Obama: You can put lipstick on a pig, but it’s still a pig

Loading

UPDATED

Probably a slip o’ the tongue, or an unconcious expression of frustration, but just as innocent as some Republican describing freshman Senator Obama as articulate. In any event, not a classy moment for the Democratic Party. No doubt about it, the left is not demonstrating their “open-armed” “open-minded” “liberal” soul. Nope.

Governor Palin’s lipstick moment is at about 3:30 in this one…

“Lipstick On A Pig” Update [Byron York]
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.”

Reporters were a bit skeptical that Obama intended to do that; from the sketchy reports we have, he seemed to be talking about how John McCain can claim to represent change but isn’t really an agent of change. But Swift said, “it’s pretty clear the crowd thought that that was the insult he was leveling.” And Swift made the (hopefully) undeniable observation that Palin is the only one of the four national candidates who wears lipstick.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
73 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Can we just ban this ass???? I am tired os seeing this BS in my email box every minute.

Your Childish comments are just as bad as the rest of Obama’s followers going after Palin.

The comment page is going to descend into nothing, if you continue to allow posters to post under many names in the same post. Please this site is to good and important to every day political life for that. some of the trash must be cleaned up. I’m not advocating censorship, just make them post under one and only one nic.

Have you all lost your minds?

This saying is older than my grandfather. McCain uses it all the time.
It is not about women.

Idiom Definition for ‘Put lipstick on a pig’
Meaning:

If people put lipstick on a pig, they make superficial or cosmetic changes, hoping that it will make the product more attractive.

http://www.usingenglish.com/reference/idioms/put+lipstick+on+a+pig.html

Now this should be a source of embarrassment:

OBAMA: Let’s just list this for a second. John McCain says he’s about change, too. Except — and so I guess his whole angle is, “Watch out, George Bush, except for economic policy, health-care policy, tax policy, education policy, foreign policy, and Karl Rove-style politics. We’re really gonna shake things up in Washington.” That’s not change. That’s just calling some — the same thing, something different. But you know, you can — you know, you can put lipstick on a pig; it’s still a pig.

Can someone say….“plagiarism”?:

Yes, you can.

Do any Liberals have any mind of their own??? Just asking. Biden, Obama, Michelle Obama and the rest f them just keep on plagiarizing everyone elese’s speeches.

they have not had anew idea in 40 years or more either. Obama’s change is the same old Liberal utopia of the 60’s.

Complete Obama quote : “John McCain says he’s about change too, and so I guess his whole angle is, ‘Watch out George Bush — except for economic policy, health care policy, tax policy, education policy, foreign policy and Karl Rove-style politics — we’re really going to shake things up in Washington,'” he said.

“That’s not change. That’s just calling something the same thing something different. You know you can put lipstick on a pig, but it’s still a pig. You know you can wrap an old fish in a piece of paper called change, it’s still going to stink after eight years. We’ve had enough of the same old thing.”

Where’s the reference to Sarah Palin? There isn’t any. It’s a common phrase and Obama even explained the context. So common even John McCain has been known to use it.

John McCain: In Iowa last October, McCain drew comparisons between Hillary Clinton’s current health care plan and the one she championed in 1993: “I think they put some lipstick on the pig, but it’s still a pig.” He used the same line in May.

McCain has proposed to bankrupt the country even faster than Bush with bigger tax cuts for the wealthiest 1% and more tax breaks for fossil fuel industries. Think any of that would trickle down to the rest of us? He’ll give you a tax “credit” less than half what it takes to go out and buy health insurance for your family but you’re on your own after that. He thinks we can throw the Russians out of the G8 when in fact the Russians would have to vote themselves out. Even the Bush Administration thinks that’s nutty. Everyone from the Iraqi government to the Bush Administration has adopted Obama’s timetable for getting out of Iraq but McCain still wants to stay for four, a hundred or a thousand years, or whatever it is this week.

Pigs will fly before any of that works.

Where’s the reference to Sarah Palin? There isn’t any. It’s a common phrase and Obama even explained the context. So common even John McCain has been known to use it.

Markg8, I can’t say for any certainty that he meant to call Sarah Palin a pig; but unless he just isn’t that bright, and I think he is a bright man, he HAD to have known that in wake of Palin’s popularity and hoopla surrounding her pitbull/lipstick comment, that using this common expression under these circumstances…it’s innuendo and a double entendre.

“This saying is older than my grandfather. McCain uses it all the time.
It is not about women.”
— Sid Wishes

Funny thing about a living language, Sid, is that it is “plastic,” i.e., you can use it “creatively.” And this is about as “creative” as the Left gets, making a simple-minded barely-high-school-level dip-wad wise-crack.

You see, if Palin had never made that Pit-Bull Hockey-Mom self-deprecating/praising remark, O’Bama would probably never have changed it from Pit-Bull to Pig. But, he did. AND, his audiance laughed knowingly, and… “NBC Nightly News reported the audience at an Obama event “actually started chanting no more pit bull”.”.

