My friends who watched Clint Eastwood’s speech last night revealed in its irreverence and thought it was great. Some of my favorite pundits, however, wondered about the exercise, particularly scheduling it at a”vital” hour of the convention.
Sara Murray of the Wall Street Journal reports that Eastwood’s (use of the) chair surprised the Romney camp: “Mitt Romney’s campaign staff did not realize that Clint Eastwoodwould be using that chair — at least not for something other than sitting.” But, I wonder.
Perhaps, we would we wise to take heed of how the Romney campaign reacted:
Judging an American icon like Clint Eastwood through a typical political lens doesn’t work. His ad-libbing was a break from all the political speeches, and the crowd enjoyed it.
(H/t Ed Morrissey.) And “normal voters“, report the Washington Examiner’s Joel Gehrke, “like the Eastwood performance that pundits panned”.
The crowd (and those “normal voters”) may have loved it — as did a number of my conservative friends who do not follow politics all that closely, but the Obama people really hated it. Last night Democratic National Committee Chairman Debbie Wasserman Schultz singled out the “sketch” for scorn in lieu of commenting on Romney’s strong speech.
And it really seems to have gotten under Obama’s skin. “This“, quipped law professor William A. Jacobson “Is Not The Tweet Of A Confident Man of a message the president sent showing himself in a cabinet meeting (via Instapundit).
And maybe that was the point, to, as Jacobson put it, get “under Obama’s skin.” Obama does not do well on defense, particularly when he feels others are attempting to mock — or tarnish — his image. Maybe Republicans were trying to provoke a reaction that would make the Democrat look petty.
Or maybe they were just trying to draw the media fire on Eastwood, a man not running for office, to limit the Democrat’s attacks of Romney. Today, I did see more liberal venom (on Facebook and political sites) directed against the movie star than against the presidential candidate.
Maybe Republicans figured fewer attacks, even ones from partisans, on the day after the convention would help burnish Romney’s image.
Jus a thought.
UPDATE: My view seems similar to that of Michael Walsh who observed, “If there’s one thing the Left can’t stand, it’s mockery, and Clint gave it to them with both barrels.” Read the whole thing.
Ridiculous figures do not respond very well to ridicule. Their reactions speak volumes, and who knows, it may even show their feet of clay to those who haven’t yet seen…
Right on the money Bruce! Eastwood did what he was suppose to & the Obama pic proved it. BTW, I thought Barry O said he wasn’t watching the convention? Must have just been a coincidence. Like the #twittergulag for Conservatives that twitter denies yet the internet has documented!
As he led the crowd in cheer: “Make my day, PUNK!” – I figured: yeah, it was calculated to get under MObama’s skin – the pic of Josie Wales – made a statement too, no? That was no random choice.
Punk and an empty chair- well played!!
The Dems went after the bait like hungry sharks swallowing a live grenade. BOOM!
Clint Eastwood is one of the most experienced actors and directors of our time. There is no way that he didn’t anticipate correctly the reaction he would trigger. He is also confident enough to recognize that there isn’t a critic that can touch him and mature enough not to be bothered by any of the youngsters that might try and take their pot shots at him. Republicans are fortunate to have his endorsement. His improvisation realistically illustrates the folly of those that would oppose the ideals about which he spoke.
I love Clint Eastwood. He is a Hollywood icon, his contributions to cinema are great and consistent, and so few people keep working so late in life with a career which has spanned decades (putting it lightly) and exposed him to talent legends. He’s both an inspiration and marvel. And I hope he lives another twenty years, and if his health and curiosity are willing, I look forward to seeing him continue to excel in his chosen fields. Gran Tarino was one of my favorite films of 2008 and am a bit mystified that Hollywood would embrace some of his more bloated, but still engaging recent efforts (Mystic River, Million $ Baby) more so than Torino, and ignore the commercially and artistically successful endeavor that was exceptionally executed and teeming with relevant social overtones, showcasing characters that normally don’t see the light of day on the big screen (Asian-Americans, the poor, the old, unlikely friendships, race relations,etc), complete with memorable/quotable lines his early films came to be known for (“get off my lawn”). I also have respect for him as being an unapologetic out-spoken conservative in a sea of liberals. That being said …
Interesting how some of the words Eastwood put in the mouth of his hallucination seated in the empty chair were words some GP commenters and Bill O’Reilly have used. Couldn’t find any links with the object of Eastwood’s hallucination speaking those words. But, I suppose, it gets a pass from many, because, haha, it’s acceptable to put such words in a mouth of men of a certain skin color. Perhaps I’m mistaken. I’d prefer to be. But, it’s what I noticed and felt like sharing.
