I’m not sure what I’m more appalled by: the fact that Josey Wales is supporting crony capitalism, or the fact that the American taxpayers are funding a Super Bowl ad for the sitting president. How is this even possible?
Michael W sees Eastwood and Down in one of the more controversial Super Bowl ads this year. He sees a $3 million dollar ad by a company that was saved from bankruptcy by tax dollars and isn’t happy. Others see another problem with the ad. Mark Wiberg says Halftime America! Clint Eastwood Makes It All Better! Ugh.
But the ad invites criticism. Would Dirty Harry ask for a handout? Hell no, he wouldn’t. He could build a car made out of his melted Smith and Wesson handgun, all while eating a sandwich and zinging bad guys with one-liners.
So, bringing in the city of Detroit as some city on the ‘comeback’ after being knocked down, and blah blah blah, was a bit disingenuous as it fails to mention they knocked themselves out. Detroit and the American car industry would not have made it to ‘half-time’ if it wasn’t for the Bail-Out ™. They were carried by the taxpayer to half-time, beaten and bruised by building inferior products, bloated management and union mismanagement and over-the-rainbow promises to it’s retiring workforce.
America will roar back in spite of Detroit, thank you very much. The rest of us will pick up the slack so crappy car or solar-energy producing companies can exist and disappear and reappear depending upon who is in the White House.
The key point there is that “The rest of us will pick up the slack”. The fact that so many taxpayer dollars can be spent on such things as ‘alternative energy’ and ‘green cars’ rather than on things that are cost effective in the free market is, on the one hand, an indication of significant wealth. On the other hand, it raises questions about whether that wealth is being wisely used.
Then consider the Super Bowl ad that looks to take top spot, the sling baby ad for Doritos. The cynic might note the powered wheel chair Granny used and the many ads on TV that imply she probably got it for free — on the taxpayer dollar.