Romney’s big night

The Republican convention–after a bunch of testimonials from Olympic athletes, businesses saved by Bain Capital, and others about what a good person Mitt Romney is–wrapped up with rambling musings by Clint Eastwood, an impressive speech by Marco Rubio, and then the presidential candidate’s acceptance speech.

What are your thoughts on the last night of the convention and especially Romney’s speech?  Do you think the convention succeeded in its stated goal of introducing Mitt Romney to the American people?  And of humanizing him?  Will the convention prove to be a successful infomercial for the Republican party?

Next week, starting Tuesday, will be the Democrats’ turn.  I hear it will be a veritable abortion-fest.  Expect to hear from a college student at a Catholic colleges whining for her right to free birth control, from teacher union leaders praising our public schools, from in-your-face gay activists, from Obamacare fans, and from would-be comedians mocking conservatives, moderates, creationists, gun-owners, and the general public in general.  Democrats, especially when they play to their base, sometimes over-reach.  They think they are populist, but they are not, and they may come across in ways they do not intend, putting off more voters than they attract.  But we’ll see.

About Gene Veith

Professor of Literature at Patrick Henry College, the Director of the Cranach Institute at Concordia Theological Seminary, a columnist for World Magazine and TableTalk, and the author of 18 books on different facets of Christianity & Culture.

  • SKPeterson

    My reaction was the same as I predict my reaction will be to the close of the Democrat convention: Yawn.

  • SKPeterson

    My reaction was the same as I predict my reaction will be to the close of the Democrat convention: Yawn.

  • Tom Hering

    Really, at this point, we ought to just combine all the primaries and both conventions into a single American Idol-type TV show, and text our votes in November.

  • Tom Hering

    Really, at this point, we ought to just combine all the primaries and both conventions into a single American Idol-type TV show, and text our votes in November.

  • WebMonk

    Didn’t watch. Sorry.

    Wait, no I’m not.

  • WebMonk

    Didn’t watch. Sorry.

    Wait, no I’m not.

  • http://geochristian.wordpress.com/ Kevin N

    I’ll vote for Romney, but here are a few random negatives:

    –There was a lot of bashing of Obamacare (perhaps with good reasons) but no statement that the status quo with health insurance out of reach for tens of millions was not good either.

    –There has been plenty of praise for veterans but little about what to do about Afghanistan.

    –Laughter the only time Romney brought up environmental issues (people who care about the environment are sooo funny) but there isn’t even an “environment” tab on Romney’s web site.

    –”Drill baby drill” isn’t a comprehensive, long-term energy policy.

    I’ll have plenty more negatives for the Democratic convention.

  • http://geochristian.wordpress.com/ Kevin N

    I’ll vote for Romney, but here are a few random negatives:

    –There was a lot of bashing of Obamacare (perhaps with good reasons) but no statement that the status quo with health insurance out of reach for tens of millions was not good either.

    –There has been plenty of praise for veterans but little about what to do about Afghanistan.

    –Laughter the only time Romney brought up environmental issues (people who care about the environment are sooo funny) but there isn’t even an “environment” tab on Romney’s web site.

    –”Drill baby drill” isn’t a comprehensive, long-term energy policy.

    I’ll have plenty more negatives for the Democratic convention.

  • Tom Hering

    There has been plenty of praise for veterans but little about what to do about Afghanistan. (@ 4)

    Eastwood was clear: get out now. And everyone applauded enthusiastically – before, I guess, they could realize what he said. (Not that realizing what he said was an easy thing to do at any point in Eastwood’s one-man stage show.)

  • Tom Hering

    There has been plenty of praise for veterans but little about what to do about Afghanistan. (@ 4)

    Eastwood was clear: get out now. And everyone applauded enthusiastically – before, I guess, they could realize what he said. (Not that realizing what he said was an easy thing to do at any point in Eastwood’s one-man stage show.)

  • Steve Billingsley

    I didn’t watch, either – just read snippets of coverage from both sides of the media aisle. In as much as the goal was to introduce Romney and give him a human face, it seems that worked OK. I have no idea if it really make a real difference in the way people vote in November.

    I won’t watch next week either. If the Democrats put on a convention that is the way it is described above, it will hurt them – but who knows if they will. I agree that the Democrats (particularly the far-left end of that spectrum) tend to think more people think the way they do then actually do.

    If Romney wins in November (and I think he will), I think it will much more of a repudiation of Obama than an embrace of Romney.

  • Steve Billingsley

    I didn’t watch, either – just read snippets of coverage from both sides of the media aisle. In as much as the goal was to introduce Romney and give him a human face, it seems that worked OK. I have no idea if it really make a real difference in the way people vote in November.

    I won’t watch next week either. If the Democrats put on a convention that is the way it is described above, it will hurt them – but who knows if they will. I agree that the Democrats (particularly the far-left end of that spectrum) tend to think more people think the way they do then actually do.

    If Romney wins in November (and I think he will), I think it will much more of a repudiation of Obama than an embrace of Romney.

  • Bdozer

    Some peple just don’t get it…I loved Clint Eastwood’s spot! Yes he rambled a bit but some of the most precious people I know ramble a bit. Gee whiz Dr. Veith the man is 82 years old! Everyone is not as eurdite as thee!

  • Bdozer

    Some peple just don’t get it…I loved Clint Eastwood’s spot! Yes he rambled a bit but some of the most precious people I know ramble a bit. Gee whiz Dr. Veith the man is 82 years old! Everyone is not as eurdite as thee!

  • Susan

    Re: ObamaCare. I’m not sure many people understand how draconian that program will become when the unaccountable 15 person panel starts making cuts to save money. Here’s the latest from the UK:

    “NEWS FROM THE WORLD OF GOVERNMENT HEALTHCARE: Caesareans and pain relief for mothers giving birth ‘should be cut to save the NHS money.’ “Family doctors are being told to try to talk women out of having Caesareans and very strong painkillers during birth to save the NHS money. New guidelines drawn up for GPs urge them to encourage women to have natural labours with as little medical help as possible. They also remind doctors to tell women to consider having their babies outside hospital in midwife-run units or in their own homes.”

    I don’t remember this from the dancing NHS tribute at the Olympics.

    I wonder if the Democrats would call this a war on women?

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2195832/Caesareans-pain-relief-mothers-giving-birth-cut-save-NHS-money.html

  • Susan

    Re: ObamaCare. I’m not sure many people understand how draconian that program will become when the unaccountable 15 person panel starts making cuts to save money. Here’s the latest from the UK:

    “NEWS FROM THE WORLD OF GOVERNMENT HEALTHCARE: Caesareans and pain relief for mothers giving birth ‘should be cut to save the NHS money.’ “Family doctors are being told to try to talk women out of having Caesareans and very strong painkillers during birth to save the NHS money. New guidelines drawn up for GPs urge them to encourage women to have natural labours with as little medical help as possible. They also remind doctors to tell women to consider having their babies outside hospital in midwife-run units or in their own homes.”

    I don’t remember this from the dancing NHS tribute at the Olympics.

    I wonder if the Democrats would call this a war on women?

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2195832/Caesareans-pain-relief-mothers-giving-birth-cut-save-NHS-money.html

  • #4 Kitty

    I have to agree with Gene. Republicans are good; Democrats bad.

  • #4 Kitty

    I have to agree with Gene. Republicans are good; Democrats bad.

  • Carl Vehse

    The hit of the evening was Clint Eastwood, who brought out an empty chair and pretended to talk to it as if Traitorbama were sitting there.

    So anyway, we’re going to have — we’re going to have to have a little chat about that. And then, I just wondered, all these promises — I wondered about when the — what do you want me to tell Romney? I can’t tell him to do that. I can’t tell him to do that to himself.

    You’re crazy, you’re absolutely crazy. You’re getting as bad as Biden. Of course we all know Biden is the intellect of the Democratic party. Kind of a grin with a body behind it….

    And I think it’s that time. And 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?

    OK, well anyway. All right, I’m sorry. I can’t do that to myself either.

    I would just like to say something, ladies and gentlemen. Something that I think is very important. It is that, you, we — we own this country.

