Yeah, but the smart thing would be to avoid talking further about the train wreck, and get people talking about how wonderful Mittens delivered his magnum opus to the nation and how he’ll set this wayward nation straight.
To say the pig sitting at the dining room table is a beautiful woman doesn’t make it so, especially when everyone there can plainly see it’s a filthy, stinking pig.
This is why politics is what it is. People are asking them about the speech, so they have to say something. They can’t say it’s a mess and they can’t say no comment because that’s the same as saying it sucked. So they try to put it in a positive light even though it was a farce. They also can’t say “Hey, who cares about the speeches anyway?” when they just put on three days of speeches at their convention.
I actually felt sorry for ol’ Clint, seeing how he’s deteriorated in his dotage. And sorrier for the GOP audience, listening to him blast Obama for Gitmo and Afghanistan (yes, really), while having to find ways to applaud him for it.
The gaffe was in acknowledging publicly that yes, the GOP base *is *angry white men. The proper reaction is to talk up the inclusive, big-tent stuff.
So it’s a gaffe when you tell an unflattering truth in support of an argument that things need to change? His point was that they’re not an inclusive big tent, they’re a party dominated by older white voters and that that state of affairs isn’t sustainable if they want to win elections in the future. Saying “It’s already a very inclusive big tent and needs to stay that way” would be bullshit.
Yes, it would be bullshit. It would also be the proper thing for a party loyalist to say in public. What he would say in private, in a strategy meeting among only fellow loyalists, would be what you say.
they asked him to talk about Obamacare, he thought they said Obamachair.
And what is the Democratic base? Welfare bums and communist union thugs who want free government cheese?
Kinda late to the party, aren’t you?
Actually, I don’t think either Mitt Romney or Barack Obama are lawyers. They both graduated from Harvard Law School, but I’m not sure either ever practiced law or even got licensed to practice law.
Obama became a law professor and later on a community activist Romney became a businessman.
Obama practiced law for four years.
Except they just nominated a big-spending, big-government guy for veep (and maybe for Prez, but who knows what Romney will be for by next year?) Ryan voted for all the big budget-busters of the Bush admin. He’s small-government when it comes to environmental regulations, or keeping big banks from doing whatever the fuck they want, but he’s big government when it comes to telling people who they should marry, and telling women to bear the child of their rapist.
Reagan presided over the largest tax increase in US history, was a tough guy when invading Grenada but meekly withdrew when over 200 marines were killed in Lebanon, violated the Constitution with his Nicaraguan adventure, lied to Congress about it, and funded it by illegal arms sales to Iran.
But you’re right, he’d probably still be leader of the Tea Party, because they don’t give a shit about facts.
When Reagan took office there were 16 marginal income tax rates with the top being 70%.
When Reagan left office there were 4 marginal income tax rates with the top being 28%.
He was a net tax cutter.
My mistake. Thanks for the correction.
And Obama is a net jobs creator, but that’s not what I heard at the convention. And net or not, Reagan still signed the largest tax increase ever, and any tax increase is anathema to the Tea Party.
Just to follow up on my response to Sam Stone, from maddowblog.com:
This is a Democratic talking point, Sam?
Obama is actually NOT a net jobs creator.
In January 2009 there were 133,561,000 Americans employed.
In July 2012 there were 133,245,000 Americans employed.
We have lost 316,00 jobs since he took office.
I know one Tea Party Republican here in Bangkok who considers Eastwood’s speech “brilliant.” The Republicans must have taken some sort of embarrassment vaccine.
Yes, when it was first perfected, it was an injection, but these days it is an oral vaccine, administered in a brightly colored, sugary liquid. It is mass produced in packets that are simply mixed with a pitcher of water. Side effects include the ability to break through block walls.
Does this mean Sondra Locke will speak in Charlotte?
'cause that would be fucking great.