Home > Federal Government, Videos > I Have Great Respect For Clint Eastwood, but…

I Have Great Respect For Clint Eastwood, but…

I’m curious what other folks thought about the Chrysler advertisement at half time of Super Bowl 46, starring Clint Eastwood.

First, I thought it was very well done…elicited emotion response, focused on the importance of being an American, the importance of working together, the importance of the individual, a powerful ad.

Then, when Clint Eastwood made the statement that “it’s halftime in America too,” a little switch flipped in my head. This was a political advertisement, a campaign message supporting President Obama.

In my mind I started connecting the dots….

We spent 14 billion dollars bailing out Chrysler and Chevrolet…saved around 100,000 jobs…that is about 1 million dollars per job.

Was this advertisement a way for Chrysler and Chevrolet to thank the President for not forcing them to go through bankruptcy and aid him in his campaign for a second term?

Perhaps I am wrong, but after watching it a second time, I have the perception and believe this is a clear example of why the government should not be involved in private business and bailouts.

What do you think? Here is the video. Watch it again. Am I wrong?

  1. February 6, 2012 at 8:59 AM

    It’s half time – but we need a different coach and strategy. JMO.

  2. February 6, 2012 at 9:09 AM

    Guess you not the only one questioning Eastwood on this. Always been a Republican, I thought. article in huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/06/clint-eastwoods-super-bowl-commercial-_n_1256817.html

  3. February 6, 2012 at 9:10 AM

    What’s weird about that then is he is a registered Republican and he supported John McCain in 08 and he appears to be supporting Ron Paul in ’12 . If you are right about the intention of the commercial he has changed his vote or was duped. I would doubt he would of done it just for the money. You would think at 81 he could careless about money at this point in his life but who knows. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clint_Eastwood#Politics

  4. February 6, 2012 at 9:11 AM

    It would’ve had more meaning if it was just Clint. No attachment to any brand. That always dilutes the message not matter the intention.

  5. February 6, 2012 at 9:11 AM

    I hate to think about Clint Eastwood being connected to Obama, so didn’t think about it until you mentioned it. Unfortunately you may be right. Hopefully it was just a plea to get people to buy American made autos…

    • February 6, 2012 at 9:17 AM

      I’m also for buying American autos (I have three right now), but there’s another side to that story. Here in Indiana we benefit greatly from building lots of “foreign” cars like Subarus and Toyotas. To that point, we’ve got a fair share of US auto maker plants here too.

  6. February 6, 2012 at 9:17 AM

    What he meant was, Republicans destroyed our economy and blocked all efforts to create jobs, just so they could say Obama’s policies aren’t working. But it’s half-time now and people are finally waking up to the fact that Republican policies are catastrophic, not just for our country, but for the entire world.

    • February 6, 2012 at 9:26 AM

      Gotta’ say Ben, Democrats are good at that, when a Republican’s in office,don’t you agree?

  7. Rebecca
    February 6, 2012 at 9:21 AM

    I didn’t get any Obama connection from the commercial at all. I think it really is just an auto ad, probably as kind of a follow up to the one they had with Eminem last Super Bowl that was really similar. Since Clint Eastwood recently did Gran Torino, he’s a bit more connected with the city of Detroit. I really liked it, although might be extra inclined to really like these commercials since I am from the Detroit area.

    Also I’m more liberal than you/most of your readers are, I’m guessing, but that is part of the reason why I started following your blog. To get more views on animal agriculture/food production, mainly, but also to be exposed to more points of view in general 🙂

    • commonsenseagriculture
      February 13, 2012 at 10:26 PM

      Thank you for posting Rebecca! I’m with you on enjoying the ad. I thought it was very well done…one of the best for bringing out emotion and patriotism in the viewer…that I have seen in a very long time. I appreciate your following my blog. Feel free to share your thoughts and ask questions…I welcome them openly 🙂

  8. william wallace
    February 6, 2012 at 9:29 AM

    It be more to the point the sheriff ( clint) having told BARACK that
    he’s to get out of town // that he having shot too many in the back
    if he ain’t outa town by morning / then their to be a public hanging.

    The broken promises of BARACK but show his true political nature
    a fraudster / a liar / a cheat / a rogue / a criminal / an vile creature
    whom responible for great injustice / of great suffering / destrution.

    To put such a liar / a fraudster / into office for a second term that
    he can continue to kill slaughter / would be a grave injustice unto
    all humanity / more so those of PALESTINE / IRAN / IRAQ / as all
    people’s of the Middle East / where such human slaughter horrific.

