by 
There are two themes that Sen. Obama and Co. seem to be hitting when it comes to Gov. Palin. One of them is the current “Lipstick Controversy”:
“You can put lipstick on a pig,” [Sen. Obama] said to an outbreak of laughter, shouts and raucous applause from his audience, clearly drawing a connection to Palin’s joke even if it’s not what Obama meant. “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.”
Attack on Palin?
Now, do I think that this reference was intended to mock the of-the-cuff joke that Gov. Palin made during her convention speech? I’m not so sure about that. This is a very well known expression, and paired with the fish joke, it seems that if it was intended, they carefully put this next part in to dissuade criticism.
But that’s part of the problem with politics—we don’t ever know what a politician is truly implying. With all kinds of lines being drafted with all kinds of subtext, you can never be sure when the used car salesman politician really is saying something he means.
5 Kids = Lots of Work
What I find more interesting than the whole “Lipstick Controversy” is this statement in the same article:
“Look, she’s new, she hasn’t been on the scene, she’s got five kids. And my hat goes off to anybody whose looking after five. I’ve got two and they tire Michelle and me out,” he said.
Regardless of whether he meant it—and again, everything’s suspect—what I got when I read this line was “Man, 2 kids is really tough, 5—how’s she going to find time to be VP?”
Voicing the same concern we’ve been reading around the Christian blogs on the net—and which is going through the minds of a lot of people. Again, it’s subtle—and it’s a good attack for the simple reason that it’s going through the minds of people as they try to digest what to think about Palin.
Kudos to Sen. Obama for saying, however, that he and his wife are involved in raising their daughters—which underscores not only that Gov. Palin and her husband raise their children, but that it takes both a father and mother working together—it’s not just a woman’s job.
So, what do you think? Subtle? Reading in?
The comments of the pig with lipstick infuriated me. Can he not be more original? Regardless it was meant as a direct insult and no one is laughing, well, except the left.
This is such an odd election, I am wondering what is going to happen next.
At least I have the comfort to know that God is still in control.
Leticias last blog post..Oprah biased as usual…
Good post, MIN. I think the Pig comment was completely uncalled for. It sounded like he did intend it to insult Palin and the Bush administration simulatenously. He really shouldn’t have said that, from a political point of view, because it only makes him appear childlish in resorting to “name-calling”. I think his campaign is frustrated that they are losing alot of the MOM vote to McCain that he responds with a “low blow”.
I think his other statement about her being a mother isn’t intended to be mean, unlike the pig statement. In the other statement he is trying to dually say that he respects her as a mother of 5, but does not think she is truly well-known enough or qualified to merit a VP slot. Here again he’s trying to gain back the “Mom” vote by saying that he respects her as a mother, yet is trying to convince women not to vote for her due to her (relative) lack of experience.
militarywifeys last blog post..Is a ring that big of a deal?
Leticia, where you equally enraged when McCain used the same phrase in regards to Hillary’s healthcare plan during this election cycle? Were you also infuriated when Cheney used the phrase while referencing John Kerry’s presidential campaign four years ago?
The comment had nothing to do with Palin, and most people realize that. If Obama has to apologize as the McCain camp suggests, Johnny boy also needs to apologize for his use of the term against Clinton.
Musicguys last blog post..Quote Monday
Well, regardless, it played beautifully into McCain/Palin’s favor. The M/P team is SWIFT on the response ad…something the Republicans have NEVER been.
Personally, I don’t think that Obama was trying to take a swipe at Palin with the lipstick comment. However, I also don’t think that the crowd that heard him speaking believed that he was doing anything other than taking a crack at her. Did you hear the way those folks went nuts with the cheering and hollering? Maybe if he had taken a moment to clarify and dispel any mistaken impressions right then, this whole thing would have been nothing.
Likewise, I don’t think that Obama was knocking Palin about whether she can do the job of VP because of her children. He doesn’t have to do that. There are plenty of other people, both democrats and those who desire America to be a theocracy, who have done that job well enough.
Goodness, I wish we could get back to talking about more important things than lipstick. It’s going to be hard to get a good focus though when you have people like Carol Fowler make such insanely stupid comments as she did. If Obama can’t kick some of these people’s shins under the table, he’s going to have a real hard time when people file into the voting booths.
Oh, just so no one tries to take my skin off- I don’t say any of this in support of Obama. I’m a republican, who is also tired of the sniping over inconsequential things.
@Jenna: I have to go along with you and MusicGuy here. I don’t know that it was intentional, but I know the crowd did– and the crowd is what I think McCain and company reacted to.
@Holly: This year’s Republican ads are amazing, that is for sure.
@MusicGuy: I don’t know that it’s equivalent. Hillary never said that she was anything wearing lipstick. The timing of the comment as well as the relation to her joke in her speech made the people that were gathered make the connection.
@militarywifey & @Leticia: Yes, it certainly seems like Obama is in a whole lot more trouble than he thought he’d be in.