Clint Eastwood yelled at a chair during his speech at the GOP Convention

You know what? I genuinely like Clint Eastwood, and I think he has an amazing, admirable Hollywood career. As for politics… well, he’s always been a Republican. He’s even held public office as a Republican. When I’ve seen him speak about his political views in the past, he often sounds more liberal than most Republicans would like to admit – like, he’s very much what I consider a “California Republican” – more liberal on social issues, and conservative on economic and foreign policy issues. Still, he claims that he’s a die-hard Republican, and so be it.

So, it wasn’t really surprising to me that Clint was invited to this week’s Republican Convention, and given that “Wimp Factor” Newsweek cover, you knew that the convention was going to stress Mitt’s manly-man credibility. So who better to introduce (sort of) Romney than Clint? How in the world could that go wrong?

OH NOES. I mean… was this really that bad? I tried watching it live, and it just made me uncomfortable (because I thought he sounded kind of senile), so I switched the channel. This morning, the news analysts said that the Romney campaign basically gave Clint an option to say whatever he wanted, and that Clint decided to “ad-lib”. The panel on Morning Joe basically said that this was a failure of properly using Clint, and that he shouldn’t have been a final-night speaker. I also think the Republican National Committee needs to fall on their sword a little bit – this really seemed like the most poorly organized convention in recent memory. Usually the GOP runs their convention like a Swiss watch, a model of efficiency and “everyone getting in line” behind the candidate. But this one seemed… I don’t know. Barely anyone mentioned the candidate. No one told Condi about the lipstick on her teeth. Ann Romney’s speech was kind of all over the place. It’s just been weird.

Us Weekly has a story about all of the Twitter-verse going crazy about Clint’s speech – crazy as in bad. Adam Levine tweeted, “Clint Eastwood has gone f—in’ nutterbutters yo.” Olivia Munn wrote: “Clint Eastwood was talking to an empty chair at the RNC. No, that’s not the set up to a joke. It’s not even a joke.” You can read more about it here. Meanwhile, this is what Obama tweeted:

Photos courtesy of WENN, Obama’s Twitter.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

287 Responses to “Clint Eastwood yelled at a chair during his speech at the GOP Convention”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. brin says:

    I love Clint!!!

    • Genevieve says:

      brin…I love Clint too, but Kaiser was 100% right.

      He was so rambling and all over the place I really wondered if Alzheimer’s had taken over. It was not only sad, but truly *painful* to watch. The GOP really screwed the pooch on Clint’s unscripted speech.

      Sadly, I agree that this Republican National Convention was the most disappointing of any I’ve watched or partaken in since I was 14. I say sadly, because I honestly don’t think we can survive as a nation with another four more years of the same.

      • Me Too says:

        Do you mean 4 more years of the same Republican refusal to compromise on anything? You do realize that while the Dems may have had a slight majority in the Senate that due to weird rules, the Republicans have shut down everything? They’ve filibustered every nominee, every bill…even bills they originally sponsored. That means nothing gets done. In the house, Republicans have spent the past 2 years legislating my body…abortion bill after abortion bill followed by bills redefining rape.

        I wish more could’ve been done too but you’re blaming the wrong person!

      • Seagulls says:

        @Me Too: I fully agree.

      • Tiffany says:

        Me Too, I completely agree. There has been record breaking filibusters in Congress, and all the GOP candidates have to offer this year is the same thing Bush offered (which lead us into mountains of debt and a collapse of the financial system): deregulation, tax cuts for the wealthy, and an INCREASE in defense spending.

        When they champion deregulation, I have to ask: Didn’t you learn from the whole “credit default swap” thing?????

      • Genevieve says:

        Thank you for your comments, ladies!

        And this is why….everyone is allowed to have their very own OPINION!

        Democracy at work. Love it!

      • TJ says:

        I agree Genevieve. I’ve been a huge Clint fan, but that speech kind of made him a joke and that sucks.
        Does anyone else find the body language between Clint and his wife awkward?

      • bluhare says:

        Me Too: Me three!!!

    • F5 says:

      Me 2, he bought 2 of my paintings so I’ll always love him:))

    • ZenB!tch says:

      I love Clint too. He is a California institution and yes, Kaiser a Northern California Republican which is code for a fiscally conservative Democrat but he would never admit it.

      I genuinely thought he was having an Alzheimer’s moment last night. The CNN camera person had the shot lined up like one does for a speech so what you saw was Clint at a podium but suddenly he starts darting around and looking toward the side and he looked out of it.

      Finally the camera person (poor thing, not his or her fault because WTF?) noticed the chair and included it in the shot, but it still sounded odd and was cringe inducing to watch.

      I didn’t even notice the chair had a teleprompter (nice touch) until this morning.

      I hate to sound ageist but I think it might have worked with a younger person doing it. The younger person would have to be a professional comedian.

    • alice says:

      this makes me sad! 🙁

  2. Eve says:

    I’ll keeping clicking on “refresh” to see how many comments will be hating on Obama’s tweet.

    • Starsky says:

      i wish i could tell obama he has PLENTY of things do to besides make smartass remarks on twitter but then i remind myself he isnt really running it and its his PR staff. oh well. disorganized politics all around this year.

      • EmmaStoneWannabe says:


      • kristin says:

        the president has his own social media team who does these posts for him…thats like assuming every senator and representative reads and signs every letter sent to them. They too have a team to do these things, just like him.

        Come on, lets just be realistic here.

      • lunachick says:

        Agree 100%. House Republicans have stated openly that they would tarher see the economy collapse than see President Obama succeed. The House and Senate Republicans have been commiting treason, in my view.

    • Eve says:

      I mean “keep clicking”. My typos piss me off sometimes.

  3. Tiffany27 says:

    He looked and sounded like that old dude in my neighborhood who constantly yells “Get off my grass!!”

    • MJ says:

      It’s like real life Gran Turino.

    • KellyinSeattle says:

      and his wife looks likes he’s got a communicable disease, shunning him.

      • a says:

        And what was that dress she was wearing? The side with the sleeve looked 3 sizes too big and I wasn’t sure if the beige part was supposed to look alluring but it didn’t. It just looked wrong. This whole convention was just wrong. I felt like I was watching that scene in Game Change when McCain’s team realizes they’d made a really big mistake. I don’t agree with the GOP platform by any means but this was so bad is was almost sad. If it wasn’t so funny.

      • MaiGirl says:

        I agree on the dress. It has no shape, and the butt ugly nude portion hurts my feelings. Why would anyone buy that, let alone wear it at an event in which your husband is making a major introduction.

    • Janet says:

      I heard Clint was also talking the radiator in the restroom before he winked at the water heater and asked it for a date.

  4. LeslieM says:

    I don’t know if I loved or hated that speech. It had some good moments but went off the rails at some points. What’s going on with his wife’s dress?! That’s a mess. She looks like she just been pulled out of a train wreck.

    • lilred says:

      Granddaughter’s failed home-ec project is about all I can figure.

    • Dotty says:

      That dress is……unfortunate. It looks like she started to get dressed for the occasion, but there was a problem with the intended dress. Not to be discouraged, she ripped the curtain off the rod (note the shredded ends in lieu of a hem) and threw that around her over her previously donned slip. Fashion fail on all fronts.

  5. Lenna says:

    The general consensus as to why the RNC speakers failed to mention Mitt as much as they should have in their speeches is political aspiration. The party is pretty much resigned to the fact that Mitt isn’t likely to win, so they’re all putting forth their own agendas for 2016

    • carrie says:


      • Bobby the K says:

        Yet Christie did himself no favours. Mark Rubio did come off as a rising star on the national stage, but that`s not what people are talking about today…

    • Tiffany says:

      I am with you Lenna. I watched all week and I just wanted to go through the screen and pop Chris Christie in the mouth. This is not your platform. Just stop. And Romney sitting there grinning trying to keep cool. Something tells me words were exchanged when the evening was over. I can’t even tell you what the ticket’s platform is. Ryan’s inaccurate info in his speech and Romney just running on and on and not taking a stance on anything. Mitt, we know that you came from a wealthy family and went on to make more money. You are not the every man. I just feel for this party and I fear for what the DNC is going to bring to the table. Politics all around has just been a disaster these last few years.

      • garvels says:

        Ryan’s speech was not inaccurate. The Obama media spoke too quickly in response to Stephanie Cutter’s tweets during Ryan’s speech calling Ryan a liar….and we all know how the Obama media jumps when Obama tells them to jump. Ryan’s speech was proven accurate for the most part…Ryan responded directly to the Obama media attacks…

      • Me Too says:

        Sorry @garvel but you’re not correct. Even Fox pointed out that Ryans speech was full of lies. The plant in WI closed under Bush. The money taken from Medicare wasn’t taken from older folks but from an insurance co. scam called Medicare Plus and from hospitals over charging. Funnily, Ryans own budget takes the same from Medicare but instead of putting it towards lowering the deficit, he puts it towards lowering rich peoples taxes.

      • ZenB!tch says:

        Ryan’s speech reminded me of Obama’s speeches 4 years ago. The ones that got him elected. All style, not substance and a lot of BS.

        I won’t be making that mistake again. The problem is I don’t know who to vote for. I just know I can’t vote for Obama again. Romney, Gary Johnson or Jill Stein?

        Being the cynical bitch that I am, I’m looking forward to the DNC. I’m sure Obama is dying to top Ryan on the BS meter.

        They may have to rein in Clinton (love him) because a few times I’ve seen him on TV and he almost sounded like a Romney ad.

        I do hope they don’t rein in Biden (love him too). He can be fun.

      • garvels says:

        Me TOO-The Fact check at FOX was written by Sally Kohn a liberal pundit on FOX…This was also proven inaccurate…but it does go to show that FOX does present both sides of the argument.

        Attached is another article on factchecking.

      • Disbelieving says:

        So garvels, everything you don’t agree with is labeled “liberal” and all fact-checking is “liberal”? Spin all you like but Ryan lied over and over and even a cursory google of his statements reveal that. American deserves better than this foolishness.

    • TG says:

      Did you notice how the 1 1/2 hour interview special CNN did on Romney consisted mostly of his wife and very little of him. That is because he is not a likeable guy. He also has that crazy behind his eyes like tom cruise does. All of the cult members had an odd look to them I noticed. Very weird. I don’t know how any woman can vote for a party of people who want to control them and govern their bodies. I feel like we have gone back in time. I love to read regency romance novels but that is fantasy for me, I would never want to live like that.

      • debbi says:

        I agree he isn’t like able and I find him to be very untrustworthy but he IS NOT a member of a cult. That is as ridiculous as all those people screaming that President Obama is a Muslim, as if it were a bad thing to be. The Mormon faith, while I’m not a member, is a lovely religion and no more a cult then Catholism or Jewdism. Just because you don’t know anything about it doesn’t make it wrong. Cults don’t allow you to leave and you can join or exit the Church of Latter Day Saints anytime you please.

      • Seagulls says:

        @Debbi: the LDS faith actually does have many things in common with cults. For example, when they try to convert people, they don’t give them all the Mormon beliefs, saying “milk before meat.” No mainstream religion hides a core of beliefs, there’s no “earning” more knowledge. I have read quite a bit about them, and the less I like the group.

      • ZenB!tch says:

        The funny thing is, I don’t hate Mitt. He’s just bland to me. The one I can’t stand is his wife. I have never seen a more entitled bitch in my life.

        I’m dying to get to know Mrs. Ryan. What kind of a woman could be married to a neanderthal like that? That and I’ve liked her dresses so far.

        Yeah I’m really only in it for the fashion and even though I distrust Ryan as much as I distrust Obama, I wish it was an Obama/Ryan contest just to watch the BS fly. I think we’re doomed either way so I may as well get some entertainment out of it.

    • garvels says:

      Not true. Romney reviewed all speeches and the Romney campaign did not want the speeches to evolve around trashing Obama and propping up Mitt. He wanted the Republican governors and Mayors to talk about their successful Republican agendas and programs in their states and cities. Essentially to compare and contrast the Democratic premise of big bloated inefficient governments verses leaner smaller government systems that partner with business and the free markets to promote job growth.

      • Me Too says:

        Facts are pesky things. Under Bush and a Republican Congress, the federal gov’t grew. They launched 2 wars and cut taxes at the same time. They deregulated the banking industry and gave us an economic meltdown. The federal gov’t ( both employment in fed’l agencies and spending) is down under Obama. Taxes are the lowest theyve been since the 50’s. If the Republicans stopped worrying about regaining power and started working with the Dems, our economy would be growing. Sadly it’s not in their political interest so all we’ve gotten for the past 3 years from Republicans are bills redefining rape or telling me what I can do with my body!

      • garvels says:

        Me too-

        Is Bush running for President? Romney is not Bush and Romney’s previous accomplishments show that he is fiscally conservative. He reduced the size of government in MA and eliminated the 3 billion $ deficit in MA and created a billion dollar rainy day fund. When Romney was governor, MA received a credit upgrade. Romney partnered with the Democratic legislature in achieving these bipartisan accomplishments. This type of leadership is what is lacking in today’s Federal government.

