September 1, 2012

Bill Maher defends Eastwood: "He went up there without a net, on a tightrope... he did a bit with just an empty chair and killed."

"He committed to it, it was consistent, and it worked."

Maher is speaking as a standup comedian, knowing how hard it is. Halfway through the video clip at the link, Jason Alexander — wearing William Shatner's toupee — breaks in to say famous people could "urinate" on themselves and people would accept it as a good routine. Maher says no, at most they'd give you 1 minute to get funny; Eastwood worked that comic routine 10 minutes, successfully, and that was impressive. And Maher loathes Eastwood's political position. So that's impressive.

Also on last night's show, Maher talked to Dinesh D'Souza about his movie "2016: Obama’s America."

138 comments:

Chase said...

Loved Eastwood - the wife and I had no idea where it was going - the guy was working without a net!

Maher's right about that - Exciting goosebump TV!


Question:

If Eastwood's routine was not effective against Obama, why are the Democrats, liberals and the lap dog media so workedup about it - and still talking about it?


Answer:

You know why.

`

Sorun said...

Maher: "I had no idea [Eastwood] was such a down the line, right-wing a---hole.”

Dems are such haters.

machine said...

The reviews continue to pour in on Clint Eastwood’s appearance at the Republican National convention Thursday night, and "mixed" might be a charitable way to put it. One prominent Republican, Gov. Scott Walker of Wisconsin, said that he "cringed" at the performance.

Is Governor Walker part of the lap dog media?

Alex said...

So basically even Maher recognizes that Eastwood killed it and the libs are in big trouble. What is the DNC going to be except for one long parade of racial/gender/homo/commie politics?

America's Politico said...

I just thing it is over for Obama. Today is my last day in Chicago HQ. I cannot support a candidate who is an empty chair. Heading back to FL. Not sure what is the next step. Of course, I am watching all Eastwood movies now.

Alex said...

Is a single DNC speaker going to praise business in America? No not just small businesses, but the large ones too? And please, do not cite Apple that's too easy. How about all the other success stories?

Hagar said...

If the reviews of your first try at stand-up comedy is to compare you to Jimmy Stewart (who could do Jimmy Stewart better than anybody) and Bob Newhart, that ain't half bad!

Chase said...

"you mean, you mean, the guy that directed Sean Penn and, and, and Tim Robbins and, and, and Morgan Freeman and, and, and Hillary Swank is not, is, is, is not a ass-kisser of Obama like them?"

Matthew Sablan said...

After seeing the weird backlash, I take back my previous tepid remarks about it being weird. Eastwood played the media and the left very, very well.

jd said...

Althouse is clinging to an untenable position. Referencing maher for her is like citing a dissent in a brief. The routine was weird and awkward, and that appears to be the objective opinion of the nation at large

Jake Diamond said...

Wow! Althouse seems more than desperate to try to spin the Eastwood performance as a brilliant success. How do we know his performance "killed?" Because Bill Maher says so!

And since you value Bill Maher's opinion so much, please note that he said that politically, Eastwood is an idiot.

garage mahal said...

Maher really exposed D'Souza for the slimy snake that he is. Surprised he went on Maher's show.

alan markus said...

breaks in to say famous people could "urinate" on themselves and people would accept it as a good routine.

Hey, maybe that's something for Debbie Wasserman-Schultz to consider.

Chase said...

machine,

Throw a rock into a pack of dogs and the ones who yell loudest are the ones who got hit.


Nursing some wounds this morning, machine?

harrogate said...

That Maher clip is pretty good.

Chase said...

Sorun said:

Dems are such haters

Serious question:

Are there any Dems that would not be at least mildly comforatble living under a totalitarian regime, say, like under Breshnev, or Castro?

I'm totally serious in asking.

Alex said...

Florida poll shows vindication for Eastwood routine

* 16% switched from “undecided” to Romney.
* 6% switched from Obama to Romney.

That's a net +10 for GOP. Eastwood killed it.

Alex said...

Sorry, correction:

* Comparing the 2 aggregate numbers: 22% switched TO Romney, 12% switched TO Obama.

Chip S. said...

jd and JakeD should become aware of the legal concept of admission against interest before posting any more inane criticisms of Althouse's citation of Maher.

Chase said...

Maher really exposed D'Souza for the slimy snake that he is. Surprised he went on Maher's show.

garage, were you stoned when you watched the clip?

D'Sopuza rocked in the lion's den. Maher looked like a child still wanting to pull off the band-aid and say "See, it still hurts and you didn't kiss it."

Sorry buddy, D'Souza won the night.

cubanbob said...

America's Politico said...
I just thing it is over for Obama. Today is my last day in Chicago HQ. I cannot support a candidate who is an empty chair. Heading back to FL. Not sure what is the next step. Of course, I am watching all Eastwood movies now.

9/1/12 11:50 AM

Please don't. Stay at the HQ and give us your scathingly funny updates.

Jake 'Cubic Zirconium' Diamond calls Clint an idiot. Priceless.

Alex said...

