Obama The Sexist: You Can Put Lipstick On A Pig

It would have been interesting if he'd said "If you put lipstick on Palin she's still a pig" but he didn't.

Or if you put lipstick on McCain he's still a pig... But he didn't.

To me, this is just an attempt to make something an issue when it wasn't .

Both parties need to debate the issues, not try to claim the other candidate is sexist, or racist for the use of a common expression.



[edit on 10-9-2008 by Wildbob77]

Let me qualify this by saying I am a McCain Supporter...but as a person from the south, that expression has been a round ALOT longer than any of us have been...my grandmother said it YEARS ago (I'm 44)...I don't believe that even Obama could be THAT stupid as to mean it in the context that some here are refering to...McCain said something VERY similar last year in a speach...it could be that Obama was refrencing that to throw it back at McCain...he probably realized as soon as he said it that he might get into some hot water over it (Watch the video and see his reaction as soon as he said it and after)...It's in these times of Politically Correct this and that, that someone can't even make a remark about an OLD saying...or even one that has been brought up by your opponent...

Originally posted by LLoyd45

Originally posted by maybereal11

No derailment...RIGHT ON TOPIC. Perhaps you should re-read my post.
www.abovetopsecret.com...


[edit on 10-9-2008 by maybereal11]

[edit on 10-9-2008 by maybereal11]

I read your post and I stand by my words. Apparently you and I have a difference of opinion regarding the matter. Calling out other posters by name is crossing the line on appropriate topic discussion in my opinion.

Every time we respond to a given post it "calls out another poster by name"...See your name at the top of this post? I am confused.

I responded by identifying those that made a specific point to infer this was an important issue.

On topic..
www.politicker.com...
"This came to Senator Obama from a friend who didn't indicate where he had gotten it from, but the questions it raises certainly continue to ring true," Psaki told the Boston Globe. "He did not know it was from a cartoon and now that he does he will certainly credit the cartoonist."

Obama used the line again while campaigning today in Michigan, as well as during an interview on Countdown with Keith Olbermann, both times PROPERLY CREDITING Tom Toles from The Washington Post.




[edit on 10-9-2008 by maybereal11]

This is such a long post and I can't begin to read 12 pages of this "stuff"...but I just want to say that you can debate the meaning, context, intentions of the quote all you want. I can accept every explanation ranging from the statement's use as an age old cliche to a certain attack on you-know-who....

Really, in the end it doesn't matter what was meant by it because perception is ultimately reality in effect and once again Sen. Obama has proven his inability to navigate the diplomatic frontier. I think it is a bad sign how he is constantly having to explain/re-explain/re-re explain himself. I don't think it makes him a bad man or incapable, it simply proves he is perhaps not ready to take on this challenge - yet.

I agree he comes off as very articulate when he has the chance to plan his words and is in friendly territory. What about when he is on the spot with dedicated enemies and makes these types of miss-thought-out statements? There will come a time when he can't take it back or wiggle out of it and the fate of us all hangs in the balance. After all, the President is a diplomat so he/she should therefore be more diplomatic. ...and please don't flame me with "the other side did this" stuff.... rising above the opponent should be the goal for both sides - it's no excuse.

reply to post by jamie83


I see, so the fact that the oposition made a comment about lipstick, that therefore negates and nulifies any usage of a commonly used phrase? Thank god Obama didn't make any mention of political pit bulls.

Originally posted by jamie83
As many others have pointed out here, when McCain made his statement Hillary Clinton had not made any reference to wearing lipstick, neither was her most famous sound bite from played 8 million times referencing her wearing of lipstick.

The timing is the key. Sarah Palin's line has become quite famous in the last week since she delivered it and people instantly associate her with it. It should come as absolutely no surprise to the Obama campaign that people would, in turn, associate that older than dirt joke with her new, very popular catch-phrase. They should have known that people would take it as a direct jab at Palin.

But lets be honest, how does even calling the other side's ideas a 'pig' represent new, hopeful politics and a change from the usual BS? How does this help unite the country? Even if you take his comment at face value and in the manner he says he intended, its not helpful at all. Its rude and disrespectful not only to the candidates, but to the voters who agree with them.

