Barack Obama is smart...

[kchoya]

Sept 10, 2008 12:35:18 GMT -5 Bando said:

Sept 10, 2008 10:37:44 GMT -5 kchoya said:

Did he say, "Sarah Palin is a pig" ? No, he didn't. But I would hope you were sober enough during your time at Georgetown to realize that there are more subtle ways to say something then coming out and directly saying it.

He knew what he was saying and the effect it would have. I'm glad he's getting down in the mud (pun intended) and focusing all his attention on the GOP VP candidate. It only hurts his campaign.

The full context of Obama's quote:

John McCain says he’s about change, too — except for economic policy, health care policy, tax policy, education policy, foreign policy and Karl Rove-style politics. That’s just calling the same thing something different.”

With a laugh, he added: “You can put lipstick on a pig; it’s still a pig. You can wrap an old fish in a piece of paper called change; it’s still going to stink after eight years.”

I reiterate: continuing to claim that Obama called Palin a pig, either directly or indirectly, your are either a liar or a moron.

Ok, you're a dickhead, no matter what Obama said.

Watch the video from the speech. The crowd started cheering halfway through the quote. They knew what he was saying. Obama knew what he was saying. And most people, unless they have their head up Obama's ass like you do, know what he was doing.

[hifigator]

Trying to stay to the topic on hand, I will admit that Obama is very intelligent. That very fact makes it somewhat difficult to accept that the pig comment was just a slip of the tongue and that he didn't even think of the possible misconnotations. At this stage, everything is carefully thought out -- except for maybe the rebuttal parts of the debates, and they too are given lots of careful thought. Still, there is certainly a degree of thinking on your feet and "ad-libbing" so to speak that will play out there. But at this point it is certainly a bit of a stretch and arguablty downright absurd to suggest that Obama didn't mean anything with his comment and just simply didn't give it enough thought.

Regardless, that comment won't doom Obama anymore than it will propel him to the White House.

In my opnion, the statement was made to sort of open the gates to the press to go after this woman. I expect all sorts of nonsense coming from the left trying to discredit and even disgrace Palin. Just yesterday Biden made some reference to the democrats really being the party for special needs children. The left had this news article about Palin cutting funds for special needs children and they were just baiting a response from the McCain camp about being a party for special needs children, so they could then counter with a statement of Palin cutting special needs funding some 60%. The problem is that the story was totally false and has been recanted, with a retraction issues. She, in fact, increased funding for special needs children ... and NO, it wasn't after having one herself!

Without straying too far off topic, Obama is very intelligent and for the most part likable. I noticed that 4 years ago at the DNC and said right then and there, that that guy is dangerous. On a much lesser scale, I said the same of Jesse Jackson Jr. He is everything his father isn't with respect to knowing what to say and how to say it. In any case, you will get no argument from me that Obama isn't smart. I honestly don't think he has the right advisors for his campaign. I think he has been given some bad advice and is bogging himself down, but I am fine with that.

As to intelligence itself however, as many have pointed out, being book smart is only one part of the equation. Being eloquent and properly sophisticated in front of the camera and microphone is only one part of the equation. Common sense is another. Thusfar, I am somewhat neutral as to Obama's common sense. I don't like many of his ideas, but that is simply a matter of viewpoint and ideology. But as for common sense, it's seen in the ability to not just be able to say stuff but to almost before you say it, understand how it will be received. There is a form of anticipation which factors in to common sense at this point. I don't think Barack is especially bad in this area, nor do I find it a stregth for him.

The bottom line is that in this context -- that being having the proper mindset to be President -- being "smart," includes raw intelligence as well as many other factors, including common sense.

[Bando]

Sept 10, 2008 12:48:01 GMT -5 kchoya said:

Sept 10, 2008 12:35:18 GMT -5 Bando said:

The full context of Obama's quote:



I reiterate: continuing to claim that Obama called Palin a pig, either directly or indirectly, your are either a liar or a moron.

Ok, you're a dickhead, no matter what Obama said.