    We — we own it. It is not you owning it, and not politicians owning it. Politicians are employees of ours.

  • Carl Vehse

    The hit of the evening was Clint Eastwood, who brought out an empty chair and pretended to talk to it as if Traitorbama were sitting there.

    So anyway, we’re going to have — we’re going to have to have a little chat about that. And then, I just wondered, all these promises — I wondered about when the — what do you want me to tell Romney? I can’t tell him to do that. I can’t tell him to do that to himself.

    You’re crazy, you’re absolutely crazy. You’re getting as bad as Biden. Of course we all know Biden is the intellect of the Democratic party. Kind of a grin with a body behind it….

    And I think it’s that time. And 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?

    OK, well anyway. All right, I’m sorry. I can’t do that to myself either.

    I would just like to say something, ladies and gentlemen. Something that I think is very important. It is that, you, we — we own this country.

    We — we own it. It is not you owning it, and not politicians owning it. Politicians are employees of ours.

  • Tom Hering

    Eastwood was a hit because he was representative of the Republican base: angry old white men. Not much of a future, though, in that demographic. :-D

  • Tom Hering

    Eastwood was a hit because he was representative of the Republican base: angry old white men. Not much of a future, though, in that demographic. :-D

  • rlewer

    According to liberals everyone who tells the truth is angry and hateful.

  • rlewer

    According to liberals everyone who tells the truth is angry and hateful.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Here’s what I learned about Romney: Eastwood may be a terrific director, but he is one lousy improv comedian.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Here’s what I learned about Romney: Eastwood may be a terrific director, but he is one lousy improv comedian.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    …What’s that, Mr. Eastwood? What? … That doesn’t make sense.

    Are, are you … are you confusing your real-life identity with that of characters you played a long time ago? Do … do you think you’re one of them now?

    But … but … Mr. Eastwood, let me … let me speak. But you’re a respected movie director! Why … no, that doesn’t make sense … why would you … with a rubber hose? How is that even possible?

    [I'll let you imagine the 10 minutes of this that follow]

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    …What’s that, Mr. Eastwood? What? … That doesn’t make sense.

    Are, are you … are you confusing your real-life identity with that of characters you played a long time ago? Do … do you think you’re one of them now?

    But … but … Mr. Eastwood, let me … let me speak. But you’re a respected movie director! Why … no, that doesn’t make sense … why would you … with a rubber hose? How is that even possible?

    [I'll let you imagine the 10 minutes of this that follow]

  • DonS

    I think the convention accomplished what it needed to accomplish — it introduced the candidates to the American people. That is an important function for the challenger to the sitting president. Romney and Ryan came across as likeable and competent, and for those who continue to believe that America is a special place with special ideals, they were comfortable and encouraged by what was said.

    The Democratic convention will not substantively help the Democrats. They have nothing positive to run on, which is why they are planning on focusing on abortion. The American people are not looking for an abortion-fest — that will appeal to the base of the Democratic party — angry, old, white feminists, but abortion repulses most people, even those who support the rights of women to get one. They want to know how the Democrats are going to turn the economy around without bankrupting our kids — and whether they have any vision for a more prosperous future that does not require taking from others.

    Romney will come out of the convention season firmly ahead in the polls.

  • DonS

    I think the convention accomplished what it needed to accomplish — it introduced the candidates to the American people. That is an important function for the challenger to the sitting president. Romney and Ryan came across as likeable and competent, and for those who continue to believe that America is a special place with special ideals, they were comfortable and encouraged by what was said.

    The Democratic convention will not substantively help the Democrats. They have nothing positive to run on, which is why they are planning on focusing on abortion. The American people are not looking for an abortion-fest — that will appeal to the base of the Democratic party — angry, old, white feminists, but abortion repulses most people, even those who support the rights of women to get one. They want to know how the Democrats are going to turn the economy around without bankrupting our kids — and whether they have any vision for a more prosperous future that does not require taking from others.

    Romney will come out of the convention season firmly ahead in the polls.

  • fjsteve

    What? People didn’t like Clint? People claiming that Republican is too old, too rich, too senile, too white? Nah! That wouldn’t happen. Surely after so many decades the Democrats have better arguments than that.

  • fjsteve

    What? People didn’t like Clint? People claiming that Republican is too old, too rich, too senile, too white? Nah! That wouldn’t happen. Surely after so many decades the Democrats have better arguments than that.

  • Grace

    Romney was slicker than he has ever been before.

    One of the saddest parts of his speech, was when the cameras centered on Ann Romney, she looked as if she had been slapped, from the moment the camera captured her. I’ve never felt so sorry for a woman, sitting watching the hoopla, but looking so forlorn.

    When Romney started off giving all the praise to female governors, and Condi Rice – mentioning his own mother over and over again, finally coming to his wife, Ann, and commenting on her mothering the children. BUT NEVER making mention of what a good wife she was, or his love for her. I thought about all the two dozen or so, times Romney must have given that speech before a mirror, his advisors, making sure every word was right – - but leaving out his wife as his help-meet, with his wife watching. I was glad her son was sitting by her side.

    The night before (Wednesday evening) she appeared the same way, very sad, looking straight ahead.

    He truly is a Ken doll.

    Romney and Obama – the comments are made loud and clear about a president not being a pastor, this is TRUE, they aren’t. We aren’t electing a pastor, we are electing a LEADER. But that leader, must be grounded, if his foundation is not in Christ Jesus, he’s on sinking sand. As for Romney his foundation is clearly and most certainly on the teachings of Joseph Smith, a man who believed that he would take the place of God, one day.

    Didn’t Satan want to be equal with God? What happened to Satan?

    Huckabee was a complete disappointment, as he stated, in so many words.. ‘Romney has stayed true to his church’ – what a mouth-full. Huckabee the pastor. Where was God when Huckabee blithered that one?

    There is more wrong with this election on both sides – be it Obama or Romney. One evil doesn’t make the other evil right.

    There is nothing to say regarding the pitiful performance of Clint Eastwood.

  • Grace

    Romney was slicker than he has ever been before.

    One of the saddest parts of his speech, was when the cameras centered on Ann Romney, she looked as if she had been slapped, from the moment the camera captured her. I’ve never felt so sorry for a woman, sitting watching the hoopla, but looking so forlorn.

    When Romney started off giving all the praise to female governors, and Condi Rice – mentioning his own mother over and over again, finally coming to his wife, Ann, and commenting on her mothering the children. BUT NEVER making mention of what a good wife she was, or his love for her. I thought about all the two dozen or so, times Romney must have given that speech before a mirror, his advisors, making sure every word was right – - but leaving out his wife as his help-meet, with his wife watching. I was glad her son was sitting by her side.

    The night before (Wednesday evening) she appeared the same way, very sad, looking straight ahead.

    He truly is a Ken doll.

    Romney and Obama – the comments are made loud and clear about a president not being a pastor, this is TRUE, they aren’t. We aren’t electing a pastor, we are electing a LEADER. But that leader, must be grounded, if his foundation is not in Christ Jesus, he’s on sinking sand. As for Romney his foundation is clearly and most certainly on the teachings of Joseph Smith, a man who believed that he would take the place of God, one day.

    Didn’t Satan want to be equal with God? What happened to Satan?

    Huckabee was a complete disappointment, as he stated, in so many words.. ‘Romney has stayed true to his church’ – what a mouth-full. Huckabee the pastor. Where was God when Huckabee blithered that one?

    There is more wrong with this election on both sides – be it Obama or Romney. One evil doesn’t make the other evil right.

    There is nothing to say regarding the pitiful performance of Clint Eastwood.

  • Anon

    Apparently someone forgot to tip off Clueless Clint that, uh…

    Mitt Romney is a lawyer.

    Welcome to the Orwellian Republican party…where facts don’t matter a damn. You can just make up your own.

  • Anon

    Apparently someone forgot to tip off Clueless Clint that, uh…

    Mitt Romney is a lawyer.

    Welcome to the Orwellian Republican party…where facts don’t matter a damn. You can just make up your own.

  • DonS

    Anon @ 17: I can see why you choose not too sign your comments.

