Image 01 Image 03

Low information artist tries to cash in on Zimmerman success

Low information artist tries to cash in on Zimmerman success

The painting above is, or was, available on Ebay, and was catching on after George Zimmerman’s famous art success.

It portrays George Zimmerman as a hooded Klansman executing Trayvon.

At this point, people like that artist are beyond hope. He obviously didn’t watch the trial and is unfamiliar with the actual facts of the case.  Or doesn’t care about the facts.

Via Mediaite, Anti-Zimmerman Artwork Pulled Down by eBay as Zimmerman’s Painting Sells for $100K:

If George Zimmerman can sell his first-ever painting for more than $100,000 on eBay, why shouldn’t another artist be able to sell his anti-Zimmerman piece for a fraction of that price?

On the same day that Zimmerman’s auction closed, eBay reportedly yanked a piece by artist Michael D’Antuono …. D’Antuono explained the situation on his blog:

On the same day that George Zimmerman closed his ebay auction of his painting for over $100,000, the online auctioneers removed my anti-racism painting inspired by the Zimmerman case, “A Tale Of Two Hoodies” for being “hateful or discriminatory.” While Zimmerman was allowed to capitalize on his ill-gotten notoriety, I was denied the opportunity to raise funds to help the very foundation named in honor of Zimmerman’s victim.

The artist went on to say that the bidding on his piece had just passed the $25,000 mark on day two of its auction, with half of the proceeds going to The Trayvon Martin Foundation. According to an email the artist received from eBay, items “promoting or glorifying hatred, violence, or racial or religious intolerance aren’t allowed.” The email specifically referenced the “images or icons associated with the KKK” in his piece.

“In my opinion, any policy that allows a murderer to profit from his crime, but deems art that speaks out against racial injustice and benefits it’s victims ‘hateful and discriminatory’ needs to be reevaluated,” D’Antuono wrote.

This notice was posted on D’Antuono’s Facebook Page:

EBay notice to Michael D'Antuono re Trayvon Painting

He had been trying to hawk the same image since during the trial, but apparently had no buyers until George cashed in on his own painting. From D’Antuono’s Facebook Page:

Zimmerman Trayvon Painting June Michael D'Antuono

I wonder who he voted for (yeah, he’s that guy):

From his birth certificate to Benghazi, the right have been trying to “crucify” President Obama with endless campaigns of accusations and hate mongering. That’s why I created what has become the most controversial painting of the new millennium, “The Truth.” You can buy a poster of this historic piece at … without proof of birth.

Obama with Crown of Thorns Michael D'Antuono

Actually, I’m on his side on this one.  eBay shoppers should be permitted to buy propaganda.  This still is a (somewhat) free country.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


Of course, this idiot doesn’t realize that Zimmerman WAS the victim, and his action defending himself saved untold numbers of potential future victims of the criminal thug
Trayvon Martin.

eBay blocks all sorts of stuff. They would be stuck with defending all sorts of nuisance (and perhaps some valid) lawsuits if they didn’t put some sort of limits on what people can sell. As long as it is clearly delineated in writing ahead of time, what could be the problem with it? There are other auction sites with less restrictive policies.

Ebay is a private company. They have the right to yank whatever they choose from their electronic shelves.

To show that turnabout is fair play, I don’t like it when facebook shows their political side and yanks stuff but they are also not part of the government and thus are allowed to do so as they please. Don’t like it? Don’t use it or beat them at their own game.

Freedom of Speech means the twit can make all the brainless hate-mongering propaganda he wants, and he can’t be arrested, harassed, or otherwise persecuted for it. It doesn’t mean that anyone else is obligated to help him make some cheap cash with the stuff.

If eBay wants to promote human decency, well, I can’t really criticize them for it.

    Immolate in reply to rantbot. | December 26, 2013 at 9:57 am

    I don’t know that the first amendment is a defense against libel. The only thing that saves most people from paying the price for their slanderous mutterings or libelous writings is that they are either not worth suing or the depth of the pockets is presumed to be too shallow to warrant legal action.

