Drudge Retort: Red Meat for Yellow Dogs
Wednesday, September 10, 2008

Speaking at a high school in Norfolk, Obama took a few moments to address what he calls "the made-up controversy" of the day, Amie Parnes reports. Obama said the McCain campaign moved to "seize an innocent remark and take it out of context because they knew it's catnip for the news media."

Liberal Blog Advertising Network

Menu

Subscriptions

Author Info

anton

MORE STORIES

Special Features

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in the discussion of this weblog entry should note the site's moderation policy.

I agree with Obama, in part.

This "pig" controversy is a ridiculous diversion.

However, I think Obama is lying about it being an innocent slip of the tongue. When I heard the comment, I immediately associated his "pig" reference with Palin's "lipstick" line from her speech at the RNC. I'm sure that was the intention despite what Obama says about it now. However, I also think you'd have to be a complete pansy to be offended by it and I seriously doubt Palin is.

In the face of demonstrable, provable, incontrovertible evidence to the contrary, McCain and Palin continue to assert that Gov. Palin opposed the infamous "Bridge to Nowhere." They do so in their speeches and ads, and their supporters say so on television until their pants are on fire. McCain and Palin also claim the Alaska governor opposes earmarks -- despite the fact that she's gotten her state so much pork she's at risk for trichinosis. The media have an obligation to point out when a politician is lying about a matter of fact, but the right-wing attack machine has so cowed some of them you can almost hear them moo.
Paul Begala
www.huffingtonpost.com

Save your jokes for the Apollo Theater.

Obama said the McCain campaign moved to "seize an innocent remark and take it out of context because they knew it's catnip for the news media."

OMG! Stop the presses! Obama called the news media cats!!!

However, I think Obama is lying about it being an innocent slip of the tongue. When I heard the comment, I immediately associated his "pig" reference with Palin's "lipstick" line from her speech at the RNC. I'm sure that was the intention despite what Obama says about it now. However, I also think you'd have to be a complete pansy to be offended by it and I seriously doubt Palin is.

When did Obama apologize for the remark or say it was an innocent slip of the tongue? Since Obama like McCain, and countless other politicans no doubt, have used the phrase, there is nothing for him to apologize about. He was referring to McCain's policies, not to Palin's personality. It is either narcissistic or disingenuous for Republicans to assume Obama was referring to her. Believe it or not, the world does not revolve around Sarah Palin's pitbull remark. Of far more importance than Palin's lipstick are McCain's policies, which is why Obama was talking about the latter and not the former.

It is either narcissistic or disingenuous for Republicans to assume Obama was referring to her .... Believe it or not, the world does not revolve around Sarah Palin's pitbull remark. Of far more importance than Palin's lipstick are McCain's policies, which is why Obama was talking about the latter and not the former.

#4 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2008-09-10 02:34 PM | Reply |

I think that is horseshit. While "lipstick on a pig" is a well-known cliche, the "lipstick" comment from Palin's big speech is perhaps the most remembered applause line. Obama and his handlers know that. The comment was a direct reference to McCain policies and (conveniently enough) has an indirect connection to Palin. I don't really have any problem with that -- this is high stakes politics -- except that I believe Obama is lying.

But, anyway, more important to me is that we may have gotten past the lovefest between Obama and the media. The media's relationship with Obama was at the point of mystical ecstatic union a few months ago. I find a press unwilling to challenge a national leader (i.e., pre-Iraq War George W. Bush) much more frightenting than some stupid veiled "pig" insult.

I think that is horseshit. While "lipstick on a pig" is a well-known cliche, the "lipstick" comment from Palin's big speech is perhaps the most remembered applause line. Obama and his handlers know that. The comment was a direct reference to McCain policies and (conveniently enough) has an indirect connection to Palin. I don't really have any problem with that -- this is high stakes politics -- except that I believe Obama is lying.

You believe Obama is lying; I don't. To you the lipstick comment is the most memorable part of Palin's speech (revealing in its own right, but I doubt it was the most important part of her speech to Obama or any other Democrats. Like I said, people who are pushing this story are either disingenuous or narcissistic. I believe that.