      • ZenB!tch says:

        Obama has turned out to be Bush lite on a few things like spending, spending and more spending.

        The only difference is he sends out drones and elite teams out vs. creating a full out war. Makes me wonder if the troops will all be out of jobs in 2013.

        He also had a Democratic Congress for two years and didn’t get much done.

        I really wasn’t paying that much attention with Bush because I had a job that paid well and I could make ends meet. Other than his wars and the Patriot Act (which Obama extended), I have no clue what he did or didn’t get through Congress.

        I hated his wars – especially the useless one in Iraq that was only fought because Saddam threatened Bush 1 and because Cheney wanted more oil but my friends and I were doing OK. That is not really the case now.

        I do know that Reagan (who I didn’t like even if I was a kid) and Clinton (loved him) both got things passed with opposite party Congresses.

      • Kim says:

        Zenb!tch, Obama has grown the deficit less than any President since Eisenhower. How is that spending, spending and more spending? I realize that it is a GOP talking point, but the truth is that Obama has NOT spent as much as his Republican predecessors. Not anywhere near, as a matter of fact.

    • Zigggy says:

      I’m Canadian so I don’t follow this too much, but I must admit- I think Mitt is going to win this thing.
      Time will tell!

  6. David says:

    I don’t like Obama but Clint almost makes me want to vote for him.

  7. ladybert62 says:

    I didnt see the speech but the consensus of what I have read about it says it was embarrassing.

    What kind of “dress” is his wife wearing? It looks like an ugly green silk bed sheet wrapped around her.

    He needs a haircut.

  8. Brown says:

    Man, it really sucks being anything other than an extremely liberal democrat on the internet. I wish people would wake up and realize it’s not “women’s rights, abortion and welfare vs. rich people, wars and religion.”

    Clint is old. He had no teleprompter (by choice) and he spoke his mind and heart. Also, I thought the empty chair was a pretty sharp metaphor.

    Obama is cool, Romney is not. Being a liberal is cool, being anything else is not. I get it. But this is the problem our country faces. It is all just a battle between the lesser of two evils: not Jesus vs. the Devil as so many people think. The last Obama post got a lot of people screaming about “blind hatred” toward him. What about all of those who blindly follow?

    I knew you guys would cover this story. At least Clint can be considered a celebrity, whereas stories you cover about Obama seem ridiculous as he is not. He is not a celebrity, though he wants to be. He is the president. But I’m going to move along to the fun gossip posts.

    • Esmom says:

      If it’s not “women’s rights, abortion and welfare vs. rich people, wars and religion,” then what is it? I’m genuinely curious to hear your take since you did take the time comment.

      • catfromfla says:

        Me too. What are the issues then? I am fiscally conservative but don’t really feel I should trade economic security for a Handmaids Tale future.

      • bettyrose says:

        I know. It’s not like “liberals” make this all about women and welfare. I think most of us would much rather be talking about education, foreign policy, health care . . . and so on . . but when we get told that the economy is less important than legislating the sexual morality of a single gender, I think we have a right to speak up on our own behalf.

        But just to keep this about the celebrity element, I thought Clint was hilarious and hopefully deliberately so. As Kaiser said, he’s a “California conservative,” so he probably doesn’t have a lot to say that would appeal to the extreme right and therefore kept the talk entertaining rather than pointed.

      • Tiffany says:

        “It’s not like “liberals” make this all about women and welfare. I think most of us would much rather be talking about education, foreign policy, health care . . . and so on . . but when we get told that the economy is less important than legislating the sexual morality of a single gender, I think we have a right to speak up on our own behalf.”

        Well said!
        (And I am a different Tiffany than the one who commented above)

    • Obvious says:

      Did I miss something? How often does this site cover ANYTHING about Obama? unless it’s a major story or has something to do with a celebrity they don’t really.

      When George Clooney hosted a fundraiser they covered it, for the GEORGE CLOONEY factor. but not because it was Obama…I don’t mean to bash or be a b*otch, but please, this is one of the LEAST politically charged sites out there, they focus on the celebrity of it all. ok…i’m done now…

    • Anna says:

      If you are a woman then seek a psychologist because you are defending the party that wants to take your right to rule over your body.
      Republicans want America to turn into the Handmaid’s Tale.

      • Lenna says:

        Anna…I’m currently re-reading that book specifically because of what is happening today

      • Anna says:

        Handmaid’s Tale is every woman’s nightmare that is very real in fundamentalist Muslim countries and these right wing Americans want to make it the reality in the US too.

        How can any woman agree with them when they want to make women into submissive servents to their men with no rights, not even over their bodies?

      • giddy says:

        Good Lord. Full of crap. While you’re worrying about being a “handmaid”, I’m worrying about getting a job or my kids having one. Grow up.

        If you want to vote for Obama — go for it. But lots and lots and lots WON”T this time around. And that’s scaring the shit out of sanctimonious liberal elites.

        And — BTW — Clint is a LIBERTARIAN. Has been for years. He often VOTES republican.

      • Janet says:

        @giddy: You don’t read much, do you?

        The thing about “Handmaid’s” was, Handmaids weren’t allowed to work or do anything else but to serve men, either as breeders or wh-res.

        Republicans would like nothing better than to turn women back into June Cleavers — subjugated, pregnant and stuck in the kitchen. As far as they are concerned, time should have stopped in the 1950s when colored people knew their place, women stayed home and kept house, everybody went to church on Sunday and gay people hadn’t been invented yet.

      • flan says:

        @Giddy. You can kiss having a good job goodnbye if those rightists get what they want.

        The whole anti-women thing is also very much an economic thing, to make us financially dependent (and thereby vulnerable) on men.

        Instead of telling others to grow up, you might want to do some thinking. Also, repeating the tired ‘sanctimonious liberal elites’ got old five years ago.

      • Rulla says:

        @ Anna, from your comments it sounds like you don’t know much about Muslims or Islam. This is a fundamentalist CHRISTIAN group that’s recreating the Handmaid’s tale. No need to drag us Muslims into it. We have enough of our own problems and comments like yours comparing fanatical Christians to Muslims don’t help matters. And btw, with the exception of possibly Saudi Arabia (one of America’s biggest allies) almost all ME countries are run by secular governments. Get your facts straight.

    • Brown says:

      Yikes. I knew I would get eaten alive for that comment (and for the record I feel like it wasn’t disrespectful to anyone but that’s beside the point) but I was just voicing my opinion. In the past week there have been 3-4 stories about Obama, I know because I usually actively avoid them. You’re right, this site is definitely not as politically charged as others, but it is a celebrity gossip site so that would make sense. My point was simply that politics don’t really belong in the gossip world but I digress.

      As far as telling me that I need psychiatric help because I am a woman and don’t agree with your views, thanks, your tolerance is showing.

      I never said I was a repub. In fact, I’m pretty libertarian. So I guess I can’t speak for everyone when I made the “___vs____” comparison. I know for me, it’s about a much broader spectrum of ideas. The general direction in which the country is going. Personally, I want less government interference in every aspect of my life. I want this country to be less dependent on the government as a whole. That is just my personal opinion. Doesn’t mean yours is wrong.

      It just gets very tiring on the internet during election season. Especially if you do not share the views of the most vocal of the electorate.

      • TheOriginalKitten says:

        Brown-I don’t see anything insulting, disrespectful or wrong about your posts except the “being liberal is cool” comment. It’s rather patronizing to politically-savvy liberals in the sense that it’s very dismissive of their opinions-as if it’s a “fad” and not a valid belief.

        Beyond that, the comments about gossip and politics being separate-the Leann Rimes story was front and center on the Today Show this morning. A D-list celeb was a MAIN story on a (supposed) news show. I think, instead of complaining we just have to accept that we live in an age where pop culture and politics overlap. Celebs endorse politicians and a lot of them run in the same social circles. Any “news” that generates hits will be covered-LR posts generate RIDICULOUS amounts of hits-so the Today show sees the general population’s interests and covers the story to garner viewership. I’m not saying it’s a good thing, but it’s a reality. Media is big business after all.

      • Janet says:

        Can you answer Esmom’s question about the issues in this campaign? If it’s not “women’s rights, abortion and welfare vs. rich people, wars and religion,” then what is it?

        I’m interested in your response as well.


      • Brown says:

        Thanks @OKitt, I appreciate that comment. I wasn’t meaning to degrade well-informed libs, I guess it’s just that I am 23 and the majority of those that I know are not well-informed, but instead just very trendy. There is a definite difference.

        You’re absolutely right, everything is so intertwined that it is impossible to separate the two in some situations. I guess I just wish it were different, but alas, it is not. I have a feeling November is not going to be pretty for anyone.

      • Brown says:

        @Janet, sorry to keep you waiting, didn’t realize my personal views were in such high demand! I will oblige.

        Firstly, I want to point out that my intention in saying that was to point out that the differences are not black and white and restricted to those three categories.

        What I was trying to point out is that many of those that vote right are doing so for reasons beyond those that are most popular. For instance, the ever-growing defecit, outrageous spending, etc. I have no problems with rich people and am more concerned with the fact that our country has no money and without getting the spending under control, there will not be a way for those who are not rich to BECOME rich. Most social issues I feel are states-rights issues, not to be mandated at the federal level, which I feel is where we are headed with another Obama-term.

        I am not asking you to change your views or see things my way. That was not my intention with my comment. I respect your views (and everyone elses.) The point of my comment is that I often feel like anyone other than liberal democrats DO NOT have their views respected. They are belittled. That’s all I was aiming for, not sparking an all out comment war over each other’s political views.

      • Esmom says:

        @Brown, I appreciate your tone. It is far more civil than most who oppose Obama and it’s refreshing to hear.

        As for your comment, “The point of my comment is that I often feel like anyone other than liberal democrats DO NOT have their views respected. They are belittled.”

        I have had the exact opposite experience. Between Fox News, commenters on various websites of all political stripes and even conservative FB friends, I feel like Obama and the left are loudly and vocally being ripped to shreds on a continual basis. I hear nothing but hatred, scorn and negativity and only rarely do I hear a concrete, rational exchange of ideas.

        So again, while we may disagree on what our country needs, I do appreciate your willingness to be civil about it.

      • Brown says:


        Honestly, there’s no reason not to be civil. Just because you don’t agree politically doesn’t mean you can’t speak to each other in a humane tone.

        I think it’s all a matter of perception. That’s what you see from Fox, I see the opposite from CNN, NBC, etc. I guess it all just comes back to where you’re coming from. You’re more inclined to be riled up watching/hearing/reading something you don’t agree with and quick to say “BIAS!” rather than something you do agree with, in which case you’re probably just “right on.”

        Wow, I really didn’t mean to start an all-out comment war. I guess it’s good though. It is refreshing to hear people treat you respectfully even if they disagree (excluding the ones that told me I need mental help..)

      • TheOriginalKitten says:

        @ Brown-ITA with you in regards to liberals being more agressive and often more disrespectful in regards to diverging opinions. Now please understand this is just MY experience. Let me explain..

        First of all, a disclaimer: I am liberal but self-identify as a liberal constitutionalist. I am neither Dem nor Repub. Now, I have predominantly Democratic/Liberals on my FB page as I live in the liberal hotbed that is Boston. So (and again, might be different if I have more conservative Repubs on my page) I get EXTREMELY irritated with the way many (not ALL but many) liberals behave in response to people that disagree with them. It very often quickly devolves into insults or worse. I also notice that a lot of my bleeding-heart Liberal friends will put up a post asking a politically-related question as if it’s to get people talking, but then quickly disparage anyone who disagrees with the insinuated answer to that question. Do you know what I mean? It’s odd to me because why ask a question in a public forum if your intention is to simply argue your stance, why phrase it as a question even? I always say that I don’t argue to assert how right I am-I argue to get to the truth, even if it conflicts with my previous line of thinking.

        Anyway, it could also be a case of mob mentality-maybe people feel safer to express their opinion in a combative or rude way because they know they’re among similarly-minded folk who will back them up. Maybe it would be the same if I had mostly conservative friends. *shrugs* Either way, I personally find moderates on either side of the spectrum to be most rational and open-minded. Hard-liners can be tough.

        Ugh post was rambling…sorry, I always do that!

      • Brown says:

        Thanks @Okitt. Our situations are probably a little different in regards to our locations. I live in upstate South Carolina which is a really beautiful place despite the unfair backward reputation it gets. Naturally, there are a lot of conservatives around these parts, but I rarely see anything inflammatory on Facebook from them.

        I have to agree though about the posting a question for the sake of argument. Why bother? Just to incite a riot? So obnoxious.