    But there is this quote from Heinlein to offer hope to the victims:

    “Stupidity cannot be cured. Stupidity is the only universal capital crime; the sentence is death. There is no appeal, and execution is carried out automatically and without pity.”

They profit from perpetuating blind prejudice. That’s all they have and it has been political and financially lucrative. They will not soon divest of this operating model. They fear the day when America is fully integrated.

    Musson in reply to n.n. | December 26, 2013 at 8:57 am

    The Racial Grievance Industry thrives by denying progress toward equality. My elderly black friends privately confide to me that young black people ‘have no idea what real discrimination is.’

      Phillep Harding in reply to Musson. | December 26, 2013 at 12:40 pm

      Truth. I saw some of the other side of this in boot camp with white boys joking about doing things to blacks that should have been counted as murder. But “har, har, har. Should have seen him fly when we hit him with the truck.”

Can’t be George and Tray. Late Senator Byrd’s friend has a police emblem and the 10 year old has the wrong candy. Wrong color jacket and hoodie too. Must be from one of the local Dem rallies.

“He obviously didn’t watch the trial and is unfamiliar with the actual facts of the case. Or doesn’t care about the facts.””

I disagree with your liberal use of the term “facts”. The most frustrating thing about the Zimmerman case & trial (especially frustrating to those of us neutral on the matter) was there were really were no facts. It was just Zimmerman’s version & few scratches on his head. And a couple witnesses who thought they some fleeting things in the dark of night, but weren’t 100% sure.

That was the trial. The “facts” as you say. The jury simply didn’t have enough to convict George of the heavy-handed charges — but actual facts proving that the events unfolded like he said were sadly lacking. There’s a difference.

I hope you really aren’t allowed to practice law.

    Exiliado in reply to b42550a. | December 25, 2013 at 11:50 pm


    YOU obviously didn’t watch the trial and ARE unfamiliar with the actual facts of the case.

    Ragspierre in reply to b42550a. | December 25, 2013 at 11:50 pm

    Heh! Just climbs ALL over you, dunnit?

    One thing is for sure…

    if you tell the truth…IF…you will never serve on a jury in a criminal case.

    V.McCann in reply to b42550a. | December 26, 2013 at 12:12 am

    Even if we choose to ignore the fact that your premise is pure horse poop, your post is self-refuting. If there were no facts, then clearly there was not enough evidence to arrest Zimmerman, let alone try or convict him.

    Crawford in reply to b42550a. | December 26, 2013 at 12:14 am

    “It was just Zimmerman’s version & few scratches on his head.”

    People this ignorant shouldn’t be allowed in public without a minder.

    JackRussellTerrierist in reply to b42550a. | December 26, 2013 at 1:00 am

    I have kept my eyes and ears peeled for a long time in hope of encountering a true idiot savant, just out of curiosity. Thank you for ending my search. You are able to write rather clearly but have no genuine thought processes at all.

    Uncle Samuel in reply to b42550a. | December 26, 2013 at 5:03 am

    It was the Prosecution, the Martins, their black grievance specialist lawyers, their publicist who not only ignored and denied the facts, but went further to create a fictional Trayvon for publicity, and for political and financial gain.

    Trayvon was not special. He was a typical Miami wannabe gangsta thug…growing up in the image of his father the useless (typical black philandering, lawless male) Fruit Martin and the typical angry, black female Sybrina Martin.

    If these people had modeled a different set of actions and values…if they had been Christians like Ben Carson’s Mom, they could have raised a far different young man… a surgeon, teacher, engineer, and a decent father.

    This commenter, like the artist, is denying the truth, facts, logic and reason.

    thats real retarded sir.
    I’d write it in cursive but suspect that would confuse you.

    DriveBy in reply to b42550a. | December 26, 2013 at 8:21 am

    Everything that OJ Simpson’s attorneys said at trial was the absolute truth! Just ask anyone that has replied to your post. 😉

    Mannie in reply to b42550a. | December 26, 2013 at 9:42 am

    What you are describing, are the facts of the case. No credible evidence was produced that American Hero George Zimmerman was in any way the aggressor. While it was not required of the defense, plenty vof evidence was introduced that the Murderous Thug Martin did in fact mount a potentially deadly attack on George.

