I expect Jon Stewart and Bill Maher will have a lot of fun with Romney, Eastwood, and the whole RNC tonight.
The Race For the US Presidency 2012 - 2
Fri, 2012-08-31 15:29
#102
Boom Boom
Fri, 2012-08-31 18:33
#103
Smith wrote:
I'm sorry, but maybe someone can explain to me what the problem with Eastwood's speech was.
For the first two thirds of it I don't think he said anything that someone criticizing Obama from the left would not have said.
Arguing AGAINST the opponent rather than FOR your guy is hardly a ringing endorsement.
We all know what his stance is on marriage equality, so it was an awkward fit, and a bad decision on Eastwood's part. This is the best the GOP can do?
And most importantly, everyone is talking about him today, not Mitt Romney.
It's all fine by me.
END QUOTE
I thought the speech was awkward, but not for the same reasons that everyone else seemed to think it was. While it was anti-Obama, it didn't sound like something that should be delivered to that particular audience.
As an example, he said to the invisible Obama "Before you decided to support the war in Afghanistan, maybe you should have asked the Russians how they did for ten years there." Now, remember, he was talking about the initial decision to go in(which Obama says he supported), not President Obama's current conduct of the war. That's something that you might want to say in front of a Ron Paul crowd, not so much to the Republican Party as a whole(since that party supported the war overwhelmingly).
And he might have been engaged in ironic understatement when he said "In 2008, I wasn't your biggest supporter, but I was almost happy you won"(or words to that effect). But I've also read personal interviews with Eastwood where he expresses roughly the same nuanced views about Obama, so he was probably being sincere in saying that. And direct quote here...
Whenever 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.
END QUOTE
As if he was kind of wavering between Romney and Obama, but now he's settled on Romney.
Like I say, maybe some of it was just ironic understatement, but that's not really what the audience was being revved up for with the Man With No Name iconography in the background.
Fri, 2012-08-31 18:46
#104
knownothing
I liked Clint's speech. He was creative, relaxed, unrehearsed and he reached out to the Ron Paul people with his reference to the Afghan war and he even mentioned them when he said, "You're the best, whether you're Democrat, Republican, Libertarian..." His political analysis of Hollywood was hilarious. There were some points where I had a hard time followig his logic but it was pleasantly stream-of-consciousness-y.
He didn't say much about Mitt, just called him a "great businessman". He justified his endorsement when he said, "We own this country and politicians are who we hire to run it. When somebody does not do the job...you gotta let them go."
Fri, 2012-08-31 19:13
#105
@ VOTD
Good point. When he mentioned that he almost cried when Obama won I could practically hear the fuses in peoples' heads blowing. He certainly was not the right-wing zealot I expect they were looking for. But then, Charleton Heston wasn't available this week.
Fri, 2012-08-31 23:49
#106
Boom Boom
Maher was good, Stewart was great, and Stephen Colbert hilarious tonight. Colbert got an interview with Clint Eastwood's chair!
Sat, 2012-09-01 00:19
#107
Left Turn
I'm sorry, but maybe someone can explain to me what the problem with Eastwood's speech was.
Eastwood insinuated that Obama told him to "shut up", and that Obama asked Eastwood to tell Romney to "f-off". It's racist because it plays into false stereotypes about African-Americans use of language.
Sat, 2012-09-01 01:03
#108
Really? Don't think I've ever heard that one before. Of course I'd never dream of telling anyone fo fuck off because I'm white.
Based on that kind of assumption you couldn't make any negative comment about the man at all, for fear of being called a racist.
The cover of today's Richmond Free Press is making the rounds on FB, though:
Sat, 2012-09-01 03:33
#109
Left Turn
Based on that kind of assumption you couldn't make any negative comment about the man at all, for fear of being called a racist.
Smith, it's perfectly fine to criticize Obama, and I have a big problem with apologists for POTUS who try to excuse his awful policies.