        It really bothers me when it comes to family and close friends. I mean, there was a time before social media when we didn’t have to know what our families’ and friends’ thoughts were on every single topic ever. Especially not on politics and religion and hotbutton issues. I don’t talk politics with people I’m close with because I honestly don’t care to know what they think, and I don’t want them knowing what I think, because it doesn’t matter in the end. I love those people for who they are, and I wouldn’t want an argument over politics to change my mind (or theirs.) I know people who have ended friendships over political disagreements. Crazy.

        But now, with Facebook and Twitter, it’s like you dont have a choice. People are going to tell you what they think regardless of whether you wanted to hear it or not. I don’t care what side of the aisle you’re on, STFU! There’s a reason I’ve never asked you about it, WHY are you making me hear it anyway??

        Sorry for MY rant, I’m a little on edge today. Which probably had a lot to do with why I commented on this story in the first place. Usually I would just pass it by and avoid the thread, but my blood was already boiling before 7:30am due to Facebook and college football.

        Good lord…. college football AND an election this fall?? I’m probably just going to have to delete my account. 🙂

      • Mari says:

        @ Brown- WOW! This is probably the most level headed political discussion I’ve ever read on the internets. I wish more people would follow your cue. I, for one, have seen more aggression and taunts from liberal friends and family than my more conservative ones. But, that’s just my experience. Again, thanks for reminding me that we can, in fact, behave like rational adults. Kudos.

      • bettyrose says:

        @ Brown – to take this out of the political for a moment, I recommend renting some of the movies that the older folks on here grew up on: specifically “Dirty Dancing” and “Fast Times at Ridgemont High.” Both of those are somewhat fluffy mainstream films that portray young women exploring their sexuality and the sometimes complicated decisions that have to be made – with no politicizing of abortion or morality judgements. Even though DD takes place in the 60s, both films came out in the 80s and illustrate that our national mentality regarding female sexuality was *much more enlightened* in that time period (a politically and fiscally conservative decade, but more socially progressive than now).

      • Brown says:


        Thanks. Everyone wins when people just settle down and talk instead of letting anger and pride run the conversation. After all, it’s hard to think and have a logical convo when your blood is boiling and you’re seeing red! 🙂

      • Me Too says:

        See this is why I just don’t get libertarians liking the current Republican party. You say you want less gov’t in our lives. Politicians telling me whether or not I can have an abortion, based on their religious beliefs; politicians telling me I can’t buy the day after pill or that while they think Viagra should be covered by insurance, birth control pills shouldn’t; politicians suggesting rape isn’t real; politicians deciding who should be able to get married…these are all very personal issues and I’d like to know how Libertarians can support a party who care more about my body than taking care of our economy?

      • Brown says:

        @Me Too

        I don’t have much time and this will have to be my last comment of the day since I’ve got plans tonight (gotta prep for college football Saturday, woo hoo!) So I’m going to have to keep it short but I’ll try to break it down for you:

        -The abortion issue is one that has been forced by the left, the right has retaliated. Stating that abortions should be covered with taxpayer funds was the left’s policy. The right retaliating and saying they do not want to use taxpayer funds for abortion is (I feel) a completely rational argument. You can go get an abortion. Right now, if you want. That will not change, its not as though that court decision will be overturned if a Republican wins the presidency.

        -I already addressed bcps in another comment so I’ll direct you to that but again, it’s a matter of how it should be PAID for, not whether you CAN or CAN NOT use them. And I kind of have a problem with the viagra coverage but if ED is a medical disorder, I understand how it would fall under the coverage of most providers.

        -Politicians deciding who should get married… well I personally don’t care. That’s just me, personally. That’s currently being decided by the states, as it should be, and that won’t change either. In fact, it wasn’t too long ago that Obama was against gay-marriage. Selective amnesia, I guess?

        You asked how I can support a party that cares more about my body than the economy. From what I can see, that is absolutely not true. In fact, it seems glaringly obvious that the alternative cares much more about those social/personal issues than the economy. Perhaps you agree with what they are trying to do in terms of those social issues and for you, that outweighs their neglect of economic issues, which is fine. For me, that is not the case.

        Well ladies, it’s been fun and thanks for chatting! Maybe I can get back in on this later but doubtful. See you guys on the next Twilight post or whatever. 🙂

      • flan says:

        About the ‘who is more civil?’ debate.

        I’ve found the rightist sexists far more outrageous online than anyone else. I’ve seen countless of times how they wish death, rape and mutilation on women politely stating their views. Many seem utterly without morals or empathy, except for themselves and their often minor problems (women don’t date them, so all women are #$%^&*).

        HOWEVER, that is (some/many of) the men. The more right-leaning women (like the ones on this site), generally show lots more manners.

        Unfortunately, the majority of the Republican voters are men. Several of whom have shown a willingness to shame women and legislate against them. And a great many of whom have shown no qualms of wishing the most vile things to women in general.

    • I says:

      I always thought that conservatives were the most vocal electorate.

      But honestly, I don’t get the political vibe from this site that you get. The story was about a celebrity who did something newsworthy, and it also contained commentary regarding the organization of the convention – each of which is relevant to this site. I will admit that I have the impression that the author leans toward the left, but only because I do too, and maybe it is wishful thinking on my part.

      While I don’t think you need professional help, I have to admit that it truly does confuse me that you, as a woman and a libertarian, are ok with the potential for major legislation regarding your sexual health and as a consequence, your lifestyle (children, career) choices.

      • Brown says:

        You must be joking about conservatives being the most vocal electorate. Come on, even an unbiased observer can admit that the vast majority of mainstream media leans left, Hollywood is overwhelmingly left (translating into the entertainment realm of cinema and television), the internet as a whole is undoubtedly left-leaning, it’s extremely rare to see conservative principles anywhere these days.

        Yes, the author of this site does lean left as has been stated in multiple posts. Which is fine, it’s not like I am going to stop reading because we disagree politically. I guess I just have hopes whenever I’m trying to enjoy a fun gossip website or look at pictures of cat memes on the internet that I won’t feel belittled by the author and other commenters for my political leanings. Which happens a good bit.

      • Lizzy says:

        What major legislation? Republicans (and libertarians) just don’t agree with government mandated free birth control and abortions. Do what you want with your own body, just don’t demand someone else pay for it. Women (myself included) have been paying for it up until Obamacare, so this is not some scary radical idea out of nowhere.
        A lot of women care more about the economy – out of control government spending, the growing national debt that could lead to Greece-like consequences. There’s nothing crazy about having different priorities.

      • I'mSupposedToBeWorking says:

        The media is always accused of leaning left. I do not find this to be true at all. I believe mainstream media is irresponsible in their coverage, and is not critically examining the campaigns like it should be. Perhaps this is a reaction to all of the bellyaching that they are leaning to the left. Anyway, that’s just my opinion. I’m tired today, and this isn’t a forum for huge debate anyway. I was just wanting to hear Brown’s perspective. It intrigues me.

        Major legislation = personhood ammendment to the Constitution outlawing invitro fertilization, abortions in the case of rape, etc.

        I’d rather pay a slightly higher insurance premium so that birth control pills are covered, than the price we all pay (and not just in dollars) for unwanted children. In addition, bcp’s are often prescribed for valid medical reasons and should be covered as such. Currently, they do not have to be. Birth control is a form of preventative medical care, and we currently pay for that in our insurance plans and I don’t hear much complaining about it. So, this is what I was referring to. I cannot afford birth control pills out of pocket. We only want (and can afford) two kids. I’d like very much to be able to control this aspect of my life.

      • Brown says:

        I appreciate that that is where your priorities are, so it makes sense for you to vote that way. Mine are not there. I do mind paying higher insurance premiums for my birth control. My situation is different than yours and it does not make financial sense in my case. At the risk of sounding insensitive though, bcps are not the only way you can avoid more children. There are alternate means of contraception. Condoms, for one. Very cheap and free many places (even non-govt subsidized locations.)

        As far as “the price we all pay for unwanted children,” that to me is not an issue of lack of accessable birth control. That is an issue of personal responsibility. Condoms are everywhere. You can buy them at gas stations, drug stores, most public restrooms even have a dispenser. The problem is the lack of responsibility on parents (in terms of teen pregnancies, etc) and a matter of discussion as to whether offering more government assistance would deter capable adults from having even MORE children. Where’s the motivation to stop if you can pay for them on the govt dime? But just different viewpoints, I guess.

      • Brown says:

        I also want to point out (just to keep the record straight) that both Romney and Ryan have said that they would not disapprove of abortion in the case of rape.

      • Chris says:

        I’m curious about the people who claim are against birth control being part of health care because procreation is a matter of personal responsibility yet favor a ban on abortion on religious grounds?

        My body, my soul, my consequences. I agree that government gets too involved at times. Particularly when it gets involved in the decision making in regards to my body. I do not comprehend going against the government getting into people’s pockets but being fine with it getting into people’s body (required invasive vaginal ultrasounds anyone?)

        Government mandated religion and government mandated medical procedures don’t sounds very libertarian to me.

        Final comment, I find hilarious (in a sad way) that the people who are against abortion invoke the value of human life. Its funny (in a sad way) because they only care about making sure a baby is born, no matter the consequences, only to completely forget about it once the umbilical cord gets cut and complain about any government help in the continuation of that life.

      • Brown says:


        **”I’m curious about the people who claim are against birth control being part of health care because procreation is a matter of personal responsibility yet favor a ban on abortion on religious grounds?”

        -When did I ever say that I favor a ban on abortion? In fact, where did I say that I favor a ban on anything? ESPECIALLY please point to where I said abortion is bad based on religious grounds? I believe that it is a states rights issue and should be left up to the people of each state to decide that for themselves. I think that federal mandates of any kind are dangerous. Please do not put words into my mouth.

        **”My body, my soul, my consequences. I agree that government gets too involved at times. Particularly when it gets involved in the decision making in regards to my body. I do not comprehend going against the government getting into people’s pockets but being fine with it getting into people’s body (required invasive vaginal ultrasounds anyone?)”

        -I agree. Your body, your soul, your consequences. Which is exactly the point. Your consequences. I do not believe abortions should be federally mandated OR taxpayer subsidized because they are your consequences, not mine or anyone elses. Also I have not heard anything about required vaginal ultrasounds and have yet to have one.

        **”Government mandated religion and government mandated medical procedures don’t sounds very libertarian to me.”

        -What?? Government mandated religion? What are you talking about? Where did I say anything about that? You should be free to practice or not practice whatever and wherever you choose. Which you are. Currently. Right now. Always have been.

        **”Final comment, I find hilarious (in a sad way) that the people who are against abortion invoke the value of human life. Its funny (in a sad way) because they only care about making sure a baby is born, no matter the consequences, only to completely forget about it once the umbilical cord gets cut and complain about any government help in the continuation of that life.”

        -Wow. I don’t really know what to say about that. I’m assuming you’re feelings of funny but sad are applying to me since you are replying to my comment, so once again I will tell you that I am actually pro-choice. You should stop fighting with those on the same team as yourself. If you are trying to imply that conservatives are mean because they don’t believe in government assistance, that is not accurate. Most conservatives (and libertarians, thanks) belive that welfare and government assistance as a means of overcoming hard times. A safety net. It should be used as a plan B when plan A fails. There is a difference between that and using it as a lifestyle.

      • Bobbie says:

        I am an independent who voted for Obama-but come on, it seems very obvious that the media (except the statedly conservative fox) is always compaigning for Obama. And I agree with you Brown, this site is no exception. Love the site but hate the political commentary. Yes, there are some idiots on the rights (and many secret agendas) but the loudest, most shrill group is from the left.

    • Nymeria says:

      “I wish people would wake up and realize it’s not ‘women’s rights, abortion and welfare vs. rich people, wars and religion.'”

      I interpreted this to mean that the political arena shouldn’t be a dichotomy of X versus Y, even though that is how it currently is. Our two party system doesn’t leave much room for shades of grey. For moderates of either party, as well as Libertarians, it is entirely possible to feel strongly in favour of abortion rights and gun rights, and as such many commenters on the Internet sound not only extreme, but intolerant.

      I don’t support either Obama or Romney. I think they’re both deep in the pockets of corporations and neither candidate is particularly clever at grasping the causes and effects of the financial problems our country faces. Both parties are corrupt and stink to high heaven.

      I’m galled by the interesting situation regarding the Ron Paul delegates whose buses “got lost” on the way to the convention centre. It’s my understanding that while their buses were off being lost, some underhanded voting occurred to effectively knock Ron Paul off the ballot. I’m not making this up. Here:

      • Brown says:

        Thanks, @Nymeria. You interpreted correctly. I was trying to make the point that it shouldn’t be a battle of those issues, black vs. white.

        I’m a single white female, middle class, young, with a job. I recycle, have a rescue dog, believe in evolution (have a degree in Biology in fact), and am pro-choice. I do not think being gay is a sin or a choice, think gay marriage is an issue for the states to decide, and do not give a shit what anyone’s skin color is. I don’t go to church and I am on birth control for pre-marital sex (gasp.) I believe every American has a right to bear arms, I think kids should say the pledge of Allegiance in school, and I think every single person is in charge of their own destiny. Things are not always black and white.

