Eastwood Unhinged: Clint Loses It And Makes Democrats’ Day !

Yep, you hate the elderly.

 

I didn't notice that. I'll have to see the clip again. So, even Obama's empty chair teleprompter was sperchless?

 

I guess the humor went over your head. The retard was sitting in the chair.

 

"Non sequitur. Your facts are uncoordinated."

Foreigner, Good thing the actor did not ask that a Green Screen be put behind the chair, it would have been easier to put Harvey in it. Actors historically talk to empty chairs, dummies, Hamlet to his father's ghost, and Green Screens as part of their job description. "You are thinking, what’s a movie tradesman doing out here?" His job, talking to a Green Screen, or an empty chair...

You said: "He berated Obama for not learning from the Russian experience in invading Afghanistan. It was George W Bush who ordered US troops into the country."

Pay attention:

"I know you were against the war in Iraq, and that’s okay. But you thought the war in Afghanistan was OK. You know, I mean — you thought that was something worth doing. We didn’t check with the Russians to see how did it — they did there for 10 years."

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0812/80505.html#ixzz25DMQwX2e

If Obama thought that war in Afghanistan was OK then what Clint said fits him too, right?

The Democrats just wanted a body in the White House, to do what they wanted, that is the timing of a community activist; it worked, they got their man in. When they had enough votes to get Obamacare did they do away with the Bush tax cuts and institute what they thought was needed to fix the deficit and economy?

NO, but hey, now they want a second chance to do exactly what they did when they had enough of Congress for Obamacare:

"Not once has this Administration tried to balance new spending with new savings or pay for new initiatives – including its enormous tax breaks for the wealthy." http://www.democrats.org/pdfs/2004platform.pdf {sorry, old link from when it was newer}

"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?"

Having an M.B.A and an A.B. in History, like Bush, does not make you a business man, “a stellar businessman.”

The Bush tax cuts were either not enough or never should have happened; the whole model of lowering taxes to stimulate business requires that it produce the desired effect, it never did, the debt continued to rise from their inception onward. And it is fracking stupid to run a deficit in a long almost endless war. If the fracking thing is not broken, creating debt, don't fix it to create it.

Obama's defense is that you do not raise taxes in a recession, but why not?

If you really believe in higher taxes, GO FOR IT, but hey, it is a little too fracking late now. If you intend to build bigger Obamacare, promote more expensive energy products, you better pay for it somehow.

The Bush tax cuts were in response to a burst dot com bubble of irrational exuberance, we kept them for more debt, till another irrational bubble burst, and still Obama kept HIS Obama taxes for more debt. Now he says to give him another chance to raise taxes, and calls in Clinton to help. Sorry, Clinton had his shot.

If we are just digging ourself into debt, the business man has to decide do we expand our business market for more income to pay the taxes or do we cut--do we call in efficiency experts, layoff, trim the fat, until we can cut no more, and let some other better business man expand into the vacuum left by defeat--or do you just keep digging? Bush's Congress, when he did not have one after 2007, and Obama's when he did have his for Obamacare, just kept digging.

 

No humor on the left. Never had been.

No, Stephanie Miller isn't funny.

 

Please do. I long for nothing more than to be ignored by the ignorant.

 

I'm a bit older than most of you, and so my history of watching Clint Eastwood goes a bit further back.

I'm a big fan of the man. He has always been plain spoken, honest, and very much his own man.
Plus, he got a LOT of poon-tang back in the day, and most men of my generation admire accomplished-cocksmen like Clint.

I found his bit at the RNC to be hilariously funny.
Sure, he was a bit rambling, and even seemed to forget what he was going to say next, but remember this;
he's in his 80's, and he wasn't working off a teleprompter.

In the end, he delivered the goods.
In classic Clint Eastwood style.

Two thumbs up.

 

Me too. He is something like 82 and left the teleprompter for the empty chair. Hilarious.

 

That's the problem! Romney, on the night of his acceptance speech, should have owned the town not Clint Eastwood. Unfortunately for the Romney partisans on this thread there are two blatant facts. 1. Clint Eastwood's ad-libbed speech was better than whatever Romney said. 2. Clint Eastwood is not your candidate.

