Title: Obama really screwed up with his PIG comment....Game Over...Checkmate Source:
[None] URL Source:[None] Published:Sep 10, 2008 Author:Campaign ad Post Date:2008-09-10 09:07:33 by Old Friend Keywords:None Views:2395 Comments:138
To quote Mr. McCready, a character in V to much better effect then he, Bullocks.
McCain with his use of the same common expression, with Obama's use of it long before McCain's choice for his co-loser in this race has over reached his hand.
Barack Obama merely has to pluck the ripe fruit of people's weariness of Swift Boat lies and garbage and call McCain's hand.
John McCain's hand will fold, and he will lose this election.
This election is the people's choice to make. Not McCain's, not Bush's, not Carl Rowe's or any other manipulative wannabe who operates to get their way by dividing people.
There is no damage in this remark, only in the phony and contrived reaction to it that is so transparent to everybody.
There is no damage in this remark, only in the phony and contrived reaction to it that is so transparent to everybody.
There is damage in it. He may not have meant to call her a pig. But the damage is in peoples perception of his words. It will push some people over to McCain. Don't doubt it.
As you probably recall, Palin got applause at the Republican National Convention when she said that the only difference between a pit bull and a hockey mom (meaning herself) is that the latter wears lipstick. So, is she dissing herself here?
There is a double standard at work, and those who buy into a double standard and gimmicks over substance are going to vote the way they will whether or not such a bald attempt at a Swift boat slam dunk is attempted or not.
But I do think that this being such a clear case of false indignation will hurt McCain with swing voters. We differ on our take on this, but I have not wavered in the slightest bit in my confidence in Obama winning this race.
Nothing has happened that I didn't expect, and Obama has yet to suffer more then the usual scrapes and bumps all candidates suffer in such a race.
But I do think that this being such a clear case of false indignation will hurt McCain with swing voters. We differ on our take on this, but I have not wavered in the slightest bit in my confidence in Obama winning this race.
Nothing has happened that I didn't expect, and Obama has yet to suffer more then the usual scrapes and bumps all candidates suffer in such a race.
Obama's opponent is a guy who will continue the policies of a President with a 28% approval rating. If BHO were a halfway competent candidate, he'd be a shoe- in.
Anyone running against George W. Bush's third term ought to be ahead in the polls by wide double digits. Instead, Obummer and Mad Mac are in dead heat, with Mad Mac actually ahead in most polls. That doesn't say very much about Obama's candidacy.
(1) The corporate media, including 99 percent of the overpaid anchors, are for the GOP because of tax policy issues. They have a personal stake in not being taxed at higher rates plus their corporate bosses have even bigger stakes.
The corporate media, including 99 percent of the overpaid anchors, are for the GOP because of tax policy issues. They have a personal stake in not being taxed at higher rates plus their corporate bosses have even bigger stakes.
Usually, the rich have to choose between their PC-liberal social views and their wallets.
That could be why the mass media likes Mad Mac so much, he supports PC causes like amnesty for illegal aliens, but also promises to give the rich their tax break.
Obama spoke an absolutely coherent paragraph, comparing W's policies to McCain's. The conclusion being that there was no difference between them, concluding that McCain was attempting to present his policies as something different than W's but all that he was doing was putting lipstick on a pig. It had NOTHING to do with Palin. Palin was not mentioned within that context.
If the McCain people believe it was about Palin maybe it's THEIR dirty minds and this is how THEY see Palin.
I already said this at the top
"Was she talking about Obama's pig comment. I kind of doubt it."
No. I do probably disagree with putting Katie Couric in the ad. I don't think she was talking about Obama when she made that statement.
Obama could have been calling her a pig indirectly. I don't think he was, but he may have been. So it is fair to put the ad up. Obama is free to put ads up to. He can defend it and call them distorters and liars. Then the people can decide.
Do you think the video should have been removed from youtube?
Ok you made your point that you think it is a dirty trick. I have a question for you. Do you think this will sway the election? How much if you think it does. And in what direction will it sway the election? Then one final question. Who do you think is going to win the election? Not who you want to win but who do you think will win?