        My point is that coming on sites like this… just reading through the comments you can always find someone accusing non-libs of bigotry, racism, sexism, etc. And surely there are those, just like there are nutjobs on the left. But it could be as simple as just realizing that some of us have different priorities when it comes to our vote. And it is all really just a decision between bad vs. worse.

        Last thing I wanted to say: the stark contrast between the candidates this year is so great, that arguing will not change anyone’s minds. Those who have decided already will not be swayed, because there is just too many differences in overall vision for people to be arguing over the little things. All I can say is that I hope everyone that CAN vote, does. For whoever that may be.

    • Sloane Wyatt says:

      @Brown, you sound like a moderate republican, being pro choice and all, but when did “moderate” seemingly become a dirty word in the GOP? Their PLATFORM is far right, even a bit fascist, and seems to me very hypocritical in stating their support of Big Government Bedroom Police. I just cannot get behind that.

      Candidate Romney is NOT the businessman who can turn our county around; he is a robber baron who’s private equity company extracted millions upon million from the blood, sweat, and tears of average Americans. Check out, and then tell me why you think this guy gives a crap about you and me. HOW Candidate Romney made his money should be the real story in my opinion. It is a vote between the lesser of two evils.

    • ZenB!tch says:

      Why does your boy Ryan keep trying to be cool by usurping my music? Which is 20 years old so it’s kind of not cool. I mean seriously, he likes Rage Against the Machine? AC/DC is a little before my time but it’s basically all dirty. I would love to see a video of Ryan rocking out to “Whole Lotta Rosie” I’m waiting for the revelation that he is a fan of NIN just so I can picture those horrid khakis singing along to “Closer” “I want to F*CK YOU like an Animal… you bring me closer to God.” Who says there is no religion in rock music.

      Why not embrace his boring conservativeness? I don’t get it. Other than him thinking “rape is a form of conception”, there is nothing wrong with being boring or conservative. He wasn’t cool in the 90s when he was young. Why fake it now. He was the president of the Young Republicans when his peers were Rocking the Vote for Bill Clinton. Mitt seems cooler than Ryan to me – which is scary.

      Still I’m not voting for cool. I want a real job again. Something I lost in 2010 and haven’t found since. Then again it took a friend of mine 3 years to find one. I’m just impatient. I have no clue who to vote for. We are screwed either way.

  9. babythastarsshinebrite says:

    Very hateful and hate-fueled speech. Haters love their haterade tho.

  10. launicaangelina says:

    Yikes! I got second-hand embarrassment from that and couldn’t even finish it. I like Clint, even if I don’t care for his political views, but first Mrs. Eastwood and Company and now this speech? Senility sucks.

  11. Esmom says:

    Lol at “a failure of properly using Clint.” His moment was surreal.

    I laughed at the tweet but am also kinda bummed that they even acknowledged it. I hate stooping to the GOP’s level of scorn.

  12. Susie Q says:

    He should have listened to the chair and shut up…I was sad and embarrassed for him.

  13. menlisa says:

    I love Obama’s tweet!!

  14. logan says:

    Clint is Clint and he didn’t hide it.

  15. Bobby the K says:

    `Despite Mr. Eastwood’s Republican affiliation, many of his views differ with the party. Though he has described himself as a fiscal conservative, he backs gay marriage, favours gun control and abortion rights and supports environmental causes.` – G&M

    Tea baggers, right to lifers etc. can`t be happy about his appearance. They should have got Tim Tebow or someone. For Clint, should have been pre-recorded, he`s awkward on talk shows as well.

    Now he is being mocked even ridiculed all over the `net, stories of him and Sandra Locke are coming out.

    For a talented guy with privacy and dignity, this has to be uncomfortable.

  16. Mia 4S says:

    Dear Saturday Night Live,

    You’re welcome.

    Love, Clint Eastwood

    • Jenny says:

      He just handed John Stewart enough material to last until the next election. What were they thinking? You want your candidate to be the story, not some crazy actor. Instead, it really made the Democrats look sane in comparison–the DNC showed humor and a bitch slap at the same time.

      • Chatcat says:

        The comedians are going to use anything of the Republican as material regardless of who, what, where and how. I’m 49 and that has gone on unhindered since Johnny Carson’s era, though Johnny did give it to both parties even though he was a liberal Democrat. Today’s comedians aren’t as balanced on attack as Johnny was, but then again none of them are as great at their craft as Johnny was either. *Shoulder shrug*

        Now if it were me as the comedian, I’d use both sides … Eastwood’s was as original and unexpected as Obama’s tweet was equally well delivered on rebuttal … creating a draw of snarkism for my audience.

      • Marie Antoinette Jr. says:

        @chatcat, I don’t know…I’ve been watching Letterman a lot lately and he seems to be more and more an equal opportunity lampoon-er.

      • ZenB!tch says:

        @Chatcat Could it be that Obama is just not funny? I remember Clinton and Carter getting a lot of nasty jokes hurled at them and I’m only 42. Your memory of Carter should be better than mine.

        Leno has had some pretty anti-Obama one-liners lately too.

    • lucy2 says:

      That’s pretty funny!
      Did Jason Sudekis leave SNL? He was their Biden and Romney. They need to get the guy who plays Gabe on the Office to be Paul Ryan.

    • Jen says:

      Mia 4S – best post in a long time! 🙂

  17. GossipyinTexas says:

    Rich, white, male, out of touch with reality. I thought he was a perfect fit for the RNC!

    • Lizzy says:

      Rich, white men like Nikki Haley, Susana Martinez, Marco Rubio, Condi Rice, Mia Love, Ted Cruz…yeah, I totally see your point.

      • TheOriginalKitten says:

        An FB “friend” wrote this:

        This is my favorite take on Clint Eastwood from Jamelle Bouie: “This is a perfect representation of the campaign: an old white man arguing with an imaginary Barack Obama.”

      • GossipyinTexas says:

        Obviously 100% of the GOP doesn’t fit that description. But read the platform – clearly old rich white dudes are who they aim to serve.

      • nina says:

        have you ever heard of the term “window dressing” my dear?

      • Lizzy says:

        You’re referring to duly elected Governors and Congressmen as “window-dressing”. I bet the people who voted for them don’t see them as tokens.
        Are you really referring to the first female National Security Adviser and fist female African-American Sec. of State as window dressing? Wow.

      • Issa says:

        What few minorities they have in power, they make sure to display them as often as possible. If you’re a minority in the Republican party and have a governing position, you’re definitely going onstage.

      • frankly says:

        See, you shouldn’t say they are all rich white men when it’s so easy to name every single one of them who isn’t white or a man. But they’re all rich, so that’s cool.

      • ZenB!tch says:

        I’m curious as to how multi-culti the DNC will be?

        This is the first time I’ve disliked both sides equally so I am fascinated.

      • Lizzy says:

        Nice Catch-22. If there’s a white man on stage it confirms your characterization of the GOP, and if there are women and/or people of color on the stage it just shows that the GOP is the super-secret party of white men “displaying” some tokens.
        I saw people who have successfully governed and/or represented their district or state who did a great job of articulating the policies and values of their chosen party. People like Marco Rubio, on the short list for VP, are the future of the party (because of his ideas, not his heritage). It’s not the GOP who is dismissing them, it’s the commenters who only see them as tokens.

      • Tiffany says:

        Original Kitten, that is the best summary I have ever read!

        It is true that the GOP is fighting an imagined version of Obama. He has been completely centrist in his policies, but you wouldn’t know that from listening to the GOP. Health care, for example, being called “socialized” or a “gov’t takeover”. Health insurnace is STILL provided by private insurance companies. This was simply health insurance reform so that people wouldn’t be left out in the cold from corporate hijinks after they get sick. It was a GOP idea that originated at the freaking Heritage Foundation. For Obama to be painted as even a “liberal” isn’t factual…he is a moderate democrat.

  18. Chatcat says:

    Eastwood’s appearance and speaking metaphorically to an empty chair is actually brilliant because it has generated many headlines and set off many conversations getting more attention then if he’d not used his acting craft and just gave a prepared speech. I love creative marketing and strategy. He’s 82 y/o, he isn’t running for office, he could care less what any of us really think of him personally, but you know what, you can’t say his name today without mentioning the GOP, the convention, Romeny etc.

    Since there is only a very small number of voters who haven’t made up their mind whether to go Dem or Rep, it will still be interesting to watch the Dem convention after having watched the Rep convention to see the approach and content delivered from the Obama camp.

    • Aud says:

      Yep, as brilliant was Hubert Farnsworth in Futurama…except Hubert is way more entertaining and intelligent.
      If he didn’t care what anyone thought or would think, then why take centre stage?
      Um…he’s an actor. Actors have so many tickets on themselves.

      • TheOriginalKitten says:

        I still love Clint-he’s a legend and even if I don’t 100% agree with his politics, he’s a really smart and talented guy. Respect for him always.

    • Jenny says:

      Correct, he is the main topic. The problem for the RNC is that Romney and his speech are not. The RNC put out a press release explaining the “humor” in the speech. If you have to put out a press release, then the speech is a serious mis-fire and a failure.

      You want your candidate or at least his policies to be front and center and this speech did not do that. It is becoming an internet parody which is, I am sure, not what the RNC wanted.

      • Reece says:

        What Jenny said.

      • frankly says:

        Yes, I’m thinking “Romney, Eastwood, RNC – what a horribly embarassing misstep.” Then I’m rewriting “Gran Turino” and at the end Clint lives and has his neighbors deported for stealin’ our jerbs.

  19. valleymiss says:

    Ok, LOVING Obama’s tweet (or tweeted by his team, whatever). Oh SNAP!

  20. Mac says:

    Obama with the tweet burn. YEE-OUCH!!!.

  21. bob says:

    Politics are empty and meaningless. None of them really mentions the true suffering going on in the world it’s truly scary, it’s my town tommorow. More security makes us less secure,good will to your fellow man might be better. It seems all the republicans want is more money for the wealthy in all of this. How can a decent person stand up for that. Maybe Clints true feelings didn’t get to show.

  22. johnnybadboytapia says:

    i like clint to, and i watched his speech and my first thought was that clint lost it. I really felt bad for him and i knew the media would have ball with this…

  23. Janet says:

    If he was having a debate with an empty chair, the chair won.

    Poor Clint. That was excruciating.

  24. Aud says:

    Did Clint really need to give that stupid speech?

  25. Leaf says:

    While I don’t agree at all with his political views, I absolutely adore him as a director and actor. He will always be The Man With No Name to me.

  26. serena says:

    Leave Clint alone, so what if he’s a bit senile? Remember how old is he?
    Or maybe he was joking and nobody got it..I don’t know, but the likes of Olivia Munn and Adam Levine have NO RIGHT whatsoever to even spell his name.

    He’s a legend (gosh I love his voice) and he can even talk to blank walls for what I think.

  27. lizzi says:

    all I’m going to say is OMFG at that dress in the last picture. What the hell? So fug!!!

    • Len says:

      and look at their bodylanguage. I’m guessing there is not much going on in the bedroom.

      • Sarah says:

        There was a blind item a while ago about a reality couple where the wife was refusing to have sex with the more famous husband until he got her a reality show. It said even after she got the show, she still wouldn’t put out.

        Everyone pretty much guessed it was Clint and that Eastwood and Company show because the only other people it could be was Kevin Jonas and his wife and we all know he wouldn’t be begging his wife for sex.

  28. Dawn says:

    I read that Honey boo or something like that had more viewers than the Republican convention. And for that I am embarrassed for all of us. However I turn people off who constantly yell about what the other guy did or didn’t do, tell me exactly what you plan to do and I’ll listen, but bitching about the other guy is a turn off. Plus I think every speech made during any election should have a bullshit detector and the candidate should be called out on half-truths and lies. Simple as that.

    • lower-case deb says:

      Politifact has a good tracking of all the lies, half-lies, half-truths, and truths spewing forth from those involved.

      They managed to write it in a sort-of readable way too.

      • garvels says:

        Politifact is a leftist fact checking source…I read its analysis of Ryan’s speech and it is an absolute joke that people refer to them as a fact checking source. I read a good article that stated that in today’s media market you need fact checkers to check the fact checkers.

      • Esmom says:

        @Garvels, it’s easy to blame the fact checkers when the facts don’t align with your beliefs.

        Welcome to today’s post-truth age…when politicians like Paul Ryan willingly tell lies because by the time they’re debunked the lies are already out there having been swallowed by the base they are trying to mobilize.

      • garvels says:


        You can not rely on one fact checking organization.Fact checkers are human beings with opinions. People need to look at conservative fact checkers and compare them with liberal fact checking organizations. The truth will float to the top. Politifact is a left leaning fact checker.

        Attached is an analysis refuting fact checkers who accused Paul Ryan of lying.

