Did Clint Eastwood Lose The Plot At Romney's Convention?

[KeyserSoze01]

I watched Clint do his piece during the RNC convention yesterday. I've listened to the rhetoric from the left. I've seen the political pundits bat the topic around like a badminton bird. I watched the live crowd's response during his piece and I have to say he was great. It's called humor people, perhaps old school, but so is Clint Eastwood. So instead of attacking an American icon for telling the truth, perhaps you should find a theater playing 2016, Obama's America, to find out who he really is.

He made several poignant comments. Here are my favorites:

"Biden is the intellect of the Democratic Party. Kind of a grin with a body behind it."

"I never thought it was a good idea for attorneys to be President. What do you think? Is it time for a businessman to be President?"

"You, we, we own this country. Politicians are employees of ours."

"When somebody doesn't do the job, we gotta let them go."

-Clint Eastwood

Great Speech ,Poignant.? You have low standards and well maybe you would say that. It looked embarassing. An Old man rambling, and chair prop was his idea just before he went on stage. Looked like some senile guy at a nursing home in the day room , talking to someone in an empty chair he believed to be there

He's 82 <deleted>. Let's see you pull off addressing 40 million people at that age.

[Pimay1]

OK back on topic. Can anyone of the posters of this thread who have trashed Clint and his speech tell us anything he said that was not true? If so please elaborate for discussion sake. Sure it was a little rambling at times but what was wrong with the core message?

I'm still waiting patiently guys and girls. Surely you can justify your opinion with facts right?

I rest my case.

[KeyserSoze01]

OK back on topic. Can anyone of the posters of this thread who have trashed Clint and his speech tell us anything he said that was not true? If so please elaborate for discussion sake. Sure it was a little rambling at times but what was wrong with the core message?

I'm still waiting patiently guys and girls. Surely you can justify your opinion with facts right?

I rest my case.

It appears that the posters on this thread are exactly like the party they support. The Obama camp's campaign strategy has been negative from day one. And why? Because they can't run on their record. Hell, their record is running up the national debt by $5,000,000,000,000 in 4 years. Yikes!!! When the facts are not in your favor, just throw enough shit at your opponent and maybe something will stick.

Most Americans that I know are sick of the two-party system in the US and would love to have a grass roots reformer like Ron Paul for President. It's too bad he is not electable because he won't accept bribes from lobbyists/big business, so he is branded as a lunatic and radical. What the US needs right now is a leader with some common sense.

[chuckd]

OK back on topic. Can anyone of the posters of this thread who have trashed Clint and his speech tell us anything he said that was not true? If so please elaborate for discussion sake. Sure it was a little rambling at times but what was wrong with the core message?

I'm still waiting patiently guys and girls. Surely you can justify your opinion with facts right?

I rest my case.

The liberals on this board have no answers to your question. Hence the silence is deafening...except for the attacks your question brings forth from them.

[KKvampire]

OK back on topic. Can anyone of the posters of this thread who have trashed Clint and his speech tell us anything he said that was not true? If so please elaborate for discussion sake. Sure it was a little rambling at times but what was wrong with the core message?

I'm still waiting patiently guys and girls. Surely you can justify your opinion with facts right?

I rest my case.

The liberals on this board have no answers to your question. Hence the silence is deafening...except for the attacks your question brings forth from them.

What question,? tell me what Eastwood said that was "true"?

[chuckd]

I'm still waiting patiently guys and girls. Surely you can justify your opinion with facts right?

I rest my case.

The liberals on this board have no answers to your question. Hence the silence is deafening...except for the attacks your question brings forth from them.

What question,? tell me what Eastwood said that was "true"?

You shouldn't answer a question with another question.

Here is the question which has now been posted multiple times with no response.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Can anyone of the posters of this thread who have trashed Clint and his speech tell us anything he said that was not true?"

Edited September 1, 2012 by chuckd

[OzMick]

I understand that it is impossible to get elected to high office in the US without doing the "I'm a believer" act, but having looked at the tenets of Mormonism, and finding them ridiculous, I wonder about the man proposed to be the next president.

Quite possibly he suffered religious indoctrination as a child which can be quite hard to shake off even for intelligent people. Even so, the faith contains inaccuracies, proven by history to be false but current at the time of its creation, that should raise doubts.

OTOH he may be just a hypocrite going through the motions.

