The Observation Deck

Someone explain this to me please. When Palin was talking in her speech at the RNC, she said some "bashing" things about Obama. Now that Obama said something about "lipstick on a pig" he is wrong? Why? How? I just dont get how it is ok for her to say what ever she wants, do what she wants, but someone else says something than everyone is up in arms. Personally her remark about pits was horrible and I would like to know where to send a very stern, nasty letter to her. I will keep it calm as I dont want to end up in jail because I am emotional, but still stern. LOL.

It is pretty clear how she can say whatever she wants. She is a republican.

It. wasn't. even. about. her.

This whole kerfuffle has me ready to vote Bob Barr.

Jim DeVito wrote:It is pretty clear how she can say whatever she wants. She is a republican.

I love this Meanwhile. mild mannered reporter for the Daily Planet, Hillary Clinton, is out on the waterfront screaming " I could have been a contender!"

Barack had a choice to qualify 18 million votes by simply "unifying" the Democratic party for country first. Simple...and basically check mate. Done. The killer, winning blow. Finis.

Instead, he chose to be himself. Parse this anyway you want, but his decision sent a message not of change, but of good old boy Illinois politics. McCain said thank you very much! Truth or consequences.

Palin could care less about the comment because she made it first. He wasn't talking about her, it's a classic euphemism. It's about sound bites and perception. The perception is Barack passed up a winning woman in his own party and he has a lot of xplaining to do Lucy.

.

Dustin James.! This Bud's for your... Yep!

It's funny that John McCain used the same phrase when Hillary Clinton and the "universal health care plan" came up earlier this year. Oh and he used it to describe the Iraq war last year.

AND..

His former press secretary wrote a book entitled...

"lipstick on a pig".



this sounds like a possible endorsement deal for Palin if this VP thing doesn't work out come November.

see that is why i didnt get it. someone else says it and its all fine and dandy everyone move on, Obama says it and the world stops, it is a top news story yaddi yaddi yaddi.....AUGHHHH. I hate politics!!! My poor little confused brain. I need a Molson...stat!!!

Ivor Karabatkovic wrote:It's funny that John McCain used the same phrase when Hillary Clinton and the "universal health care plan" came up earlier this year. Oh and he used it to describe the Iraq war last year.

AND..

His former press secretary wrote a book entitled...

"lipstick on a pig".



this sounds like a possible endorsement deal for Palin if this VP thing doesn't work out come November.

~~~

Like Rudy said, Biden better have his VP appointment in writing.

.

Here's exactly what Obama said:

Chris Matthews' Hard Ball segment

please watch it because Matthews blasts some "dude" that thinks he knows something. I love it when he does that.

It also includes the ad that John McCain ran that painted Obama's comment to be exactly about Palin.

Missy Limkemann wrote:I need a Molson...stat!!!

Canadian I hope.

Ivor Karabatkovic wrote:Here's exactly what Obama said:

Chris Matthews' Hard Ball segment

please watch it because Matthews blasts some "dude" that thinks he knows something. I love it when he does that.

It also includes the ad that John McCain ran that painted Obama's comment to be exactly about Palin.

WHATEVER.

These are campaign political maneuvers. I think they are stupid too. Instead of chasing bunnies down a hole, Dems need to look at the real elephant on the table (pun intended).

Barack could have chosen a woman who had been in the white house and delivered 18 million votes. Instead, Hillary gets to be a paid shill out on the campaign trail, for which he will pay back her enormous campaign debt. They also want all their pals in the media to help them destroy Palin. This will be relentless - and it will backfire. Barack made a critical mistake not hiring Hillary and millions of voters know it. His first big decision that could have shown integrity and guts becomes amplified every time Palin is mentioned.

I suspect Michelle told him SHE was going to be the ONLY first lady in the white house (no room for Hillary who probably still knows secret service agents by their first names) and he said yes m'am! This was not about qualifications for Dem VP, it was about egos.

.

So the assumption is that Hillary Clinton would WANT to be #2 in the White House yet again? Why is everyone assuming that it was the Obama campaign that chose to not include her on the ticket. I really doubt that she wanted the position. I think she and her hubby still think that Obama is the wrong man for the job and will be content to wait out the next 4 years. If it is an Obama success, goody. If McCain wins, she picks up where she left off again in 2012 and will have 4 more years of Bush-style ruling to run against. Why play second fiddle when there is still a good chance of lead chair in not too many years?


Of more substance, to me, is the flip way that the Republican party can on the one hand yell "Service!" at the top of their lungs as a campaign slogan and with the other hand denounce anyone that actually engages in providing "Service!" to their community. Sadly, explaining that to the electorate is hard and it is easier to talk about pigs, pit bulls and lipstick.

We all know that Obama wasn't referring to Palin but that doesn't matter. If he was, it would have been far funnier to actually say "lipstick on a pit bull and it is still a pit bull." Pigs have far better connotation in this nation than the Pit Bull.

The McCain campaign is grasping at straws.

McCain has mucho bucks from lobbyists, etc. to spend on advertising.

I'm spending my time today organizing people to give to Obama - my kids, my friends and relatives. Even $10.00 donations add up.

I can't sit back and let these people get away with this.

sharon kinsella wrote:The McCain campaign is grasping at straws.

McCain has mucho bucks from lobbyists, etc. to spend on advertising.

I'm spending my time today organizing people to give to Obama - my kids, my friends and relatives. Even $10.00 donations add up.

I can't sit back and let these people get away with this.

We gave $5 for each member of our family. I figure even though it was just $35 it all adds up.

Danielle Masters wrote:

sharon kinsella wrote:The McCain campaign is grasping at straws.

McCain has mucho bucks from lobbyists, etc. to spend on advertising.

I'm spending my time today organizing people to give to Obama - my kids, my friends and relatives. Even $10.00 donations add up.

I can't sit back and let these people get away with this.

We gave $5 for each member of our family. I figure even though it was just $35 it all adds up.

These people get away with what?? According to fact check.org, Obama's war chest is over double that of McCain's. BHO can advertise all day long and will. But it sounds like you are characterizing his political machine as down-trodden and up against this huge opponent of super funds. It's just not so. McCain was broke one year ago and for all accounts out of the race. Somehow it's not about money and advertising. It may be something else more substantive. Just sayin' http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/w ... bamas.html

.