No wonder the world overwhelmingly wants Obama as our country’s next president. Imagine how easily this guy will be rolled to help further their national interests.
When I first heard about Obama’s “lipstick on a pig” comments I thought nothing about it. It’s a somewhat amusing, but tired political expression that I often use myself.
My brother Dan thought the gaffe had legs, coming on the heels of Sarah Palin’s “lipstick on a pit bull” reference at the Republican National Convention, and called me to say that he believed it was much more than a one-day story. I learned a long time ago to trust his instincts, and sure enough, Obama himself gave the matter additional life with his ham-handed (no pun intended) defense of the remark the following day.
All this got me to thinking about the infamous “Macaca” non-racial racial slur that brought down the political career of George Allen. I say non-racial, because prior to the time you and I first heard the word, there weren’t ten people on the planet who had any idea what a Macaca is. It’s two years later and I still don’t. But, thanks to the opinion leaders in the mainstream news, we’ve all been properly educated that a Macaca is . . . well, we’re still not sure whether it’s an adjective or noun, but it’s definitely racial. Well, pretty sure definitely. Well, at least definitely enough so that anyone using it was using code for the N-word, you can be absolutely certain of that.
Now, to be fair to Obama — in contrast to the way the Democrats and media were unfair to Allen — I think the jury is still out on whether the lipstick smear against Palin was a personal reference or not, or just a heavy-handed slap at his opponents. Sure, McCain used the phrase before, but Hillary made no direct claim to that particular type of cosmetic, or any cosmetics at all. Hillary took no offense at the time, and neither did her supporters, so Hillary obviously saw no sexist conspiracy at work. When Liberals and Democrats, who invented the logic that it’s the seriousness of the charge that deserves to be investigated whether any evidence of a crime exists or not, fail to respond to a potentially “sexist” remark, I think we’re all safe in assuming there’s no there, there.
Obama, on the other hand, has this nasty little penchant for schoolboy antics. We’ve all seen the video of him scratching his face with his extended middle finger at the mention of Hillary’s name, then looking around when the crowd reacts approvingly with his best Alfred E. Newman “What, Me Worry?” expression. So, personal attack or not, why is it out of the question that he used “lipstick on a pig” to describe the Palin component of the Palin-McCain economic plan? (I say Palin-McCain instead of McCain-Palin because ever since the Republican National Convention he’s been running against Palin, not McCain. But that’s another story.)
After all, the second reference was to an “old fish;” another coincidence, I’m sure, that had no relationship to John McCain’s recent birthday. There isn’t a day that goes by where we’re not reminded by the Obama camp or the mainstream press that a 72-year-old man could easily die in office, leaving us with an inexperienced small town mayor as president who has five kids (one special needs) and a pregnant daughter. Why should anyone think that “old fish” is a personal attack on McCain? I’m sure in all the world there’s no other way for Obama to communicate his opinion about his opponent’s economic plan than through the lipstick and old stinking fish metaphor.
So, was the Obama lipstick smear unintentional? The crowd reacting to his words didn’t act that way. As the Boston Herald reported, they hooted and hollered and reacted just as Obama intended. “Of course Sen. Barack Obama’s comment about ‘lipstick on a pig’ was a reference to Supergirl Sarah Palin. You know it, I know it and the partisan crowd that literally rose to their feet and cheered when they heard it know it. And it’s nothing new. Democrats shot the lipstick line at Gov. Palin on their official Web site last week with a posting entitled ‘McCain’s Selection of Palin is Lipstick on a Pig’ . . .”
Why doesn’t Obama just man-up and admit the obvious, or even apologize as Senator Allen did. By using “lipstick on a pig” to refer to Palin-McCain, he screwed up, crossed the line, let his mouth run away, did something he shouldn't have, you know, say something like this. He doesn’t for a simple reason. He doesn’t want to lose the election before the first debate has even begun.
Obama’s Macaca Moment is a thousand times more serious than Allen’s gaffe. Republicans are supposed to be racist bigot homophobes, so all Allen did was confirm conventional liberal media-driven wisdom. But Democrats are caring and compassionate and value the sanctity of all non-aborted human life. If Obama is seen as just another crude, venal, typical politician, he’s just another black guy running for office. And we all know how far Jesse Jackson made it when he ran for president, and exactly why he failed, thanks to the informed analytical musings of Bill Clinton.
