Why is Obama regarded as such a great politician? Seriously, he constantly makes tone-deaf comments that upset large numbers of people. Perhaps his "magnetism" is just the ability to appeal to people who share his views, and in reality he can't move beyond that base?
I agree that he prob. didn't intentionally mean it -- though the full quote in which he talks about an "old fish" and then "lipstick on a pig" does raise questions about where his mind was when he was discussing his opponents whose most obvious characteristics are that one of them is old and the other is a woman.
But Obama does have a rather sketchy history in his off-hand remarks dealing with women, as Geraghty outlines in this post.
The short version is:
1) During the primary, refering to Hillary's "kitchen sink" strategy of getting "the china flying"
2) The time he responded to a jibe by Hillary during a debate with a "the claws come out" line
3) The time when he talked about how Hillary "periodically" "feels down"
4) And, of course, his innocent habit -- which he's working on! -- of calling random women "sweetie". As a professional working in NYC, I can confidently say that lots of Ivy-League lawyer types refer to women as "Sweetie." Generally, they are the 85 year-old literal white-shoe wearing lawyer types, not the young, brash up-and-comers, but whatever.
Yeah, McCain's campaign or anyone supporting it should never have brought it up. It's not like McCain is 100% politically correct and diplomatic.
Obama scores points when he says he wants to talk about education (or some other real issue), but this is what his opponent wants to talk about. Note that I plan on voting for McCain, but I don't like feigned outrage over trivial matters from either side.
Obama scores points when he says he wants to talk about education (or some other real issue), but this is what his opponent wants to talk about. Note that I plan on voting for McCain, but I don't like feigned outrage over trivial matters from either side.
I tend to agree however since Obama pretty much owes his entire candidacy to racialist identity politics and his team hasn’t hesitated to cry “dog whistle” in response to criticism, I’m inclined to enjoy the sight of him finally getting a dose of his own medicine.
Oh great glorious MSM, please keep your story straight!
Obama is the uplifting orator and wordsmith par excellence -- and yet unwittingly criticizes McCain-Palin with the parallel phrases of putting lipstick on a pig (which metaphorically will not make a beautiful woman) and wrapping old smelly fish in a newspaper. He then goes on Letterman admitting he meant Palin, but by the lipstick, not the pig. Hello!? McFly?!
Which is it? Gifted, articulate orator with a purpose, or bumbling fool?
Hey could someone explain what this whole "lipstick on a pig" thing is about? I don't really keep up with politics so could someone tell me what he said?
McCain went to the Naval Academy in the 1950s, Obama went to Columbia and Harvard in the 1980s. And the best the Obama defenders can do is say, "Well, at least Obama isn't more insensitive to the possible perception of sexism his statements than McCain is."
I have no reason to think that Obama intended to call Palin a pig, even as a snide hint; he's not stupid. On the other hand, a lot of people thought he did, including the audience in the video (who apparently thought it was a great jab). He should have given one of the Standard Apologies: "I never intended to insult anyone with my remark; I wouldn't do that. However, a lot of people heard it as an insult, and I see how it could have come across that way. I'm really sorry." I think he would have been fine.
Afterwards, if he wanted, he could have knocked the McCain campaign for going way overboard with their ridiculous ad.
Instead, he doubled down, and all the liberal pundits are calling all the people who were offended idiots and liars. Bad idea.
He then goes on Letterman admitting he meant Palin, but by the lipstick, not the pig. Hello!? McFly?!
Sorry MarkG, but I heard it very differently. I saw that clip and here's how it went.
He said "If I had meant it that way, she would've been the lipstick and the pig would've have been [pause for laughter] the failed policies of John McCain and George Bush."
See the difference?
Obama was trying to point out how the McCain campaign weren't even being logical about their fake outrage and that the only way to interpret it that way was to purposely twist it around.
The fact of the matter is this: Obama could've been there with a sign above his head that said "Some Pig" and McCain and Company still would've worked themselves into a lather.