An Alinsky Rule for Radicals: Use ridicule to attack your enemy. His reply will make him look silly, petty, and weak. Barack, an old Alinsky trainer, must startled and concerned to to see an elderly Republican use the tactic so masterfully. Gee, I wonder if the RNC read the book. POTUS must be wondering that, too.
Snatch, aren’t YOU the one who just made the skin-color/word-choice association?
Good question, Az Mo. As I said in my comment, “Perhaps I’m mistaken. I’d prefer to be.”
Az Mo, Eastwood had a very clear and original idea and he went with it, which was ballsy. I found the whole speech peculiar and rambling, however. It may have come up with the idea at the last minute. And, I began to question why someone would place these words in the mouth of someone who quite clearly doesn’t use vulgar language or react in a dismissive manner, like Bill O’Reilly used to be known for (but, has since corrected). But, it made me wonder, if we, as a society, tolerate such a gimmick, because of the color of one’s skin.
I tried to imagine Elton John or George Clooney, for instance, trying to pull of the same schtick in 2004 with an invisible Bush. And I can’t. I don’t recall Bush ever being belittled in such a fashion on the national stage (tens of millions of viewers) shown to express such vulgar language, while being willingly mocked (Eastwood’s hallucination never left his chair; was he tied to the chair or accepting of the shame?). I’l be pleased if you can provide a link of a comparable example.
Cinesnatch must not remember George W. Bush having to endure an insulting Colbert routine during the White House correspondent’s dinner in 2006. It was full of all sorts of nasty insinuations about the Valerie Plame leak and so on. And unlike Obama last night, Bush was in the room and just a few seats from the podium.
But Cinesnatch’s comment also made me realize something else about the Eastwood routine. It was one of the first times since Obama became president that a well-loved mainstream entertainer mocked Obama. Bush was pilloried on late night TV every night, and frankly, Clinton was regularly mocked, too. Most entertainers, though, have been afraid to take on Obama, and although those firmly identified with the political right frequently mock Obama, few mainstream performers do, or when they do they hold back on the force of their hits. Last night, though, Eastwood, didn’t hold back. He mocked the “empty chair,” and he used the implied vulgarity to mock Obama’s thin skin (and it worked, as illustrated by the tweet cited above).
Partly because of Eastwood’s performance, Romney’s big line later in the evening was even funnier than it would have been if Eastwood hadn’t warmed up the crowd by getting in a few good hits ahead of time: “President Obama promised to begin to slow the rise of the oceans and heal the planet. My promise is to help you and your family.”
I’ve referred to Pres. Obama as an “empty suit” before…but I like the meme of the Empty Chair as a better metaphor and graphical-shorthand.
It should be used again, …and again.
My gay budz in Montana posted this on FB. Made me think of Clint
http://i1124.photobucket.com/albums/l569/rusty98119/6d27f84f64dcfebc61e78831b5009203.jpg
Such a great man. Great work as a director and actor
Eastwood: I was an Eisenhower Republican when I started out at 21, because he promised to get us out of the Korean War. And over the years, I realized there was a Republican philosophy that I liked. And then they lost it. And libertarians had more of it. Because what I really believe is, Let’s spend a little more time leaving everybody alone. These people who are making a big deal out of gay marriage? I don’t give a fu@k about who wants to get married to anybody else! Why not?! We’re making a big deal out of things we shouldn’t be making a deal out of.
