ashcroft, and it ticks off hardcore feminists.

[sneakypete]

Remember, this is STONE, not a painting or a photograph:)

Simply incredible.

[Cold Heat]

Your Pic is the only criticism that I find in good taste on this thread. You have captured the humor in the AGs action and not blended it with hidden agenda.

[CyberAnt]

No, I'm not kidding - My Pastor would have done the same thing (cover the statutes). It's called modesty - and I guess only my generation understands it's importance.

In an art gallery, that's another story - but these statues are right out in the front of the Justice Dept. where a Christian man does not want to be photographed with a nude woman in the picture. And ... I might add - I think the photos were done on purpose because of Ashcroft's stand for Christ. The media will do anything to try to embarass him. Any real journalist would never have allowed the picture in the first place.

[Lazamataz]

Simply incredible.

Isn't it?

Some of the art I saw had me in tears. I saw it on the second date I had with the woman who will become my wife.

We went to Rome for 10 days on our second date, with one day out to Florence..... :o)

Yeah, yeah: I hit Love Lotto. I know it. :o)

[Tumbleweed_Connection]

I wonder how the Rats can use it against him without creating a bigger problem for themselves.

[Cold Heat]

I think the photos were done on purpose because of Ashcroft's stand for Christ. The media will do anything to try to embarass him. Any real journalist would never have allowed the picture in the first place.

And this is the truth of this matter. Expressed well, I might add.

[The Grim Freeper]

"The problem is that you Puritans want to make sure that everyone else is as pure as you - by law."

This is a lie.

[BikerNYC]

Still, my point is, as stated above, I do not understand the mentality of someone who goes through all the work and trouble of creating a statue, and then deliberately decides to make it naked.

Since we are all born naked, don't you have to "deliberately decide" to put clothes on a statute, rather than the other way around?

Now, this may not apply to your body, but many of us find the human body quite beautiful and are happy to occasionally see it unadorned with all the cultural trash that passes for clothes.

I still think that concealing a statue of justice is just too much to bare (teehee).

[Dane]

Coming from a clinton loving, porn loving dope smoker like you (according to DANE LOGIC) I guess that is a compliment, or did the laws of physics and rhetoric have another pole shift in the universe of Dane, is down now up?

Uh, CS you are projecting, it isn't pretty, IMHO. Anyway let me ask you if you would like have the picture that Drudge posted of you instead AG Ashcroft splashed on every front page in the country. Would you be happy, would you compliment the photographer?

Let me start the first "joke".

Sure looks like Central Scutiniser is being "titular" in that photo.