September 1, 2012

Why the criticism and mockery of Clint Eastwood will backfire.

Obama supporters are straining to nullify Clint Eastwood's GOP convention performance, but it's not going to work. Take, for example, Michael Moore, writing in The Daily Beast, which embeds the full-length video of what it labels "Clint's Crazy Speech." Moore — who everyone knows is a left-wing propagandist — says:
The footage of Eastwood rambling and mumbling to his "Harvey"—President Obama—will be played to audiences a hundred years from now as the Most Bizarre Convention Moment Ever. The people of the future will know nothing about Dirty Harry or Josey Wales or Million Dollar Baby. They will know about the night a crazy old man hijacked a national party's most important gathering so he could literally tell the president to go do something to himself (i.e. fuck  himself). In those few moments (and these days, it only takes a few moments—see Anthony Weiner), he completely upended and redefined how he'll be remembered by younger and future generations....
Who won't watch the video now? Most people didn't watch the convention and therefore didn't see the speech in its context, within which it was anomalous. Eastwood wasn't speechifying to the huge crowd from a teleprompted script. He was seemingly speaking straight from his head — you know, the illusion actors know how to create. It had an intimacy and riskiness that you just don't expect from a convention stage. That's what made it so much fun for people who are rooting for Romney, but it also the invited ridicule from those who want Obama to win.

Accepting that invitation is taking the bait. And look what is happening. Millions of folks who didn't bother watching the convention are watching Eastwood's performance out of the context within which it was anomalous. They're watching viral video.

You expect viral video to be surprising and weird in some way. And the intimacy and riskiness of the performance is cool in the context of a little window on your computer. You listen to exactly what Clint says as you hang in there waiting for it to be as crazy as the Obama promoters are claiming. And you have whatever love for Clint Eastwood you happen to bring to this little project of watching a viral video. And there is a lot of love out there. These people are throwing hate at a guy you have loved, so, okay, let's see what's so terrible.

Should Obama supporters be spreading this viral video? Should they want the moderate undecideds of the country sitting at their computers attending to lines like:
But — you know about — I remember three and a half years ago, when Mr. Obama won the election. And though I was not a big supporter, I was watching that night when he was having that thing and they were talking about hope and change and they were talking about, yes we can, and it was dark outdoors, and it was nice, and people were lighting candles.

They were saying, I just thought, this was great. Everybody is trying, Oprah was crying.

I was even crying. And then finally — and I haven’t cried that hard since I found out that there is 23 million unemployed people in this country.

Now that is something to cry for because that is a disgrace, a national disgrace, and we haven’t done enough, obviously — this administration hasn’t done enough to cure that. Whatever interest they have is not strong enough, and I think possibly now it may be time for somebody else to come along and solve the problem.
Imagine some uncommitted voter clicks on the embedded video, predisposed to laugh at the crazy old man, and then — alone at the computer — encounters the beloved elder talking about things that have made him cry. They might not laugh. They might be drawn in by Eastwood's performance. They might not take direction from people like Moore who've instructed them to mock. That uncommitted voter might prefer the direction of the far greater director, Clint Eastwood.

***

I thought of a new slogan: Putting the Mitt in uncommitted.

163 comments:

America's Politico said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Jay said...

When haven't these people gone over the top with attacks and have it backfire?

Hey, remember when Ryan's budget was going to sink the Romney campaign?

*GIGGLE*

ndspinelli said...

Althouse the spinmeister. I love Clint. It was brave, maybe. Weird definitely.

Jay said...

It is interesting Ann that the "smart" people can't grasp what Eastwood did.

Their reaction is entirely name calling, hysteria, and silly emotionalisms.

Thanks for the analysis, it is illuminating.

America's Politico said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
The Drill SGT said...

watch the post convention polls in Florida...

Clinton blew them away

AprilApple said...

I'm sure the Hollywood blind faithful Obama adoration crowd can come up with some great hollywood lefty lie that erases and hides our economic misery and real unemployment figures. They can blame Bush. Or blame and whine about how the evil R did it all.
Obama has zero responsibility. Come worship.






virgil xenophon said...

Ann, unless you find some sort of droll humor in American Politico's deadpan straight-ahead imitation of an unmodulated megaphone for the Obama Administration, isn't it time to send his posts straight to the Spam-filter?

edutcher said...

As I said, if they'd just laughed it off and walked away, it would be mostly forgotten now.

They've called attention to it like a book that was Banned In Baaston.

And now everybody's seen it

And it's shown Lefties everywhere to the same preening, narcissistic egomaniacs as their Messiah.

Ann Althouse said...

Most people didn't watch the convention

In terms of TV viewership, but it was streamed on YouTube and other outlets had it on the Net.

It would be interesting to see how many saw it online.

Ann Althouse said...

The post is about the transformation of the performance as it moves from convention speech to viral video and the impact on the mind of an undecided voter.

I think this is a new observation, and since we've already talked more generally about the Eastwood performance in other posts, I would like to focus the conversation here.

Don't simply say you think Eastwood was bad (or good) or that I'm wrong because I'm saying good and you're one of the people who thinks it was bad.

Let's moveon.org to the new topic.

America's Politico said...

Actually, I found the Eastwood speech to be the best. Thus, I agree with the Prof. It will backfire if the WH and K-street and Chicago HQ focus on it. Eastwood is an icon. I was watching this movie, Where Eagles Dare, just last weekend. His line: you have to let go someone who does not do the job, was brutal. His line: we own America, was every more brutal. If the Romney campaign is smart, it will use these lines in the ads this Oct. I cannot imagine anyone in the Hollywood coming up with such lines. The chair was a master-piece. I wonder if anyone has the chair. It can fetch millions of dollars. Obama an empty chair is a brutal metaphor. We at the Chicago HQ (where I got from Tampa, on route to Charlotte) are not happy with Clint's assault on us.

Steve Austin said...

Ann's right. The Dems don't get it. I watched it again.  The only hard part was the fact he is older and more frail thus the delivery was off. 

But the content was as they say, pure Alinsky.  It completely rattled Obama and the Dems.  They aren’t used to seeing a big time Hollywood star ridicule the heck out of their President.  It just doesn’t happen. 

In the meantime, we put up with decades of Baldwin, Clooney, Streisand, Fonda, etc serenading the Dem faithful with what idiots Reagan, Bush and Bush are/were. 

No question the GOP is now community organizing.  Rallies, social media networks, GOTV events and now Clint.  The left is not sure how to deal with their own tactics being used against them.  They can’t count on having Dan Rather, Tom Brokaw and the NYT control the narrative for them anymore. And it is driving them crazy.

Ann Althouse said...

"In terms of TV viewership, but it was streamed on YouTube and other outlets had it on the Net."

There are over 200 million eligible voters in the United States. I think it's really, really safe to say "Most people didn't watch the convention."

Jaske said...

Error
Spin
Error
Spin again
Error
Ad Hominem
Error
Error
System closed
Draw..Draw..Draw

Conserve Liberty said...

Eastwood is not a crazy old man.

He just gave an intentional, nuanced and well-rehearsed performance that draws the viewer in by its seeming disorganized thinking, and then - perfectly timed - delivers a devastating conviction of Obama and his cronies. He asked the questions that Rubio and Romney answered.