Obama is in a real political pickle. He’s not a nice guy. (No Chicago Pol is; it’s the nature of the beast there.) Yet, to win the presidency he needs to stand for new politics as embodied in Hope and Change. Giving the finger to Hillary and sliming Palin as a lipstick-wearing pig tends to diminish that image. Yet, he’s behind in the polls and his ship of state is taking on water fast. Reverting to instincts, he’s become a small minded petulant little man (I won’t call him a “boy” as Jimmy Carter did) who sees his shiny new toy slipping away, and lashes out in a personal way against the adults denying him his prize.
But there’s more driving this scenario than Obama’s personal character flaws. It’s delicious to watch a Liberal Democrat get hoisted by his own politically-correct worldviews that elevate a pretty tepid “lipstick on a pig” insult to a grievous sexist smear, but there’s much more at play here. As usual the Left Wing of the body politic (Democrats, Liberals and the mainstream press alike) have completely misread the nature of the charge against them. Determined to not be “swiftboated” as John Kerry was, they react to every charge — no matter how minor and insignificant — immediately and with a full-blown, full-court defense. This has allowed the McCain-Palin camp to tweak Obama’s lipstick comments with an ad that should have been laughed off and ignored by the Obama folks, instead of suckering Obama into a multi-day defense of his actions.
Because of this, McCain wins on two counts. He keeps the story alive longer than it should, and he makes Obama react to what McCain does instead of allowing Obama to set the agenda for the national discussion. With less than 8 weeks to the election, I don’t expect Obama to suddenly realize what a jerk he is and begin behaving like a politically savvy adult. McCain will continue to bate him, and Obama will continue to take the bait, all in the name of not being swiftboated.
Of course, it might be helpful to Obama if he and his fellow travelers actually stopped for a moment and asked themselves what swiftboating actually is. To the Democrats, it’s any accusation they don’t like. Obama has an unrepentant terrorist as a friend; Obama’s tax policy will stifle investment and cause a recession; Obama wears women’s clothing. All of these are scandalous charges that must be quickly addressed and thoroughly debunked. And Obama must do this personally, in addition to his surrogates.
Contrast this with the way Sarah Palin reacted to the hundreds of manufactured rumors slandering her in the week following her announcement as McCain’s running mate. Remember what she said when she was accused of faking her pregnancy, banning books, having an affair with her husband’s business partner, supporting Nazis like Pat Buchannan, being a member of a subversive political organization, and insisting that only creationism be taught in schools?
What, you don’t remember what she said? Well, don’t be disappointed. There’s nothing to remember. The charges were outrageous, and Palin didn’t take the bait. And except for a blanket denial by the McCain camp that condemned sleazy personal attacks, nothing was said by her running mate either. Instead, like adults, she and McCain waited until the convention to answer her critics the only way they needed to be addressed; through a tangible display of her competence and poise that put a lie to all of the outrageous charges. Now, Palin is essentially bulletproof. No matter how seemingly credible any new accusations may be, the public will always remember the unfounded slurs of her first week. Palin’s future silence will be a confirmation that she is being slurred, not a tacit admission that the charges are correct.
Obama’s silence will have the exact opposite effect, because the thin-skinned community organizer and junior US Senator always cries and moans at the slightest challenge to his truthfulness. The true lesson of John Kerry’s swiftboating wasn’t that all accusations had to be answered immediately and with force. It was that accusations that rang true cannot be answered. Five purple hearts in eight months? That doesn’t pass the smell test, unless you’re Audie Murphy and at least one of those decorations was accompanied by the Congressional Medal of Honor.
Kerry was made a national laughing stock because his peers called him out and put a lie to his war heroics claim. There’s no defense against the truth, and his candidacy was doomed from that point. McCain would suffer a similar fate if his POW brethren were to accuse him of collaborating with the enemy or faking his five years in captivity. They haven’t, and thus recent charges that McCain is unable to define what “Honor” means are seen for what they are. Political bulls*it.
I don’t know if we’ll look back months or years from now on Obama’s Macaca Moment and point to that as the definitive beginning of the end of his candidacy. But I am convinced that the emptiest suit ever to run for political office has no idea how to answer charges from his American political opponents, or stem the tide of blood from his own self-inflicted political wounds.
No wonder the world overwhelmingly wants him as our country’s next president. Imagine how easily this guy will be rolled to help further their national interests.
I don't think Obama would be pushed around nearly as much as you might expect. He's proven he can take a punch by ignoring the McCain campaign's false claim about how Obama sponsored the bill to teach sex ed to kindergartners. Now the McCain-Palin campaign is crying because they imagine that the lipstick remark was about Palin? Go ahead and imagine it–he never mentioned Palin or McCain anywhere near that remark.