 

Thanks for pointing that out. But, since this thread is about how well Clint did, maybe that didn't need to be pointed out.

He was great comic relief. Plus, liberals everywhere are sucking their thumbs because a hated elderly person shoved wisdom into their ears and made everyone laugh in the process. I understand it is no fun to look the fool. But please, just this once, allow us the chance to laugh at all liberals everywhere.

As for Romney's speech, he wasn't funny, he was serious. He did far better than I thought he would. He was inclusive of all races, gender and ages. Maybe you could do the same and quit showing hate for Clint.

 

Look, a squirrel. Eastwood is a one day news event that the libs try to blow out of proportion so what is it, sad or the best speech ever?

 

Okay, a couple days have went by now. Has the Eastwood "disastrous" speech ended the Romney campaign ?
Is he now way down in the polls ?

 

I have never showed hate for Clint (or anyone for that matter) so I'm assuming you are referring to some overly "partisan" posters to this thread, something I am not nor ever have been. As to your assertion that this thread is about "how well Clint did" perhaps titling it something other than "Eastwood Unhinged" would have been more appropriate. Don't you think?

 

Again you miss the point. Be it "sad or the best speech ever?"is not the issue. That Romney isn't the issue is, in itself, the issue. All my post did was point that out.

 

What would you expect for the left wing media to concentrate on? The issue at hand or something to distract the viewers?

 

Though in all fairness Fox news and their various "opinion" shows gave a lot of airtime to the Eastwood speech as well.

 

This is becoming pure nonsense. "Owned the town" is a figure of speech. You seem dedicated to some retarded notion that a speaker, or a joke, must be limited in how good it is because the actual nominee needs to be the funniest. Or have the best delivery. Further, you are stuck in some narrow-minded partisan rant about how only one person can shine, so if Clint shined, then that means no one else did. How foolish.

Guess what ! The GOP is not trying to nominate the best actor. That's a lib thing. And you can see where it has gotten us !!

Josey Wales was great !! Whoooooot !!

 

You are new here. The thread title, and OP, was the doing of one hoping to be critical of Clint. You can start a thread "Clint did great", but who cares ? This thread can suffice for debate.

 

Well, it sure did a good job of summing up Obama's presidency, didn't it.

Empty chair = empty suit
Hope and change
Yes we can
23 million unemployed
It IS time for someone else to be President
Promises made, promises unkept.
Gitmo still open.
When ARE the troops coming home from Iraq and Afghanistan?
Biden the intellect of the Democrat party. (I can't wait to see the Ryan/Biden debates.)
Time for, in Bill Clinton's words, a "stellar" businessman to take over
When someone does not do the job, we gotta let 'em go.

Interesting how these points seemed to have escaped the liberals as they fall all over themselves to attack Mr. Eastwood.

 

And the teleprompter in front of the empty chair.

 

LOL ... they heard them. They heard them real well. They know Eastwood was all the rage on the internet the day after. He was so good, they had no choice but to go into full attack mode against him. Which only had more folks hear Eastwood.

No one will remember much about what Romney said at the Convention. Nor will they remember what Obama says. Its already what we've heard for months, and will hear right up to election day. Same stuff over and over.

People will remember Clint, the empty chair, and the valid mocking of Obama and Biden, for years. With a smile

 

Even Fox news was like "if they had a do over they probably would have put it in there...".

 

Who's that? The 1%? ...then you're right....it's not the common man that's for sure.

 

I agree with your above post. Particularly the "This thread can suffice for debate." part. However you don't seem to have a problem with the post I was responding to which stated "But, since this thread is about how well Clint did, maybe that didn't need to be pointed out." So by "debate" do you mean for one point of view only?

 

Anybody can pick on the style that the aging Clint's speech was delivered...but..he was right on with the verbiage regarding the critique of Obama's 1st (and hopefully ONLY) failed 4 yrs...he shot from the hip and he hit the target!