Clint Eastwood’s Super Bowl Chrysler Ad Stirs Political Waters
EmailDuring a typically animated Super Bowl party in suburban Chicago Sunday, the chatter came to an abrupt halt when that trademark voice–in an urgent, raspy whisper–knifed through the air in its quiet, compelling way.
Suddenly, all eyes turned to the television screen flashing soft images of an industrial America that had been pushed to the brink only to claw its way back, in Clint Eastwood’s words, because America “knows how to come from behind to win.” Sounding like the weary but determined character from a tough Detroit neighborhood (a role he played in “Gran Torino”), Eastwood’s tone turned defiant.
“This country can’t be knocked out with one punch. We get right back up again, and when we do the world is going to hear the roar of our engines.” The commercial, “Halftime in America,” didn’t reveal its sponsor until the final seconds, when Chrysler logos appeared briefly, but it has already become a classic, and perhaps inevitably in this election year, a political football.
White House spokesman Dan Pfeiffer weighed in on Twitter, “Saving the American Auto Industry: Something Eminem and Clint Eastwood can agree on.” (Eminem’s Chrysler commercial was a huge hit last Super bowl.) The conservative blogger Michel Malkin fumed, “Did I just see Clint Eastwood fronting an auto bailout ad?”
Chrysler, like General Motors, was headed for the junk heap before the Bush and Obama administrations rode to the rescue with $12.5 billion from U.S. taxpayers. Now, both are roaring back from near death-hiring workers and posting strong profits. In January, the American auto industry put the pedal to the metal, selling cars at the fastest pace in nearly four years. (Chrysler has repaid all but $1.3 billion.)
Ironically enough, Eastwood-the former Republican mayor of Carmel, Calif., opposed the bailout, telling the Los Angeles Times in 2010: “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.”
Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney also opposed using government money to help the American automakers, famously penning an op-ed in the New York Times entitled, “Let Detroit Go Bankrupt.” Now Romney says he favored a “structured bankruptcy” using private funds. But former Obama administration car czar Steven Rattner, who supervised the bailout, tells ABC News that such a solution was impossible during the credit crisis of 2008-2009 because only the government was willing or able to provide financing.
But Chrysler CEO Sergio Marchionne insists that presidential politics had nothing to do with Eastwood’s Chrysler commercial. “It has zero political content,” Marchionne told Detroit radio station WJR. “We are as apolitical as you can make us.” Instead, he says, the ad was intended as a tribute to the employees of Chrysler and resonated “because it says something…about the resilience of America.”
Italy’s Fiat SpA now owns a majority of Chrysler.
Memorial Day Deals 
Man Charged in Deposit Error Spending Spree 
RSS
Twitter
Facebook
It’s halftime in the Super Bowl, and the Patroits and Giants are trying to figure out how to squeeze $12.5 billion out of the fans in the stands and watching at home on TV so they can pay a rapper and an older actor to talk about how they are going to win the second half while producing a second rate product on the field…….Somehow, comparing play on a footbal field to an automobile bailout doesn’t quite work for me…..
Posted by: MNResident | February 6, 2012, 1:59 pm 1:59 pm
How interesting! Me and a colleague were discussing this particular ad only this morning. Where as I did not pick up anything political it was my colleague who felt that this was a great ad that could be used by the Obama campaign word for word.
Posted by: MyTakeOnThis61 | February 6, 2012, 2:26 pm 2:26 pm
The current US auto companies would have been forced into bankruptcy years ago from fresh domestic competition if it weren’t for the fact that Congress has prevented the formation of new automobile companies by crash testing and other standards that make it impossible for an auto manufacturer to make fewer than millions of cars.
Posted by: Amy Forshurtz | February 6, 2012, 2:44 pm 2:44 pm
You know Clint’s a Republican, right? Oh wait he’s one of those that cares about America.
Posted by: Seamus | February 6, 2012, 2:45 pm 2:45 pm
It didn’t sound politcal to me, he was just stating facts. I have lived in a recession most of my life through 10 presidents. The growth (cheap energy prices, cheap food, cheap houses, etc.) we enjoyed in the 60s and 70s is gone. This country has been retrogressing for quite some time. The average citizen of this country really isn’t considered, at all, it’s all about corporations, and it doesn’t matter who’s president when corporations are in control because they control everybody.
