Friday, August 31, 2012

Quote of the Day


"Nonsense from Clint Eastwood, anti-people Hollywood actor, in defense of Mitt Romney, the Right’s candidate for the U.S. elections. For friends who know English, if you understand what this guy said, let me know too.”

-- The caption from the above picture circulating throughout Iranian media circles this morning, translated back into English

Look, I noticed quite a few people on the left, particularly in a couple of choice columns at the Huffington Post, giving Clint crap not about anything he said or the fact that he was willing to appear in front of the RNC at all, but about what it all supposedly says about him as a person. In other words, there was a lot of denigrating of a guy who's undisputedly a Hollywood legend and a cultural icon just because he happens to be Republican. It was petty, it was foolish and it was a flawless example of just how ridiculously all-or-nothing our political discourse has become. I don't particularly love Eastwood's politics across the board, but that doesn't mean I can't have a hell of a lot of respect for who he is and what he's done throughout his career -- and I'm certainly not going to try to pretend that his political affiliation somehow lessens or cheapens his accomplishments. That's fucking stupid.

That said, his speech was admittedly really bizarre -- although I do think it added some much needed life and a sense of tightrope-walking danger to the otherwise tediously boring proceedings. This was, after all, the staircase-descending coming out event for the world's most uninteresting debutante, Mitt Romney. In fact, I kind of think Clint may have purposely punked the GOP. Maybe he's been tapped to replace Dunn in the Jackass crew and this was his big introduction. Also, like all of Eastwood's work, his speech was slow, had a lot of unnecessary pauses and was about twice as long as it needed to be.

19 comments:

Jester said...

Clint Eastwood for four minutes would have been fantastic. Clint Eastwood for 13 minutes just sucked all the air out of the room, and dissipated all the goodwill generated by the tribute videos.

I like him as much as the next guy, but he works best in small batches.

pea said...

At least they didn't let him compose the music.

pasta65 said...

He is/was an Icon and he made some incredible movies that will stand the test of time.

However his convention speech just pissed on all that goodwill. It wasn't his politics that people are shocked by, it was his Depends diaper wearing, hopped up on gin flavored Metamucil delivery that he will forever be remembered for.

Chez said...

Like I said -- as with his movie, he was ponderous and overly long. As talented as he is, that's a hallmark of his work.

bafreeman said...

Clint's always kind of been two people to me: one made great movies; the other fucked Sondra Locke. Mitt thought he was getting introduced by a true American icon, but the other Clint showed up, just another skank-fucker in a room full of them.

Anonymous said...

Why must everyone preface it with "he's a legend, he's done all this great stuff...". Gimmee a fkn break.

Any criticism of the pre-chair Eastwood at all?? Anyone? (I've never heard any.)

Does noone else in the world agree with the following?

Some.
fairly good
stuff. (Josey, ugly,...)

ok

...with a Whole Fucking Lot of major ego throw in. Scripts tailor-made to make his every move look cool and macho. Some of it _extremely_ offensive (what was that movie where he says "come 'ere bitch I'm gonna rape you cause y'all need me to clean up this town"? (High Plains Drifter).

But even my lesbian sister gave him a pass with 'it's Clint'.

Talking to the Trees in a thin wheezy voice? Gimmee a fkn break.

So much of his schtick is just so transparently self-serving and shallow....

gimmee a fkn break....

Stephen said...

The only difference is that Sandra Locke got raped in every one of his movies.

Anonymous said...

Oh please. Fuck that guy. Decrepit old fuck. Whatever he did to earn my more-than-generous, nearing pity, respect-for-your-elders respect as a tough-guy catch phrase actor and a guy that directed one good movie(Unforgiven)was pissed away like a degenerate gambler with one incoherent simulated public lynching. And If you thought Gran Torino was a good movie, you should fuck your face with a VHS tape.

Don't use fantasy Clint to apologize for reality Clint. We do this too much as a culture. "He's an incoherent son of a bitch, but he sure made some good fucking movies!"

Kind if like, "he covered up for a kiddie rapist, but he sure turned that college football program into something we could all be proud of!"

You can forgive him. That old racist motherfucker is dead to me.

Chez said...

