Greg Sheridan on The GOP Convention

[tewiremu]

Cut and paste "Magnum Force for Mitt Romney" into Google News. It will take you to the biggest pile of horseshit since the charge of the Light Brigade. Greg Sheridan must be on Deludin.

"Eastwood's performance was full of that art which conceals an art, and it was lethal."

What a piece of spin. Eastwood came across as a doddering old fart with a bad sense of humour.
You fucking idiot, Sheridan. He must be hoping that his readership don't have Fox Cable, and access to Jon Stewart. For those of you who don't, listen to the real story on Huffington Post. (Note: there are three parts to the vid. Watch them all.)

[jreidy]

Even Romney's spokesman are on records as denying any knowledge, role in Clint's speech, everyone is backing away from it.
As you suggest, poor old Greg may not be aware of the thing call 'the Internet'.
(personally I prefer the Italian term - 'infostrada')

[Matthew Of Canberra]

Wow. I have to admit that I've sort of tuned out of the US presidential thing. I haven't really followed the GOP convention. But the coverage I have skimmed over seemed to be uniformly positive - even huffpo's singing its praises. But I haven't bothered to watch any video or read any transcripts (I honestly don't care - we know who the nominees are, and the rest of the knees-up is only relevant to the faithful)

So I'd just sort of assumed that all the glowing praise that supporters had heaped upon eastwood's appearance was probably justified - I mean, he's clint eastwood! It's not _that_ radical that they've found an actor who votes republican. I can think of plenty of apparently conservative actors and directors (although I couldn't really say for sure who they vote for). I just think there are more who vote democrat who like to talk about it, is all.

But it would seem that reality has been somehow warped by expectations and aspirations. Either that, or the people who would normally criticise it have decided to take a pass.

Is it possible that mrs romney's speech also wasn't as great as the headlines have led me to believe?

I have noted one thing, though. Apparently Bush 43 is nowhere to be seen. Could it be that history is judging earlier than expected?

Aside for military history buffs: Antony Beevor was on lateline a couple of nights ago.

www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2012/s3580824.htm

[Matthew Of Canberra]

Some time ago I posted a comment at PP that it seemed that the US right had settled on an overt strategy of attacking and discrediting political fact-checkers and the like, and that this did not augur well for the way the GOP campaign would proceed.

And here's the pudding:

www.huffingtonpost.com/sophia-a-mcclennen/truthiness-is-not-a-joke_b_1849256.html

mediamatters.org/research/2012/08/31/in-lockstep-conservative-media-turn-to-attackin/189688

mediamatters.org/video/2012/09/02/on-cnn-wash-posts-jennifer-rubin-plays-defense/189715

And aren't the punters loving it ...

www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2012/08/28/Romney-to-media-fact-checkers-drop-dead

We are in the post-fact era. We're through the truth barrier now, and it's smooth flying ahead. Just attack anyone who points out the lies as being part of the problem. Just don't do it when they're picking on the other guy because, despite the paranoia on the right, politifact and factcheck do actually go after the dems when they fib too. They've been particularly supporting of mitt romney over the business with his old company.

But I guess the GOP doesn't need them for that. They've got Fox.

[angra]

Facts are just boring trivia, brought up by lefties.

Reminds me of this excellent Rumsfeld quote, much admired by the Far Right (aka News Ltd.)...

"there are no "knowns." There are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say there are things that we now know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we do not know we don't know. So when we do the best we can and we pull all this information together, and we then say well that's basically what we see as the situation, that is really only the known knowns and the known unknowns."

Also "I'm not into this detail stuff. I'm more concepty. "

And ...

"We do have a saying in America: if you're in a hole, stop digging ..... erm, I'm not sure I should have said that."

No it's not Monty Python, it's the US Defense (sic) Secretary on the killing of more than 100,000 Iragis.

[Matthew Of Canberra]

Who thinks it's too early to ask Mitt who he's going to attack?

I mean ... he's a rep. He has to have a war, so that everyone looks the other way as he shovels money to party interests and spies on everyone else. It also means he can top obama's debt spending, but nobody will mind, because "there's a war on". And it'll give everyone something to be scared off so they don't ask questions - and if they do ask questions, well, there are things the FBI can do about that these days.

It _is_ doing to happen. Bookmark this page - watch and see.

Ok, people will die. But it's great politics. You know it.