The only defense they have is to try to portray it as ANYTHING other than a masterstroke.

TML said...

This is interesting. Maher being honest about Eastwood's performance as a performance.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Hollywood/2012/09/01/Maher-Defends-Eastwood?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

Kind of hard to maintain rigid team esprit de corps when one of the 800 lb gorillas on your side is praising Clint.

bagoh20 said...

I think you're right and very insightful. The attacks change the way you view it, and for the better. Now most people will see it in that mode. I don't think it was a planned trap; as usual the left built the trap and then jumped into it.

kentuckyliz said...

Law of Unintended Consequences. The Echo Chamber has a tin ear for what the Flyover Zone people think and feel and experience. So let the Echo Chamber become a circular firing squad.

bbkingfish said...

I didn't watch a minute of the Republican convention. But, I've always been an Eastwood fan, so I watched the clip yesterday.

He was bad. Real bad. For way, way too long.

This was supposed to be Romney's coming out party, but two days later, no one remembers anything he said. All the talk has been about Clint going off the rails.

It's bad enough that the ratings were down 25% from 2008. Clint's meltdown was a disaster for Romney, and no one needs Michael Moore to tell them so.

amba said...

I think its detractors are trying to spin common sense as dementia.

virgil xenophon said...

Exactly so, Ann, and the proof in the viral pudding is the coining of a new word/term in the American political lexicon: "Eastwooding" or "To Eastwood" someone. The explosion of pictures on twitter showing judgmental hands pointing to empty chairs (of all design and fashion) with assoc. "pithy" comments (h/t Bill O'Reilly) is testimony to the power of the viral universe and has already created a cultural (let alone strictly informational) effect FAR beyond the mere immediate impact of the speech qua speech. The Donkey's have NO defense against this..

rhhardin said...

The footage of Eastwood rambling and mumbling

Conversational speech if filled with ah's and um's

Trained professional speech is not. As with Eastwood, who is therefore not rambling and mumbling except in the frame he produces, as a conversational one.

Shouting Thomas said...

I arrived late to the Eastwood bandwagon. Didn't originally much like the spaghetti westerns. Big fan of Rowdy Yates.

Not until Unforgiven did I really understand that Eastwood is a damned serious artist.

The character he's been playing all of his life is a guy who originally appears to be a little slow and unnecessarily mean. He's an Everyman.

I did finally watch the convention video on YouTube, and I was astounded by the impact. He's playing that character... that Everyman.

You might want to remember that the Democrats want to label that Everyman... that white, middle class guy who's just doing what he has to do to get by... a potentially violent bigot.

edutcher said...

Ann Althouse said...

In terms of TV viewership, but it was streamed on YouTube and other outlets had it on the Net.

There are over 200 million eligible voters in the United States. I think it's really, really safe to say "Most people didn't watch the convention."


One quibble:

Since the convention is on video on YouTube, parts of it (Romney's, Ryan's, Condi's) can be viewed at any time between now and the election.

Of course, you may well be right in saying most people probably didn't watch it online or on the air in real time, but I'm thinking long haul.

bagoh20 said...

I agree with Bill Maher? This rocks my world. I don't know how I'll deal with this. He does make a living mostly being rudely contrary, so he's gonna hit it right once in a while just by accident. Maybe he owes Clint money or is trying to get him on the show. Yea that's it.

ndspinelli said...

Some of us deem the topic is spin! This isn't your classroom, school marm.

Shouting Thomas said...

And, he was subtly mocking President Obama with the "go fuck yourself" jokes.

In the skit that Clint's Everyman played on that stage, it was, in fact President Obama who was telling Clint to "go fuck yourself."

Clint was mocking a well know facet of President Obama's behavior. Obama has sneakily given the middle finger to both Hillary and Ryan.

alan markus said...

When I watched it live, I was feeling the "cringe" factor. Sitting on edge of my chair thinking that he was stressed and would stroke out or something. Relieved when it was finally over that it didn't turn into a "train wreck".

Next morning, the clip became much easier to watch through because I knew there was no sad ending.

As the clip is spread around, anyone watching it now will not experience that fear and trepidation, as they already know that there is no sad ending.

Donald said...

The more undecided voters watch Eastwood's video, the better, from my point of view. I think the line about "when somebody's not doing the job, we've got to let him go" strikes the perfect note. No anger or personal animus, just the sad realization that we (the swing voters) made a mistake when we hired the man and, now that it has become clear that he's not up to the job, the only rational thing to do is to cut him loose. It's a tough decision, and we know he was well-intentioned, but we can't let our personal feelings for the guy get in the way of what's best for the country.

loudogblog said...

It's amazing that some people on the far left thought it was a good idea to ridicule a great and beloved person for simply growing old. We're all going to grow old and our voices will get harder to use effectively, but we realize, as we grow older, that what we say is more important than how we say it. Also, the senior citizen vote is going to be extremely important this election cycle.

bagoh20 said...

"This was supposed to be Romney's coming out party, but two days later, no one remembers anything he said."

If not for Eastwood nothing would be remembered. Very little viewing of the message from anyone else's speeches will continue. Only Eastwood's speech will live on, still selling that message. Conventions are lucky to get one good line to live on, and nothing Mitt said was gonna do that. This will add votes and remove none from Romney's column. A free, effective viral ad.

Skipper said...

Clint was not weird or unintelligible. He was performing a theater piece, of sorts. He was following the first rule of good theater...show, don't tell. Bravo!

alan markus said...

Ann, unless you find some sort of droll humor in American Politico's deadpan straight-ahead imitation of an unmodulated megaphone for the Obama Administration, isn't it time to send his posts straight to the Spam-filter?

No, please don't. Humor is good. Good troll material too, at one local liberal site I copied in some "America's Politico said" to give some positive encouragement to the blogger and some of his followers. Never caught on that it was a spoof.

Sam L. said...

"For A Fistful Of Dollars": Clint plays both sides against each other, getting the bad guys to kill each other, leaving the village peaceful.

"The Good, The Bad, And The Ugly": Clint plays the Bad and the Ugly against each other. He gets the gold.

Clint learned from his movies. This time he gets the Dems and lefties to draw attention to his softspoken "rant?" Sucked them right into the boobytrap.

Sorun said...

I'd be interesting to know what Clint Eastwood's actor colleagues really think of his speech.

Mike: It's Planet Cuckoo, not Planet Koo-Koo.

furious_a said...

Should Obama supporters be spreading this viral video? Should they want the moderate undecideds of the country sitting at their computers...

...viewing a message that is unfiltered by the Palace Media and not controlled by the Obama Campaign?

By all means. As Clint might rasp, Bring It On.

People (probably campaign professionals) will be studying Clint's speech years from now, but not for the reasons that Moore thinks. And people will still be watching Clint's Westerns long after Moore's clogged arteries have betrayed him.

Sloanasaurus said...

People know Clint already. They have a view of him being a successful movie star playing tough characters. People believe that Clint is like the characters he plays. Thus they love him and respect him. Someone coming out now and calling him a crazy old man will do nothing but inform people that Clint is for Romney. Especially white people - white men over the age of 35. Will it change any votes.... It might, because people all assume that everyone in Hollywood supports Obama.

It would suck if Clint was for Obama. Because then someone might believe that Obama was tough or cared about America.