Well, first Gov. Palin made a joke about herself being a hockey mom: "What is the difference between a hockey mom and a pit bull? Lipstick".
Then, Sen. Obama, trying to imply the new image doesn't change the foundation (like applying yet another coat of wallpaper) said that is was 'Like putting lipstick on a pig...it's still a pig'. The controversy is, that he was ambiguous enough/sloppy enough to let people looking to be aggrieved try to convince everyone he was calling Gov. Palin a pig.
Now, I am cynical enough to believe he was actually trying to insult her, but in a sly, deniable way. But he blew it. I mean, insults, slick or gross, subtle or not, vile or silly are part an parcel with politics. But in the 'Lipstick' vs. 'Community Organizer' battle, I am afraid Gov. Palin has won the round.
For all of the political Right's frequent - and usually justified - outrage over political correctness and the language police, it's always good to get a reminder that they're every bit as bad about this sort of thing as the political Left.
The idea that using a cliche like "putting lipstick on a pig" - when clearly and specifically referencing McCain's (not Palin's) policies - is somehow sexist, or even tone-deaf, is simply bizarre.
I look forward to the accusations that McCain is tone-deaf should he ever claim that Obama is "the pot calling the kettle black" or that Obama "can't get the Rezko monkey off his back." Similarly, I can't wait to hear the Right's response should Obama ever say about McCain that "you can't teach an old dog new tricks" (which is clearly age-ist).
@Jackson:
Barack Obama said something at a campaign rally about "If you put lipstick on a pig, it's still a pig" and people assumed it referred to Sarah Palin. ("The difference between a hockey mom and a pit bull? Lipstick.")
To be honest, I'm on the side of the people who thinks it actually was directed at her, simply because his follow up remark was something along the lines of, "And if you wrap an old fish in some newspaper, it's still an old, rotten fish." To me, it's just a little uncharacteristic of Obama to use these folksy phrases (I almost said "colorful phrases"... whoops!) so I can't help but think that two of them in a row, one that could be construed as referring to Palin and one that could be construed as referring to McCain, must have been deliberate. I suspect at some meeting they were discussing ways to make Obama sound more "down-to-earth", threw around some ideas for things he could say, and when these two came around everyone patted themselves on the back for finding truisms that *hint* at Palin and McCain.
That being said, I hardly think it matters in the least. He insulted them indirectly. Boo hoo. This is politics. It wasn't like Obama was trying to insult all women by way of comparing Palin to a pig. It wasn't like he was trying to insult all old people by calling McCain a rotten old fish. He was just tweaking common, populist sort of rhetoric into jabs at his opponents. People need to grow up.
No Megan, it's not at all obvious (which is not to say that it's a big deal). What is obvious is that Obama is not a very good politician, and that he collapses under pressure - and that is a very big deal.
Perhaps if he hadn't relied on shenanigans to get rid of other candidates (getting nominations invalidated, or benefitting from magically released divorce proceedings) in previous elections he might have had the experience necessary to avoid freaking out.
Daniel Finklestein in "The Times" sums it up quite well:
Thank God the media isn't asking them questions about Iraq or health care or infrastructure. Those things will work themselves out. What a glorious age we live in!
I really don't understand how anyone who listened to the entire anecdote, rather than selective quotes, could think he was talking about Palin. It seems like such a stretch, and the outrage rings totally false.
I'd like anyone claiming he wasn't referring to Palin to explain the crowd cheering.
Putting lipstick on a pig is a well worn phrase. It isn't an applause line. The crowd knew what Obama was saying. Anyone who watched the video knows as well.
Per Ann Althouse: "But the thing is I know that the crowd laughed -- and Obama paused to encourage the crowd to laugh -- after he said "You can put lipstick on a pig," and before he said, "but it's still a pig."
Sarah Palin's convention statement was 'The only difference between a hockey mom and a pitbull is lipstick.' Thus she is being self effacing and allowing she could be viewed a 'pitbull' if it weren't for the lipstick. Obama's reply suggests she wasn't self effacing enough: she's still a pig even though she has lipstick on. It's sly and the Democratic brain, per previous post, might not see it. It's not worth causing a civil war over; Obama is nothing to her, just a Democratic Senator running for president.
