While I was finalizing the car situation this week Stacy McCain was on the road to Tampa filing report after report.

Today he and Ali are on the road home but a problem has come up with the car.

It might make it back, it might not, at best he will have a $300 bill when he gets home, at worst he will need an expensive repair on a holiday weekend.

That stinks.

He needs two things.

One is easy prayer, that can help him make it to the house.

The other is cash, let make sure once he gets there the car can be fixed.

Go over there and hit the freaking Tip Jar, Clint Eastwood would want you to.

Update: Stacy’s post at the local Ray Kroc Memorial Media Center is up,

Sheldon: Amy Farrah Fowler has asked me to meet her mother.

Leonard: Yeah, so.

Sheldon: What does that mean?

Leonard: Well, you know how you’re always saying Amy is a girl who is your friend but not your girlfriend.

Sheldon: Uh huh.

Leonard: Well, you can’t say that anymore.

The Big Bang Theory The Desperation Emanation 2010

Although my Breitbart “Bring it On” video remains the single most popular video I ever shot in terms of total hits (even making MSNBC) the video that constantly gets comments on a weekly basis is Rick Santorum’s answer to a college student during the New Hampshire Primary on the subject of Gay Marriage:

The full nine minutes is a spectacular reasoned argument by Santorum simply knocking it out of the park. The most interesting point was when he posed the following question to the crowd of liberal college students:

“Everyone has the right to be happy so if you’re not happy unless your married to five other people is it OK?”

The college kids were not happy with the question claiming it was “irrelevant”

Well it’s less than 9 months later and guess what? It’s not irrelevant anymore as per this article in the Guardian:

Why shouldn’t three people get married?

As three Brazilians are legally joined as a ‘thruple’ it starts to look illiberal to insist that marriage must be between two people

Note the appeal to “feelings” it doesn’t matter what Marriage actually IS it matters how something feels. Notice also the arguments that sound so familiar:

Without reverting to religious arguments, or logistical ones (does Ikea manufacture a big enough bed to accommodate this union?), it begins to feel a bit illiberal.

Is it possible that if we allowed more people to marry simultaneously that more marriages might be successful? Fewer breakups over infidelity might occur, for example, if those who found themselves in love with more than one person didn’t have to choose or conceal their feelings. And relaxing the expectation that one partner should fulfil all of one’s needs – good sex, complementary taste in television and shared preference for dogs over cats may just be too much to ask for – might mean that people who opt for a portfolio of other halves (or thirds) could outdo the rest of us in happiness.

Yes and if we re-defined the word deficit to mean only amounts over 500 Trillion then we would no longer have one.

That this is advanced in the Guardian is interesting, even more interesting is the comments, tons of people agreeing after all one does not want to be “Judgmental.”

I submit and suggest anyone who claims they didn’t see this coming was either delusional, ignorant or a liar and I further submit and suggest that the basic goal of this debate from the start has been for many of those involved the destruction of marriage as an institution.

But I will concede this in terms of logic, ignoring the religious argument she is quite correct, if you redefine marriage to include gay marriage there is absolutely no logical case to forbid any other different combination ick-factor not withstanding.

When I saw the Clint Eastwood speech yesterday, an image formed in my mind:

For those too young to remember that is Rowan & Martin’s Laugh-In and John Wayne in that bunny suit. That’s the last time I saw something this Ayptical from a Hollywood icon.

I thought Eastwood’s presentation was one of the weirdest things I’ve ever seen, somebody said on TV it was a variation of an old Morry Amsterdam bit (Eastwood is certainly old enough to remember Amsterdam) but that might just have been a bad joke.

Nevertheless I submit that the Clint Eastwood bit worked absolutely perfectly for the GOP in general and Mitt Romney in particular. Here is why:

1. The Presence:

A lot of people who normally wouldn’t have tuned into the RNC yesterday tuned in to see Eastwood.

2. The oddity of it:

If it was a regular “Make my Day” speech they would have changed the channel when it was done, this was so odd that I suspect people kept the TV there just to see what people might say about it or if there was any odd reaction.

3. The memorable lines:

Because Eastwood bit was so odd, the memorable lines “Politicians are employees of ours”, “When somebody does not do the job, you gotta let ‘em go.” stood out and will be remembered.

4. The lead-in:

Those folks who stayed looking for Eastwood reactions who normally would have gone caught Marco Rubio, who hit it out of the park for Romney and he gave a speech that would hold them.

5. The Comparison:

The Mitt Romney speech contrasted to the Eastwood bit was a smashing success.

6. Drawing their fire:

Take a look at this image from Memeorandum as of 8:31 AM

And here is the stuff on the Romney speech same page:

What is Missing? Attacks on Romney’s speech! Today was the day that the Democrats should be hitting Romney’s speech and trying to counter it a-la Ryan. Instead the readers of the Morning papers, Cable TV and the left blogs are reading attacks on Eastwood. Clint Eastwood is playing the same role as a hero in an old western, drawing all the fire so the good guy could escape unharmed.

7. Picking on an old man:

The left has been particularly strong hitting Clint Eastwood, Here are three images from Twitchy

Not only is it not smart to hit an American Icon, what do you think the reaction of the elderly voters who always show up will be to the “pick on the old guy” bit? I suspect it won’t play well at all.

For tall these reasons Clint Eastwood appearance at the RNC made my day and I suspect it made the Romney campaign’s day too.

There were a lot of speeches yesterday. Mike Eurzonie gave a great one, Marco Rubio made a better one, Clint Eastwood made an odd one and Mitt Romney is giving his as I type this.

In the morning when this post will go up, there will be an awful lot of pixels spent to say what they think about Mitt’s speech but it was not the most important words said on the air yesterday. The most important words came from of all People Michael Moore:


Listen to these quotes:

The big problem is Obama’s base is ‘Yeah I think I’m going to vote for him’ but this time four years ago everybody including myself were working on phone banks.

and this

Young people who were voting for him four years ago are not that enthused and are not working like they were four years ago.

Moore did something you don’t often see him do, give an honest assessment of a situation, acting not as a propagandist but as a realist. He said out loud what a lot of people on the left know and what the media know but are doing their best to hide.

This post has over 10,000 comments I read through a bit over 50% during & after the Romney speech (a good speech but not a killer one) and from what I can see in comments it affirms what I’ve been saying for over a year…

“Ride right through them, they’re demoralized as hell”!

And if you don’t believe me read those comments and believe them and when you do remember, the Huff Post folks are the left’s footsoldiers.

Update: American Glob, The Daily Caller and the Evil Blogger Lady (who was there first) get it.