[lazeeboy]

he was smiling ,it was tongue in cheek,,,

[rotary]

Not sure if the Eastwood thing will help but anything to get Obama out of office is ok with the majority of Americans before he does any more damage to the country

[cdnvic]

Those of you not grown up enough to have a simple adult discussion without insulting others can go elsewhere. Next insult gets a long rest.

[ALFREDO]

To the Topic,

No, he did not lose it. But, with 82, he is sure not in his Hay days.

The idea with the chair, why not? All together the performance could and would have been much better, 20 years ago!

What surprises me, I sit far away in TH, but where is that part with, "Yes, we can! Yes, we will change." under Obama?

At least in the Foreign policy, contact with other supposed "enemy" countries, more visits, more open contact with these countries, more talks at a high political level with those I miss, more dialog was promised, no?

Where's the change?

Clint spoke about that question also, from the tears in the eyes, the first colored president, young, who will bring drastic changes on every level!

Eastwood, was in the parts I believe, I can have an opinion -Foreign policy- with my knowledge, not wrong!

I would have thought, Obama will sit with the new leader -KIM YONG UN- in North Korea at his inauguration at the table

and dance with Kims just official appeared spouse.

Edited September 1, 2012 by ALFREDO

[Steely Dan]

He should have talked to an empty golf cart imho.

[doggie888888]

Lose the plot?

1) No self-respecting American would even talk like that. Which leads us to:

2) Who in the US cares what a newspaper in Australia says about anything having to do the the US presidential election? Let me help you out: NO ONE.

Why is it that non-Americans get diarrhea of the mouth (pen) when talking about US politics?

Perhaps if Americans had cared a bit more about their impact upon others they would not have fallen into such a foreign relations predicament. The USA went from its heyday JFK era from being admired, loved and respected to loathed and hated during the last Bush administration.

US politics have an impact upon Australians because it seems that US foreign policy can result in Australian military personnel dying in dumps like Afghanistan. The next time the USA sounds the alarm, it may find that even its staunchest allies say, not this time Bubba. In today's world, the USA cannot go it alone. It's economy is dependent upon Canada and Mexico. The day either of those countries turn off the energy supply, the USA collapses. The day Australia says, sorry chum, you can't use our facilities or assets to spy on China anymore, the US pacific defence strategy falls apart. Bet you didn't know that the largest export market for the USA is Canada, and that the more the USA attempts to impose trade barriers, the greater the likelihood that the US exposrt market will suffer in return causing tens of thousands of high paying jobs to be lost. This isn't 1950 and the world has changed.

None of the Australians I fought alongside in two wars would speak this way about America. Very negative and fails to talk about the wonderful things US has given to the world. Seems the australians would be speaking Japanese about now if it was not for the sacrifice of my father and two uncles during WWII

As an Australian, I can say I do not mind speaking Japanese or Chinese.

Yes, the USA has been a force for good and they have been more positives than negatives in the last say 100 odd years. But, as a non American who do not wish to wish to offend, I think there are reasons why in the last 10 years, people around the world are starting to question the status quo...even Americans I know started to notice a less than warm regard towards Americans generally around the world. Of course, we owe a gratitude to those who sacrificed for our freedom, be they Americans, Aussies or Brits, but that does not mean we are supposed to unquestioningly adhere to the mantra that USA is consistently and always a force for good.

I am sorry if the above offends Americans (it is not intended to). At the end of the day, when you find others starting to question your role, your integrity, your moral compass or whatever, maybe it is time for a good hard look at your actions and not blame the messengers. What made you guys exceptional and a great friend to many nations for the last 150 years? And what makes you guys less so in the last 10 years?

Edited September 1, 2012 by doggie888888

[Ulysses G.]

What made you guys exceptional and a great friend to many nations for the last 150 years? And what makes you guys less so in the last 10 years?

Your premise is flawed. The liberal left has been complaining about capitalism and the USA in particular for numerous decades and they are complaining still. Not a lot is differerent from the.1960s in that regard. The only thing that has really changed is the Internet gives a louder voice to the Occupy Wall Street types.

Edited September 1, 2012 by Ulysses G.

[bunuel]

He's an old man. I think Clint Eastwood is beloved by all political persuasions in the USA for his show business career. I don't think he swayed many swing voters with his convention speech though. Which was the point. Of course his speech and most of the other speakers during the three day love/hate fest for the irrational, climate change denialist, anti health care for poor people, anti-science, pro creationist poppycock, anti-civil rights party were mostly more substantial than their actual nominee -- Romney.