And it isn’t as if O’Bumbler doesn’t have a history of such crude and tasteless attacks. Here we see the loser give Hillary the finger, and the audience knew EXACTLY what he was doing then, too.

And now he has to waste so much precious time trying to undo the damage, …time that he could be spending talking about the issues. And that’s probably fine with him, too, since he has nothing worth saying about them, anyway, so there’s really no loss.

So, you see, Sid, you can spin it however you want, but U B WRONG, DUD!

CODE WORD “LIPSTICK”

“Where’s the reference to Sarah Palin?” — markg8

It’s the act of putting on lipstick, and O’Bummer’s sick joke is that he switches a pig for a pitbull. He also uses a decoy subject, but it was obvious to his audience what he was doing, and since he didn’t correct them, that means he meant it the way they took it.

If you’re so dense you can’t see what O’Bumpkin was doing, no wonder you’re voting for him. And, since his audience not only got it, but laughed at it, it’s also no wonder they are voting for that sleezebag, even though they are cleary smarter than you, though not by much.

See my previous post on this, when they dig it out of the spam-filter.

“Everyone from the Iraqi government to the Bush Administration has adopted Obama’s timetable for getting out of Iraq” — markg8

Bush, McCain and other Reps thought of it first, but somehow it’s Obama’s plan? LOLOL What a HOOT!!!

O’Bummer makes up half a dozen different scenarios, trying to find one that people like until he finally copies one from McCain, and he claims it was his original idea, and you believe him???!!! Only the dimmest of bulbs would think that was a bright idea. The fact is that O’Bungler got it wrong from the get-go, and now he’s latched onto someone else’s idea and claims it was his!!! He’s an idiot.

Leaving Iraq has always been predicated on success, and O’Blooper NEVER factored success into ANY of his alleged “plans” (I doubt he even has an understanding of what real success actually is). He STILL can’t admit the surge (that he opposed) has worked, and that without it no draw-down would be happening now. If anything about the current plan looks even remotely like anything the silly one said, it is pure coincidence, nothing more.

Go back and look at his original “Run Away, Run Away” plan, and compare the disaster that would have resulted to what has actually happened by NOT doing things his way. Better yet, don’t. You might hurt yourself.

Asked if he [Maj. Gen. Jeffery Hammond] considered it dangerous to pull out if the withdrawal is not based on “conditions,” Hammond said, “It’s very dangerous. I’ll speak for the coalition forces, men and women of character and moral courage; we have a mission, and it’s not until the mission is done that I can look my leader in the eye and say, ‘Sir, Ma’am, mission accomplished,’ and I think it is dangerous to leave anything a little early”.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Vote2008/Story?id=5351864

And, nothing about any of O’Bullspitter’s plans had anything to do with “conditions” determining when draw-downs should occur, so the bottom line is that bottom feeder or his surrogates are full of garbage, as are you for believing them.

I agree let’s send the Obama campaign our lipstick 🙂

What a Moron he knew exactly what he was doing.

I despise that idiot

In no way do I condone this kind of comment, but each side is going to slip up. That seems to be the name of the game in America, calling the kettle black. It’s very sensationalist of you all to get so upset over one thing, when there really are bigger problems at hand, in all of the current parties.

If you want to hit him where it hurts, make fun of his foreign policies or something like that. You know, the issues. Those things you all forgot about? And listen:

McCain Calls His Wife a “Cunt”

-It’s essentially the same story, only from a different perspective. “Oooooh look at him he hates women!”
Your comments are almost identical to the ones on that website, yet this fact seems to elude you. All of, even on that site.

Uggh.

It’s very sensationalist of you all to get so upset over one thing, when there really are bigger problems at hand, in all of the current parties.

I’m not upset. I think it was a mistake for whats-her-name to demand an apology and for my team to get so “huffy and puffy” bent out of shape over this.

Palin herself, should just laugh it off and joke about it.

If you want to hit him where it hurts, make fun of his foreign policies or something like that. You know, the issues. Those things you all forgot about?

Just because this is talked about (you want to know how to make an issue disappear? Quit talking about it….yet you couldn’t help but leave a comment, drawing attention to this thread, yet again) doesn’t mean the actual issues aren’t being talked about as well. It’s all part of the political game. character matters, background history, AND the issues. And Obama, the supposed “new kind of politician of change”, is playing the game well, straight out of the “Karl Rovian” playbook and Chicago-style dirty politics. Obama’s no more “holier than thou” than the next politician.

If you want to hit him where it hurts, make fun of his foreign policies or something like that. You know, the issues. Those things you all forgot about?” — Patrick Murphy

Whaddya think I’m doing when I point out that he’s claiming credit for a foreign policy that isn’t his? …and also pointing out where his is wrong?