        By the way, where is all of the left’s outrage for all of the lies coming from the Obama campaign,insinuating that Romney was responsible for a woman’s death from cancer,that Romney was a potential felon,liar and tax cheat.

      • Marie Antoinette Jr. says:

        Garvels, “facts” are the exact opposite of opinions. Yes, “fact checker” may be a job title held by a human; but if it’s his opinion, by definition it isn’t a fact.
        Even Fox News debunked Ryan’s speech. And that’s a FACT! 😉

      • ZenB!tch says:

        @garvels I thought Ryan’s speech was total BS, all style and no substance. As I said above, he reminded me a lot of Obama.

        However, I did go on that site because one of my leftie-loopy friends kept posting it and it felt biased to me on the Romney speech.

        For the record I have lefty-loopy friends and right wing-nut friends and everything in between. My Facebook feed is a riot.

  29. Rubenesque says:

    If I was Romney I would be extremely annoyed. The first day after the convention and all every one is talking about is Clint Eastwood. A very unwise choice for final night speaker that did not appeal to swing voters and younger people. Trust me, the Republicans already have the majority of the “Viagra vote” locked down. After the Ron Paul delegate drama you would think they would have carefully vetted speeches. I’m not sure Romney will be getting the “bump” in the polls most candidates expect post-convention.

  30. Messenger says:

    Clint is the counter to Clooney in the gop’s mind (I use the term loosely) … I’m with Mrs. Obama in that I do not watch the conventions, speeches etc. of the other party. gleaning from those who endured them however, there was a lack of cohesiveness among the speakers, a lack of substance and grasp of our country’s most pressing issues, and the coup de grace: Christie’s self-promotional yack fest, all leading imo to the conclusion that there will be no change of command come November. Oh and my favorite tweet so far:
    Chris Rock @chrisrockoz
    Clint Eastwood on the phone with Obama now: “It all went according to plan, sir.” #RNC #GOP2012
    who said liberal was a bad word?

  31. TG says:

    @debbi – I do know a lot about the cult and it is a cult, and yes all religions are cults. And why do people throw in Christianity and Judiasm whenever they don’t have a foot to stand on? Did you read up on Joseph Smith? Do you know how he came up with this “religion”? It is laughable at best. I do know people who are members of this “church” and have seen first hand how they send people after you if you don’t show up for church and everyone gives 10% of their income to the church. I stand by my word. I also noticed on the CNN special on Romney how he escaped to France to avoid the war yet was very vocal at Stanford about being pro-war. I have no problem with people not wanting to go to war and running off to Canada because you shouldn’t have to fight a battle you don’t believe in, but to speak publically about being pro-war and to speak out against the anti-war people and then run off to France is hypocritical and after the accident that took the life of one of the wive’s of his mission he talked about the numbers and the goal of how many people they would convert. I would think that if you were on a mission to help people and to “save” them so to speak it wouldn’t be about numbers and conversions it would be about compassion. Sounds more like a pyramid scheme to me. My theory is the reason cult members have that odd look in their eyes and face is they have wilfully shut down the area of their brain that houses their common sense.

    • nina says:

      the term “cult” is a dated term at this point, and basically describes any early movement that relies on zealous members to get the ball rolling for a more established movement. the roots of mormonism seems wacky to us today, but many of JS’s claims simply reflect a man of his time, place, and social status when American religion was at a very mystical phase. The modern version of JS’s religion is quite different, and more mainstream at this point. I find a lot of their claims out there and hard to accept, but most mormons I know are pretty normal people with just some eccentric beliefs. I’m not a fan of Romney, but my concerns about him have nothing to do with his religious beliefs.

      • Marie Antoinette Jr. says:

        “Cult” is only a “dated” word to the members of a cult.
        Mormonism has some pretty clear markers to indicate it’s cult status. Ever hear of “magic underwear”?

      • ZenB!tch says:

        I don’t know much about Mormonism other than they have a GIANT temple in West LA with a golden angel on top holding a trumpet. I also know they wear funny undies and believe that God lives on the Planet Kolob but since they aren’t chasing me down the street trying to recruit me like the $ci cult is, they don’t really bug me.

        If he hadn’t picked Ryan for VP, I would say give him a chance – we’ve had a whatever religion Obama is (none?) for 4 years and he sucked. We had a Methodist for 8 years and he sucked so why not a Mormon but Ryan is a no to me. Even the Catholic Bishops wrote him a nasty letter. When the Catholics think you are too far right, that’s a problem.

        I quit Catholicism because I thought they were too far right but at least my local parish doesn’t hate poor people. They just want more butts in the seats.

      • Sassy says:

        The angel atop the LDS temples is the “Angel Maroni”. This is the angel who told Joseph Smith where to find the golden tablets that held the tenets of the Mormon faith. Read up on Mormonism, folks. It is a cult. is a Mormon company. This is tied into their desire to baptize dead people in the Mormon church. Even Jewish people. The records are astounding and helpful for genealogy research. A very, very strange religion, but the people seem real nice, don’t they?

      • ZenB!tch says:

        Oh – I forgot about and baptizing dead people. Can you baptize a dead person?

        I can’t imagine them MAKING my great-grandfather leave Catholic heaven for Kolob. He was a feisty one. A classic patriarch so if his soul won’t go – none of my ancestors will and neither will I. I like my regular everyday Jockey hipsters and my for special occasion lace undies.

        I’m still trying to figure out Ryan. Even the most misogynist Catholic is trained to help the less fortunate.

        OMG! That reminds me, I was driving in North Hollywood (a less affluent suburbs) and the $ci peeps are passing out free food twice a week. I know the economy sucks – I’m living on it (barely) but I hope they don’t convert any poor people.

  32. Tanya says:

    the deficit is beyond unbelievable…Obama may seem ‘cool’…but I want someone who will lead and do the job. I do not care WHO is in office. If i look back at the lat 4 years and see such horrible results…knowing the deficit will cripple the country, I would vote for ANYONE else, cool or not, there isn’t a choice… isn’t about what you say, it’s about what you do…and it’s true, a strong businessman KNOWS more about finances and this country is now bankrupt. Romney if the lesser of two evils….this election is crucial or the U.S. is finished. It is beyond conmprehension to me that people would still elect more debt…and more devastation.

    • kpist says:


    • lucy2 says:

      I agree that the deficit is a very important issue, but on a lot of the reading I’ve done about it lately, it seems the major factors contributing to the rise in the past few years were the 2 very long and expensive wars, major programs like TARP and the stimulus, Bush tax cuts which have been extended, and the recession, which began in 2007, pushing more and more people onto government assistance programs over the past 5 years. A perfect storm of deficit raising components.
      I think the deficit needs serious work, but I don’t think it’s as simple as Obama caused it all and Romney will fix it all. I don’t know if anyone can fix it all, because I would guess the best solutions lie somewhere in the middle, and neither party is willing to work together to make it happen. Just look at how useless Congress is.

      • Esmom says:

        “I think the deficit needs serious work, but I don’t think it’s as simple as Obama caused it all and Romney will fix it all. I don’t know if anyone can fix it all, because I would guess the best solutions lie somewhere in the middle, and neither party is willing to work together to make it happen.”


      • Kathryn Word says:

        Ok…I’m sorry if this sounds be-littling but I am in shock and awe that Americans think the President is solely responsible for ANYTHING. He is our most visible leader and yes, I kinda like the cool factor, he is our first impression…the other powers of government well, old rich white and master manipulators

      • Tiffany says:

        I agree that the deficit is a more complex issue than many realize. There were programs in place when Obama took office that were unfunded: 2 wars, Medicare Part D, Bush tax cuts, etc. These are the biggest contributors to the deficit, along with lack of revenue because of unemployment/income taxes.

        I take issue with this comment, though “neither party is willing to work together to make it happen.”

        The GOP rejected the Democrat’s plans for 3:1 and 4:1 spending cuts to tax increases. That is a pretty pragmatic approach. In the GOP primary debates, every single candidate said they would reject even a 10:1 spending cuts-to-tax increase approach. That is completely RADICAL! That is not working towards solutions to our problems. Since the GOP started all of these BIG spending programs, why won’t they pay for them! The bill for 10+ years in 2 wars was going to come along eventually!

      • Babette says:

        Lucy2 and esmom, ITA…totally brilliant, and exactly my thoughts. Our political leaders, with the president’s guidance, are the ones who MUST work together to promote change. The president by him or herself, cannot change a thing.

    • Laura says:


      • Tanya says:

        I think most people would agree, OF COURSE Obama did not create it all…,BUT, think about it…he put more debt in ONE term then ALL OTHER presidents combined since George Washington. Something is seriously wrong with that. He’s a cool guy, sure, but he is NOT a sound leader and just is NOT qualified where it counts. Someone else needs a chance or we just get more of the same. Romney is a sound businessman, period. At least we have a better chance. What is the definition of insanity they say? ..doing the same thing and expecting different results… Old style politics have never worked…and it’s too bad our children’s futures have been crippled with debt due to a failure of an experiment these past 4 years. as I said, if he gets re-elected again, it’s over and things will not be the same again for a long, long time.

      • Bugsrunny says:

        We are living in the midst of a global economic freefall precipitated by market practices/deregulation that occurred under Clinton and Bush. And while we have struggled mightily, countries in Europe have utterly floundered. Our economy is growing–slower than people would like but growing just the same. THIS while the majority party in Congress stated–on the record–that their primary goal was to see Obama fail (and, therefore, the country fail).

      • Seagulls says:

        @Tanya: source it or it didn’t happen.

        Since Washington, really? As a commenter said on another site I read: every road, every bridge, every charitable dollar home or abroad, every war – including the two that George W Bush started – that’s all been outspent in four years? You’re believing nonesense.

      • Tiffany says:

        Tanya said, “he put more debt in ONE term then ALL OTHER presidents combined since George Washington”

        That is not factual. “He” didn’t put more into the debt…there were programs that were started before he even came into office that continue to add to our deficit in vast amounts. The policies that are the biggest contributors to the deficit are:
        *Iraq War (started under Bush, unfunded),
        *Afghanistan War (started under Bush, unfunded),
        *Medicare Part D (started under Bush, unfunded)and
        *Bush Tax Cuts (started under Bush, not paid for with spending cuts)

        It is misleading to imply that Obama caused the debt from all of these billion dollar programs (wars are TRILLION dollar programs if you include care for returning veterans for years to come).

        There is only 1, maybe 2, programs started by Obama that contribute to the deficit. #1-Stimulus. #2-Bush tax cut continuation…but the continued tax cuts for the wealthy were forced upon him by congressional GOP members.

    • Bugsrunny says:

      When you look back on the last four years, you’re seeing the result of the previous 8. Bush inherited a surplus and squandered it and more by authorizing not one but two unpaid-for wars, cutting taxes and signing into law the prescription drug benefit that was also unpaid-for. Obama inherited the mess Bush created, and Romney is proposing a return to Bush’s supply-side economic policies. You should absolutely care who is in office–it makes a difference.

      • storyteller says:

        THIS. A thousand times over. People seem to have forgotten just how much damage George W. Bush did during his time in office. Obama in four years, cannot undo all that and nor can everything be made alright in the same time. People who refuse to see this are simply deluding themselves.

    • nina says:

      you realize that we were in the black when Bush got in, and it was the Bush years that brought on the ridiculous deficit that we have today right? Obama has not been an effective leader so far, but blaming him for the deficit is comical. Bush has had a devastating effect on our country, and we are still feeling the effects of it four years after he left.

      • Rubenesque says:

        Which is one reason 41, 43 & Cheney were all noticeably absent from the convention.

      • Dana says:

        Exactly. People rail about the deficit um there was a ten trillion dollar deficit before Obama stepped into office. Electing a president who has the same platform as the one that got us into this mess in the first place will hardly solve anything. Also electing a businessman as president has often been disastrous for the U.S. i.e. Bush and Hoover so to quote Shania Twain “that don’t impress me much”. Obama is certainly not perfect but he’s a lot better than the alternative who has delivered nothing solid (btw independent agencies like the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center have looked at his budget plans and concluded it’s simply not viable without raising taxes on the middle class). For me, it’s not enough to simply be anti-Obama. You need to have sound and sustainable policies yourself and watching the RNC convention I didn’t see that.

      • ZenB!tch says:

        I blame him for continuing a lot of Bush’s policies – including spending. He also extended the Patriot Act and didn’t he say he was going to repeal the Bush tax cuts because they hurt the budget? Now he calls them a tax cut on the middle class. Well it was when Bush did it and it was a strain on the budget. I’m not advocating raising taxes – although at this point I would be happy to have an income that they could tax. However, I have a problem with Obama taking credit for them.

        Oh and his payroll tax cut in 2009 – it was $7 on one pay check because then I got a raise (before all hell broke loose where I worked) and it went away and then some.

