Earlier I introduced you to the presidential portraits of Barack and Michelle Obama. They are amateurish, look nothing like the subjects, and are just plain ugly. The Obamas decided to chose some terrible black artists rather than anyone with artistic talent to capture them for posterity. While art is subjective, the liberal media bias is not. The non-shocker of the week has the lefty news organizations tripping over themselves in praise of these hideous abominations.
Here’s CNN White House reporter Kate Bennett with her unique take on Michelle’s Etch A Sketch portrait.
Amy Sherald’s incredible portrait of @MichelleObama. Sherald uses greyscale to paint skin tone in order to take away “color,” so her subjects can be seen for their personality and presence. pic.twitter.com/mLiLZSlNEU
— Kate Bennett (@KateBennett_DC) February 12, 2018
That’s a fun way to say that picture looks nothing like Michelle Obama, isn’t it? CNN’s Chris Cillizza knows it doesn’t resemble the former first lady, but finds that to be why it’s so damn beautiful:
This is a beautiful portrait. It looks very little like Michelle Obama pic.twitter.com/1CsRrWIJtN
— Chris Cillizza (@CillizzaCNN) February 12, 2018
While it might seem like Cillizza is trolling Michelle by saying that something that doesn’t look like her is beautiful, he’s actually trying trying to spin something hideous into a work of art because it involves the Obamas.
The Washington Post also does its best to make lemonade out of horse shit:
Review: The Obamas’ portraits are not what you’d expect and that’s why they’re great https://t.co/qMfoVWGiAl
— Washington Post (@washingtonpost) February 12, 2018
Maybe the WaPo isn’t the best judge of greatness and by “maybe” I mean they are not. Neither is The New York Times with this take:
Barack Obama’s portrait shows him not as a self-assured, standard-issue bureaucrat, but as an alert and troubled thinker.
Michelle Obama’s portrait overemphasizes an element of couturial spectacle, but also projects a rock-solid cool. https://t.co/tTJuIGWa4d
— The New York Times (@nytimes) February 12, 2018
Is there any other way to describe the portrait of a liar than by using lies? Actually, there is. Erin Biba is a writer for Scientific American, Wired, and the BBC. She thinks if you have a negative opinion on the Obama portraits you are a damn racist. She doesn’t think this enough to not delete her tweet, but the Internet is forever:
“Dear white people: It is beautiful that the Obama portraits are bringing so much joy to the black community. That is the only opinion you need to have about them,” wrote Biba.
Apparently black people took offense in a white woman speaking on their behalf and she deleted this tweet and locked down her account. She however didn’t delete it because she doesn’t believe what she said, which is that white people aren’t allowed to do anything but love those terrible Obama portraits.
When Donald Trump eventually leaves office and has his official portrait done, all of these same liberal media types will slam it as the most horrifying thing they’ve ever seen. They will compare it to portraits of Stalin and Hitler and freak out that he didn’t chose a one-legged black trans-lesbian Muslim with AIDS to paint his portrait.