Once again I ask - if voting against a dangerous President immoral? I keep hearing lefties say that a vote for Romney is a vote against Obama? My response - so fucking what? Obama scares the shit out of me. I don't pretend that Romney will provide a magical cure-all to our ills, but I feel that he will stop the bleeding.

Michael K said...

"One prominent Republican, Gov. Scott Walker of Wisconsin, said that he "cringed" at the performance.

Is Governor Walker part of the lap dog media? "

No, I also had reaction like that listening to it but when he finished, as someone else commented, it was apparent that it worked and was well done.

Machine, you reacted as expected.

Alex said...

Romney up +3 in latest Rasmussen poll

Just wait until the DNC Hate-fest concludes, Romney will be up +8 after that.

Tim said...

The one thing that's profoundly stupid about Obama and his supporters complaining/mocking/ridiculing Eastwood's speech is, even if one decides it was bad/awkward/weird, no one is going to decide to vote against Romney/for Obama on the basis of this speech.

Some might decide to vote against Obama because of it, though.

All the risk in drawing more attention to it is carried by Obama, not Romney.

Alex said...

Look I cringed myself watching the old man's body betray him at times. But in the end it was a brilliant performance for an 82 year old. Just remember how great he was in his prime.

"My mistake, 4 coffins".

n.n said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Alex said...

"A man's got to know his limitations" - Dirty Harry on Obama.

MayBee said...

Elizabeth Banks made a video for Obama where she said stupid things about how she didn't want to tell her employer she used birth control pills for her migraine.

That is ok. It's ok to be a stupid lefty celebrity.
It is tough going to be a right-leaning celebrity. Clint Eastwood, a legend, must be destroyed.

How does that feel to you, lefties? Why can't you just say, 'Oh well, a non-lefty celebrity" and move on?

Chase said...

jd said:

The routine was weird and awkward, and that appears to be the objective opinion of the nation at large

What "nation" you talking about Willis?

As Jon pointed out earlier:

SurveyUSA poll of Florida voters out this morning, finds reaction to Eastwood speech was positive by 2-1.

16% switched from “undecided” to Romney.
* 6% switched from Obama to Romney.
* Adding those 2 together, that’s 22% who switched TO Romney.



Alex said...

Chase - but 12% switched TO Obama, so it's a net 10% to Romney.

n.n said...

Eastwood also made a universally relevant remark, which seems to have been forgotten in the rush to convict him. He reminded us that irrespective of who is elected to office, they must be held accountable by the people he serves. The principles claimed by an individual may promote an outcome, but they do not guarantee it.

Also, as Maher's response reminds us, each individual's behavior and outlook can be described through a constellation of vectors. The degree and direction of each vector varies for each and every issue, perspective, etc. that it represents. An individual's stated philosophy, ideology, etc. does not provide a comprehensive description of this constellation. And, not surprisingly, there is varying degrees of correlation between one individual and the next.

When we acknowledge that correlation exists, we have integrity of character. When we deny it, then we are merely hacks and opportunists. Apparently, Maher does have some personal integrity.

Chase said...

Alex,

Cooool!

Jon said...

jd said: "The routine was weird and awkward, and that appears to be the objective opinion of the nation at large."

Don't confuse the media with the nation at large. SurveyUSA poll found that Florida voters had positive reaction to Eastwood's speech by 2-1.

AprilApple said...

So what If Walker didn't like Clint's routine? It doesn't bother anybody that he has a differing opinion.

You democrats would walk lockstep over a cliff defending the corruption on your side. I never see a democrat fall out of line. Why is that?

Alex said...

No Walker liked it, but he cringed during those moments we all did. You know when Clint was stumbling over his words like you'd expect an 82 year old pre-senility case.

MayBee said...

Even Jason Alexander who, as far as I know, is not getting paid to do anything these days gets to say stupid stuff like the urinate quote (seriously, Jason, put your theory to the test!) but nobody on the right has to destroy him.


How does this feel to you guys?
How does this reflect on Obama, who at one point promised to bring all Americans together in a very special way. Remember the convention speech that made him famous?
Three years into his presidency and a celebrity slips out of the Blue America zone and pow!

Alex said...

Alinsky Rule 5. “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon. It is almost impossible to counteract ridicule. Also it infuriates the opposition, which then reacts to your advantage.”

Alex said...

Imagine if we won turning Alinsky's Rules for Radicals back ON Obama? Political ju-jitsu!

AprilApple said...

Than again, Maher sort fell out of line, but then he got back in...

Hagar said...

This Ron Christie looks and sounds like David Brooks in blackface.

alan markus said...

@ AprilApple
So what If Walker didn't like Clint's routine? It doesn't bother anybody that he has a differing opinion.

@ Alex
No Walker liked it, but he cringed during those moments we all did.

Maybe he was reliving those debates where he was sharing the stage with a "fuzzy" older politician who came off a little past his prime.

JohnJ said...

“One prominent Republican, Gov. Scott Walker of Wisconsin, said that he ‘cringed’ at the performance.”