Watch the video from the speech. The crowd started cheering halfway through the quote. They knew what he was saying. Obama knew what he was saying. And most people, unless they have their head up Obama's ass like you do, know what he was doing.

Wow, a Democratic crowd cheered at the notion that John McCain is a liar? Get outta town!

Seriously, you're making this up. Stop.

[hoyaboy1]

Sept 10, 2008 13:04:38 GMT -5 Bando said:

Sept 10, 2008 12:48:01 GMT -5 kchoya said:

Ok, you're a dickhead, no matter what Obama said.

Watch the video from the speech. The crowd started cheering halfway through the quote. They knew what he was saying. Obama knew what he was saying. And most people, unless they have their head up Obama's ass like you do, know what he was doing.

Wow, a Democratic crowd cheered at the notion that John McCain is a liar? Get outta town!

Seriously, you're making this up. Stop.

There are two possible inferences from the quote:

1 - McCain/Palin will be Bush/Cheney 2, even though they have a superficial "change" campaign

2 - (much less sensical) McCain is a pig and Palin is the lipstick

In context it makes absolutely no sense whatsoever to assume that Palin is the pig.

[HealyHoya]

Sept 10, 2008 12:35:18 GMT -5 Bando said:

Sept 10, 2008 10:37:44 GMT -5 kchoya said:

I reiterate: continuing to claim that Obama called Palin a pig, either directly or indirectly, your are either a liar or a moron.

Yeah, respectfully, that's a bit naive. That wasn't an off-the-cuff remark. Actually, having read the context of the statement that you posted, it's clear that someone -- BHO or his writers -- penned that line. And why not? That's a good line. Given that perhaps the single most memorable line from Palin's speech, itself the second (?...after BHO's stadium speech) most anticipated campaign speech in the last year, alluded to lipstick on an animal it's clear to me that the Obama Campaign is trying to take a Palin positive and turn it around.

Now where I differ from the other Rs on this board is that I think that's a completely legitimate and effective campaign tactic. Just like JSM has tried to turn BHO's strengths, for instance, popularity, into a negative (Paris Hilton ad, etc.), so too has BHO now made an effort to take a Palin strength and turn it into a weakness.

There's no shame in this. Steve Schmidt has taken this race into the boxing ring and it's clear, to me at least, that if BHO is going to stem the slide in the polls then he's going to have to start hitting back. That's exactly what this very good, very effective, very nuanced, but very clear reference is.

Bring it. That's politics. That's campaigning.

Expect JSM or Palin to respond in kind.

Expect BHO to counter.

Expect it to get a bit rougher.

Expect that to continue until election day.

[kchoya]

Sept 10, 2008 13:13:59 GMT -5 HealyHoya said:

Sept 10, 2008 12:35:18 GMT -5 Bando said:

Sept 10, 2008 10:37:44 GMT -5 kchoya said:

I reiterate: continuing to claim that Obama called Palin a pig, either directly or indirectly, your are either a liar or a moron.

Yeah, respectfully, that's a bit naive. That wasn't an off-the-cuff remark. Actually, having read the context of the statement that you posted, it's clear that someone -- BHO or his writers -- penned that line. And why not? That's a good line. Given that perhaps the single most memorable line from Palin's speech, itself the second (?...after BHO's stadium speech) most anticipated campaign speech in the last year, alluded to lipstick on an animal it's clear to me that the Obama Campaign is trying to take a Palin positive and turn it around.

Now where I differ from the other Rs on this board is that I think that's a completely legitimate and effective campaign tactic. Just like JSM has tried to turn BHO's strengths, for instance, popularity, into a negative (Paris Hilton ad, etc.), so too has BHO now made an effort to take a Palin strength and turn it into a weakness.

There's no shame in this. Steve Schmidt has taken this race into the boxing ring and it's clear, to me at least, that if BHO is going to stem the slide in the polls then he's going to have to start hitting back. That's exactly what this very good, very effective, very nuanced, but very clear reference is.

Bring it. That's politics. That's campaigning.

Expect JSM or Palin to respond in kind.

Expect BHO to counter.

Expect it to get a bit rougher.

Expect that to continue until election day.