Posted by: nfission | February 6, 2012, 2:49 pm 2:49 pm
Hey, perhaps the U.S. automakers wouldn’t have to deal with digging themselves out of a hole if they didn’t put themselves there to begin with. Let’s face it, had they built decently priced, well made cars like the foreign automakers did, then they wouldn’t be in this position. The cost of an American made car versus that of a foreign one a few years back was a no-brainer, you got more quality and options for your money with a foreign car than a domestic one.
Posted by: Manda | February 6, 2012, 2:49 pm 2:49 pm
Complaining about this ad is creating a tempest in a tea pot.
Posted by: Thinks2010 | February 6, 2012, 2:54 pm 2:54 pm
I wonder how long before Chrysler starts overpaying its CEO’s and employees and we have to bail them out again!!!!
Posted by: Lourdes Chu | February 6, 2012, 2:56 pm 2:56 pm
Chrysler is about a 1.3 billlion loss to the taxpayers – so I guess it was a publically funded ad – nothing my tax dollars going to a super bowl ad – what a joke.
Posted by: jamescbuilder | February 6, 2012, 2:59 pm 2:59 pm
I saw the commercial. I thought it was awesome. I thought the auto bailout was a risk we had to try to take given the economic climate, the tens of thousands of lost jobs if we didn’t try and considering it worked, very well, I mean, what is there to discuss. If it didn’t work, if they weren’t profitable, ok, then it’s up for discussion, but please, again, it was the right call and it was executed well, so obviously, it was a risk that was taken and was proven to be best for rthe economy, for tens of thousand of workers and for Americans in general. Seriously. sour grapes folks. sour grapes.
Posted by: Johnny boy | February 6, 2012, 3:00 pm 3:00 pm
How ironic the American people bailed out Chrysler and they spend a million or more for air time during the superbowl. What a way to spend money and put a political spin on it to boot. Shame on you Chrysler –you should have been thanking the American taxpayer instead of selling cars–they are the ones who bailed you butts out.
Posted by: Joe | February 6, 2012, 3:07 pm 3:07 pm
I thought the add was great! And it has become all too frequent that people want to make some meaning seem to be relevant instead of listening to what was said. Eastwood’s message says we can overcome our problems and have in the past. What in heaven’s name is so political about that?? Congress is not the only disfunctional group around. How about John Q Public!
Posted by: Larry | February 6, 2012, 3:09 pm 3:09 pm
mantra of absurd (not necessarily all) rebulicans : “of course we didn’t approve the auto bailout. we wanted those american companies to go belly up in favor of foreign ones and we wanted even more americans out of jobs, just so we could use it in the 2012 campaign saying how obama killed icons of american industry and lost jobs”
Posted by: what the deuce? | February 6, 2012, 3:20 pm 3:20 pm
Oh Johnny Boy – sour grapes – well executed – read the ABC article of Jan 3 – “How Much Did the Auto Bailout Cost Taxpayers” – first of all the government (actually the taxpayers) did not bailout the auto industry – only GM & Chrysler – Ford was not bailed out – only kept from profiting from good business practices – at this point the TAXPAYERS are out about 14 billion – and that only if GM stock stays the same.
Posted by: jamescbuilder | February 6, 2012, 3:22 pm 3:22 pm
What were these advertising people thinking about with this yesterday? I couldn’t believe anyone would be this brain-dead unless they had a severe stroke or aneurysm recently…. And yea, I agree with the person above, spending millions on this ad. after WE bailed them out…. Huh????
Posted by: James | February 6, 2012, 3:28 pm 3:28 pm
Did none of ya Einstiens read to the end of the article where it says Italian car maker owns most of Chrysler. Now that’s America lol lol
Posted by: onlyanegg | February 6, 2012, 3:30 pm 3:30 pm
The ad definitely had undertones of being political as well as patriotic, in a good way. “It’s half-time in America” could be interpreted as President Obama is at the end of his first term. His work is only just beginning. I said, first term because of course he is going to be re-elected. Do you really thing a doofus like Romney of Gingrich could do any better right now? And it is Mr. Obama who gets the credit for helping breathe new life into the Detroit auto industry, THE backbone of this country. The government bailout worked, and it will keep on working as long as people stop listening to the Republican spin on how terrible everything is. We have gone though a very tough time, yes, but things are improving, day by day. Great commercial, good message. Keep buying cars, America, and shopping, and don’t be afraid to buy a house. Don’t pay attention to the Republican spin of “the sky is falling”. It was a Republican who mucked things up with trillions in defense spending.
