The Clint of the Matter

I have a love/hate relationship with politics. I love to hate it. I love to get angry about it. And I love to complain about it. But it's not disagreements over issues that keep me coming back and get me fired up. It's something else entirely.

When I've written about politics here in the past I've had a difficult time properly explaining what that something is. But now I think I finally have the perfect example of everything I'm fascinated with and despise. 

I don't have a problem with people who are pro-life or pro bombing Iran or pro calling women sluts. I disagree with them, but that doesn't bother me or really interest me that much. Heck, we're not going to agree on everything.

No, what really kills me, what I can't get over, what feeds my addiction to this stuff is:

Clint Eastwood and the empty chair.

As you know, at the Republican National Convention, Clint Eastwood gave a speech where he spoke to a chair as if Obama was sitting in it and talking back to him. It caused a stir and got people talking, not necessarily in a good way.

After the dust settled, Republican's rallied to Clint's defense. Conservative commentators and bloggers and tweeters were adamant about one thing: Clint Eastwood's speech was pure genius.

They loved it and defended it and refused to back down about it. Not only was Clint's speech not a disaster, it was the greatest moment of the entire convention. Clint destroyed Obama! He made Obama look like a damn fool. Clint won the week and was an American hero!!! 

Okay, THIS IS IT!

This is my problem. This is what I hate. This is what keeps drawing me back in to the fight.

Why?

Because what if Clint had spoke in prime time at the Democratic National Convention.  And what if he rambled in the exact same way, having a made up conversation with an empty chair that represented Mitt Romney.

Do you think these same conservatives would think it was a good speech?

Of course not. They would loudly, very, very loudly, mock the democrats and Clint. It would be relentless.

So there's my problem. Here we have the exact same speech by the exact same person. But depending on where he gives it, these people will have the exact opposite reaction?

Why can't they have an honest reaction? Why not be consistent? Why can't there be critical thinking? Why would people want to be like this? Why would they want to say what everyone else in their party is saying?

I'm desperate for these answers. It's what keeps me coming back. Why?!!!

Let me see if I can make this even clearer:

The 49ers are my favorite team. On Sunday, they are playing the Packers. I hate the Packers. Let's say on the opening possession, Alex Smith throws a pick six to Charles Woodson. And then Aaron Rodgers reels off 400 yards passing and 5 touchdowns. In the fourth, with the game out of reach, the Niners punch in a meaningless touchdown to make the final score 52-7.

And then on Monday I come on here and write "the 49ers made the Packers look like idiots!!!"

Wouldn't I sound like a retard? Like a crazy person? Like a blind, raving, fool?

That's what these people sound like to me, every fricking day. And I just can't let it go. I have to say something. Sometimes your side gets it's ass kicked, that doesn't mean you should brag about it! I don't understand it.

When I yell at conservatives on the internet, it is always about this. It is never about what they believe. It is always about this dishonesty. This fake cheerleading. This hypocrisy.

Do democrats do it too? Uh, yeah. Of course. But it's not as coordinated. And the dems don't have these national media figures like the conservatives do. There's no democrat version of Rush Limbaugh, or Hannity, or Malkin, or Coulter, or O'Reilly, or Ingrahm, I mean, it's endless.

Democrats have, at best, very weak versions of them, who have no influence on the party. I don't think Ed Schultz is talking to anyone besides Mama and Papa Shultz (as you immediately wonder, who in the hell is Ed Schultz?)

When I'm watching Clint Eastwood at the RNC, or Sarah Palin getting interviewed by Katie Couric, or any of these moments, I'm always thinking, "how bad does it have to be?" How bad does it have to be before Republicans admit that it's bad?

And the answer is always: it can never be bad enough. Never. It can't be. Or else the dirty liberals will win.