    It’s time to for the american people in opening their eyes as hearts
    in saying NO to the butchering of humanity / in saying NO to such
    as BARACK whom promised in the restoring of / justice / equality /
    freedom / true democracy // yet brought only more injustice / more
    horrer / ever more appalling acts of inhumane /barbaric behaviour.

    It being not those of other nations whom the victims the American
    people under BARACK’s cruel dictatorship / having been stripped
    of their rights // where any individual can be arrested / having NO
    access to a lawyer // there being no trial /but be held in prison for
    any length of time // if be a trial / such being a trial behind closed
    doors under military law // where being one verdict / that of guility.

    It time BARACK got out of town // as its time he be put out of office.

  9. February 6, 2012 at 9:30 AM

    I would hate to think you’re right but the thought crossed my mind, as well!

  10. February 6, 2012 at 9:35 AM

    I was confused by this as well… After all just in November Eastwood stated “”But I’m a big hawk on cutting the deficit. I was against the stimulus thing too. We shouldn’t be bailing out the banks and car companies. If a CEO can’t figure out how to make his company profitable, then he shouldn’t be the CEO.”

    Another add to check out was the Silverado ad. At the end of the commercial they featured Twinkies and Hostess just recently filed bankruptcy. Is this implying we should bail them out… I am not sure what it was implying but for sure it has a political message.

    • February 6, 2012 at 9:51 AM

      Yeah, I caught that about the Twinkies too. Kind of a strange commercial. How about the vampire commercial- rather disturbing. Oh, that’s right it was a car commercial, hard 2 tell.

    • February 6, 2012 at 11:51 AM

      I took the Twinkie cameo as a take over on the never-ending thought that heavily processed foods like Twinkies are so unnatural, they will outlast nuclear holocaust. I didn’t see any politics to it at all.

  11. Don Stotts
    February 6, 2012 at 9:37 AM

    I don’t believe it’s a great example of whether or not the federal government should be involved in bailouts. Speaking as both an ag person and a media professional, the Clint Eastwood advertisement seems to largely be a failure if the intent is to increase support for Obama’s presidential campaign. That subtext is probably too subtle to have wedged into most viewers’ more obvious recognition that Clint Eastwood is giving America a pep talk through the example of hardworking auto industry employees (which we know was a group of Americans hit hard by the recession and for whom most people feel bad), and in a low-key style that makes it all the more effective when contrasted to the usual bombastic fanfare that goes on during a presidential election year. The fact that it is a Chrysler ad kind of gets lost. As presented, it’s easier for the viewer to start thinking about the important restoration of America’s manufacturing base than any call for political support, no matter the party. It’s easier to have our heartstrings tugged and feel good about hardworking people who were unemployed getting a chance to be more prosperous, as opposed to “big business” getting a bailout. In short, the Eastwood piece embodies the problem faced by many commericials: Many viewers can remember the clever spot but not the specific “product” being pushed. As for Chrysler buying commerical time to say “thanks,” they have that right as long as they don’t break FCC regulations regarding political advertising; if the FCC thinks they did then we’re certain to hear about it in the coming weeks/months, but at first glance it looks like Chrysler managed to tread the line with the context given.

  12. February 6, 2012 at 10:02 AM

    I don’t think it has anything to do with Obama in the least. The America auto industry has sucked wind for a long time. My dad was all buy American, but he started buying cars from other countries as well. To me the whole point of the ad is focused on the auto industry

  13. February 6, 2012 at 10:21 AM

    I had the opposite take on the commercial. I knew Eastwood was Republican and felt like the ad was pro Eastwood more than anything. Especially the line “We’re not going to be knocked out by one punch” referring to Obama’s one term in office. I started getting jack up that Eastwood would announce he was running next week and the Republican party was going to steamroll the election. But then my wife reminded me he was 80 and unlikely to happen.

  14. February 6, 2012 at 11:18 AM

    I thought the message was a-political – no real indication of either party – myself. After re-watching the commercial, trying to construe otherwise is a bit of a reach, IMO.

    When did statesmanship and political collegiality die? Was there a service? I didn’t even get to send flowers. Seems everyone is more interested in tearing the other side apart than trying to make things better for all. My way or the highway – but for dang sure not OUR way, right?

    My take on the commercial was one of expressing the notion that we all are interconnected and will stand united or fall divided.

    And that Chrysler makes a line of cars they would like you to buy….

  15. February 6, 2012 at 11:55 AM

    Well Jeff, you are not the only one to see the ad this way….
    http://www.gopusa.com/theloft/2012/02/06/was-that-the-super-bowl-or-the-obama-bowl/?subscriber=1

    It would be interesting to hear Clint’s explanation of the ad…

  16. February 6, 2012 at 10:23 PM

    Good insights Jeff…look, Hollywood is 90% left, period. And the 10% that might be “right” are mostly afraid to speak up…I come from that world and know it all too well!

