His Inner Eastwood
That’s what Ignatius wants Obama to dig deep for as he stumbles through his economic stimulus standoff. I don’t even know where to start with this cluelessly irony-packed commentary, except to say that if Obama could summon anything like a little “inner Eastwood,” this would be a very different presidency.
“What Would Dirty Harry Do?” … that works.
“Man With No Name” orders Guantanamo closed, military tribunals shut down. “Get 250 coffins ready.”
That works, too.
A man has got to know his limitations. But it starts with not caring if you’re liked, not living to be admired. Which is where this script falls apart. Sucking up to the local thugs and helping them pad their pockets? Not an Eastwood move. Ignatius is right about that.
One start would be to scrub the stimulus legislation for any hint of wasteful spending for partisan political gain. Another would be to review pending nominations anew for tax and other problems — and any suggestion that the old rules of Washington still apply.
That’s not “one start.” With the grotesquely misnamed economic stimulus plan … try Demo-nomic auto-erotic scheme … it’s the whole teen high school comedy. That WaPo screenwriter needs to work on his continuity. This script shoots itself in the foot:
… most of all, Obama needs to tell GOP leaders what he expects, and make clear the political consequences of obstruction. In that sense, the tone of his Post op-ed today was off. The themes were there; what was missing was that Clint Eastwood snarl: Go ahead, Senator. Defy my stimulus program. Make my day!
Anyway, I thought the whole point of Obamism was to get away from cowboy politics as usual.
G’day Instapundit. Always so good to see you. Speaking of that economic thing, OK, I’m convinced, It’s a Depression. Well, at least we have Bi-Partisanship, Bi-Schmartisanship.
Topics: Obama
Posted by Jules Crittenden at 11:12 am on Friday, February 6, 2009
8 Responses to “His Inner Eastwood”
Leave a Reply
Trackback URLYou must be logged in to post a comment.
February 6th, 2009 at 11:18 am
It starts with the raincoat. Obama needs a very good Italian-inspired coat as would be worn by the Man with No Name.
Then he needs a background score by Ennio Morricone. That helps with the dramatic moments, what with all the High Noon settling of scores with Congressional aides and nebbishy TARP experts from Treasury likely to occur should our previously pensive — albeit messianic — President square off with his foes.
February 6th, 2009 at 12:12 pm
[...] Crittenden is right, this is a cluelessly ironic piece of drivel. [...]
February 6th, 2009 at 12:24 pm
I love how to people like Ignatius, it’s somehow the Republican party’s fault that this crap sandwich of a bill is in trouble, and that Obama has made himself look like a bumbling incompetent so far. I keep seeing this all over the leftysphere, and it’s delusional. The Republicans have absolutely no legislative power to stop anything that Congress and Obama want. NONE. The only power they have is in voicing objections to laws that are, h/t Jules, “deeply unpopular” with the American people. THAT’S why the bill is in trouble, not because Republicans don’t like it.
February 6th, 2009 at 1:37 pm
I liked the way Richard Fernandez put it:
February 6th, 2009 at 7:37 pm
Frankly, so far the Obama Administration is coming off less like Dirty Harry and more like the Pink Panther.
February 6th, 2009 at 9:41 pm
the reason the suggestion that Obama be like Dirty Harry is silly is because Obama is inherently, and obviously, a girly-man. That is how he has won the presidency: he made a visceral appeal to the 14-year-old girl inside some half of the American electorate (men and women).
February 7th, 2009 at 4:33 pm
More like his “Inner Meryl Streep” than his “Inner Clint Eastwood”.
February 7th, 2009 at 6:59 pm
[...] February 7, 2009 Posted by Jehuda in Uncategorized. Tags: Film, News, Politics trackback Obama’s “Innear Eastwood”? I doubt Obama harbors [...]