Aww. Wasn't it so sweet of President Obama to react so nicely to Clint Eastwood's RNC speech by lobbing such compliments as: "I am a huge Clint Eastwood fan" and "his movies are terrific" and he's "not offended at all" by his speech the other night. I'm sure this reaction was carefully crafted and his media lapdogs will jump all over it as another opportunity to paint Obama as just the greatest guy ever, and See! This is why he needs to be re-elected President!
But that was exactly Eastwood's point in his speech. Just because Obama is a nice guy doesn't mean he deserves to stay in office. Notice that while Obama was busy taking the higher road and saying how great Eastwood is, he wasn't addressing some of the important points that Eastwood and Republicans have continued to raise.
What about those 23 million unemployed people?
What about closing Guantanamo Bay?
What about that war in Afghanistan and all those soldiers that want to come home from that war?
Of course Obama should not be offended by Eastwood's speech. That was a dumb question for a reporter to ask him, but also a clever one because it takes the focus off the serious questions raised in the speech that we voters have a right to have answers to.
We are the ones that should be offended -- by Obama and his inability to lead this country to a better, more financially stable future. As strange or rambling Eastwood might have been in his delivery, the questions he asked of an "invisible Obama" (which pretty much nails the last four years on the head) could not have been more salient or crystal clear.
What about 'hope and change' and 'yes we can' and all those other promises that you didn't keep, Mr. President?
We're still waiting ...
Did you find Clint Eastwood's RNC speech offensive at all to the President?