“You can put lipstick on a pig, but it’s still a pig.”
That old saying has been used quite adeptly by the rightwing Republicans to start a faux controversy, not because they thought it would stick to Obama, but because they knew the media would fall for it and the public would either get tired of it or be disgusted by it.
They knew that some of the public would buy it as what the Rove surrogates put out that it was, Obama dissing a woman and that some of the dittohead rightwing camp followers would look no further than their leaders’ claims and buy it.
They knew others would pay attention and become aware that it’s an old saying used not only by John McCain in campaign appearances when referring to Hilary’s and Obama’s healthcare plans, but also by a former Bush speechwriter, as well as General Patreus’s right hand man (in describing Iraq policy) and many others on the Republican side. But they also know those kind of people are more informed anyway and likely to vote for Obama as a result.
But others, they figure, who may become aware that it wasn’t intended as “sexist” or aimed at anything other than the Republican so-called “economic plan”—which consists mainly of continuing the tax cuts for the rich and letting corporations have even more freedom to reap even greater profits while the rest of us see our incomes diminish—might be so fed up with the endless campaign and the way it has become more about lies and mudslinging and unfounded slanders etc. (and more divisive tactics about Hilary, which have mainly been generated by Rove and his surrogates, see how those who once referred to her even on my blog as "Hitlery" now try and make a case for why she would have been a better candidate for either the top or second position, even though they know that if that had been the case their charges of "extreme leftwing liberal" etc. would have stuck much more than it has to Obama and Biden) they will become disgusted with the whole political process and stop caring.
And they figured right. I’ve run into or heard from a lot of these kind of folks—“independents” or Democrats or more moderate Republicans—who are just tired of and disgusted with the presidential race and plan on writing some friend in or just not voting.
And that “my friends”—as McCain likes to say as if—is the point. The Rove strategy was always based on the reality that the Republican base, especially the rightwing base, is not only not large enough to carry an election but doesn’t even believe the same things most “Americans” do. So the strategy has always been to make the whole process seem not worth the bother, because their base will hold their noses and vote anyway, but a lot of independents and dissatisfied Democrats and more moderate Republicans might just give up and not vote.
If only a fair portion of the young people Obama’s campaign has inspired and turned on to election politics get cynical about the way it’s playing out and don’t vote, Obama loses. If only a fair portion of “liberals” do the same, the same result. So, expect more and more outrageous slanders and misinformation and distortions (like the ad posting Obama as some kind of sexual predator for wanting young children to be given an education in how to protect themselves from predators!) that will turn people off from paying attention to what’s really going on and what the real differences are on the issues and why their vote really does count.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
had breakfast with a friend this morning who aptly said the republicans are running their campaign the same way the church has for many years: "with shame and fear" plus a few new 'rove' twists ...
i wonder what the outcome of barak's meeting with mr. clinton will be ...
wonder where the celebrity voice for the youth vote is - so far nothing but static ...
stay tuned for the avon lady's interview this evening ...
You are right about the "Faux Controversy". However, in looking at the replays, it looks like he knew what he was about to say could be construed both ways. If he had any doubt, he should have clarified it at the time. After all he played the racist card against Bill Clinton and knows how, precieved racist or sexist remarks can be played. I think he just could not resist it. His audience obviously enjoyed it. I think they thought he was referring to Sarah.
It has been suggested that the Dems may pull a Torricelli and substitute Hillary for Biden. I guess anything is possible in this race. Boy, this sure is fun to watch.
McCain has become quite the politician since he got his party's nomination; he has proven time and again that his strategy for winning is based on personal attacks and distracting people from the main issues... i just hope people aren't as gullible as McCain seems to think they are
I understand that the debate formats are going to be much freer than in past presidential elections. Supposedly, the moderators role will be greatly diminished. The candidates will have much more point and counterpoint. One would think that the issues and their ability to think on their feet will be given full exposure. Only two weeks to go to the first one.
just a note to say, jim - i've enjoyed some of your recent insights and information ...
harryn, Thanks I appreciate that. You may want to watch your self, you may start agreeing with me occasiionally.
Even if Obama was calling Palin a pig, I don't think it's sexist. If he had said, "Sarah Palin is a sow", that would be more sexist than pig. In fact, we call a lot of politicians pigs. Look at cartoons and you'll see politicians drawn as fat pigs, especially when making the point about "pork barrel spending".
In fact, to say that we can't call Palin a pig -just because of her gender- seems a little sexist. You can say:
GEORGE BUSH IS A PIG
DICK CHENEY IS A PIG
JOHN MCCAIN IS A PIG
MITCH MCCONNELL IS A PIG
JOE LIEBERMAN IS A PIG
But you can't say:
SARAH PALIN IS A PIG
-just because she's a woman?
She's up in the big leagues now, and she deserves every right to be a pig, just like everybody else.
Post a Comment