Thank God the media isn't asking them questions about Iraq
Yes, thank God. A question like, "Senator Obama, it turns out you were completely wrong about the surge, while Senator McCain was completely right. Why should be trust your judgment now over his?" could really torpedo Obama.
I object to complaining that Obama said something stupid. When you lower the bar to what is going to be pranced around as offensive THAT LOW, then its not a matter of avoiding saying anything remotely controversial - that won't help, but exactly what words will be chosen for the next criticism.
Cheer up, Megan. The race is now close again, and the traditional media can once again have their horse race to cover.
It would be incomprehensible for Obama to have to big a lead before the election; what would the talking head blather about? Real issues? National debt? Public policy?
Don't make me laugh. You and I both know they're not capable of that, you've got to go to the blogs for real election meat.
This goes to Judgment. If Obama can't think through the consequences of simple statements, what does that say about his judgment on more complex stuff?
It's just not that hard to avoid saying stupid things. Can't anybody play this game? Just don't be stupid!
But if you insist on being stupid...well then maybe you're not as smart as you think you are, and you're certainly not smarter than me. And do I want someone dumber than me for President? Yikes!
I think we'll see this lipstick thing as a tipping point that will help Obama when we look back on it in a few weeks.
The sleaze liberal websites and much of MSM pushed about Palin in the first few days served the McCain campaign perfectly. Every day spent on that kind of nonsense was a day not spent on the economy or healthcare or foreign policy or 100 other issues where McCain loses. Even better, the rumors that were the most lurid (Her daughter's pregnant by a high-school dropout!) and least likely to be true (She's not Trig's real mom!) got the most coverage, so the McCain campaign's accusations that the press (and by their extension the Obama campaign) were smearing Palin sounded reasonable.
But the critiques of Palin relevant to her ability to govern are emerging from the dreck of the first few days -- the truth about her support of the bridge to nowhere, her ongoing ethics investigation, her flirtation with book censorship and subsequent firing of the town librarian, etc. And the McCain campaign's commercial on the lipstick controversy was too obviously an attempt to keep the news cycle going for another day or two. It's dawned on the press in the last 24 hours that this is an overt campaign strategy.
So I suspect that for the next week or two, the press narrative will boomerang back to the issues -- how the American people want the press to focus more on the issues, how the McCain campaign is trying to distract us from the real issues, how the Obama campaign may be making Kerry's mistake by ignoring the Freak Show and focusing on the issues. And maybe, just maybe, some actual coverage of the issues themselves.
Alex, it is certainly not easy to avoid saying stupid things. You do it all the time, I bet. I think Obama has done a great job so far, actually. Compare with McCain. And how about Bush?
i thought it was a brilliant move on Obama's part. he stuck a pin in the palin baloon; baited mccain into over playing his hand so he looks like the only sane person in the room. he took the narrative away that she had to be handle with kid gloves.
everyone is wringing their hand saying obama effed up. whatever. the guy's middle name is hussein for chrissake and he's within striking distance of the presidency. you don't get there by being reckless, unless of course your last name is bush.
Speaking of animal metphors, in markets there's a term called a 'dead cat bounce.' It's when an asset, mortally wounded as it were, has an uptick as a trading phenomenon.
Obviously, he didn't mean it that way. The outrage is ridiculous.
Well, considering that his audience certainly took it that way, and he's supposed to be such a great speaker, it's not entirely obvious that he didn't mean it that way and was trying to get away with something.
I mean, if you get an audience going "Whoop! Whoop! Yeah! Yeah!" and then back off going "Golly, I didn't mean it like that...".
OTOH, if he really didn't mean it, then setting off an audience like that and a furor like this by accident bespeaks .... worrisome inexperience? Doing something like this as a world leader could blow a treaty ... start a war?