But, anyway, more important to me is that we may have gotten past the lovefest between Obama and the media. The media's relationship with Obama was at the point of mystical ecstatic union a few months ago. I find a press unwilling to challenge a national leader (i.e., pre-Iraq War George W. Bush) much more frightenting than some stupid veiled "pig" insult.

Wasn't there a recent study that revealed that 70 percent of the news coverage of Obama was negative. That's some lovefest. I guess you think the media coverage of this McCain camp's faux outrage is just another example of the mystical estatic union between Obama and the MSM? LOL

Gal,


You are delusional if you believe that press coverage of Obama has been anything other than glowing.

SNL wouldn't satirize the positive coverage of a liberal icon unless such satire had teeth. Yes, that is an anecdotal example, but I've got to pick my son up from school.

"You believe Obama is lying; I don't."

I'm really not surprised.

"To you the lipstick comment is the most memorable part of Palin's speech (revealing in its own right"

The hockey mom/pitbull/lipstick line has been rehashed in the press so much, it has become the most memorable to me. I think Palin's speech is overrated, frankly.

"Wasn't there a recent study that revealed that 70 percent of the news coverage of Obama was negative."

Was that a rhetorical question?

#6 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2008-09-10 03:00 PM | Reply

It got somewhat tough for Obama during the "Goddamn, America" fiasco. Other than that, the press has been abundantly kind it seems to me.

vote mccain/china

Anton-
Palin's husband belonged to the AIP (an Alaska secessionist party) until 2002. Palin addressed the Party at their convention.
The AIP's founder has had this to say about the USA:

"The fires of hell are frozen glaciers compared to my hatred for the American government. And I won't be buried under their damn flag..."

But you haven't heard about that.

Betelg,

I hadn't seen the quote. The story about AIP broke over a week ago. I understand there are extreme secessionist elements in that party. All parties have extremists. You know, for example, Lyndon Larouche is a Democrat, right? So, is Fred Phelps. David Duke is a Republican. And?

Anton-
This was a quote from the founder of the AIP.

The name of the Party is the Alaskan Independence Party, so they are all secessionists, and it's founder is Volger, which is the person I quoted.

Anton-
This was a quote from the founder of the AIP.

#12 | Posted by BetelG at 2008-09-10 03:36 PM | Reply

First, just so you understand, I am not voting for McCain/Palin.

Have you never heard extreme comments from members of the two mainstream parties? Would you like me to find crazy quotes for you from prominent Democrats throughout history about, say, African-Americans? What would that prove? So, Palin may have given a speech to a group founded by a weirdo. It's worth knowing. Standing alone, it doesn't mean much to me.

For his part, Obama has associations with real nutcases a la Rev. Wright and William Ayers. Do I think he shares those extreme views? No, I don't. Although, I have to admit I don't think I'd associate with those people. Do I think Sara Palin wants Alaska to secede from the Union. No, I don't.


The name of the Party is the Alaskan Independence Party, so they are all secessionists

#13 | Posted by BetelG at 2008-09-10 03:39 PM | Reply

That doesn't necessarily follow. There was a story in the press a few days ago with the state chairwoman saying otherwise.

I wasn't concerned with who you'd vote for. You seemed to think that the media has taken it easy on Obama, though you are aware of everything Rev. Wright has said that is offensive (due to the media). But the quotes from the AIP's founder were new to you (due to the media not reporting them). That was my only point.

Anton-
Then I guess the Alaskan Independence Party should change their name.

Do I think Sara Palin wants Alaska to secede from the Union. No, I don't.

Me either. It would put an end to all those millions in earmarks she's been getting for her state. :-)

"McCain spokesman Brian Rogers responds: Barack Obama cant campaign with schoolyard insults and then try to claim outrage at the tone of the campaign."

Mr. Rogers is as big a liar as Murphy.

"Mr. Rogers is as big a liar as Murphy."

No one is as big a liar as Murphy. She's a lean, mean, lying machine.

No one is as big a liar as Murphy. She's a lean, mean, lying machine.


Sorry Murph.

Anytime a Stripes quote can be incorporated into daily conversation, I have to laugh.

Then I guess the Alaskan Independence Party should change their name.

#17 | Posted by BetelG at 2008-09-10 03:49 PM | Reply

I suppose if you think "Independence" means "secessionist," then you are right.

