home

Open Thread: Bridges to Babylon

By Jeralyn, Section Media
Posted on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 05:50:51 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

Gimme Shelter from the Bridges to Babylon tour.

Here's You Can't Always Get What You Want. So true, but we can get what we need, and that's not John McCain and another 8 years of George Bush policies.

This is an open thread.

< McCain-Palin Ticket Injects Culture Wars Into Election | NBC - WSJ Poll: Good News for Both Candidates >

  • Premium Ads

  • Blog Ads

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

    donate to TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Open Thread: Bridges to Babylon | 90 comments (90 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    More of the Same (5.00 / 2) (#1)
    by WS on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 06:07:18 PM EST
    Is Obama vague on what "more of the same" means like when some people complained that he was vague over what "change" means?  Obama helped himself by being more specific in his acceptance speech and now I think he needs to start explaining what "More of the Same" means.  Maybe he should show how McCain's Iraq, health care, Tax Cuts for the top 5%, energy, etc. stances are the same and then contrast that with Obama's Change message.  

    Basically, instead of just McCain is more of the same, he should expand and explain why McCain is more of the same.  Thoughts?  

    A Mydd post (5.00 / 1) (#6)
    by WS on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 06:16:02 PM EST
    was inspiration for my comment.

    mydd

    Obama said,

    "You can put lipstick on a pig," he said as the crowd cheered. "It's still a pig."

    "You can wrap an old fish in a piece of paper called change. It's still gonna stink."

    "We've had enough of the same old thing."

    So he was right to call it a pig but also say why its a pig and the same old thing.  

    Parent

    Obama's not folksy.... (5.00 / 1) (#38)
    by Maria Garcia on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 06:39:26 PM EST
    ...he should stay away from that kind of stuff.

    Parent
    This just in (none / 0) (#44)
    by Paladin on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 06:44:18 PM EST
    The McCain campaign is holding a conference call with former Massachusetts Gov. Jane Swift, who is calling on Barack Obama to apologize to Sarah Palin for his "lipstick on a pig" comment.  "We need to continually combat this stream of insults," Swift said, referring specifically to "what I can only deem to be disgraceful comments comparing our vice presidential nominee, Gov. Palin, to a pig."

    Unbelievable.

    Parent

    This (5.00 / 2) (#72)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 07:13:36 PM EST
    is one of the reasons that they picked Palin. After Obama's behavior during the primary this kind of narrative is going to be easy for them to run with.

    Parent
    "When men ... (none / 0) (#62)
    by Robot Porter on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 07:00:22 PM EST
    ... sow the wind it is rational to expect that they will reap the whirlwind." -- Fredrick Douglas

    Parent
    Where is Jane Swift (none / 0) (#90)
    by befuddledvoter on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 09:02:21 PM EST
    and what the heck is she doing?  Surprised to hear from her at all.  She has been a phantom in Massachusetts, ever since Mitt knocked her out.  She was "acting" Governor.  She ascended to the thrown when Paul Cellucci took the ambassadorship to Camada. jane probably identifies with Palin since she, too, comes from a very small town and she, too, was a new mother in the Governor's office.  Jane also had a meteoric rise and then a meteoric fall.

    Parent
    The right wing blogs (none / 0) (#16)
    by Paladin on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 06:24:40 PM EST
    are already in a tizzy accusing Obama of calling Palin a pig with this comment (somehow alluding to her lipstick/pit bull blurb).  Of course, he meant no such thing.  But it just goes to show how the campaign has to be very careful with its phrasing - something the Clintons' found out during the primary:  Say something perfectly innocent and have it twisted to hurt your cause.

    Parent
    Bingo (none / 0) (#55)
    by Lou Grinzo on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 06:50:51 PM EST
    I haven't seen the righties make the connection you describe, but it wouldn't surprise me in the least.

    This is the fundamental issue that Dems face cycle after cycle: The righties are very, very good at playing these stupid word games and then making them work with their base and just enough of the "middle ground" to either win the presidency or hold enough seats in the House or Senate to avoid a debacle.