You say Palin is bulletproof. Not so fast. A number of media analysts are less than impressed by her performance in the interview with ABC News' Charlie Gibson. She didn't know what the Bush Doctrine was, and glibly suggests it might be okay to go to war against Russia. She may indeed make more glaring mistakes in the weeks to come.
Palin has zero national security or foreign policy experience, whereas Obama has sponsored dozens of bills and amendments in Congress and has served on at least three U.S. Senate Committees: Foreign Relations; Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs; and Veterans' Affairs committees, and chaired the Foreign Relations Subcommittee on U.S./European Relations.
McCain and Palin would set America and women back. Vote Obama and Biden for a strong defense, an invigorated economy, and to return America to its greatness at home and in the eyes of people around the world. Americans historically have courage to look ahead to the future, and Obama and Biden will help lead the way.
“Now the McCain-Palin campaign is crying because they imagine that the lipstick remark was about Palin? Go ahead and imagine it–he never mentioned Palin or McCain anywhere near that remark.”
*** You need to address your comments to the Boston Herald and other media that seem to feel differently about this. And to Obama himself who felt the need to explain himself, unlike Palin with the false charges made against her. Did you actually read my article?
“You say Palin is bulletproof. Not so fast. A number of media analysts are less than impressed by her performance in the interview with ABC News' Charlie Gibson.”
*** Hmmm. Let me guess. NBC, CBS, MSNBC …
“She didn't know what the Bush Doctrine was, and glibly suggests it might be okay to go to war against Russia.”
*** I actually saw the interview. She asked what are you referering to precisely? From Wikipedia: The Bush Doctrine is a phrase used to describe various principles of United States president George W. Bush, created in the wake of the September 11, 2001 attacks. There are many and varied elements to the phrase. It is sometimes described as the policy that the United States has the right to treat countries that harbor or give aid to terrorist groups as terrorists themselves, which was used to justify the invasion of Afghanistan.[1] Later it came to include additional elements, including the controversial policy of preventive war, which held that the United States should depose foreign regimes that represented a supposed threat to the security of the United States, even if that threat was not immediate (used to justify the invasion of Iraq), a policy of supporting democracy around the world, especially in the Middle East, as a strategy for combating the spread of terrorism, and a willingness to pursue U.S. military interests in a unilateral way.[2][3][4] Some of these policies were codified in a National Security Council text entitled the National Security Strategy of the United States published on September 20, 2002.[5] This represented a dramatic shift from the United States's Cold War policies of deterrence and containment, under the Truman Doctrine, and a departure from post-Cold War philosophies such as the Powell Doctrine and the Clinton Doctrine.
Palin answered properly. The “Bush Doctrine” is a multi-faceted approach to international affairs. Gibson is the fool for thinking it only meant one thing.
“Palin has zero national security or foreign policy experience, … ”
*** seems to me she has as much, if not more, than Bill Clinton had in 1992 when he ran against a sitting President. And yet, no “media analysts” at NBC, CBS, etc. said he wasn’t qualified to be president. After all, Bill deployed the National Guard once.
“… whereas Obama has sponsored dozens of bills and amendments in Congress and has served on at least three U.S. Senate Committees: Foreign Relations; Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs; and Veterans' Affairs committees, and chaired the Foreign Relations Subcommittee on U.S./European Relations.”
*** Wow! All you need to do to be a certified foreign policy expert is sponsor (not actually pass) legislation, and serve on (but not actually attend) committees.
“McCain and Palin would set America and women back. Vote Obama and Biden for a strong defense, an invigorated economy, and to return America to its greatness at home and in the eyes of people around the world. Americans historically have courage to look ahead to the future, and Obama and Biden will help lead the way.”
*** Was flavor was the Kool-Aid?
Phil writes:"There’s no defense against the truth, and his candidacy was doomed from that point."
Well, of course there is! You simply boot up MS Word and type up a letter from McCain’s military boss saying he was a bad boy and backdate it using the automatic superscript feature in Word.
Ivan: I stand corrected!
@ Don Stevens: Take a look at the question on the "Bush Doctrine". When she replied to the effect what specifically would you like to know Charlie?, it was apparent that Gibson was clueless. He looked like he was about to have a seizure. Of course during a break he was spoon fed what the Bush Doctrine was so he could recite it. She did an excellent job. Gibson did a pretty good job, didn't follow through enough on questions, but then he would just have exposed himself for the clueless person he actually is.