      • Dana says:

        The Romney/Ryan budget (or the generalities they give claim they won’t make any cuts to defense, and they’ll lower everyone’ s taxes(including those on businesses) while decreasing the deficit. Gee I wonder why no one else has thought of this miraculous cure. Well to be blunt because it’s impossible. Anybody with sense to read between the lines knows that you can’t possible force domestic agencies to take 16 trillion in cuts unless you’re planning on following the Rick Perry school of thought that wants to abolish stuff like the EPA, Department of Energy, Education, etc. and even then it won’t be enough (look at the percentage that domestic agencies account for in the federal budget). You can’t have a serious conversation about reducing the deficit unless you put the military on the table point blank and Romney has said he won’t. At least Obama is honest about wanting to raise taxes on millionaires to offset cuts elsewhere. Romney and Ryan have said no such thing instead they say a lot of things that sound good but will lead to an an unsustainable budget and the media lets them get away with it. His five point plan last night was eerily reminiscent of the Bush years so thanks but no thanks. As bad as things are right now, it’s a lot better than when we were hemorrhaging jobs four years ago every month. Finally in my opinion Clint Eastwood was a liability. Why? Because the day after the convention people aren’t talking about Romney but him. That speaks volumes.

    • Janet says:

      Have you conveniently forgotten that Clinton left Bush with a $200 billion SURPLUS and Bush turned that into a trillion-dollar DEFICIT chasing imaginary WMDs?

      • ZenB!tch says:

        I miss Clinton. I almost cry when I think of Clinton compare him to the inept person we have in office today who is blackening the name of “Democrat”.

        My mom has been a Democrat for 50 years. She voted for Kennedy when in her first election. She stuck by the Democrats through thick and thin. This year she will probably vote for Romney. I can’t quite bring myself to do it because of Ryan but I am close and that makes me really sad.

    • ZenB!tch says:

      @Tanya are you voting for Romney? I’m thankful I don’t have to. I’m in Cali so it won’t make a difference and I DO hate Ryan. The moderates in this state may skip this election but the Lefties are all excited and can’t understand why anyone doesn’t love Obama. Even though, based on several stories in the lefty press (Mother Jones, Rolling Stone) Obama threw the Lefties under a bus too.

      Is there anyone he HASN’T thrown under the bus. I really don’t understand how anyone can trust this guy.

  33. lucy2 says:

    I’m a big fan of Clint’s film work, and I actually kind of like that they had someone speak who isn’t in lock step with the party on every single issues. However, on the final night of a convention, to let someone just speak with no script? Terrible idea.

    I haven’t watched the speech, but OMG at the internet chatter on it, sounds truly embarrassing.
    I’m doing my best to avoid the 2 conventions – it’s pure campaigning and little substance or fact from both sides. I’m much more interested in the debates, and then reading the fact checks of the speeches and stuff.

    I do have to applaud whoever runs Obama’s twitter, that was sharp. Nicely done.

  34. garvels says:

    Actually I thought this convention was very well organized and the speakers were quite impressive. I watched it via live feed. I was reading that the networks only covered one hour/night and did not cover the majority of the convention so I can understand how one would reach your conclusion when 95% of the liberal news pundits in the Obama media were trashing it, without actually broadcasting the convention.Talk about looks like today’s media gets it’s programming agenda from PRAVDA.

    Bottom line if you are into a big intrusive government which runs your life and takes your money;like it does for dear sweet uninspiring boring Julia..whose ultimate dream is a vegetable garden;and that you should be content with your assigned station in life, then you will vote for the Democrats.

    If you believe in a smaller Federal government that allows the individual to make their own choices and assigns no limits to your success, then you will vote for the Republicans.

    I personally am more of a Ron Paul Libertarian, but I will vote for Romney because I don’t like big government clusterF++ks.

    Love Eastwood…don’t care for his wive’s reality show and I think the skit was initially confusing because you couldn’t see the empty chair which symbolizes empty suit with empty promises. I however agreed with Clint’s sentiment regarding President Obama…”he needs to go”.

    • Laura says:

      I’m more of a RP person too, might write him in if I don’t vote for Romney. Still undecided.

      • garvels says:

        I understand your point but I strongly feel that our country can not afford 4 more years of Obama,so I will vote for Romney especially since Rand Paul endorsed him.

        I am from Minnesota and I actually attended the GOP convention where we voted for 36 Ron Paul delegates. What was really cool, was that the Ron Paul endorsed Senate candidate won the GOP nomination to run against Senator Klobuchar and then 3 other Ron Paul candidates won the state GOP nomination.Ron Paul actually spoke at our convention.

        I think the Ron Paul Libertarian wing is adding positive energy to the Republican party. I think Romney will work with the Libertarian wing as opposed to squashing their input like John Boehner does. Personally I think John Boehner and Mitch McConnell need to step down from their leadership roles..they have too much baggage. We need younger leaders who will work to get things done.

    • Esmom says:

      “Talk about looks like today’s media gets it’s (sic) programming agenda from PRAVDA.”

      Please. One statement like that and you’ve undermined everything else you are trying to say.

      • garvels says:

        I was not exaggerating. I am a political junkie. These conventions are like my super bowls. I made it a point to watch the media commentary after the televised speeches on NBC,CBS,ABC,CNN and it was unbelievably slanted… was a joke.I am really curious to see their analysis of the DNC convention next week.

      • Esmom says:

        And Fox’s coverage isn’t slanted?

      • garvels says:

        Fox News coverage leans more right,but they do present both sides of the argument. Hilary Clinton even said she received more fair coverage on FOX than on the other networks when she ran for the presidency. Generally I flip between FOX and CNN… news is such a waste of time.

      • Chatcat says:

        I am an information junkie…political, world, celeb – current events or history.

        I watched the Rep convention and I will watch the Dem convention because I owe it to myself to hear both sides since it effects my present and future.

        As far as Fox News, yes they are a Republican/conservative station. However, they are the only such network. The Democratic/liberal networks are NBC, CBS, ABC, CNN and all the little spin-off news/business channels. So you singled out Fox but the irony is you singled out a station that is really singular.

        I will watch CNN and Fox for news and important issues and events because if you watch any of the others you either don’t get the real story at all, or it’s so truncated it winds up being a totally inaccurate account of the event.

    • Kelly says:

      “that you should be content with your assigned station in life, then you will vote for the Democrats.”

      You hear that, firefighters, police officers, and teachers! You too can be millionaires! USA! USA! USA!

      Because God forbid we should guarantee a decent standard of living for the backbone of American society.

      • garvels says:

        What are you talking about? Many teachers,firefighters and policemen are retiring at age 55 with substantial lifetime pensions with full healthcare benefits…..try getting that in the private sector. The private sector has nothing like the pensions and benefits offered in the public sector. The private sector is hurting big time…hence the OUTRAGE when the president made his infamous remark,”the private sector is doing fine”.

      • garvels says:


        I think staying on our current path is not an option. I look at Romney’s record in MA,where he reduced the deficit by 3 billion and created a billion$ surplus;his record of turning around an Olympics’s that was 400 million in debt and creating a 100 million dollar profit and then his private sector experience where he turned around failing enterprises with an 80% success rate.

        I strongly believe that Romney would make entitlement reform a reality and he would reduce the size of government by removing redundant systems and positions. Obama’s policies have placed more burdens on private sector businesses making it more difficult to turn a profit. The economy has stalled and is on the verge of a second recession and the president has not passed a budget in over 3 years and the government is spending more than it takes in…..this is not a good direction.

      • Tiffany says:

        “Many teachers,firefighters and policemen are retiring at age 55 with substantial lifetime pensions with full healthcare benefits…..try getting that in the private sector.”

        Do people in the private sector run into buring buildings to save people? Do they confront armed and dangerous bank robbers? Do they find and stop gang members from committing crimes? Do they save people’s lives when they are sticken with heart attacks, stroke, etc? NO? Well then there is your answer.

        Police and Firemen SHOULD get paid handsomely for RISKING THEIR LIVES for ours! (I think it is ok for military to be paid well, and think the VA should be better funded to provide health care for returning veterans as well).

    • Bugsrunny says:

      Remember George Bush? He’s a Republican, altho the GOP doesn’t like to admit as much these days. During his eight years in office, the government grew EXPONENTIALLY.

      Generalizations about Republicans and Democrats are easy, but if you want to talk factually, you’re going to have to do your homework.

      • garvels says:

        George Bush fueled the Ron Paul movement with his reckless spending and big government progressive views.

      • Bugsrunny says:

        Bush absolutely inflamed Ron Paul. I loved, during the debates, to hear Paul talking about the reckless war Bush waged in Iraq and how ridiculous it is to talk about cutting spending without talking about the extraordinary cost of that upaid-for war. So I have to ask you, as a Paul supporter, how do you embrace Romney’s remarks about Iran and Russia in his speech last night? Ron Paul himself must have flipped out.

      • garvels says:

        Bugsrunny-I personally was opposed to the IRAQ war and thought Bush lost his marbles when he decided to attack IRAQ. I am generally more isolationist,I do however believe like Rand Paul, Reagan and Romney in the concept of Peace through strength. I think we should develop a powerful military where no one would dare challenge our country or our allies.

        I believe in investing in missile defense shields and in assisting our allies in developing theses system’s as well. This is why it was frustrating to see President Obama cave to Russia’s whims against shields in Poland. Why would Russia insist on no defense shields for Poland? I also did not like Obama’s comment, that was picked up by an open mic, to Russia,”that he would have more flexibility after the election”.

        I personally think right now we have no leverage to make any demands on China and Russia because our country is bankrupt and our military has been weakened. That is why I think our growing debt is our number 1 national security issue.

        We need a leader to come in and get the economy moving again,reduce the size and expense of big government and retool the military.

      • Bugsrunny says:

        Garvels–I think you and I probably agree on a lot, but I think our politics are probably very different…

        I also think anyone who claims to be seriously interested in deficit reduction HAS to tackle defense spending as well as “entitlements” and health care. Ryan’s budget proposal leaves defense spending intact. Between that and Romney’s hard line on Iran and Russia in his speech last night, I have to believe that an R/R presidency would be a return to Bush/Cheney. The deficit wouldn’t seriously be drawn down except on the backs of the poor and disadvantaged.

    • Seagulls says:

      If you believe the “liberal media” lie, you need to try again. All the big outlets are corporate owned. As such, they pretty much report the corporate friendly news – and that ain’t liberal.

      • Dana says:

        They’ve also done studies that have proven that the media is so worried about appearing liberal/biased that they overcompensate and examine left oriented issues and politicians more critically. Yet the calls of liberal media bias still persist. Gee, I wonder who gains the most from perpetuating this notion…

      • flan says:


        This while a certain other news channel has no qualms about lying, even in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

      • garvels says:

        Actually the corporate view is a global government and not American exceptionalism and dominance.So it makes sense that they would slant the news towards an Obama victory.

        The recession in the US was officially over in June 2009. Every summer after that has been declared a summer of recovery by the Obama administration. I ask where is the recovery? I am middle class. My company was downsized and my department was eliminated. I was unemployed for several months. My annual income has been reduced,gas is almost double what it was when Obama took office. The value of my home has decreased significantly,stocks have been nauseatingly volatile…..and I am suppose to feel good about the recovery and president Obama’s policies……and by the way my health insurance has increased by 30+% due to Obamacare.

        Obama keeps saying tax the rich,tax the rich…if you tax the rich 100% of their income,the federal government would only operate for about 15 days…taxing the rich is not the answer..reducing the size of government and its reach is the answer.

      • Dana says:

        If you think the president has any control over gas prices, then you’ve been lied to (Bush didn’t and Obama certainly doesn’t). Speculation determines the price of gas pure and simple, hence why when there is any news about a refinery going offline due to a hurricane prices skyrocket. The Republicans solution of drill baby drill solves nothing because even if there is more supply OPEC will collude to take more off the market. There are some aspects of the health insurance law I’m not crazy about, but I will say this, at least Obama did something. The Republicans solution was what? Oh that’s right it was set up a market exchange for health insurance before Obama championed that idea and then they became against it. Now I would love to know the Republican solution to healthcare rather than criticizing Obama’s strategy. They want to put a strategy on the table, other than social Darwinism ok but until then I guess it’s easier to attack the guy that actually tried to do something in regards to exorbitant health costs consuming more and more of the federal budget because healthcare was on track to increase exponentially(it was 17 percent ten years ago and by 2020 would be about 25percent of the federal budget) so something needed to be done. Plus I think it’s great that insurance can’t kick people off for preexisting conditions or can’t put limits on coverage so there are some good things about Obamacare (I’m aware that this is blasphemy to some but surveys indicate that there is a lot of support for such provisions when Americans are individually asked about them even if they don’t agree with it all the way on the whole). Plus if you want to talk reducing the government, then it should be reduced across the board. Not merely asking the domestic side to take all the cuts. Finally if you worried about out of control federal spending I’d read up on the Simpson-Bowles plan which would have reduced the deficit by about 4 trillion dollars which the Republican V.p. nom Paul Ryan was instrumental in helping to kill (no compromising for him). In a nutshell while it may be convenient to blame Obama for everything, this country has had tons of problems before he came into office and he’s had a lot of obstruction while he was in office (look at how much the filibuster was used). This being said Obama has at times been in over his head and lacked leadership while trying to compromise with people who from day 1 said they weren’t interested, however everything that I’ve read about Romney’s plan suggests he would be worst. More deregulation=more American jobs being sent overseas and the ones that stay offering jobs for less and less money (it wasn’t a coincidence that Romney mentioned Apple as his American success in his Republican presidential acceptance speech which despite billions of dollars in corporate profits sees the majority of its employees in the service sector or three-fourths making about $25,000 a year) with more being employed overseas than in the U.S. Yes taxing the rich may not be a complete solution however as I mentioned above still waiting for the Republicans to come up with a viable one. Forcing the domestic side of government to take all the cuts will only add to unemployment, plus it’s not possible to do so and balance the budget with keeping the military off the table, which Romney has said he will do (btw the stock market has stabilized a whole lot more since Obama has been in office than when Bush was) so like I said, for me it’s not enough to merely be anti-Obama. As Bush proved, things could always be worst and Mitt Romney’s policies sound an awful lot like W’s did and picking a vp nominee that signals he isn’t about compromise doesn’t bode well at all.