Quite honestly, Obama needs to fire his campaign manager. They're off-message (in fact, the message has completely evaporated as he has been forced to shift on a number of issues) and he's been forced to play defense against a McCain campaign that, for the last two months, has outmaneuvered him at every turn...just like Hillary's did for the last several weeks of their contest. He may yet win it, but its going to be the same type of win as in the primaries if he does; he's going to limp over the finish line.

[edit on 10-9-2008 by vor78]

In the midst of everything that is going on in todays world, we are debating expressions that use the word "Lipstick"?

Our heads aren't so much burried in the sand as they are being forcfully shoved into the hole by political strategists.

As long as we keep eating it, they will feed it to us.

It's up to us.

Originally posted by maybereal11
Every time we respond to a given post it "calls out another poster by name"...See your name at the top of this post? I am confused.

I responded by identifying those that made a specific point to infer this was an important issue.

That's true, but you singled out several people, not just one, with the intent of portraying some type of conspiracy or partisanship. In my opinion that makes a big difference in your intent.

reply to post by JacKatMtn


I agree. Obama dissing Mccain & Palin should not sway anyone's vote. Stop making excuses to why you shouldn't vote for someone, and vote according to who you think is the best candidate for you! I have a son and I make less than $2.6 mill a year, so my selection is a no brainer. I voted for Bush last time caught up in this morals B.S. If anyone remembers Kennedy, Reagan, or Clinton, you should know that morals are the last thing you should concern yourself with when chosing a president!

Who cares if he dissed Palin & Mccain or not?! Bush dissed us all when he did not fullfill his promises from 2000, and we still put the idiot back in office for another 4 years!

Does anyone know for a fact that what Obama said was a cheap shot against Mccain and Palin? No! Are we putting God in office, or a president?

A mentally retarded person may be non offensive and have good morals, but should he be running the country?

It's funny b/c I'm white, and I can honestly say that if Obama was 100% white, this race would not even be close.

Okay. I am a British onlooker and have no allegiance to either party in the ridiculously drawn-out US elections / media circus. The US election is well covered here so I am well aware of Palin's pitbull comment.

So for what it's worth, here is my opinion unfettered by blind allegiance to either candidate.

The rest of the world is laughing at the stupidity of this debate. "Putting lipstick on a pig" IS a commonly used phrase and the reaction to it's use is a total over-reaction. Over-analyse any speech and you will be able to read into it all sorts of innuendo as well as being in serious danger of disappearing up your own backsides.

Was Palin's comment offensive to pitbulls and/or hockey mums?

Rest assured that each party will have a PR team looking to capitalise on anything that they can dig up.

Grow up and concentrate on the things that matter.

Originally posted by LLoyd45

Originally posted by maybereal11
Every time we respond to a given post it "calls out another poster by name"...See your name at the top of this post? I am confused.

I responded by identifying those that made a specific point to infer this was an important issue.

That's true, but you singled out several people, not just one, with the intent of portraying some type of conspiracy or partisanship. In my opinion that makes a big difference in your intent.

Not "several"... 3 And they should own their posts as each of us do.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Lets stay on topic...as inane as this topic is. Your opinion of my intent is just that, Opinion...and not an accurate one.

U2 me if you would like to continue this discussion rather than occupy space here off topic.



[edit on 10-9-2008 by maybereal11]

reply to post by maybereal11


...words represent ideas. This has little to do with the word "lipstick" and everything to do with judgement and timing. Two very essential elements of diplomacy. IMO....

Originally posted by glad_to_be_His
reply to post by maybereal11

 

...words represent ideas. This has little to do with the word "lipstick"....

YES! Words do represent IDEAS. Agreed!
Does that mean we can DEBATE THE IDEA that Obama was talking about? How he used those words, that well known expression, to communicate his opinion that John McCain and Sarah Palin, though portraying an image of "change" and "new politics" are in fact representitive of the same "broken politics" that McCain claims to deplore?

Thank you for directing this discussion to the actual IDEAS that were being communicated rather than the words.

reply to post by Alxandro


I thought it was hysterical and have no idea how it can be sexist.Because it involves lipstick?

reply to post by jamie83


I was discussing the topic, and addressing how one-sided and flawed your argument is, my friend (you've done worse, I read your posts). Total within bounds. An argument needs objectivity to be credible. I'm questioning the rationale of both of your and Jet's arguments.

Do you think Obama is naive and would not understand the reaction when he made the pig/lipstick comment?