    To clarify the record, Romney obtained joint MBA and JD degrees from Harvard in 1975, and did sit for and pass the Michigan bar. However, he never practiced law, and his bar membership is no longer active.

    Hopefully, you can do better than you have done so far. Your comments are emblematic of the vacuity of Obama’s campaign this cycle.

  • DonS

    Anon @ 17: I can see why you choose not too sign your comments.

    To clarify the record, Romney obtained joint MBA and JD degrees from Harvard in 1975, and did sit for and pass the Michigan bar. However, he never practiced law, and his bar membership is no longer active.

    Hopefully, you can do better than you have done so far. Your comments are emblematic of the vacuity of Obama’s campaign this cycle.

  • Klasie Kraalogies

    Anon is the left wing version of Vehse……

  • Klasie Kraalogies

    Anon is the left wing version of Vehse……

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    True, Mitt Romney is not, and never was, a practicing attorney.

    But then, Eastwood’s barb strikes as somewhat less than accurate as well, given that obama was only an associate of a law firm for three years, from 1993-1996 (after which he then was of counsel until 2004). And, of course, Obama ran for and was elected to the Illinois senate in 1996.

    So was Obama an attorney? Clearly, for a short time. Was he one when he was elected? No. Heck, his license became inactive in 2007.

    This quibble is, mind you, one of the least of Eastwood’s problems.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    True, Mitt Romney is not, and never was, a practicing attorney.

    But then, Eastwood’s barb strikes as somewhat less than accurate as well, given that obama was only an associate of a law firm for three years, from 1993-1996 (after which he then was of counsel until 2004). And, of course, Obama ran for and was elected to the Illinois senate in 1996.

    So was Obama an attorney? Clearly, for a short time. Was he one when he was elected? No. Heck, his license became inactive in 2007.

    This quibble is, mind you, one of the least of Eastwood’s problems.

  • DonS

    Wow, tODD @ 20, political speeches that strike as somewhat less than accurate? Shocking! You mean Romney didn’t personally kill that poor fellow’s wife I heard about in a recent ad?

    Romney never practiced law. Obama did, and also held himself out as a law school instructor for a substantial period of time. It’s a substantive part of his (rather thin) resume.

    Eastwood has no problems. He’s 82 years old, beloved by his fans, and not running for anything. His purpose at the convention was to drive up audience numbers for Rubio and Romney. From all reports, he was successful in doing so.

  • DonS

    Wow, tODD @ 20, political speeches that strike as somewhat less than accurate? Shocking! You mean Romney didn’t personally kill that poor fellow’s wife I heard about in a recent ad?

    Romney never practiced law. Obama did, and also held himself out as a law school instructor for a substantial period of time. It’s a substantive part of his (rather thin) resume.

    Eastwood has no problems. He’s 82 years old, beloved by his fans, and not running for anything. His purpose at the convention was to drive up audience numbers for Rubio and Romney. From all reports, he was successful in doing so.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Also, really, are we jumping on Anon for his chosen handle? I mean, sure, complain that it’s not unique enough or whatever, but … that I can see, most people here are intentionally obscuring their full names, with a few exceptions (Tom Hering, Steve Billingsley).

    Which is to say, most of us are enjoying the anonymity (notably, from search engines) of the Internet when we comment here.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Also, really, are we jumping on Anon for his chosen handle? I mean, sure, complain that it’s not unique enough or whatever, but … that I can see, most people here are intentionally obscuring their full names, with a few exceptions (Tom Hering, Steve Billingsley).

    Which is to say, most of us are enjoying the anonymity (notably, from search engines) of the Internet when we comment here.

  • DonS

    I don’t have any objection to posting anonymously as most do here. I post semi-anonymously (as you know, tODD, it wasn’t that hard to find me) because when I began my daughter attended PHC and I didn’t want to embarrass her :-)

    However, when you post multiple comments as “Anon”, there is no way to tell whether you are the same poster. I would suggest to him/her that if he/she wants to become a contributing member of the commenter community here, he/she should post under a consistent and more unique handle, which can be done without sacrificing anonymity.

    My point in comment 18 was that Anon’s comment @ 17 was so poorly thought out and researched, not to mention rude and unproductive, that perhaps he/she really has no interest in genuine dialogue.

  • DonS

    I don’t have any objection to posting anonymously as most do here. I post semi-anonymously (as you know, tODD, it wasn’t that hard to find me) because when I began my daughter attended PHC and I didn’t want to embarrass her :-)

    However, when you post multiple comments as “Anon”, there is no way to tell whether you are the same poster. I would suggest to him/her that if he/she wants to become a contributing member of the commenter community here, he/she should post under a consistent and more unique handle, which can be done without sacrificing anonymity.

    My point in comment 18 was that Anon’s comment @ 17 was so poorly thought out and researched, not to mention rude and unproductive, that perhaps he/she really has no interest in genuine dialogue.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Look, DonS (@21), if you’re going to parse comments for accuracy, try to do so even-handedly. You took Anon to task for being incorrect about Romney, but when I pointed out the troubles with Eastwood’s characterization of Romney, suddenly you’re all, “Political speeches that strike as somewhat less than accurate? Shocking!”

    A professor is not an attorney. Eastwood’s crack was about attorneys. The most recent year in which one could seriously contend Obama was merely an attorney seems to be 1996.

    And I get that you like Republicans and all, but Eastwood’s performance was pitiful — pitiable, even. He rambled. He seemed lost at times. He said odd things.

    John’s here, an academy award winner. A terrific guy. These people are all like-minded, like all of us.

    Republicans are all “like-minded”. Boy, that’s one for the Romney ads, isn’t it?

    And then went on to lambast Obama for … starting the war in Afghanistan?

    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.

    Yeah, um, which President, exactly, should’ve “checked with the Russians” before starting that war? Remind me.

    And then Eastwood said that Romney was in favor of bringing home the troops in Afghanistan immediately:

    I think Mr. Romney asked the only sensible question, you know, he says, “Why are you giving the date out now? Why don’t you just bring them home tomorrow morning?”

    And then, after having twice pretended that the chair told him to “shut up”, Eastwood ratcheted up the classy rhetoric by twice — twice! — pretending that the chair told either himself or Romney to go [expletive] themselves. And then had the chutzpah to tell the chair, “You’re crazy, you’re absolutely crazy.” Ahem.

    And then he finished by conceding to audience demands that he spout cliches he made famous from his days as an actor.

    Yup, good job, there, RNC. It’s not like that bravura performance overshadowed Rubio’s (or possibly even Romney’s) appearance.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Look, DonS (@21), if you’re going to parse comments for accuracy, try to do so even-handedly. You took Anon to task for being incorrect about Romney, but when I pointed out the troubles with Eastwood’s characterization of Romney, suddenly you’re all, “Political speeches that strike as somewhat less than accurate? Shocking!”

    A professor is not an attorney. Eastwood’s crack was about attorneys. The most recent year in which one could seriously contend Obama was merely an attorney seems to be 1996.

    And I get that you like Republicans and all, but Eastwood’s performance was pitiful — pitiable, even. He rambled. He seemed lost at times. He said odd things.

    John’s here, an academy award winner. A terrific guy. These people are all like-minded, like all of us.

    Republicans are all “like-minded”. Boy, that’s one for the Romney ads, isn’t it?

    And then went on to lambast Obama for … starting the war in Afghanistan?

    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.

    Yeah, um, which President, exactly, should’ve “checked with the Russians” before starting that war? Remind me.

    And then Eastwood said that Romney was in favor of bringing home the troops in Afghanistan immediately:

    I think Mr. Romney asked the only sensible question, you know, he says, “Why are you giving the date out now? Why don’t you just bring them home tomorrow morning?”

    And then, after having twice pretended that the chair told him to “shut up”, Eastwood ratcheted up the classy rhetoric by twice — twice! — pretending that the chair told either himself or Romney to go [expletive] themselves. And then had the chutzpah to tell the chair, “You’re crazy, you’re absolutely crazy.” Ahem.

    And then he finished by conceding to audience demands that he spout cliches he made famous from his days as an actor.