    Parent

    Yes. (none / 0) (#11)
    by Realleft on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 06:22:04 PM EST
    He should do more of this.  He did it some in the KO interview, citing the Toles Washington Post cartoon, but he should own it and drive it home as his own point.



    Parent

    Brand New Ad (none / 0) (#19)
    by Dalton Hoffine on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 06:26:01 PM EST
    I just saw this ad today too:

    It's not laying out things in GREAT specifics, but saying that McCain has 7 lobbyists running the campaign, voting with Bush over 90% of the time, and hitting Palin on the Bridge to Nowhere thing isn't vaguery either.

    Parent

    They need to be careful with the lobbyist (none / 0) (#49)
    by nycstray on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 06:47:10 PM EST
    angle, IMO. When Biden was asked about lobbyists/son, Biden proclaimed he spoke directly to the CEO's.

    Parent
    I think (none / 0) (#21)
    by Lil on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 06:29:04 PM EST
    if this country can't figure out what more of the same is by now, we really are stupid. I can't believe McCain is even in this thing. I don't know what Obama should do (although I have opinions on that too), but the fact that he has to spoon feed what more of the same means...well I'm just incredulous.

    Parent
    Everyone knows (5.00 / 2) (#41)
    by lentinel on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 06:41:28 PM EST
    that McCain will be more of the same.
    One of the problems that Obama has is that he has yet to convince people that he too would not be more of the same - and an even more inept more of the same.

    For example: Bush says withdraw troops from Iraq and ship them to Afghanistan. Obama says withdraw troops from Iraq and ship them to Afghanistan.

    Bush tramples on civil liberties, and Obama votes for the renewal of the Patriot Act, FISA and campaigned for Lieberman.

    And so on.

    It seems obvious that Obama is more intelligent than his adversary, but I have yet to be convinced that an Obama presidency would not be more of the same.

    Parent

    Not possible... (none / 0) (#52)
    by Oje on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 06:49:40 PM EST
    That is beyond the campaign's strategy and abilities, since the beginning of the primaries:

    To be sure, all candidates running for office give the same remarks over and over -- Barack Obama's stump speech has hardly changed throughout the campaign, and McCain has been telling familiar stories and jokes for months.

    Besides, from the campaigns to the media to the blogs (Palin, 365/24/7), the lack of substance and policy wonkishness is de rigeur. That raises the question: if a policy wonk discussed specific issues in this election, and Americans - Democrats, Republicans, and Independents - did not have the ears to hear it, would it meet the criteria to be considered substantive political discourse?

    Parent

    I was encouraged. (5.00 / 1) (#2)
    by Dalton Hoffine on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 06:09:27 PM EST
    I saw Obama's new ad today about Education, and was pleased to hear what he had to say on the matter throughout today. I'm glad he's making it a central issue in his campaign. I complained a long time ago on here that I wish that someone would talk about it, since it seems to have been a very forgotten subject in the election since the end of the primaries.

    I like Obama's plans because they include giving to higher education--something that Republicans have been no fans of, especially not Bush. Except for the increase in Pell Grants (largely thanks to the Democratic Congress), over the last 8 years, federal scholarships and grants have dwindled considerably.

    Hopefully an Obama will turn that around. I know McCain won't.

    The charter school position is troubling (none / 0) (#27)
    by Manuel on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 06:32:18 PM EST
    On education, as on social security, Obama is too willing to accept the right's framing.  In fact, didn't Obama single out his education position as something that his base would not like this past Sunday?  

    Parent
    Charter Schools (none / 0) (#36)
    by Dalton Hoffine on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 06:38:30 PM EST
    I'm NOT convinced, for one, that supporting charter schools and magnet schools will ruin the public education system. I think that there need to be preventative measures put in place that would make any voucher program or charter school program or otherwise a slow-moving process, as opposed to giving the entire system a shock.

    I'm a poor kid. But if for any reason at all a child can be put into a better school, then I think that's worth it to that child and that family. Public school systems, especially in the South, are a disgrace to what the institution is supposed to do--teach the kids and prepare them for college or vocation.

