Obama The Sexist: You Can Put Lipstick On A Pig

page: 18
11
<< 15  16  17   >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 04:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by northof8
  • He had every reason to do it. He is very afraid of Palin.
  • There is no proof that he didn't do it on purpose.
  • He was talking about her when made the statement. You can tell by the crowds reaction and his pause that it was intentional and he did mean to call her a pig.
  • The media is in the bag for Obama and has been from day one. Just ask Hillary or watch PMSNBC


You're still not addressing the issue.

-Him not being afraid of Palin does not give him reason to do that.
-I can't prove a negative.
-He was talking about McCain's policies. In no way was he talking about Palin at the time. The most you can say is that it was a suggestive reference, but again, that is a reach at best - and you still can't give any motive for him to do it (other than "he's not scared of Palin").
-If the media is in the bag for Obama, why are we having this discussion? Why do we talk about the lapel, his lack of pets, and his face scratch.

Yes, the media has an obsession with Obama. That is, they love to talk about him. Sometimes it's good, sometimes it's bad. But they certainly don't give him a free pass.

*Edit to add:

Hell, I saw Obama get criticized for only releasing 3 years of tax records. They said he was hiding something.

Then, McCain released only 2 years of his and wouldn't release his wife's records (and she has all of the money anyway) and nobody said anything.

Sure, I pick up on those types of things, but I don't start threads on them and raise hell about it because it's nonsense and it's not worth talking about.

[edit on 10-9-2008 by Sublime620]




posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 04:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sublime620

Just like what he said right afterwards, that a fish wrapped in paper that says changes will still stink after 8 years. The difference between the fish statement and the pig statement?

You can't take the fish statement out of context. But believe me, if she had fish lips you'd be all over it.


Actually you are misquoting what he said. He specifically said "old fish."

He was giving a speech attacking both McCain and Palin's attempt to claim the "change" label. The pig and lipstick referred to Palin. The "old fish" referred to McCain.

He got his point across. His base LOVED it. And now he gets to pretend he's the victim and send out another email asking for money.

Don't you understand how this whole email database he's built up works?

He can't just ask for money everyday. He needs a new reason every time they send out an email. Last week it was that Palin attacked Obama supporters because she dissed Obama's community organizer background. So send money to Obama.

This week it will be the false claims that Obama is sexist. So send money to Obama.

They need to create something everyday to justify sending out new emails asking for people to cough up cash.



posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 04:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by jamie83
Actually you are misquoting what he said. He specifically said "old fish."

The pig and lipstick referred to Palin. The "old fish" referred to McCain.


I'd love to see your proof on that. The old fish is McCain... now you're just insulting your own candidate. Way to put words in someone else's mouth.

He's talking about POLICY (something we should all be talking about), and you somehow infer he's talking about people...


Originally posted by jamie83
Don't you understand how this whole email database he's built up works?

He can't just ask for money everyday. He needs a new reason every time they send out an email. Last week it was that Palin attacked Obama supporters because she dissed Obama's community organizer background. So send money to Obama.

This week it will be the false claims that Obama is sexist. So send money to Obama.

They need to create something everyday to justify sending out new emails asking for people to cough up cash.


Oh Jesus... and here comes the conspiracy side. That's right, Obama wants to stir things up.

He needs money so he decides to insult McCain and Palin. I suppose he could have said:

"Palin isn't change, you can put lipstick on a pig..." and then said, "McCain isn't change, you can wrap and old fish in paper..."

But hey, that would just make too much damn sense wouldn't it? So instead, he says a commonly known phrase about pigs and lipstick when talking about POLICY and continues on with the fish analogy (which by the way, I find it hilarious you link that to McCain).

All this, just to stir things up and make some money... as you put it. The deeper you dig, the more absurd it gets.

[edit on 10-9-2008 by Sublime620]

[edit on 10-9-2008 by Sublime620]



posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 04:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sublime620
reply to post by northof8
 


Hmm, proof that he didn't intentionally do it. Sure.

  • He has no reason to do it.
  • There is no proof that he did do it on purpose.
  • He wasn't even talking about her when he made the statement.
  • The media has a previous record of taking things out of context and blowing them out of proportion (and worse... people believing it).


reply to post by SectionEight
 


What worked against Hillary? Can you cite an example?

[edit on 10-9-2008 by Sublime620]


Do some googling on,

"The claws come out"
"you're likable enough"
"sweetie"
brushing off his shoulders gesture
his use of the word "periodically"

It is a veritable carbon copy clone of the Palin lipstick tactics.



posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 04:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sublime620
All this, just to stir things up and make some money... as you put it. The deeper you dig, the more absurd it gets.



Now you're putting words in my mouth. I didn't say he wanted to "stir things up." I said he needed to change the momentum which was all going McCain's way.

I'll post excerpts from the next email that they send asking for money and referencing more "attacks" on Obama.

And it's not a conspiracy. It's a strategy, and not a bad one.



posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 04:29 PM
link   
reply to post by SectionEight
 


Did you just complain that he used the word "periodically".

Screw it. This man can't win.

I give up.

I hope he never has to reference the Periodic Table of Elements or people might start suing him.



posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 04:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by jamie83

Originally posted by Sublime620
reply to post by northof8
 


Hmm, proof that he didn't intentionally do it. Sure.

