Wednesday, September 10, 2008

Manufactured Outrage

"I was just your average hockey mom. I love those hockey moms, you know, they say, what is the difference between a hockey mom and a pit bull? Lipstick." Sarah Palin, at the RNC.

"John McCain says he's about change... ...except for economic policy, health care policy, tax policy, education policy, foreign policy... ...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." Barack Obama, campaigning in Virginia.

It's comforting to know that the Republicans are still the party of dirty tactics, outright lies and totally retarded manufactured scandals.

'Lipstickgate' is the latest. The Republicans spotted that Obama had used the term 'lipstick on a pig' in a recent campaign rally (a line both Obama and McCain have used several times during this election.)

Remembering that Vice Presidential candidate Sarah Palin had described herself as a 'pitbull in lipstick,' they cut that one line out of his speech and used it - totally out of context - to suggest that Obama had called Palin 'a pig.'

Stupid - deeply stupid - right wingers are actually buying this garbage.

The McCain camp released this statement: "Obama was referring to Gov. Sarah Palin. It's obviously disrespectful and offensive. ... Who else has been talking about lipstick lately? It was obvious. The [Democratic] crowd went crazy because of it..."

I'm not sure really what's worse. The fact that the Republicans did something so transparent (I mean, seriously...) or the fact that some of their supporters don't see through it for what it is.

In our age of soundbites, you can take anything out of context and make it look shocking. Just take a peek at this small tidbit snipped from one of Hillary Clinton's campaign speeches.



The actual transcript of her speech was about how she rejects the idea of private-school voucher proposals, saying they'd encourage the development of schools with extreme political, social or religious agendas:

“Imagine the first family that comes in and says ‘I want to send my daughter to St. Peter’s Roman Catholic School.’ You say ‘Great, wonderful school, here’s your voucher. Then the next parent comes and says, ‘I want to send my child to the school of the Church of the White Supremacist …’ The parent says, ‘The way that I read Genesis, Cain was marked, therefore I believe in white supremacy. … You gave a voucher to a Catholic parent, you gave it to a Jewish parent - under the Constitution, you can’t discriminate against me. So what if the next parent comes and says, ‘I want to send my child to the School of the Jihad? … I won’t stand for it.”

But a bit of editing makes it look like she's proclaiming herself as a white supremacist.

In this day and age, you have to take every quote with a pinch of salt and find out what the context was behind it. If you don't? You're just a bleating sheep, calmly shambling along wherever the political shepherds want you to go.

12 comments:

ck said...

Are you so dull? Come on now, you don't think these well scripted speeches don't understand the reason for every word?

I just can't believe Obama's speech writers are so dumb that this was just a coincidence. And if they are... they need fired.

ck said...

Sorry, the dull comment was not well thought out.

Shouldn't have said it.

Roland Hulme said...

Don't worry! I'm sure I've called you worse (and I'm sure I've deserved worse than this.)

Nope, the Republicans are being idiots barking up this tree. Obama was CLEARLY talking about something completely unrelated and it's TENUOUS at best to link it to Palin.

McCain's campaign is opening itself up for all sorts of crap.

If McCain says: "It'll be dark times ahead..."

This justifies the Obama camp saying:

"DARK times? Like Obama is DARK skinned? Like the slavery term DARKIE? McCain is a RACIST!"

McCain, too, has used the term 'lipstick on a pig' twice in this election - in fact, I stumbled over your blog thanks to your post 'Lipstick on a Pig.'

It's an expression. A turn of phrase. It means nothing and the McCain camp know it!

Roland Hulme said...

Just to clarify - you were using the term 'lipstick on a pig' to describe something (a brilliant song by Sugarland, I seem to remember) not quoting McCain.

It's just a common expression.

The Chemist said...

Bah! This lipstick on a pig thing is nonsense I'm fairly sure we can all agree.

Look, I criticize people when they try to extract all kinds of meanings from between the lines of literature. I tell them either the author's full of shit, or they are. I let them choose. It's no different here. The context easily makes it an innocent comment.

It is somewhat possible that the lipstick meme migrated unintentionally, but that's a whole different ball game.

If you want a truly bad gaff (though one we can agree was an innocent mistake) look at Biden forgetting the situation and asking a man in a wheelchair to stand up and be recognized. I do like the way he handled it though, quick on his feet that Biden, I'll give him that.

ck said...

It is a common saying... but that doesn't mean it wasn't meant to be used in a degrading way.

I don't think they are so dull to not see the connection.

They had to know what they were saying, and if they didn't... they need fired. You can tell they knew what they were saying by Obama's reaction to it, he is trying to clarify what the pig is... so he knew it was linked to her comment. He's just saying SHE isn't the pig... but of course by morning they'll change their tune again and say it was never meant that way.

The Chemist said...

Fine let's assume it refers to Palin. It's apt.

Roland Hulme said...

By your logic, CK, the Republicans have basically nixed the term 'Lipstick on a Pig.'

"Because Palin used the word 'lipstick,' you Dems can't use that phrase any more!"

What other nonsense are they going to come out with and try to ban or misconstrue?

This is such a non-issue it's laughable (if it wasn't so pathetic.)

Coffee Bean said...

Ugh. Lipstick on a pig is a very common saying in politics. If any double meaning was intended it would be that Palin is the lipstick... not that Palin is a pig.

I hate all the dirty politics... and make no mistake, it's all dirty.

Becky said...

The trouble with public forums is that once it is out there...it is out there.

You can't take it back, and if there was any chance something could be construed as inappropriate...caution should be used.

Yes, Obama meant to say that to invoke a response...the air had been let out of his democratic balloon and he was going to get some of the attention back.

Do I think it needed a statement from the Republicans and to be made into such a big deal? No.

Any data or speech...etc...can be taken out of context and/or manipulated for your own gain.

Here is the deal, though, Roland...you are lumping all Republicans into a mold just as you have Christians...and we are not all alike.

We see through the crap, the tactics, etc...and we will still vote our values and our conscience, no matter the social faux pas of either party. :)

The Maid

Writer Seller said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Roland Hulme said...

Hi Maid!

Just to clarify - when I referred to 'Republicans' I was largely meaning the party officials themselves, not Republican voters. Most of those (I hope) are smart enough to see through this as a totally manufactured issue.

My point is - you take one line of one of millions of Obama's recent lines and compare it to one line from one of Palin's hundreds of recent lines and you might find an unfavourable comparison. That's totally out of context.

When Obama made that speech, he wasn't addressing Palin, the vice presidency or lipstick wearers in general. He was talking about a completely different topic and probably Sarah Palin was the last thing on his mind.

The whole lipstick debarcle was, 'scuse my French, bullshit from beginning to end.

If that's the sort of tactic the Republicans (again, talking about the people in charge of the party and it's policies) think will win them the election, they're dead wrong.