McCain Camp Responds to Obama’s Palin “Pig” Slur
Wednesday, September 10, 2008 at 08:13AM McCain/Palin campaign’s response to Barack Obama’s comment yesterday that “You can put lipstick on a pig, but it’s still a pig”:
Was Obama just using a harmless colloquialism or was he taking a swipe at Sarah Palin, the Republican VP?
He was taking a swipe at Palin. The audience understood what he was doing and if he wasn’t insulting Palin, he would have used a different phrase and they wouldn’t have given a standing ovation.
Obama has been growing increasingly disgruntled and irritated at the success of the McCain/Palin ticket and has been losing his emotional grip since the Republican National Convention. He’s also angry that the McCain camp has hijacked the “change” mantra and made it a legitimate issue. If Obama can’t have it, he doesn’t want anyone to.
The problem for Obama is that Democrats know how to attack the person, Republicans now how to attack the issue. This puts Obama at a disadvantage.
But I’m not complaining about Obama’s bad judgment.
Trackback URL: http://amyproctor.squarespace.com/blog/trackback/2254566
View Printer Friendly Version
Email Article to Friend
Reader Comments (18)
There is such a thing as a colloquialism, but there is no such thing as a harmless colloquialism. Any word can be used as a weapon.
Sarah should now attend a Washington Redskin's football game and wear a pig's snout, LOL!
I think this smear may follow Barry O all the way to the voting booth.
"The Obama Syndrome"
The man is starting to melt down. Of course he was referring to Governor Palin. Presidential candidates always have a basic speech or talking points they give. The Obama usually doesn't say something new unless it's cleared by his many advisors. Somebody must have mentioned the "lipstick on a pig" comment at at strategy session and he ran with it. Now he's been put on "blast"(the current generations term for being questioned on something). He can't take any critism. I guess nobody is supposed to question him because he is the almighty Obama.
Thank God, our current President is made of more sterner stuff. The Obama couldn't handle one thousandth the critism President Bush receives in a day. This man isn't ready to be President. Maybe he should try being a mayor first???
I knew when I heard him say it not once, but delighted with the small crowd's reaction, twice, he was going to regret that. That is one couple who should never speak spontaneously. The "I know a lot of woman are upset over Hiliary, but they'll have to get over it." really resonated, too. Women being interviewd about supporting McCain/Palin will say, something like, "I'm one who didn't get over it".
My, my. How easily people are distracted by silliness. j
Palin plainly lies every day about this "I told Washington no thanks on that bridge to nowhere", and all we can talk about is an oft used colloquialism referring to the attempt to disguise the continuation of failed Bush policies.
Wonder what will be the distraction de jour?
I guess we'll just have to wait and see what the next ridicuolous or contradictory comment comes out of the collective minds of the plagiarism twins to find out.
And I think we should continue to talk about President Bush because 1) he's not running for president and 2) his approval rating is still 14 points higher than the Dem led Congress.... maybe Biden/Obama should consider running away from the most unpopular Congress in history.
You know that remark was meant to insult Palin. I was in a doctor's waiting room and the tv was on CNN and I couldn't believe that those ridiculous insults were being accepted. Did you see the pig with lipstick? It was there.
He is losing his grip and beginning to panic.
Looks like the McCain may have pulled the video from his You Tube site. Perhaps they thought the controversy and attention wasn't worth it? Let me know if anyone can find it on the web.
A few comments:
Obama can still rebound if Palin doesn't start speaking more off the cuff and keeps regurgitating her acceptance speech. She can address the same issues but needs to put it in different words.
Palin needs to address the abortion issue and national defense.
She should talk about McCain's major accomplishments in the Senate that show he's a maverick. This will continue to appeal to moderates and independents while the abortion issue will continue to excite conservatives.
Obama is indeed coming unraveled. He's going through what the Clintons went through during the primaries and isn't used to being challenged, criticized or held accountable for his words and actions. Don't get me wrong; he's taken a lot of heat during the campaign with Jeremiah Wright, but he brought that all upon himself.
You can see Obama's irritability and unpolished comments when he talks about Palin and McCain.
grumpy, the Bush administration has very few failed policies. I cannot think of any off hand. No Child Left Behind has closed the gap incredibly with minority groups as their marks in math and reading have improved dramatically. This has been an incredibly successful program but it remains politicized because it's a Bush initiative. Bush also did a B+ job with the economy, particularly considering that since 2006 he's been opposed at every turn by a Democratic Congress and Senate. Iraq has been a success, not a failure. We've gained some real allies in Germany, France, Australia and other nations around the world. Bush has given the most aide of any country, including the US, to fight AIDS in Africa.