What's not ok is making negative comments about Obama based on racial stereotypes of African-Americans.
Sat, 2012-09-01 05:44
#110
Mitt Romney, the First Mormon President of the United States? - by Webster G Tarpley
http://presstv.com/detail/2012/08/31/259144/mitt-romney-the-first-mormon...
"Mitt Romney has now been officially nominated as the Republican candidate for the president of the United States. His victory marks the first time that the Republicans have failed to nominate a Protestant Christian, and the first time that a major US party has nominated a person who is not a Christian at all..."
Sat, 2012-09-01 09:24
#111
knownothing
I'm sorry, but maybe someone can explain to me what the problem with Eastwood's speech was.
Eastwood insinuated that Obama told him to "shut up", and that Obama asked Eastwood to tell Romney to "f-off". It's racist because it plays into false stereotypes about African-Americans use of language.
How are "shut-up" and "f-off" false stereotypes about African-Americans use of language?
Sat, 2012-09-01 09:44
#112
blairz
The whole convention was lame because Obama is so moderate they really have no beef. Condaleeza Rice might not have been as angry and vulgar as the rest, but her assertion that the rest of the world "doesn't know where America stands" was every bit as absurd as Paul Ryan's just say shit approach. The GOP has hit empty.
Sat, 2012-09-01 10:13
#113
He certainly was not the right-wing zealot I expect they were looking for. But then, Charleton Heston wasn't available this week.
This Chartlon Heston?
Sat, 2012-09-01 10:36
#114
Boom Boom
GOP convention to provide closer look at Romney’s Mormonism on the nominee’s big night
“I don’t think underlying attitudes have changed,” said John Green, director of the University of Akron’s Bliss Institute for Applied Politics. “I don’t think evangelicals are any less skeptical about Mormons, but an election is a choice and Republicans have something to work with here because of the unpopularity of Obama among this group of evangelicals.”
Sat, 2012-09-01 10:41
#115
What's not ok is making negative comments about Obama based on racial stereotypes of African-Americans.
Sure you're not just imagining this, Left Turn? I have never heard of black people having a reputation for saying "shut up" more than anyone else.
Have you read any excerpts from the Watergate tapes? I believe they invented the term "expletive deleted" especially for Nixon.
FDR, Kennedy, and Clinton cheated on their wives. Grant and Bush were drunks, and that's just a few of the better-known ones.
But you think implying that Obama might say "shut up" or "go stick it in your ear" (perhaps some of those listening are the ones with the dirty minds) is somehow designed to make black people look bad?
And as for Eastwood:
Yeah, he's such a puritan I'm sure he thinks implying someone might say "shut up" will score some big points and make them look REALLY bad.. Or maybe he was just channelling Clint Eastwood.
Now there is plenty enough REAL racism to go around in this campaign - like the open attempts to disenfranchise poor and non-white voters. Like people at that convention throwing peanuts at a non-white cameraman. Like heckling a Puerto Rican official with chants of "USA USA" when she tried to speak. Like the fact that they had to beat the bushes to find ANYONE non-white to speak at that convention. Like the refusal to accept Obama's heritage, and incitement to open revolt, treason and even assassination against the president, and congress being willing to grind the entire business of government to a halt and wreck the country - just to accomplish their number one stated goal of "making Obama a one-term president".
I don't see anything at all in your assumption, especially when you consider that Eastwood went as far as to say in front of that crowd that he almost cried when Obama was elected.
On the other hand, the fact that I am questioning your logic may also mean that I am in denial of the fine subtleties of where I arrange white and black socks in my drawer.
Sat, 2012-09-01 10:43
#116
knownothing
lol
Sat, 2012-09-01 11:06
#117
Boom Boom
Bill Maher had an ex-Mormon (Walter Kirn) as his final guest last night, and in the conversation one of them said George Romney and now Mitt Romney are running for president partly to gain 'respectability' for the Mormons. Once a Mormon is in the White House, that makes the church mainstream, or so they argued.
