McCain Plays Gender Card in Pig Ploy
LEBANON, Virginia -- Sen. John McCain played the gender card on Tuesday night, seizing on a hackneyed statement by Sen. Barack Obama to claim, rather implausibly, that the Democratic nominee was calling Gov. Sarah Palin a pig.
To even entertain McCain's far-fetched attack, one would have to think Barack Obama had a political death wish. Rather than attack Palin, however, Obama has spent the past few days praising her story and personal characteristics at each stop here at events in Virginia, Ohio and Michigan. He has confined all of his criticism to policy differences.
I was sitting at a press table in the Virginia gym as Obama rattled through two cliches to argue that the McCain/Palin ticket could not deliver change. First, Obama reached for a farm analogy: "You can put lipstick on a pig," he said. "It's still a pig." Then he said, "you can wrap an old fish in a piece of paper called change. It's still gonna stink." The pig cliche went from Politico to Drudge before Obama had left the stage. The McCain camp pounced with an emergency conference call, and the press corps unthinkingly dug into the story.
McCain surrogate Jane Swift accused Obama of talking about Palin and demanded an apology. Swift said she thought Obama was referencing Palin because she is the only candidate who wears lipstick. I guess that means no one can take offense at the fish analogy, since none of the candidates are wrapped in newspaper.
This entire non-event -- a candidate uses a common cliche in passing while answering a question about "change" -- barely merits any reporting at all. (It definitely isn't worth the lead of the AP's traveling report on what Obama did today, for example.) Don't take my word for it; even the journalist who jump-started this drama said so. Amie Parnes, who I've been sitting next to on Obama's plane, added this addendum to her short lipstick post:
The McCain campaign is now saying Obama called Palin a pig, which he didn't. They also note that "lipstick is a fairly common idiom he often uses," as in a recent Washington Post interview. McCain has also used the phrase...(emphasis added)
The Atlantic
's Marc Ambinder also swiftly debunked McCain's ploy. But the distraction is already upending the news cycle -- and I haven't even seen a television yet, (since we're en route to the airport). This is the kind of blatantly false charge that works even when reported skeptically, because it shouldn't be reported at all.Campaign journalists don't need to cover two sides to every lie; especially an outlandish gender card trick like this one. (For skeptical readers, I'll note that I filed several policy pieces about Obama today, including one from the Lebanon event; I'm wading into the pig ploy with the minor goal of providing some context from the road.)
Actual sexism still infects our culture and our politics, of course, but John McCain and Gov. Sarah Palin undermine the fight for equality when they falsely and cynically stage fake offenses. McCain's decision to put a woman on his ticket was laudable and inspiring, (as I've written before), and regardless of the motives, it was good for the country. McCain's overall conduct is more significant than that single decision, however. His cynical attempt to cloak his ticket in gendered victimhood is an offense to all women and men who value equality, and any voters who still desire a campaign devoted to a truthful debate of the issues.
Original piece here.
Ari Melber is traveling with the Obama campaign for The Washington Independent, blogging from the road here and Twittering here.
Follow Ari Melber on Twitter: www.twitter.com/AriMelber
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Obviously Mr. Obama saw how well the Palin bashing went for the guys at MSNBC and decided he would copy it. I like this strategy, keep it up.
The McCain campaign is out of touch. The Senator JM himself made the comment about Hillary Clinton and was referring to her directly and we haven't heart as much about it. Either the media is bought and sold to these guys or all the other stories of today ( corruption in the oil industry, the lying rhetoric from the JM campaign, we need to vet out next VP a heartbeat away from the Oval Office, etc, aren't important.
If that's not the way he meant it then he is not as quick as members of his audience. They start laughing before he can finish his puchline. Give me a freaking break!!!
On MSNBC they showed a clip of McZero using the same phrase in one of his speeches. Does anyone besides me see that this ad attack actually makes McZero look like he is insulting his sidekick by referencing her as the pig? From now on each time I hear this phrase I will immediately think of Palin. I find this rather humorous. Who's using sexism now? McZero is.
The MSN falls right into this trap all the time. I have just been watching Obama talking to a high school in Norfolk, Virginia. He gave a little time to address the silliness of the press and McCain camp using these things to distract, etc. Then it went into a very interesting point-by-point talk about how he wants to take students and education into the 21st century -- and then what happens? CNN has to break away, ok, but then the "news" caster casts away what he was talking about and says "yes, meat and potato stuff ..." right into Lipstickgate. I said this in another comment and I'll say it again -- my friend only gets his news from the BBC. Very, very sad when Americans have to go to a FOREIGN news source to get at issues and the truth. Shame, shame, shame.