Posted by: KitCat | February 6, 2012, 3:31 pm 3:31 pm
The automobile industry and other manufacturing helped to create the middle class and give people a chance at a decent life. It was the right thing to do to help the auto industry during hard times and it paid off for the taxpayers – unlike helping the financial industry. I am all for tax breaks for any business who chooses to manufacture here in the states – as long as they are creating jobs with good pay and beneifts – not slave labor. Companies who take jobs out of the country shouldn’t get anything in return except higher taxes for deserting the American people. President Obama gives a dam about America whereas the Republicans have never done anything to convince me they care about the American worker.
Posted by: Saints Fan | February 6, 2012, 3:33 pm 3:33 pm
It’s weird. The corporations are people people only like the speech that comes out of a politically myopic superpac. If some corporation freelances in trying to unite (real) people instead of dividing them, then it’s time to inject divisiveness into it. Next they’ll have the SCOTUS require right of first refusal to superpacs buying equal time against all media messages that might be interpreted as being a “political statement” by the superpac supercommittee committee. Can’t have corporations crying ‘unify’ in a crowded theater now can ‘we’. Poor Clint. They gave him a script, paid him to read it, and now look.
Posted by: sameagain | February 6, 2012, 3:35 pm 3:35 pm
let’s see. we bailed out chrysler 30 years ago…and we got the K car. for some crazed reason, daimler decided to get in bed with chrysler and a few years later daimler realized what a mistake it was and ditched them. next, we bail out chrysler again. then, fiat buys a controlling interest in the company…and we’re supposed to be optimistic? an italian car company? really? the italian auto industry is known for two things…ultra-expensive high performance speed machines…and junk… lke the “cinque cento”, a hilarious little piece of garbage made by fiat that is now being marketed to americans as some kind of neat little euro love car…but it’s still a cinque cento…and it’s still a hilarious little piece of garbage. my brother owns one of the older “vintage” models. to be sure, it’s hilarious and draws crowds wherever he takes it, but he won’t take it more than a few miles from home lest the wheels come off or the motor falls off its mounts. wonder which kind of car we’ll be seeing from the likes of chrysler? hint…it probably won’t be lambourghinis and ferraris.
Posted by: grumpopolis | February 6, 2012, 3:37 pm 3:37 pm
Bottom Line — If allowed to go bankrupt and re-organize… (the typical and capitalist route)… the companies could have been allowed to re-negotiate the union contract… which Dems didn’t want… but was the primary reason GM was in trouble to begin with!!
Posted by: TheLoyalOpposition | February 6, 2012, 3:48 pm 3:48 pm
You know, the bailout wasn’t exactly what saved GM and Chrysler. What really pulled their bacon out of the fire was the earthquakes and tsunami in Japan. It’s pretty easy to compete with even a superior product when their factories and supply chain have taken an enormous hit.
So unless the government caused those disasters, claiming that the auto industry came back from the brink because they received billions of dollars and were allowed to screw their shareholders is like taking credit for the death of a mass murderer who died of food poisoning.
Posted by: Danny A. Moose | February 6, 2012, 3:50 pm 3:50 pm
The auto bailout saved not only the car industry, but all the suppliers, car dealerships, manufacturers ,etc. and all the businesses that make money by having a thriving car industry in the US. If you think the auto bailout was expensive, check out how much the taxpayers pay in farm subsidies, oil subsidies, etc. EVERY year. Corporate welfare.
Posted by: momofboys | February 6, 2012, 3:53 pm 3:53 pm
@ JAMESCBUILDER You have to factor in the cost of inaction. How many jobs in the auto industry supply chain were saved by decision to shore up the Chrysler and GM? Romney’s argument was that a structured bankruptcy with private investment (not unlike his work with Bain Capital) should have been used; however, he’s ignoring the fact that commercial credit was almost completely frozen up in 2008-09…there was no guarantee that there would be investment enough to stop a larger collapse.
Obama’s action was at least decisive. Whether taking a loss of $14 billion on an $80 billion investment is a boondoggle or the “stitch in time that saved nine” is ultimately dependent on your personal politics. It’s impossible to say with certainty what might have happened if there hadn’t been any action. What is clear is that in the winter of 2009, there weren’t a whole lot of options that looked very good.