You've hit the nail on the head. I'm sure some junior staffer came up with this great idea to get a subtle dig in one of the more memorable lines from Palin's speech (which was ad libbed) and Obama worked it in to his speech.

Of course he's not actually trying to compare her to a pig. That would be stupid, sophomoric and really make no sense (as hoyaboy pointed out). However, it was what politicians do all the time. Take something other side said and be clever in twisting it a little bit. Does anyone really think that a major presidential candidate (in this day when everything is scripted, focus group tested and planned out) just happened to say what he said in a totally innocent manner?

Obama's real problem with this dustup is not that he somehow connected Sarah Palin with a pig, it is

1. he's now spending 2 days of a 60 days campaign on this issue
2. which distracts him, the media, and the public from any real issues he may want to talk about
3. and he continues to focus on the VP candidate of the other party, and using high school level tactics for the most part
4. which can only contribute to the "stop picking on Sarah Palin" sentiment that exists out there

[hifigator]

Healy, that's a reasonable position, but again, my opinion is that the comment was more of a sign to the liberal pundits to take the gloves off and go attack this woman.

As I posted before, Biden had some quote yesterday about being the "real party for special needs children." Had the McCain camp responded at all, I bet dollars to doughnuts they were ready to bring up the article about her cutting funding. but as I mentioned, the article is totally false.

Now the McCain campaign can take that cut and run with it for a while. Now it totally looks like yet another below the belt personal attack on Palin. Here is a lady who has a baby with Down's Syndrome and the opponent tries to claim to be the "real" party for special needs children. Well, first things first: many from said "real" party would never likely have kept the baby in the first place, but abortion aside, that is clearly a cheap shot. I think there are almost enough of these to do a laundry list ad, showing nothing but clips from the Obama campaign itself and some of his major supporters like moveon.org and the sort.

[kchoya]

Sept 10, 2008 13:42:49 GMT -5 hifigator said:

Healy, that's a reasonable position, but again, my opinion is that the comment was more of a sign to the liberal pundits to take the gloves off and go attack this woman.

As I posted before, Biden had some quote yesterday about being the "real party for special needs children." Had the McCain camp responded at all, I bet dollars to doughnuts they were ready to bring up the article about her cutting funding. but as I mentioned, the article is totally false.

Now the McCain campaign can take that cut and run with it for a while. Now it totally looks like yet another below the belt personal attack on Palin. Here is a lady who has a baby with Down's Syndrome and the opponent tries to claim to be the "real" party for special needs children. Well, first things first: many from said "real" party would never likely have kept the baby in the first place, but abortion aside, that is clearly a cheap shot. I think there are almost enough of these to do a laundry list ad, showing nothing but clips from the Obama campaign itself and some of his major supporters like moveon.org and the sort.

This is one I don't get. Is there a party that is AGAINST helping special needs children? Maybe Bando's pink elephant party?

I doubt the "I care more about special needs kids than you do" debate is going to go real far.

[hifigator]

kc wrote:

This is one I don't get. Is there a party that is AGAINST helping special needs children? Maybe Bando's pink elephant party?

I doubt the "I care more about special needs kids than you do" debate is going to go real far.


No, you're right. There aren't any parties against funding for special needs -- certainly not openly and in public in any case. Either way, the obvious connection is that Palin has such a child. We will probably never know for sure, since the article has been taken down and the link no longer works, but like I said, when Biden made that comment, I think they had every intention of baiting a reply from the McCain camp, only to respond with this story. When the story turned out to be false, then they can just drop it. The mainstream media won't show the Biden clip over and over again like they would if McCain or Palin had made such a mistake. Still, it might fit nicely in a laundry list type of ad, in amongst all of the other comments and negative articles.

[JohnJacquesLayup]

Sept 10, 2008 13:42:49 GMT -5 hifigator said:

Well, first things first: many from said "real" party would never likely have kept the baby in the first place

That statement makes a lot of assumptions to include that democrats automatically subscribe to every political aspect of their chosen party and therefore accept abortion across the board. And that if a defect is detected during pregnancy, the parents default response is to abort the child.