As did the wife & I, at the time.

But you know, the next day, and still now, it seems funnier than hell.

EMD said...

I have to give AP credit.

He was accused of being stale, and now he's the one without the tightrope.

garage mahal said...

"SurveyUSA poll of Florida voters out this morning, finds reaction to Eastwood speech was positive by 2-1."

Caution: As expected, those who watched the speeches at the Republican National Convention were disproportionately Republican.

Hehe.

Mary Beth said...

It was uncomfortable to watch because of all the pauses when he was trying to remember what he wanted to say next. We're too used to him having every line down and delivering them with confidence.

furious_a said...

Machine: Is Governor Walker part of the lap dog media?

Not at all, unlike Cory Booker Gov. Walker free to deviate from the Narrative.

AprilApple said...

Alan Marcus--
Maybe he was reliving those debates where he was sharing the stage with a "fuzzy" older politician who came off a little past his prime.

plausible - heh.

kentuckyliz said...

Birth control pills don't treat migraines, they cause them--especially if they are higher dose estrogen pills. Which is why when women's estrogen levels drop through adulthood and especially after menopause, they cease having migraines. Elizabeth Banks, you're making it worse! Take NSAID's, ergotamines, calcium channel blockers, beta-blockers, and/or anticonvulsants. See your doctor to work on the right combo of drugs for you. Also, the breasts you save might be your own. Using hormonal contraception for five years or longer in your lifetime skyrockets your risk of breast cancer, which explains the epidemic of breast cancer reaching into younger age groups of women. It used to be an old woman's disease. Women who start the pill in their teens and stay on it for years are trading their health and life span for round-the-calendar sexual access (making a difference of about 48-72 hours a month). That's like killing a gnat with a steam roller.

Kit said...

Fighting schadenfreude with more schadenfreude.

Yawn.

Hagar said...

Mary Beth should get some old Jack Benny and Bob Newhart clips and watch them work the audience.

And Eastwood's skit was made for laughs, but more to bite, and bite it did. Just listen to the news media with their panties all in a twist.

Jon said...


@garage 12:26 PM

Independents had a positive reaction by 54% to 24%.

phx said...

I didn't see it. I just figure Eastwood gets a pass no matter what. Maybe he doesn't even need one.

He's Clint Eastwood.

Lem said...

If you remember towards the end Eastwood was... for lack of a better word nice.

Its important that you realise that you are the best in the world, whether you are democrat or you are republican or libertarian or whatever and we should not ever forget that.

Contrast that to Mahers disclaimertish insult..

Its like, yea, on the one hand I think he did well as far as a command performance but that doesn't mean I'm one of them.. don't misunderstand.

Mahers underestimates the audience powers of perception.. even when he is seemingly praising it.

Talks down to people.

phx said...

Trust the artist. Just think of how many times someone said Bob Dylan sucks.

Alex said...

phx - I had a feeling it wouldn't impress you.

edutcher said...

Maher steps out from behind his petulance to give props to another performer.

For that, I'll give him a pat on the back.

Jake Diamond said...

Wow! Althouse seems more than desperate to try to spin the Eastwood performance as a brilliant success.

The term "Eastwooding" ring any bells?

Diamond and the mindless automaton are the ones who are spinning.

So, one might add, is Uncle Saul. I'll bet he didn't envision his rules being used this way.

PS My thanks to Alex for appropriating so much of my material from today and yesterday.

phx said...

@Alex If you're talking about Eastwood's bit I didn't see it. It sounds like it might have been impressive but I didn't see it.

Clint Eastwood is pretty impressive. That's why whatever he says goes. I'm still voting for Obama. If I vote.

I suppose.

aritai said...

Re: the (empty) chair. It struck me as the type of prop a (method) actor would use to get into the proper frame of mind. In this case, Mr. O, a poorly performing, arrogant and sullen employee is about to get a dressing down from his boss, we-the-people. Which is going to end with “you’re fired, get out of my sight.”

Mr. E even asks him to step aside to let Mr. R begin cleaning up the mess he’s created. Which reminds me, anyone else remember the clamor in the MSM in 2008 asking that Mr. B remove himself in November so Mr. O could begin to save the earth and earn his Nobel immediately? Certainly seems more deserved in this case.

Well done. I hope am half as able when I’m 80. I suspect the leftists have yet to appreciate how Mr. E's skit has exposed their emperor, and is inexorably destroying the facades of their entire Potemkin village.

Lem said...

If it was so bad, they would not still be talking about it.

Lets do a thought experiment..

Make a list... bad movies, bad restaurants, bad football/baseball games, bad comedians..

Do you stay with them to marinate over, dissecting it like a moon rock?

Or do you just tweet ONCE OR TWICE and move on?

There something about that empty chair that hit a soft spot..

Like a guy walking on his side, nursing an operation who instead of staying home puts on his suit, and hopes nobody comes up for high fives.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

Oh wow. Yeay for objectivity, huh Althouse?