Posted by: As Goes Ohio... | February 6, 2012, 3:54 pm 3:54 pm
I backed Obama in 2008, but did not agree when he bailed out Detroit. I was not in the mood for taxpayer bailouts of ANY corporations by then. It turns out he was right to do so-not only was a huge swath of jobs saved, the quality of the product was vastly improved and the money loaned has been nearly all returned. To the naysayers before me here, it looks like the rest will be too. And as to spending for the ad, it WAS more about thanking (and encouraging) the rest of us than it was about selling more product. So I say thanks to Chrysler and Clint Eastwood for a solid message well delivered. Oh, and yeah, I will be backing Obama again, because it IS only half-time in America.
Posted by: John | February 6, 2012, 3:55 pm 3:55 pm
The company is owned by the Italians (majority) – it’s not even an American company. I’m disappointed in Clint.
Posted by: Sharon | February 6, 2012, 4:01 pm 4:01 pm
Sounds like the people that wanted America to fail are upset….
Posted by: rippedpockets | February 6, 2012, 4:06 pm 4:06 pm
I just want to know who paid the $12 million for the ad?? Could it be……………us taxpayers? Didn’t think the bailout money would be used for that!!
But at least Clint Eastwood made Obama look bad – let’s go America….we can’t count on Obama!!
Posted by: Cindy | February 6, 2012, 4:08 pm 4:08 pm
I don’t doubt you would miss that mnresident. Isn’t that why you voted for him in the first place?
Posted by: steve rogers | February 6, 2012, 4:12 pm 4:12 pm
GREAT AD FOR THE GOP – time for the 2nd half!!
Posted by: Work for Freedom | February 6, 2012, 4:14 pm 4:14 pm
Everyone seems to forget the auto bail out money went mostly to the UAW to cover their pension programs. The auto makers are profitable now because Obama closed plants, laid off workers, shuttered car dealerships and right-sized GM and Chrysler to the current auto market. Something the auto companies executives could not do thanks to the UAW work rules. Even if they had gone into bankruptcy the unions would have crippled them with “job actions” to ensure their way of life. The car companies have shown very quickly they can produce cars people want profitably now that we the taxpayer have paid off the union bosses.
Posted by: ionagoal | February 6, 2012, 4:26 pm 4:26 pm
Listen, he wasn’t asking for a bail out for the auto industry… What a moron you are! Mr. Eastwood was just saying that yeah, things are very hard for America right now. And yeah we lost our AAA rating; but that by NO means we are down and out! This is AMERICA, people! We know how to fight; we can take any punch they dish out… AND we can give it back in kind… with interest!!! So, yeah we got knocked back a few steps. We’re just dusting off our clothes, patching up our nicks and restringing our gloves before stepping back into the ring. Brace yourself world!
Posted by: MsCurd | February 6, 2012, 4:54 pm 4:54 pm
Cindy, how do you get that Clint made President Obama look bad from this ad? Just the opposite, by bailing out the American car companies, we saved so many jobs. It isn’t just the jobs at the plants but all the suppliers that would have gone under.
Posted by: Librarian53 | February 6, 2012, 4:58 pm 4:58 pm
In June, 2011, the Obama administration reported (according to the AP) “The Obama administration said Wednesday that the government will lose about $14 billion in taxpayer funds from the bailout of the U.S. auto industry.” In a voice not quite as raspy as Eastwood’s, Obama later added that the number might be higher than $15 billion for General Motors alone. So answer me this, without American taxpayer debt funding, just how “solid” would this industry be…other than Ford which took no taxpayer dollars?
Posted by: wantingbalance | February 6, 2012, 5:05 pm 5:05 pm
The commercial was motivating and encouraging at a time when America needs an ‘atta-boy’! I didn’t identify a blatant political message in the ad, although I do believe President Obama could use it in his campaign for re-election.
Posted by: NCResident | February 6, 2012, 5:56 pm 5:56 pm
The reference to being half time I believe is geared towards those who say the 20th was the American Century and the 21st will be the Asian (China) Century. Don’t believe it. The rest of the world still neeeds fifty years to reach where we are now, and where we are now is coming out of the toughest reccession since the 1970′s. We’ve done it before, we will do it again.
Posted by: ionagoal | February 6, 2012, 6:18 pm 6:18 pm
LOVE IT! What really drives conservatives crazy about this whole thing is how completely, 100%, wrong they were. Not only has (almost) all the money been repaid, the companies are thriving again and thousands of jobs were saved. If we had listened to them we’d be in a real depression today. So of course they’re furious. If they had been right about the bailout they wouldn’t care what Eastwood or anyone else said about it today. This strikes a nerve because one of their own is admitting he- and they- were wrong. What’s more, they know they were wrong and now everyone else is figuring that out too.
