Dan Patrick: State Senator, Artiste

Watercolor depiction of the Statue of Liberty with the face of Jesus Christ, by far-right state Sen. Dan Patrick, R-Houston.

That is all.

(h/t Texas Independent)

This is how Sen. Patrick explained his painting on his Facebook page:

In teaching myself how to watercolor I was trying different styles. After a beach scene, I decided to try a Peter Max type of painting of the Statue of Liberty. I could not get the fact right and used water to remove the paint on her face. When it dried and I tried to clean it up suddently the face of Jesus appeared so clearly. It struck me that Jesus face on the Statue of Liberty sends an incredible message that the real light that our country has sent in the past, and needs to send once again today, is we are a nation that stands on His Word This was only my 4th try at a painting I had no idea of how to paint the face of Jesus, nor was I trying to do so

27 thoughts on “Dan Patrick: State Senator, Artiste

  1. I’m just sorry that it wasn’t Marcus Bachmann’s face on Liberty. At least that would have been in context.

  2. That man is so disgusting trying to get us to believe that religion, America and freedom are the same thing. Why would Jesus want to be the living face of old Liberty? These people JUST scare me and I am a Christian! OUCH! Is the GOP heading for a THEOCRACY?

  3. Patrick represents a loony fringe of Christians who feel obsessed to conflate their religion with politics and culture. This is the same “Christian” who insists guns should be brought to campus, all for the sake of the 2nd Amendment. He feels the 2nd Amendment is right up there with the Ten Commandments. I hate to call people dirty names, but Patrick really is a complete nut job.

  4. Hi folks. I would like to correct something here, at least technically. In my view “theocracy” is a system where some God, god, pasta monster, or other deification exists and actually takes personal control of a government without human agency being necessary to bring it all into being. I cannot say that this planet has ever had a true and lasting theocracy. Even Jesus said that his kingdom is not of this world.

    Screw the dictionary!!! Ben knows we writers don’t need no stinkin’ dictionary. I don’t even wanta hear about it.

    At the risk of sounding a bit like our lovable old semantic Gene, I think we need a new term in the English language for a government formed by stupid, toxic, and quite probably mentally ill people who have deluded themselves into thinking that God has instructed them to form a worldly government on his behalf. This is a case where words really are important in the English language. I would like us—here at TFN—to actually create this word and start using it so it will catch on nationwide. Why is that? Whenever one hears the word “theocracy” and someone speaking negatively about it, they think it is someone who hates God, which usually is not the case at all. For example, even our friend Ben does not believe in God and does not believe that He exists. How can you hate someone who doesn’t exist?

    Personally, as you all know, I have no problem with Jesus coming down here personally and starting his own government—him personally. However, I have a real problem with some idiot like Pat Robertson, Michelle Bachmann, or Rick Perry saying:

    “I was on a conference call with Jesus yesterday, and he directed me to set up a government on his behalf, and he wants me to lead it.”

    We need a new English term for that—and it ain’t “theocracy.” This is something different, unique, and all together screwy in our present time—meaning this peculiar stage presence that we see now in American society, politics, and religion.

    How about it folks? Gene?

  5. That’s the problem bluescat48.

    The so-called “original sin” in the Book of Genesis is about Bachmann, Perry, and the impulse to be God. This misnomer thing we call “theocracy” is really the human impulse to be God. Just think about that. Rick Perry taking on the function of God on Earth. Michelle Bachman taking on the function of God on Earth. We need a term for that, and it ain’t “theocracy.”

  6. Couldn’t stand Patrick as a sportscaster for KHOU in Houston twenty-five or so years ago. Haven’t seen anything to change my mind. He was a truly obnoxious, narcissistic blowhard then, and remains so today. Why any sentient being would vote for him completely baffles me.

  7. A classical term would be hierocracy, i.e. rule of the ‘holy’ (men*). That traditionally meant priests but in the strict sense ‘hieros’ just means ‘holy/sacred’ as in Hieros Gamos the ‘holy marriage’ = two mortals of opposite sex serve as stand-ins for absent deities and have, often public, sex as part of a fertility ritual.
    It would even nicely fit with the terms used by evangelicals themselves who speak of the ‘Rule of the Saints’.

    *most cases; the word does not automatically exclude women.

  8. In no way whatsoever do we need a “new”, less “theocratic”, way of saying “theocracy”. What we need is a government that understands, accepts, and stands by the separation of church and state. Which, if I recall, was intended to be a central pillar of equality within out leading bodies. Thanks for playing, now get god out of my government.

  9. we do not need more of your jesus in america, we are free to be who we want to be and do not need christian symbols forced down our throats.

  10. Sacrebleu! After all zis time you Americaines have discover our little jocque. Oui, oui, oui, it is our Jesu we sent you. And you were sinking you could keep your pathetique state separ from your ugly little churches. Mais non! We put a pritee dress on Monsieur Christ, we teech him to walk a little funny, and hold his torch comme ca, and voila–he is ze simboll of your contairee. We are la fing. Ha ha ha…at you.

  11. The radical religionists are bitter that the radical muslims get to have all the blowing-up and blood-spilling fun.

    Bring back the lions.

  12. That ‘Statue of Liberty’ looks like a guy that was in a Gay Pride parade last year wearing a rainbow tunic.

  13. A very interesting interpretation. It is art. If we stuck to Jesus’ message of compassion and left Christianity as a religion out of it, I think that there could be some parallel in terms of the “light” that the US received in the past in terms of the ethos of our government foundations. What is implicit here is that our rights as individuals and those liberties are inherent and self-evident rather than needing to be mandated by any organization or political structure. That is what the unraveling and polarities existing now are really about.