Secondly, it's not like Obama's side is innocent of trying to manufacturer tornadoes out of teapots like this. Remember when Hillary explained that she hadn't dropped out yet citing "Bobby Kennedy was shot in June", and all the furniture they threw at her over that?
Um, McCain said the same thing, using the exact same phrase. No outrage there.
Context matters, as all skilled speakers know.
"Voodoo economics" is a term that's been used in politics for 30 years.
But if McCain's people described Obama's proposals as "Voodoo economics", you don't think you'd hear a hundred cries of "racial code", "race slur!", from the left?
I believe Senator Obama did not mean it as an insult but knew what he was doing. I believe he was trying to set a counter fire to the maelstorm that Governor Palin was causing. Everyone gets outraged and the momentum stops and in a month no one remembers much about the story, but the results are plain to see. The question is did it succeed. I am as clueless as the next guy but even I would have picked lipstick out as a reference to the lone woman in the race.
You're saying Obama said it knowing it would be interpreted as an insult by the crowd and by Republicans but in his own heart he was blameless because he was aware it was just a cynical campaign ploy? Wow.
Not cynical, calculated, you do not get to be the candidate of a major party making such a blatant gaffe. The McCain campaign has been in rapid response mode and I believe the Obama campaing was looking to take advantage of it, everyone stops and demands a course of action be taken. The key is everyone stops, which was the desired result. Maybe I have read to many historical books where people like to brag about their abilities, but it seems to be right down the line.
Why is Obama regarded as such a great politician? Seriously, he constantly makes tone-deaf comments that upset large numbers of people. Perhaps his "magnetism" is just the ability to appeal to people who share his views, and in reality he can't move beyond that base?
The outrage is ridiculous. But mockery is entirely appropriate.
We've known for a while that he isn't very good off teleprompter...
Megan, you're a day late and a million dollars short on this one. The outrage is fake and a gazillion Republican pols have used the same phrase.
Besides, Republicans have been voting for pigs for years, so they should be proud.
I agree that he prob. didn't intentionally mean it -- though the full quote in which he talks about an "old fish" and then "lipstick on a pig" does raise questions about where his mind was when he was discussing his opponents whose most obvious characteristics are that one of them is old and the other is a woman.
But Obama does have a rather sketchy history in his off-hand remarks dealing with women, as Geraghty outlines in this post.
The short version is:
1) During the primary, refering to Hillary's "kitchen sink" strategy of getting "the china flying"
2) The time he responded to a jibe by Hillary during a debate with a "the claws come out" line
3) The time when he talked about how Hillary "periodically" "feels down"
4) And, of course, his innocent habit -- which he's working on! -- of calling random women "sweetie". As a professional working in NYC, I can confidently say that lots of Ivy-League lawyer types refer to women as "Sweetie." Generally, they are the 85 year-old literal white-shoe wearing lawyer types, not the young, brash up-and-comers, but whatever.
Um, McCain said the same thing, using the exact same phrase. No outrage there.
He may not have meant it that way, but it was perceived by audiences on both sides of the aisle that way.......and perception is reality.
Yeah, McCain's campaign or anyone supporting it should never have brought it up. It's not like McCain is 100% politically correct and diplomatic.
Obama scores points when he says he wants to talk about education (or some other real issue), but this is what his opponent wants to talk about. Note that I plan on voting for McCain, but I don't like feigned outrage over trivial matters from either side.
I was more outraged by his attack on the fishing industry.
Fake outrage by liars or real outrage by very very stupid people. You decide.
I tend to agree however since Obama pretty much owes his entire candidacy to racialist identity politics and his team hasn’t hesitated to cry “dog whistle” in response to criticism, I’m inclined to enjoy the sight of him finally getting a dose of his own medicine.
Oh great glorious MSM, please keep your story straight!