    • ZenB!tch says:

      @garvels I’m laughing at your political junkie stories. I have no idea how old you are, I’m about the same age as Rubio and *cough* Ryan. Last night I really related to Marco Rubio and not because we are both Hispanic. It was when he said the first convention he remembers watching with his grandfather was the 1980 Convention. That was my family.

      Like I said above, we were Democrats. Every night at dinner as long as I can remember the conversation was about politics – mostly how much Reagan sucked as governor and then as president.

      We watched all the conventions, if the Libertarians had had a convention we would have watched it. I liked the funny hats and the elephants and the donkeys. I didn’t really know who was who and what was going on until 1980 but I watched them.

      I also like watching them on different stations. This year I did CBS, ABC, FNC and CNN for the main events at 7pm – I can’t watch MSNBC – sorry. Sometimes I flip around to compare camera angles.

      Even though I mistrust Obama, I’m excited about the DNC. I want to see the younger Dems because I really enjoyed seeing the young Republicans. I want to believe in “hope and change” but real change. Which we didn’t get from Obama. I keep remembering Clinton and hoping Obama was an aberration.

      I am I guess what people are calling a California Republican. I’m social liberal or maybe even libertarian – I don’t care what anyone does but I am fiscally more conservative and I don’t want big government watching what I do. I’m not fiscally libertarian, that is a little less government than I want. I do believe in the safety net but not having Obama more or less forcing us to use it.

      • Tiffany says:

        ” I want to believe in “hope and change” but real change. Which we didn’t get from Obama. I keep remembering Clinton and hoping Obama was an aberration.”

        Clinton was working with a MUCH different congress, where they still believed that both parties could win if there was a part of the legislation they could tout to their members. They compromised for the greater good. Obama is working with a congress that has exponentially increased the number of filibusters, not even allowing bills to be brought up for debate. They think that 10x the spending cuts isn’t enough for a 1x tax increase. That isn’t logical, and that isn’t working for the greater good. That is selfish obstruction that hurts our country.

      • garvels says:

        Too funny, I am about the same age as you and we always talked current events and politics when I was growing up. I come from a family of teachers,school administrators and iron workers…needless to say the majority of my family and extended family were Democrats. My father was one of the few Republicans at the Thanksgiving table. I distinctly remember the smell of cigars as everyone yelled at each other as they were passing the turkey…ha ha ha ha……I guess you could say we were passionate about our politics.

      • ZenB!tch says:

        @garvels when I say “we” were Democrats I mean the parents. At the bigger family dinners it was just like you described. The Democrats and the Republicans going at it then everyone went off to watch football or the Sound of Music. This is why I don’t take it personally. In the end, as long as someone can defend their point, I respect it and sometimes I even change my mind.

        @Tiffany Obama had a Democratic Congress for 2 years. Clinton balanced the budget and Bush was an idiot and spent it all on a useless war. However, Obama has done nothing to stop this rampant spending and most of what he has done is extend Bush’s policies. If he had balls he would have ended the Bush tax cuts. I’m not saying I’m for that but that would have taken balls.

  35. Sawbuck says:

    Oh the hue and cry of the Left.

    Just a thought for you? If you are wondering about the wisdom of getting Eastwood to speak – just look at the electoral map.

    He did what was required – and it WILL move votes.

    Obama is OUT of that chair come January 20, 2013 and good riddance to bad rubbish.

    • flan says:

      Here we have another one who only comments on this website to defend rightist views. These people only comment on political articles and care not a hoot for this website otherwise.

      By the way some of these write, they seem to be male.

  36. mia girl says:

    This was the GOP’s “special surprise speaker” they had been talking up all week.
    Well, seems like he surprised them alright.

    Maybe they should have gone with the Ronald Reagan hologram after all.

    • Ravensdaughter says:

      Oh, SNAP! The Repugs always fall back on Ronald Reagan when they can. It was so accommodating for him to die during the election campaign of 2004.

  37. babythastarsshinebrite says:

    People who like Romney only because they hate our President, are what’s wrong with America. I don’t trust any Pol or believe that they can fix the problems in this country – As long as every American continues to hate every other American we will go nowhere but down. However, I’m not going to throw away my vote so I will vote for the the party that does the least amount of kicking people when they’re down.

  38. Mandy says:

    I kind of thought the chair bit was funny. Republican or Democrat, I still love some Clint!

  39. Indiegirl says:

    Longtime reader here, first-time poster. Although Celebitchy isn’t the usual forum for political discussion, I have to say that the comments here are far more civil and respectful of opposing views–which is GREAT to see at last. I worked on the Hill, then in media. Obama or Romney can’t do much about the economy: Congress holds the purse strings. And keep in mind that GOP Senate leader Mitch McConnell said, four years ago, that the #1 priority of the GOP was to do what it took to defeat Obama in 2012. As an independent, I am disgusted by this tactic. A major party is willing to hijack the country in order to regain the White House? IMO, this election should give us all pause for thought–because if this is the best the Rs and Ds can do, we are all in trouble.

    • Esmom says:

      Thank you. You’ve perfectly articulated what’s been so frustrating and utterly appalling about these past four years.

      The Republicans shamefully put their own interests ahead of this country’s and Obama gets all the blame.

      Sadly, most people do not seem willing to pause and really think about the damage that’s being done. They seem to need someone else to think for them.

      My blood boils just typing this, which is why I need to step away now. 🙂

      • Chrissy says:

        Sorry, Obama had two years with a straight democratic congress to get his agenda passed and look where we are. Can’t blame all of this on one party in Congress. And there are just as horrendous quotes from Pelosi and Reid. (I personally wish we could vote all of Congress out! Start off with people willing to work with each other.)

      • ZenB!tch says:

        +1 I’m tired of the Congress excuse. Clinton and Reagan got things past hostile Congresses.

        What we need is a leader. Congress will get voted out again and Obama still won’t know what to do.

      • Tiffany says:

        Chrissy, Obama did not have 2 straight years with a democratic congress. You have to remember that Kennedy had brain cancer and was out of the Senate for long periods, even before he died. Also, Joe Liberman campaigned with McCain and voted with the GOP on many issues.

      • JulieM says:

        Chrissy: Repeat after me, here it comes: filibuster. The republicans decided on inauguration night to stop anything and everything Obama tried to do. Obama is the only president who has needed 60 votes in the senate to get anything done. Reagan, the Bushes didn’t need 60 votes. Just Obama. Filibuster abuse.

    • lucy2 says:

      Thanks for the insight!
      That statement always bothered me too. They were elected by their constituents to work for them and the country as a whole, not to try to keep their party in power. It seems way too many people in power forget what their job is actually supposed to be.

    • Tiffany says:

      @ Indiegirl. I like to think that people in general have courtesy and good sense. You cannot let a few bad apples spoil the bunch.

      I am glad that you bought up Congress having the say so over the budget. This is why I keep my mouth shut about the President, Republican or Democrat, and my behind in the booth when it is time to vote for my state reps.

      • ZenB!tch says:

        You’re lucky your vote counts. My Congressman – the (dis)Honorable Howard Berman – D has been in office as long as I have been alive. He has a challenger this year due to redistricting; the (dis)Honorable Brad Sherman – D who has only been in office 20 years.

        My money is on Berman. I vote against him every two years just for fun. He’s a Hawk even though he’s a Democrat. I tend to be a Pacifist unless we are attacked.

    • Jayna says:

      This. Indiegirl is spot on, and it makes me sick.

    • ZenB!tch says:

      @Tiffany – so Joseph Lieberman or any Congressperson or Senator HAS to vote in favor of what his or her party says even if he or she doesn’t agree with it? Gee? I thought our Congresspeople and Senators did what they thought what was best for their district not their parties.

      • Indiegirl says:

        @ZenB!tch (awesome name, btw)–You are absolutely right. Your elected officials are supposed to represent the interests of their constituents. When I was on Capitol Hill (’93-’96), reps routinely bucked their parties to vote the way their districts wanted. But, I also saw members of both parties discussing policy in constructive ways–and these were the folks who went on to balance the budget. However, you don’t need to look past Tom DeLay’s tenure (and, it was DeLay, not Pelosi who ushered this era in) to see how moderate Ds AND Rs were purged (via gerrymandering). We lost a lot of great public servants then, and now we have extremists on both sides serving in Congress, who are more interested in punishing each other than accomplishing anything for us. How are we supposed to create jobs, etc., when our reps act like nasty kids in the sandbox?

    • storyteller says:

      Wonderfully put. Obama may have disappointed some (is it any wonder with the magnitude of expectation?) but the Republicans are not a palatable option for me. No way.

  40. diva says:

    I love Obama. People want to give him a hard time but people need to realize he is STILL cleaning up the mess that the last republican in office left.

  41. Dee Cee says:

    He gets more sense and sane response from a chair? We all own this country.. HA HA Go Clint.

  42. ozperson says:

    hilarious….from an australian perspective

  43. trina says:

    I thought it was hilarious! The only thing better than Clint was Paul Ryan’s speech Wed night.

    It’s Obama’s economy, not Bush’s. The Bush tax cuts are set to expire in January and everyone making more than 11k a year will have to contribute 2.5% of their income to “Obamacare”

  44. Steph says:

    I’m not a Yank but I have to say, I thought Obama’s tweet was bloody brilliant!

  45. Cody says:

    You reach a certain age in life and you get this license to say and do whatever you want and nobody can really stop you, I think Clint earned his license last night. I also think it is interesting, that sometimes you hear an actor complain they aren’t getting roles or are overlooked, because they vote Republican and Hollywood votes Democratic. This has not stopped Clint from being a successful director/actor in Hollywood.

  46. snappyfish says:

    why is is that if the republicans have a celebrity or two at their rallies and conventions it’s ok, but when the democrats do it they’re wallowing in hollywood elitism?

  47. teehee says:

    I think it was a typical ad lib talk. I dont get why people would criticize it too much. Sure it wasnt massively scripted and genius or amazing delivery but what I mean is, its nothign to allude to ‘dementia’ about, that is just terribly rude.

  48. Issa says:

    This is a wake up call for both parties. Stop putting celebs onstage and to represent your parties! Its never good, ever! Didn’t get to see it live but watched it on youtube. Honestly couldn’t finish the video. I was winching the whole time because an American Icon was reduced to a senile old man. The RNC gave him no boundaries, no script and just threw him onstage. It’s the RNC’s fault. My opinion of him hasn’t changed. However, my opinion of the RNC has downgraded from it being a boring convention to SNL material. Not good for Romney.

  49. Turd Fergussen says:

    I’m from Texas and have more of a California Republican viewpoint myself — pro gay marriage & pro choice — but I agree with Repubs on everything else. Obama was elected based on nothing but hype in 2008 and has governed accordingly. He’s a disaster and he’s gotta go…and the chances are very good that he will.

    That said, watching Clint — who I admire and respect as an actor and director — was crazy uncomfortable. He came across as very doddering. He’s really showing his age, and I’d always sort of thought of him as ageless.

    But past this turning into a funny meme, I don’t see it hurting Romney at all.

    • Janet says:

      Clint won’t hurt Romney. Romney will hurt Romney. And Lyin’ Ryan won’t help Romney much.

      What’s interesting is that the usual immediate post-campaign bump is much smaller than normal this year. Could mean a lot of trouble for Romney, especially after the DNC, and forget the debates. Obama is going to steamroller him.

      • Jayna says:

        Romney is too busy trying to be what the far right wants him to be, and they still don’t like him. He’s lost himself. Obama will win. But Hillary, my woman, needs to run next. I want her to be President.

  50. Turd Fergussen says:

    Also? Arrogant as hell for Obama/his handlers to tweet the pic of him in the chair saying it’s taken. So unpresidential.