They say Romney already has the white male vote... but that is not true. There are a lot more white male votes to be gotten. There are more total white male voters than all minority voters combined.

ricpic said...

Hey, I never thought I'd say this, but kudos to America's Politico for admitting Clint's speech - with special reference to his use of the empty chair - was effective,

Ruth Anne Adams said...

Althouse: Love the tagline "Putting the Mitt in uncommitted."

In deference to Romney, it might be a Taggline. Perhaps "Finding the Mitt in uncommitted" also works.

Tim said...

Eastwood was basically playing himself as "Walt Kowalski" without the snark, without the animus - the voter who wanted Obama to succeed because he wants America to succeed (and does anyone anywhere doubt Eastwood's patriotism?), and who also took note of Obama's promise, and promises made.

And then, deftly, with the straight honesty of a man who's lived a full life who knows he has many fewer years ahead of him and really does want his nation to be better after he passes, reminds us that Obama has failed, and that it is our custom to fire those who have failed.

No wonder Obama and his supporters are pissing in their pants. Worse yet, they took the bait, and a drawing attention to the stiletto that is carving them up.

Fucking amateurs. Time for them to go away.

garage mahal said...

It wouldn't even matter if Eastwood's speech wasn't being criticized. The right would still say he was. Which was probably the intent all along. Dangle the old man out there like bait.

I did see a lot of Lyin Ryan type headline links from major news sites. Ryan's latest tall tale of running a sub 3 hour marathon will add to the meme. remember when Kerry said he ran the Boston Marathon? Why do these idiots lie when they know someone is going to fact check them?

Shouting Thomas said...

There are more total white male voters than all minority voters combined.

That's certainly one of the things Clint addressed.

Clint was also sending a message to several other groups. That message is:

"The white male Everyman guy is a good guy doing the best he can, not some bogey man."

Ruth Anne Adams said...

There might also be a ricochet to a backfire when SNL's Bill Hader does a killer Eastwood impression in the fall, closer to the election.

But is Bill Hader still in the cast? Did he 'graduate' with Jason Sudekis, Andy Samberg and Kristin Wiig?

furious_a said...

"Eastwooding".

America's Politico said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Robert Cook said...

I didn't watch the convention, but all the hubbub got me to try to watch the clip of Eastwood's speech. I made it about 3 or 4 minutes. It was just dull. It's probably not the "disaster" that some are claiming--it's hardly important enough to be that, and it certainly won't be watched in 100 years--but neither is it anything more than expected convention speechifyin'...one celebrity partisan performing for the crowd of fellow partisans.

This is what conventions amount to now, nothing more.

As Bill Shakespeare said, "...sound and fury, signifying nothing...."

edutcher said...

Agree with Shout on Mr Yates, but I've never gone for Clint's moral relativism in the movies.

bbkingfish said...

It's bad enough that the ratings were down 25% from 2008

And they will be for the Demos, too.

As I say, it would be interesting to know how much of that 25% was taken up online at the time or since, as many didn't want to be kept up past 11 when they had to go to work the next day; particularly those who heard about so-and-so's speech from somebody else and wanted to check it out.

This should be true for the Demos, too.

Expat(ish) said...

Ok, I saw it live and what really really struck me was not how effective it was but that he ended it early.

Total ad-lib off the script. Watch it and you can see him processing the lady screaming Make My Day.

Did you notice the band was behind him when he ended it?

It was an astounding thing to see. Well worth the hours of watching and the G&T consumed off diet.

-XC

The Farmer said...

Steve Austin said...
Ann's right. The Dems don't get it. I watched it again. The only hard part was the fact he is older and more frail thus the delivery was off.

But the content was as they say, pure Alinsky. It completely rattled Obama and the Dems. They aren’t used to seeing a big time Hollywood star ridicule the heck out of their President. It just doesn’t happen.


The content probably would've been funny if it had been delivered well but as you noted, it was delivered poorly. And it was awkward because a lot of us felt bad for the guy. He was an old guy trying to do something he can't do anymore. It was tough to watch.

Dems weren't "rattled" - they were delighted because what could've been a pretty funny, biting attack was reduced to an elevator fart, in real time and living color.

You guys want to give credit to Eastwood for trying. "Everybody gets a trophy!" But it was objectively lame and ineffective. The only real heat from this has come from conservatives defending Clint. If liberals hadn't pointed and laughed at him, most of the rest of us would've felt bad for the guy and avoided trying to analyze it for genius when it was clearly an epic fail.

dreams said...

Those who voted for Obama hoping his election would help move us beyond our racial history or those who bought into his hope and change but who are less than satisfied with the last three and half years will watch the video and hear Clint Eastwood tell them that it is ok to let him go because he couldn't get the job done.

I've heard him say it over and over in clips and sound bites which is very good for Romney and those of us who want him elected president.

ndspinelli said...

RuthAnne, You may be correct. But most cast members of SNL who move on often come back for their signature characters.

sydney said...

I think Eastwood meant for his performance to go viral. It wasn't directed at the audience in front of him - Republican partisans. It was delivered as if he was talking to all of America. At one point he even did this explicitly. He referred to the greatness of "you" - "Democrats, Republicans, and Libertarians," and the whole line about how "we" employ politicians, they work for us. I think it was definitely conceived as a video performance for all voters.

Shouting Thomas said...

... it's hardly important enough to be that, and it certainly won't be watched in 100 years...

50/50

If Romney wins, it will be pointed to as the turning point in the election.

So, you have half a chance to be right.

Ross said...

I have to admit, this is now the only speech at the RNC I have actually watched. It was hilarious!

Sorun said...

"It wouldn't even matter if Eastwood's speech wasn't being criticized. The right would still say he was. Which was probably the intent all along. Dangle the old man out there like bait."

The Right is just too clever:

1. Set up an old man for ridicule.
2. ?
3. Profit!

madAsHell said...

The first time I saw it, I thought Clint was losing it.

After all the controversy, I had to watch it again, and it was a different camera angle.

It was absolutely genius, but the staging was wrong. He should have been mic'ed, and not used the podium microphone. The empty chair should have been illuminated.

That wasn't a bumbling old man. That was a shrewed commentary.

Kchiker said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Paddy O said...

He's playing that character... that Everyman.

Yes!

Moore tries to play that part, but it's pretty clear he's playing a part.

Eastwood plays the part, and people are convinced he's bizarre.

I said it in the mega-thread, and I'll say it again here. Eastwood was being classic Eastwood, instead of trying to be Ronald Reagan.

Eastwood is the anti-hero, the guy who doesn't live in the lofty dreams, but the guy who gets things done. All his movies have this element. Unforgiven was the pinnacle, with Gran Torino completing the arc of that character study.

The character communicates by bypassing the normal narratives, by getting under the skin, by infuriating and causing his opponents to make mistakes, to be exposed, and then mocked.

Tyrone Slothrop said...

As many others have already pointed out, the lefty chatterers are the ones giving Clint's message legs. Hundreds of thousands who had zero interest in watching the RNC by now have seen it on YouTube. It is funny, direct, and from the heart. It seemed like a high-wire act at the time, but if you view it expecting to hear a demented old coot losing it on stage you will be forced to change your mind.

Kchiker said...