    Your racism and liberal propaganda are not convincing. Go start your race war somewhere else.

    Immolate in reply to b42550a. | December 26, 2013 at 10:12 am

    Fact: George Zimmerman was not a policeman, nor was he any more associated with the police than any other neighborhood watch person.

    Fact: George Zimmerman was not a Klansman. He was a registered Democrat and participated in efforts to right an injustice against a black person.

    Fact: Trayvon Martin was not a baby-faced child at the time of his death.

    I’ll assume artistic license for the incorrect details that aren’t part of the argument the painting is trying to make.

    Phillep Harding in reply to b42550a. | December 26, 2013 at 12:46 pm

    “Innocent until proven guilty”. (That should be “unless proven guilty”.)

    If you ever get selected for a criminal case jury, that’s what the judge will say, that’s what the DA will say, that’s what the defending atty will say.

    Heck, it’s even what Perry Mason said.

    Zimmerman was not proven guilty.

    ConradCA in reply to b42550a. | December 28, 2013 at 11:41 pm

    In court the only evidence that matters is that produced for the jury. The prosecutions own witnesses proved Zimmerman’s innocence. The lead investigative officer for this case testified that the evidence supported Zimmerman’s statement in every significant respect and he was correct.

    Trayvon had Zimmerman pinned to the ground an unable to defend himself from the blows that Trayvon was raining down on his head. Furthermore Zimmerman’s head injuries showed that his head had been bashed into the concrete sidewalk. These are two incidences of use of deadly force by Trayvon against Zimmerman and each provides justification for shooting in self defense. Furthermore, Trayvon had no injuries accept from his fist hitting Zimmerman and the bullet that killed him. This is all the evidence needed to prove Zimmerman not guilty of murder.

“It was just Zimmerman’s version & few scratches on his head. And a couple witnesses who thought they some fleeting things in the dark of night, but weren’t 100% sure. ”

There was a heck of a lot more than that, but apparently you weren’t able to discern that through the fog of your own prejudices masquerading as “objectivity.”

Prof. it is FAR too generous to say this artist was “low information”.

He is more correctly ANTI-information, from top to bottom.

I’m sure he has a work depicting the Boston Bombers as Minute Men.

But, you’re right. People should have the right to collect the “art” of such pukes.

    Crawford in reply to Ragspierre. | December 26, 2013 at 12:17 am

    Minute Men? They were whites, and fought to establish the United States. He has them dressed as Native Americans.

    David Yotham in reply to Ragspierre. | December 26, 2013 at 3:59 am

    One of the things that bothers me about such “pukes” is identification. Who is this person? Zimmerman we know. Trayvon we know. But, who is this person called Michael DAntuono? What do they look like and what are their qualifications to make the statements that they’re making? Why do people like this always hide their identities, never stepping out from under that rock they dwell under? No contact information, no photo, no history – just a lot of angry words demanding money for somebody else’s pain. heh They sound like another liberal art student who failed to maintain his parents standards, now working at Pizza Hut.

    Why should they get upset? As it is, they’re just an unidentified and unskilled troll trying to make some money off of another persons (Travyvon’s) bad decision/death.

    Libel is not libel? Since when is it protected?

    You notice the police badge? Another “police are pigs” idiot?

Such a loser. He has no stake in the tragedy. But he builds a false illustration on top of it, merely to make a buck. He can be sure of one thing: The only kinds of friends he can make, guarantee a lifetime of betrayal from them.

Cultism is a dangerous thing. Next, this ‘artist’ will be selling flowers on the corner, or proseletizing at mall entrances.

The anti-Zimmerman image, made worse in that it’s being hawked for profit, appears to me to be actionable defamation.

Oh my! Look at the big eyed innocence of the little boy (that Trayvon Martin wasn’t) that the “artist” tried to sell. A huge GZM and sweet, innocent boy offering candy. The real story: a six foot, almost 200 pound druggie buying the components for a high decided to go MMA on the pudgy neighborhood watch who couldn’t fight his way out of a wet paperbag but who, being armed, was able to save his life by shooting the thug dead, accidentally.