Now how about some praise for Republicans who criticize their own, or praise the other? Where's your scorn for conservative SCOTUS justices who generally decide cases one way, but not when "the shoe is on the other foot"?

You don't sound like the sort of John Huntsman supporter that someone as in favor of balance and objectivity as you portray yourself might be expected to be. Of course, maybe you just like, as bin Laden put it, "strong horses", and give infinite deference to the power inherent in an idea or a person before deciding that there's any merit in what they stand for.

shiloh said...

Let's recap, shall we:

Continuing minutiae aside, Clint is more popular than mittens. Shocking!

ToddKman said...

I'd love to see the president try doing something similar next week..without a teleprompter.

Lem said...

The term "Eastwooding" ring any bells?

Now that you mention it..

Teabagging?

alan markus said...

Hey, Althouse got linked at Real Clear Politics today!

RealClearPolitics

Althouse: On Eastwood, are Liberals Dumb or Just Playing Dumb?

Oops, I guess I should have thought twice about calling Lindsey Meadows a guy, considering company is coming. No, not really.

ndspinelli said...

Ann "Smokin' Joe" Althouse.

Unknown said...

Lol. Berneke talking of a QE4. Obamas team is at the end of their ropes regarding the economy. Tank is empty.

Toast.

John said...

One of two things is true.

1. Eastwood is senile.
2. Eastwood is an exceptional actor and made the presentation intended.

Maher guesses number 2. Unfortunately, Eastwood will never be seen in public again - so we will never know the true answer.

ndspinelli said...

Hollywood people are always cautious about blasting other Hollwood folks, particularly if they're as powerful as Clint. Ben Affleck had kid gloves also. They all live in fear of "Never having lunch in this town" said to them.

Robert Cook said...

I'm surprised there's meat there for so many separate blog posts here today! Jeebus! If not for the 24 news cycle and blogging, this thing would already be yesterday's news. Both those making much of Eastwood's "disaster" and those making much of his "triumph" are making of it something it was not.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

Maher also pointed out that Eastwood has seven children with five wives.

I expect the family values social conservatives on this board to be up in arms. But of course they won't be.

All of a sudden being a good role model and having decent character means nothing when you've got the money to pay for your bad behavior. That's today's Republican message to America, and they expect it to be one that the mainstream in this country will respect.

I'm not so sure they will.

phx said...

I'd love to see the president try doing something similar next week..without a teleprompter. Okay, but then Romney has to do it, too.

Can we vote right after they each do that? Got my $ on Obama, but who knows?

phx said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Alex said...

Does anyone really want to go down the road of attacking Clint's personal life?

Alex said...

Clint has always been a libertarian, so going after him on his multiple marriages is a dog that won't hunt. No doubt many religious conservatives had a big problem with Clint on the stage because to them it's all about the personal morals. Never mind that this country is in a huge mess - it's all about the peccadilloes.

phx said...

No, they don't Alex. That topic is closed.

phx said...

Nobody has to say another word about it one way or another.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

My mr. "phx". You certainly seem to have a very personal stake invested in what other people are allowed to talk about.

alan markus said...

@ O Ritmo
All of a sudden being a good role model and having decent character means nothing when you've got the money to pay for your bad behavior

Liberals will never get that this has nothing to do with money, but everything about taking personal responsibility for one's actions.

phx said...

Back to the bigger topic. I respect Eastwood coming out with or for whoever he wants. I mean respect with a capital R. Eastman's not a perfect man or a model for anyone other than other actors or his kids I guess, but he's all right. Like a good fella, only not in the mafia. He's got a good heart. I can so easily see that; most people can I think.

phx said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Alex said...

phx makes a great point. The average "on the fence" swing voter likes Clint and they don't like the idea of re-electing the empty chair.

phx said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Lem said...

If the liberals continue on this path, the empty chair could trump Obama's "you didn't build that" as his recollection signature.

Of course the "you didn't built that" remark was aimed at a business minority, from whom Obama expects little.

But the empty chair... 23 million unemployed.

Reminds me of another democrat blunder.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

Liberals will never get that this has nothing to do with money, but everything about taking personal responsibility for one's actions.

Regardless of whether they had the talent for making that money, the privilege of inheriting it, or the drive to work hard for it. Only one of those things is based on personal initiative.

By your standard, I could say that O.J. Simpson had the money to take responsibility for being charged with murder by being able to pay for a top-notch legal defense.

Thank you for demonstrating the corrupt basis for how you understand responsibility and morality.

Ignorance is Bliss said...

I finally had a chance to watch it. I wasn't that impressed, but it wasn't particularly weird either. No way it hurts Romney, and will most likely help get his message out to people who otherwise would not have been listening.

bagoh20 said...

Out here in California, Obama voting Hollywood elites are pushing hard right now to get $100 million in tax credits extended to support the movie industry, so it doesn't continue to move to other states and countries with lower taxes.

Lower taxes for rich people is a good thing after all, I guess.