    There are ways around the economic block, though, and that's to provide needier kids who perform well in school federal vouchers to attend magnet state schools or these so called "charter schools."

    Moreover for me, though, his position with higher education is spot-on. We need to dramatically improve our investment in our colleges and universities. Increase scholarships and grants, and encourage students to go into post-graduate education. K-12 is something that is always looked at, and is the leg of the school system which gets constantly reformed. In the meantime, our collegiate systems have been falling through the cracks, and students are taking on massive, sometimes six-digit debts just to get a four-year degree from a respectable institution.

    Good on Obama for speaking out about that.

    Parent

    I don't disagree with you, (5.00 / 1) (#64)
    by tootired on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 07:03:40 PM EST
    but school vouchers are a right-wing talking point, and the jury is still out on charter schools. Some are wonderful, and some are decidedly not. Just like regular schools. But these are Repub talking points. As is merit pay for teachers usually. All things Obama embraces. That doesn't make him wrong, but it doesn't separate him from McCain.

    Parent
    The problem with charter schools (none / 0) (#63)
    by Manuel on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 07:03:04 PM EST
    isn't the education they provide (which varies).  The problem is that autonomy often includes the decision of which kids to serve.  Poor performers and the disabled are often left behind in the regular public schools.

    Higher education wont matter if we can't provide better elementary education.  Remember the old joke about why not many elephants graduate from college?

    I would be much more impressed if we could get universal pre school.

    Parent

    Actually, no. (none / 0) (#67)
    by Dalton Hoffine on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 07:08:57 PM EST
    I don't remember the joke, but it sounds interesting. What is it?

    Parent
    Not many of them finish high school. Ba Da Bing! (none / 0) (#76)
    by Manuel on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 07:17:26 PM EST


    Parent
    Barack is doing the right (5.00 / 2) (#7)
    by LatinoVoter on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 06:16:37 PM EST
    thing by defending Governor Palin's religion.

    "So, the fact that Gov. Palin is deeply religious, that's a good thing," Obama said. "You know, I give her all the credit in the world for that, and for people to start poking around and trying to, you know, paint that as if it's, as if it's strange and wrong, I think that's offensive. I don't think we should be doing that.

    Will his supporters trying to make her religion an issue listen?

    New ipods today (none / 0) (#3)
    by davnee on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 06:10:49 PM EST
    My nano is dying and I've yet to take the iphone plunge - any iphone or itouch owners have any advice to offer?  I hate to commit to the big phone contract, but I'm not sure if I'd get too frustrated just having wifi on my touch.

    Get the cheaper one (none / 0) (#5)
    by Dalton Hoffine on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 06:15:08 PM EST
    The old iPhone and the 3G have worked about the same for me. The 3G is a little bit more compact, and the feel of it is a little nicer, but you can find a deal on the old iPhone then go for that. The difference in quality is minimal.

    As for the iTouch, I haven't used one of those, but I hear they're great, if you don't want the Phone capabilities. It performs all the other same functions that the iPhone does, and it's cheaper. I don't think I've heard of many complaints about either the iTouch or iPhone and the few I've had about my Mac products, the Apple Store people have always been very nice and willing to help.

    Parent

    Thanks for the input (none / 0) (#9)
    by davnee on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 06:19:41 PM EST
    I guess I'm just going to have to go down to the Apple Store and play with a few of them to get a better feel.  Life's so tough.  ;-)

    Parent
    Comparative PR (none / 0) (#4)
    by Realleft on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 06:14:50 PM EST
    McCain/Palin are mavericks who will change Washington, even by challenging their own party when it goes too far.  McCain has been trying to reform Wa(r)shington for years, and now will have VP Palin, the pit bull hockey mom who is just a regular person on a mission, at his side to make it happen.

    Obama/Biden are....

    No snark please.  I'm interested in how Obama/Biden can cast themselves in a way that is competitive. I think the Republicans may have successfully stolen the mantle of change from a PR viewpoint as well as captured the media and public excitement about something new.  Any thoughts?  

    In case it's not clear, (none / 0) (#8)
    by Realleft on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 06:17:02 PM EST
    I mean that "McCain/Palin are being cast as mavericks who..."

