xyzzy

No, he's really not. He's "both sides are terrible, no one wants to work anymore, and everyone's too sensitive" center right curmudgeon.

2016:

"There's been just too much funny business on both sides of the aisle."

"I think both individuals and both parties backing the individuals have a certain degree of insanity." Eastwood said in the same interview, "I'm not on either side of the aisle. I think most Americans are going, 'What the...? Is this all we can do?' ...When there were 17 people on the stage [in the early GOP debates], I thought, well, there are three or four people up there I could see voting for. They seem pretty good. I had a few...and then I thought, what the hell happened?"

In a red carpet interview with Extra on September 8, 2016, when asked about supposedly supporting Trump, Eastwood replied, "You know, I haven't supported anybody, really," and jokingly suggested that Trump and Clinton constituted a modern-day Abbott and Costello, referring to the bumbling comedians of the 1940s and early 1950s.

Then he endorsed Michael Bloomberg in 2020. That's it.

Yeah. I think it's somewhere in between this and the above post. I think he thinks it's funny, and he likes stirring the pot for his own amusement or to deflect from something else. I don't think he's thinking about it as a demoralization tactic; I think he's just having fun because he doesn't take being president seriously and he's just seeing what he can get away with.

I think Trump is mainly there for grifting, trolling, and bullying, and all the other stuff is just because he wants his crazy base to love him. He just uses the issues as leverage.

Talking big on the Internet

Yeah, first, this is movies, not politics.

Second, what the fuck does this even mean? Clint Eastwood doesn't make "MAGA movies," whatever those might be, and although he said some things in support of Trump back in 2016, he endorsed Michael Bloomberg in 2020. Also, again, none of this has any relation to his movies.

South Korea's population will be cut in half in less than 50 years and be right around the size of North Korea by that time, which will have a much larger army unless South Korea dramatically increases conscription.

Within 70 years, South Korea will cease to be a functioning society. Their options are to dramatically and abruptly increase immigration (overtaking their native population and thereby wreaking havoc on their culture), reunify with North Korea (whose population would overtake theirs), or just give up and accept fate.

Either way, they're going to be overrun or die out in the long run, and it'll only get harder for working age people. Not sure nuclear armament is the best strategy given the demographic realities...

More than two times. The US has used wide scale tariffs many times in the past, particularly in the 19th century and into the early 20th. They directly caused or were a significant contributing factor to a recession and FIVE depressions. The last one was the Great Depression.

I've got to say, the fact that these lists are so small is impressive. I haven't compared the lists, but it seems like many of the issues that were previously found have already been addressed as well.

I mean, he of course thinks white people are superior. That's why he's a white supremacist.

But he said the first comment about Air Jordans in Atlanta, then a follow-up talked about low IQ, which is a racist stereotype most closely associated with black people, and low impulse control, which feeds into the racist narrative that black people are more primitive.

Also, white supremacists typically have a hierarchy of hate, and black people are usually at the top of it. In other words, white supremacists hate all non-white races, but they still have priorities.

Anyway, this guy sucks.

He's a white supremacist. He means black people. Note the bold.

In October of that year, he responded to a video of people in a neighborhood in Atlanta, saying: “When a population gets feral, a little snip snip keeps things in control. Could offer incentives (Air Jordans, etc.).”

“Where do these population reduction conspiracies come from? All I see is trash multiplying,” he wrote in January 2023.

In May of that year, Beattie wrote on X that “It's not politically correct to say, but low-IQ, low-impulse control populations lack higher reasoning and moral faculties---they require strict corporal punishment and threat of violence to function properly within a society. Instead of anarcho-tyranny, we need Singapore for the dumb and violent, and Sweden for the more elevated.”

A bunch of rich 80-year-olds should not be running our country. It's why the response to Trump has been so anemic: they're too comfortable and they can't be bothered.

In other words, it cannot be exclusively one narrow demographic. That's not ageism; that's just common sense.

Not a great sign for physical media if even something like Dragon Quest I & II is a key card release. I can't imagine they're exceeding the storage budget.

The US isn't the only country on the planet. The real question is what are other country's debt ratios, and how have those impacted their economies? And the answer is there are lots of countries with a similar debt ratio, and many with a higher ratio, and most of those are doing fine.

Of course, if (say, over a period of four years) the US replaced its healthcare system with universal single-payer, cut back on defense spending, and raised taxes on the rich, it might actually get back to a surplus.

But then some Republican would come along and squawk about the "people's money" and give it all away in tax cuts and just plunge us back into a deficit again.