The same people also support our High speed train which after getting approved by voters years ago has doubled in cost, become a low speed train, and ridership estimates have dropped to 1/3 of the selling figures. It is yet to be started. $68 billion and growing. We are already completely broke. Thank God for Hollywood.

rhhardin said...

I like Maher but always wonder how he's so stupid about economics.

The problem is the number of possible voluntary exchanges, not the presence of rich people.

Government after a certain size reduces the possibilities for exchanges instead of increasing them.

Enforcement of contracts, for instance, increases the number of possible exchanges.

Health care mandates decrease the number of possible exchanges.

Guitar neck wood import restrictions decrease the number of possible exchanges.

And so forth for a million new regulations, invented daily by federal agencies.

No exchanges means no jobs.

wyo sis said...

O
Redefine the question then answer the redefinition.
Good work.
I can recognize a master at his craft as well, and just like Mahar I acknowledge the skill then go ahead and believe what I always did.
Unconvinced...but entertained.

alan markus said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
alan markus said...

Thank you for demonstrating the corrupt basis for how you understand responsibility and morality.

Nope, I'm saying that conservatives tend to demand taking personal responsibility for their actions. Makes no difference how many times someone has been married or how many children they have, as long as they care of themselves and don't dump on society.

OJ Simpson did not take any personal responsibility for his actions, actually did the opposite by using his money to avoid being found guilty.

Archie Waugh said...

If the apoplectic reaction of my lib friends on Facebook is any indication, Eastwood really got under their skin. Of course they attacked the performance, and ignored what he actually said...or pretended to.

Jake Diamond said...

Obama scares the shit out of me. I don't pretend that Romney will provide a magical cure-all to our ills, but I feel that he will stop the bleeding.

I know a few people who make decisions based on fear. Personally I prefer to make decisions based on facts and reason.

wyo sis said...

Jake
Fear works too. Fear is a pretty good mechanism for recognizing when something is not right.

phx said...

You can't expect Democrat rank & file not to take advantage of that if they can. You have to take responsibility for that, imo.

It is what it is. Maybe it was a brilliant move. But "Wah the Democrats are trashing him in FB" is just whining, and makes GOP look bad.

It might be smart to bide your time and stop responding with the cliches of Victimhood.

phx said...

For some people fear is like alcohol. They get afraid and they can't even think straight.

bagoh20 said...

Facts: 4 years of malaise, no budget for 3 years, no plan to fix either.

Reason: This is bad, and not likely to improve on it's own. That's scary.

Conclusion: Do something different.

I don't see any conflict between fear and reason. Both say flight or fight, and I like it here, because I know where everything is.

Cedarford said...

rhhardin - "The problem is the number of possible voluntary exchanges, not the presence of rich people.

Government after a certain size reduces the possibilities for exchanges instead of increasing them."

==============
Not true, if the richest few control most of the wealth...you have a stultified nation with little growth.
You cut off the heads of the French aristocracy, shoot the Russian nobles or the Paraguayan 200 Families in Charge of everything..........
You put the money, lands, and accumulated other resources once in the hands of a few into the hands of many of the proleteriate and peasantry.
Transactional exchanges go up overall. Voluntary or not.
That is why post Revolutionary France and the Soviet Union in the 20s and early 30s had such impressive growth and material improvement in the lives of the peasants and serfs as opposed to how they lived under the King and aristocrats, Czar and Nobles...with no trickledown.

Trickledown doesn't work.
away from


PatCA said...

Maher's argument with D'Souza about the film was actually pretty cogent.

I still don't get the "obstructionist Republican" meme though.

Obama had all three branches of government! The GOP was powerless. He passed everything he wanted, even though Americans were against the stimulus and Obamacare. So, what's the deal?

shiloh said...

"seven children with five wives."

Hey, Althouse blubber boy hero, family value, Limbaugh has been married 4 times.

Fortunately for humanity's sake, Limbo has no children!

ok, let's give Limbo the benefit of the doubt and say at least he believes in the religious institution of marriage. :-P

hmm

"serial womanizer"

affairs with actresses Catherine Deneuve

Jill Banner

Jamie Rose

Inger Stevens

Jo Ann Harris

Jean Seberg

Megan Rose

James Brolin's former wife Jane

columnist Bridget Byrne

and swimming champion Anita Lhoest

What's not to like as Rowdy has been quite rowdy er randy! :D

Inger & Catherine :)

>

Quite the dichotomy w/mittens lol.

AprilApple said...

I still don't get the "obstructionist Republican" meme though.

Obama had all three branches of government! The GOP was powerless. He passed everything he wanted, even though Americans were against the stimulus and Obamacare. So, what's the deal?


This must be shouted from the roof tops.
Plus the fact that obstructionist democrats don't let any reform bills from the House come up for a vote. The dems and the pro-democrat media have the audacity to say republicans are obstructionist. Riiiiiiight.

rhhardin said...

@Cederford

You're describing a limited access society, which gets its stability from distributing access to rents according to access to violence.

Each rent-seeker is better off with the system than without it, and each has the means to enforce it.

That's what Obama is heading towards.