It’s good to get the story straight.

Oh my! Look at the big eyed innocence of the little boy (that Trayvon Martin wasn’t) that the “artist” tried to sell. A huge GZM and sweet, innocent boy offering candy. The real story: a six foot, almost 200 pound druggie buying the components for a high decided to go MMA on the pudgy neighborhood watch who couldn’t fight his way out of a wet paperbag but who, being armed, was able to save his life by shooting the thug dead, accidentally.

It’s good to get the story straight.

(Why am I getting a duplicate comment notice when I only hit submit once? Here goes again!)

Libel isn’t still libel? That picture is not libel?

1. Showing the picture as a child.
2. Showing the hood.

This here is not actionable?

It is the artist who is trying to sell Obama as a Messiah figure from the moment of his election, and he obviously sees blacks (and probably homosexuals and muslim terrorists) as victims, misunderstood, heroic, crucified.

Fact is, these people are crucified and victimized by their own ideologies, actions, compulsions – sin.

The mind of this artist is operating in the natural, fallen flesh nature, his mental processes bent and twisted until he believes the opposite of Truth, rejects facts, logic, reason.

It’s the same sort of thing that makes Islamists believe sharks, birds, rabbits, pigs, etc. are Israeli spy agents.

Bet the artist also hates America, loves Obama’s economic policies and has votes Democrat and multiple times in every election using numerous aliases and addresses. Bet he has also benefitted greatly at the expense of the working taxpayer.

For all of the Zimmerman sycophants that post here, you can now communicate directly with your idol, have fun!

George Zimmerman Is On Twitter –

    utahprez in reply to DriveBy. | December 26, 2013 at 8:25 am

    And you can get in line for the Saint Trayvon’s parents’ book when it comes out. I’m sure they will include chapters on his drug use, thuggish behavior, twitter pictures of guns and drugs and his school suspensions (the reason he was in Sanford in the first place):

    Immolate in reply to DriveBy. | December 26, 2013 at 10:24 am

    How many people here do you think really like Zimmerman? He was a low-information liberal, is a drama queen, and has a penchant for making bad decisions. His appreciation of the 2nd Amendment and the fact that he was in the right (once) doesn’t make him a candidate for friendship. Of course, a conservative is a liberal who got mugged, so maybe he’ll come around, after he works through all of his woman issues.

      platypus in reply to Immolate. | December 26, 2013 at 11:20 am

      Pretty sure “like” has nothing to do with my support of GZ. I have this stupid notion of supporting underdogs when said underdogs are being swarmed by manure-loving cowards. I took unbelievable grief for my defense of the father who murdered his own boys (Powell case in Tacoma). I never said anything about him killing his kids; merely asserted that without illegal and unconstitutional violations of his parental rights those boys would not have died.

      You would have thought I had given him a commie-type hug in front of the courthouse. Of course, constitutional rights don’t matter when we know somebody is guilty. Just need a show trial to make the lynching legal.

        DriveBy in reply to platypus. | December 26, 2013 at 11:55 am

        That’s bizzare… But fitting with your devotion to all things “George Zimmerman.” How did you defend his murder of his young sons with an axe and burning down the home, while a child services officer tried to stop him but was locked out? Never mind.

    I am pretty sure I would not like him at all.
    good chance I would have liked him and trayvon about the same, not at all.
    has nothing to do with the case.

    ConradCA in reply to DriveBy. | December 29, 2013 at 12:43 am

    You have made a lot of charges against Zimmerman and those of us who defend him based on the evidence produced at the trial. When are you going to back up your claims with evidence from the trial? I listed the evidence that proves Zimmerman’s innocence. What facts do you have to support your claims? I think that your just one of the progressive fascist supporters of Tyrant Obama and the cause. The ends justify the means for you and lying is ok if it’s for the cause. Prove me wrong if you can.