"Failed policies" is code for "We don't like Bush because he's a Republican".
All respectable news sources, and even some so-called "conservative" commentators, have recognized that Obama's comments were very clearly aimed at the George Bush policies being carried on by one John McCain--that was stated with complete clarity as Obama spoke. Because McCain has a desperate need to distract from the fact that his Republican party and his beloved Big Money, Big Oil president have completely wrecked the domestic economy and destroyed the reputation of the U.S. around the world with an endless parade of incompetence, corruption, and lies, he and his operatives have all signed on to a concerted program of fake smears and phony outrage, just like George Bush and his nasty campaign advisor Karl Rove before him, following his lead in this as in everything else. McCain has lost all claim to the high road of "straight talk." No one needs to attack Sarah Palin; she has the ability and the freedom to self-destruct on her own by carrying on with her own campaign of lies and smears. Let's get back to the issues, please. American needs a real change, not these whining phonies. Vote Obama, or get another four years of lies and a country run completely for the benefit of the rich and the corrupt. If you lie down with Big Oil, you're going to get oily.
I am wondering, really, if it is justified to say that the Democrats know how to attack a person while the Republicans know how to attack issues.
Sarah Palin had belittled Obama's work as a community organizer and his stands on issues. As to Obama's concerns about terrorist suspects being detained without habeas corpus, Palin put it "Al-Qaida terrorists still plot to inflict catastrophic harm on America ... he's worried that someone won't read them their rights?" The truth, which many people know, is that yes, some of those people may consist of terrorists, but there are INNOCENT people who happened to be at the wrong place at the wrong time. It's a violation of civil liberties and rights. She just makes a one liner, generalising and glossing over it such that it distorts the facts and makes Obama come off as a terrorist sympathiser, and perhaps "Un-American".
"Terrorist states are seeking nuclear weapons without delay ... he wants to meet them without preconditions." This is why I do not support her. She is a polarising figure. Look, countries like Iran may have a crazy president, but what about the average Iranian on the street? Are all of them terrorists? Surely not! Most of these average Iranians probably face the same everyday problems anyone can relate to. Even if they dislike everything the US stands for, do you think they will want to get into a bloody and costly war with the US?
And what is wrong with talking to the "enemy", if it means for a peaceful resolution? By no means do we have to compromise our state sovereignty and national security- Obama has said he is not taking military action off the table. Nelson Mandela talked to the enemy, the same people who so cruelly repressed his people in South Africa, and they managed a peaceful transition to democracy. Just because you talk or negotiate with enemy does not mean you are giving in to them.
All this while I've been watching the election, and most of the time, disappointingly, I see the Repulicans take half-truths and distort them- instead of confronting and rebutting the Democrats' issues in their true form. They keep on saying Obama has no record as a reformer, but if you would look it up, he has sponsored and pushed through many important ethics bills in the Senate. They have a shameful ad about sex-ed, making it look as though Obama wants young children to learn graphic sex ed instead of the basic, "no one should touch you there".
The GOP often questions Obama's patriotism over silly issues like not wearing a flag pin (notice McCain isn't wearing one now either) as though wearing a pin could accurately quantify a person's patriotism, something said man never has done of his opponents. He just said that they "did not get it" not that they were unpatriotic.
And now this thing about the lipstick. The GOP has been rather engaged in mud-slinging-some very dirty ones, and they ought to have been prepared for Obama to stop parrying the shots. Fact is, if you all are really for change too, you wouldn't blow this whole lipstick issue out of proportion and make it end up detracting from real bread and butter issues. Instead of saying "We demand an apology!" they could have just said, "we are disappointed with Obama's comments...they seem to be..." McCain used the same remark when describing Hillary's policies, as did Obama-listen, was he talking about Palin before he made that comment? No. He was talking about Bush's policies.
Pig= Bush's policies
Lipstick=McCain's slogans and claims of change.
And I certainly did not hear of Hillary crying sexism either when McCain likened her policies to putting lipstick on a pig either. If we follow such warped logic, one could say Palin is anti-feminist and sexist by likening herself to a breed of dog (female dog=bitch). The list goes on.
Issues that really matter get eclipsed.
Hey! A Fellow Human Being! Nice to meet you :-)
A few thoughts... whether you agree with Palin going after Obama's experience as a community organizer or not, his campaign threw the first stone. and the only reason Obama's experience as a community orgaizer is an issue at all is because he doesn't have a long, extensive record, beyond being a community organizer, to go after.