    Parent
    Obama/Biden.. (none / 0) (#15)
    by steviez314 on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 06:24:13 PM EST
    are the ones who will get you out of this s**thole of an economy that the Republicans have created.

    As opposed to the Maverick who knows nothing about the economy, and the Maverickess (is that un-PC?) who..., well who knows what?

    Parent

    The economy. Especially health care. I (none / 0) (#30)
    by Teresa on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 06:33:08 PM EST
    read that McCain's plan could actually be an incentive for employers to drop health care because young, healthy employees would opt out and go for McCain's credit. This would raise the employer cost so high, they would have to drop it.

    I think people without employer subsidized insurance understand what a mess health care is, but those with good employer insurance don't get it because they are unaware of how much it really costs. Scare the heck out of them with those facts because it scares me and it should everyone.

    Parent

    Anybody see the Drudge headline now? (none / 0) (#10)
    by Jonathan3 on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 06:20:41 PM EST
    Pig AND fish.  We're doomed.

    Drudge has been running anti-Obama headlines (5.00 / 1) (#18)
    by steviez314 on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 06:26:00 PM EST
    for 2 weeks now, but thanks for keeping us up to date.

    Parent
    Problem is that the media (none / 0) (#25)
    by Jonathan3 on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 06:31:47 PM EST
    picks up Drudge headlines.  It's a huge distraction and makes Obama look petty and unpresidential.

    Parent
    I cringed too (5.00 / 1) (#31)
    by Lil on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 06:34:19 PM EST
    knowing the Republicans will make an issue of this, and btw, if you take it further, does that mean McCain stinks...rotten fish.

    The more I thought about it, the more I think Obama knew what he was doing, just like flicking dirt off his shoulders... Obama is not stupid. One way to get attention back, maybe.

    Parent

    Drudge is sexist. (5.00 / 1) (#34)
    by Realleft on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 06:36:59 PM EST
    In context, Obama was clearly talking about Republican policies and went on to offer praise for Gov. Palin.  Drudge, though, links the comment to a picture of Gov. Palin.  Sexist.

    Parent
    Um what? (none / 0) (#13)
    by Socraticsilence on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 06:23:50 PM EST
    Drude is gouing to headline whatever he wants, I don't see what Obama said that was wrong.

    Parent
    Um (5.00 / 1) (#20)
    by nell on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 06:27:00 PM EST
    whether you think it is wrong or not, most people are going to hear this and think, Oh, Obama called Palin a pig.

    Not so presidential. And may be turned into a distraction if the press eats it up. I believe Jack Tapper already started.

    I think women are going to hear this one very differently than men...kind of like the "You're likable enough, Hillary" comment. My partner heard that and thought nothing of it while it made me SEETHE inside...

    Parent

    Personally, I don't think he called Palin a pig... (5.00 / 1) (#74)
    by skuld1 on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 07:16:29 PM EST
    However, I can definitely see how some would see it that way.  Either way, it was a real bonehead move to use that line.  I agree that this doesn't sound presidential!

    Along these lines, the Obama campaign shouldn't be shocked or outraged at how the repubs are using this, because this is exactly what his campaign did when they twisted the 'Fairy Tale' comment (and IMO, Obama's comment is much easier to see as an attack than the 'Fairy Tale' comment).

    Parent

    Is this before or after (none / 0) (#45)
    by Socraticsilence on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 06:44:27 PM EST
    The American people start freaking out aobut Palin going racial with the "community organizer" bit?

    Parent
    Perspective (5.00 / 1) (#22)
    by Jonathan3 on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 06:30:02 PM EST
    Yes it was very wrong. Palin's lipstick/pitbull joke made a lot of airwaves last week.  The reference to lipstick on pig can be interpreted no other way but as a personal attack on Palin.  The further line that the "fish...still stinks" makes it practically unambiguous.

    This was a stupid, stupid move.  First rule of presidential campaigns: the VP does the attacking.  Obama should have listened to Clinton's advice and focused on McCain and McCain only.