If Obama wins this election, Republicans are going to have a lot to think about and a lot of time to think about it. I think moments like this one may come to mind when they wonder how they could have possibly lost this election.

Comanche Voter said...

I read Jon Katz's Bedlam Farm Journal blog every day. While he's not interested in politics--having chosen to withdraw into life on a small farm in upstate New York, he did hear about the Eastwood performance. Everybody in that corner of the state (up on the Vermont border) was talking about Eastwood on Friday morning.

Katz watched the video and couldn't get through it. Okay, Katz has withdrawn from political life---but note that all of his neighbors in the adjacent small towns were abuzz with Eastwood.

You can like it (I did) you can hate it (Larry O'Donnell wet the bed) but very few people are going to ignore it.

The Dems would do best to just stop talking about it--but it's like a scab on a wound that they just can't stop picking at. Still--it's a wound.

furious_a said...

Garage: Why do these idiots lie when they know someone is going to fact check them?

You've been pwn'd every time you've tried, garage. I'm starting to feel sorry for you.

jr565 said...

The people of the future will know nothing about Dirty Harry or Josey Wales or Million Dollar Baby. They will know about the night a crazy old man hijacked a national party's most important gathering so he could literally tell the president to go do something to himself (i.e. fuck himself). In those few moments (and these days, it only takes a few moments—see Anthony Weiner), he completely upended and redefined how he'll be remembered by younger and future generations....

Somehow, I think people will still watch the good the bad & The Ugly or Dirty Harry Mke.

Robert Cook said...

"'For A Fistful Of Dollars': Clint plays both sides against each other, getting the bad guys to kill each other, leaving the village peaceful."

FYI, it was derived from Akira Kurowawa's great Yojimbo, which was itself derived from Dashiel Hammett's hard-boiled novel Red Harvest.

Jay said...

HA HA HA HA
HA HA HA HA
HA HA HA HA
HA HA HA HA

From Survey USA
1,211 adults were interviewed statewide 08/31/12, after Romney, Florida’s Marco Rubio and Clint Eastwood spoke to the convention 08/30/12. Of the adults, 1,100 were registered to vote in Florida. Of the registered voters, 754 heard the convention speeches. Of the convention speech watchers:
* 66% did not change their mind.
* 16% switched from “undecided” to Romney.
* 6% switched from Obama to Romney.
* Adding those 2 together, that’s 22% who switched TO Romney.
* 10% switched from “undecided” to Obama.
* 2% switched from Romney to Obama.
* Adding those 2 together, that’s 12% who switched TO Obama.
* Comparing the 2 aggregate numbers: 22% switched TO Romney, 12% switched TO Obama.


The left are Idiots.

ricpic said...

Hey, Real Clear Politics has posted an Althouse posting on this very subject!

Bob Ellison said...

Obama is at 57.6% on Intrade.

The bubble grows.

Chip S. said...

Althouse gets this exactly right.

I didn't watch any of the convention, so had read the stories about how "awful" Clint's speech was. As I watched it for the first time last night, I found it incredibly good. Funny as hell, and hitting marks that no mainstream politico could've aimed at.

EDH said...

"I'll take that as a 'yes'... 'cause if I have to come back here, it's gonna get fuckin' ugly."

Robert said...

It's interesting to note that even in the one small paragraph quoted Moore lies, because he says Clint told the president to go eff himself. When in fact Clint imagined Obama saying that to Romney.

Robert Cook said...

"Putting the Mitt in uncommitted."

As with many ad slogans, it sounds like it means something...but doesn't.

bagoh20 said...

" I think moments like this one may come to mind when they wonder how they [Repubs] could have possibly lost this election."

Who's the idiot that's gonna vote for Obama because of Clint Eastwood's performance?

Tyrone Slothrop said...

This has reminded me of another Clint, Ron Howard's brother. While most famous for playing a weird little alien on Star Trek, he is a witty, intelligent conservative. His interviews on Hugh Hewitt's show are hilarious.

garage mahal said...

"You've been pwn'd every time you've tried, garage. I'm starting to feel sorry for you."

"I had a two hour and fifty-something" marathon, Ryan said last week an interview. "I hurt a disc in my back, so I don’t run marathons anymore."

But the Ryan campaign confirmed to Runner's World that he has only run one marathon, the 1990 Grandma’s Marathon in Duluth, Minnesota, which he finished in just over 4 hours.


What's the excuse now, furious_a?

It wasn't a lie because __________?

ricpic said...

Hey Cookie, it's alright to admit a message you disagree with was delivered effectively by Eastwood. AP did that and you can to. After all, they may look askance at you at the next cell meeting but they can't afford to lose you and be down to nine. Why that's even less than a minyan!

Unknown said...

Yes, convention viewership is down. However, i was at a football game and spent the evening at a sports bar with friends enjoying the first day of the college football season.

I watched all the speeches on replay. You don't think hundreds of thousands of people arent doing the same?

I wouldnt worry about the sinking viewership......i would prefer to watch You Tube replays of the entire speeches without the idiocy of the talking heads blowing smoke.

Shouting Thomas said...

give garage some credit.

He's heard from Althouse that this is all best forgotten, and he's trying to change the subject.

Robert Cook said...

"Hey Cookie, it's alright to admit a message you disagree with was delivered effectively by Eastwood."

I called like I (partially) saw it: dull.

sonicfrog said...

I love it that the group of people who claim to be the champions of the old and infirm are savaging Clint Eastwood as being old, infirm, and senile just because he gave an impromptu speech at the RNC convention. I suspect that most of the liberals ragging on him could not even get on a stage in front of that many people and deliver anything coherent.

Jake Diamond said...

I thought of a new slogan: Putting the Mitt in uncommitted.

As in uncommitted to having a firm and clear set of principles and policy positions?

ndspinelli said...

I don't remember Althouse commenting about Clint's slam on attorneys. That was one of his biggest applause lines.

Robert Cook said...

"...just because he gave an impromptu speech at the RNC convention."

Do you really think the speech was impromptu?

alan markus said...

OMG, Garage has provided irrefutable evidence that Ryan is a liar and unfit for public office. Next thing you know, Ryan will say he has been in more than 50 states & the Romney/Ryan ticket will self-implode.

Bob Ellison said...

sonicfrog, you've got it. Clint Eastwood's performance was over the heads of most liberals. The stupidity, it burns.

Shouting Thomas said...

Do you really think the speech was impromptu?

No, it was brilliantly scripted. And, Eastwood's been working on that Everyman character his entire career.

Including, Rowdy Yates. Think of that "Rowdy" name.

Jake Diamond said...

Who's the idiot that's gonna vote for Obama because of Clint Eastwood's performance?

Who's the idiot who's going to vote for Mittens because of Clint Eastwood's performance?

Shorter version: Who's the idiot who's going to vote for Mittens?

madAsHell said...

America's Politico to the spam bucket??

No way!! I think it might be the nom-de-plume for Joe Biden.

Dust Bunny Queen said...

The post is about the transformation of the performance as it moves from convention speech to viral video and the impact on the mind of an undecided voter.

Performance art is exactly what it was and not a standard convention speech. This is what the left doesn't understand. I've long ago decided that they just do not have a very good sense of humor.

Because they lack a sense of humor and any real self awareness, they are flailing around trying to come up with a counter to the very effective blows that Eastwood did to their little king. Attacking Clint Eastwood in the most nasty and small minded way.