You done, anonymous pissy guy? You're of course entitled to your hilariously hostile opinion, but do yourself a favor and try not to compare Eastwood to, say, Joe Paterno because it just makes you look kind of dumb.

Anonymous said...

Eastwood went out there representing racists, bigots, and all around jagoffs who are trying to subvert democracy, overthrow women's reproductive rights, starve children, start wars, and blow up the planet for the plutocrats.

He's much worse than Joe Paterno as a human being at this point. With Paterno, some kids got molested. Eastwood might as well be up there defending pedophiles and mass murderers.

Claude Weaver said...

Oh for fuck's sake, really?

Did you just say "With Paterno, some kids got molested." like it was fucking NOTHING?!?!?!! An old man doing some weird performance art for a bunch of other old men is somehow on equal or greater offensive foot in that a guy who COVERED UP CHILD RAPE?!?!?!!

Rhesus Christ in a canoe, what the fuck is that?!?!?!

That isn't false equivalency, that is just fucking nuts. You wanna know how I can tell? BECAUSE YOU CAN'T VOTE ON WHO GETS TO RAPE A CHILD!!!!!

The two things aren't even in the same galaxy. That is emotion and fervor trumping logic and reality. If you consider yourself a progressive in any way, please stop. You are doing it wrong.

This us-vs-them mentality is THEIR game. They want you to shriek and scream at anybody with an (R) next to their name, because it allows them to play the victim card. You are their greatest weapon.

And yes, I DO think Eastwood should be respected for his film work. He isn't perfect, no one is, but he does have an eye for movies and has made some powerful stuff. And for people to wholesale disregard that because of this...this FARCE is the very same type of prejudice and baseless judgmental bullshit we claim the right does to us. You are judging Eastwood only by superficial means, and simplifying him into a strawman for...what exactly?

Is this the new thing, political hipsterism? "I totally hated that guy before it was cool. These people trying to be all respectful and shit, there just know-nothing posers. I'm the real deal!"

Goddamn, I thought we were past this immature bullshit! I thought we could accept that people had different facets to their lives, often contradictory ones, and the thing that made progressives so awesome was that we could acknowledge and debate those differences without become dogmatic zealots.

Then again, whatever the hell this group is that is so eager to gloss over rape in order to stick it to "DA MAN", if it is progressive, I want no part of it!

Anonymous said...

Yes, for fuck's sake, really.

Put it this way. You either excused the "college football legend and icon" who covered up kids getting molested, or you didn't. I don't really give a shit that you or anyone else has a strong stance against underage overexposure to elderly man balls. Such a courageous stand, though.

But just to be clear, for the sake of posterity, defending a "Hollywood legend and an icon" who used his "legendary icon status" as an iconic propaganda poster for the white wash of the despicable lovers and followers of movement conservatism, lending an American face-you-won't-fuck-with to a lock-step freak cult of right wing psychopaths trying to steal the presidency and who author policies that actually encourage more mainstreaming of rape and torture(Or don't you pay attention?)----- is much more preferable, or acceptable, to "a college football legend and icon" covering up the despicable deeds of one very sick man?

Clint Eastwood's appearance at the RNC convention was shelter from the storm for right wing policies of rape and torture. Or does Todd Akin and Paul Ryan inspire you to turn the other cheek? Do you not take them at their word and deeds? I try not to apologize for rape and torture apologists, whomever they might be. Tear down that statue, man, is all I'm saying.

Claude Weaver said...

Saying the man made a few good movies does not, in any way shape or form, mean a defense of horrible practices. It simply means he made a few good movies. THAT IS IT.

Anyone who argues otherwise, whether for or against the person, is crazy. Just as being an entertainer doesn't excuse horrible behavior, horrible behavior doesn't automatically invalidate the entertainment.

Clint Eastwood isn't whitewashing anything any more than any liberal entertainer is for the Democratic Party. He is about as dangerous to you as Alec Baldwin is to them: NOT AT FUCKING ALL. Here's the thing: Eastwood isn't running for office. He isn't presenting any bills to Congress. He is TALKING TO AN EMPTY CHAIR. If the Republicans want to use that display of senility as an honest attempt at propaganda, they are indeed just as delusional as they appear.

Don't you get it? They are desperate. They are flailing. The man they have running for President is about as engaging as a wet cat. Of course they are gonna put some crap like this. And by hyperventilating over it, you are playing right into their hands.