    Yup, good job, there, RNC. It’s not like that bravura performance overshadowed Rubio’s (or possibly even Romney’s) appearance.

  • DonS

    tODD @ 24: I am a partisan. I have no obligation to parse comments “evenhandedly”, any more than you do. I look forward to such a detailed parsing of Democratic convention speeches from you next week, but I doubt I’ll see it. Hopefully, you’ll parse Biden’s speech for us.

    That said, Clint’s allusion to lawyers was accurate as far as it went. Clearly, Romney is no longer a lawyer and never practiced. Obama practiced law, and taught law. He was an active member of the bar during his teaching years, and law professors most certainly are considered to be practicing law, and are most certainly lawyers.

    As for Clint’s performance, I thought it to be very effective. It was different and attention-grabbing. It got the point across — Obama hasn’t done the job and should be fired. More importantly, it drove audience, and the instant response from target audiences was outstanding. People liked it.

    You are not the target audience for that speech. You are not sympathetic to notions of U.S. exceptionalism and your political leanings are to the left. The speech was not directed to you, so it doesn’t matter that you didn’t like it.

    Clint slipped in some Ron Paul stuff related to foreign policy — I’m OK with that because that’s who he is. He opposed both Iraq and Afghanistan, and he has always been consistent on that. He’s also 82 years old and an actor, so there was an eccentric tone to his approach. Regardless, the speech worked. And I don’t see any sign in the post-convention interviews or polling indicating that he overshadowed either Rubio or Romney.

  • DonS

    tODD @ 24: I am a partisan. I have no obligation to parse comments “evenhandedly”, any more than you do. I look forward to such a detailed parsing of Democratic convention speeches from you next week, but I doubt I’ll see it. Hopefully, you’ll parse Biden’s speech for us.

    That said, Clint’s allusion to lawyers was accurate as far as it went. Clearly, Romney is no longer a lawyer and never practiced. Obama practiced law, and taught law. He was an active member of the bar during his teaching years, and law professors most certainly are considered to be practicing law, and are most certainly lawyers.

    As for Clint’s performance, I thought it to be very effective. It was different and attention-grabbing. It got the point across — Obama hasn’t done the job and should be fired. More importantly, it drove audience, and the instant response from target audiences was outstanding. People liked it.

    You are not the target audience for that speech. You are not sympathetic to notions of U.S. exceptionalism and your political leanings are to the left. The speech was not directed to you, so it doesn’t matter that you didn’t like it.

    Clint slipped in some Ron Paul stuff related to foreign policy — I’m OK with that because that’s who he is. He opposed both Iraq and Afghanistan, and he has always been consistent on that. He’s also 82 years old and an actor, so there was an eccentric tone to his approach. Regardless, the speech worked. And I don’t see any sign in the post-convention interviews or polling indicating that he overshadowed either Rubio or Romney.

  • Carl Vehse

    Well, Clint Eastwood certainly managed to get the leftists riled up, and in just 10 minutes (not counting applause).

    Along with tODD’s four Cranach rants against Clint (not to mention Anon’s, if that wasn’t also tODD), even Bob Schieffer was forced to unlock his lips from Barry’s keister long enough to spew out his SeeBS Evening Pukefest temper tantrum about the actor/director.

    If anyone should be hacked off at an 82-year-old, or a professional actor playing an 82-year-old, effectively ridiculing the Empty-Chair-in-Chief, it should be Milquetoast Mittens. He’ll now be relentlessly interrogated by the fifth-column media buttboys about whether he will disassociate himself and the entire GOP from Eastwood’s putdown of Barry and BiteMe. Todd Akin had better send a thank-you note to Clint.

  • Carl Vehse

    Well, Clint Eastwood certainly managed to get the leftists riled up, and in just 10 minutes (not counting applause).

    Along with tODD’s four Cranach rants against Clint (not to mention Anon’s, if that wasn’t also tODD), even Bob Schieffer was forced to unlock his lips from Barry’s keister long enough to spew out his SeeBS Evening Pukefest temper tantrum about the actor/director.

    If anyone should be hacked off at an 82-year-old, or a professional actor playing an 82-year-old, effectively ridiculing the Empty-Chair-in-Chief, it should be Milquetoast Mittens. He’ll now be relentlessly interrogated by the fifth-column media buttboys about whether he will disassociate himself and the entire GOP from Eastwood’s putdown of Barry and BiteMe. Todd Akin had better send a thank-you note to Clint.

  • Susan

    I think the liberal progressive’s problem with Eastwood’s humor is that they don’t understand dry humor and haven’t been exposed to the really good old comic routines like Bob Newhart: http://tinyurl.com/9q24n6j I’m not sure if their self-righteousness drains them of humor or the pop culture’s expletive spouting comics have ruined good humor. Eastwood was old-school funny, especially if you know a bit about his personality and/or have met him. Mollie Hemmingway has an interesting post on Eastwood’s appeal for many of us, too. http://ricochet.com/main-feed/Eastwood-And-The-Divide-Between-Americans-And-The-Ruling-Class

  • Susan

    I think the liberal progressive’s problem with Eastwood’s humor is that they don’t understand dry humor and haven’t been exposed to the really good old comic routines like Bob Newhart: http://tinyurl.com/9q24n6j I’m not sure if their self-righteousness drains them of humor or the pop culture’s expletive spouting comics have ruined good humor. Eastwood was old-school funny, especially if you know a bit about his personality and/or have met him. Mollie Hemmingway has an interesting post on Eastwood’s appeal for many of us, too. http://ricochet.com/main-feed/Eastwood-And-The-Divide-Between-Americans-And-The-Ruling-Class

  • DonS

    So, the lefties are riled up and attacking an icon like Clint Eastwood. Brilliant way to reach the independents, eh? Not to mention Clint has completely derailed them from their “message” of whining about Romney’s tax returns or attacking Todd Akin about abortion.

    Old Clint is crazy like a fox.

  • DonS

    So, the lefties are riled up and attacking an icon like Clint Eastwood. Brilliant way to reach the independents, eh? Not to mention Clint has completely derailed them from their “message” of whining about Romney’s tax returns or attacking Todd Akin about abortion.

    Old Clint is crazy like a fox.

  • Tom Hering

    I think the liberal progressive’s problem with Eastwood’s humor is that they don’t understand dry humor and haven’t been exposed to the really good old comic routines like Bob Newhart … (@ 27)

    I understood Newhart’s tweet Thursday night:

    @BobNewhart. “I heard that Clint Eastwood was channeling me at the RNC. My lawyers and I are drafting our lawsuit.”

    I also understood Newhart’s comment to the L.A. Times about how conventions are like infomercials, and the only thing missing is someone saying, “Wait, we’ll give you two Romneys for the price of one.”

  • Tom Hering

    I think the liberal progressive’s problem with Eastwood’s humor is that they don’t understand dry humor and haven’t been exposed to the really good old comic routines like Bob Newhart … (@ 27)

    I understood Newhart’s tweet Thursday night:

    @BobNewhart. “I heard that Clint Eastwood was channeling me at the RNC. My lawyers and I are drafting our lawsuit.”

    I also understood Newhart’s comment to the L.A. Times about how conventions are like infomercials, and the only thing missing is someone saying, “Wait, we’ll give you two Romneys for the price of one.”

  • Susan

    Newhart’s joke in response (his daughter told him Eastwood was channeling him) and his joke about political conventions were great. And he is right about the successful delivery of comedic lines being harder than it looks. I miss the days when all of these men used to be on Johnny Carson and their quips kept viewers chuckling for days. What’s bizarre is the way the MSM is trying to paint Eastwood as a racist. The MSM have eviscerated the word of all meaning and that’s sad.

  • Susan

    Newhart’s joke in response (his daughter told him Eastwood was channeling him) and his joke about political conventions were great. And he is right about the successful delivery of comedic lines being harder than it looks. I miss the days when all of these men used to be on Johnny Carson and their quips kept viewers chuckling for days. What’s bizarre is the way the MSM is trying to paint Eastwood as a racist. The MSM have eviscerated the word of all meaning and that’s sad.