Sorry -- I meant MSNBC, not CNN.
ARF ARF YUP YUP
Here is the thing. It isn't the intent, it is the result that counts. Anyone who has ever taken a harrassment course at work know that. You might not mean it to be offensive, but it could be, so don't say it. If he was referring to McCain, it is fine, but you don't use a pig analogy when referring to a woman. Just like if McCain used the term uppity for Obama he should be taken to task, while if he used it to describe say, Romney, he would be OK.
Uppity, has a negative meaning towards african-americans, even though it's mean suggests no such thing. While, pig has a negative meaning. My point is, be careful what you say.
Lord, McCain is so ridiculous. When you hear it, the intention is clear: http://www
Obama said, "You can put lipstick on a pig. It's still a pig."
The McCain camp then goes into full fake outrage mode.
That tells me only one thing: the McCain camp itself thinks Palin is a pig. If they believe the word 'pig' is referring to her, then they've got even worse problems than it appears.
There's one aspect of this that I haven't seen anybody pick up on yet. Everybody is assuming that the original pitbull/lipstick comment was something original with Palin (or some clever Repub writer).
It wasn't. I probably heard it over 10 years ago as a sexist "joke" that referred to women suffering with PMS. Honestly.
So this really is one more nail in the Repub campaign coffin, a willingness (and experience with) to use a subculture that freely demeans women. Time to call this for what it is and I'm telling everybody I know why we can't take another 4 years of this. Enough is enough.
I don't know if he originated it or not but Pastor Hagee told that joke in a speech he gave at a conference once.
Obviously Obama was saying that John McCain looks like a pig when he wears lipstick. It's no wonder McCain's campaign is outraged because John is adorable, but he shouldn't get too red.
As far as lipstick comments go, when McCain made his comment about lipstick-wearing pigs, he said that he hated to use the term. At the time, I thought that was odd because he was ostensibly referring to Hillary Clinton's health-care plan so why did he hate to use the term "pig"? Did he think that the health-care plan would be outraged?
way to stay on message barack. bury your education plan with an obtuse palin reference. concede palin was insulted. man, you need some manhattan addies on board. the chicago guys can't close this thing.
Well it will be perfectly fine for Obama to use the well known phrase "pig on lipstick" about the same time as everyone lets John McCain start using the also well known phrase "lets call a spade a spade" when he wants to talk on the campaign trail about some outlandish claim that Obama has made.
How about this.
McCain: My opponent has claimed that I said "just a few days ago" that the economy is fine. Now my friends, LET'S CALL A SPADE A SPADE. I made that comment about the economy MONTHS ago. Not a FEW days ago as Obama claims. And, I have recently, including just a few days ago, been acknowledging the troubles in the economy. If fact I have run a commercial acknowledging that people are worse off today than they were in the past. So, my friends, just who is being honest with you in their claims?
Would this be OK with you?
Of course he was talking about Palin.
Since the Repub convention, the lipstick joke by Palin was one of the most if not the most quoted lines and readily identifies her with lipstick.
So Barack said that lipstick joke knowing the audience and everyone would immediately think Palin.
And then he follows up with the fish line ... again, something which is a known saying, but he changes it and adds "OLD" ... obviously to slam McCain. Because the line should have been you can take a fish and wrap in newspaper, it will still stink after blah. The "old" is unneccessary and proves that Obama wasn't just using well known sayings as they are now falsely claiming.
both lines were scripted to invoke the audience to think Palin/McCain. Unless Obama is so daft he couldn't realize the connection (which of course the audience did) -- and he isn't.
He wasn't talking about Palin, but yes, it was a veiled reference to her pit bull comment, and perhaps the old fish comment was a veiled reference to McCane.
But in all honesty the Rethugs use that double entendre ALL the time...so he is just flinging it right back at them.
Two can play this game...and if the rethugs can dish it...they should certainly be able to take it.
It obviously struck a nerve for them to go on the offense like this.
well, other common sayings are "let's call a spade a spade" or the differences in policies in this election is "black and white" or etc ... obviously context is important and in the context of this election, McCain can't or shouldn't use those kinds of words.
if he did, the Obama campaign would (rightly) be furious. Because though the sayings are common, it would be apparant what McCain was subtlety implying ... they would not be just idioms, but carry the undercurrent of racism ... just as with Obama's statements yesterday with the undercurrent of "pig" to Palin and "old" to McCain.