Read More http://www.gq.com/entertainment/movies-and-tv/201110/leonardo-dicaprio-clint-eastwood-gq-september-2011-cover-story-article#ixzz25BVOYR55
When Metaphor’s Collide; Mr. Eastwood and Pres. Empty Chair.
Note the teleprompter…perfect together.
Eastwood did a great job. He dissed Obama, rightly, but with no anger. He used humor to highlight Obama’s ‘vacuous, yet defensive’ qualities.
Of course you don’t. Bush only suffered (and may I add, suffered with near-perfect dignity and class) such episodes as a Vice President of the United States screeching at the absolute top of his lungs that Bush had literally betrayed America, a House Speaker questioning Bush’s mental stability, and worse.
**OF COURSE** you don’t remember any of that, Cinesnatch. I expected NOTHING LESS from the likes of you. ROFL 🙂
Now, as to the topic at hand:
I think John Hayward nails it:
Defenders, may I add, who clearly plant suggestions of racism at every opportunity.
Mark Steyn quoted Hayward, and adds:
Kinda interesting that more attention was paid to the Empty Chair than was given to Rubio or Romney. Didn’t see Rubio but several folk have made mention of it. Maybe over the holiday.
because thanks to people like you, the empty chair is president
… by Democrats, who *did not want* attention paid to Rubio or Romney, and so tried as much as possible to talk about something else.
I’d be interested to know if the racists at MSNBC even showed Rubio’s speech. I expect that they did, because it was too big a moment even for them to hide; but, earlier in the week, they did hide (i.e., break away from) other non-white speakers like Artur Davis, Susana Martinez, and Mia Love.
… by Republicans, including by Romney in his speech.
#18.. MSNBC cut off the first 3 minutes of Rubio’s speech.
All of this political crap pales in comparison to the fact that my son’s school won their football game last night.
Natch.
But again, I think lefties are making so much “news” over their own “disappointment” in the Eastwood sketch, because of their strategy of ducking the issues with the economy. They are indeed disappointed… because they were hoping to see the kind of petty, nasty kind of anger toward Obama that they had toward Bush, and which they could portray as racism against Obama. The GOP didn’t give it to them. The biggest thing that the Left got was a Hollywood star doing Newhart to skewer Obama gently. They are sad like kids at Christmas… Not because the star’s performance was sad (or anything but what he intended), but because they didn’t get the “present” they wanted.
V, congrats! Yes, stuff closer to home and family is more important.
I see Rubio as a very strong candidate for 2016. If Romney doesnt get his act together and doesnt take the 2012 slot, Rubio would have the best chance even if he goes up against Christie.
Rubio seems very level headed but there is that ugly birther whisper campaign.
There is the very evident ‘no-Obama’ contigent but the’pro-Romney’ camp is still kinda shakey. I think it was V that stated earlier this Spring about Romney’s money and financial backing that got him through the primaries.
Anyway, Empty Chair syndrome plays well for the No Obama folk butdidnt do much for the rah rah for Romney. Rubio had a great speech.
Rubio definitely had the best speech. I didn’t care much for him, but he’s a great salesperson. Out of everyone, he had earnest down pat.
Condoleezza Rice was my favorite of the three-day event, though. Rumor has it she might run for California governor in 2016. Don’t know how much truth we can attach to that, but certainly would make for an exciting election year.
The proponents of Affirmative Action took the GOP to task for advancing minorities and women to the convention stage. The saddest part : the left doesn’t see that irony. As with all things liberal, “Politics before policy, always”.
The only thing missing from the empty chair skit was a gold club.
urg… “golf club”
ILC, Indeed. It was an amazing night, although a little warm for football. Also, my bf had never been to a high school football game before. He was extremely surprised at what an exciting and social event it was. I’ll make a conservative out of him yet.
#28.. It took my partner 12 years to “fix” me. I hope you are in it for the long haul. haha
http://m.youtube.com/#/watch? v=pNO58WdUptU&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DpNO58WdUptU&gl=US
There’s also Biden’s love of profanity and wasn’t it BHO who said something about judging a person by the people who surround him?
http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=pNO58WdUptU&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DpNO58WdUptU&gl=US
Here is wisdom for him who hath understanding (and I’m talking to YOU, Cinesnatch): If YOU’RE THE ONE hearing the “dog whistle,” that makes YOU the racist.
