Bruce Willis calls Mitt Romney an 'embarrassment,' report says

Fox News ^ | May 27 2012 | Fox News

[WilliamIII]

Bruce Willis calls Republican Party nominee Mitt Romney an "embarrassment" in a new interview with Esquire magazine and says he doesn't care which side wins in November. "Yeah, Romney. He's just such a disappointment, an embarrassment," Willis told the magazine. "Chin up, hair up. He's just one of those guys, one of those guys who says he's going to change everything and he'll get in there, and they'll smile at him and introduce themselves: 'We're Congress, we make sure nothing changes,'" Willis went on. "He won't do it. He can't. Everybody wants to be Barack Obama. And what did he change?"

[Delta 21]

Of course its by their fruits.

You actually want me equate C.S.Lewis with Bruce Willis? !! ?

Thats like you thinking that Jessie “The Body” is gonna carry a mini-gun into the Governors mansion and “not have time to bleed”. (I wouldn’t even begin to think that you would do that, by the way.)((You didn’t? Did you??))

Anything else you want to assume about me?

[OneWingedShark]

You actually want me equate C.S.Lewis with Bruce Willis? !! ?

I never said that; I just think your statements were incredibly disparaging to anyone who would write fiction (or pursue acting) even in a recreational sense.

I'm an amateur writer myself, and while I do have a non-fiction work in-progress, I've got many more ideas for fiction than I'll ever have the time or energy to explore. Furthermore, I see storytelling is a good method for conveying philosophy; let's be realistic, how many people are going to be swayed in their opinions about trial/retrial from debating/arguing the situation? Not many at all, precisely because it is a non-issue underneath their radar. But a story about a guy who is snapped up by big-gov and tried, retried, and retried until he is a broken shell of a man (despite the 5th amendment), would raise far more awareness of the issue, while at the same time making the case for why multiple trials in the same issue is a bad idea. (BTW, I'm of the opinion that the 5th should eliminate virtually all mistrials, at least in possibly-capital cases, as the operative phrase is 'put in jeopardy', precisely because EACH trial has the possibility of ending the man's life.)

Also, you'll note that I picked The Screwtape Letters as the CS Lewis example, precisely because it's all about the fictional character deceiving the patient.

Thats like you thinking that Jessie “The Body” is gonna carry a mini-gun into the Governors mansion and “not have time to bleed”. (I wouldn’t even begin to think that you would do that, by the way.)((You didn’t? Did you??))

Um... what? I seriously don't understand what you're trying to say here.

Anything else you want to assume about me?

What assumptions have I really made? Be honest.

[OneWingedShark]

I just love how folks like to expand their perception of what they think I said. "Why anyone would listen to anything he has to say outside of his profession".

And I'm a programmer by profession... well, currently unemployed.
Does this mean that you'll listen to what I have to say on matters of programming?
How about matters of computation (like hardware) as that's tied into my field?

Does my lack of formal legal training trump my formal training in logic? (i.e. would you count my opinion as worthless because I'm not a lawyer/judge/policeman/etc?)
What if I were to, in a hypothetical situation debating the legality of some action under-color-of-law, pull out the Federal and/or State Constitution on the matter that was being discussed?
Or would my “lack of standing” extend to invalidate even considering superior law in the discussion?

[OneWingedShark]

>So our choice in 2012 is: four more years of obama, or eight years of Romney.
>
>Since obama’s twice as bad, there’s no difference!

But that’s just it; Obama’s NOT twice as bad. Obama and Romney are virtually the same on ALL matters of policy. Furthermore, Romney lacks the polarizing effect to make his enemies pool together. Therefore, we are actually WORSE OFF with Romney than Obama.

{Also, look at how Congress does not resist Obama in any meaningful way; this leads me to believe that Congress-as-a-whole is not Obama’s opponent... it would be nice to have someone who was in Congress.}

[Delta 21]

I really am sorry that I threw everybody off the track. I did not I mean to demean the entire works of literary fiction since time began. I wasnt even thinking about literature...(lets see...at noon I was thinking about...eating my samich...going back to work ((on a holiday)) and getting things done a little early and trying to salvage an extra hour before sundown today.)

GOOD GRIEF!!

I thought this thread was about Bruce Willis' political opinion, and at the outside, the lying Hollywood film industry and everyone thats associated with its lack of standing when it comes to believing anything that they have to say.

Oh, and I was a Curious George kid, myself.

[angcat]

Don't flatter yourself I never tried to convince anyone about Romney. I could care less who you people vote for don't worry.

[ansel12]

Conservatives do make you uncomfortable, it must be tough for you to handle FR.

[geege]

I’m conservative and voting for Romney.....is that a problem?????

[ansel12]

Gee, post 127 upset you?

[Revolting cat!]

It doesn’t take much to provoke the defenders of high culture, does it. Let’s talk about opera, shall we?

[geege]

Not at all ansel12....Just don’t bitch and moan another 4 years if 0bama wins....

[ansel12]

You set the rules for FR now?

Are you telling us to get behind your man or leave FR?

[Delta 21]

Yeah, silly me. I wasnt even holding out my pinky while eating by bologna sammitch.

[BearArms]

If we vote for a big government Republican just to vote against a liberal Democrat, all we're doing is helping the Republican Party move left. But worse than that, we're enabling the Republicans in their effort to enact their favored big govt programs. Look at GWB...his election allowed for the largest expansion of a federal entitlement in history. It would never have happened if a liberal Democrat had been in office (the "only Nixon could go to China" rule applies here).

Big government Republican presidents put federal spending and fiscal irresponsibility on the fast track (I mean, it must be okay if a Republican is doing it, right??). I, for one, will have no part in it. If government is to grow without limit, let the Democrats be the party responsible for it.

[geege]

I don’t know what your talking about....If you would rather see 0bama in office for another 4 years then you shouldn’t bitch and moan about it after he’s re-elected....Has nothing to do with rules....You should go argue with Levin....He’s voting for Romney....

[Rides_A_Red_Horse]

you would rather see 0bama in office for another 4 years then you shouldn’t bitch and moan about it after he’s re-elected....

---

Who was at fault when Dole lost to Clinton? Does your philosophy all the GOP hold any guilt?

Perhaps the Country Club Repubs should try backing Conservatives.

[ansel12]

Your instructions are meaningless if you don’t run freerepublic.

I think there will be much talk here by conservatives who won’t be voting for Mitt Romney, regardless of who wins the election.

[Lady Lucky]

Won’t waste my time.

[Lady Lucky]

But that’s just it; Obama’s NOT twice as bad. Obama and Romney are virtually the same on ALL matters of policy.

Ok. Obama wins, we get 4 years of him. Romney wins, we get 8 years of him. Same diff, except some folks would like to get it over with in 4 years rather than 8.

Either way, it's probably...over.

[Delta 21]

Electrons are cheep. Dont let me stop you. Go ahead. Let ‘er rip. If you have something to say, say it.

But I would appreciate it if you would peruse post #117 first.

It is after all up to you.