  17. Doug Horst
    February 7, 2012 at 7:23 AM

    Great observation, Jeff.
    So Clint was on O’reilly last night.

    Clint Eastwood: ‘I am certainly not affiliated with Obama’
    http://t.co/Qe359lnd #Eastwood #Obama

  18. February 9, 2012 at 6:31 AM

    Hahaha I think you guys are thinking too much, and that has to be funny coming from the gal who is a deep thinker.

    I agree it would have been more effective not being attached to any brand. Folks would have asked anyway-kinda like an anonymous giver.

    Clint was perfect to give this message to American BECAUSE he is willing to stand on what he thinks not just a political party. He is Conservative fiscally and yet supports liberal social ideologies like gay marriage. He thinks on his own and does not let a political party tell him what is RIGHT or wrong.

    What does concern me is how everyone was quick to come to the negative conclusion instead of connect with the message it is time to work together. Look ahead and put the party bickering aside.

    Having friends in Detroit business, they have been able to do that because they were so close to bottom. It was about the flight to get up and not who was going to get credit.

    Maybe American has to hit more bottom for everyone to stop focusing on their petty differences and just come together already. Everyone is spending way too much time tearing each other down to rebuild America. Sad just damn sad.

  19. February 9, 2012 at 3:25 PM

    Again, everyone seems to be looking for the deep, hidden agenda meaning behind a simple and straight-forward statement. The take-away is ‘Buy American’ and build some pride in our domestic auto industry. Why is everyone so paranoid that there has to be a hidden meaning? I like the patriotic theme that it conveyed, and Chrysler had stated before the Super Bowl that this year’s ad would make another strong ‘Buy American’ statement, similar to the ‘Imported from Detroit’ ad that was so successful last year. I’m tired of all this over-analysis! Another example: McDonald’s does ads supporting the farmers that produce their fresh products and the critics go nuts. Really.

  20. scott
    February 27, 2012 at 5:14 AM

    This country is plauged with ignorance when it comes to politics. I honestly do not understand the absolute hatred for these “bailouts”. For the record, TARP was initiated and comlpeted under republican president GWB. I understand free market, but the economy is bigger than most can even comprehend. The banks and automakers bailed out were done so for a few simple reasons, to save american jobs. This country went unregulated and the banks took full advantage of the people. The people were stupid and thought they could afford more than they could, and no one was stopping them. The amount of jobs that would have been lost would have sunk this country into a deep depression. Instead, GWB and Obama decided to stop this from happening. These companies were given money however they had to pay it back. In fact, the tax payers have made a hefty profit from the bailouts. The government MADE money off of the bailouts. These companies were under government oversight until they paid back that money. So they were not simply given billions of our dollars. GM is now the #1 automaker in the world again. We beat the depression and have been actually doing well under Obama. I know everyone whines about jobs but anyone with a fractional understanding of basic economics KNOWS that the president does not control jobs. They would also know that post recession there is a stagnant period of growth where companies look to build capital. The stock market has been doing well for 3 years or so, meaning companies are doing well. Obama has actually shrunk the government by slashing jobs. His debt ratio is FAR FAR FAR less than GWB, GB sr. and Ronnie Reagan. These are cold facts. It annoys me that the teabaggers never complained about the hudreds and hundreds of billions being borrowed from china to fund iraq. But they whined about money to help their own country? I find it amazing when someone says Obama is the worst president ever blah blah fascist, blah blah, because it’s complete B.S. He took on one massive challenge when this country was on the verge of collapse. And guess what, we are doing pretty ok now. I have made a fortune in the stock market, which is solid proof.

    • February 28, 2012 at 12:02 PM

      1) GWB was a lame duck and went along with whatever the Democratically controlled congress wanted to do
      2) GWB warned Congress,not once,but THREE times that Fanny May and Freddy Mac needed to be modified and that the sub-prime mortgages were going to bankrupt the system
      3) Making a fortune on the stock market has as much bearing on the economy as making a fortune on a roulette wheel. Stock prices go up and down on the whims of rumors and have nothing to do with how well the economy is actually doing…
      4) IF he really wanted to do something about highways and bridges he could use the millions of dollars which are collected daily from fuel taxes.
      5) As GM and Chrysler manufacture more vehicles in Mexico and Canada then they do in the US, it was not near as much of a help as you assume, especially when you consider that the TOP line workers in Mexico only make $10 an hour yet they are selling them as if labor was costing them $60 an hour…

  1. May 19, 2012 at 1:17 AM

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: