Obama: 'Lipstick on a pig' - Page 2

HQ6 · 09-10-2008, 10:21

The better half came in howling this morning and saying, "You are not gonna believe what he has said now!" I was one of the ones who had never heard that phrase, and was appalled at the comment. Silk purse out of a sow's ear, yes but not lipstick on a pig. I hate to get myself too excited over this, but it just seems that Obama keeps burying himself over and over particularly with women voters whom he really should be trying to court.

jamber97 · 09-10-2008, 10:23

All do respect but it’s obvious that politics are being played here on both sides. McCain used the same phrase when referring to Hillary Clinton.

Who cares about lipstick, paper wrapped fish and planes on eBay. We're all victims of our fickleness. Politicians play these silly games because they're largely effective in swaying the fickle, weak minded masses to their side. What we should be more concerned about are the issues and whether politicians adhere to their promises while in office and when they don't; vote them out or impeach them.

Team Sergeant have mercy on me

HQ6 · 09-10-2008, 10:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by jamber97

All do respect but it’s obvious that politics are being played here on both sides. McCain used the same phrase when referring to Hillary Clinton.

If you actually watched the speech given by Obama, the distinction between McCain's comment (re: health care policy) and Obama's comment become evident. Obama allowed a very distinct (perhaps scripted) paused to allow for crowd laughter before allowing himself a slight chuckle and continuing on with his speech. Regardless of whether or not the speechwriter intended the remark to be a passive aggressive jab at Palin, the crowd took it that way, and Obama's pause and subsequent chuckle cemented.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jamber97

Who cares about lipstick, paper wrapped fish and planes on eBay. We're all victims of our fickleness. Politicians play these silly games because they're largely effective in swaying the fickle, weak minded masses to their side. What we should be more concerned about are the issues and whether politicians adhere to their promises while in office and when they don't; vote them out or impeach them.

I care because whether we like it or not these " fickle, weak minded masses" are going to be voting based on the US magazine cover they saw in line at the market, the guest appearance on Oprah, and/or snappy advertisments. Sadly, most people will vote based on these arbitrary sound bytes rather than taking the time to educate themselves about the candidates.

**Peregrino** · 09-10-2008, 10:46

Sigaba · 09-10-2008, 11:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by jamber97

Politicians play these silly games because they're largely effective in swaying the fickle, weak minded masses to their side. What we should be more concerned about are the issues and whether politicians adhere to their promises while in office and when they don't; vote them out or impeach them.

This statement reflects a curious interpretation of the word 'respect.' American citizens can decide for themselves which issues matter to them. That one may disagree with those decisions doesn't make them 'fickle' or 'weak.'

Richard · 09-10-2008, 11:48

BHO, JB and crowd can say what they like, here are a few new views of Sarah among the MSM editorial cartoonists.

Richard

Richard · 09-10-2008, 11:50

And here are a couple more.

Richard

jamber97 · 09-10-2008, 12:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sigaba

This statement reflects a curious interpretation of the word 'respect.' American citizens can decide for themselves which issues matter to them. That one may disagree with those decisions doesn't make them 'fickle' or 'weak.'

The main point I was trying to make was to not be distracted by the political games that both sides play and focus on the issues. Let’s hold our leaders accountable for their policy choices and promises. Disagreeing on the issues doesn't make one fickle but making a decision based upon lipstick one day and fish wrapped in paper the next does.

It seems as though we are in agreement.

HQ6 · 09-10-2008, 12:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by Broadsword2004

And to think we thought it was Biden who was going to be making the verbal slipups.

Oh he is doing his part. Did you read his speech in Columbia, MO yesterday? Apparently since she is against stem cell research, Palin cares less about her son with special needs.

Sigaba · 09-10-2008, 13:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by jamber97

The main point I was trying to make was to not be distracted by the political games that both sides play and focus on the issues. Let’s hold our leaders accountable for their policy choices and promises. Disagreeing on the issues doesn't make one fickle but making a decision based upon lipstick one day and fish wrapped in paper the next does.

It seems as though we are in agreement.

I've read your posts on topics related to the American political system, the candidates for the presidency, and the upcoming election. I'm highly confident that we're not in agreement.

jamber97 · 09-10-2008, 13:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sigaba

I've read your posts on topics related to the American political system, the candidates for the presidency, and the upcoming election. I'm highly confident that we're not in agreement.

I highly doubt we agree on everything. It was never sugested to be so. But as to your comment

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sigaba

American citizens can decide for themselves which issues matter to them. That one may disagree with those decisions doesn't make them 'fickle' or 'weak.'

I agree

abc_123 · 09-10-2008, 18:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Reaper

Huge mistake.

Wheels are falling off the wagon.

TR

Wow. No kidding. I'm beginning to like the "circling the drain" metaphor myself.

Once that death-spiral starts it reaches a point where some of the democratic leaning media start to join the feeding frenzy... they can't help themselves...just like vultures to a animal dying in the desert.

Then the spiral gains speed and the more the BHO campaign has to go off script to respond...just like Biden saying today, "Hillary Clinton is as qualified or more qualified than I am to be vice president of the United States of America. Lets get that straight." That has to be real helpful...

http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/09...r-pick-for-vp/

Eventually even more left leaning media are compelled to start picking at the dying BHO campaign because...well, because they are journalists and can't help it.

Eventually down the drain it goes.

Gypsy · 09-10-2008, 19:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by abc_123

Then the spiral gains speed and the more the BHO campaign has to go off script to respond...just like Biden saying today, "Hillary Clinton is as qualified or more qualified than I am to be vice president of the United States of America. Lets get that straight." That has to be real helpful...

http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/09...r-pick-for-vp/

I heard Biden's sound bite today and couldn't help but laugh. How unreal is it that a candidate for VP would say such a thing, considering she was a) running for POTUS and b) well...basically "dissing" himself. What a rocket scientist!

ZonieDiver · 09-10-2008, 23:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by Broadsword2004

The H.M.S. Obama: Thought to be unsinkable, and driven recklessly because of it.

Anyways, anyone think Obama might dump Biden and replace him with Hillary...? Maybe THAT is why Biden was saying Hillary would be better for the VP position and POTUS...? Would this work...? Or would it be the metaphorical equivalent of slicing his throat? I know George McGovern lost badly when he dropped his VP, but I also read this was partially because he had said he would stand by his VP choice, only to dump him a few days later, thus destroying his chances.

I also wonder if Hillary would take the position, or refuse since the Obama campaign mistreated her so badly and then snubbed her for the VP slot as well...

1. It wouldn't have mattered WHO McGovern picked as his VP. He was "toast" from the "get-go" due to a serious misreading of what the American public wanted. McGovern and the Dems actually thought that the "silent majority" was a figment of Nixon's imagination!

2. I don't think Obama will dump Biden for HRC. Nor do I think HRC would accept, but not because she had been "dissed" or "snubbed". Whatever the Clinton's are, they are pretty shrewd politically. I think she realizes that IF Obama is elected, his administration will be a disaster. She wants to be in the Senate - snipping at him when things turn the wrong way. Just my thoughts...

gagners · 09-11-2008, 05:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by ZonieDiver

1. It wouldn't have mattered WHO McGovern picked as his VP. He was "toast" from the "get-go" due to a serious misreading of what the American public wanted. McGovern and the Dems actually thought that the "silent majority" was a figment of Nixon's imagination!

2. I don't think Obama will dump Biden for HRC. Nor do I think HRC would accept, but not because she had been "dissed" or "snubbed". Whatever the Clinton's are, they are pretty shrewd politically. I think she realizes that IF Obama is elected, his administration will be a disaster. She wants to be in the Senate - snipping at him when things turn the wrong way. Just my thoughts...

Agreed.

Additionally, I think she hopes that JM wins, that way she can beat the "We need a Dim in the whitehouse" drum for 4 years and be a shoe-in for the next round.