Posted by: John Martin | February 6, 2012, 6:34 pm 6:34 pm
I loved the ad and was moved by it. No political motivation, no hidden agendas or messages. It IS half time America. Let’s rally together and make this country the great country we know it is.
Posted by: mamacita808 | February 6, 2012, 7:02 pm 7:02 pm
You people do realize that this commercial was presented by an Italian owned company, right? If America’s second-half involves selling out to foreign companies at fire-sale prices I’m not sure it will be to our benefit.
Posted by: Texasjimbob | February 6, 2012, 7:03 pm 7:03 pm
This ad was controversial?
How could ANY real American object to this?
How could anyone object to this unless they want America to fail?
Posted by: ignatz | February 6, 2012, 7:25 pm 7:25 pm
who cares…we the tax payers saved them and when I tried to go and buy a new car I got the same old stuff..they don’t care about their hind ends being saved and they are still doing the same things they always used to do…..there are foreign car makers in the USA who employ Americans so it is no shame to buy them.
Posted by: Kevin | February 6, 2012, 7:28 pm 7:28 pm
It sure sounds good. BUT, GM is hiring a company from India, HCL to handle their Voice commucation. AND send 250 India’s over here to do the work.
Posted by: John Peterson | February 6, 2012, 7:28 pm 7:28 pm
Everyone was so against the federal government bailing out the American auto dealers with tax payers money ,but everyone forgets how the American auto makers stopped the presses and started turning out war equipment and munitions to support WWII and supporting all our troops and giving them what they need to stay alive and help them fight against Mitsubishi Toyota Nissan Honda Volkswagon and Mercedes benz that made Equipment and munitions to kill troops and millions of Jews. Now we would rather support an enemy then our Neighbor how Ironic
Posted by: Scott | February 6, 2012, 7:29 pm 7:29 pm
Quote: “But Chrysler CEO Sergio Marchionne insists that presidential politics had nothing to do with Eastwood’s Chrysler commercial. “It has zero political content,………”
******************************************
Clearly, CEO Sergio Marchionne is either:
a) an idiot, or
b) lying to us.
Posted by: DaMailMan | February 6, 2012, 7:35 pm 7:35 pm
What I object to is Fiat or any other foreign car maker owning an American car company. Let’s get our priorities straight!
Posted by: Tim C | February 6, 2012, 7:37 pm 7:37 pm
GREAT AD FOR THE GOP – time for the 2nd half!!
POSTED BY: WORK FOR FREEDOM**************
GOP (Gambled On Patriots)….oh that’s right, they lost.
Posted by: michael | February 6, 2012, 7:40 pm 7:40 pm
Sounds like Michelle Malkin is still upset with Clint Eastwood over “Gran Torino”
Posted by: Atu | February 6, 2012, 7:46 pm 7:46 pm
You “forgot” the part about how Obama screwed the Chrysler bondholders to benefit his union buddies. Whoops!
Posted by: Jack Davis | February 6, 2012, 8:09 pm 8:09 pm
Go ahead you so called freedom loving conservatives. Let’s get rid of all laws that impede freedom. Freedom to make money anyway possible? Should we be allowed to swindle, commit fraud, carpet bag, steal, export jobs, utilize foreign slaves, manipulate the stock market, support taxes only for what we personally need, allow people to die for lack of health care, maybe even murder? Tell me, just how far should freedom be allowed to go to make/save a buck? It really is simply a matter of degree! Let’s see how long our great country lasts when a well spoken message about working together for our countries common good is considered blasphemy and stomped, on all in the name of misguided freedom! Let us see.
Posted by: Birdhouse | February 6, 2012, 8:33 pm 8:33 pm
I personally was unimpressed by the commercial… it did not inspire nor did it uplift. On the one hand you have Ford which had the same issues that GM had… Ford followed the normal route of bankruptcy and reorganization and has made a successful recovery WITHOUT impacting the taxpayer while GM went through “bailout” where the company screwed over the bond holders as well as the taxpayers. The “investment” that the givernment was supposed to use to offset costs to the taxpayer were sold at a loss. Ford is an American company whereas GM is now mostly foreign owned. If any one has a right to talk about “the second-half”, it would be Ford.
There is also the hypocrisy (knowingly or unknowingly) of someone against the “bailout” working for the company that was bailed out. Government should not be involved with business as far as operations or funding… a company suceeds or fails on it’s OWN MERITS, not on government propping it up. The argument that they HAD to to prevent all of these businesses from going under is false… the American spirit has always had those willing to step in and start new businesses when large ones fail. (Usually with better customer satisfaction and better business practices.)