"spare me all the phony outrage. Spare me all the phony talk about change," he said.

Ya know what Barry, how about sparring us with your half-assed cliches. Maybe the American people see your standup routine on the stump for what it is. And this time the MSM didn't cover your ass.

Anytime a Stripes quote can be incorporated into daily conversation, I have to laugh.
#21 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

Lighten up Francis!

politifact.com

DragnLady's post on "lipstick" ought to end the discussion, but it won't. Sad.

I suppose if you think "Independence" means "secessionist," then you are right.

#22 | POSTED BY ANTON AT 2008-09-10 04:44 PM | REPLY | FLAG:

"The problem with you John Birchers' is that you are too damn liberal!"
~ Joseph Vogler, Founder Alaskan Independence Party

The FAQ about who and what AIP believes:

www.akip.org

Typical republicans, can't take the pitch when they bitch, but bitch when they get pitched.

High school whining is about the level of republican education now a days.

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS ABOUT ALASKAN INDEPENDENCE
Q: What is the Alaskan Independence Party?

A: An Alaskan political party whose members advocate a range of solutions to the conflicts between federal and local authority; from advocacy for state's rights, through a return to territorial status, all the way to complete independence and nationhood status for Alaska.

Q: Aren't most Alaskan Independence Party members a bunch of radicals and Kooks?

A: The party has its share of individualists, in the grand Alaskan tradition. No longer a fringe party, the A.I.P. is a viable third party with a serious mission and qualified candidates for elected offices.

Q: If Alaska became independent, wouldn't we lose a lot of federal money?

A: No. If Alaska returned to territorial status, most federal money would still be available. If Alaska were to attain complete independence, its revenues from oil and other natural resources would far exceed the amounts currently received from the federal government, at our current level of resource utilization.

Q: If Alaska were independent, what would happen to my social security check, federal pension, or military retirement?

A: People receive these checks around the world, regardless of their place of residence. In most cases eligibility for such checks would not be effected by Alaskan independence.

Q: If Alaska became independent, would U.S. military bases leave?

A: The strategic location of Alaska would indicate that it would serve U.S. interests to maintain a presence in Alaska. The military are good neighbors. There would be no compelling reason for the military to leave Alaska.

Q: Didn't we vote for statehood already?

A: The vote for statehood was invalid because the people were not presented with the range of options available to them. Further, the federal government has since breached the contract for statehood on numerous occasions in over a dozen serious and substantial instances.

Q: Under independence, what would happen to all the federal controls and regulations?

A: We believe that controls should be exerted by the lowest possible governmental unit. The people of Alaska can better decide what controls need to be in place than can bureaucrats in Washington. Specific local regulation might be either more or less restrictive than current federal regulation. The point is that it will be our regulation, not Washington's.

Q: Would I lose my U.S. citizenship?

A: Depending on the form of independence, several forms of citizenship would be possible, including the retention of U.S. citizenship or dual citizenship. However, considering the moral, educational, and economic decay of the U.S., Alaskans' who hold themselves to a higher standard might very well decide to at least maintain an arm's length distance from a country in decline.

Q: What will happen to major U.S. stores such as Sears, Safeway, and McDonald's?

A: Any company which found it profitable to sell in Alaska would remain. Without the constraints of the deteriorating U.S. economy, and with the enormous wealth of Alaska, international as well as local companies will prosper.

www.akip.org

"Q: What will happen to major U.S. stores such as Sears, Safeway, and McDonald's?"

AIP deserves a funny flag for that one.

Anton, I thought you might enjoy their website.

Cheers.

Anton, I thought you might enjoy their website.

Cheers.

#30 | Posted by YAV at 2008-09-11 09:31 AM | Reply

Thanks, Yav.

"Canada my ass, it's Alaska's Gas!"

Sweet motto. I'm sure Spud disagrees.

Spare me all the phony talk about change," he said.

Right back atchya, Senator.

If Obama wanted to get his point across, how many different metaphors are available. Other than "lipstick on a pig" or "calling a spade a spade". Why not say "If it acts like a duck, walks like a duck...." Not to tough Senator.

Comments are closed for this entry.

Drudge Retort

Home | News | Comments | User Blogs | Nooner | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | Copyright 2009 World Readable