Obama is the uplifting orator and wordsmith par excellence -- and yet unwittingly criticizes McCain-Palin with the parallel phrases of putting lipstick on a pig (which metaphorically will not make a beautiful woman) and wrapping old smelly fish in a newspaper. He then goes on Letterman admitting he meant Palin, but by the lipstick, not the pig. Hello!? McFly?!
Which is it? Gifted, articulate orator with a purpose, or bumbling fool?
Hey could someone explain what this whole "lipstick on a pig" thing is about? I don't really keep up with politics so could someone tell me what he said?
McCain went to the Naval Academy in the 1950s, Obama went to Columbia and Harvard in the 1980s. And the best the Obama defenders can do is say, "Well, at least Obama isn't more insensitive to the possible perception of sexism his statements than McCain is."
"Obama pretty much owes his entire candidacy to racialist identity "?
???????????????WTF?
I have no reason to think that Obama intended to call Palin a pig, even as a snide hint; he's not stupid. On the other hand, a lot of people thought he did, including the audience in the video (who apparently thought it was a great jab). He should have given one of the Standard Apologies: "I never intended to insult anyone with my remark; I wouldn't do that. However, a lot of people heard it as an insult, and I see how it could have come across that way. I'm really sorry." I think he would have been fine.
Afterwards, if he wanted, he could have knocked the McCain campaign for going way overboard with their ridiculous ad.
Instead, he doubled down, and all the liberal pundits are calling all the people who were offended idiots and liars. Bad idea.
Sorry MarkG, but I heard it very differently. I saw that clip and here's how it went.
He said "If I had meant it that way, she would've been the lipstick and the pig would've have been [pause for laughter] the failed policies of John McCain and George Bush."
See the difference?
Obama was trying to point out how the McCain campaign weren't even being logical about their fake outrage and that the only way to interpret it that way was to purposely twist it around.
The fact of the matter is this: Obama could've been there with a sign above his head that said "Some Pig" and McCain and Company still would've worked themselves into a lather.
Well, first Gov. Palin made a joke about herself being a hockey mom: "What is the difference between a hockey mom and a pit bull? Lipstick".
Then, Sen. Obama, trying to imply the new image doesn't change the foundation (like applying yet another coat of wallpaper) said that is was 'Like putting lipstick on a pig...it's still a pig'. The controversy is, that he was ambiguous enough/sloppy enough to let people looking to be aggrieved try to convince everyone he was calling Gov. Palin a pig.
Now, I am cynical enough to believe he was actually trying to insult her, but in a sly, deniable way. But he blew it. I mean, insults, slick or gross, subtle or not, vile or silly are part an parcel with politics. But in the 'Lipstick' vs. 'Community Organizer' battle, I am afraid Gov. Palin has won the round.
For all of the political Right's frequent - and usually justified - outrage over political correctness and the language police, it's always good to get a reminder that they're every bit as bad about this sort of thing as the political Left.
The idea that using a cliche like "putting lipstick on a pig" - when clearly and specifically referencing McCain's (not Palin's) policies - is somehow sexist, or even tone-deaf, is simply bizarre.
I look forward to the accusations that McCain is tone-deaf should he ever claim that Obama is "the pot calling the kettle black" or that Obama "can't get the Rezko monkey off his back." Similarly, I can't wait to hear the Right's response should Obama ever say about McCain that "you can't teach an old dog new tricks" (which is clearly age-ist).
While I'm here - can anyone show me a single person who was offended by this remark who wasn't already vehemently opposed to Obama?
@Jackson:
Barack Obama said something at a campaign rally about "If you put lipstick on a pig, it's still a pig" and people assumed it referred to Sarah Palin. ("The difference between a hockey mom and a pit bull? Lipstick.")
To be honest, I'm on the side of the people who thinks it actually was directed at her, simply because his follow up remark was something along the lines of, "And if you wrap an old fish in some newspaper, it's still an old, rotten fish." To me, it's just a little uncharacteristic of Obama to use these folksy phrases (I almost said "colorful phrases"... whoops!) so I can't help but think that two of them in a row, one that could be construed as referring to Palin and one that could be construed as referring to McCain, must have been deliberate. I suspect at some meeting they were discussing ways to make Obama sound more "down-to-earth", threw around some ideas for things he could say, and when these two came around everyone patted themselves on the back for finding truisms that *hint* at Palin and McCain.
