The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

How Awesome Was Clint Eastwood?

Posted on | August 31, 2012 | 60 Comments

TAMPA, Florida
Evil Blogger Lady quotes Clint’s best line:

“Of course we know Biden is the intellectual of the Democratic Party…” That alone was worth the price of admission!

Members of what Andrew Breitbart liked to call the Democrat-Media Complex are all over the ‘Net today going on about Eastwood’s “Bizarre, Rambling Speech to Empty Chair,” as Benjy Sarlin of Talking Points Memo describes it. But these are liberals: People who think a crude buffoon like Bill Maher is hilarious, and who think of Janeane Garofalo as a brilliant comedienne. Are we going to let people like that tell us what is or is not funny?

The best analysis of Eastwood’s routine was Romney adviser Eric Ferhnstrom’s quote to Byron York: “It’s improv” — and the important thing is, it worked, both as a comedic performance and in terms of its political purpose in the closing-night schedule at the Republican National Committee. It was a low-key, offbeat, humorous moment that provided a sort of relaxing breather before the emotional excitement of Marco Rubio’s speech and the big drama of Mitt’s acceptance speech. Here’s the video:

Description at the video:

Rachel Maddow was at a loss for words on Thursday after Clint Eastwood finished what was largely considered a bizarre and awkward GOP convention appearance.
“I don’t — I don’t — I don’t know what was going on there,” Maddow said, seemingly tongue-tied. “Clint Eastwood is 82 years old and I think that — I don’t know if that’s what was going on there.”

Maddow “at a loss for words”? Winning!

UPDATE: John Nolte: “Newsflash: Obama can’t take a joke. But we already knew that.”

Category: Celebrities, Fear and Loathing at the Republican National Convention, humor

Comments

60 Responses to “How Awesome Was Clint Eastwood?”

  1. Mark Mays
    August 31st, 2012 @ 10:59 pm

    Well first K-Bob, you can stop condescending to me. I know a bit about news and newspapers and about pushing stories, having worked on both sides. So no, this is not a matter of the medium being the message. The reporter’s role in the news is hardly forgotten, even in the social media age.

    Thing is, in this case, there’s no reporter or blogger involved, is there? Everyone either saw it live with their own eyes (or saw it later thanks to — you guessed it — social media!) And they made their own judgments. There was no slanting of opinion. No one told “the libs” what to think.

    And then, everyone was talking about it. And the Eastwood story took up as much time on the 24 hour cycle as Mitt’s speech. And poor Rubio, left out almost entirely, except for people saying, “what a shame no one is talking about Rubio.”

    And the talking heads are talking about Eastwood because they can see, from the evidence, that people want to discuss it. How do they know? By observing social media. They didn’t have time to poll or survey. They didn’t just guess because no one relies on the wiley old editor’s hunch anymore except at the alt.weeklies. Gannett and the Times are all about numbers.

    It’s not gossip. This is not something “the liberal media” decided was worth discussing. It was the people.

  2. Mark Mays
    August 31st, 2012 @ 10:59 pm

    Well, thanks for the intelligent comments. I appreciate the talk!

  3. Adjoran
    August 31st, 2012 @ 11:46 pm

    If the MSM isn’t panicked with their plunging ratings, circulations, and ad revenues, they aren’t paying attention.

    And maybe they aren’t, since they’ve doubled down on stupid leftist lying for Obama. Fine with me, it only hastens their demise.

  4. Adjoran
    August 31st, 2012 @ 11:49 pm

    They will want to talk about anything except Michelle Obama’s ***hole, the President.

  5. K-Bob
    September 1st, 2012 @ 1:15 am

    Sure. Only you get to be condescending. Figures.

    They saw those things because they were on TV. Why you don’t seem to understand the origins is beyond my concern. You keep peddling the medium as if it’s more important than what’s on it. That’s like claiming air is more important than music because music is carried on the air. Nobody notices the air until it’s gone.

    And hell yes it was “the people.” That’s exactly what I was telling you. They chattered about it and in some circles it was popular. In others, not. If you think Rubio didn’t get any coverage then you have been paying attention to where they DON’T cover him. The infosphere is a vast place, and a lot of people watched Rubio’s speech in full, some of us more than once. Others are doing so right now, in some cases, because they can. But that doesn’t mean it’s a new, big deal to “go use social media.” It’s just another term for the same, dynamic collection of information channels. Marketing people know this. They’ve known it a long time.

  6. K-Bob
    September 1st, 2012 @ 1:20 am

    Heh. He’s just focusing on the blinkin’ lights. Eventually he’ll get to the content.

    Sadly, I’ve also outed myself as a web geek.

    The horror. The shame. I’ll only do it till I wear glasses.

  7. rjacobse
    September 1st, 2012 @ 9:43 am

    Go ahead and keep pitying us. Your opinion of conservatives matters to me just as much as your opinion of Eastwood and RSM. You’ve demonstrated time and again that you are impervious to reason and evidence, and refuse to argue in good faith.
    For example: “The RNC-Eastwood moment was an embarrassment by any standard.” Wrong, based on prima fasia evidence: the crowd at RNC and the widely observed positive reactions following. YOU may find it an embarrassment, but your statement is wrong. Yet you refuse to back down from it.
    Many of us find YOU a pitiable figure–those of us who aren’t mildy amused by you. Did you ever stop to try to understand why we might think that? Or do you already “know” that it’s only because we’re poor, deluded knuckle-draggers? Have you never noticed that the average conservative understands far more of your world-view than you do of theirs?
    Nope. You just troll around here, toss out your talking points and refuse to engage in honest debate.
    Go ahead and pity us. Frankly, my dear Anamika, I don’t give a damn.

  8. Clint Isley
    September 1st, 2012 @ 10:14 am

    Clint Eastwood kicked Ozeros ASS. IT WAS TOO FUNNY

  9. Anamika
    September 2nd, 2012 @ 12:43 pm

    Wrong, based on prima fasia evidence: the crowd at RNC and the widely observed positive reactions following.

    Even Scott Walker publicly confessed that he “cringed” at Eastwood’s speech. Anyway, the point is, they booked “Dirty
    Harry” and got “Grandpa Simpson.” The crowd in there might applause that act at that moment. But that’s quite sad, I think. (He’s always had difficulty focusing when he spoke and rambled on.) I kept watching in the hope that he would end the grueling 11 minutes with “I was only kidding. I am NOT a Republican and I’m NOT going to make your day!”

  10. Thomas Georgetown
    September 5th, 2012 @ 8:56 am

    LOL And how is that Buzz and Wave working for you? I only use Facebook so I can comment on certain sites requiring it for log in. Otherwise, it is just AOL reborn for a time.