"…Obama has sponsored dozens of bills and amendments in Congress and has served on at least three U.S. Senate Committees: Foreign Relations; Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs; and Veterans' Affairs committees, and chaired the Foreign Relations Subcommittee on U.S./European Relations."
And he did all this in 143 (or so) days!
Obama's SECOND Macaca Moment:
Now Obama has made fun of McCain’s war disabilities — a new low even for him.
“Earlier today, Barack Obama’s campaign released an ad attacking John McCain for not knowing how to send an e-mail. Their crack research team apparently never heard of Google or Lexis-Nexis, but Jonah Goldberg does. He discovers why McCain doesn’t use a keyboard — his torturers made sure he couldn’t. The Boston Globe reported it eight years ago:
McCain gets emotional at the mention of military families needing food stamps or veterans lacking health care. The outrage comes from inside: McCain’s severe war injuries prevent him from combing his hair, typing on a keyboard, or tying his shoes.”
http://hotair.com/archives/2008/09/12/why-cant-mccain-email/
Phil, I am a disabled Veteran as the result of my Army service (not even one one-hundreth of one percent to McCain's experiences). And I also live in the greatest concentration of liberal colleges in the world, Boston.
Did you know these privileged little student boys and girls think there's something *funny* that I walk around with a cane? They honest to God do. Informing them it's as a result of my servie time get's no play, nay, contempt.
When I wear anything indicative of my service, I get sneers, dark muttered comments, even blatant outrage, right to my face. I don't care a Rat's ass. Damn them to hell. I literally will wear such garb at times, *because* I know it pisses them off.
Having the merest hint of what McCain means, what he went through, I would follow that man on a campaign to conquer hell. Not a one of those Liberal little deluded children would, or could, remotely understand.
We are nearly 30 million strong, us Veterans. Only an idiot would willfully and eyes-wide-open piss us all off. Obama has done just that.
I think that succinctly highlights yet another reason why that superficial, lying moron will lose, and lose HARD.
As it should be.
(Sorry for the pissy rant. Not for nothing do I self-name as "Angry Last Man.")
Dang. Spell Check and grammar, damnit! Get it right!
LAM: I like your attitude. It's just a shame that the adults in this country (even those who were still technically in their teens) had to make sacrifices for the superficial fools to enjoy their superficial lives.
The only time a soldier is truly appreciated by them is when their own ass is directly on the line. Then, as soon as the moment passes, they forget everything you've done for them.
But we don't.
take care, Phil
Thanks, Phil. I'll pass that on to my Brother and Sister Veterans. It means a great deal that you say so, it really does.
It surprises not in the least that the Democrat attack machine is acutely anti-military. After all, we're the current descendants of the baby-killers of My-Lai. For them to think, act otherwise, is a violation of their skewed belief system. We are all career killers.
Well, yes, true. That's our job, and they should be thankful for the fact. That they are sub-grade morons, and think we won every conflict we never asked for by sheer luck is not relevant.
It further doesn't surprise me that the Obama campaign believes this is a "fair game" issue. So much for being "Inclusive." Guess we're a bunch of inconvenient "gimps," good for a vote and an "issue" when it's convenient, but not much else.
What a pack of hypocrites.
Guess that explains Bidens gaff with the State Senator of a few days ago. "Stand up and…oh, geez…"
Swear to God, they only possess a Brain-Stem to keep them breathing, and nothing in the way of higher cognitive functions.
I'll close my rant by saying that if an Obama had a disabling condition, he'd decry to the high heavens that we should all bow, scrape, and hold doors open for him, the poor injured person. And call us all right-wing evil insensitive people if we didn't kowtow to him.
Refreshing article. Dr. Jackson, I'd like to get your thoughts on the number of softballs that have been thrown Barry Obama (e.g. 9/11 public service forum). (I thought Woodruff was egregiously partial to Obama's portion of the symposium.)
Obam is being treated by the mainstream press like all Democrat nominees are: with respect, where they set the rules for what questions are off limits, and with no real questioning of their background, claims, or policy positions. The only difference with Obama is that due to hyper-political correctness, the press is even more deferential than normal so as not to be called racist (and not to help the old white guy get elected.)
http://rsmccain.blogspot.com/
Scroll down to “Obama in the Bunker” and play the video!
This is what happens when a transparent panderer speaks. While I really don’t think “The One” was calling Palin a Pig (I wish he did because I know she could thump him), it did show his ignorance. As a life long Midwesterner, and now southerner, I could never pull off speaking “Ghetto”, or elitist Massachusetts snootery, and he should have known better than to try to relate to us “commoners” in the fly-over states in such a way. He only came off as condescending to those of us who “cling to our guns and religion”. At least Palin knows who she is, where she comes from, and what she believes in. And so does McCain.