  • He has no reason to do it.
  • There is no proof that he did do it on purpose.
  • He wasn't even talking about her when he made the statement.
  • The media has a previous record of taking things out of context and blowing them out of proportion (and worse... people believing it).




Yet knowing all this he said it anyway. And in spite of his protests that there are important issues to discuss, he drew more attention to this issue today by discussing it some more.

I think this is evidence he planned this whole episode.


Lord help me...First off you are asking someone to prove a negative.

No, I cannot PROVE he didn't intend it the way you claim and I can not PROVE that John McCain isn't a North Vietnamese Manchurian Candidate. Sometimes we have to let commonsense prevail.

" And in spite of his protests that there are important issues to discuss, he drew more attention to this issue today by discussing it some more."

Jamie really? First the GOP spins this to INANE proportions and now you are criticizing the Obama camp for explaining the comment and saying lets talk about issues?

Keep them on the defense and they can't talk about the issues.
GOP Strategy: They can't discuss the economy or war if they have to keep answering our non-issue spin. Distract, dodge, bob, weave....what issues? Oh yeah..LIPSTICK

What was your other argument ..oh yes...a faulted Binary argument..either/or ...do you steal money on tuesday or thursday?

Either (1) Obama was naive in making the statement and should have known the right would take it out of context and thus has bad judgement OR (2) It was directed at Sarah Palin and he is a sexist.

Bad judgement or sexist. Are you a thief or a liar?

How about this as a 3rd alternative...Obama thinks better of the American people than this and doesn't think about outrageous right wing spin everytime he talks to the American people. HE IS BETTING ON US ACTUALLY CARING ABOUT ISSUES.

If he is guilty of anything it is overestimating the average american citizen and it is that kind of optimism that makes me want to support him...win or lose.

It was a well known expression of speech in a context that was directed specifically at the McCain camps recent re-tooling of their image in a brazen hypocritical way.

Makes for good headlines though!...At times I think there are more Karl Rove supporters on this site than McCain supporters.


[edit on 10-9-2008 by maybereal11]

[edit on 10-9-2008 by maybereal11]



posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 04:31 PM
link   
Hmm...
My previous post of how I explained everything and made sense of it all must have been over looked.

Don't you see? THis is what THEY want, they want you to fight amoungst yourselves, all it does is spur you loyalty to one or the other party more and more, the more you identify with that party, the more you reject the idea that they are just as evil and deceptive as the other.
It's all a game folks, it's all an illusion, don't get caught up in the insanity of the devisixe tactics of the NWO.

-Jimmy



posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 04:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sublime620
reply to post by SectionEight
 


Did you just complain that he used the word "periodically".

Screw it. This man can't win.

I give up.

I hope he never has to reference the Periodic Table of Elements or people might start suing him.


If you look it up with reference to Obama and how his use of it enflamed feminists, you will find a lot of angry people that took issue to the way he used it.



posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 04:39 PM
link   
So let me get this straight - an 18 page thread quibbling over semantics and innuendo ? The government just announced the biggest bailout in history amidst the common knowledge that the US deficit now stands at HOW MUCH - and the value of the dollar abroad has plummeted ? Issues people, policy. Political debates need to be about relevant policy, and not a “he said/ she said” contest.

So the public attention has been shifted from the “Paris Hilton / Brittney Spears/ American Idol” type of gossip onto the Obama/ McCain/ Palin gossip. Very clever. See, this way the real issues are still ignored but it gives people the sense that they’re actually participating in the political process.



posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 04:40 PM
link   
Obama isn't sexist. This comment was taken out of proportion.



posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 04:41 PM
link   
Don't be fooled sheeple... Everything these two clowns spout is written, rehearsed, practiced, and polled before they open their mouths.

It's clear what he meant, and it was a direct response to her.

But, it doesn't matter, it's just to get people going. Remember, ANY press is good press.

Please, do our Country a favor and find someone else to vote for!



posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 04:46 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 04:47 PM
link   
I can hardly believe this is being debated soooo much.

The "PIG" he was referring too is McCain's "campaign of change"!

Listen to it yourself!




[edit on 9/10/2008 by Keyhole]



posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 04:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kesosip
for the sake of argument if that old saying was you can put Lipstick on a coon but its still a coon how would all the oboma suporters be taking it?


Oh lord help me!
Is "pig" a derragotory place holder for women? A female Pig is a SOW!
Where in american sexist or racial lexicon is the word "pig" used to refer to the female gender as a whole?

How on earth does this argument make any sense? Or are you just giggling to yourself that you said the word [snip]

I am done here. Have at it.


Mod Edit - removed comment. Not needed here.

[edit on 10-9-2008 by elevatedone]



posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 05:10 PM
link   
 

 



ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION:

THREAD CLOSED DUE TO CIRCULAR ENDLESSNESS




Okay folks, this has been done to death, and then some. This thread is now nothing more than a bright light attracting silly pointless rhetoric from all points within the political spectrum.

Please divert your precious energy toward threads that cover real issues that will be important to the populace over the next four years.



 

 



DISCLAIMER: Closing this thread is my decision, and mine alone. If you want to blame anyone or complain about this action, I'm your target.


 

 





new topics
top topics
 
11
<< 15  16  17   >>

log in

join