Lipstick On An Idiot?

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
41

[quote]katzenjammer wrote:
Tiribulus wrote:
The GOP web ad was a serious mistake. I cannot stand Obama, but he is guilty of not being more thoughtful in his choice of old sayings, not calling Palin a pig which would have been the campaign blunder of a lifetime. The man is an amateur, but not stupid. Calling her a derogatory name right when the country would bristle at it most would have been cataclysmic for the campaign. I accept his explanation and actually didn’t even really need it.

The ad risks casting the GOP as petty and dishonest which they are, just like all good campaigners must be to win, but you don’t want to get blatantly caught… at least until after the election.

The ad may have already been pulled - everywhere I’ve found it, it turns out to be a dead link. [/quote]

You may be able to burn books, but you sure can’t burn the web.

42

[quote]lixy wrote:

The ad may have already been pulled - everywhere I’ve found it, it turns out to be a dead link.

You may be able to burn books, but you sure can’t burn the web.

- YouTube [/quote]

That’s pretty damn lame. Pathetic.

43

If Obama did not mean it as a play off of Palin’s very famous, very recent joke about herself and the only difference between a pit bull and a hockey mom being “lipstick,” if it was merely using a tired old cliche with no relevance to Palin, then why did the crowd scream and cheer repeatedly in applause and start chanting “No more pitbulls?”

Why then did the original AP story on this read:

“You can put lipstick on a pig,” he said to an outbreak of laughter, shouts and raucous applause from his audience, clearly drawing a connection to Palin’s joke.

What’s worse than being nasty is being nasty and then lying about it saying, in effect, “I didn’t mean that” and furthermore attacking those that correctly say you did, when it’s overwhelmingly obvious that those hearing it at the time did indeed take it to mean that; and then the media deliberately misrepresenting it now, playing all sorts of audio clips of past use by politicians but somehow not finding time to include the current Obama clip with its cheers and screaming approval that prove this was not taken as being an unrelated cliche. (I refer to ABC Radio News.)

44

Instead of the word pig he should have worked the term cuntrag into his speech.

If that would have happened I would be at home right now glued to FOX News with a big box of popcorn in my lap.

45

He didn’t call her a cuntrag, but did go for “Mother governor moose-shooter.”

46

[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
He didn’t call her a cuntrag, but did go for “Mother governor moose-shooter.” [/quote]

I loved that one. Couldn’t be “moose hunter”, had to be “moose shooter”, like she just randomly draws on any moose that happens to cross her path, then chuckle to herself as she walks away from the still-twitching corpse. Those are the sort of lines that will not ingratiate Sen. Obama to a lot of real hunters. You know, the ones who cling so bitterly to their religion or their guns. The guns that Obama is not going to come and take away. He “doesn’t have the votes” to take your guns away, even if he wanted to! Well, thank goodness for that! I bet he has the votes to make them a LOT more difficult to obtain, though.

Really, I think the policies that Obama outlines (maintaining a ban on OCS drilling, setting a timeline for withdrawing in Iraq, increasing taxes on the producers and corporations) will end up hurting him a lot more than stupid little gaffes and jabs. I’d like to see the McCain campaign and their supporters focus a lot more on what Obama actually wants to DO, rather than on stupid stuff like this that he SAYS and MIGHT be taken this way or that.

47
48

[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
If Obama did not mean it as a play off of Palin’s very famous, very recent joke about herself and the only difference between a pit bull and a hockey mom being “lipstick,” if it was merely using a tired old cliche with no relevance to Palin, then why did the crowd scream and cheer repeatedly in applause and start chanting “No more pitbulls?”

Why then did the original AP story on this read:

“You can put lipstick on a pig,” he said to an outbreak of laughter, shouts and raucous applause from his audience, clearly drawing a connection to Palin’s joke.

What’s worse than being nasty is being nasty and then lying about it saying, in effect, “I didn’t mean that” and furthermore attacking those that correctly say you did, when it’s overwhelmingly obvious that those hearing it at the time did indeed take it to mean that; and then the media deliberately misrepresenting it now, playing all sorts of audio clips of past use by politicians but somehow not finding time to include the current Obama clip with its cheers and screaming approval that prove this was not taken as being an unrelated cliche. (I refer to ABC Radio News.)[/quote]

Hold on, you’ve seen the “no more Pitbulls” chant? The oft repeated clip I’ve seen lends itself to the incidental cliche explanation and I cannot believe that wouldn’t be front n center on FOX.

If that’s so then it does cast it in a different light, but he can still claim exoneration from responsibility for the crowd misunderstanding it though he should have clarified for good measure.

I can’t believe anybody could be that stupid. She is, for the moment, the most popular person in America. It would be political suicide to launch a grade school playground attack like that. You know I DO NOT want this man elected, but I find it tough to believe he could do that intentionally. If he in fact did then I’ve been woefully guilty of giving him too much credit.

49

He’s wrong on the economy (increasing taxes to corps/cap gains/top 50% earners to be more fair and somehow helping the country out of a slow down/recession/whatever the popular term of the week is), wrong on drilling–of course it’s not the long term solution, but it DOES decrease our dependence on foreign oil and could help in the short term (in combination with a clear gov’t incentive to research alt. fuels), he has no plan for switching us over to an alternative fuel economy–

he has an idea, a position he holds, but not a plan on how to do it, he wants bigger gov’t than the Reps do, he has been long time affiliated with ACORN and introduced legislation that could be arguably considered “on their behalf”–he has a demonstrably close relationship with the head people of ACORN, who advocate a socialist agenda as well as economic policies that chase businesses away from the neighborhoods that need them most in addition to outright intimidation tactics, and he has lots less experience than McCain (yes, that’s a vaild point).

