An Answer to Eastwood

By now, I’m sure we’re all aware of Clint Eastwood’s bizarre and unfairly mean spirited bit of performance art as an introduction to Mitt Romney’s acceptance speech. By Thursday night, we had all become accustomed to the GOP revisionism and outright lies that were trotted out over three sweltering nights in Tampa. But allowing Eastwood carte blanche to talk down to an imaginary president represents a degree of incompetence largely unheard of in a modem political convention.
Of course it gives the Democrats a chance to show the GOP how it’s done.
First, you need a prominent Republican. How about Mitch McConnell?

Mitch McConnell

Then you need a prominent Democrat. This is important. It can’t be Obama or Biden. That would be punching down, like Romney was against Harry Reid recently. Actually, Reid would be a perfect choice. He’s the Senate Majority Leader, McConnell’s counterpart.

Harry Reid

So what would Mr. Reid do? Well, naturally, he’d interview McConnell. Of course, McConnell isn’t likely to consent to this, and an empty chair would be silly. I think McConnell should show up via video feed.

Reid would proceed to grill McConnell on all the popular legislation that was passed by the 111th Congress, only to die in the Senate because the GOP minority reused to even let it be debated, let alone voted upon.

Reid could simply ask McConnell why this or that piece of legislation was killed. The answer would be this video clip, over and over. Not only would this be an effective answer to the Eastwood nonsense, but it would provide an effective way to drum up support for Democratic Senate candidates, end the fillibuster, and make the case for a Democratic House.

And it would be very entertaining.


About Andrew

I'm a Christian, American, liberal, geeky, thoughtful, Northwest-transplanted Angeleno husband, father, and pundit who writes about anything he can think of.
This entry was posted in Politics and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to An Answer to Eastwood

  1. Jess says:

    eh, didn’t buy the whole “it’s crazy, it’s bizarre” slant the media slapped on Eastwood’s performance. Was it really that newsworthy?

    It was a little weird. It was kinda sad to watch when he meandered away from his point. I was reminded of all those Doonesbury strips where the prez is represented by an empty chair and a feather.

    The convention audience seemed to like it though.

    • Andrew says:

      Honestly, it might have been more effective with some scripting/rehearsal, and maybe some facts (although those seem to have been banned in Romney’s Republican party. That’s the main part that made it unfunny to me. Humor needs a kernel of truth. Based on the responses, it seemed more like Eastwood was talking to Dick Cheney with “He can’t do that to himself,” or maybe Rahm Emmanuel. In the meantime, I’ll take the actual comedy it has spawned.

What are your "Great" Thoughts

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s