I'm really tired of people, easyed comes to mind, on this board equating pro-choice with being pro-death or a "baby killer." I should just start referring to pro-life as "rape and incest supporters" or "mother endangerers." It's about as unfair a response as the accusation.

There are the contradictions of pro-life and every life being sacred, in contrast to the death penalty that I wont go into because I don't assume every republican of the world is for the death penalty.

[Boz]

Sept 10, 2008 13:40:10 GMT -5 kchoya said:

Obama's real problem with this dustup is not that he somehow connected Sarah Palin with a pig, it is

1. he's now spending 2 days of a 60 days campaign on this issue
2. which distracts him, the media, and the public from any real issues he may want to talk about
3. and he continues to focus on the VP candidate of the other party, and using high school level tactics for the most part
4. which can only contribute to the "stop picking on Sarah Palin" sentiment that exists out there

This is exactly right. You can decry it all you want and call it "gutter politics" or "distractions" or whatever, but the McCain camp is so clearly outcampaigning the Obama side at this point, it's almost embarrassing.

This is not to say that it will continue this way, or that McCain will win because of this, but Obama is NOT doing what he should be doing right now.

I would take KC one step further. They haven't just been off message for two days. They have been off message for the better part of a month, except for the week of their convention.

Obama cannot win this fight. He just can't. First of all, let's say it was unintentional. I don't buy it (especially given how many left-leaning Web sites had been using the "pig-lipstick" analogy directly in reference to Palin over the last week), but for the sake of argument, let's say that's the case.

What does he win by fighting this "issue"? He's out there today saying he's being "swift-boated" because of this. I'm sorry, but that analogy does not hold up. Americans heard him using the words "pig" and "lipstick" and heard the crowd laughing at that, and HE is going to claim being the victim here? No, it doesn't wash.

(Obviously his supporters will get a little fired up, but I don't think that gain even comes close to the amount he will lose by not just letting it go.)

This is not like John Kerry, who people said should have attacked those who were attacking his record unfairly. This is Obama, choosing to fight something that was entirely of his own creation! It makes no sense.

Now if Obama was really smart ;D , he still could have made this comment, then just come right out and issued an apology, one of those backhanded apologies that politicians are so great at ("I apologize if my expression was misconstrued by Gov. Palin or any other Americans. I have respect for Gov. Palin as a strong woman and mother, but I repeat that she is completely wrong on the issues that are important to hard-working Americans...blah, blah, blah,"; something like that)

Would it stop the righty blogs or Web sites from criticizing him about it? Of course not. But it wouldn't be a news story. Now it is a story. I can virtually guarantee it will be on all of the cable stations tonight (though probably not network news). Olbermann & Maddow might ignore it, but Matthews won't, CNN won't and you're damn sure Fox won't. And that is nothing but bad for Barack Obama, and he has no one but himself to blame for making it that.

[hifigator]

Sept 10, 2008 14:25:33 GMT -5 JohnJacquesLayup said:

Sept 10, 2008 13:42:49 GMT -5 hifigator said:

Well, first things first: many from said "real" party would never likely have kept the baby in the first place

That statement makes a lot of assumptions to include that democrats automatically subscribe to every political aspect of their chosen party and therefore accept abortion across the board. And that if a defect is detected during pregnancy, the parents default response is to abort the child.

I'm really tired of people, easyed comes to mind, on this board equating pro-choice with being pro-death or a "baby killer." I should just start referring to pro-life as "rape and incest supporters" or "mother endangerers." It's about as unfair a response as the accusation.

There are the contradictions of pro-life and every life being sacred, in contrast to the death penalty that I wont go into because I don't assume every republican of the world is for the death penalty.

In all honesty, there was a degree of tonfue-in-cheek to that comment. What I was sort of suggesting though, is that some abortion supporters use babies with problems as justifiable reasons for abortion -- not all mind you, but some.

[FewFAC]

I really quit trying to rationalize why Republicans would bald faced lie and think there is no repercussion, but I think the proof is in the pudding ($5T surplus to $9T deficit).