  • Carl Vehse

    Michelle Malkin has this sign for conservatives to keep handy. Of course, we know what the leftists will say about the sign.

  • Carl Vehse

    Michelle Malkin has this sign for conservatives to keep handy. Of course, we know what the leftists will say about the sign.

  • Tom Hering

    Huh. I didn’t see anything racist in Eastwood’s whatever-it-was at the convention. (Speech? Mild seizure? Stand-up routine?) The message of his Gran Torino, though, is another matter: the right kind of minority kid can melt an old racist’s heart, because racists are really pussycats. Uh huh. I suppose it made a certain segment of Eastwood’s fans feel better about themselves.

  • Tom Hering

    Huh. I didn’t see anything racist in Eastwood’s whatever-it-was at the convention. (Speech? Mild seizure? Stand-up routine?) The message of his Gran Torino, though, is another matter: the right kind of minority kid can melt an old racist’s heart, because racists are really pussycats. Uh huh. I suppose it made a certain segment of Eastwood’s fans feel better about themselves.

  • Carl Vehse

    Based on Clint Eastwood’s political evisceration of Steve Dunham at the GOP convention, Eastwooding the empty president is catching on.

    Here’s the ECOTUS (Empty Chair of the United States) relaxing on the Florida beach after his appearance at the GOP convention.

  • Carl Vehse

    Based on Clint Eastwood’s political evisceration of Steve Dunham at the GOP convention, Eastwooding the empty president is catching on.

    Here’s the ECOTUS (Empty Chair of the United States) relaxing on the Florida beach after his appearance at the GOP convention.

  • Susan

    For anyone interested, I found that large numbers of people opted to watch the convention on C-Span and saw a remarkable speaker that was cut the other networks. She is well worth hearing.

    Jane Edmonds is an African-American woman, who proudly called herself a “liberal Democrat.” In a strong and firm voice, Edmonds told the delegates and those who did watch her speech, that the Romney she got to know well when he was Governor was a supporter of women, appointing them to high positions in his administration. Moreover, she noted that Romney was a bold, strong administrator, who worked hard on behalf of the people he represented.

    “The late Stephen Covey,” Edmonds said, “writes about 2 kinds of people: one type is all about themselves and their success. The other type works as hard as they can — and certainly succeeds, but their success is motivated by doing good for others. That’s how I see Governor Romney. He is authentic.”

  • Susan

    For anyone interested, I found that large numbers of people opted to watch the convention on C-Span and saw a remarkable speaker that was cut the other networks. She is well worth hearing.

    Jane Edmonds is an African-American woman, who proudly called herself a “liberal Democrat.” In a strong and firm voice, Edmonds told the delegates and those who did watch her speech, that the Romney she got to know well when he was Governor was a supporter of women, appointing them to high positions in his administration. Moreover, she noted that Romney was a bold, strong administrator, who worked hard on behalf of the people he represented.

    “The late Stephen Covey,” Edmonds said, “writes about 2 kinds of people: one type is all about themselves and their success. The other type works as hard as they can — and certainly succeeds, but their success is motivated by doing good for others. That’s how I see Governor Romney. He is authentic.”

  • Tom Hering

    I guess it hasn’t occurred to all the Eastwooders that confronting an empty chair is about as bold and meaningful as, well, pretending to confront someone who isn’t there. We’ll see how well Romney (remember him?) does in the real debates with the real President. :-D

  • Tom Hering

    I guess it hasn’t occurred to all the Eastwooders that confronting an empty chair is about as bold and meaningful as, well, pretending to confront someone who isn’t there. We’ll see how well Romney (remember him?) does in the real debates with the real President. :-D

  • Tom Hering

    Susan @ 34, I watched Jane Edmonds on PBS. C-SPAN wasn’t the only network that showed it all.

  • Tom Hering

    Susan @ 34, I watched Jane Edmonds on PBS. C-SPAN wasn’t the only network that showed it all.

  • Carl Vehse

    Tom @35: “I guess it hasn’t occurred to all the Eastwooders that confronting an empty chair is about as bold and meaningful as, well, pretending to confront someone who isn’t there.”

    Wrong guess, Tom.

    What Eastwooders realize is that whether Barry is sitting in it or not, it’s still the ECOTUS.

    Whether Mitt will do any Eastwooding at the debates remains to be seen. Ryan’s debate with the VPECOTUS will also be worth watching.

  • Carl Vehse

    Tom @35: “I guess it hasn’t occurred to all the Eastwooders that confronting an empty chair is about as bold and meaningful as, well, pretending to confront someone who isn’t there.”

    Wrong guess, Tom.

    What Eastwooders realize is that whether Barry is sitting in it or not, it’s still the ECOTUS.

    Whether Mitt will do any Eastwooding at the debates remains to be seen. Ryan’s debate with the VPECOTUS will also be worth watching.

  • Tom Hering

    Well, it should be interesting to watch a chair debate an Etch-A-Sketch. :-D

  • Tom Hering

    Well, it should be interesting to watch a chair debate an Etch-A-Sketch. :-D

  • Carl Vehse

    And if conservatives run out of empty chairs to ridicule the ECOTUS, “Dear Leader” is offering yet another image of his egomaniacal narcissism to mock.

    15.5 tons of sand?!? Ringling Bros. and Barnum and Bailey have something behind their elephant stalls that could be used instead.

  • Carl Vehse

    And if conservatives run out of empty chairs to ridicule the ECOTUS, “Dear Leader” is offering yet another image of his egomaniacal narcissism to mock.

    15.5 tons of sand?!? Ringling Bros. and Barnum and Bailey have something behind their elephant stalls that could be used instead.

  • Tom Hering

    15.5 tons of doo-doo could also serve as a ready replacement in case you run out of comments, Carl. :-D

  • Tom Hering

    15.5 tons of doo-doo could also serve as a ready replacement in case you run out of comments, Carl. :-D

  • Carl Vehse

    Thanks for your generous offer, Tom.

    But there is plenty of “doo-doo” available from the Washington Compost, like this steaming pile from Chris Cillizza.

    Powerline contributor, Scott Johnson, explains in his column, “Sudden Impact“:

    “The Washington Post’s Chris Cillizza gives his coveted Worst Week in Washington award to Clint Eastwood. According to Cillizza, at the RNC ‘Eastwood did everything but stick to any sort of script that would have given the audience a shot at understanding whatever point he was trying to make.’

    “In the annals of cluelessness this campaign season, Cillizza’s column deserves some kind of recognition — maybe a special edition of Worst Week In Washington.”

    Another Powerline contributor, Paul Mirengoff, adds: “I agree with Scott. Eastwood’s points about Obama were easy to understand and in some cases quite powerful. Cillizza understood them; he just didn’t like them.”

    And another contributor, Steve Hayward, adds: “I still say the Democrats are going to counter next week in Charlotte with . . . Betty White.”

  • Carl Vehse

    Thanks for your generous offer, Tom.

    But there is plenty of “doo-doo” available from the Washington Compost, like this steaming pile from Chris Cillizza.

    Powerline contributor, Scott Johnson, explains in his column, “Sudden Impact“:

    “The Washington Post’s Chris Cillizza gives his coveted Worst Week in Washington award to Clint Eastwood. According to Cillizza, at the RNC ‘Eastwood did everything but stick to any sort of script that would have given the audience a shot at understanding whatever point he was trying to make.’

    “In the annals of cluelessness this campaign season, Cillizza’s column deserves some kind of recognition — maybe a special edition of Worst Week In Washington.”

    Another Powerline contributor, Paul Mirengoff, adds: “I agree with Scott. Eastwood’s points about Obama were easy to understand and in some cases quite powerful. Cillizza understood them; he just didn’t like them.”

    And another contributor, Steve Hayward, adds: “I still say the Democrats are going to counter next week in Charlotte with . . . Betty White.”

  • http://www.toddstadler.com tODD

    DonS said (@25):

    I am a partisan. I have no obligation to parse comments “evenhandedly”, any more than you do.

    Wow. Really? I disagree. Why would you not only subjugate both logic and fairness to mere partisanship, but also brag about it? How is that a good thing?