  51. Janet says:

    What the effity-eff is his wife wearing?!

  52. frankly says:

    There’s only one option for the DNC: Bring on the Freeman.

  53. L says:

    I see little reason to support Romney Ryan over the existing regime. This is nothing more than ’08, two sides of the same coin…

    I figure the Republican option might cause the ship to sink more slowly but for all intents and purposes the course has already been set.

    In fact I’d vote Democrat just to see it sink as quickly as possible TBH.

    I’d do a write-in for RP however…

  54. sashavice says:

    I personally thought it was a funny and excellent speech, even if I don’t agree with everything he says. Esp. the part about politicians being our employees…

    • Becky1 says:

      Yeah, I’m a registered Democrat and I found the speech kind of amusing. He was obviously ab libbing.

      • Really? says:

        Finally a breath of fresh celebitchy air, thank you guys! I see no need to sling mud at Dirty Harry (oops, someone else has that title now) but Clint deserves a little respect. When i read that he was “talking to an empty chair” i thought he was doing so to some random empty seat in the audience. Clearly he thoughtfully constructed the scene and dialogue, and i am in no position to toss rotten tomatoes at a true living legend. I do not support any organized religion or politics. I have become apathetic with both of these institutionalized interventions on the public. But that still doesn’t give me any desire in the slightest to bash Mr.Eastwood!

  55. Shane says:

    Eastwood is pro-choice, pro-gay marriage, consistently anti-war, and has consistently called for heavy government regulation into the protection of the environment. In other words, he’s a Democrat. He just doesn’t realize the Republicans have abandoned him. That speech made me sad because he’s clearly old enough that he just doesn’t realize it anymore.

    • Issa says:

      Don’t think he’s a Democrat as much as he’s an old school Republican. The new Republican party more and more is a shadow of its former self. At one time it was the party for workers, women’s rights (supported abortion) and civil rights. Unfortunately the religious right has corrupted it.

      • J says:

        or rather greed for ‘christian vote’ has corrupted the entire GOP system. 90% of GOP call themselves “Christian” but in reality they are biggest hypocrites in America. The GOP is very pale shadow of its former self and has now to rely on religion hogwash to get vote. pathetic

        Obama is gonna win again. No competition here. Rommey doesnt even comes close.

      • Marie Antoinette Jr. says:

        You can’t be socially liberal and call yourself a republican. Well you can, but you’d be wrong. Clint is an independent. He may register as a republican so he can vote in the primaries; but he’s just another rich old white guy who cannot come to terms with the fact that the Republican party has changed drastically, and for the worse. And since he is 82 years old, he’s entitled to his delusions.

  56. Missy Moo says:

    OK, can we please talk about that green dress? What the hell is it?

  57. blasted1 says:

    Didn’t anyone from the RNC check on Clint and what he had in “mind” for his speech? He’s 82, sure, and maybe that’s why he stumbled and stammered through the most acid-flashback performance I’ve seen anywhere.

  58. Andy says:

    Leave Clint alone.

    He escaped near death from hitching a ride with a loon(who had a raccoon and a trunk full of rabbits). Jeff Bridges also escaped serious injury. Breathing in the fumes from the exhaust pipe may have caused damage to Mr. Eastwood’s brain.

  59. dapperdaph says:

    It was despicable and it was disrespectful to the Office of the President and it should have been repudiated by the Romney/Ryan campaign. Eastwood unscripted speech blew up in the Republicans face on their main night. But they got their chuckle on.

  60. ck says:

    I don’t understand this class warfare and women’s rights. I put myself through school and worked 2 jobs as single Mom. I abstained when I had to. If i had to I used Condoms..there cheap and yes I am not a rich…but I am a Clint lover.

  61. supervisor says:

    clint can do as he pleases. he will always be marshal jim duncan from high plains drifter (finest western ever made)

  62. mila says:

    Paul Rayan and Mitt Romney are such fundamentalists . Seriously, US best bet is Obama. You got to look at political program of each party and for what it stands. And than look little deeper for what presidential candidates stand for. I an not American, but i like politics and economy. I did a little research about Paul Rayan and that guy is really anti women rights, gay rights, free health care and so on. I think they are even pro war. Mitt Romney is not far behind. And it seems to me that Republicans hope for general US society amnesia. Bush administration did horrible job. Obama can’t clean everything in two short years.

    • garvels says:

      Fundamentalists???? why because they want a limited government that upholds the constitution and they do not want to fundamentally transform America?? Obama is the wrong man for the Job. Obama is no Reagan or Clinton who both got things done in a bipartisan manner. President Obama is comfortable dictating his policies and mandates.Does President Obama not realize that the American people elected their respective congress people to represent their views in Congress??? By Obama ignoring Congress and passing and overturning previous legislation via executive orders he is thumbing his nose at the American people.

    • Marie Antoinette Jr. says:

      I agree with you mila. The republican platform is an embarrassment to many Americans. But the problem is, most hardcore republicans are impossible to reason with because many are so brainwashed by their religion or paralyzed by their fear of change.

      I hope Obama wins but if he doesn’t, we will get by. We survived Bush for 8 years, we can survive ANYTHING! 😉

  63. Debbie says:

    I love Clint. Romney 2012!

  64. Marta says:

    I liked his speach. I´m from Europe, we don´t have Rhetoric in school and it is important what You have to say and not how You say that.

  65. Maritza says:

    Bless his heart, I love Clint but he is getting senile his wife however is young and should know better…her dress is awful!

  66. ezra says:

    Poor America.

  67. Deeana says:

    I confess to being of the “Viagra generation” and then some, and I am voting for Obama – again. And when the new healthcare come in, if they won’t pay for abortions then they surely should not pay for “lifestyle” medications like Viagra, right?

    Re: Mr. Eastwood’s “speech”. Definitely cringe-inducing, and I am a long time fan of his. Sad. Why didn’t his loving young wife stop him from making a fool of himself like this? She surely has heard him around the dinner table. The point where the elderly start saying whatever pops into their head, no matter how bizarre or socially unacceptable, is medically known as “disinhibition”. Look it up, it is one of the signs of senile dementia. Oh, and that was piss poor lighting for Clint at his age – just sayin’.

    I will confess that as a well-experienced voter, I usually vote the party, not the individual candidate. I’ve voted for candidates I didn’t particularly “like” and I’ve “liked” candidates that I would not vote for because of their party affiliation. Rarely, I have deviated from this – but always for a specific reason.

    Last but not least, I question the poster who brought up the idea of an issue being “decided by the individual state”. Folks, this is not the 1860s, and the “state’s rights” argument didn’t work even then. When you look at the great strides to the welfare of ALL the people in our country it is Federal law and Federal programs that have been the most effective. From roads and bridges to environmental safety, workplace safety, women’s right to choose, human rights, civil rights and so many more, it IS up to the Federal government, not the states, to provide for the welfare of the citizens.

    Women, you better look at what is being proposed and by whom. Not just for yourself, but what about your sister, your daughter or your grandaughter?

    • garvels says:

      Personally I could careless what people do in the privacy of their bedrooms….I just don’t want to pay for it. I am pro-life and I also oppose infanticide and I do not want my tax money funding abortions and partial birth abortions and the killing of babies born alive after botched abortions. Check Obama’s Chicago record..this so called kind and compassionate man voted to end the baby’s life after a failed abortion…his views are on tape and documented in the public record…but then again the Obamabots will say it is a lie.

      …I could care less about Viagra coverage, but for those women who think they are taking a jab at men by forcing the government to eliminate this medication…they are also hurting elderly women who are married to elderly men….if you get my drift.

      What scares me more than anything is Obama’s newly created IPAB board which will be determining and approving the treatments of patients. Obamacare will be the biggest tax hit on the American middle class. If your treatment is not an approved treatment under,IPAB..the consumer will have to pay for it out of pocket. The only concern the IPAB board will have is the cost and not the patient outcome. The government will just gloss over the negative outcomes with fabricated stats.

      People need to research Obamacare, and not by going to the Obama website. Attached are some facts regarding the new taxes in Obamacare…if Obama wins you need to be aware of these so you can financially plan accordingly.

  68. thebutlerdidit says:

    Vote however you please, most people are totally ignorant about politics, anyway, I’m just disturbed that no one here has a memory of movies/comedy pre-1995 or so. Eastwood’s riff is a takeoff from a very famous movie, “Harvey” starring Jimmy Stewart, with a side adlib reminiscent of early Bob Newhart stand up. Things happened before the Kardassians, ya’ll. Besides, Clint is in no way senile. Query the folks working with him on his 3 films he’s working on this year. Geesh.

  69. lily says:

    Okay, Clint I really respect you, but this was so embarrassing. And what the hell did you see in Mitt Romney?

  70. 6 says:

    I don’t get the “OMG, that was embarrassing!” I guess I totally get the empty chair bit. I think he was a little nervous and that comes across but he was totally making fun of Obama. And it wasn’t scripted. I don’t get the big deal. He is of very sound mind still, that is impressive at 82. His wife on the other hand, I have to question the soundness of that, much younger, mind. I have to admit to watching an episode of Eastwood and company. Holy crap! SHe is one weird chick.

  71. Snowbunny says:

    Everyone is entitled to vote for the candidate of their choice but before you cast your vote for Romney do some research.

    1.Find out what composes our deficit. The largest part is created by the Bush era tax cuts, not the stimulus that Obama passed.

    2.Romney’s business was a private equity firm. A private equity firm does not purchase businesses to create jobs but to turn a profit for their investors. The business is charged management fees and expected to pay dividends to the private equity firm. If these goals are not met, the business is dismantled and sold. Many businesses in order to meet the private equity firm obligations cut costs by reducing workers wages and/or outsourcing jobs to foreign countries to save money.

    So who would Romney be concerned with as POTUS, his investors (large campaign contributors) or workers (taxpayers)?

  72. Mac says:

    “College graduates should not have to live out their 20s in their childhood bedrooms, staring up at fading Obama posters and wondering when they can move out and get going with life.”

  73. Jennifer says:

    Clint rocks! Thank you for such a fabulous speech! 23 million out of work — enough said!!

  74. Sarah says:

    With all of this constructive discourse, I hope that a future post regarding some celeb appearing at the DNC doesn’t turn into a kiss ass post about Obama. Lets Keep discussing our issues and situations, this whole thread is a more honest representation of political America than the polls could ever reflect. Whatever your politic, take pride in the fact that you can openly discuss it with intelligence and respect for the right of others to have a different opinion.

  75. normades says:

    Big up Kaiser. You summed it up great.

  76. Isabella Notarfrancesco says:

    Both the Dems and the Republicans are sock puppets for their corporate overlords. When are you people going to wake up and realize this? The American government is completely beholden to the military industrial complex which means America is under the rule of a military dictatorship.

  77. Liza Jane says:

    “For a talented guy with privacy and dignity”……well that’s all gone down the tubes now with that wife of his doing some awful reality Show!!! How demeaning is that?????
    I’m British/ Canadian and watch American politics because they are endlessly fascinating,and ours are rather boring to be frank.The level of unpleasantness being seen here is stunning!! Looking from the outside it is blatantly obvious that this elite,1% band of GOP candidates do not give one iota of concern for the electorate..seems to me that the Republican Party on the whole care more about defeating the Democrats at any cost regardless of the terrible toll it will ake on their country!
    One may also be disappointed at Obama’s last 4 years,but in all honesty how was he expected to make any dramatic changes after inheriting such a mess from George Bush, and whilst being willfully stymied at all ends and turns by the opposing party???? If you think that a Republican win and Mitt Romney in the White House is magically going to restore your jobs and move you forward..think again. I have a brother who is now one of the 1% and has broken my heart by stating that Obama is bad for his business and amassing his now substantial fortune…bottom line,vote Romney to ensure the rich get richer and the middle class disappear ! Apart from all
    the other unbelievable platforms they are campaigning on ( and the cynical flip flopping ) it is glaringly obvious that this is a rich man’s party which tries to get elected by appealing to the ultra conservative and traditional voter,tapping into all the stale archaic fears of years long past… sad to see voters being led like lemmings over the cliff!!! I will watch and weep for a once good nation who can no longer talk of America as being the best country in the your election pontificating and your manipulating and scarily robotic candidates and say that once you may have had the chance to make your country great,but with the lack of true desire to work for all your peoples

  78. Dee Cee says:

    Drudge headline!/search/realtime/%23emptychairday

  79. DIANE says:

    Shut up, you old codger. Yes, the legendary Clint Eastwood has joined the ranks of that other idiot, Charlton Heston, in becoming public loudmouths for their right wing dogma in their twilight years, right about the time all those steaks catch up with them via madcow disease, aka dementia.

    Clint’s just blown his whole film persona for people like me. He joins the evergrowing list of actors who have offended me with their behavior and who will never get another dime or viewing out of me.

    Oh. And what’s with the wife wearing a half-finished dress??? Is she blind??? Or just another tasteless ignorant idiot with a reality show??