They are calling so much attention to the performance/speech that people who didn't bother to watch the convention are now going to take a look at the video. Those dedicated lefties are not going to be swayed have their minds changed. HOWEVER, many of the uncommitted middle of the road voters, the independents, will now see the performance and be able to make up their own minds.

The faux pas of trying to attack a well liked actor, director and a now quite elderly man is going to backfire.

Calypso Facto said...

Should Obama supporters be spreading this viral video? Should they want the moderate undecideds of the country sitting at their computers...

Because of the uproar from the left, Clint became the only speech of (likely either) convention I watched. I agree that his delivery was awkward, but overall I think it was an extremely effective attack from a well-liked, aging, voice-of-reason, Everyman. I'd be hushing it up like a shooting at the FRC if I were the Dems.

Kchiker said...

"Who's the idiot that's gonna vote for Obama because of Clint Eastwood's performance?”

If you think that the 3 hours of prime time coverage that the RNC had at its disposal adequately covered the case against Obama, fair enough. It’s all a matter of opportunity cost.

bagoh20 said...

"It wasn't a lie because __________?"

I heard it from Garage. Past performance has proven that's a good indicator. I don't even research it anymore.

I wonder if Ryan ever lied about how big that fish was that got away. Now that would get me to vote for 4 more years of malaise.

Ruth Anne Adams said...

Dust Bunny Queen,
Clint Eastwood may be quite elderly, but I would not kick him out for eating crackers in bed.

He still exudes masculinity and sturdiness. I find him quite attractive still.

Ask Darcy. She probably wouldn't disagree with me.

Clint is still hubba-hubba.

cubanbob said...

Clint's performance was brilliant. As noted by others, he spoke exactly like Obama when Obama is off his teleprompter. he wasn't rambling, he was acting. The man is still on top of his game. And he stuck the knife in so deftly and repeatedly.

America's Politico (who is a rather good parodist of the democrats) nailed it. The usual lefty suspects on this blog just don't get it. And they won't until the day after the election and then they won't be able to process the outcome.

Whoever thought of bringing Clint to the convention is a genius. The clips on youtube will deadly for the democrats. No matter who the democrats trot out in their convention they won't top Clint.

Hagar said...

I kind of loved all the time and attention CBS and ABC News gave to Clint's skit.

bagoh20 said...

All these comments about Eastwood's performance, yet I don't think I've seen one rebuttal to what he said. Are you guys ever gonna defend your man and his record?

The Godfather said...

The Eastwood speech was a no-lose proposition for the Romney campaign. If Eastwood bombed, if people thought it was disrespectful of the president, or just plain stupid, or whatever -- well, too bad, but Hell, he's just an actor, what would you expect? Can't blame Romney for that. But if Eastwood was well received, people would hear him saying things that they think, but perhaps can't quite articulate (like "you just got to let 'em go"), and that can't help but move them in Romney's direction.

As for the viral video, it can't do anything but help, because it spreads a message that the Republicans want people to hear. Could anybody seriously think that millions of people hearing "we own this country", "politicians work for us" would HURT the insurgent candidate?

cubanbob said...

Jake Diamond said...
Who's the idiot that's gonna vote for Obama because of Clint Eastwood's performance?

Who's the idiot who's going to vote for Mittens because of Clint Eastwood's performance?

Shorter version: Who's the idiot who's going to vote for Mittens?

9/1/12 11:01 AM

Who is the idiot that is going to vote for four more years of this shit? Clint's right. The shareholder's are going to vote to replace the current management, after all when the crew you hired can't do the job right, you let them go.

mtrobertsattorney said...

Ann, you are right. Millions of more people will be watching Clint's performance art speech because of the left's conniptions.

And what will they see? They will see Walter Kowalski just as he is when he's at his favorite diner talking to his buddies about what has happened to his country.

The talking heads of the left will never understand Walt and his buddies. Is it any wonder that Clint's performance went right over their heads? Clint Eastwood is light-years ahead of them.

Kchiker said...

"All these comments about Eastwood's performance, yet I don't think I've seen one rebuttal to what he said. Are you guys ever gonna defend your man and his record?”

That’s like asking you to rebut an SNL skit about Romney.

The only part of the performance I objected to was in quoting Imaginary Obama as telling Romney to “do that to himself”. If the Dems use their convention time to (even indirectly) quote imaginary Romney using profanity there will (rightfully) be some uproar.

Dust Bunny Queen said...

Clint is still hubba-hubba.

Oh Yeah agreed

bagoh20 said...

If you think that the 3 hours of prime time coverage that the RNC had at its disposal adequately covered the case against Obama, fair enough. It’s all a matter of opportunity cost."

I absolutely do. In fact, the very approach of the convention was to avoid the "meanness" charge of piling on by slyly sending the message that the case is so clear, and well known that covering it more is piling on a poor inept President that is over his head. The Eastwood inclusion was perfect for that. Which speaker managed to get his speech actually listened to over and over? Opportunity cost could not have been better used by another bland speech that nobody remembers.

bagoh20 said...

" If the Dems use their convention time to (even indirectly) quote imaginary Romney using profanity there will (rightfully) be some uproar."

Because it would be stupid. It wouldn't be believable. We all know that Obama is much more likely to use that language, than Romney, and by a lot.

mtrobertsattorney said...

You are right Ann. Millions more people will see Clint's performance art speech because of the left's conniptions.

And what will they see? They will see Walter Kowalski just as he is at his favorite dinner talking with his buddies about what has happened to his country.

The talking heads of the left will never understand Walt and his buddies. Is it any wonder why Clint's performance went right over their heads? Clint Eastwood is light-years ahead of them.

Michael K said...

"
Blogger Robert Cook said...

"...just because he gave an impromptu speech at the RNC convention."

Do you really think the speech was impromptu?"


I know you don't read much but that has been part of the discussion all along. The lefties are trying to say that the Romney campaign didn't know what he was going to say. The most likely version I read was that Clint discarded a prepared speech. Maybe this was his plan all along.


By the way, Condi Rice's speech was not written for her either. She gave it from notes, not the TelePrompTer.

cubanbob said...

Robert Cook said...
I didn't watch the convention, but all the hubbub got me to try to watch the clip of Eastwood's speech. I made it about 3 or 4 minutes. It was just dull. It's probably not the "disaster" that some are claiming--it's hardly important enough to be that, and it certainly won't be watched in 100 years--but neither is it anything more than expected convention speechifyin'...one celebrity partisan performing for the crowd of fellow partisans.

This is what conventions amount to now, nothing more.

As Bill Shakespeare said, "...sound and fury, signifying nothing...."

9/1/12 10:35 AM

Joe Biden being the intellect of the democratic party it really is the democrat talking points are "...a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury signifying nothing..." which is also what the democrat convention will be '... much ado about nothing..."

Jake Diamond said...

All these comments about Eastwood's performance, yet I don't think I've seen one rebuttal to what he said. Are you guys ever gonna defend your man and his record?

My best guess is that people who plan to vote for Obama are supporting him primarily because Mittens is so dreadful. That seems to be why most Republicans are voting for Mittens.

creeley23 said...