And no, I don’t plan to unpack or debate all of that here. This is a thread about a gaffe and how its being spun, ruthlessly but foolishly IMHO, by the McCain camp.

51

[quote]lixy wrote:

[/quote]

thank you

52

[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
If Obama did not mean it as a play off of Palin’s very famous, very recent joke about herself and the only difference between a pit bull and a hockey mom being “lipstick,” if it was merely using a tired old cliche with no relevance to Palin, then why did the crowd scream and cheer repeatedly in applause and start chanting “No more pitbulls?”

Why then did the original AP story on this read:

“You can put lipstick on a pig,” he said to an outbreak of laughter, shouts and raucous applause from his audience, clearly drawing a connection to Palin’s joke.

What’s worse than being nasty is being nasty and then lying about it saying, in effect, “I didn’t mean that” and furthermore attacking those that correctly say you did, when it’s overwhelmingly obvious that those hearing it at the time did indeed take it to mean that;

and then the media deliberately misrepresenting it now, playing all sorts of audio clips of past use by politicians but somehow not finding time to include the current Obama clip with its cheers and screaming approval that prove this was not taken as being an unrelated cliche. (I refer to ABC Radio News.)[/quote]

This is exactly what I thought of the comment. Obama knew that everyone would instantly think of Palin’s lipstick comment, then he tried to cover his tracks with the stinky fish comment that took him almost a minute to deliver. He knew what he was saying, and he knew how everyone would interpret his comment.

The Obama campaign must slamming their heads into the wall over Palin, just like all the other libs. There is just no way they can attack her without looking like the assholes that they are.

Politics is FUN!

53

As someone casting an anti-Obama vote, I think people are looking too far into an old, old, old cliche.

54

[quote]skaz05 wrote:
Bill Roberts wrote:
If Obama did not mean it as a play off of Palin’s very famous, very recent joke about herself and the only difference between a pit bull and a hockey mom being “lipstick,” if it was merely using a tired old cliche with no relevance to Palin, then why did the crowd scream and cheer repeatedly in applause and start chanting “No more pitbulls?”

Why then did the original AP story on this read:

“You can put lipstick on a pig,” he said to an outbreak of laughter, shouts and raucous applause from his audience, clearly drawing a connection to Palin’s joke.

This is exactly what I thought of the comment. Obama knew that everyone would instantly think of Palin’s lipstick comment, then he tried to cover his tracks with the stinky fish comment that took him almost a minute to deliver. He knew what he was saying, and he knew how everyone would interpret his comment.[/quote]

Covered his tracks???

With the audience clearly believing that the lipstick comment referred to a specific woman, then coming up with what-seems-to-me a novel parallel of you can wrap a fish in paper but it still stinks, this was not intended to play on some negative, misogynistic, anti-female-directed imagery?

I doubt he would dare in any way let it sound to a woman’s face like he even might be implying that she was like a fish that stinks.

But with the crowd that clearly strongly objected to Palin believing he was talking about her, and so cheering the lipstick/pig comment – thus obviously themselves NOT viewing it as just an old cliche – that’s the imagery he chose to follow up with.

Maybe the thinking required to come up with that parallel is why the slowdown in delivery that you noted.

Doing a Google search, I can’t find anywhere on the Internet a (“wrap a fish” paper “still stinks”) usage where the fish still stinks except his usage just now – there is one single usage where the paper now stinks but that is different – so if it’s not novel, it’s certainly rare.

I do think he thought it up on the spot to meet the situation of the crowd being so satisfied with thinking the lipstick/pig meant Palin and perhaps being hungry for another negative-image innuendo, which the “fish” “stinks” deal certainly accomplishes if taken to be another comment about a woman as the crowd took the preceding lipstick/pig.

Coincidence combined with blithe lack of awareness on his part? I’m sure some will say so, but I don’t think he’s that unaware.

55

[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
<<< Coincidence combined with blithe lack of awareness on his part? I’m sure some will say so, but I don’t think he’s that unaware.

[/quote]

If you’re right then it was deftly played though still a mistake.

I kinda think the potential association with Pailn was in the process of occurring to him as he was saying it and he juggled it the best he could on such short notice.

56

[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
He didn’t call her a cuntrag, but did go for “Mother governor moose-shooter.” [/quote]

Haha.

I’d have opted for “raving lunatic cuntrag”. Probably why I’ll never be president.

57

[quote]Malevolence wrote:
katzenjammer wrote:

I think you must have found yourself in the wrong thread. This thread is about an unfortunate Obama gaff and how it’s being spun.

[i][u]This thread is about irrelevant non-issues clouding one of the more important decisions we as Americans are entrusted to make. [/i][/u][/quote]

Very well said. This is a non-issue. There’s a lot more important things to be talking about.

58

[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:
Malevolence wrote:
katzenjammer wrote:

I think you must have found yourself in the wrong thread. This thread is about an unfortunate Obama gaff and how it’s being spun.

[i][u]This thread is about irrelevant non-issues clouding one of the more important decisions we as Americans are entrusted to make. [/i][/u]

Very well said. This is a non-issue. There’s a lot more important things to be talking about. [/quote]

It’s a nice distraction for both sides from discussing any real issues.

59

[quote]Malevolence wrote:

And all of this coming from the party that supposedly values integrity and responsibility? What a joke.
[/quote]

How about whatever it takes to keep this guy out of office. Anyone who is undecided on barry at this point is not going to be swayed by discussing issues. Unfortunatly, many in this country would rather watch dancing with the stars than do any kind of meaningful research on the candidates they vote for.

If it needs to get ugly to reach the irrisponsible voter, then it needs to get ugly.

60

[quote]AynRandLuvr wrote:
Here’s the vid of Obama implying Palin is a pig.

Here’s the vid of McCain calling Hillary Clinton a pig…