Democrats will be making a huge mistake if they underestimats the impact of the Clint Eastwood icon - just as they underestimated the political power of Ronald Reagan. The fact is that most Americans hate intellectuals and are suckers for The Face in The Crowd, as W.'s handlers understood very well when they morphed W. from an Ivy Leaguer born with a golden spoon in his mourh into an incoherent rube with a pick up truck. The rambling incoherence is all part of the act. Will be interesting to see how Dems respond next week - hopefully they can come up with some iconic political theatre that will offset this politically effective sideshow.

As PT Barnum used to say: " Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public!"

[lomatopo]

"Can anyone of the posters of this thread who have trashed Clint and his speech tell us anything he said that was not true?"

During his speech, Eastwood said he was crying for the 23 million unemployed Americans. The only problem: there are actually only 12.8 million unemployed Americans as of July, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, whose job it is to keep track of that sort of thing.

Just sayin'. Not the worst of the lies spoken at the RNC.

[Jingthing]

"Can anyone of the posters of this thread who have trashed Clint and his speech tell us anything he said that was not true?"

During his speech, Eastwood said he was crying for the 23 million unemployed Americans. The only problem: there are actually only 12.8 million unemployed Americans as of July, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, whose job it is to keep track of that sort of thing.

Just sayin'. Not the worst of the lies spoken at the RNC.

I don't have a big problem with that. So many millions are underemployed and/or off the books of being officially counted. However, what I do have a problem with is the lie that Obama is only to blame for the problem. He inherited the worst economy since the great depression and the party of Romney is on record that their entire agenda from the moment Obama was elected was to OBSTRUCT anything they could from him and their number one goal was to beat Obama, no matter the cost to the country. Some critics have called that treasonous. Now they hope to reap the rewards. I say it is immoral to reward them for caring more about the partisan goals than the overall good of the nation, including of course the masses of unemployed.

This is not a fiction. Their leaders are on clear record. There are a number of cases of good policies that the republican party was FOR but as soon as Obama was for it, they instantly and magically became against it. Has Obama not accomplished as much as hoped? Yes. Because the republicans created such a toxic environment that they made it almost impossible to govern. Again, this cannot be rewarded by the people or the U.S. is sunk.

Now the republicans are about to spend hundreds of millions of dollars to LIE and avoid owning up to what they did, placing their extremist partisanship over the greater good of the country. We'll see how that works for them.

Edited September 1, 2012 by Jingthing

[Mosha]

I can't understand why Americans call the Democrats left of centre. They would on most policies be considered right wing in Europe on most policies. Even more than a Thatcher government. Neither party would be electable outside the USA

[F1fanatic]

Getting back on topic - I think its a shame.

Clint's films in his later years have been thought-provoking and always worth watching.

Its sad to see that he is now beyond realising that his speech was a mistake.

[chiangmaikelly]

Getting back on topic - I think its a shame.

Clint's films in his later years have been thought-provoking and always worth watching.

Its sad to see that he is now beyond realising that his speech was a mistake.

We are devastated !

[gaucho]

Lose the plot?

1) No self-respecting American would even talk like that. Which leads us to:

2) Who in the US cares what a newspaper in Australia says about anything having to do the the US presidential election? Let me help you out: NO ONE.

Why is it that non-Americans get diarrhea of the mouth (pen) when talking about US politics?

agree mate all around the world people tell the yanks what they should do .....and their own backyards r well and truly fxxxxed

[bhatmasterson]

To the Topic,

No, he did not lose it. But, with 82, he is sure not in his Hay days.

The idea with the chair, why not? All together the performance could and would have been much better, 20 years ago!

What surprises me, I sit far away in TH, but where is that part with, "Yes, we can! Yes, we will change." under Obama?

At least in the Foreign policy, contact with other supposed "enemy" countries, more visits, more open contact with these countries, more talks at a high political level with those I miss, more dialog was promised, no?

Where's the change?

Clint spoke about that question also, from the tears in the eyes, the first colored president, young, who will bring drastic changes on every level!

Eastwood, was in the parts I believe, I can have an opinion -Foreign policy- with my knowledge, not wrong!