An open access society, the US until now, gets its stability from a million ideas with the good ones adding to the number of exchanges possible.

The standard of living ratio of open access to limited access is historically about ten to one.

The bottom rung, ten times lower again, is tribal, namely hit the guy on the head and take his stuff. No investment pays off, and most of the resources go into defending your limited junk.

Finally, money isn't wealth.

Paco Wové said...

"He passed everything he wanted, even though Americans were against the stimulus and Obamacare. So, what's the deal?"

I think the story goes: Democrats can't be expected to govern unless they have total control. One Republican pipes up in opposition, and all their beautiful plans come to naught, and it's all the R's fault.

rhhardin said...

@Cederford

Trickle down isn't dimes falling from the pockets of the rich.

It's that the ditch digger with heavy equipment earns a lot more than the ditch digger with a shovel.

The difference is capital. That's what the rich supply (capital is extra money, the rich have extra money. They buy heavy equipment because it pays off. The ditch digger as a result earns a lot more).

If you redistribute capital, all the seed corn gets eaten this year.

The rich don't eat the seed corn.

shiloh said...

"Obama had all three branches of government!"

The SC is quite conservative, Roberts raining on the cons ACA parade notwithstanding.

Jake Diamond said...

Obama had all three branches of government!

Yet another Althouse reader without an understanding of our system of government.

The three branches of the federal government of the United States:

1. legislative,
2. executive,
3. judicial

Only in the fantasy world of lunatic right wingers did President Obama control the judicial branch of the federal government.

Moreover, Democrats do not control the 112th Congress. How do some Althouse Republicans happen to know so little about our government, politics and current events?

Chip Ahoy said...

Bill Maher dijo algo. *pausa* Sí. *pausa* Eso es muy interesante, Andy.

That's my imitation of Floyd the Barber. Andy of Mayberry. With the thing accidentally turned to Spanish. Come on! The way Floyd talks. He's hilarious. The character is based on a real barber who actually did cut Griffith's hair and Griffith goes, "oh man, this is too perfect. Too perfect to miss. We gotta put Russell in the show. Here, Howard, act exactly like Russell, and that's how we have Floyd. Who is hilarious.

Chip Ahoy said...

Put the close quote up there where it should go. Sorry.

Joe Schmoe said...

I expect the family values social conservatives on this board to be up in arms. But of course they won't be.

They probably are, but the intellectual diversity is much bigger in the GOP tent than the Democrats'. It's a squabble that will be kept within the family. Doesn't mean it will be resolved to everyone's satisfaction. The beauty of conservative thought is that we know humans are flawed. We don't think people like Clint should be brought to heel by forced sterilization and mandatory women's studies. He made his own bed and he's accountable for his actions. He's not crying for government to bail him out, or remunerate him in some way for his poorer decisions in life.

AndyN said...

Jake Diamond said...

Obama had all three branches of government!
/snip/
Moreover, Democrats do not control the 112th Congress.


And you were doing so well with the branches of government part. Should have quit while you were ahead instead of making yourself look even more ignorant than the person you were trying to correct by failing at basic grammar.

AndyN said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
cubanbob said...

Jake Diamond said...
Obama scares the shit out of me. I don't pretend that Romney will provide a magical cure-all to our ills, but I feel that he will stop the bleeding.

I know a few people who make decisions based on fear. Personally I prefer to make decisions based on facts and reason.

Wow! Your going to vote for Romney! Who knew?

Amazing how Reagan and Bush never having a veto proof senate and a small majority in the house were able to pass legislation but Obama can't.

rhhardin when you exchange comments with c4 you have to understand you are dealing with a Klansman and with a Klansman's economic views.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

They probably are, but the intellectual diversity is much bigger in the GOP tent than the Democrats'.

Lol. It includes some with a meager portion of intellect and many with none at all.

Kidding. Sort of.

OJ Simpson did not take any personal responsibility for his actions, actually did the opposite by using his money to avoid being found guilty.

Oh, so you're going the criminal acquittal route. Well, O.J. was sued in a civil suit for his culpability in those deaths, too. And paid 'em off. So the system worked there, too. He was allowed to use his money to pay off the disaster he made by ending someone's lives.

Which is how Republicans feel about moral/political issues generally. Money obviates the morality of what you should or should not be allowed to do to someone.

Name one political and/or possibly moral issue where a Republican can't be bought off with enough money to side with the better funded argument.

This is the folly of an ideology where an ordered hierarchy (and therefore, unequal privilege) is paramount.

Jake Diamond said...

AndyN thinks the 112th Congress came into existence just now. Believe it or not, the 112th Congress dates to January 2011. (2011 is in the past!) Therefore, included in the time period when Obama didn't control all 3 branches of government is the period from January 2011 to the present during which the Democrats have not controlled the 112th Congress.

It takes a special kind of stupidity to fail miserably when correcting someone about grammar. Congratulations to AndyN for displaying that special stupidity for the entertainment of all.

BaltoHvar said...

rhhardin said: "The problem is the number of possible voluntary exchanges, not the presence of rich people.

