Posted on 02/16/2012 2:14:19 PM PST by Michael van der Galien
The Barack Obama budget document just released is not a budget. It is a work of literature. It is Barack Obama’s published apologia for a second presidential term, in which—as the budget and its tax proposals make clear—he will reset the historic balance in America between the public sector and the private sector. This reset will require large wealth transfers—from individuals and companies to the government, and from the government back to the people.
The Obama budget is described everywhere as a “political document,” but it is more than that. Mr. Obama hasn’t assembled these ideas just to get elected. This budget is a statement of belief. It is a road map of where he wants the country to go.
This being so, it behooves us to revisit the most controversial political event of the past two weeks—Clint Eastwood’s Super Bowl commercial for the Chrysler car company.
This ad was widely viewed as an argument for a second Obama term. It is undoubtedly true that the pro-Obama admen who created the commercial embedded a pro-Obama spin. Asked about this afterward, Clint Eastwood said simply: “I certainly am not politically affiliated with Mr. Obama.”
No sensible person would try to disagree. When The Man With No Name looks at you dead on, as he did Super Bowl Sunday, and says it’s halftime in America and the country will come roaring back, you know the man speaking those words wasn’t talking about his embrace of the vision in Barack Obama’s 2013 budget.
Well, we already know what he would do, he’d make a commercial for BHO about Chrysler.
Uh oh...Bill Ayers has been busy again!
Eastwood?
Don’t think he would stick his neck out in any way—fine actor, though!
Semper Watching!
******
Dunno, why don’t we ask him at halftime...
I'll take "Tell Lies About a Non-existent Recovery in Third-World Detroit" for $600, Alex.
At the top of my “disappointed, but glad I found out now list”: Eastwood and Christie
I think the question was “what” not “who”. However, in this case it may be a distinction without a difference...
Cash the DNC's check, get invites to the best parties, and wait for the next DNC check, like any good Hollywood mercenary.
![](http://i47.tinypic.com/xqfihw.png")
Even if most FReepers didn't realize Eastwood was pimping Chrystler and nor Government Motors, he was still pimping that liberal hellhole paradise Detroit.
To say I was disappointed in him is an understatement.
Run him down for the ad and its political implications, but leave geography out of it.
Unless you want to take on Tom Selleck, Tim Allen, Bob Seger, Ted Nugent, and a lot of other people.
It certainly is, yeah. Having said that, I was also disappointed he appeared in that ad. A conservative - a believer in small government - cannot possibly endorse any bailout.
>>Last time I checked Detroit was still part of the United States.
Run him down for the ad and its political implications, but leave geography out of it.
<<
And a shining example of what liberalism produces. It is the biggest hellhole in the USA. NOLA, another liberal hellhole, is a close #2.
Geography is very much on point.
20 Things We Can Learn About The Future Of America From The Death Of Detroit
“distinction without a difference..” my favorite saying.
A lot of people complain about being despised by elites in New York or Los Angeles, but they're very quick to express contempt themselves for people who live in some other part of the country.
They have a lot of moral indignation, but they don't object to snobbery or condescension or disrespect themselves, they just want to be the ones dishing it out.
I'm not saying that's you. I don't know. There are legitimate concerns about Eastwood and his ad. Throwing "pimping for Detroit" in there just distracts from them.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.