I would have thought, Obama will sit with the new leader -KIM YONG UN- in North Korea at his inauguration at the table

and dance with Kims just official appeared spouse.

I don't fully comprehend what you are trying to say here but I don't think Clint said anything about a first "colored president". Maybe I missed that though. I'll go back and check and if I find it I'll retract that statement.

[F1fanatic]

Getting back on topic - I think its a shame.

Clint's films in his later years have been thought-provoking and always worth watching.

Its sad to see that he is now beyond realising that his speech was a mistake.

We are devastated !

I wouldn't say I'm "devastated", just sad that he made such a monumental misjudgement.

[bigbamboo]

I understand that it is impossible to get elected to high office in the US without doing the "I'm a believer" act, but having looked at the tenets of Mormonism, and finding them ridiculous, I wonder about the man proposed to be the next president.

Quite possibly he suffered religious indoctrination as a child which can be quite hard to shake off even for intelligent people. Even so, the faith contains inaccuracies, proven by history to be false but current at the time of its creation, that should raise doubts.

OTOH he may be just a hypocrite going through the motions.

Yep, just more political motions.

[bhatmasterson]

He's an old man. I think Clint Eastwood is beloved by all political persuasions in the USA for his show business career. I don't think he swayed many swing voters with his convention speech though. Which was the point. Of course his speech and most of the other speakers during the three day love/hate fest for the irrational, climate change denialist, anti health care for poor people, anti-science, pro creationist poppycock, anti-civil rights party were mostly more substantial than their actual nominee -- Romney.

Democrats will be making a huge mistake if they underestimats the impact of the Clint Eastwood icon - just as they underestimated the political power of Ronald Reagan. The fact is that most Americans hate intellectuals and are suckers for The Face in The Crowd, as W.'s handlers understood very well when they morphed W. from an Ivy Leaguer born with a golden spoon in his mourh into an incoherent rube with a pick up truck. The rambling incoherence is all part of the act. Will be interesting to see how Dems respond next week - hopefully they can come up with some iconic political theatre that will offset this politically effective sideshow.

As PT Barnum used to say: " Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public!"

When you make statements like this:

"The fact is that most Americans hate intellectuals and are suckers for The Face in The Crowd, as W.'s handlers understood very well when they morphed W. from an Ivy Leaguer born with a golden spoon in his mourh into an incoherent rube with a pick up truck."

You give up all credibility as a sensible contributor to this thread. Some readers may dismiss everything else you have to say on this particular subject.

You obviously don't know how most Americans feel about intellectuals and you have very little info on the real W. He was an underachieving Ivy student born with a silver spoon in his mouth and his handlers didn't have to do very much morphing because there is plenty of proof that he was indeed an incoherent rube. That's is one of the many reasons why he wasn't invited to speak at this year's or last year's, if I'm not mistaken, RNC shindig.

[lomatopo]

Some Mitt Romney aides perplexed by Clint Eastwood’s routine

SEPTEMBER 01, 2012

TAMPA — Clint Eastwood’s off-color endorsement of Mitt Romney on Thursday seemed to startle and unsettle the candidate’s own top aides, several of whom made a point of distancing themselves from the decision to put him onstage without a polished script. ‘’Not me,’’ said an exasperated-looking senior adviser, when asked who was responsible for Eastwood’s speech. In late-night interviews, aides variously called the speech ‘‘strange’’ and ‘‘weird.’’ One described it as ‘‘theater of the absurd.’’ Finger-pointing quickly ensued, suggesting real displeasure and even confusion over the handling of Eastwood’s performance, which was kept secret until the last minute.

A senior Republican involved in convention planning said Eastwood’s appearance was cleared by at least two of Romney’s top advisers, Russ Schriefer and Stuart Stevens. This person said that there had been no rehearsal. But another adviser said several top aides had reviewed talking points given to Eastwood, which the campaign had discussed with the actor as recently as a few hours before his appearance.

Also, the campaign placed Eastwood at the beginning of the television network coverage, at 10 p.m., eclipsing a video of Romney’s family life for most viewers. Stevens said he would not discuss internal decision-making but described Eastwood’s remarks as improvised.

http://bostonglobe.com/news/nation/2012/08/31/some-mitt-romney-aides-perplexed-clint-eastwood-routine/ByWp0tPETZpcb2w8yROOaO/story.html

[koheesti]

Clint Eastwood puts liberals in full panic mode

Eastwood said what I’ve heard from non-journalist, non-political people for the last two years – President Obama hasn’t delivered on his promises, and now things are worse. There’s a growing sense, that’s been growing for a while, that President Obama doesn’t know or care what he’s doing, that he’s an empty suit.