One of the biggest tactics employed by the Left, which we also see everyday from our resident group of liberal trolls -- garage, shiloh, Lindsey et al. -- is to repeat some big slogan-like smear loudly, over and over again, with the intent to vilify, so that the person or group being attacked becomes out of bounds from civil discourse.

It's an ugly and evil technique but it works. Whatever faults they may or may not have, Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Ann Coulter, the Koch Brothers, and Dick Cheney have been marginalized out of existence in national debate except within the solid right.

It works because the average person has to go out of their way to experience the taboo viewpoints directly. Even if someone does manage to tune into Limbaugh, say, they would have to listen for several hours to realize that underneath the glib, bombastic, sometimes outrageous talk, Limbaugh is a serious man with some serious arguments.

But with the Eastwood appearance, the left has over-reached with the Big Smear technique. Most Americans know who Clint Eastwood is and have some fondness for him as the John Wayne of our era. Worse, the video can be reached with a click and it is only 11 1/2 minutes long, so it's not a big time investment. Even worse, Eastwood leverages his film persona for even greater, faster impact. And for the very worst, he uses humor and shock, to slyly skewer the near-untouchable and prickly Barack Obama.

The left and MSM can sputter on about how bizarre Eastwood was or posture about how amused they are, but this will backfire badly for them.

furious_a said...

Garage: What's the excuse now, furious_a?

Oh, I dunno, that you're now reduced to trolling for fish stories?

Garage: "Ryan Promises Wife to Take out Trash, But Doesn't".

wyo sis said...

Mr. Eastwood is a genius...or an Alzheimer's savant.
Whichever is true, he clearly outsmarted almost everyone.

Alex said...

Maybe it's gone viral, but if you look at the Youtube view count it's well under a million.

Donald said...

I think the delivery was awkward by design. Eastwood was playing the part of the boss who has called a recently-hired employee into his office. He has decided he's got to let the fellow go because he's demonstrated that he isn't up to the job. Eastwood is uncomfortable..doesn't enjoy firing people...and verbally stumbling around because he's trying to let the guy down easy. The boss tries to stroke his ego a bit with a hilarious semi-excuse (the guantanamo thing wasn't all your fault. Somebody else had the stupid idea to try terrorists in NY), does what he can to soften the blow ("you can still use the plane"), rationalizes that maybe the job just wasn't a good fit for his skill set (maybe a businessman instead of a lawyer). But the bottom line is that the job's just not getting done.

Mr. Eastwood knew exactly what he was doing. He was speaking directly to undecided voters and letting them know that, although it's not going to be easy for either the boss or the employee, this is a step that's got to be taken if we want to turn things around.



rosebud said...

Wasn't it just two weeks ago that Piers Morgan interviewed an empty chair? Wasn't that considered by the left an incredibly hard-hitting comment on Mr. Akin?

creeley23 said...

...because Mittens is so dreadful.

Sorry, Jake, for not including you as one of our liberal trolls. Thanks for providing an example of the Big Smear.

No arguments, just smear. Rinse, Lather and Repeat.

Tank said...

Jake Diamond said...

All these comments about Eastwood's performance, yet I don't think I've seen one rebuttal to what he said. Are you guys ever gonna defend your man and his record?

My best guess is that people who plan to vote for Obama are supporting him primarily because Mittens is so dreadful. That seems to be why most Republicans are voting for Mittens.


Well, I gots to admit, that there is a strong and well reasoned argument ya got there Mr. D.

I is convinced.

Jake Diamond said...

Joe Biden being the intellect of the democratic party

As determined by the Sarah Palin fan club?

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.

Bubblers, it ain't just us...and it wasn't brilliant...

garage mahal said...

Oh, I dunno, that you're now reduced to trolling for fish stories?

Hahaha. So insignificant lie then. We need to start a tag.

Jake Diamond said...

I is convinced.

The amount of whining by right wingers about Obama far outweighs the amount of love for Mittens. Face the facts. Mittens was challenged by some of the biggest losers in the GOP during the primaries and he struggled to put his opponents away. A LOT of republicans actually preferred Santorum and Gingrich to Mittens.

A vote for Mittens is a vote against Obama, not an endorsement of Mittens and his etch-a-sketch principles.

Alex said...

Jake - I'd rather have etch-a-sketch then Obama's freight train off the cliff.

furious_a said...

Garage: Hahaha. So insignificant lie then. We need to start a tag.

Indeed: Mouse Nut Hunter.

Jake Diamond said...

Jake - I'd rather have etch-a-sketch then Obama's freight train off the cliff.

Which supports my position that a vote for Mittens is more a vote against Obama than an endorsement of Mittens.

furious_a said...

Jake: the amount of love for Mittens.

Unlike you and Sandra Fluke, Rs are voting for a President, not a boyfriend.

Alex said...

Jake - when Obama is trying to destroy this country, a vote against him is the moral thing to do. You somehow think that voting against a danger is wrong?

Saint Croix said...

The content probably would've been funny if it had been delivered well

I wonder if he rehearsed it, filmed himself, watched it, tried a few different versions. He is a filmmaker, after all.

Eastwood's speech is disarming. That's the first thing you notice. His uncombed hair and how he says a variety of things.

It's self-effacing. It's a highly human performance. Does he seem slick, or over-produced? He does not. He's the antithesis of slick.

It's unlike any other political speech. Thus it's highly watchable. Non-partisans are watching it. They are watching an old man talk to an empty chair.

I've never, ever, been so aware of the age of Eastwood before. That's the first thing he does. He humanizes himself. "I'm not a star. I'm just an old guy."

Americans are genius at smuggling propaganda into art. Think about the politics behind Casablanca. Amazing. Or think about what the Marx brothers did. Or Dr. Strangelove.

But you have to disguise the politics. You have to smuggle it in, using humor or other tricks. If you're partisan--like all the Hollywood movies about the evils of Bush--people know what you're going to say. They're bored. And they run away from you and your stupid ideas.

Eastwood's performance is odd, different, highly watchable. He has a lot of zingers, he worked in some vulgarity, some real nasty attacks on Obama and Biden.

And none of this seems mean, at all. He avoided all the meanness in politics. And yet it's all there, underneath that performance as a doddering old man.

And Eastwood probably is slipping a bit, in his old age. But the way you make a performance authentic is by taking what is there and pushing it. I believe that's what he did.

You could imagine George Clooney giving a speech at the DNC, right? And it's very produced and his voice is just right and he's outraged and all the delegates love him.

Yet would that work? Or would people tune it out because they know what Clooney is going to say? Would he seem (gasp!) like all the other politicians on the stage?

Eastwood's performance is self-effacing. He's not relying on his authority as a famous Hollywood star. He diminishes his own authority, and then after doing so he diminishes Obama's, too.

And he has nice (and passionate) things to say about the American people.

Does it come across as propaganda? Not in the slightest. All we are left with is that funny and likable old man who is talking to an empty chair, and mocking the President for his incompetence. And telling us all to fire him.

Who's angry at Eastwood? Nobody. Who's watching the performance and listening to what he has to say? Everybody.

Within the context of what he is trying to do, it's a pretty amazing piece of performance art. Off-hand and casual. And maybe it was off-hand and casual. But I'll bet he worked on it, too.

Perpetua said...

I think "Make my day" was the perfect close because it was basically challenging the progressives to mock this which would make this into a viral video, which is what he wanted. Make my day, ie, try to shot me down, and I will win the battle.

