JL21 wrote:So help me God, if this whole lipstick/pig thing is the deciding factor in your decision to vote for one party or another, I will hunt you down and subject you to re-runs of Michael Moore movies, Clockwork Orange-style.
(not aimed at anyone in this thread... I'm just stunned by the sheer stupidity of this whole thing and that it might actually influence someone's vote)
++ That's how these politics threads usually turn out, from what I've seen. No one will listen, everyone just wants to prove themselves right.
Can we just say:
Obama may or may not have made a reference to Palin with the "pig on a lipstick" There is only one person who knows with 100% certainty and that is Obama. ANd, right now, he's in a position where no one will believe him if he tells the truth and no one will believe him if he doesn't. Regardless of what he says now or what anyone else says, it's open to interpretation. And, this argument could go on forever because there is no right or wrong answer; only that which you think may be right or wrong. You can type until your fingers fall off and won't change anything.
++
It will go on and on forever. The only people taking him at his word are those who will defend him on just about everything. It doesn't matter his intent.
And you're right. Nobody's really going to believe him. That's the bigger issue. The mistakes that campaign has made this week with their mouths is kind of amazing to me. Maybe I didn't think Biden would be this bad.
It fills me with blind rage that, in the middle of an election, America has spent 2 days now fixated on [expletive] pigs and lipstick. And it frightens the hell out of me that some voters out there might actually base their choice on that one-liner from Obama.
JL21 wrote:It fills me with blind rage that, in the middle of an election, America has spent 2 days now fixated on [expletive] pigs and lipstick. And it frightens the hell out of me that some voters out there might actually base their choice on that one-liner from Obama.
JL21 wrote:It fills me with blind rage that, in the middle of an election, America has spent 2 days now fixated on [expletive] pigs and lipstick. And it frightens the hell out of me that some voters out there might actually base their choice on that one-liner from Obama.
You know some will.
It doesn't bother me so much that time has been spent on it. Again, that's not the partisan side of me speaking. As I've said in here before, you want good news being reported, then make good news. You don't want bad news? Don't say stupid things. Biden should be very thankful. He's not getting much air time with his comments.
BW23 wrote:If he didn't mean it he's stupid. The crowd thought he was referring to her, and they ate it up.
As for the author of the political cartoons...yeah, he cited him AFTER the paper contacted them. Three times in four days. Tough getting new material I guess. I think it's funny...and I mean nothing partisan about that.
He didn't even use her name. He was talking about McCain's economic policy and referred to it as putting lipstick on a pig. To assert that he was talking about Palin just because she said she was a pitbull with lipstick or something is absolutely preposterous. So does this now mean nobody can ever use the term "Lipstick on a pig" again just because it might insult Sarah Palin? This is ridiculous.
And I don't seem to recall any story about the paper contacting them. And okay, so, he used the line once, maybe twice after it was pointed out to him by a friend, realized that it was from a WaPo article and immediately started sourcing it. Are we done grasping at straws? Can we PLEASE talk issues now or is that sexist, too?
Yes, the paper did contact them.
And yes, he was talking about Palin.
You'll believe any spin that camp throws out there.
"Spin" is taking what someone said and twisting it into a different meaning. That's what you're doing, not what we're doing. Obama said "You can put lipstick on a pig, but it's still a pig". He didn't say anything about Palin. You are "spinning" it into a Palin issue.
By the way, he followed it up with an anology about wrapping up a dead fish. So does that mean he was calling her a dead fish, too?
You're taking what Obama's explanation for what he said as truth. His explanation is the spin here.
And, he followed the pig comment with something about and "old" fish. Not a dead one.
First lipstick on a pig. Then an old fish.
Nah, you're right. That's just policies. It's not a woman who just talked about lipstick less than two weeks ago and the old guy she's running with. Obama starts how McCain says he's about change. He then uses the lines from the cartoon. Very light applause. Very light. When did McCain start with the change mantra? When Palin came aboard. After the cartoon lines, he immediately goes into the pig comment. He just got done saying that there wasn't change in the policies. "That's just calling something the same something different." No reaction from the crowd at all. Even if he's referring to the policies, the way they're dressing it up or making it look different is with Palin.
"You can put lipstick on a pig..." with a nice pause because of all the laughter and clapping. Why were the laughing? Why did he pause for laughter and cheering before finishing the sentence?
Now, the fish comment wasn't about dead fish. It was this.
"You can wrap an old fish in a piece of paper called change. It's still gonna stink."
So, McCain's old, and he's trying to go with the change mantra now.
Like I've said before, and I'll say again. The comment doesn't bother me. If he meant that it was about policy. Fine. I don't believe that, but it doesn't bother me either way.
