It’s not the first time a childhood hero turned out to be a douc
Obama by a Landslide in 2012
Hello, fans! It’s been a long time! Seven years! Wow!
Clint Eastwood was – WAS – my hero through Firefox, when was that? 1982? I didn’t like Firefox that much and for some composite of reasons I let him go. Went to see “Pale Rider” and thought it sucked. I kind of liked “The Unforgiven,” and “In the Line of Fire”… The “edge” westerns of his stopped with “The Outlaw Josey Wales” and the Dirty Harry series should have stopped with “Magnum Force” – one of the greatest films of all time – for the music and the co-stars (Tim Matheson, David Soul, et al). And for what it’s worth, my favorite of Clint Eastwood’s films is “High Plains Drifter” – a feast for fans of westerns, horror movies, in-jokes, and dark characters.
As far as I’m concerned, he’s a douchebag. Not because he’s a so-called “conservative” and been plenty successful at politics, business, procreating, shaking off crazy women without apology and so on… that stuff is the hallmark of a high-quality movie star…
He’s a douchebag for endorsing Mitt Romney’s Presidential candidacy.
According to some website, Clint Eastwood said that Mitt Romney would “restore, hopefully, a decent tax system that we need badly… so that there’s a fairness and people are not pitted against one another as to who’s paying taxes and who isn’t.” Gee, Clint, what’s wrong with the tax system that, over the last 60 years made and kept you a multi-millionaire? Same with Jenna Jameson – who also endorsed Romney in the same article (OK, here’s the link) apparently because, as a rich person, it’s better if there’s a Republican in the White House. I guess she didn’t do so well with Bill Clinton in office, wait a minute, that’s when she did her best work – that’s made her filthy – FILTHY – rich… But I digress.
So wealthy octogenarian Clint Eastwood, about whom I’ve yet to hear an Alzheimer’s joke, thinks we need Romney to “restore” whatever. I guess during the commie-socialist years since the 2000 election he was just taxed too hard and couldn’t make a cent. Hold on, a bit more than half that time we had George W. Bush in office and the US was fully employed, stocks were all go-go, and it was safe to use your house like a free ATM, right? Despite the wars – the wars that made a hell of a lot of people very rich.
My understanding of recent economic history is that it all came to a grinding halt about 2007 and the bottom fell out of everything due to the interference of UFO aliens in the housing market (do you have a better explanation?). And starting in January 2009, with a new Executive Administration, the USA was forced to wear sackcloth, eat ashes and shave our collective heads.
And things didn’t get better, depending on your perspective.
Because, in my expert opinion, the Tea-partying Republicans, who took over from the do-nothing idiot Democrats who took over from the stupid idiot Republicans (they threw away everything an alliance with Ed Koch and Ron Silver bought them), don’t really want things to get better. They would rather the entire country come to an economic bottom than give the Irish guy in the White House anything other than complete political failure.
I think it’s because he’s identified as Irish and “those people” are still not accepted as an “Americanized” ethnicity. But some may disagree.
Is David Lee Beowulf endorsing Barrack Obama in 2012? Are you kidding? I never vote for commie-pinko, collectivist, hippie liberals! But I like the present and future Republican machinery a hell of a lot less so it’s understandable for me to prefer the re-election of President Obama. I guess my opinion on these matters has evolved – though I voted for a black guy in 2008!
Among Barry’s accomplishments in office there are: getting Osama Bin Laden, Ending the Iraq War (as a war), speaking in favor of bettering Americans who have found themselves in dire economic straights (that would not include people of the wealth of Mr. Eastwood and Ms. Jameson), surrounding himself with wealthy liberals, a bunch of stuff that doesn’t effect me or stuff that I don’t care about, all sorts of things that I disagree with but he at least isn’t pro-feudalism, he’s smart about the importance and influence of the Clintons, and standing firm on his public principles in the face of incredible adversity. I can’t help but respect him. But I digress yet again.
Getting back to the sackcloth-wearing thread, none of the Republicans is wearing sackcloth or giving up much of anything.
But economics isn’t what’s going to cost Romney the election. No one cares about economics anymore because it’s more important to hate the Irish guy because he’s Irish. Bush-hating liberals forgot that W. was a progressive center-rightist (oh yes he was and is!). And, accordingly, Irish-hating “conservatives” have failed to notice that B.O. is a progressive, corporate, center-leftist, an economic inclusionist, and a hawk. Shoot, the guy could almost be an Irish Dick Cheney!
Romney will not win because he’ll likely not get the votes of two key political blocs: Christians, African Americans and serious students of American conspiracy theory. (Oops, that’s three, but the third no one knows about so it doesn’t count.)
Christians, especially the so-called “Evangelicals” will find it difficult to vote for a Mormon. Christians historically (and currently) view Mormonism as a cult. It will be fun to watch who among the popular TV evangelists compromises on this… Is it more important to be a “conservative” or a Christian?
