The Republicans and Clint Eastwood — No Better Than the Democrats

eastwood.jpgHad I been watching the Democrat National Convention, I would not have been surprised.  They have years of experience in grooming the extreme left that makes California, and more specifically, Hollywood, their home.  Every convention and in every occupancy of the White House by Democrats, you can anticipate a constant stream of starlets and stud-muffins “gracing” the people’s house with their glamor and celebrity.  I’d expect no less.

But, the longer I think about the Republicans giving Clint Eastwood a prime-time spot last night, the angrier I get.

Forget the fact that he gave one of the most incoherent and ridiculous “speeches” in the history of party conventions, there’s more.  In fact, inviting him for such a prime time slot just embodies much of what is wrong with American politics in general and in this case, the Republicans specifically.

Clint Eastwood is a reprehensible person.  For all his talent in which he pretends to be people that never existed in stories that never happened, his moral character makes Obama’s look like a Pope (or should I say an Oman”).  Rubio’s speech included the line that said, “It’s not that Obama is not a good person; it’s that he’s not a good President.”  Well, Mr. Eastwood isn’t a good person.

I’m not sure how many times he’s been married, but in an industry where philandering is common place, Eastwood is legendary.  He’s been married more times than I can recall.  He’s fathered 9 children by at least 5 different women and 2 of those were murdered in the womb.  Many of my FB friends went on and on about his “wonderful” movies.  I’m not sure whether or not he’s all that as an actor because I don’t generally attend R-Rated movies which is what the majority of his are.  Before you call me a legalist — Let me ask if you’d take your kids to see “Dirty Harry” or most any other movie in which he is the star?  Not if you’re a good parent.  He’s not pro-life, he’s not pro-family, he’s not family values friendly, he’s not known for being a moral example, an entrepreneur, a patriot, a war hero or a statesman.  He’s most certainly NOT a standup comedian.

He’s a Libertarian, not a Conservative — at best.  (You aren’t going to believe I’m typing this next line.) If they wanted a Libertarian to speak, why didn’t they let someone who is at least a person of morality, a good example, a family man, an intellectual, consistent and at least pretended to be a Republican for a while — someone, like, well…..Ron Paul? (And I’m a renowned Paul critic.)  At least he “earned” a spot on the podium.

celebrity.jpgNo, the reason that Eastwood was invited is because of one word — Celebrity.  That’s it.  He’s famous.  He uttered a famous line or two that people found “catchy” and worked their way into the cultural lexicon.  Whoopee.  What is with our national obsession with Hollywood and the entertainment industry?  What makes us bow and scrape before their alleged talents?  Why are we so quick to genuflect before their worthless opinions?  Why are they not held to any level of scrutiny, accountability or apparently vetting?  Ironically and justly,. the Republicans had it all blow up in their faces.  It was a travesty.  It was silliness.  It lowered the ambient IQ in the room by 20 points.  It was childish.  At times it was unintelligible.  AND it revealed the shallowness of the leadership of too many politicians….again.

The worst job in the house last night was Marco Rubio’s, who had to follow that dog and pony show.  Like the class act that he is, Rubio ignored what had preceded him and went right on to deliver what was arguably one of the best speeches of the conventions — nearly over-shadowing the candidate’s and making more than one conservative say under his breath, “We’ve nominated the wrong man.”

I doubt that anything will change in the future.  Both sides of the aisle are enamored with the superficiality of the Eastwoods, Moores, Depps, Clooney’s, Streisands, and Goldbergs of the industry that pollutes our culture, morality and reputation around the world.

But it is what it is.

I’m sure some will disagree.

To those I simply say, “Go ahead.  Make my day.”

7 thoughts on “The Republicans and Clint Eastwood — No Better Than the Democrats

  1. William Dudding

    I was so uninspired and so unimpressed by the whole lot of them. They are all goons playing games with the greatest country that has ever existed and most Americans in this generation are just getting what they deserve. Our countrymen are about as stupid as they come…we are really living in the last days of the Roman empire and it won’t surprise me if I see America fall in my lifetime like the Roman Empire did and get divided up among the power mongers.

  2. Henry Wentz

    I had some of the same thoughts when I heard he was the GOP mystery guest. Presidential politics have been sinking lower watch year and this is no different. None of the values of the Hollywood set are anything I would recommend to my family or church. I suppose this was just a case of the Republicans trying to get one up on the traditional celebrity politicians. Too bad we don’t have more statesmen and less celebrities trying to influence the electorate.
    Thank for the sentiments.

  3. Jonathan Charles

    I don’t see how a truly sold-out Christian can be in politics at the national level. If you are going to be electable, you have to court the favor of people who have no concern or love for Christ and who may live very immorally. Too, you would have to bury some of the things you have convictions about because to speak of them would make you unelectable. It is a dirty business.

  4. Arlene

    In the words of Tim Hawkins, (sung to music of John Lennon’s Imagine)

    “Imagine all the actors
    And musicians too,
    Would stick to acting and singing,
    With no political views?”

  5. Ben

    You are right Dan! Problem is when our culture has become enamored with entertainers and celebrity it is already too late. I applaud the republican party for trying to reach people where they are at. Which is exactly what you did in the closing line of this article. (And for the record you “made my day.”) How can you criticize Clint’s movies and then turn around and utilize them in the same article? Talk about the definition of ironic. :) I will continue because I “feel lucky” I just hope I don’t come across as a “punk”

    I could not agree more that are nation should think about ideology rather than accept anything because they like a person’s music or movies. But you are talking about a nation that would rather watch honey boo boo than the DNC. President Obama was successful in ’08 because he was able to manipulate the cultural edges of politics and turn himself into a celebrity. The question should be, what is the goal? If the goal is to reform societies view of celebrity than obviously Eastwood is the wrong choice. If the goal is to capture the attention of the populous, bring on the star power. Maybe not Eastwood but someone who will pander to the crowd’s low standards of intellectualism. In theory it was a good move. I agree that they should have sailed with the idea. They just chose the wrong ship.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>