If McCain uses the calling a spade a spade line after saying something about Obama, and then his campaign says it is a common saying (as the Obama people are spouting today) - would that fly? or would we know what he means
I've heard this "old" saying as far back as I can remember (and I'm no spring chicken) I've heard it come from many a political candidate from both sides of the fence past and present, including John McCain. The statement in no way was intended as a slam towards Palin. Nor do I think it was a veiled reference to her pitbull comment. Both the "Lipstick on the pig" and "old fish wrapped in a newspaper" comments are metaphorical in terms of pointing out someones attempt at "running a sham" or "pulling the wool over your eyes". Which is exactly what the McCain campaign is doing right now with this whole switch-a-roo thing to him being the "Change candidate". And that, the idea of McCain being "the change candidate" was what Obama was referencing , nothing else.
If people in this country are really stupid enough to buy all this crap (and that's all it is ) rhetoric coming from the McCain campaign lately, then we are in bad shape as a people. And if McCain wins this election because of that stupidity we will have gotten exactly what we deserve, four more years of rule by a George Bush clone with a bad comb over.
It does give us the opportunity to bring up McCain laughing when one of his supporters called Hillary Clinton a bitch though.
Let's say he DID mean to imply Palin. Then his words are true: she brought up the lipstick thing AND she is a huge pork-barreller who claims to fight pork. I think the phrase has been waiting for years for the exact correct usage. I think this was the time.
And who's to say the fish line wasn't about Palin as well? She loves to fish. If it was about McCain, well, he IS old.
I do not like that a woman can claim lipstick as a qualifier of who she is and the the word lipstick becomes sexist.
And honestly, I am MORE offended by McCain's rape joke than I am about a lipstick wearing pig. Especially in the light of the fact that Alaska has the highest rates of rape and that Wasilla charged rape victims for rape kits.
Jennifer
Obama won the primaries by casting his opponent (and her husband) as racist thereby deligitimizing her in the eyes of some voters and galvanizing the African-American vote. It was unjust and unwarranted. Now, he gets the same treatment on the gender card. It is obviously an outlandish allegation, but as they say: the chickens come home to roost.
Evidence of your supposition please. A few links to reputable news articles maybe!
Umm, I suppose in an election year truth is at a premium, but I do recall that he was in the lead in the primaries from the outset, well before race became an issue. (Or are you suggesting that the 5% Black vote in Iowa gave him his jump-start?)
i think what is being suggested is that despite the Iowa results, if Obama hadn't carried 80 - 90 percent ofthe black vote, he would not have won SC, he would not have won ANY southern state. He would not have won MO. He would have lost in the states like OH, TX, PA etc by much LARGER margins and he would have won in states he did win by much SMALLER margins.
Obama won the primarys because he was the better candidate. Period.
And if I remember, Bill and Hillary did say some racially irresponsible things. If you want me to post some links, I'll be happy to do so. Just ask...
Please do.
http://www
The motive for putting Palin on the ticket was not because it was good for the country, but because it was good for the campaign. The campaign "cares" about women being victims when it helps the campaign. It's all about the campaign so, cynicism, distortions and lies are tools to achieve their goal.
If the campaign "cares" about women being victims, why have they not said a word about the current US ally Pakistan. The place where 6 women were killed the other day because they did not marry the people the men told them too. What about the Elected politician who stood up and defended these honor killings in the Pakistan parliment. How about the legal right to rape a woman because she was seen alone, not sexually at all as if that would make a difference, with a man. All perpetrated by US allies like Pakistan and Saudi Arabia!
Yet all I ever hear about is now bad China's human rights are! Sheeeesh what hypocrisy! Especially when your own country tortures!
Moreupnorth, Iyamchazz wasn't saying the McCain campaign cares about women who ARE victims, he was saying they care about "Women being victims," specifically Palin. If Palin was killed by a bear and they could get a sympathy vote for McCain, the McCain campaign would be estatic (not in public of course). I still wonder if the reason they said so much about where and when Trigg was deploying was in hopes he would be killed or wounded by "terrorists," to get a sympathy vote for McCain/Palin. Of course, after the election we would learn that the terrorist was actually a blackwater guard, but by then it would be too late.
The word cares was in parenthesis and my comment was not in support the campaign. But to answer your question, what happens in Pakistan or Saudi Arabia would not be helpful to the campaign. You don't know what country I'm from, so don't assume.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