Regarding Obama's thoughts on the civil rights of terrorists, on the one hand he wnats to ensure that we have the right person before sending them to prison, on the other he says “My position has always been clear: If you’ve got a terrorist, take him out,” Obama said. “Anybody who was involved in 9/11, take ‘em out.” So please explain how you "take them out" without first asking them if they are the right guy to kill? Is this a matter of shoot first, but if you miss, read them their rights? He can't have it both ways.
Not that it is a defene, but both side distort half-truths and Obama was first out of the gate with the 100-year war attack on McCain. Obama has, on more than a few occassions, portrayed something as a direct quote from McCain and then attacked McCain on that direct quote... only problem is, it was Obama's interpretation of what McCain said and not a quote at all. That goes beyond half-truths, that is lying about quoting someone's words.
regarding sex-ed, there is a video of Obama speaking to Planned Parenthood defending sex-ed to kindergartners.. if I find it, I'll post it .. thanks for the idea :-)
If you really believe Obama was not going for a cheap laugh with the lipstick line, that is your right. It is my right to believe he was. McCain's refernec was clearly not about Hillary wearing lipstick; following Palin's joke about lipstick on a pitbull, Obama either knew it would be associated with his joke or should have. Maybe he should spend less time trying to yuck it up with adoring fans and tart acting like an adult.
That is an issue that should not get eclipsed.. can his leadership lead more than a fan club.. can he lead a nation.
Why is it a direct attack on Palin this time, but it wasn't when McCain used the exact same expression last year regarding Hillary Clinton's healthcare plan?
Obama is a cut throat politician who as abandoned his "taking the high road" politics since just before hiring Joe Biden for VP.
The chance of this being accidental or coincidental is miniscule. It is a common phrase, but McCain didn't use it while the phrase and discourse about lipstick became popularized by a Hillary comment.
This is just like Obama standing by his church when the parishoners stood up and cheered with ever incindiary comment made by Jeremiah Wright. He'd say, "Those are Wright's words and I reject them, but the church is great." Oh, really, then why did the church stand up and applaude those comments?
In the same way, the Obama supporters at the event last week where he made the lipstick and pig comments gave him a standing ovation for the comment. Sure, because it's just a common phrase and they are really that excited about ecomonics.
Give me a break!
LOL.. that is a great point in the last paragraph Amy! Wish I had thought of that :-)
Also, great point on the church. The church is not a building, the church is the people and their common beliefs and values... if he loves his church, I doubt he was referring to the building. Clearly he must have felt comfortable with the values and beliefs of his church, reflected in the people of his church.
There are people who are steaming mad about 8 years of Bush ineptitude and corruption. And, yes, they will stand up and applaud someone who says that enough stinking garbage is enough. There's not enough perfume in Palin's boudoir to take the stink off of the policies and practices of the current administration, and McCain ( whom I actually liked back in 2000), has so aligned himself with that administration that he can't wash it off either. What does it say about McCain's character that he would actually hire for his 2008 campaign someone like Tucker Eskew? Eskew is one of those responsible for the vile "McCain's black baby" whisper campaign that helped Bush defeat McCain in the 2000 primaries. My take is that McCain will apparently prostitute himself to whatever he thinks will get him elected. Not the kind of change I had in mind.
Considering Obama's political history, if you've done the research, it appears you are willing to look the other way for someone who has run as a new breed of politician while employing hard-nose tactics throughout his political career and is running on smoke and mirrors campaign.
Regarding all that Bush lies and corruption stuff... perhaps you can be the first to highlight a few that really happened. Usually I just hear liberal relatives of mine regurgitate the KOS driven drivel ... my uncle hates Bush, but he can't even tell me why. Group-think must be very comforting...
In response to the question about Bush administration lies:
How about the whisper campaign about McCain's "black baby," for starters? OK, so that was pre-Bush administration, but it set the tone.
Onward:
Iraq's dangerous WMD's? (Yes, S. Hussein was a cruel oppressor, but the U.S. has tolerated and continues to tolerate regimes that are cruel and oppressive. I think WMD actually meant Way Massive petroleum Deposits.)
Mission Accomplished? What mission, and who was behind that banner? Just how great a supporter of the troops can one be if one delays the reunion of sailors and combat aircrews for a photo-op?
Last throes of the insurgency? How many years ago was that now?
At Ashcroft's bedside in 2004- Just what was it that Card and Gonzales were doing there? What were they trying to accomplish? Delivering a "get well" card to Mr. Ashcroft?
To go any further we should probably have another thread. This thread, after all, was about the lipstick incident.