Painter including Lewinsky’s shadow in Clinton portrait is just WRONG!
When hired to do a job, there are just some things that one should just not do, and metaphorically slapping the client in their face, especially the President of the United States, is one of them.
Nelson Shanks, a world-renowed portrait artist, revealed in a recent interview that the shadow in one of President Clinton’s portraits represents Monica Lewinsky standing in the room.
Click here and here if you want to read the story.
The portrait, which was unveiled in 2006, is also notable for not depicting Clinton’s wedding ring. (source)
Ouch! A low-blow and a slap in the face.
Shanks claims to be "very conscious of trying to paint a moment in history," but there are other moments in history which are more positive that he could have included. A hint of Chelsea being around, for example. I wonder how many of his previous clients are studying their portraits looking for any hidden meanings of inglorious days of past.
Sure, what Bill did was wrong, but it was not Shank’s place to pass judgment and include such a hateful metaphor. At the very least, Shanks should not have disclosed this information and just kept this little secret to himself.
BREAKING NEWS….
News just came out about the dress that both Monica wore and Shanks used on the mannequin. It has been discovered that the dress was not blue. Here is a photo of what the dress is reported to look like….
↓
↓
↓
↓
↓
↓
↓
↓
↓
↓
↓
↓
↓
↓
↓
↓
↓
↓
↓
↓
↓
It was white with gold trim. Like this is any surprise….
Top Posts
This problem can be solved by pre-school children in 5-10 minutes. By programmers in one hour.
Click on image to go to full problem
Motley News, Photos and Fun 
Reblogged this on The Militant Negro™.
I think it’s outrageious that the artist did this in the official portrait. If I were Clinton, I’d demand another portrait be done — by a different artist.
There are something like 10 portraits of him in the White House. Apparently they all have their portraits painted several times.
Oh, okay. I thought there was one official portrait in the Capitol Rotunda or someplace, and this was it.
This is clever. Artists sometimes express deeper truths in subtle ways. Clinton will always have the shadow of his own misconduct following him and this is the sort of thing a painter might incorporate into profound artwork.
Have you taken a good look at Michelangelo’s work? Same sort of thing, especially on the Chapel ceiling.
A few years back, I read where there have only been three presidents who did not have a mistress. I believe I read this back during all this hoopla about Clinton. Unfortunately, the article didn’t say who the 3 were. Even though Clinton’s infidelity is immoral, it certainly is not impeachable material. Especially when nearly all the presidents before did so and hardly a word was mentioned then.
Nobody was trying to impeach Bill Clinton because he was screwing around.
Impeachment is what happens when the highest law enforcement officer in the nation lies under oath in a court of law, after swearing to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
But the case wasn’t even about his infidelity. It was about the Clintons’ corruption, using tax dollars to help cocaine smugglers and other misdeeds. Even as Ken Starr waited to get the court’s permission to subpoena documents, he did a stand-up outside the Clintons’ Rose Law Firm as truck after truck hauled away bales of shredded documents.
Like Al Capone, it was nearly impossible to bag them on the real crimes they were committing, but there was one angle to try to put a stop to the criminal enterprise.
Nailing him for lying under oath was a way to demonstrate that his testimony in court could not be trusted. It’s standard courtroom procedure that often lands a person in prison.
Unfortunately, the Democrat-controlled Senate declined to remove him from office after the impeachment. So much for the law.
“A morsel of genuine history is a thing so rare as to be always valuable.”
–Thomas Jefferson, letter to John Adams, 1817
I’m still trying to figure something out.
At the end of the article, you post that the dress was not blue, it was white with gold trim. But the picture is of a blue dress with black trim.
What’s that about?
Oh, it was a viral topic last week. It was driving everyone crazy and the news ate it up. Here is the story. http://www.cnn.com/2015/02/27/health/science-of-gold-blue-dress/
And this site has a bit more humor that came out of this… http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/02/27/the-dress_n_6766774.html
Okay, that is just freaking weird.
However, it is also a fascinating exercise in public manipulation!
Remember, during and after the corruption trial, all the mainstream (left-wing) press focused on Monica Lewinsky, kept everyone talking about her, to distract the public from what the trial was all about – the corruption of the Clintons.
Now, to distract from Bill’s infidelity and impeachment, they’re trying to get everyone talking about what color the dress in that picture is, and it DOES NOT EVEN RESEMBLE the blue dress relevant to the impeachment.
http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/clinton/lewinskydress.html
Henceforth, any discussion of those past events is going to come down to the new meme being implanted in the minds of the ‘useful idiots’: What color is the weird dress in this picture?
And the Clintons’ past is systematically erased from public memory by replacing it with these games.
It is just one more stage in the misdirection game. A-freaking-mazing how the masses are manipulated, isn’t it?
The dress meme didn’t have anything to do with the Clintons or politics at all. I added that in as a joke.
Well, you’re not the only one doing the dress meme. At least this one is somewhat relevant to Clinton’s exploitation of women…
https://fbcdn-sphotos-b-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xpf1/v/t1.0-9/p480x480/10994880_10152851018218882_5408071395711102711_n.jpg?oh=6369085b5edf5c0edff3f74213f86356&oe=55BB3FFF&__gda__=1433701609_9e7c6b49c988d0d7c390e252cf3c16a4
Bwahahahahahahaha!!!!!! This is hilarious!
Well, I take that back. I thought it was an ad for Fifty Shades of Grey… then I read through it all. That is actually some very creative use of a meme to speak out against violence on women.