CORRECTION: I received an email pointing out that it wasn't five purple hearts that Kerry earned, but five medals(a Bronze Star, a Silver Star and three purple hearts).
Dear Last Angry Man – God Bless You and thank you for your service. Please take some comfort that there are those of us that teach our children that it is because of you that we live free in this country the way we do. Most recently, explaining to my kids why I was wiping tears from my eyes while listening to Mike Huckabee tell the story at the convention about the teacher in Arkansas who told her classes why they each had a desk, and who earned it for them.
TrueRight1: No worries. Thanks for the accolades, but I really don't make much of my experiences. They merely "are." It's just certain dates for me (I self-describe as was once said of Grant, "a simple man of the Republic, going about his business") have relevance, and they sometimes make me blunt/outspoken.
Like many forums of discussion, I self-moderate and try to not make my voice heard all of the time, out-dominating and out-shouting others. I can't learn a damned thing from other people otherwise.
But thanks again. HOOAH, Army!
Last Angry Man: Spoken like a true noble warrior. To illustrate, last week an elderly gentleman with a Marine Corps League hat joked with my 5 year old son at McDonalds: “I’ll trade you hats”, to which I replied: “Thank you Sir, but I bought his hat, You earned Yours.” Semper Fi! Hooah. God Bless.
Damned right, and one of many reasons why I (yes, a true "Yankee" have long since realized that us "Swamp Yankees" are the same as staunch Conservative Southerners. We share the same values, the same belief-systems. We are really the same, merely separated by Geography.
I like that description, btw. It rings so true…
Btw, at the Veteran's Shelter I work at, we today took in a new Veteran. Early 20's, Marine, Afghanistan, Combat Action Ribbon, Purple Heart. The real deal. That this guy became hmeless just a month after ETS tells me oodles about how our Liberal world looks at such people.
I am so disgusted with this, I could Puke.
Damn. Accidentally hit post prior to edit. Sorry.
To LAM, and all others reading this post: Please follow my lead: Here in my small Army base town, the gas station and restaurant owners all know that if I’m there when a member of our armed forces is filling up, or eating lunch, that their money is no good. I was able to go to law school and do well for myself because of their sacrifice, and I will always be grateful. No police officer, firefighter, or member of our armed forces will ever pay for their own tank of gas, or their own lunch whenever I am around.
LAM, does your shelter have a link? If so I will post it and a story about the shelter on our VFW blog site.
This is one of the rare cases where the responses are more important that the article itself. Regarding the foreign policy comments seems to me a state governor (that is governor Palin to those refusing to use the correct honorific) that will need to deal with two adjoining countries may just have some actual experience. Further she actually attends her meetings.
I am still somewhat amazed that the media attempts to counterfeit experience for Obama where the information is actually aviailable to dispute their claims. Bad research does not cover this situation. Maybe Goebels has reincarnated to carry his theories that if you say something enough times people believe it. Certainly the Obama supporters seem to prove his theory.
Two typos, I am going to start using my word processor and pasting comments in.
Mickey, yes we do (I am running a shift there as I type this):
Http://www.neshv.org
LAM, go to http://vfwwebcom.org/nc/post2573/ to see the blog entry
Why, that's quite good of you, Mickey, and thank you.
I should be at work today (this is my Friday), but as with a lot of us, I have a few disabling conditions that sideline me once in a while.
*Ouch*
"The only time a soldier is truly appreciated by them is when their own ass is directly on the line. Then, as soon as the moment passes, they forget everything you've done for them.
But we don't.
take care, Phil"
– Those words are hollow Phil when in the exact same article you smear Kerry's record yet again. You're a bright guy, I'm sure you're aware with all the discrepancies of the accusations. Yet even with these discrepancies, you dishonor a veteran. Good job Phil.
http://www.factcheck.org/article231.html
"McCain : I think the ad is dishonest and dishonorable. As it is none of these individuals served on the boat (Kerry) commanded. Many of his crewmates have testified to his courage under fire. I think John Kerry served honorably in Vietnam."
"Kerry was made a national laughing stock because his peers called him out and put a lie to his war heroics claim. There’s no defense against the truth, and his candidacy was doomed from that point."
– Thank you for your service Last Angry Man, however I hope you're aware that your service record is being used as a political tool for gain by the various sides. If you were a liberal veteran, this exact crowd would question whether you actually even served.