For those who are defenders of Obama, everything is about how Romney is not this, that or the other thing.
But, also, for those who are defenders of Obama, the Republican campaign is appealing to( 1) the Romney supporters, (2) those who are waiting to hear about how “hope and change” will pick up the slack and start working and (3) those who are for anybody but Obama.
Therefore, Romney has two out of the three groups. Obama has strutted his stuff on the stage for nearly four years and sprayed blame everywhere except on his own leadership.
Eastwood clearly pointed out that Obama’s “leadership” and sense of “responsibility” and “clarity of purpose” are all wrapped up in an empty suit, sitting in an empty chair and reading from a TeleprompTer.
Now we are beginning to learn how that is playing to group #2: those who are waiting to hear how “hope and change” will pick up the slack and start working.
The Alinsky rule about ridicule as a tool of demagoguery is not really the same as what Eastwood and the Republicans are doing. Alinsky was not interested in the least whether the ridicule was founded in truth.
The Eastwood and Republican ridicule is totally founded in truth. Obama has made a mess of his Presidency and now he is becoming a laughingstock target of ridicule for what he has actually done.
Vince was quick to suggest the one and only thin reed of defense: don’t criticize the black man. (RACISM !!!!!! Hey, everybody, RACISM!!!!) It is sort of like the female who makes the football team and everybody on her side screams foul when someone “hits the girl.”
Vince, blame Obama’s massive, Carter level failures on his white half. It might make you feel better.
Sorry about the level of the oceans and the health of the planet, but my bet is that many more people in the productive sector care about the President focusing on jobs and the economy and restoring economic stability and the foundation of the workers and their families. We have reached a Carter level malaise when it come to wealth transfer and more entitlements.
Now we will watch Obama defend himself and look smaller and smaller as he lies, recalls his promises as “facts” and throws blame everywhere. Obama will become the incredible shrinking President and he will call in the flying monkeys and harpies and his college tour pep rallies will add to the ridicule and then he will get nasty. Really, really nasty. The bunker is not a happy place when the collapse is near.
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2012/09/02/opinion/sunday/bruni-excluded-from-inclusion.xml
Lovely commentary
“WHAT the Republicans painstakingly constructed here was meant to look like the biggest of tents. And still they couldn’t spare so much as a sleeping bag’s worth of space for the likes of me.”
Then
“It was striking because the Republicans went so emphatically far, in terms of stagecraft and storytelling, to profess inclusiveness, and because we gays have been in the news rather a lot over the last year or so, as the march toward marriage equality picked up considerable velocity. We’re a part of the conversation.”
Translation: Despite that the GOP’s tent includes those who disagree on the issue of same-sex marriage (which the author has demonstrated), the GOP has a small, exclusive tent because the GOP platform doesn’t mimic the Democratic Party platform. Thus, the Democratic Party platform has the bigger tent because it doesn’t allow disagreement, i.e. they won’t allow anyone to speak for traditional marriage at their convention, just like Bob Casey was banned from speaking at the DNC in 1992 because he’s pro-life. In other words, big tent == if you agree with me; small tent == if your party includes those who are allowed to express that they don’t.
More Mark Steyn in The National Review, “Dog-whistling past the graveyard”:
RTWT… for fun.
Major Conspiracy Theory: Members of the racism industry deliberately try to outrage whites in order to make them angry at blacks in general. Example. A group high school rowdies run through the stadium at a football game sucker punching people. All the victims are white, and the perps get suspended. Rev. Jessee Jackson arrives in town screaming “racism” because the only kids suspended were black. White kids & parents get pissed off. The constant theme of rampant white racism is more of the same, I believe. Call somebody a filthy name like that, day in day out, and might develop a rage that can grow inside him like a cancer. In other words, charges of racism may be a self fulfilling diagnosis. Why would Jackson, Sharpton, et. al. do this? Because their only jobs are as generals in the war against whites. The last thing they want is for peace to break out. Maybe “theory” is the wrong word. Call it a hypothesis
For those of you who are too young to have seen “The Wizard of Oz,” the Wicked Witch of the West deployed squadrons of winged monkeys as airborne attack troops. They were nasty creatures sent out by a nasty person. Use of the metaphor for nasty attacks was quite common for a time, less so now that the flick is passe. I’m shocked that it hasn’t been denounced as racist on this board yet. Maybe everyone’s offline for the three day weekend.