You Lefties are totally out to lunch, accusing us of not dealing with the issues when we are.

And, speaking of “issues” what exactly are you doing, if not deviating even further from issues than you accuse us of doing? You either don’t know what you are talking about, or are being deliberately disruptive, which I think is the more likely case.

If you want this to be on issues, why don’t you drop a line to O’Bumbkin and tell him to lay off the cheap shots he uses to attack people rather than ideas, and especially ideas that aren’t even the ones the people he’s attacking actually hold. And, as far as issues, if you look at what I’ve written above you will see I’ve addressed quite a few, in addition to the silliness that O’Bummer descended to.

, I totally agree. It looks bad for her to demand an apology, but she honestly does deserve one. This country needs some civility, especially from our potential leaders. Whether Obama’s comment was just a joke gone wrong, or an actual insult, it was a bad move on his part.

The thread may have lost its lustre, but it’s still an issue. I heard just recently about this, so it’s not like the issue has gone away. That’s why I decided to weigh in.

-I see your point though. It’s all part of the game, but it’s weird that it is. We’re not going to be run by Obama’s or McCain’s off-handed comments. We’re going to be run according to his policies, his platforms. If there were a candidate with a policy that could put an end to national debt, bring world peace, and put an ice cream cone in every American’s hand, then I wouldn’t care if he (or she) called someone a name, or made a vaguely offensive comment about the other candidate, because those things don’t (or at the very least shouldn’t) matter.

Now…

“You Lefties are totally out to lunch, accusing us of not dealing with the issues when we are.”

First, may I respond with the fact that 1…2…3…4… oh, about the first 37 responses to this article were nothing but “Wow, Obama sure does suck.” That was what I was referring to when I said that these people aren’t dealing with the issues.

Second: yes, because it was always clearly defined that I’m even on the Left. That’s another thing wrong here: jumping straight to political lines. “The Lefts are…” “Those crazy Rights…” I’m not representing my party, I’m representing me. Don’t blame my supposed party for what I say, blame me.

I’m trying to deal with this…nonsense because if someone doesn’t point out that this is an irrelevant topic to discuss, then you guys won’t ever stop.
If I may bring some sort of analogy to this: Iraq sucks. Bush’s job is to run America, not to get involved with Iraq, but if he doesn’t do anything about it, it will get worse. Now obviously that plan didn’t quite work out, but ideally, it should have. Same here: I’m trying to stop something that, if left unchecked, will result in skewed and uneducated opinions about a political candidate who should be judged on policy rather than off-handed remarks.

O’Bummer…wait, are you referring to Bill O’Reilly, or Barack Obama? Either way, your pet names aren’t witty. You’re not in third grade.

You know Patrick you put up a fairly well reasoned argument until you say that we “aren’t dealing with the issues.”

There are pages and pages and pages and pages of threads related to the “issues” including the page that this thread is currently on.

Obama has a long and demonstrable history of sexism. His lipstick moment was just another piece of that chain and, yes, his sexist attitude toward women is a valid “issue.”

Then, the remainder of your argument gets derailed when you say:

Iraq sucks. Bush’s job is to run America, not to get involved with Iraq, but if he doesn’t do anything about it, it will get worse. Now obviously that plan didn’t quite work out, but ideally, it should have.

Have you been following the progress in Iraq lately?

Or have you fallen victim to a lack of knowledge which has “result[ed] in [a] skewed and uneducated opinion”?

You shouldn’t feel comfortable enough here to think you can come in and crap on our rug and then expect to not get called on it.

“…this is an irrelevant topic to discuss,…” — Patrick Murphy

No, it’s not. It points out what a childish twit O’Bummer is. (and I’ll use whatever cute little names I chose to characterize that jerk.) He gave Hillary the finger, (as Aye Chyhuahua pointed out in the first post above),

…and he and the appreciative jerks in his audience knew what he was doing. It is important to realize that he is a childish twit. No sleeze is beneath his “dignity.” Someone whose “humor” is straight out of the toilet is NOT the kind of person I want in the White House.

“First, may I respond with the fact that 1…2…3…4… oh, about the first 37 responses to this article were nothing but ‘Wow, Obama sure does suck’.” — P.M.

As I just pointed out, post #1 by AyeChyhuahua cites a video where O’Bozo acts like a nasty child, something that’s important to know about him. The ‘FACT’ is that you ignored that, and sought to mis-characterize it as irrelevant. That’s why I call you a Lefty, because you distort or dismiss what others say when it doesn’t suit your narrative.

Aye also shows (#14) the video where O’Bumpkin says “hold on a second, SWEETIE” to a female reporter, and then never does answer her question.

So, since all this is a reflection of his “character” (or, rather, lack thereof), it is important for people to know about, and get a clear appreciation of just how immature, mean and petty he is.

He does “suck.” He is a schmuck. And you are a Lefty. Deal with it.