Alex said...

Thing is the film of "Make my Day" - "Sudden Impact"(1983) was so politically incorrect. The opening robbery scene featured an all-black gang with Clint taking them down. That would never be allowed anymore, despite the reality.

Colonel Angus said...

Hahaha. So insignificant lie then.

Compared to 'my uncle liberated Auschwitz' and 'I dodged sniper fire in Bosnia' yes. Yes it is.

Eric said...

One hundred years from now, people will still be blown away by Unforgiven. Pictures of Michael Moore will be known only as examples of the obesity epidemic.

Tyrone Slothrop said...

Jake Diamond said...

Mittens was challenged by some of the biggest losers in the GOP during the primaries and he struggled to put his opponents away. A LOT of republicans actually preferred Santorum and Gingrich to Mittens.


Perhaps you don't recall Obama's 2008 campaign that pilloried Hillary. You are probably too young to remember it, but Axelrod et al. tried to paint Hilary as racist, and a "typical white woman." A LOT of Democrats actually preferred her to GodZero. Hey, there's always 2016.

Tyrone Slothrop said...

St. Croix

A tiny quibble-- the Marx Brothers' humor is about as apolitical as humor can be, unless you want to include their surname as propaganda. I suppose you could call Duck Soup a sendup of Balkan politics, but it's not really commentary.

The Crack Emcee said...

Alex,

Thing is the film of "Make my Day" - "Sudden Impact"(1983) was so politically incorrect. The opening robbery scene featured an all-black gang with Clint taking them down. That would never be allowed anymore, despite the reality.

You're right - now it's a bunch of white folks trying desperately to take down a single black guy. I've seen it, right here.

Great fucking show.

Oh - and it's fun watching you simple partisan morons trying to lay claim to an old man talking to an empty chair.

Your side won? Really? Let's look at the take-away line:

"We own this country .. not politicians. Politicians are employees of ours. And -- so -- they are just going to come around and beg for votes every few years. It is the same old deal."

Oh yeah, that's a great defense of your fucking side, you idiots.

You guys are as dumb as the day is long,...

shiloh said...

"sound and fury, signifying nothing"

Indeed more Althouse minutiae, except everyone is talkin' about Clint instead of mittens. Which may be a wash 'cause who the fuck wants to talk about mittens lol.

Apparently Althouse doesn't. :-P

Jake Diamond said...

Jake - when Obama is trying to destroy this country, a vote against him is the moral thing to do. You somehow think that voting against a danger is wrong?

I get really bored reading comments like this. You have to be some kind of lunatic to accuse Obama of "trying to destroy this country." As much as I disliked Bush and thought his policies were damaging, I wouldn't accuse him of "trying to destroy this country." Honestly, when I see someone make a statement like that, I assume the person is a child, a person with a mental impairment, a partisan hack, or a brainwashed ignoramus. Why would I want to stick around for a conversation with someone like that?

Dr Weevil said...

Alex wrote: "Maybe it's gone viral, but if you look at the Youtube view count it's well under a million." Everyone I know who watched it after it was given watched it on the CNN website or Republican Convention website. Can a video go viral without being on YouTube? I think it can.

Then again, "if you look at the Youtube view count" with any care, you'll find that there are at least two more-or-less full-length versions on the site - the 3rd and 4th videos that come up when you type in 'Eastwood' - and the view counts are 922,000+ for the 11:15 version, 831,000+ for the 11:50. Even if you don't count all the shorter excerpts on YouTube, that's a lot closer to two million than one million, with more than two months left for the virus to spread.

Dr Weevil said...

Nobody except stupid shiloh want to talk about mittens. Talking about the next president of the United States is something everyone here except shiloh wants to talk about.

shiloh said...

Dr. W's inanity is duly noted!

Dr Weevil said...

shiloh's hilariously oblivious projection is noted and appreciated.

emelks said...

Democrats are kicking themselves for their reactions to Mr Eastwood. They amplified Clint's performance to people who otherwise wouldn't have heard it, and once they understand that he was ACTING like a doddering old man while delivering hit after hit that cannot be refuted they'll have a communal head-banging session.

Clint Eastwood intended the viewer to think of him as a harmless, doddering elderly man speaking truth to the younger folks. That he succeeded so well only helps the Republicans.

Clint Eastwood has the added advantage of being a Hollywood icon completely independent of the lunatic lefties inhabiting that sphere. He can say whatever he likes and suffer no adverse consequences whatsoever. No one can deny him roles or readings. I'm sure that royally pisses off a lot of the Hollywood establishment.

BaltoHvar said...

Saint Croix - exactly right - and emelks - nice follow-up.

JAL said...

The more I ruminate on it (mowing the pasture for a couple hours) the better it tastes.

Are any of the lib progs discussing WHAT Eastwood said? Or just the routine and the left-to-your-imagination profanity? (I can't be bothered today to read any except our usual suspects here. And I am skipping them as there is not content and little cleverness.)

23 million unemployed

Disregard for the security and well being of the people NYC and the United States with the stupid
political theater of the terrorist trial in NYC?

Sending a copy of our plans to enemy.

The true balance of power (You work for us.)

The reasonable act of firing someone (who was so full of his own promises) who has not done the job he was given well enough.

Etc.

? Any "he lied!" out there? ny one talking content?

Any thing the Dems offer up is going to be pathetic.

You can only crucify Sarah Palin once (although they are trying for an endurance record on that one), and trying to palinize Eastwood is simply going to be a huge FAIL.

JAL said...

@ JD As much as I disliked Bush and thought his policies were damaging, I wouldn't accuse him of "trying to destroy this country."

Uhmm ... maybe because Bush wasn't trying to destroy the country?

Obama entered the stage telling us the US Constitution was defective and wasn't written correctly.

He has stated that since he can't get what he wasnts he will make law around Congress. (That after his party controlled both houses the first two years.) Examples? Contraception mandate, illegal immigration changes, right off the top of my head.

He wants to redistibute the wealth of the American people and not just to Americans. And he isn't talking the Marshall Plan here.

He wants to diminish our power so we are just one of many at the International Community Organizing Love Fest where we solve all the problems by being nice and bowing and taking money away from free enterprise systems, while demeaning the individual.

Oh, and Ahmadinejad is a happy fella. (Now if he just figure out the timing of his surprise party for Israel ....)

wyo sis said...

We have 4 years of Obama's presidency to refer to. His actions are not and have not been the actions of a person who even loves his country. He apologizes for it.

There's an old Western saying called Ride for the Brand. It means you give the person paying you your loyalty.
it was a sort of honor code for the West when cattle were all mixed up on the same range.

Rustlers would try to find and brand the calves before their owners could brand them. Range riders employed by each owner would ride out and try to keep the rustling from happening.

Sometimes they would turn on their employers and begin to build up their own heard by branding calves with their own brand while taking money from the person they were supposed to work for.

People who did this were despised as the lowest of the low. One of the best tributes a cowboy could be paid was if people said he rode for the brand.

It's an honor thing.

Obama doesn't ride for the brand.

Unless he's really getting paid by someone other than the people of the United States.

Robert Cook said...

"Are any of the lib progs discussing WHAT Eastwood said?