In a nutshell, Mormons believe that Joseph Smith discovered – with help from the angel Moroni – and subsequently translated, the Book of Mormon, written on gold plates, buried in Palmyra, New York. This book tells the amazing story of the pre-Columbian Anglo Israelites who inhabited North America, built impressive cities, fought incredible wars, nearly annihilated themselves, and wrote books in a language only Joe Smith could translate. The original gold plates have long since been called back to the planet Kolob.
And from roughly 1830 on, the Mormons built an amazing Global Empire that allowed (or allows, nay, demands it, if you’re a Mormon Fundamentalist) polygamy, forbids drinking of coffee, condemns masturbation, and a bunch of other stuff.
By divine revelation, the Mormon leadership decided to dispense with their position on polygamy in favor of Utah reaching Statehood. But they’re still on the books about prohibiting coffee and masturbation. Anyone who’s read the Bible will know that while many of the prominent Biblical personalities practiced polygamy, there are strong warnings against it as taught through the adventures as object lessons of said personalities like David, though it’s not prohibited – unless one wants to be a deacon of the church. The Bible doesn’t say anything about not drinking coffee or jerking off, so no one can claim them as forbidden by God. Yeah, the Bible doesn’t say anything about shooting heroin, either, so I would conclude that any laws regarding heroin are strictly of human origin… (…so is there a Biblical precedent for the War on Drugs? I can’t find one.)
While there may be “marginal” Christians or “Secular” followers of the Abrahamic religions (i.e., Islam, Christianity, and Judaism), where they identify with some of what they consider mainstream-palatable tenants of said religion and they live their peaceful, lawful lives as they see fit (e.g., Bill Clinton). There’s no such thing as a marginal or secular Mormon. A Mormon lives his daily life looking authoritatively to their Living Prophet and the works of previous Prophets, on back to Brigham Young and Joseph Smith, as the receiver and arbiter of divine revelation from God. They’ve got rules to follow and they are monitored.
Anyway, core beliefs of Mormons include that Jesus and Satan are brothers, Mormons can become Gods, and a bunch of other stuff. And thus Evangelical Christians will find themselves hard-pressed to vote for someone who firmly believes in and identifies with these, and other, weird, anti-Biblical teachings, no matter how well behaved they are.
African Americans will likely not vote for a Mormon, either.
Until 1978 African Americans were, in accordance with divine revelation to the prophet at the time, to put it nicely, “inferior.” Or, in the words of Brigham Young, “You see some classes of the human family that are black, uncouth, uncomely, disagreeable and low in their habits, wild and seemingly deprived of nearly all the blessings of the intelligence that is generally bestowed upon mankind.” Powerful stuff, contrast it with lily-white Christian Abolitionist, John Brown, predating Young: “If it is deemed necessary that I should forfeit my life for the furtherance of the ends of justice, and mingle my blood further with the blood of my children and with the blood of millions in this slave country whose rights are disregarded by wicked, cruel, and unjust enactments-I submit; so let it be done.” And it was, as Brown was soon after executed for treason (and murder…).
To which I suppose Brigham Young’s reply was “Shall I tell you the law of God in regard to the African race? If the white man who belongs to the chosen seed mixes his blood with the seed of Cain, the penalty, under the law of God, is death on the spot. This will always be.” Modern translation: “you’re a putz, John Brown!”
Don’t believe me? Do a web search. John Brown’s history should be well known to all Americans, Brigham Young’s, maybe. Do a web search for the quotes, you’ll find them.
Mitt Romney was 31 years old in 1978. His accomplishments at the time included a Mormon mission to France and missing out on Viet Nam.
Until he was 31 the public would presume that he firmly believed that (heresy, see Acts 8:27, etc.) black people were cursed by God because God said so through the Mormon prophets.
Despite the numbers of African Americans becoming Mormons, unless Mitt Romney explains his position — and he likely won’t because any thoughts contrary to the hive-mother’s, retroactive or not, could be akin to a death sentence – he’s not going to get the votes of this important group of American voters.
Joseph Smith and his apostles’ goal was a kingdom on earth. They were a group of physically strong, charismatic white men who were determined through right of concentrated, concerted force to take as much land and white women for themselves as they could. They almost got it in Illinois – before Joseph was dragged out of a jail and killed by a mob. They almost had it in Utah, too, but they joined the Union as a State and had to tone it down a bit.
They have thus since waited.
They have thus since sent missionaries all over the world, have built “Temples” in many major world cities, they figure prominently in all levels of government, they have recruited legions, they command an economic empire worth billions of dollars that’s got its tentacles in all facets of the American enterprise, they are an army of non-masturbating, tee-totaling coffee-abstainers, working tirelessly for the right time…
The right time wasn’t 1968 when Mitt Romney’s father ran for president.
The right time is NOW, to quote Thulsa Doom, er, Brigham Young, “…when the Constitution of the United States hangs, as it were, upon a single thread, they [the people of the United States] will have to call for the ‘Mormon’ Elders to save it from utter destruction; and they will step forth and do it.”
Gird thy loins, folks!
But… my money’s on the Irish guy come 7 November 2012.