Lipstick and Pigs….Two Different Things?
Wednesday, September 10th, 2008Did the moon turn to red or did hell just freeze over. You may be curious as to why I would ask but I swear I just saw Barack Obama on CNN telling an audience that the “media was to blame,” for the misinterpretation of his “lipstick,” remark yesterday at a campaign rally. Like you, I consider a democrat blaming the media the crown jewels in hypocrisy….but, that is really not the point. A point Barack Obama has (intentionally) evaded.
To catch some of you up, at a campaign rally yesterday, Barack Obama (I am paraphrasing) indicated that a pig was still a pig, even if you put lipstick on it. What the media has picked up and logic can only conclude was that he was thinly veiling an attack against a similar remark that Sarah Palin made in her acceptance speech where she stated that the only difference between a pit bull and a hockey mom was lipstick. See:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FPd4yk0x-eg
and
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U32G5_bqFvA&feature=related
Herein lies the problem. The context of Barack Obama’s remarks don’t matter. Perception matters. And someone as smart and savvy as Barack Obama knew that the conclusion that has been drawn, was going to be drawn. In politics, especially Presidential politics…every word is intentional with meaning meant to be drawn from those words. This was no lighthearted mistake by the Obama camp and it was hardly vailed at that. The only reason it is now a faux pas is because the media has gotten the incorrect “perception,” than what was intended.
Oh poor Barack, is he now getting the same media treatment that eventually doomed Hilary and that Republicans have faced for years. The hypocrisy of his response to this supposedly “phony hoax,” is the real lipstick on a pig.
Davis GOP Chair out!
Ben Horsley

By Stan Lockhart