The funny thing is that people who think McCain is better because of experience and foreign policy stature are gonna be shocked when they turn to the world for help solving some Russia crisis, or some Iran crisis, or some Palestine crisis, or to pay for more American debt to go into hock to be the world's policeman by ourselves and the world looks at America as the boy who cried wolf should McCain happen to win.

[Jack]

Late to the party, and not really interested in continuing the mud-wrestling on the pig line, but I do agree with the original premise. It is just ridiculous that Palin can claim "Hockey Mom" as some sort of credential to be proud of but Obama could never get up in front of a crowd and reminisce on his days as the first black EIC of HLR. One of those is an impressive accomplishment and testament to a powerful intellect. The other is a made up demographic that is no better or worse than any other type of mom. Neither has much to do with running a country, but, assuming some God-like human was both, I know which one would show up first on every resume.

[kchoya]

Sept 10, 2008 20:08:47 GMT -5 Jack said:

Late to the party, and not really interested in continuing the mud-wrestling on the pig line, but I do agree with the original premise. It is just ridiculous that Palin can claim "Hockey Mom" as some sort of credential to be proud of but Obama could never get up in front of a crowd and reminisce on his days as the first black EIC of HLR. One of those is an impressive accomplishment and testament to a powerful intellect. The other is a made up demographic that is no better or worse than any other type of mom. Neither has much to do with running a country, but, assuming some God-like human was both, I know which one would show up first on every resume.

1. She's not using the "hockey mom" as some sort of credential? I don't know where you got that. I don't hear her saying, I have kids, elect me.

2. Why can't Obama get up and talk about being editor in chief? Other than it's dry and boring, most people wouldn't care, and it means nothing.

A lot of people would say being a hockey mom is harder than being editor in chief.

[Jack]

She seemed awfully proud of being a hockey mom in her convention speech, wouldn't you say? And expressing a similar pride in being a brilliant legal scholar would be seen as elitist and probably arrogant too, right? So maybe "credential" is not the right word, but significant biographical characteristic is what I was getting at. And a lot of people would probably say digging ditches is harder than being EIC, too, but that doesn't make it a more notable achievement. That is not to minimize the importance of being a loving and caring parent in the grand scheme of things, but I think there is ample evidence that all of the candidates in this race are model parents and that does nothing to differentiate them from millions of other people or demonstrate why they should be leading our country.

[HoyaSinceBirth]

You guys are ridiculous! that putting lipstick on a pig line was clearly about mcCain/Palin being bush/cheney! Putting lipstick on a pig is common saying indicating that you can dress something up as much as you want but it still is what it is. It had nothing to do with Palin. That is a huge leap. I can't believe you guys could ever reach that conclusion.

Ugh can we please stop talkign about Palin. I really hope we don't blow this thing. But it seems more and more that the republicans are now making up false swipes at her because it's helping her to be attacked.

[Boz]

Yes, yes. False swipes.

Like saying that McCain's celebrity ad was racist.

Like making fun of being a community organizer is somehow code language for racism.

Like saying Sarah Palin is in favor of Alaska seceding from the Union.

Like saying John McCain wants to continue the Iraq war for 100 years.

Like saying Sarah Palin believes the Iraq was is "the will of God."

Shall I go on?

If you are offended by stuff like this, fine. Just don't pretend that it is one side that is doing it.

Political speech does not occur in a vacuum. This phrase does not have the same connotations it had a couple of weeks, months or years ago. If you want to say it was unintentional, fine. I have no problem with that. I don't agree, but I won't argue that point because we can't read Barack Obama's mind. But unintentional or not, it doesn't make it any less dumb.

[Deleted]

Last Fall, John McCain used the "lipstick on a pig" metaphor in referring to Hillary Clinton's health care policies. At no point did anyone accuse him of being sexist or mean or of calling Hillary Clinton a pig.

[Elvado]

If memory serves, Hillary Clinton had not made a fabulously well-received speech a week earlier in which she referenced Hockey Moms, Pitbulls and lipstick.

If Obama meant to insult her, it was juvenile and petty. If he didn't he's a tad tone-deaf politically or should fire his writers.