WEEKEND WRAP
A VOICE of BALTIMORE OCCASIONAL SERIES
Op-Ed Musings on the Week’s Events
It was the GOP Convention to nominate Mitt Romney for President, and
For a different perspective on Clint Eastwood’s allegedly “off-color” performance — which Voice of Baltimore contends was not off-color at all; rather, on-target — read the Weekend Wrap analysis which follows and watch the controversial Dirty Harry video of the event.
It’s an eye-opener, and it might just put Mitt Romney over the top. Hollywood icon Clint Eastwood offended TV talking heads and other pundits with alleged ‘off-color’ remark at last week’s GOP Nation- al Convention at Tampa Bay Times Forum.
AFTER ROUSING, ‘RAMBLING’ PERFORMANCE
OFFENDS MOST TV COMMENTATORS
WITH ALLEGED ‘OFF-COLOR’ REMARK
‘When somebody does not do the job, we gotta let ’em go’
— a not-so-veiled reference to President Barack Obama
‘WE OWN THIS COUNTRY,’ HE DECLARES;
‘POLITICIANS ARE EMPLOYEES OF OURS’
By Alan Z. Forman
Republican or Democrat, Libertarian or whatever, anyone who watched
Deviating from the highly scripted, carefully vetted, rehearsed and pre-approved speeches of the various politicians, GOP elected officials and Romney Family members, Hollywood legend
In a mock one-way conversation with an absentee President Obama, imagined to be sitting on an empty stool, Eastwood twice responded to an unvoiced suggestion from the President that he and GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney — whose acceptance speech was to follow later in the evening — do something sexual to themselves that is physically and biologically impossible.
Hence the “off-color” charge by national news media critical of Eastwood’s performance — which was in fact a highly comedic presentation, not a speech.
View the Eastwood performance in its entirety by clicking here: (http://bcove.me/10nfbyfz)
Embarrassing maybe — judging from the facial expressions of some of the delegates, including a blank-faced vice presidential nominee Paul Ryan — but entertaining nonetheless. And not nearly as off-color as what one sees and hears nightly on the various television network talk shows.
Nor hardly as disrespectful as the many talking heads, pundits and reporters who frequently described — and still continue to describe — George W. Bush as “stupid,” failing to recognize that the former President’s academic record is as good if not better than that of his successor.
ONLY PRESIDENT TO HAVE EARNED AN M.B.A.
Bush attended two Ivy League universities and is the only U.S. President to have earned an M.B.A.
At another interval Eastwood got a big laugh — one of many throughout his 12 minutes on the convention stage at the Tampa Bay Times Forum — when, upon criticizing Obama’s performance on the job, he interjected, ostensibly quoting the President, “What do you mean, ‘Shut up!’?
“I’m not going to shut up, it’s my turn!” he responded later.
It was a breath of fresh air at an otherwise stodgy event, which national political conventions, Republican and Democrat alike, are wont to be. Instead of reading from a teleprompter, the Academy Award-winning director and producer appeared to be ad-libbing his talk, thereby giving a false sense, considering his gravelly voice and sometimes hesitating delivery, that he was rambling, leading to an almost universal media rush to judgment that his talk was poorly delivered and disrespectful.
But the audience loved it, despite the media pundits’ reaction, many of whom alleged he had stolen nominee Romney’s thunder and detracted from serious analysis of the evening’s events.
No one seemed to take note of the fact that an enormously popular Hollywood personality was roundly criticizing the President of the United States for his poor performance of the last four years and heartily endorsing the candidacy of the man who hopes to succeed him, although even the most partisan pundits credited Eastwood with delivering a hard-hitting line that brought the crowd to its feet with thunderous applause:
“When somebody does not do the job, we gotta let ’em go!”
He also got heavy applause when he said the President had failed and that it’s “time for somebody else to come along and solve the problem.”
‘A DISGRACE, A NATIONAL DISGRACE’
It is “a disgrace, a national disgrace,” the self-described “movie tradesman” declared, that 23 million people in this country are unemployed.
Referring to the tears of joy by Democrats on Obama’s election night four years ago, he said: “Everybody [was] crying, Oprah [Winfrey] was crying, I was even crying; I haven’t cried that hard since I found out that there’s 23 million unemployed people in this country.
“Now that is something to cry for. Because that is a disgrace, a national disgrace, and we haven’t done enough, this administration hasn’t done enough to cure that…”
Referring to Obama and Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr., both of whom have law degrees, he said, “I never thought it was a good idea for attorneys to be president anyway,” adding, “I think it’s maybe time for a businessman… a stellar businessman” — an obvious reference to Mitt Romney — to lead the country.
He then called Obama “absolutely crazy. You’re gettin’ as bad as Biden!” he declared, to the audience’s delight, adding, “‘Course we all know Biden is the intellect of the Democratic Party, just… kind of a grin with a body behind it.”