Bill Maher: My theory about Mitt Romney is that he is sort of what Kennedy was in the 60s. He had a father who wanted to be president, just like Kennedy, and Joe Kennedy as we all know wanted to be president for one reason above all: that the Catholics, he thought, really were not going to ever be accepted fully in American until they had one in the White House. And when he couldn’t do it, he sent his son to do it. And I think Mitt Romney is the same thing. I think what motivates him above all is: Mormons are not going to be accepted fully, my people are not going to arrive until we put one in the White House.
Sat, 2012-09-01 11:46
#118
And sorry A_J, I missed your post.
Good find. I have never seen that pic before.
Yes.... "my cold dead hands" Heston, carrying the quote from that fellow who on his deathbed wouldn't even give his own lover her freedom, and only considered selling his slaves when he had to pay off the bills he racked up buying porcelain in France.
My point was not to suggest that Heston didn't support any progressive causes - but I expect his support of the Republican party and its policies was a bit more unwavering than Eastwood. And he does know how to give a barnburner of a speech.
And besides, Republicans are always making a big deal about that "all men are created equal" thing. Believe it or not when the party was created it was for one purpose - ending slavery.
Sat, 2012-09-01 12:02
#119
I think for the purposes Republicans were trying to achieve, the guy they really would've wanted for a warm-up speaker would have been not Clint Eastwood or Charlton Heston, but rather someone like Chuck Norris. But a figure like that, while appealing to their base, would have been mocked by the commentariat, so they went with the more high-brow Eastwood instead, expecting him to give a standard, boilerplate macho call-to-arms. Instead, though, Eastwood gave them. well, we're still debating exactly WHAT he gave them. but it probably wasn't exactly the speech they were hoping for.
As for Heston quoting Jefferson, Canadian leftists quote him(roughly) every time they demand "separation of church and state", in arguments about religious-school funding and whatnot. So I suppose Heston could be in worse company.
Sat, 2012-09-01 12:35
#120
Boom Boom
The nice thing about the Eastwood event is that it knocked Romney off the front page.
Meanwhile: New poll shows that Chair is now leading the polls over Obama and Romney.
Sat, 2012-09-01 12:40
#121
And sorry A_J, I missed your post.
Good find. I have never seen that pic before.
Yes.... "my cold dead hands" Heston, carrying the quote from that fellow who on his deathbed wouldn't even give his own lover her freedom, and only considered selling his slaves when he had to pay off the bills he racked up buying porcelain in France.
My point was not to suggest that Heston didn't support any progressive causes - but I expect his support of the Republican party and its policies was a bit more unwavering than Eastwood. And he does know how to give a barnburner of a speech.
The picture was merely the first thing I could find, but the point I was trying to convey was the fact that Heston was a firm supporter of the civil rights movment in the U.S. - joining Martin Luther King Jr. on his 1963 march to Washington and even leading a boycott of one of his own films while it was being shown by a theater that segregate white and black patrons. Support of gun-ownership aside (and you'll find anarchists and others on the left who support gun ownership as protection against the state) he was no "right-wing zealot" - or at least no more than Eastwood.
Sat, 2012-09-01 14:04
#122
A_J
I said nothing at all about Heston being a racist, nor did I imply it; bringing racism into this was someone else's idea. And believe it or not, there are some Republicans who support the idea civil rights (though Heston was a Democrat in the early part of his career).
My actual point - in fact, my only point - is that by later in his career Heston became a staunch Republican, and was enough of a zealot for right-wing causes that he became the very outspoken president of the National Rifle Association.
In a way, your pic supports my point, because Heston was strongly politically active in a way Eastwood is not. The fact that he supported civil rights does not change the fact that he has been a fierce advocate for a number of right-wing causes.