That being said, I hardly think it matters in the least. He insulted them indirectly. Boo hoo. This is politics. It wasn't like Obama was trying to insult all women by way of comparing Palin to a pig. It wasn't like he was trying to insult all old people by calling McCain a rotten old fish. He was just tweaking common, populist sort of rhetoric into jabs at his opponents. People need to grow up.
No Megan, it's not at all obvious (which is not to say that it's a big deal). What is obvious is that Obama is not a very good politician, and that he collapses under pressure - and that is a very big deal.
Perhaps if he hadn't relied on shenanigans to get rid of other candidates (getting nominations invalidated, or benefitting from magically released divorce proceedings) in previous elections he might have had the experience necessary to avoid freaking out.
Daniel Finklestein in "The Times" sums it up quite well:
http://timesonline.typepad.com/comment/2008/09/here-are-a-few.html
Thank God the media isn't asking them questions about Iraq or health care or infrastructure. Those things will work themselves out. What a glorious age we live in!
Thank you, Kristian and Seth. It sounds like the only reason people are linking the statements is because of the word "lipstick"...
I really don't understand how anyone who listened to the entire anecdote, rather than selective quotes, could think he was talking about Palin. It seems like such a stretch, and the outrage rings totally false.
I'd like anyone claiming he wasn't referring to Palin to explain the crowd cheering.
Putting lipstick on a pig is a well worn phrase. It isn't an applause line. The crowd knew what Obama was saying. Anyone who watched the video knows as well.
Per Ann Althouse: "But the thing is I know that the crowd laughed -- and Obama paused to encourage the crowd to laugh -- after he said "You can put lipstick on a pig," and before he said, "but it's still a pig."
Sarah Palin's convention statement was 'The only difference between a hockey mom and a pitbull is lipstick.' Thus she is being self effacing and allowing she could be viewed a 'pitbull' if it weren't for the lipstick. Obama's reply suggests she wasn't self effacing enough: she's still a pig even though she has lipstick on. It's sly and the Democratic brain, per previous post, might not see it. It's not worth causing a civil war over; Obama is nothing to her, just a Democratic Senator running for president.
Thank God the media isn't asking them questions about Iraq
Yes, thank God. A question like, "Senator Obama, it turns out you were completely wrong about the surge, while Senator McCain was completely right. Why should be trust your judgment now over his?" could really torpedo Obama.
I object to complaining that Obama said something stupid. When you lower the bar to what is going to be pranced around as offensive THAT LOW, then its not a matter of avoiding saying anything remotely controversial - that won't help, but exactly what words will be chosen for the next criticism.
If political campaigning is Obama's one skill and achievement, then him making this comment reflects quite poorly on him, regardless of its intent.
While I'm here - can anyone show me a single person who was offended by this remark who wasn't already vehemently opposed to Obama?
Posted by Mark | September 11, 2008 12:55 PM
Well, there is Megan, who has been pretty positive on Obama.
Cheer up, Megan. The race is now close again, and the traditional media can once again have their horse race to cover.
It would be incomprehensible for Obama to have to big a lead before the election; what would the talking head blather about? Real issues? National debt? Public policy?
Don't make me laugh. You and I both know they're not capable of that, you've got to go to the blogs for real election meat.
This goes to Judgment. If Obama can't think through the consequences of simple statements, what does that say about his judgment on more complex stuff?
It's just not that hard to avoid saying stupid things. Can't anybody play this game? Just don't be stupid!
But if you insist on being stupid...well then maybe you're not as smart as you think you are, and you're certainly not smarter than me. And do I want someone dumber than me for President? Yikes!
I think we'll see this lipstick thing as a tipping point that will help Obama when we look back on it in a few weeks.
