Same with Carney.
The Dem "talking heads" and surrogates just can't bring themselves to acknowledge that the entire world "got" Eastwood's message loud and clear--and they have nowhere to hide.
Agree, too, with Applegateranch's comments on another thread about the genius of Eastwood's use of his object's own "egregious speech pattern," commonly referred to by pseudointellectual "progressives" as a sign of Obama's great intellect and deliberative style. Now, Eastwood's use of it, with "progressives" (an entire set of "empty chairs" when it comes to understanding and defending the ideas of freedom), such a "deliberate" and halting style denotes everything from senility to "doddering fool."
Another gem was his use of a former President's assessment of Romney's "stellar business performance" in this total unmasking of the great destroyer of business in America.
From Geraldo Rivera on FOX to Gloria Borger on CNN, the faux criticism and claims that Eastwood distracted from the Romney speech and Borger's claim that parts were "crass" are laughable when compared with much of the Dem performer language and inferences.
This was a priceless and iconic performance which will live on, long after Eastwood is gone, and Obama is a distant memory in the rearview mirror of presidents.
Thus far, Mr. Eastwood's use of Clinton's "stellar business performance" has either slid by unnoticed or is being ignored by Clint's Demo critics.
I heard it the first time by and thought that this is a very well thought out "bumbling" skit.
The Dem “talking heads” and surrogates just can’t bring themselves to acknowledge that the entire world “got” Eastwood’s message loud and clear—and they have nowhere to hide.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
A Tucson newspaper did an online poll: Did you like Clint Eastwood’s speech? The “Yes” vote was in the 90 percentile range. The “No” vote was embarrassingly low.
Struck me how the tweeted chair was not THE chair.
... which makes Clint’s point.
The photo depicted a chair with “The President” on it, but it wasn’t the Oval Office chair.