"23 million unemployed"


Yes, we have a crisis of unemployment in this country, and Obama has done squat to improve matters...because Obama serves the same masters as did Bush and as will Romney...Wall Street. Our jobs have disappeared because it helps the stock prices of the big corpse (sic) and they and Wall Street profit at the expense of American workers. Does Eastwood think Romney is going to improve our unemployment crisis? Romney is the exemplar of the business thinking and practices which have resulted in the calamitous mass loss of jobs in this country.

"Disregard for the security and well being of the people NYC and the United States with the stupid
political theater of the terrorist trial in NYC?"


Why would it have been "political theater?" I live in NYC and I had no concern at all for the expected trial of terrorists here.

"Sending a copy of our plans to enemy."

What does this refer to? Our expected withdrawal date? What difference does it make? It's a foregone conclusion we have to leave Afghanistan eventually. We're not going to "win," whatever that means. How is "victory" in Afghanistan defined? What goal is to be achieved that will constitute "winning?" Who are we even fighting, aside from the Afghan population?

Neither Obama nor Romney qualify to be President, but one of them is now, and one of them will be come January 2013. The "one" who that will be may or may not change, but the shit we're in will stay the same, except maybe to get worse.

Saint Croix said...

A tiny quibble-- the Marx Brothers' humor is about as apolitical as humor can be, unless you want to include their surname as propaganda.

A lot of their jokes are apolitical. Often word gags, for instance, or sight gags. But a huge amount of their art is an attack on class, I think.

The Marx brothers attack class all the time. That's their schtick. They attack the rich, the pompous, the artsie-fartsies. They attack opera, man.

And they always attack their own capacity for evil. Margaret Dumont is pompous and rich, but she's always nicer than Groucho! That's what's so hysterical.

In fact Americans have been ripping class for 200 years. Watch any of the Thin Man movies, for instance. Watch Sabrina. Read Mark Twain.

Class is boring and stupid. I don't have patience for so-called European "art movies" about class. Ugh. Marx is a fucking idiot. Rules of the Game is moronic. Soviet cinema can be visually exciting. But the narratives are death pie. It's so boring!

I suppose you could call Duck Soup a sendup of Balkan politics, but it's not really commentary.

I see it as broader than Balkan politics. It's all about the corruption of politics. It's insanity! Groucho taxes people just for fun. And he outlaws things just for fun. And he declares war just for fun.

He's so corrupted by power. He's a madman singing songs about his madness. It's hysterical.

Unknown said...

The skit worked so well because the audience was on edge waiting for some senior moment disaster and, just when it seemed he would walk off the stage mumbling to himself, he turned loose one of his perfectly phrased, straight to the point zingers. The audience's tension built as he rattled on and their relief was palpable each time he did it. He was like a brilliant acrobat pretending to be clumsy on a high wire at the circus.

creeley23 said...

He was like a brilliant acrobat pretending to be clumsy on a high wire at the circus.

Unknown: I've got to admit I'm wondering about that. At first I assumed that I was watching the inevitable effects of age on a man even as vital as Eastwood, but on subsequent viewings I could see that old glint in his eye after he lost his balance then regained it.

Then there was his hair all askew. It's not like someone woke him up from a nap then pushed him out on stage. Eastwood may have lost some control of that voice, but he had as many assistants as he wanted to make sure he looked as spiffy as he wanted. He could have easily looked better, but he didn't.

Hmm.

creeley23 said...

OT, but I'd like to recommend a mid-career Eastwood film that's mostly forgotten: White Hunter, Black Heart. It's a somewhat bizarre, or maybe mostly true, roman a clef of John Huston putting together the deal to make The African Queen then going to Africa and getting endlessly sidetracked.

Wickedly funny.

Dave Cearley said...

Looks like Obama's pitcher has run out of Kool-ade.
November, Nobama.

Dave Cearley said...

Looks like Obama's pitcher has run out of Kool-ade.
November, Nobama.

Featherless Biped said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Featherless Biped said...

Moore says Clint implied that Mr. O should eff himself. Of course this is typical michael mooore -- getting things backwards.

Eastwood was simultaneously lampooning Obama's testiness and Joe Biden's actual use of the phrase to Patrick Leahy. Pretty slick, if you ask me.

Featherless Biped said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
me said...

When the child in Andersen's tale made his observation on the Emperor's costume - I wonder what was said about the child in pro-Emperor media? Like that child, the old man Eastwood had the special status to diss the hollow idol. Two or three lines of what he said to that chair will, I expect, be used in campaign ads - and will help. A good job.

Unknown said...

creeley23 said., “Then there was his hair all askew. It's not like someone woke him up from a nap then pushed him out on stage. Eastwood may have lost some control of that voice, but he had as many assistants as he wanted to make sure he looked as spiffy as he wanted. He could have easily looked better, but he didn't.”

I agree, and expect that his assistants made him up exactly as he wished, that is to look like a confused, doddering geezer. Thinking about it a little more put me in mind of the circus chapter in Huckleberry Finn where the pretend drunk did his remarkable equestrian stunts.

Some thoughts, for what they're worth.

JAL said...

@ Robert Cook Why would it have been "political theater?" I live in NYC and I had no concern at all for the expected trial of terrorists here.

You weren't who I had in mind, of course.

JAL said...

And the terrorists would have made it political theater as they don't give a flying flip about you.

Sheldon S. said...

It's also about what Eastwood said, and not just how he said it. If having a businessman as president is a good idea, why was Donald Trump rejected out of hand? And why do the Republicans bask in the glow of the Reagan presidency, when it was headed by a non-businessman, as we're the terms of Eisenhower, Nixon, Bush and Bush (a failed businessman).

creeley23 said...

Sheldon S.: Seriously?

Obviously the quality of the candidate matters in addition to the type of his experience. Donald Trump is not anyone's idea of good presidential material except Donald Trump.

Confusion on this point got Obama elected. On general priniciples I think it was great to elect our first black president, but that doesn't mean any black candidate would do.

Politics aside, Obama was the least accomplished and experienced presidential candidate we've had since William Jennings Bryan, arguably of our entire history.

Politics included, Obama was a triply flawed candidate -- a populist demagogue, a machine pol, and a product of the New Left and Black Power.

jimb82 said...

@St. Croix: On the Marx Brothers, I've always thought "A Day at the Races" was a double entendre. They included a musical number of about 20 minutes in which some of the top African American performers of the day put it out there to a large audience that would otherwise never have seen them, and it was pretty clear that they lived on the other side of the racetrack. It was genius.

furious_a said...

If having a businessman as president is a good idea, why was Donald Trump rejected out of hand?

Haven't his Atlantic City casinos been in and out of bankruptcy?

Sheridan said...

You wanna take shots at Clint? You might as well shoot at Santa Claus. Good luck with that. Clint wins, everytime. Best to walk away and hope this goes away. Oops! Too late! Gone viral!

CharlesVegas said...

Just google for an Eastwood interview at the AT&T Pebble Beach Pro-Am held just 6 months ago.

He was perfectly cognizant and aware. It was an act. A brilliant act. An act which *mocks* it's own response.

The attempted criminal Leftist takeover of our institutions is about to be rolled back.

Darcy said...

He still exudes masculinity and sturdiness. I find him quite attractive still.

Yes, ma'am! You are correct! :)