You're asking to get inside of someone's head. Whether he knew the extent of the backlash is pretty much irrelevant anyway. Plus the converse argument can be made that he would not intentionally have caused such a negative backlash on purpose, in an effort to to intentionally hurt his campaign. We just don't know. But working off of what we do know, the analogy is common from him, and even more common from McCain.

Do you think this is a big shock to him that people took it to be a reference to Palin?

Again, no way of knowing. My personal opinion is that they obviously knew the Hannity's of the world would pounce. At best, it's a 2-day story.

reply to post by maybereal11


Yes, I too agree. The problem is, that with all the huff about the famous lipstick line Sen. Obama should have the instinct to know not to use that age old expression because of the way it could and would be construed. There were certainly other ways to make his point, other clever one-liners, and he should have used one of them. I said it before, bad judgement. ...IMO

It seems to me he wants to appease and talk to terrorists but in the same breath he can't even begin to be diplomatic with his own people. If they disagree with him they are called pigs but a terrorist deserves dialog and the benefit of the doubt?

It really makes you wonder who in his mind the terrorists really are. I suspect he thinks we the American people are the real threat and Palin is number one on his hit list.

For all of you that can't put this together this video does it very well.
www.youtube.com...

[edit on 10-9-2008 by northof8]

reply to post by Kaiser Sohse


UGGGHHHHH no I do not think it was a punch to the republicans at large.....

This was an attack on the plans of the republican party. Really the plans being offered by bush are nothing more than a fresh new copy of what bush has pushed for all along...

Which is fine if the country were in better shape, but come on

Deficit through the roof, gas and food more expensive, pay down, unemployment up, 2 wars, Osama still at large, N. Korea now has nukes, Iran is working towards nukes, schools have higest drop out rates ever.

not to mention McCain has used the same words vs. Hillary..... did he appologize??? NOPE!!!!

So pLEEAAAASSSSSSSSSSEEEEEEE, GIVE ME A BREAK on this

Seems a very poor choice of an analogy, especially given Palin's speech. While it taken in context was referencing tieing McCain to Bush's 8 years, it was stupid of him to use that particular term.

It was kinda one of those insults that you can't exactly say was an insult, ("Oh, I wasn't talking about you.........). Don't think that is was an "off the cuff" remark.

For a supposedly thoughtful man, Obama made an error with using that term. The audience he was speaking to picked up on the reference to Palin's speech. Why wouldn't others? Way to go endearing women to you Barry.

I'll let it pass though, it's politics as usual.

Originally posted by whatukno


I see, so the fact that the oposition made a comment about lipstick, that therefore negates and nulifies any usage of a commonly used phrase? Thank god Obama didn't make any mention of political pit bulls.

Nullify isn't the proper word, and it isn't that Palin just "made a comment about lipstick."

You need to put this in context:

1. A week or so ago Obama was coasting, leading all the polls.

2. Obama gave his big speech in Denver that was promoted and built up for months.

3. When he woke up the next morning, nobody was talking about his big speech. They were talking about McCain choosing Palin as VP.

4. For a week the only story in the media was Palin. There were non-stops stories, almost all negative, about her, her baby, her daughter, her inexperience, etc.

5. The Palin buzz built up to a crescendo, and as many people watched her speech as watched Obama's.

6. Palin gave one of the best speeches in convention history. She dressed down the "Obama persona" every way imaginable, exposing his superficiality at every turn.

7. Palin absolutely shifted the entire dynamic of this election. USA Today reported that McCain now leads in the polls by +10% among likely voters.

8. The most famous sound bite replayed from Palin's speech is the pitbull/lipstick sound bite. In fact, the ONE WORD punchline was "LIPSTICK," and her statement referred to HER wearing the lipstick.

9. The topic of Obama's speech was not an issue. It was merely an attack at McCain and Palin, saying they really didn't represent "change" because HE wants to convince people HE represents "change."

10. In this context, Obama uses the pig/lipstick metaphor, saying you can put lipstick on a pig.

11. The people in the crowd immediately roared their approval, presumably linking in their mind the words "lipstick on a pig" which Obama said, and the words Palin said about her wearing lipstick.


Either Obama was aware the crowd would make this connection, or his is a bigger dolt than people given him credit for.

And now once again he is doing what he does best -playing the role of a self-righteous, innocent VICTIM.

Obama no longer owns the word change. He now owns the word VICTIM.