    I mean, I realize that, for many Americans, politics is just another sport in which you mindlessly support your team, no matter what, but I didn’t think that was true of you, Don. You’re an intelligent man. Why would you willingly subjugate that intellect to partisanship?

    I get that you and I have different beliefs. I get that we both have biases. But if you’re going to critique someone because they didn’t meet a standard you claim to uphold, then I expect you to uphold that standard across the board, and not just drop it when you think it’s convenient. Otherwise, you’re employing the very relativism that I’m pretty sure you abhor. You’re engaging in a postmodern pursuit that values the ends over the means, with no tenets except advancing the power of one group over another.

    To that end, it’s clear from the context that Eastwood’s comment wasn’t just about who was an attorney at some point. His point was about the way attorneys think. And, I’m sorry, but someone who has graduated cum laude from Harvard Law School (yes, also Obama’s alma mater) has clearly learned to think in exactly the same way Eastwood laments.

    You are not the target audience for that speech. You are not sympathetic to notions of U.S. exceptionalism and your political leanings are to the left.

    I’m pretty certain you’re dead wrong there. I’m an independent voter, and as yet uncommitted to any candidate for President. Actually, as I’ve said on this blog before, I’m almost certainly not voting for Obama this year, owing to his administration’s handling of religious freedom in several cases. I mainly tend libertarian, if anything.

    Now, technically, Oregon is probably not a swing state. Karl Rove seems to believe it might be — at least some day — but probably not this year. So maybe my vote as an independent isn’t all that important to Romney.

    But there is no question that the Romney needs to be reaching out to independents, and to that end, Eastwood’s speech was ineffective. If Romney’s still trying to reach out to conservatives, he might as well quit now.

    But hey, you’re a partisan. Why bother trying to convince you of anything? Rah rah Romney, right? Have fun with that.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com tODD

    DonS said (@25):

    I am a partisan. I have no obligation to parse comments “evenhandedly”, any more than you do.

    Wow. Really? I disagree. Why would you not only subjugate both logic and fairness to mere partisanship, but also brag about it? How is that a good thing?

    I mean, I realize that, for many Americans, politics is just another sport in which you mindlessly support your team, no matter what, but I didn’t think that was true of you, Don. You’re an intelligent man. Why would you willingly subjugate that intellect to partisanship?

    I get that you and I have different beliefs. I get that we both have biases. But if you’re going to critique someone because they didn’t meet a standard you claim to uphold, then I expect you to uphold that standard across the board, and not just drop it when you think it’s convenient. Otherwise, you’re employing the very relativism that I’m pretty sure you abhor. You’re engaging in a postmodern pursuit that values the ends over the means, with no tenets except advancing the power of one group over another.

    To that end, it’s clear from the context that Eastwood’s comment wasn’t just about who was an attorney at some point. His point was about the way attorneys think. And, I’m sorry, but someone who has graduated cum laude from Harvard Law School (yes, also Obama’s alma mater) has clearly learned to think in exactly the same way Eastwood laments.

    You are not the target audience for that speech. You are not sympathetic to notions of U.S. exceptionalism and your political leanings are to the left.

    I’m pretty certain you’re dead wrong there. I’m an independent voter, and as yet uncommitted to any candidate for President. Actually, as I’ve said on this blog before, I’m almost certainly not voting for Obama this year, owing to his administration’s handling of religious freedom in several cases. I mainly tend libertarian, if anything.

    Now, technically, Oregon is probably not a swing state. Karl Rove seems to believe it might be — at least some day — but probably not this year. So maybe my vote as an independent isn’t all that important to Romney.

    But there is no question that the Romney needs to be reaching out to independents, and to that end, Eastwood’s speech was ineffective. If Romney’s still trying to reach out to conservatives, he might as well quit now.

    But hey, you’re a partisan. Why bother trying to convince you of anything? Rah rah Romney, right? Have fun with that.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com tODD

    Carl (@26):

    Along with tODD’s four Cranach rants against Clint (not to mention Anon’s, if that wasn’t also tODD)

    Of course that was me. You know better than anyone that people who use pseudonyms can’t be trusted, right Ri…Carl?

    …Anyhow, I couldn’t read the rest of your comment, as you got spittle flecks and foam all over my monitor. Sorry.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com tODD

    Carl (@26):

    Along with tODD’s four Cranach rants against Clint (not to mention Anon’s, if that wasn’t also tODD)

    Of course that was me. You know better than anyone that people who use pseudonyms can’t be trusted, right Ri…Carl?

    …Anyhow, I couldn’t read the rest of your comment, as you got spittle flecks and foam all over my monitor. Sorry.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com tODD

    Susan (@27):

    I think the liberal progressive’s problem with Eastwood’s humor is that they don’t understand dry humor and haven’t been exposed to the really good old comic routines like Bob Newhart.

    Oh, to be sure. I mean, find one left-leaning comedian who uses, much less understands, dry humor. You can’t. They just put on funny hats and make “doop doop” noises. And it’s not like Bob Newhart himself supports Democrats. That’s impossible — he employs dry humor!

    I’m not sure if their self-righteousness drains them of humor or the pop culture’s expletive spouting comics have ruined good humor.

    Right. Those awful, coarse, self-righteous people! They just pale in comparison to a man who calls a President he disagrees with “crazy”, and then pretends twice on national TV that the President told people to go f*** themselves. Clint Eastwood: genuine class.

    Why can’t more of our nation’s comedians be like Clint?

  • http://www.toddstadler.com tODD

    Susan (@27):

    I think the liberal progressive’s problem with Eastwood’s humor is that they don’t understand dry humor and haven’t been exposed to the really good old comic routines like Bob Newhart.

    Oh, to be sure. I mean, find one left-leaning comedian who uses, much less understands, dry humor. You can’t. They just put on funny hats and make “doop doop” noises. And it’s not like Bob Newhart himself supports Democrats. That’s impossible — he employs dry humor!

    I’m not sure if their self-righteousness drains them of humor or the pop culture’s expletive spouting comics have ruined good humor.

    Right. Those awful, coarse, self-righteous people! They just pale in comparison to a man who calls a President he disagrees with “crazy”, and then pretends twice on national TV that the President told people to go f*** themselves. Clint Eastwood: genuine class.

    Why can’t more of our nation’s comedians be like Clint?

  • http://www.toddstadler.com tODD

    DonS said (@28):

    So, the lefties are riled up and attacking an icon like Clint Eastwood. Brilliant way to reach the independents, eh?

    Um, just a minute ago, you were mocking me for even thinking that Eastwood’s speech was aimed at me. Now you’re mocking the Democrats for not focusing on the independents? Um … what about Clint’s speech was brilliant in its appeal to independents? Do independents like rambling? Or people talking to chairs? Do independents not care much for facts about wars or foreign policy?

    Clint has completely derailed them from their “message” of whining about Romney’s tax returns or attacking Todd Akin about abortion.

    Wait, you already said several times that the point was to “drive up audience numbers”. Now you’re claiming that, instead of being an appeal to Republicans (who, I guess, would have otherwise been distracted from paying attention to the last night of speakers at their own convention?), Clint was actually being intentionally loony, just to distract Democrats from other attacks?

    I guess this is where “partisan” thinking will get you.

    But hey, it distracted me and all my like-minded liberals from attacking Todd Akin, right?

  • http://www.toddstadler.com tODD

    DonS said (@28):

    So, the lefties are riled up and attacking an icon like Clint Eastwood. Brilliant way to reach the independents, eh?

    Um, just a minute ago, you were mocking me for even thinking that Eastwood’s speech was aimed at me. Now you’re mocking the Democrats for not focusing on the independents? Um … what about Clint’s speech was brilliant in its appeal to independents? Do independents like rambling? Or people talking to chairs? Do independents not care much for facts about wars or foreign policy?

    Clint has completely derailed them from their “message” of whining about Romney’s tax returns or attacking Todd Akin about abortion.

    Wait, you already said several times that the point was to “drive up audience numbers”. Now you’re claiming that, instead of being an appeal to Republicans (who, I guess, would have otherwise been distracted from paying attention to the last night of speakers at their own convention?), Clint was actually being intentionally loony, just to distract Democrats from other attacks?