Stu, a very white middle aged, college educated, single woman, manager of a WALMART store, had a little plaque on her office desk. “I have flying monkeys and I know how to use them.”
People raised AWAY from the metro D-onkey farm do not hear the dog whistles from the PC handlers, nor do they recognize that the words and phrases they commonly use would send some liberals and minorities into shitabrick shock. the faux liberal outrage is probably because they heard their own dog whistle and are annoyed that they have to start barking.
“What’s a movie tradesman doing out here?”.
Spoken by a master craftsman. No, it wasn’t innovative nor outre. It was a superb blending of Jimmy Stewart’s Harvey and Bob Newhart by a unique talent, a genius. Watch it again, folks. Jack Benny and Don Rickles flitter in the wings.
So, the Romney folks were surprised? You betcha. I’ve been watching this circus for a long time – since 1952. The Romney campaign is SEAL Team 6. You don’t see them coming and are never quite sure what happened. You just wonder where your pants are.
Cinesnatch, a correction.
If Condi Rice runs for governor of California in 2016, she will either be 2 years late or 2 years early. We hold our state election in between national elections. You know, since the left is all about the facts, just wanna clear that one up for ya.
Monday is National Empty Chair Day.
http://michellemalkin.com/2012/09/02/monday-is-national-empty-chair-day/
Wait, wait, wait. Obama (or more precisely, Obama’s Twitter team) responds with a post that took all of 2 minutes to produce, and this is supposed to indicate that Obama is not a confident man. Oh, okay. He’s the President, but he’s not confident. He won states like North Carolina and Virginia, which doesn’t usually happen, but he’s not confident. When’s the last time any of you dorks had tens of millions of people vote for you? Haven’t I seen a bunch of posts around here chastising Obama for being overconfident?
Anyway, let’s all try to remember that the Republicans spent a week hyping a mystery speaker that turned out to be a movie star harboring a set of political opinions that directly contradicts a number of the planks of the Republican Party’s platform. Is using a gimmick and exploiting the fame of a celebrity supposed to be a sign of confidence, these days? I’m so glad you’ve got this little chair thing to high-five about for the next couple of weeks, but let’s not pretend that this wasn’t a desperate, flailing move to make Romney seem cool by associating him with one of the most recognizable icons in the culture.
They also built a whole convention on a misconstrued four words from less than two months ago.
We have yet to see the DNC, but the bar has been set pretty low (Rice and Rubio aside, which oddly, very few people on here are parading around as the biggest triumphs).
Eastwood’s bit was the best thing I have seen from a political conference in a very long time. It was biting satire about the current President and about how Conventions are run in general.
@Levi.
Thank you for admitting the Republicans allow opposing views, something Democrats (and socialists like yourself) try to exterminate.
@Vince What four words do you mean? “You didn’t build that?” Cited in context. Maybe you mean the four letters, “O I H O.”
Oh wait, he didn’t spell that either.
That’s odd, Levi, because that’s always been your argument.
So once again, Levi, you get caught projecting onto conservatives exactly what you were trying to do previously.
And moreover, conservatives have once again demonstrated that we can outresearch, out-study, and out-fact you and your fellow mindless Obama talking points repeaters.
I love it. Desperate and pathetic Cinesnatch tries to insist all the commenters here are racists because we’re supposedly not “parading around as the biggest triumphs” people Cinesnatch picked who happen to be black and Hispanic.
Tell me, Cinesnatch, why would anyone from this blog want to meet you, when all you do is call us racists?