Had he been on stage I would have expected an unequivocal and fiery endorsement of Romney - not half-assed statements that they should give a businessman a try, from a person who opposes at least one major part of the Republicam platform, and who has in the past 10 years given endorsements and financial support to Democratic candidates.
I'll say it again. Is this the best the GOP can do? Because Eastwood may be onside, but he is hardly a part of their team.
Sorry, but "from my cold dead hands" is the distilled essence of zealotry.
and @ VOTD
I think what says it most is that their last VP candidate is not only invisible - she was cut off by Fox News for the duration of the convention. And no, I don't think we'll see Ted Nugent giving any concerts for the young republicans either.
Sat, 2012-09-01 18:58
#123
And that's his problem in a nutshell.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-night-obama-first-shone/2012/...
Sat, 2012-09-01 21:12
#124
Interesting article. Though it reminds me that we often don't realize what is significant and what is not until long after the fact.
Sat, 2012-09-01 22:24
#125
Sat, 2012-09-01 22:47
#126
Boom Boom
Sun, 2012-09-02 01:36
#127
The nice thing about the Eastwood event is that it knocked Romney off the front page.
Meanwhile: New poll shows that Chair is now leading the polls over Obama and Romney.
ROTFL at that image! I love it!
I didn't get to see Eastwood's speech, but the clips I saw on tv weren't so awful. The guy's an actor, so he did a little bit of experimental theatre... :)
Sun, 2012-09-02 02:37
#128
autoworker
Perhaps Eastwood's 'surprise' appearance was the GOP's attempt to woo Blue Dog Democrats in the rust belt, such as Michigan and Ohio (a key swing state), and distract them from the fact that Romney was against the auto bailouts.
Sun, 2012-09-02 03:11
#129
Smith wrote:
And no, I don't think we'll see Ted Nugent giving any concerts for the young republicans either.
Too bad. I would pay good money to see the GOP Christian Youth Choir singing back-up on Cat Scratch Fever!
@Michelle. Good point about experimental theatre. The Obama people were comparing it to Salvador Dali, but I think the more accurate reference would be Pirandello or Ionesco. But I'll settle for the Bob Newhart consensus that seems to be emerging.
Sun, 2012-09-02 08:13
#130
Ahh, the perils of live TV. Imagine if Neil Young said he wanted to speak at a Mulcair campaign stop. Tempting, huh? Blue collar guys love him, national institution, wrote Ohio...
but you'd be just as likely to get a confused mess like this.
The musical cues were sooooo lame. They couldn't even get the rights to the real The Good the Bad and The Ugly theme? Instead the house band plays an obvious ripoff, just different enough to not get sued, maybe.
Same thing when Ryan spoke. "My Ipod Starts with AC/DC and ends with Zeppelin" but instead of playing Rock and Roll by Zeppelin, they play a lame ripoff of it
Heart's lawyers must have sued the hell out them after Palin used Barracuda.
One last note. Peirs Morgan was supposed to have Todd 'legitimate rape' Akin on as a guest earlier last week. Mr. Akin pulled a no-show at the last minute. Morgan proceeded to interview the empty chair to highlight the gutlessness of Akin.
To me this is obviously where Eastwood was jumping off from. No one seemed to notice.
but if they had, it would have made Eastwood's performance even worse. Taking an enormously embarassing issue for the party and bringing it right into the convention hall.
Sun, 2012-09-02 11:13
#131
Of all people, Romney should not be making references to the "birther" nonsense.
His father ran for president, and it is an established fact that he was born in Mexico, in a polygamist refugee colony.
You don't have to be born on US soil to become President, do you? Or is it that you have to be born a US citizen? Otherwise Americans born while their American mothers are travelling abroad when they give birth wouldn't be able to become President despite being Americans.
Anyhow, that's an interesting factoid I hadn't heard before.
But because we all know what's behind the birther nonsense, we know it would never stick to Romney. Because he's white, so it's okay for his family to have ties to other countries.
Sun, 2012-09-02 11:42
#132
No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.