But it was a stupid comment to make, and he shouldn't get upset with anyone but himself. Even if someone in his camp suggested using it, it's like a pitcher giving up a homerun and blaming the catcher for calling for that pitch. You always have the option to shake him off.
Wow.
This keeps getting better.
More please.
I noticed he was wearing a white shirt when he said it. Probably making fun of McCain's white hair.
BW23 wrote:If he didn't mean it he's stupid. The crowd thought he was referring to her, and they ate it up.
As for the author of the political cartoons...yeah, he cited him AFTER the paper contacted them. Three times in four days. Tough getting new material I guess. I think it's funny...and I mean nothing partisan about that.
He didn't even use her name. He was talking about McCain's economic policy and referred to it as putting lipstick on a pig. To assert that he was talking about Palin just because she said she was a pitbull with lipstick or something is absolutely preposterous. So does this now mean nobody can ever use the term "Lipstick on a pig" again just because it might insult Sarah Palin? This is ridiculous.
And I don't seem to recall any story about the paper contacting them. And okay, so, he used the line once, maybe twice after it was pointed out to him by a friend, realized that it was from a WaPo article and immediately started sourcing it. Are we done grasping at straws? Can we PLEASE talk issues now or is that sexist, too?
Yes, the paper did contact them.
And yes, he was talking about Palin.
You'll believe any spin that camp throws out there.
"Spin" is taking what someone said and twisting it into a different meaning. That's what you're doing, not what we're doing. Obama said "You can put lipstick on a pig, but it's still a pig". He didn't say anything about Palin. You are "spinning" it into a Palin issue.
By the way, he followed it up with an anology about wrapping up a dead fish. So does that mean he was calling her a dead fish, too?
You're taking what Obama's explanation for what he said as truth. His explanation is the spin here.
And, he followed the pig comment with something about and "old" fish. Not a dead one.
First lipstick on a pig. Then an old fish.
Nah, you're right. That's just policies. It's not a woman who just talked about lipstick less than two weeks ago and the old guy she's running with. Obama starts how McCain says he's about change. He then uses the lines from the cartoon. Very light applause. Very light. When did McCain start with the change mantra? When Palin came aboard. After the cartoon lines, he immediately goes into the pig comment. He just got done saying that there wasn't change in the policies. "That's just calling something the same something different." No reaction from the crowd at all. Even if he's referring to the policies, the way they're dressing it up or making it look different is with Palin.
"You can put lipstick on a pig..." with a nice pause because of all the laughter and clapping. Why were the laughing? Why did he pause for laughter and cheering before finishing the sentence?
Now, the fish comment wasn't about dead fish. It was this.
"You can wrap an old fish in a piece of paper called change. It's still gonna stink."
So, McCain's old, and he's trying to go with the change mantra now.
Like I've said before, and I'll say again. The comment doesn't bother me. If he meant that it was about policy. Fine. I don't believe that, but it doesn't bother me either way.
But it was a stupid comment to make, and he shouldn't get upset with anyone but himself. Even if someone in his camp suggested using it, it's like a pitcher giving up a homerun and blaming the catcher for calling for that pitch. You always have the option to shake him off.
Wow.
This keeps getting better.
More please.
I noticed he was wearing a white shirt when he said it. Probably making fun of McCain's white hair.
I'm sure there's more. Can you share the rest?
Continue to be a lapdog at whatever they throw at you. We all know you will. Hook. Line. Sinker.
I'm sure there's more Liberal spin. Can you share it? I await ever so anxiously.
Question: We have some people at my work that just seem to be very "Angry" about the Republican Party. They are 1,000% Dem, and just seem to invoke anger into everything they've been saying to others lately, including "I'm right!!", and "You need to be more open-minded" .... ???
Any recommendations on dealing with political issues with others that share a different viewpoint & are so entirely mad & vocal about it?
I can't believe the stupidity of Americans. This tripe that BW keeps repeating is just utter nonsense but it clearly works and that depresses me. OTOH the digging through Palin's garbage can to find some trash that may stick when thrown against the wall is nearly as depressing yet doesn't work. When did Republicans get so good at playing the victim? Politics is certainly a cynics game.
JL21 wrote:It fills me with blind rage that, in the middle of an election, America has spent 2 days now fixated on [expletive] pigs and lipstick. And it frightens the hell out of me that some voters out there might actually base their choice on that one-liner from Obama.
Thank you, yes.
There will be more and probably dumber issues that arise, of that I will bet my bottom dollar.
During the primaries, I once watched a hardcore liberal and a hardcore conservative get into an argument over if the bookshelf in Huckabee's Christmas commercial was made to look like a cross or not. That went on for 5 days and something like 200 posts and then becamse an argument over rather or not a word was quoted correctly or not - in the actual argument that ensued - that lasted another 100 posts. It was quite the spectacle.....unlike on this board, however, that argument carried into every single thread on the website.