    I guess this is where “partisan” thinking will get you.

    But hey, it distracted me and all my like-minded liberals from attacking Todd Akin, right?

  • Carl Vehse

    A torrential downpour struck Charlotte Saturday afternoon and damaged “Mount Obama,” the 15.5-ton pile of sand in the form of Obamassiah, who was campaigning elsewhere and thus not there to calm the winds and part the rainclouds. The 5-day forecast is for more thunderstorms.

  • Carl Vehse

    A torrential downpour struck Charlotte Saturday afternoon and damaged “Mount Obama,” the 15.5-ton pile of sand in the form of Obamassiah, who was campaigning elsewhere and thus not there to calm the winds and part the rainclouds. The 5-day forecast is for more thunderstorms.

  • Anon

    Paul Ryan is a liar. He lied about how long it took him to run a marathon.

    Nice going, Paulie. You and Mittens are really not ready for prime time. Better luck in 2016.

    http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2012/08/31/paul_ryan_s_marathon_history_runners_world_wonders_aloud_whether_the_vp_candidate_was_as_fast_as_he_claims_.html

  • Anon

    Paul Ryan is a liar. He lied about how long it took him to run a marathon.

    Nice going, Paulie. You and Mittens are really not ready for prime time. Better luck in 2016.

    http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2012/08/31/paul_ryan_s_marathon_history_runners_world_wonders_aloud_whether_the_vp_candidate_was_as_fast_as_he_claims_.html

  • Anon

    What a nice bunch of people — the Republicans. As long as you’re white or rich. What a group of idiots.

    “Two people were removed from the Republican National Convention Tuesday after they threw nuts at an African-American CNN camera operator and said, ‘This is how we feed animals.’”

    Nice job, Republicans. Keep it up. You’re the ones who belong at the back of the bus.

    http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2012/08/29/rnc_attendees_heckle_black_cnn_camerawoman_toss_peanuts_at_her_report_.html?wpisrc=obinsite

  • Anon

    What a nice bunch of people — the Republicans. As long as you’re white or rich. What a group of idiots.

    “Two people were removed from the Republican National Convention Tuesday after they threw nuts at an African-American CNN camera operator and said, ‘This is how we feed animals.’”

    Nice job, Republicans. Keep it up. You’re the ones who belong at the back of the bus.

    http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2012/08/29/rnc_attendees_heckle_black_cnn_camerawoman_toss_peanuts_at_her_report_.html?wpisrc=obinsite

  • Carl Vehse

    The damage to the Mount Obama sand sculpture appears to be minor.

    In the meantime the question is: Will Paul Ryan, with his lie about marathon times, catch up with the Liar-in-Chief, or will Ryan remain a rank amateur by comparison? Stay tune.

    Oh, and someone tell Todd Akin to talk to the press again!

  • Carl Vehse

    The damage to the Mount Obama sand sculpture appears to be minor.

    In the meantime the question is: Will Paul Ryan, with his lie about marathon times, catch up with the Liar-in-Chief, or will Ryan remain a rank amateur by comparison? Stay tune.

    Oh, and someone tell Todd Akin to talk to the press again!

  • http://www.toddstadler.com tODD

    Carl (@46), once again proves my point that Republicans are wildly inconsistent aeromancers.

    Anon (@47), really? You think Ryan’s “not ready for prime time” because he got the time wrong on a marathon he ran 20 years ago? Even though Ryan is, by all accounts, a remarkably fit man for his age?

    Also, one might note that those people were removed from the RNC for their racist acts.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com tODD

    Carl (@46), once again proves my point that Republicans are wildly inconsistent aeromancers.

    Anon (@47), really? You think Ryan’s “not ready for prime time” because he got the time wrong on a marathon he ran 20 years ago? Even though Ryan is, by all accounts, a remarkably fit man for his age?

    Also, one might note that those people were removed from the RNC for their racist acts.

  • DonS

    tODD @ 42:

    DonS said (@25):

    I am a partisan. I have no obligation to parse comments “evenhandedly”, any more than you do.

    Wow. Really? I disagree. Why would you not only subjugate both logic and fairness to mere partisanship, but also brag about it? How is that a good thing?

    I disagree with your reference to “mere partisanship”. There is a place for objective reporting, as well as a place for persuasive writing, written from a point of view (partisanship). When I comment on this blog, I am generally engaged in the latter, rather than the former. I don’t think it’s “mere” to have and to promote a point of view. However, it is important, when writing either objectively or persuasively to be honest.

    I’m not sure whether Eastwood knew that Romney at one time long ago obtained a joint JD/MBA degree from Harvard. However, there is no question that Romney chose to pursue life as a businessman, never practicing as a lawyer, and that Obama, in turn, chose to pursue life as a lawyer and then a law professor, and to emphasize this experience in his biography. There is absolutely no evidence that Romney “thinks” like a lawyer, rather than a businessman. So, Eastwood’s comment was substantively correct, and Anon’s criticism was very much misplaced.

    I mean, I realize that, for many Americans, politics is just another sport in which you mindlessly support your team, no matter what, but I didn’t think that was true of you, Don. You’re an intelligent man. Why would you willingly subjugate that intellect to partisanship?

    That is kind of you to say. But, you are wrong. I am a partisan for a particular set of ideals, not a “team”. Nothing I do in this area is “mindless”, and I am not subjugating my intellect to the pursuit of the ideals I hold dear. To the contrary, I employ whatever intellect the Lord has given me to the furtherance of those ideals. I believe the prevalent political philosophy in our country today is destructive to the nation and to the spiritual condition of its citizenry.

    I’m pretty certain you’re dead wrong there. I’m an independent voter, and as yet uncommitted to any candidate for President. Actually, as I’ve said on this blog before, I’m almost certainly not voting for Obama this year, owing to his administration’s handling of religious freedom in several cases. I mainly tend libertarian, if anything.

    Are you an Eastwood fan? I would not take you for such, and if you are not, then Eastwood’s speech was not for you. Whether or not you are a persuadable voter, not every campaign ad, speech, or strategy is intended to reach all persuadable voters. Eastwood’s speech was intended to reach Eastwood fans, and his appeal to American exceptionalism and individual rights and liberties was a part of that appeal. He was also to drive audience for Rubio and Romney. The Romney campaign may have other appeals in mind for voters in your category, but I am most confident that the Eastwood speech was not for you.

    But there is no question that the Romney needs to be reaching out to independents, and to that end, Eastwood’s speech was ineffective. If Romney’s still trying to reach out to conservatives, he might as well quit now.

    I disagree. By definition, “independents” are segmented — they are not a homogeneous group. Eastwood’s speech reached out to Eastwood fans. Not all independents. I think it was effective as far as it went. And Romney certainly needs to continue to reach out to his base, conservatives, even as he broadens his reach to independents and Reagan Democrats. For one thing, he needs to convince conservatives that he is reliable, and worthy of their enthusiastic support. That was an important purpose of the convention.

    But hey, you’re a partisan. Why bother trying to convince you of anything? Rah rah Romney, right? Have fun with that.

    Hopefully, given the above discussion, you have a correct idea of what I meant by partisanship.

  • DonS

    tODD @ 42:

    DonS said (@25):

    I am a partisan. I have no obligation to parse comments “evenhandedly”, any more than you do.

    Wow. Really? I disagree. Why would you not only subjugate both logic and fairness to mere partisanship, but also brag about it? How is that a good thing?

    I disagree with your reference to “mere partisanship”. There is a place for objective reporting, as well as a place for persuasive writing, written from a point of view (partisanship). When I comment on this blog, I am generally engaged in the latter, rather than the former. I don’t think it’s “mere” to have and to promote a point of view. However, it is important, when writing either objectively or persuasively to be honest.

    I’m not sure whether Eastwood knew that Romney at one time long ago obtained a joint JD/MBA degree from Harvard. However, there is no question that Romney chose to pursue life as a businessman, never practicing as a lawyer, and that Obama, in turn, chose to pursue life as a lawyer and then a law professor, and to emphasize this experience in his biography. There is absolutely no evidence that Romney “thinks” like a lawyer, rather than a businessman. So, Eastwood’s comment was substantively correct, and Anon’s criticism was very much misplaced.

