The last paragraph is not right: Eastwood has a long pedigree in politics (he has even been elected as Mayor of Carmel, CA, although I don't know whether that was as a Republican or an independent; I think he may have endorsed the odd Democrat as well). He endorsed McCain in 2008.I didn't think I did! Either way, I'll be the first to admit that my first couple of posts here were intended to be tabloid and somewhat satirical in nature. Well in my mind anyway. But then you can be the judge of that.
Wrt, Clint Eastwood - my point simply is this. He is/was loved by most all for myriad great movies and his persona in said movies was something most could associate with in a real sense, regardless of partisan conviction. Of which is something our friends in the US buy into - as evidenced in their politics - in a way that we tend not to this side of the pond. We are not as intensly partisan, in my opinion.
So, for years Mr. Eastwood never used his fame and on-screen persona to endorse a politician until now. His Superbowl ad, I should ad, was something all sides could buy into - the great American way. Today, however, he finds his fans divided and his his reputation compromised - by those fans(to quote Jim Hacker!) 'on the other side'.
For my part, I do see a big difference between saying "I don't like Eastwood - he's a Republican" and "I don't like Eastwood - I'm not a Republican or a Democrat, but it's a shame he's adopted a political position and made himself a partisan figure".
On the latter, I do think it is unreasonable to suggest that just because someone's been in the public eye (in a non-political field) they need to forswear expressing political views.
On the former, I don't find someone's politics get in the way of how much I enjoy their work. Coming at this another way, Martin Sheen's politics are very different to mine (and he is very passionate and public in his political views). But it didn't stop me from enjoying the West Wing.