ETA: You don't have to born in the U.S.
Sun, 2012-09-02 12:06
#133
Boom Boom
I've listened to Obama many times - I think he's a born orator. Hard for me to imagine Romney captivating people in any venue the way Obama did at the Apollo.
I could only listen to a mnute or two of the Eastwood skit - I found it too painful to watch all the way through. But I love that Eastwood has completely upstaged Romney! 
I tried to watch Romney's speech later that night, but it was just empty platitudes delivered by the most wooden candidate I have ever seen the GOP put forward.
I think Election Day in the USA will be full of surprises. I'm wondering if we're about to see the lowest turnout on Election Day ever.
Sun, 2012-09-02 12:07
#134
@ U, Michelle
Yes. My point is that George Romney had an even more tenuous link to the U.S. than Obama. He was born in Mexico, in a colony of outlaws who left the country to get away from the U.S. Justice system. Yet no one had a problem with him when he was Eisenhower's anti-communist minister of agriculture, or when he ran against Nixon for the nomination.
But again.... he's white, and has a white name. He doesn't need to prove anything.
Sun, 2012-09-02 12:46
#135
I thought presently you have to have been born in the USA to be eligible to run for president.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/2004-12-02-schwarzenegger-amendment_x.htm
With a bit of encouragement from the Terminator himself, some of Schwarzenegger's supporters are pushing for a constitutional amendment that would allow the Austrian-born governor to run for the White House as soon as 2008. Schwarzenegger is blocked by Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5 of the Constitution. It reads, "No person except a natural born citizen ... shall be eligible to the office of president." The 12th Amendment says the vice president cannot be foreign-born.
---------------
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural-born-citizen_clause
The weight of legal and historical authority indicates that the term "natural born" citizen would mean a person who is entitled to U.S. citizenship "by birth" or "at birth", either by being born "in" the United States and under its jurisdiction, even those born to alien parents; by being born abroad to U.S. citizen-parents; or by being born in other situations meeting legal requirements for U.S. citizenship "at birth". Such term, however, would not include a person who was not a U.S. citizen by birth or at birth, and who was thus born an "alien" required to go through the legal process of "naturalization" to become a U.S. citizen.[1]
Sun, 2012-09-02 13:13
#136
Smith wrote:
Yet no one had a problem with him when he was Eisenhower's anti-communist minister of agriculture
Minor correction: It was Ezra Taft Benson, who later became head of the LDS, who was Eisenhower's one and only SOA. He was apparently born in Idaho, but wiki doesn't say where his family was before that.
George Romney was Governor of Michigan and later Secretary of HUD under Nixon. He's the guy who blew his chances for the presidency in '68 by saying he had been "brainwashed" into supporting the Vietnam War.
Sun, 2012-09-02 13:32
#137
Ah... you're right. Thanks and sorry.That's what I get for multitasking. - mixed mormoning.
Yes, it was Romney's family who came from a polygamist refugee colony in mexico.
Sun, 2012-09-02 14:06
#138
[url=https://www.commondreams.org/headline/2012/08/31]Romney will win: Michael Moore[/url]
Sun, 2012-09-02 14:10
#139
He's used to the media letting him get away with outlandish claims. But this time he went too far
Sun, 2012-09-02 15:18
#140
When you screw over the ones that worked hard to get you into office in the first place, enthusiasm dies and you lose the future.
Obama and the Democrats are in major denial about why they might lose - too bad!
Yes, we must
Disillusioned Obama supporters from 2008 must rally behind the President if they don't want a Romney victory
http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/yes-article-1.1149351
Sun, 2012-09-02 20:56
#141
Bush & Cheney were conspiciously absent from any significant media events at the recent GOP convention - I wonder why!
http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/09/obama-dncc-charlotte-romney-bu...
Mon, 2012-09-03 15:13
#142
[url=https://www.commondreams.org/headline/2012/08/31]Romney will win: Michael Moore[/url]
Wow, I was expecting something a little more insightful from Moore than that.