    Parent

    Not bad in and of itself (5.00 / 1) (#28)
    by davnee on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 06:32:54 PM EST
    But Obama has a history of making snide or sarcastic comments about his female opponents, so he needs to be extra cautious with his words.  The word "lipstick" should never be spoken by him again.  He should play it safe.

    Parent
    Drudge (none / 0) (#79)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 07:37:10 PM EST
    was completely deligitimized until the Obama campaign brought them back to life months ago. Now, it's something they are going to have to deal with. And thinking that drudge is any friend of dems was a mistake.

    Parent
    Hillary (none / 0) (#47)
    by WS on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 06:46:19 PM EST
    should say "lipstick on a pig."   That will help divert the attention.  

    Parent
    No, no, no. It isn't her job to correct Obama's (5.00 / 3) (#54)
    by Teresa on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 06:50:35 PM EST
    errors (though I think that's a common phrase used all the time). The thing is, the Republicans are making a major big deal out of this and this is exactly how the Clintons ended up apologizing for stuff they didn't do or say. The tables are being turned on Obama.

    I don't think he meant that the way it sounded at all, but neither was the fairy tale comment. He is finding out how they play hardball.

    Parent

    Defense (none / 0) (#56)
    by WS on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 06:54:16 PM EST
    This isn't about Hillary having to do things for Obama.  Its about defense to protect the Democratic nominee against baseless Republican attacks.  

    Hillary has been at the receiving end of Repub faux rage attacks too from the Republicans and know how it feels.  

    Parent

    That would just bring more attention to it. If (5.00 / 1) (#60)
    by Teresa on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 06:57:25 PM EST
    she is asked about it, rather than defend Obama, she should just shrug it off as media BS. If what he said isn't wrong, no need to defend it. I think everyone knows what he meant but they will twist his meaning to their benefit.

    I find the comment by the Rep introducing Biden to be much worse.

    Parent

    Not Asked (none / 0) (#94)
    by WS on Wed Sep 10, 2008 at 08:21:51 AM EST
    She shouldn't be asked about it but just say McCain policies are just like putting lipstick on a pig.  You're right that it would draw more attention to O's original comment, but if it gets bigger, then she should do it.  If the faux outrage dies down, she shouldn't do it.  

    Parent
    Hillary should say exactly (none / 0) (#71)
    by LatinoVoter on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 07:13:30 PM EST
    what Barack said during the height of the LBJ comments. And that is that Barack "offended a lot of people" and he should apologize.


    Parent
    I'd say "That old dog won't hunt" (none / 0) (#66)
    by vj on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 07:06:57 PM EST
    But it might be misinterpreted.  :)

    Parent
    3rd time's a charm? (none / 0) (#14)
    by Realleft on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 06:23:50 PM EST
    Or I give up.

    Here.

    Pig-gate? (none / 0) (#24)
    by NJDem on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 06:31:42 PM EST
    It's started already....  link

    Includes an updated response from the JMc camp

    Obama should not (none / 0) (#32)
    by WS on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 06:35:30 PM EST
    back down and say the McCain campaign is cynically using sexism as a weapon.  Repackaging McCain policies is like putting lipstick on a pig since its the same as Bush's.  

    Parent
    Yeah (5.00 / 3) (#37)
    by nell on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 06:39:24 PM EST
    but, the problem is there is a pattern with him. This is NOT about opposing the ticket, this is looking at a political problem and a strategic reality. Like it or not, many Hillary supporters, perhaps more women than men, have not forgotten:

    Likable Enough
    Calling a reporter sweetie
    Flicking the dirt off his shoulder and the crap off his shoe while pretending to knife someone as he was talking about Hillary
    Periodically feeling down
    Drinking tea with foreign leaders

    I watched this you tube and the first flashback I had was to the rally where he flicks Hillary off his shoulder and wipes her from his shoe with the maybe or maybe not face scratch. He looked just as petulant.

    If he is going to make veiled attacks at her, and yes, this was one, could he PLEASE stay away from ANYTHING with a gendered tone. I don't care whether one thinks he should have to stay away or not stay away, I care about this becoming a media distraction.