He concluded on a more serious note by telling the delegates and all America: “You’re the best in the world… you’re the best and we should not ever forget that. And when somebody does not do the job, we gotta let ’em go… let ’em go…”
“You, we, we own this country… yes, we own it….. Politicians are employees of ours.”
And then, with everyone on their feet, he led the audience in a final cheer: “I’ll start it,” he said, “you finish it: Go ahead..
“Make.. my.. day!”
alforman@voiceofbaltimore.org
September 2nd, 2012 - 10:01 PM
You can’t be serious. If it’s a joke, I don’t get it.
September 2nd, 2012 - 10:59 PM
Did you watch the video? it’s hilarious! no joke. Politics aside, it was an entertaining presentation, a welcome departure from all the scripted stuff. And he was certainly less disrespectful to Obama than most of the pundits have been toward Bush.
September 3rd, 2012 - 1:31 PM
I like Clint Eastwood as an actor and admire him greatly as a director, so it was painful to watch his doddering performance at the RNC. As good a filmmaker as he is, he was hackneyed and mediocre on the real world political stage. I’ll grant you that his style was unique, but it’s only his celebrity that saved him from making a complete fool of himself.
[The commenter is a former Baltimore Sun reporter and author, now retired. —Ed.]
September 3rd, 2012 - 9:47 PM
Well I suppose I can’t disagree completely with you on this, your take is certainly far more in the mainstream than mine. Like you, people who admire and respect Clint Eastwood have been making many of the same points with me all day. I guess I’m just so turned off by the hackneyed, vetted, canned political scripts we’re all continually subjected to, that I welcome Eastwood’s stylized presentation, despite its hesitations (which many have termed “rambling”), as a refreshing change.
September 4th, 2012 - 9:21 AM
First, let me say that I think you are dead wrong about it being a breath of fresh air, unless you are referring to the air we take in when we gasp in horror. What I think of the concept doesn’t matter. But the content of the performance itself does matter. I think the sexual references were wildly off color for any situation, even a cocktail party, but they were highly offensive in the context of the Republican National Convention.
I can’t believe the GOP planners or the candidates knew he was going to say that. Also, you keep referring to the talking heads and pundits. I know what you mean (Jon Stewart knocks them nightly and I laugh), but I think you go too far. Journalists of all kinds have to cover that event and not all journalists deserve to be lumped in with that crazy Fox crowd. He makes a point of saying Bush has better academic credentials than Obama. I don’t think law school is any easier than business school, but I doubt Bush could have made it through Harvard Law School. And if his MBA made him such a business whiz, how did he turn the surplus Clinton left us with into the pathetic economic mess he left behind when he vacated the White House. (The cost of two wars (without achieving his goal of finding Osama bin Laden), tax cuts for the rich, General Motors on the brink of bankruptcy, etc., just to refresh your memory.)
At any rate, I thought the performance was a complete embarrassment to everyone watching, especially to the candidates and their wives. I can’t believe they expected that. But it’s a lasting embarrassment for Eastwood, considering his age and how little time he has left to restore his reputation. He’s a brilliant actor and director, but now I have to consider putting him in the Mel Gibson-Tom Cruise category — those who are so crazy I won’t even watch their movies.
His act could have been chalked up as a bawdy, awkward performance by an old man who didn’t quite understand where he was, except for the fact that he did know where he was and we all know quite well how smart he is. Whether anyone else knew what he was going to say, he did, and I think his incredibly bad judgment is inexcusable.
[I am a lifelong journalist, a founding editor of USA Today and Editor in Chief of United Press International, now retired and living in the DC area.]
September 4th, 2012 - 3:16 PM
Thanks, Susan, you’ve presented a thoughtful commentary, pretty much what most of the pundits and talking heads are saying. Voice of Baltimore appreciates your posting on our site.
I’m surprised however that you would label Eastwood’s performance “bawdy,” based on a single joke that was at worst slightly risqué. The other 99.9 percent of his performance was not off-color at all.
And if you watched the audience reaction to his comments, I think you’d have to agree the convention delegates loved it.
It’s been reported that Eastwood so impressed Romney and his handlers at a fundraiser in Utah early last month that they never asked him for a summary of what he planned to say at the convention, as they did for all the other speakers. I doubt he would have given it to them if they had; he would probably have declined the invitation to speak. That’s Eastwood, his Dirty Harry persona.
Nor did anyone question his request for an empty chair. In hindsight, I guess maybe they should have.
But I stand by my statement that his talk was a welcome change from the “highly scripted, carefully vetted, rehearsed and pre-approved speeches” we’ve become so used to hearing from our politicians, especially in campaign/convention setting.
And I would certainly never lump him in with Mel Gibson and Tom Cruise — he’s neither a bigot nor a Scientologist — although I agree with your analysis of them: They ARE crazy. And I won’t watch their movies either.
October 29th, 2012 - 8:54 AM
[…] opinion of the dramatic effect of Eastwood’s allegedly unscripted/unrehearsed convention speech (click here). VoB believes the iconic actor/director accomplished whatever it was he set out to do. Witness the […]