Government after a certain size reduces the possibilities for exchanges instead of increasing them."

This is the essence of a free market model, and how it is fouled by external, non-economic forces.

Cedarford said (in rebuttal): "That is why post Revolutionary France and the Soviet Union in the 20s and early 30s had such impressive growth..." Napoleonic Wars, deliberate Famine and Political Purges - sure signs of social, political and economic prosperity.

hombre said...

Which is how Republicans feel about moral/political issues generally. Money obviates the morality of what you should or should not be allowed to do to someone.

How does one determine what "you should or should not be allowed to do to someone" in the world of the moral relativist, Ritmo?

hombre said...

Name one political and/or possibly moral issue where a Republican can't be bought off with enough money to side with the better funded argument.

Abortion, religious faith. There are others, but you are just projecting here. Dems are nearly all bought and paid for the media simply covers it up. More money from banks, Wall Street and lobbyists in 2008.

Cedarford said...

cubanbob - "rhhardin when you exchange comments with c4 you have to understand you are dealing with a Klansman and with a Klansman's economic views."

Not, but ever wonder why when you rootless cosmopolitan guys leave a nation, having been expelled, the locals are generally very happy about it??
Cuba was just another example of "Don't let the door hit you on the butt on the way out. Go plunder and try to grab as much power as you can in another nation."

mrs whatsit said...

Garage, of course mostly Republicans watched the convention -- but since then, pretty much EVERYBODY has seen the Eastwood video, whether they watched the convention or not, and no matter what party they're in. The thing went viral because your side won't stop making such a silly fuss over it and keeping it on everyone's minds. (For instance, almost every liberal I know has posted an "Eastwooding" photo of an empty chair on FB. Do they actually think they're HELPING Obama by reinforcing the empty chair meme like that?) This is the proof that it worked. Had it not stung so badly, you and yours would not be hollering over it in the age-ist, ugly way you are.

PatCA said...

Ok, fine, he didn't control the entire judicial branch, although the SCOTUS ruled in his favor on Obamacare, so who cares that Roberts is a "conservative."

He controlled the Senate, the House and of course the Executive and the quasi-executive of his czars and HHS and EPA and all the other alphabet soup of apparatchiks.

What the hell else did he need?

Seriously, I want a good explanation, b/c it's the only thing in Maher's rebuttal that really stuck out as indefensible.

Calypso Facto said...

Badger Pundit did a nice mashup of this RNC speech and the Halftime in America ad. (h/t Legal Insurrection)

Revenant said...

I guess even stopped clocks are right twice a day.

rcocean said...

Needing a dope like Bill "the Dogface boy" Maher to defend you isn't a good thing.

William said...

I saw the Eastwood movie about J. Edgar Hoover. I can understand how Maher thought of Eastwood as an acceptable conservative. The Eastwood movie included every conceivable liberal slander against Hoover. It made him out to be some kind of weird Norman Bates character.....Just for the record: Hoover did not blackmail FDR for more autonomy. It was FDR who encouraged and enhanced Hoover's pursuit of power. The first FBI black bag jobs weren't against the Commies, but against the Bund and Liberty Lobby. They were done at FDR's urging. FDR also enjoyed any tidbits of salacious gossip that Hoover could supply him....I don't know if Hoover was a monster, but if he was, FDR had quite a lot to do in building it.....Hoover screwed up a lot of things, but he was the founder and guiding spirit of an organization that to this day enjoys a high reputation for honesty and competence. Compare the scandals that have occurred in the FBI with those in other Federal Agencies such as the CIA, ATF, etc. Hoover did a lot of things right, and that is not shown in Eastwood's movie.

cubanbob said...

Cedarford said...
cubanbob - "rhhardin when you exchange comments with c4 you have to understand you are dealing with a Klansman and with a Klansman's economic views."

Not, but ever wonder why when you rootless cosmopolitan guys leave a nation, having been expelled, the locals are generally very happy about it??
Cuba was just another example of "Don't let the door hit you on the butt on the way out. Go plunder and try to grab as much power as you can in another nation."

9/1/12 5:07 PM

So besides being a racial socialist you're now an out of the closet communist.

Synova said...

"I know a few people who make decisions based on fear. Personally I prefer to make decisions based on facts and reason."

Fear comes in two forms, rational and irrational.

Someone who isn't afraid when they should be, is not rational.

chickelit said...

O Ritmo Segundo said...
Maher also pointed out that Eastwood has seven children with five wives.

I expect the family values social conservatives on this board to be up in arms. But of course they won't be.


There were no dead girl/live boy scandals in Shilho's list so Clint never suffered (unlike Dingy Harry Reid).

Neither Obama nor Romney have issues with womanizing so what's your point?

Unknown said...

shiloh grumbles about, "seven children with five wives.", and a list of dalliances with a harem of lovelies. As far as his affairs go, he had much better taste than Bill Clinton and he didn't need Arkansas state troopers to round up his paramours. I do however, hate to think of his alimony and child support payments.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

How does one determine what "you should or should not be allowed to do to someone" in the world of the moral relativist, Ritmo?