    I mean, I realize that, for many Americans, politics is just another sport in which you mindlessly support your team, no matter what, but I didn’t think that was true of you, Don. You’re an intelligent man. Why would you willingly subjugate that intellect to partisanship?

    That is kind of you to say. But, you are wrong. I am a partisan for a particular set of ideals, not a “team”. Nothing I do in this area is “mindless”, and I am not subjugating my intellect to the pursuit of the ideals I hold dear. To the contrary, I employ whatever intellect the Lord has given me to the furtherance of those ideals. I believe the prevalent political philosophy in our country today is destructive to the nation and to the spiritual condition of its citizenry.

    I’m pretty certain you’re dead wrong there. I’m an independent voter, and as yet uncommitted to any candidate for President. Actually, as I’ve said on this blog before, I’m almost certainly not voting for Obama this year, owing to his administration’s handling of religious freedom in several cases. I mainly tend libertarian, if anything.

    Are you an Eastwood fan? I would not take you for such, and if you are not, then Eastwood’s speech was not for you. Whether or not you are a persuadable voter, not every campaign ad, speech, or strategy is intended to reach all persuadable voters. Eastwood’s speech was intended to reach Eastwood fans, and his appeal to American exceptionalism and individual rights and liberties was a part of that appeal. He was also to drive audience for Rubio and Romney. The Romney campaign may have other appeals in mind for voters in your category, but I am most confident that the Eastwood speech was not for you.

    But there is no question that the Romney needs to be reaching out to independents, and to that end, Eastwood’s speech was ineffective. If Romney’s still trying to reach out to conservatives, he might as well quit now.

    I disagree. By definition, “independents” are segmented — they are not a homogeneous group. Eastwood’s speech reached out to Eastwood fans. Not all independents. I think it was effective as far as it went. And Romney certainly needs to continue to reach out to his base, conservatives, even as he broadens his reach to independents and Reagan Democrats. For one thing, he needs to convince conservatives that he is reliable, and worthy of their enthusiastic support. That was an important purpose of the convention.

    But hey, you’re a partisan. Why bother trying to convince you of anything? Rah rah Romney, right? Have fun with that.

    Hopefully, given the above discussion, you have a correct idea of what I meant by partisanship.

  • DonS

    tODD @ 45: Clearly, you did not grasp my point @ 28.

    My point was that before the convention, the Democrats were talking about Romney’s taxes, Mediscare, and Todd Akin. However, Eastwood got them so riled up that they engaged in a wholesale attack of him. That may play well inside the beltway and in elite liberal establishment circles, but there are an awful lot of people in this country who very much like Clint Eastwood and agree with his point that Obama has failed in the presidency and should be fired. Attacking Eastwood is a very dumb political strategy. Not to mention the fact that it took them completely off message (acknowledging that said message was foolish as well).

  • DonS

    tODD @ 45: Clearly, you did not grasp my point @ 28.

    My point was that before the convention, the Democrats were talking about Romney’s taxes, Mediscare, and Todd Akin. However, Eastwood got them so riled up that they engaged in a wholesale attack of him. That may play well inside the beltway and in elite liberal establishment circles, but there are an awful lot of people in this country who very much like Clint Eastwood and agree with his point that Obama has failed in the presidency and should be fired. Attacking Eastwood is a very dumb political strategy. Not to mention the fact that it took them completely off message (acknowledging that said message was foolish as well).

  • Tom Hering

    Eastwood’s speech reached out to Eastwood fans. (@ 51)

    You must mean it fired up those Eastwood fans who already liked his politics. Because I haven’t seen a whole lot of reaction along the lines of, “I’ve always been a fan of Eastwood’s movies, but now I’ve been swayed to like his politics too.” His skit didn’t accomplish that – certainly not to any degree that matters.

    But what did you think of the look on Ann Romney’s face when the camera cut away to her for a reaction shot? Now there was an expression that clearly said, “What the hell is this? Somebody stop this guy! He’s supposed to be praising my husband!” She even said the next day that she wished the biographic video had preceded her husband’s big moment. Of course, she was also polite enough to add that Eastwood is “A unique guy who does unique things.” You know, like when a friend shows you their latest arts-and-crafts project, and you say, “Well, that’s certainly … unique.” :-D

  • Tom Hering

    Eastwood’s speech reached out to Eastwood fans. (@ 51)

    You must mean it fired up those Eastwood fans who already liked his politics. Because I haven’t seen a whole lot of reaction along the lines of, “I’ve always been a fan of Eastwood’s movies, but now I’ve been swayed to like his politics too.” His skit didn’t accomplish that – certainly not to any degree that matters.

    But what did you think of the look on Ann Romney’s face when the camera cut away to her for a reaction shot? Now there was an expression that clearly said, “What the hell is this? Somebody stop this guy! He’s supposed to be praising my husband!” She even said the next day that she wished the biographic video had preceded her husband’s big moment. Of course, she was also polite enough to add that Eastwood is “A unique guy who does unique things.” You know, like when a friend shows you their latest arts-and-crafts project, and you say, “Well, that’s certainly … unique.” :-D

  • John C

    Was this Clint’s Gabby Hayes impersonation?

  • John C

    Was this Clint’s Gabby Hayes impersonation?

  • Carl Vehse

    With the teleprompter prop next to ECOTUS, Clint was ridiculing the incompetent Obozo as much as he was borrowing Jimmy Stewart’s talking to the empty barstool in the movie “Harvey.”

  • Carl Vehse

    With the teleprompter prop next to ECOTUS, Clint was ridiculing the incompetent Obozo as much as he was borrowing Jimmy Stewart’s talking to the empty barstool in the movie “Harvey.”

  • Tom Hering

    Making fun of speech impediments now, Carl? Oh well. Whatever. Carry on. I’m sure it isn’t easy being you.

  • Tom Hering

    Making fun of speech impediments now, Carl? Oh well. Whatever. Carry on. I’m sure it isn’t easy being you.

  • Carl Vehse

    The Obama Sand Sculpture has been repaired. What an appropriate place it would be for Tom Cat and his fellow felines in Charlotte to do their business.

  • Carl Vehse

    The Obama Sand Sculpture has been repaired. What an appropriate place it would be for Tom Cat and his fellow felines in Charlotte to do their business.

  • Carl Vehse

    The sand sculpture in Charlotte has an amazing likeness to the ECOTUS.

  • Carl Vehse

    The sand sculpture in Charlotte has an amazing likeness to the ECOTUS.

  • Pingback: supplemental resources

  • Pingback: why shouldnt kids take diet pills

  • Pingback: http://www.episcenter.si/Static/p.php?a=a+hrefhttptemp.violy.netinfo.phpa5B5Dcaffeinefreedietpills283Cahref3Dhttp3A2F2Fwww.xs2mail.com2Finfo3Fa255B255D3D253Ca2Bhref253Dhttp253A252F252Fexateam.hu252FphpSitemapNG252Fphpinfo.php253Fa25255B25255D253D25253Ca25

  • Pingback: http://www.npacl.com/userinfo.php?uid=198006

  • Pingback: Http://Games.Casinoisfun.Com/Profile/167132/NiTomasini.Html

  • Pingback: www.dovevacanze.it

  • Pingback: diet pill weight loss perscription

  • Pingback: statistics for weight loss pills

  • Pingback: methoxy burn diet pills

  • Pingback: Diet pill side drug effects medicine

  • Pingback: Going at dawilk.piwko.pl

  • Pingback: fda recently disapproves diet pills october 2013

  • Pingback: http://www.ksop.org/xe/?document_srl=210458

  • Pingback: she said

  • http://youtu.be/kuh9vaqCqDw Penny

    The steps with the short step height and deep step
    depth are constructed for short little legs and are probably
    best for your cat. Folks consistently fawning around you, delivering foodstuff, shelter and a loving atmosphere will get truly boring.
    Some will even consist of perches where your
    feline can sleep and you can find others that have hanging toys built regularly into them.

  • Pingback: My Homepage


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X