The sleaze liberal websites and much of MSM pushed about Palin in the first few days served the McCain campaign perfectly. Every day spent on that kind of nonsense was a day not spent on the economy or healthcare or foreign policy or 100 other issues where McCain loses. Even better, the rumors that were the most lurid (Her daughter's pregnant by a high-school dropout!) and least likely to be true (She's not Trig's real mom!) got the most coverage, so the McCain campaign's accusations that the press (and by their extension the Obama campaign) were smearing Palin sounded reasonable.
But the critiques of Palin relevant to her ability to govern are emerging from the dreck of the first few days -- the truth about her support of the bridge to nowhere, her ongoing ethics investigation, her flirtation with book censorship and subsequent firing of the town librarian, etc. And the McCain campaign's commercial on the lipstick controversy was too obviously an attempt to keep the news cycle going for another day or two. It's dawned on the press in the last 24 hours that this is an overt campaign strategy.
So I suspect that for the next week or two, the press narrative will boomerang back to the issues -- how the American people want the press to focus more on the issues, how the McCain campaign is trying to distract us from the real issues, how the Obama campaign may be making Kerry's mistake by ignoring the Freak Show and focusing on the issues. And maybe, just maybe, some actual coverage of the issues themselves.
Alex, it is certainly not easy to avoid saying stupid things. You do it all the time, I bet. I think Obama has done a great job so far, actually. Compare with McCain. And how about Bush?
i thought it was a brilliant move on Obama's part. he stuck a pin in the palin baloon; baited mccain into over playing his hand so he looks like the only sane person in the room. he took the narrative away that she had to be handle with kid gloves.
everyone is wringing their hand saying obama effed up. whatever. the guy's middle name is hussein for chrissake and he's within striking distance of the presidency. you don't get there by being reckless, unless of course your last name is bush.
Gobama.
Speaking of animal metphors, in markets there's a term called a 'dead cat bounce.' It's when an asset, mortally wounded as it were, has an uptick as a trading phenomenon.
Obviously, he didn't mean it that way. The outrage is ridiculous.
Well, considering that his audience certainly took it that way, and he's supposed to be such a great speaker, it's not entirely obvious that he didn't mean it that way and was trying to get away with something.
I mean, if you get an audience going "Whoop! Whoop! Yeah! Yeah!" and then back off going "Golly, I didn't mean it like that...".
OTOH, if he really didn't mean it, then setting off an audience like that and a furor like this by accident bespeaks .... worrisome inexperience? Doing something like this as a world leader could blow a treaty ... start a war?
Secondly, it's not like Obama's side is innocent of trying to manufacturer tornadoes out of teapots like this. Remember when Hillary explained that she hadn't dropped out yet citing "Bobby Kennedy was shot in June", and all the furniture they threw at her over that?
Um, McCain said the same thing, using the exact same phrase. No outrage there.
Context matters, as all skilled speakers know.
"Voodoo economics" is a term that's been used in politics for 30 years.
But if McCain's people described Obama's proposals as "Voodoo economics", you don't think you'd hear a hundred cries of "racial code", "race slur!", from the left?
I believe Senator Obama did not mean it as an insult but knew what he was doing. I believe he was trying to set a counter fire to the maelstorm that Governor Palin was causing. Everyone gets outraged and the momentum stops and in a month no one remembers much about the story, but the results are plain to see. The question is did it succeed. I am as clueless as the next guy but even I would have picked lipstick out as a reference to the lone woman in the race.
Blaine,
You're saying Obama said it knowing it would be interpreted as an insult by the crowd and by Republicans but in his own heart he was blameless because he was aware it was just a cynical campaign ploy? Wow.
Cal,
Not cynical, calculated, you do not get to be the candidate of a major party making such a blatant gaffe. The McCain campaign has been in rapid response mode and I believe the Obama campaing was looking to take advantage of it, everyone stops and demands a course of action be taken. The key is everyone stops, which was the desired result. Maybe I have read to many historical books where people like to brag about their abilities, but it seems to be right down the line.