It may come as a shock to certain senile idiots that one need not deem ancient texts written by Near Eastern goat-herders as the final word of absolute moral truth, and still be a moral person. The difference comes from using reason to guide your morality. (Which is something of which you are probably incapable).

And since you don't value reason, then it's not worth taking you seriously in any event, let alone as someone who can have a reasonable discussion about morality.

bgates said...

It may come as a shock to certain senile idiots that one need not deem ancient texts written by Near Eastern goat-herders as the final word of absolute moral truth, and still be a moral person.

Please try to get these exact words included in the Democratic platform.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

"Name one political and/or possibly moral issue where a Republican can't be bought off with enough money to side with the better funded argument."

Abortion,


Funny. You have a citation on that? How poorly funded is the "Pro-Life" at the Zygote stage movement? I heard one of its branches actually runs a country in Europe.

...religious faith.

Yes. Tax-exempted religious organizations are sooo poorly funded! Their vast media empires are also so obscure as to have no influence whatsoever in American politics - or so you would have us believe.

There are others, but you are just projecting here. Dems are nearly all bought and paid for the media simply covers it up. More money from banks, Wall Street and lobbyists in 2008.

It's interesting that you lack the capacity to distinguish between accepting the valuable existence of a sector of the economy and allowing that industry to dictate legislative terms. Thus, the difference between a bribe and a donation.

We could outlaw all financial transfers to politicians, but it is only the Republican Pied Pipers who refuse to legislate activities conducted by those who call their tune.

Prove me wrong by identifying a single Republican-sponsored piece of legislation that went further than Dodd-Frank (or that would go further than other Democratic-proposed reforms of the financial services industry). Good little right-wing whore that you are, though, you won't.

Who's calling your tune.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

Please try to get these exact words included in the Democratic platform.

Why? Are ancient Near-Eastern goat herders yet another demographic that you wish to court?

Anyways, a "platform" on it isn't necessary. Irreligious belief is one of the fastest growing "creeds" in the U.S. But as with fast-growing non-white ethnic groups, you continue to look down on them while your favored demographic dwindles to the point of eventually being swallowed whole.

Myself, I don't lack respect for ancient texts. I just don't think that literal (if incredibly selective) interpretations of them trump the need to apply them, if at all, reasonably to modern-day, industrial, technologically advanced, non-pastoral civilizations.

Not that I expect you to see the obvious logic in that or anything.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

What a brain and a few minutes with the Google thing will do:

The National Right to Life PAC must pay a $25,000 fine, which is dwarfed by the PAC's election spending during that election cycle and in other election cycles in the past. Center for Responsive Politics data shows that the group has been relatively quiet this election cycle, having raised and spent only $386,000 and $470,000, respectively. In every other election cycle since 1990, the PAC has raised and spent in the seven-figure range.

Rusty said...

O Ritmo Segundo said...
Maher also pointed out that Eastwood has seven children with five wives.


So?

I expect the family values social conservatives on this board to be up in arms. But of course they won't be.


Why? Was it a bad speech?



O Ritmo Segundo said...

1. Hypocrisy.

(And BTW, why do Republicans keep brushing hypocrisy off as if it's a neutral or even virtuous thing? I thought they were all about "integrity". I guess not.)

2. It was a speech. An unusual one, of course, but that's not a problem in and of itself. It made use of acting techniques that might have seemed innovative, creative or effective to some, but I haven't encountered any people with such opinions off of this blog or outside of the right-wing bubble.

Non-Republican Bill Maher found it effective, but he was judging its effect on only one, particularly limited audience. Jon Stewart thought it made Eastwood look senile and the epitome of projected Republican fantasies of how they imagine Obama to be, rather than who he really is. That was funny.

I don't think that praise even from Republicans was uniformly effusive.

Of course, your mileage may vary. But I don't think that the GOP is in a mood to be realistic these days. I would think that warps their perception a bit.

Eastwood is a talented actor and director but I always thought him a bit of a crank with a violent streak. Does that make him the best spokesperson for Republican outreach? Probably not.

But by now I've thought way too much about this anyway, though. I'm sure that its impact is limited. It's ten mildly sour minutes out of a generation full of frenzied hatred directed at imagined enemies all across America and the world. Much more symptomatic of Republican ills than a way to diagnose how healthy or sick their politics really are.

BoMomma said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
BoMomma said...

Eastwood had a great message and delivered it brilliantly. I would bet it will be the speech most listened to repeatedly on the Internet (RNC or DNC) until the November election. So Eastwood's message will continue to be told. Brilliant. RR-2012

Amartel said...

Every now and then Maher says something sensible and everyone rushes to heap praise on this nasty little man. Hello? Earth to Charlie Brown? He's the same asshole he was when he was calling people "cunts" and praising terrorists for their bravery. He's only saying it to keep his last remaining shreds of cred. He'll be back to misrepresenting and sneering shortly, don't worry.