    Let's see. If he is the media darling still, the networks will stay away from it since it isn't conclusive. But we all saw what happened to both Hillary and Bill Clinton when they made perfectly innocent remarks that had nothing really do with race relations...they were SAVAGED by the press.

    Parent

    And many Obama supporters have not forgotten: (1.00 / 1) (#81)
    by Realleft on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 07:52:04 PM EST
    Hillary's Bobby Kennedy assassination comment

    Bill comparing Obama to Jesse Jackson, who ran a campaign that was only successful in appealing to African-Americans

    Bill calling Obama's Iraq opposition a fairy tale

    Hillary refusing to concede even in her concession speech.

    Etc.

    They might not be correct in their interpretations of these things, but they remember them just the same

    From their perspective, Obama may be "perfectly innocent", while the Clintons have a "pattern."

    Both are a matter of perception, and it is the way politics works.  They throw dirt at each other and see what sticks.  It's ugly, but it's true.  Supporters hear the innocent explanations and opponents hear the damning explanations.

    Obama's comment today was not a "veiled attack" - that's you putting your own issues on top of it.

    Parent

    And (none / 0) (#82)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 08:10:30 PM EST
    yet they still expect Hillary to deliver the election for Obama on a silver platter. Obama's supporters are his worst enemies.

    Parent
    That's the way political parties work. (none / 0) (#85)
    by Realleft on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 08:23:35 PM EST
    If Sen. Clinton had won the primary, Obama would be helping her.  They're not quite the sniping lot that some of either of their supporters are.  They both actually are supporters of the Democratic party and rise above intra-party squabbling.

    Parent
    Actually (5.00 / 1) (#87)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 08:31:29 PM EST
    I don't think that Obama would do it if things were the other way around. Hillary has put more energy into electing Obama than Obama has it seems. Or at least she's doing a better job of telling people why they should vote for Dems than Obama is.

    Parent
    Gas Tax Holiday (none / 0) (#33)
    by WS on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 06:36:53 PM EST
    He should use the same strategy he used against the gas tax holiday and say they're using the same old politics of dividing people and breeding resentment.    

    Parent
    Well apparently "lipstick" may have been (none / 0) (#89)
    by nycstray on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 08:49:28 PM EST
    today's talking point as Biden used it also.

    This can be a problem for the Obama camp. They put out talking points and everyone uses them even after O says, "Oh, no. We don't think that!", after it's been well played in the MSM. The supporting cast keeps the remarks going in subtler terms for at least another 24-48.

    Been there done that one too many times.

    And I will say again, he really needs to cut some fat from his stump so the only thing making the news snippets isn't him whining or mocking McCain. He needs to have issue point contrast making the news. Not just "McCain Bad" "McCain Bush" "McCain stole my slogan". How about "Vote for me because: McCain Bad bullet point and Me GREAT! counter bullet point"?

    Parent

    Obama has nothing for which to apologize. (none / 0) (#91)
    by befuddledvoter on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 09:12:45 PM EST
    When the statement is read in context of his other statements, he was definitely not calling Palin a pig.  Why would he admit to that by apologizing??  This would be a horrible admission to what end??  Anyone already in Obama camp sees it for what it is, an analogy that even john McCain has even used in describing Hillary's health plan.  I would just put it back on McCain that it is an idom he also uses.

    Parent
    The point isn't (none / 0) (#93)
    by tootired on Wed Sep 10, 2008 at 07:55:52 AM EST
    how the people already in the Obama camp see it. The point is how do the people who are not in either camp see it. Obama is trying to get more votes, right? If the polls say that this election is going to be decided by women voters, then you don't do anything that might offend them even if what you're doing isn't offensive to you or even to all of them. I didn't need Jane Swift and John McCain to tell me that what Obama said was going to be offensive to some women. Palin has given women somewhere else to go. The game plan needs to change.