There is only the revolutionary truth, that set of words that serve to advance the glorious worker’s revolution…real facts do not matter to these folks, they prefer to believe in only that which confirms their bias and advances their ideology. I don’t know if Zimmerman was “innocent” or not – but what I do know is that when presented with the facts, a jury acquitted him of a crime. We do know this: Zimmerman’s proclivities and behaviors preceding the incident do not indicate a man who was capable of killing someone without provocation and what we do know about Martin seems to indicate that he was quite capable of providing that provocation. People still talk about Zimmerman’s duty to refrain from engagement – what about Saint Trayvon’s responsibility? Would this have not had a completely different outcome had Martin sat down on the curb and wait for the police – who Zimmerman had already called?

I wonder whether this painting would be sufficient to win a libel verdict — after all, depicting Zimmerman as a Kluxer doing an execution is clearly false and defamatory, and contrary to the known details of the incident.

    I doubt it’s actionable. Nowhere on the painting is the antagonist identified as George Zimmerman. Perhaps it’s titled that way or perhaps I’m not seeing it, but without that it’s just the identifiable Trayvon character that tells us who the Klansman is supposed to be.

      janitor in reply to Immolate. | December 26, 2013 at 11:19 am

      I don’t think ID has to be on the painting. The Zimmerman case is identified on the FB page using the painting as banner and elsewhere; the painting is ostensibly depicting facts or ideas of some sort pertaining to that case. Even if “everyone knows” that Zimmerman isn’t a KKK’er, the painting still conveys multiple deliberately false facts and impressions with apparent actual malice (publication — with accompanying narratives of a work obviously offensive, even pulled by EBay — continues for profit post-trial notwithstanding the now-knowable facts) about a specific individual, Zimmerman (e.g. he deliberately killed an innocent child, he is racist).

        Not A Member of Any Organized Political in reply to janitor. | December 26, 2013 at 1:38 pm

        Janitor, that is clearly defamation through libel.

        Time to Sue baby Sue!

        Sue them out of existence.

George answered many eBay questions about his “original painting,” including one about whether or not he was going to even try to pay Mr. O’Mara for saving his ass from decades in prison. George is (has always been) a POS:

Q: Will Mark O’Meara receive any proceeds from the sale of this painting? Dec-17-13
A: No.

    Ragspierre in reply to DriveBy. | December 26, 2013 at 10:54 am

    Oh, I think you’ve very nicely identified who is a POS over your history here.

    There is certainly no doubt in my mind.

      SmokeVanThorn in reply to Ragspierre. | December 26, 2013 at 2:48 pm

      DriveLie thinks we’ve forgotten the many times he’s been caught lying and the frequent meltdowns when the unconvincing “I’m the unbiased observer” guise just can’t be maintained and the pathological, foaming at the mouth hatred for Zimmerman bursts out.

      But we haven’t forgotten – and no one takes DriveLie seriously.

      Although I would buy a painting of DriveLie and the Two Suspicious Looking Hippies – that would be bitchin’.

    ConradCA in reply to DriveBy. | December 29, 2013 at 12:16 am

    You don’t need to worry about Zimmerman’s lawyers they are going to be paid by Florida and the great publicity they earned by saving an innocent man from the evil persecution of the progressive fascists will pay them back many times over.

Taking Trayvon idealization, even further, Breitbart reports a Methodist church has put up a bleeding Trayvon nativity scene.

Unsurprisingly, the church is in California and the pastor is a hyphenated female.

DriveBy still, unsurprisingly, thinks that because GZ is not a perfect person, he must be guilty of murder. Does he understand that the trial was about one specific event, not GZ’s whole life?

What is interesting to me is the total lack of connection between Martin’s completely unprovoked attack on Zimmerman, and the “knockout game” that has received so much press recently, esp with a White Texan being charged for a hate crime for targeting an elderly Black man, and esp since almost all such attacks are just the opposite – Black on White, and esp Black on Jewish. Martin had talked on social media about just this sort of thing, and the way that he knocked Zimmerman down with one blow is consistent with the rules of the Knockout Game – except that he didn’t just walk away after the original assault on Zimmerman, but instead climbed on top of his victim and apparently pummeled him MMA style. It is net resting to contemplate whether Martin would have been tried for a hate crime if he had been the one to survive, under today’s recognition that many of these attacks are racially motivated.