Posted by: kbrum1066 | February 6, 2012, 8:49 pm 8:49 pm
I saw Karl Rove was in the video above saying he hated the ad. That’s enough reason for me to like it. Also, why isn’t he in jail?
Posted by: michael1_4 | February 6, 2012, 9:02 pm 9:02 pm
What I saw in the ad was a cry to revive Detroit the City as it is on the verge of demise. What I think that they (GM, Ford, and Chysler) should do is take a portion of those great profits they are making and clean up all of those empty auto manufacturing plants they the dumped during bankruptcy… Clean up the City and just maybe you can attract new business…
Also, to John Peterson’s comment… That was a different time…and a different place… That was BEFORE Boeing had plants to create this stuff…AND national defense was a fairly low priority in the late 1930′s.. And where do you think our stuff has been built at for the Ongoing war on terror?
Posted by: Dave B | February 6, 2012, 9:33 pm 9:33 pm
Problem is Americans have turned into a bunch of dumb sheep that believe the Obama propaganda. I give the U.S. maybe 10 years before total collapse. I defended this country for 24 years for this?? Ugh! Why I moved to a better location. Now even Clint Eastwood gets used as a tool… idiots!
Posted by: Army_VET | February 6, 2012, 9:34 pm 9:34 pm
Keep buying your foreign cars and all the overseas junk and when you end up retirement age with nothing but a cardboard box made in U.S.A don’t be looking for handouts. I agree with what Scott said regarding the stop in production for WWII. Pull your head of of that dark hole it is in and stop
trash talking the Auto Industry. What about the bankers who get bailied out and then pocket the
funds that were suppose to be to help bail out people who are losing their homes. Oh and as far as the president I am kinda thinking that no matter who is in there can talk the talk and that is all they do.
Either put up or get out.
Posted by: Kay | February 6, 2012, 9:38 pm 9:38 pm
Its not halftime Clint, it’s the fourth quarter and we’re down by 20.
Posted by: Tucsondan43 | February 7, 2012, 12:20 am 12:20 am
I could swear that Fiat (an Italian company) owned over 50% of Chrysler … not mentioned in this article BTW
Posted by: Pat Norman | February 7, 2012, 12:49 am 12:49 am
That ad was nothing but a reelection ad for president Broke Obummer who has taken Bush’s deficit and made Bush look much more thrifty in comparison. Obummer is more caught up in trying to pay off all of his idiotic investors and attempt to get reelected than the preservation of the USA. Thanks to the dumb @sses who believed his pie in the sky campaign promises, the USA is in much worse condition had this inexperienced community organizer never been elected in the first place.
Posted by: Sean | February 7, 2012, 1:22 am 1:22 am
If we give Broke Obummer, the worst president in US history, another 4 more years, this country will not survive for much longer. If you voted for that clown in 2008 to prove to yourself that you weren’t a racist bigot, you will have to vote for anyone else in 2012 to prove to everyone that you’re not a complete moron.
Posted by: Sean | February 7, 2012, 1:26 am 1:26 am
Hey, people in Detroit are working and we are getting paid back. Give the man some credit for goodness sake,
Posted by: VT | February 7, 2012, 8:46 am 8:46 am
wow all this over an ad.
step back and look what the political machine that’s in bed with corprate buisness has done to America
our own are living in the streets while billions are sent over sea’s to ingreats
with the arsenal we have what does it matter whats going on on the other side of the world, those billions could be better used at home
everyone is paying attention to the wrong headlines like about ads
how about the ones about a possible WW111
eventually we’ll be the lost city of Atlantis THE END
Posted by: jesse jablonowski | February 7, 2012, 9:16 am 9:16 am
Clint Eastwood’s Super Bowl Chrysler Ad Stirs Political Waters….only for the Reich Wing. The rest of us (80% or more) saw it as a spirit lifting and Pro American message. Thanks Clint, we need more of this. :)
Posted by: Brave Brick | February 7, 2012, 10:06 am 10:06 am
“Pat Norman”, you are not a very thorough reader. Take another look at the very last line of the article, “Italy’s Fiat now owns a majority of Chrysler”. The reporter got it right.
BTW, great TV commercial. Let’s get going again, America!
Posted by: Nancy J | February 7, 2012, 2:47 pm 2:47 pm