Debate, and discuss, just dont Bore me.
Published on September 10, 2008 By Dr Guy In Democrat

The latest controversy concerns a remark that Obama made about lipstick and pigs.  The republicans are of course feigning indignancy and claiming the comment was a slap at Sarah Palin - due both to her sex and her own self depreciating humor about Hockey moms.  If one squints hard enough, they can actually see the republicans point.

But I dont think Obama even thought of the reference to Palin.  And that is what concerns me more. "Lipstick on a pig" is an old, country cliche.  I have heard it before (and the one about a silk purse and sows ear).  But there are times that you do not use certain phrases (see article about an arrest of a politician for making a comment about a young girl) as the timing is not right, and the circumstances do lead to a mis-interpretation.  Experience then comes into play and warns the speaker about making such comments as most assuredly they will be taken out of context.

And Obama just does not know the difference.  That is not to say he never will.  With time, and more experience he will gain the wisdom of knowing when to shut up, and when "inserting foot into mouth" is a real danger.  This incident will blow away - hopefully not as painfully as the monkeys in the tree comment that got his own staffer fired.  But what about when he is meeting with the president of Russie, or Premier of China?  Making a stupid joke that will cause already strained relations to become more tenuos will not help this nation - or for the more etheral citizens - world peace.  And Obama just does not know when to shut his mouth yet.

He is a great reader of speeches, but his "err-um-ah-oh-mm-eh" off the cuff speaking leaves a lot to be desired.  He may get better in time on that, but he sure needs to get better at knowing when to say and when not to say things before he is ready to be leader of the free world.

On the job training is great.  But not when you are starting from scratch.


Comments (Page 1)
2 Pages1 2 
on Sep 10, 2008

You know what?  How about they just go ahead and insult each other?  I think the news would really love that and this "careful language" crap can go away.

When someone has to dig to find phrases to be offended by...well, they need a new hobby.

~Zoo

on Sep 10, 2008

You know what? How about they just go ahead and insult each other? I think the news would really love that and this "careful language" crap can go away.

It would be refreshing.

When someone has to dig to find phrases to be offended by...well, they need a new hobby.

This was not a detective story.  It was not hard to find.  And that is what is troubling.  We did have a president go down to Mexico and talk about "Montezuma's revenge".  We dont need to repeat those mistakes.  And we sure dont need someone "learning" on the job when to keep their mouth shut.  To be fair, I dont think McCain is much better, but it is not his inexperience, but temper that worries me.

on Sep 10, 2008

This was not a detective story. It was not hard to find.

Yeah, but someone had to put a bit of effort in it to actually cause a fuss.  If someone says the same word in two different speeches in two different contexts somehow there's a commotion?

Honestly, people never cease to amaze me with their stupidity or rather their committment to it.

~Zoo

on Sep 10, 2008

It's like "gravitas" and other buzzwords that find a home during campaign season.  Sarah Palin made a joke that included the word "lipstick", so now, apparently the Democrats have decided that they'll fit that word in wherever they can.  It's been used more in the last few days than ever before (again, much like "gravitas" was a couple of elections back).

Let them have their lipstick slapstick, it's pretty meaningless anyway.  Most the people who support Obama laughed at the joke, the people who are against him get to have their little "Well, I Never!" moments.   I doubt anyone who is still undecided is going to base their vote on this one way or the other.

on Sep 10, 2008

If people outside of America want to be offended at America for our president saying something, they'll find something to dig at to be offended with no matter what he says.

on Sep 10, 2008

Yeah, but someone had to put a bit of effort in it to actually cause a fuss.

In an election year, if a candidate says "me" instead of "us" it is going to cause a scandal.  It is the nature of the beast.

on Sep 10, 2008

I doubt anyone who is still undecided is going to base their vote on this one way or the other.

Taken in the context the way the republicans are playing it up, I tend to agree.  But then Ford mispoke as well, and that may have caused him the election too.

In this context, I think it may sway some undecideds on the experience issue. 

Then again it may have just won Obama the Male chauvinist vote too.

on Sep 10, 2008

If people outside of America want to be offended at America for our president saying something, they'll find something to dig at to be offended with no matter what he says.

Trees are going to get burned in a forest fire too.  That does not mean you have to throw gasoline on the fire to ensure they get burned.

on Sep 10, 2008

Taken in the context the way the republicans are playing it up, I tend to agree. But then Ford mispoke as well, and that may have caused him the election too.

Yup, his mispeaking cost him the election, I think the quote was "I pardon Richard Nixon" ;~D

on Sep 10, 2008

Yup, his mispeaking cost him the election, I think the quote was "I pardon Richard Nixon" ;~D

In his short tenure - that was the best thing he did.  I think he knew it was going to cost him politically, but he was one to put the nation ahead of his own ambitions.  One of the few politicians to do so.

on Sep 10, 2008

I hate election years. My bullshit meter stays pegged the whole time.

on Sep 10, 2008

I think this just further highlights that there is a difference between speech-reading and charisma, I think Palin has both, while Obama sorely lacks the latter.

I think everybody who thinks Obama is charismatic should watch a couple of Gordon Brown interviews, then watch an Obama interview. In the UK Brown is thought of as a wooden, dour, uncharismatic Scottish sourpuss. Obama is, in my opinion, just as poor in his responses and body-language (especially at Saddleback), yet everybody thinks he's phenomenal because he can read well. There's a difference between Hitleresque inspiration of people who would normally hate you, and being able to read without going 'er' or losing your place. The latter simply reflects literacy and youth.

 

With the amount of Obama gaffes, if he'd invaded a country and wasn't untouchable in mainstream society (we all know why) there would be just as many websites of Obamaisms as there are about Bushisms.

on Sep 10, 2008

In his short tenure - that was the best thing he did. I think he knew it was going to cost him politically, but he was one to put the nation ahead of his own ambitions. One of the few politicians to do so.

Absolutely, it was the best thing to promote healing in the nation, but since Nixon couldn't be punished, the nation punished Ford...  and if you ask me, the nation just rubbed acid in the wound when Carter was elected.

on Sep 10, 2008

Elections are proof of the saying "a person is smart, people are stupid"

on Sep 10, 2008

I'd think it goes "a person who votes for McCain is smart, the people who vote for Obama are stupid".

2 Pages1 2