Clint Eastwood made him an empty chair.

The media has, and will continue to tell you that Eastwood was a flop, a mistake of epic proportions. Democrats will say how horrible it was. But they both know this country holds Clint Eastwood as an icon and has done so for nearly 50 years. Real people like, trust and believe him. A tornado’s worth of spin won’t touch the credibility that man has earned with the American people.

How do I know I’m right? How do I know Democrats even know this, no matter what they’re saying publicly? Twitter.

http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/the_rumble/2012/08/clint-eastwood-puts-liberals-in-full-panic-mode

[chuckd]

"Can anyone of the posters of this thread who have trashed Clint and his speech tell us anything he said that was not true?"

During his speech, Eastwood said he was crying for the 23 million unemployed Americans. The only problem: there are actually only 12.8 million unemployed Americans as of July, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, whose job it is to keep track of that sort of thing.

Just sayin'. Not the worst of the lies spoken at the RNC.

That isn't my quote but it is from one I quoted. I noticed it when he said it but forgot it later.

That aside, JT is correct in that he should have said 23 million unemployed and under employed to be precise.

Talking about lies at a convention, to quote an old saying..."You ain't seen nuthin yet."

The Democratic convention is next week.

[bhatmasterson]

OK back on topic. Can anyone of the posters of this thread who have trashed Clint and his speech tell us anything he said that was not true? If so please elaborate for discussion sake. Sure it was a little rambling at times but what was wrong with the core message?

I'm still waiting patiently guys and girls. Surely you can justify your opinion with facts right?

My opinion has been that Clint was not able to deliver as the RNC producers would have liked. I don't think I've trashed him at all. I like almost every film he's acted in or directed. However, since you insist, I'll take a swing at your challenge, with the help of the National Broadcasting Corp.

Eastwood suggests President Obama is flying Air Force One by choice

What he said:

I think if you just step aside and Mr. Romney can kind of take over. You can maybe still use a plane. Though maybe a smaller one. Not that big gas guzzler you are going around to colleges and talking about student loans and stuff like that. You are an -- an ecological man. Why would you want to drive that around?

The name

Air Force One applies to any plane carrying the president. There are two Boeing 747-200B series aircraft that are highly customized for security reasons. According to the White House, the on board electronics are hardened to protect against an electromagnetic pulse, and the planes are equipped with advanced secure communications equipment, allowing them to function as a mobile command center in the event of an attack.

The Romney campaign, meanwhile, is currently traveling on an MD-80 aircraft, which seats between 130 and 172 passengers.

Eastwood says he doesn't support lawyers running for president

What he said:

See, I never thought it was a good idea for attorneys to the president, anyway. I think attorneys are so busy -- you know, they're always taught to argue everything, and always weigh everything -- weigh both sides. They are always devil's advocating this and bifurcating this and bifurcating that. You know all that stuff. But, I think it is maybe time -- what do you think -- for maybe a businessman. How about that?

It's true that Mitt Romney is a businessman -- he founded the private equity firm Bain Capital. It's also true that President Obama is a Harvard-trained lawyer -- he graduated magna cum laude in 1991. But Mitt Romney is also a Harvard-trained lawyer -- he attended both the law school and the business school from 1971 to 1975 and graduated from both with honors.

There are 23 million unemployed Americans

What he said:

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.

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, there were 12.8 million unemployed Americans as of July. However, if you add up the number of Americans looking for more work, one gets to Eastwood's figure. The Bureau of Labor Statistics reports that there were 8.2 million Americans in July who were working part-time "because their hours had been cut back or because they were unable to find a full-time job."

Additionally, there were 2.5 million people who were "marginally attached to the labor force." The Bureau explains, "These individuals were not in the labor force, wanted and were available for work, and had looked for a job sometime in the prior 12 months. They were not counted as unemployed because they had not searched for work in the 4 weeks preceding the survey."

This adds up to more than 23 million, a figure the Romney campaign has highlighted.

[koheesti]

People nit picking the unscripted, non-teleprompter speech of an 82-yr old for "lies" is pretty stupid.