And as far as the comparison to Paterno, the thought process to make it is borderline mental derangement. You don't have to denigrate actual has-already-happened rape in order to prove that you don't like the GOP. You can dislike both without worrying about not having enough outrage. There is no exclusivity here.

I mean, you are honestly arguing that hating the GOP and their stupidity is supposed to be more important than kids getting raped. Does the disconnect there just not trigger anything in your mind.

And yes, hating child rape may not be "courageous" in your world, but it isn't about what looks better or cooler or more subversive or whatever stupid idea you have in your head about what people should be angry about. It is about morality and caring for your fellow human being regardless. THAT is what makes us different from them.

You know why I'm not in an apoplectic fit over Eastwood or the GOP? Because no matter what they do, what tricks they pull, what bullshit they may spew, we can fight them. We can stop them. We can counter them. Yeah, we might lose. We might suffer. But we still have a shot. And we are growing.

We accuse the right of Obama Derangement Syndrome, the idea of them doing whatever they can to get "the other guy" out of power. Any and all rationality or even self-interest is trashed in deference to that one goal.

People like you are dangerously close to that line, where the goal is so important that you sacrifice anything, including your humanity, in order for the other guy to lose. Don't do that. Don't be like them.

Anonymous said...

People like you, people like you..

If you spoke at the RNC, I would say you're covering for the torture and rape party, too.

You're much too forgiving of torture and rape.

You are exactly why Dick Cheney is breathing free air and why a guy like Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan are this close to probing your vagina.

Chez said...

And you're an idiot. Sincerely.

Anonymous said...

Different anonymous/constant lurker:
I like the unnecessary addition of sincerity after calling someone an idiot. Classy.

One note: there is the violent and acute misanthropy associated with the Paterno scandal. Despicable in its gross negligence and criminal in its contempt for children and the public safety in general and then there's the slow grinding deaths and despair delivered by the right. I agree that Clint gave the douche bags on the right the cover they so crave to legitimize the ugly and sinful cavalcade of granny starvers. It can be argued that dozens of awful sexual transgressions perpetrated on the young is awful (and criminal) and yet to deny that Clint gave the R's safe harbor when their intentions are to subject our fellow citizens to starvation and slow, painful deaths due to limited and non-existent healthcare are just as awful a crime as those committed by Sandusky et al. In fact, anonymous is right in the facts. Thousands die at the hands of those associated with those policies and Clint is an awful human being for giving them his imprimatur. Dirty Harry would have shot that motherfucker on the spot.

Chez said...

It's a staggeringly off-base comparison and a hilariously melodramatic argument -- and this is coming from someone who agrees with you that the general Republican worldview right now is reprehensible. By the way, one more time for the cheap seats -- if you're bothering to make a passionate statement, particularly one that takes issue with something I've said and assumes a contrary position, it would help me take you more seriously if you at least bothered to come up with a bullshit online screenname rather than doing the somewhat cowardly anonymous thing.

Anonymous said...

I'll grant you that the comparison is off base, in the one instance dozens of children are raped and survive, albeit with major trauma for the rest of their lives ( I hope Sandusky and friends are traumatized equally and as frequently), in the other instance, people just suffer and then die. So for comparisons sake, which circle of hell should we choose? I mean some deserve worse than others don't you think? I have children and want Sandusky to suffer and would love to revive Paterno so that he suffers as well but what's 45,000-50,000 deaths due to inadequate healthcare, chopped liver? I think your scale of outrage is badly skewed but what do I know I'm just a dirtbag anonymous commenter. But once again, fuck that old gas bag fucktard Clint Eastwood. And since the Internet is wonderfully anonymous, but you demand a name to take my ideas and argument seriously, the name's Cesca, Bob Cesca.

Anonymous said...

That's impossible. The real Bob Cesca is busy saving the world one second at a time. He is an American hero at home AND abroad. Prolific thinker and world class feeler of feelings. An ass that never quits.

This is like Clark Kent saving a kitten in a tree.

Chez: The general republican worldview right now is torture and rape. Literally. It's beyond reprehensible. It's much worse to me than say, Michael Moore raping a drugged and disoriented Clint Eastwood, eating him, and then eating his own shit.