    Parent
    And here is an Obama quote from 2007 (none / 0) (#26)
    by steviez314 on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 06:32:01 PM EST
    'I think that both General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker are capable people who have been given an impossible assignment,' Sen. Barack Obama said yesterday in a telephone interview. 'George Bush has given a mission to General Petraeus, and he has done his best to try to figure out how to put lipstick on a pig.'
    I'm not sure (none / 0) (#35)
    by NJDem on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 06:37:08 PM EST
    I understand your point.  It's a common phrase, as the JMc response says, both pres candidates have used it--it's about the context--the 'lipstick' thing is her line.  

    Unfortunately, at this point it doesn't matter what he meant, perception is everything in politics...

    Parent

    And clicking through your link to another link, (5.00 / 1) (#39)
    by Teresa on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 06:40:45 PM EST
    the Representative who introduced Biden today also used a lipstick line about her experience. They haven't learned.

    Parent
    Agreed (5.00 / 1) (#40)
    by Jonathan3 on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 06:41:19 PM EST
    There are lots of common phrases that you just don't use in certain contexts.  Could you imagine what the reaction would be if McCain said: "You can put a suit on a monkey, but it's still a monkey"?  This is essentially the same thing, especially considering Palin made the term "lipstick" famous at her acceptance speech last week.

    Parent
    Actually, McCain said... (none / 0) (#68)
    by Realleft on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 07:09:37 PM EST
    he had not studied Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton's health-care plan, he said it was "eerily reminiscent" of the failed plan she offered as first lady in the early 1990s.

    "I think they put some lipstick on a pig, but it's still a pig," he said of her proposal.

    Link

    Parent

    That was October, 2007 (none / 0) (#69)
    by Realleft on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 07:11:07 PM EST
    and Obama has used the phrase before, too.  Don't fall for it people.

    Parent
    he wasn't talking about Palin (none / 0) (#29)
    by Jeralyn on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 06:33:02 PM EST


    Of course he wasn't.... (5.00 / 5) (#43)
    by Maria Garcia on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 06:42:27 PM EST
    ...but neither did Bill Clinton call Obama's presidential campaign a fairy tale. That doesn't stop people from interpreting things however they want, apparently.

    Parent
    Yeah, I was reminded of the fairy-tale thing too (5.00 / 3) (#59)
    by vj on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 06:56:59 PM EST
    This kind of stuff can cut both ways.  

    The Obama campaign is super-sensitive to "coded language".  That makes it plausible that this was not accidental.  I hope that's not the case, but the alternative - that we have yet another gaffe-machine candidate is not too pleasant to contemplate either.

    Parent

    It's not too helpful that the (5.00 / 3) (#61)
    by nycstray on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 06:57:46 PM EST
    campaign that was so sensitive about words, suddenly "misspeaks" and calls them old phrases. They must be smarter than that after 37+ million heard her speech.


    Parent
    There are some comments from (none / 0) (#77)
    by tootired on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 07:18:49 PM EST
    people at the link to Politico above who picked up on the "stinky fish" reference, too. The lipstick line alone he could probably pass off, but the two together are going to bite him. Is he really this tone deaf? I don't want to believe he did this on purpose.

    Parent
    I deleted the comment (none / 0) (#58)
    by Jeralyn on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 06:56:17 PM EST
    falsely stating he did. You can discuss what you think he meant by his comment or whether it was wise or not, but you can't misstate the facts.

    Parent
    I thought (none / 0) (#86)
    by Lil on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 08:23:54 PM EST
    I said it was my thought, not a fact.

    Parent
    I'm almost certain he was. (5.00 / 1) (#53)
    by Southsider on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 06:49:46 PM EST
    I don't think he intended it as sexist, though.  I don't think he realized that the words he was using could be given such a sexist spin until they were already out of his mouth (we've seen him cock up like this before).  

    But either way this was an unfortunate own-goal gaffe that will eat up yet more media airtime and contribute to the preexisting "Sarah Palin Sexism" narrative.  Ironically enough Joe Biden is nowhere near the scene of the crime.

    Parent

    Old Fish and Pig with a Lipstick (none / 0) (#42)
    by Polkan on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 06:41:30 PM EST
    What kind of impact will this have?

    "You know, you can put lipstick on a pig," Obama said, "but it's still a pig."