Yes, the Republicans will have more money and a better machine on election day. But WHY will Romney have more money and a better machine on election day? He doesn't go there, does he? But some lefties in the comment section do.
Because Obama didn't come through for all those people he inspired to vote for him in 2008. That's why. Sure, the usual voters will go and vote their usual way, but Obama not only got the swing voters but also a lot of people who don't usually bother voting. He made them believe he was going to change things. And then he didn't.
So not only is he not going to get a lot of the voters he got last time, but I'm betting he's also not raising the funds he did last campaign.
He didn't come through on the bread and butter issue people wanted - universal health care with a public option for people to choose from. Instead, there are only private insurance companies to choose from, and he's forcing people to buy those private plans. It would be fine if buying a plan was mandatory but there was a public option available - but no. He barely even tried before caving.
So he's handed insurance companies a gift on a silver platter with no non-profit competition to keep them honest, and everyone's insured with shitty private plans and little American flags for all.
Not very inspiring. Not very hopey-changey. Change the hope! Hope for the change of the hope! Change some change for hope change! And of course, the every-four-years'-refrain is being chanted again by centrists to American lefties - vote for the Democrats or the world will end. And probably most American lefties will feel obliged to do so.
The sad thing is, I'll be glued to the set on election night and hoping Obama wins. But I agree with Michael Moore - I think Romney will win too. What a waste.
Mon, 2012-09-03 16:16
#143
I think it might just be a tactical move on Moore's part. For all the people calling him a traitor on that site, why would he be saying things like that if not in the hope that people might get off their asses and change? After all, the future is unwritten.
And if he really is so pessimistic that he thinks that, so what? The future is still unwritten and I think the kick in the ass is just as appropriate.
Mon, 2012-09-03 18:25
#144
Boom Boom
I had a link on Facebook that detailed very carefully all the obstacles that the Repugs placed in front of Obama, thus preventing him from doing anything.
Mon, 2012-09-03 18:30
#145
Boom Boom
Actor Jon Voight called Obama a Marxist. Freaking idiot. 
(google Jon Voight Obama Marxist)
Mon, 2012-09-03 19:16
#146
Fortunately for Obama, I don't think conservatives are all that enthusiastic about Mitt Romney. So even if liberals stay home they'll be canceled out by conservatives doing the same.
Mon, 2012-09-03 20:26
#147
I thought presently you have to have been born in the USA to be eligible to run for president.
Anyone born in the United States can automatically be a citizen. But if you're born overseas to American parents, you're still considered a "natural born citizen". John McCain was actually born in Panama cause his dad was in the Navy and was stationed overthere.
Mon, 2012-09-03 21:03
#148
I thought presently you have to have been born in the USA to be eligible to run for president.
Anyone born in the United States can automatically be a citizen. But if you're born overseas to American parents, you're still considered a "natural born citizen". John McCain was actually born in Panama cause his dad was in the Navy and was stationed overthere.
Actually, he was born in the Panama Canal Zone, which at the time was considered part of the United States, and persons born there were considered citizens (although it is unclear whether they would be natural-born citizens). The term natural-born citizen seems not to be particularly well defined, and people born in some US territories (such as American Samoa) are considered nationals, not citizens.
Wed, 2012-09-05 01:56
#149
Darn, how did that leak out? Darn, Now he has to apologise. 
Haley Barbour apologizes for Obama remark
Wed, 2012-09-05 02:10
#150
Joe Biden vs Paul Ryan: Smart vs Dumb Visions for America
http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/2012/08/joe_biden_vs_pa/
Wed, 2012-09-05 06:24
#151
The Republicans Cross the Rubicon - Paul Craig Roberts
http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2012/09/04/the-republicans-cross-the-rub...
"When a people have no political party that represents them, they are doomed to tyranny. And to war..."