Obama The Sexist: You Can Put Lipstick On A Pig, page 2
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 11 times


reply posted on 9-9-2008 @ 07:04 PM by bknapple32
reply to post by jetxnet



jet... really? Obama was the one to change the analogy to lipstick on a pig?

Straws people... straws.....


reply posted on 9-9-2008 @ 07:04 PM by mabus325
reply to post by jetxnet



This is what you call damage control.



reply posted on 9-9-2008 @ 07:05 PM by skeptic1
reply to post by jamie83



So, according to you, he's either clueless or sexist? Then, don't vote for him.

Isn't this the exact political baiting we are trying to get away from?

The general public (us here on this board....for the most part) are smarter than these yahoos that are running for office. Can we try to act like it?? All of this is getting old.....

I still contend he was speaking of McCain's version of change (or perceived lack thereof), not Palin in particular.

There are bigger issues, people, than who puts their foot in their mouth more.....BIGGER ISSUES...REAL ISSUES!!


reply posted on 9-9-2008 @ 07:07 PM by mabus325
reply to post by jetxnet



Here is another quote, courtesy of ABC News' Jake Tapper

blogs.abcnews.com...


"You can wrap an old fish in a piece of paper called 'change,'" Obama continued, "it's still gonna stink after eight years


reply posted on 9-9-2008 @ 07:07 PM by bknapple32
reply to post by skeptic1



i thought for sure jamie would stick to the pact that we would raise the level of discourse here, but if this is viewed as sexist to jaime, then i am done debating with that poster. I find it ridiculous that this has even gotten a few responses defending the OP and attacking obama.



reply posted on 9-9-2008 @ 07:14 PM by skeptic1
reply to post by Fromabove




Then, if you can deduct that, then I can turn around and deduct that Obama hates animals.....I mean, discussing putting chemicals on a poor piggys snout and wrapping a poor elderly trout in newspaper to suffocate!!! How dare he?!?!?!

I guess it is a matter of opinion....

I read what he said, and took the time to notice that when he said "putting lipstick on a pig" was preceded by a phrase about.....CHANGE.

And, what he said about wrapping an old fish in newspaper was preceded by a phrase about.....CHANGE.

So, I deduct he was talking about.....CHANGE.

Poor choice of words? Yes.
Easily twisted? Yes.
Matter of interpretation? Maybe.
Meant as an obvious insult to Palin and McCain? More than likely not.


reply posted on 9-9-2008 @ 07:16 PM by loam
reply to post by bknapple32



You have to admit this language isn't very smart for Obama. In fact, it damages him tremendously.

Wouldn't he have been better served by simply stating McCain/Palin, however well intentioned, do not understand change? That message is much stronger, without the implied insults.

The divide between Obama the candidate and Obama the myth widens, imo.


[edit on 9-9-2008 by loam]


reply posted on 9-9-2008 @ 07:17 PM by jetxnet


Please Review This Link





[edit on 10-9-2008 by MemoryShock]



reply posted on 9-9-2008 @ 07:19 PM by Fromabove
Originally posted by skeptic1
reply to
post by Fromabove




Then, if you can deduct that, then I can turn around and deduct that Obama hates animals.....I mean, discussing putting chemicals on a poor piggys snout and wrapping a poor elderly trout in newspaper to suffocate!!! How dare he?!?!?!

I guess it is a matter of opinion....

I read what he said, and took the time to notice that when he said "putting lipstick on a pig" was preceded by a phrase about.....CHANGE.

And, what he said about wrapping an old fish in newspaper was preceded by a phrase about.....CHANGE.

So, I deduct he was talking about.....CHANGE.

Poor choice of words? Yes.
Easily twisted? Yes.
Matter of interpretation? Maybe.
Meant as an obvious insult to Palin and McCain? More than likely not.



Obama is clearly upset that McCain is using the "change" motto where once it had been the Obama mantra. How else can one see what he said as innocent in any way? I know how I took it, and probably a lot of people as well. I thought it was low... even for Obama.


reply posted on 9-9-2008 @ 07:21 PM by skeptic1
reply to post by jetxnet



Please don't tell me that you thought I was serious about his hating animals?? We really need a sacasm emoticon around here....

My point is that you can deduct what you want from what he said. Some will see it as a slam against McCain and Palin. Others will read what he actually said and notice he might have been talking about change or the lack thereof from his opponents.

If you support him, you will view it one way; if you support them, you will view it another way.

I am by no means an Obama supporter...at all. But, read what he said, see the phrases that came before his "expressions" and don't just "assume" what he meant.

It was a poor choice of words, a choice of words that is easliy twisted. But, I don't think it was a deliberate slam at McCain or Palin.

You have your opinion and I have mine. We can agree to disagree on what someone else meant.



[edit on 9/9/2008 by skeptic1]
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5  >>    ^^TOP^^



Senator Paul is being detained at the Nashville Airport by the TSA
  Posted 19 days ago with 89 member flags
Bruins goalie Tim Thomas takes stand against U.S Government
  Posted 19 days ago with 88 member flags
Romney: "I\'m Not Concerned About the Very Poor"
  Posted 10 days ago with 73 member flags
The Girl Killed by Obama: She "never saw it coming"
  Posted 4 days ago with 62 member flags
Ron Paul In Nevada - The Caucus Is Rigged!! - w/VIDEO
  Posted 6 days ago with 60 member flags

Newest topics getting replies, in real-time:

Anonymous show your face!
  Rant, Posted 14 hours ago, 68 replies