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

    Obama senior adviser Robert Gibbs insists the senator was not referring to Palin. "That's an old expression," Gibbs says.

    link

    Republican women (5.00 / 2) (#48)
    by nell on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 06:46:27 PM EST
    have started responding. Swift (former gov of MA) responded and made it clear that she found the statement offensive and akin to calling the republican VP a pig - she also pointed out only one person wears lipstick of the candidates...

    Whether it was meant in a bad way or not, we all know how it is to get comments taken out of context and twisted by the media. Bill Clinton and fairy tale is all that needs to be said about this...if the media loves him, they will ignore the story. If they want the ratings Palinmania brings, they will run with it...let's see.

    Parent

    Hillary can (1.00 / 1) (#51)
    by WS on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 06:49:12 PM EST
    help defend Obama on this.  Call McCain policies lipstick on a pig and Shame on the Republicans for using the politics of resentment!

    Parent
    Um, no (5.00 / 3) (#57)
    by nell on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 06:55:14 PM EST
    Thank you.

    Hillary is NOT mommy dearest who has to come and clean up after Obama on this.

    I am sure she remembers well when her husband referred to Obama's position on the Iraq War as a "fairy tale" and was pilloried by the media and by the Obama campaign for being a racist as the comment implies a black man running for President is a fairy tale.

    This is what happens in campaigns, its hardball. He said it, the republicans will run with it, just as the Obama campaign flung all the crap they could at Hillary, and I am sure the Obama campaign would use a questionable comment against McCain if they could.

    Parent

    Did you forget she "conceded" (5.00 / 1) (#73)
    by oculus on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 07:13:50 PM EST
    and called for a voice acclamation nomination of Sen. Obama?  

    Parent
    If Obama has to check his speeches for (none / 0) (#50)
    by steviez314 on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 06:48:53 PM EST
    what Drudge might do with it, then just forget the election.

    The Republicans are great at fomenting fake outrage to distract and they could take almost everything said by anyone to do it.

    Problem (5.00 / 4) (#65)
    by nycstray on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 07:04:04 PM EST
    all the Obama fake outrage during the primaries and the basic primary game they played. Painted themselves into a corner. They need to watch how they phrase things. They are smart enough to do that.


    Parent
    As of tonight (none / 0) (#70)
    by nell on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 07:11:20 PM EST
    I believe he is still the media darling.

    Fox mentioned the comment briefly and then said that McCain talked of Hillary's health care plan the same way.

    It could change by tomorrow, but if Fox isn't hyping it, I can't see how CNN and MSNBC would since they favor Obama.

    If Fox doesn't care then no one will. (none / 0) (#75)
    by steviez314 on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 07:16:50 PM EST


    Parent
    As They Used Say About Fish (none / 0) (#78)
    by WakeLtd on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 07:25:06 PM EST
    And something else: once you get past the smell, you got it licked. This is getting vaudevillian.

    Well, that's a thinly veiled (none / 0) (#83)
    by tree on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 08:11:20 PM EST
    sexist comment right there.

    Parent
    And, the fish rots (none / 0) (#92)
    by befuddledvoter on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 09:19:20 PM EST
    from the head down.

    Parent
    Beautifully put (none / 0) (#80)
    by glanton on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 07:51:28 PM EST
    I'm trying to think of what prevents people from seeing it.  

    Her line about hockey moms and pit bulls and lipstick played well with Republicans, but you've just got to believe that the majority of the electorate knew it was about as relvant to the problems we face as a bicycle is to a fish.

    Or, as lipstick is to a pig.  As the old saying goes.

    Headline on yahoo: (none / 0) (#84)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 08:15:34 PM EST
    Obama puts heat on Palin as she boosts GOP ticket

    I went to go see (none / 0) (#88)
    by LatinoVoter on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 08:45:20 PM EST
    the headline you posted and there's a new one under it.

    McCain camp: Obama's 'lipstick' remark disgraceful

    Can Republicans drum up enough outrage to make it to the 10PM news cast?

    Parent

    Open Thread: Bridges to Babylon | 90 comments (90 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment