• Hello, this board in now turned off and no new posting.
    Please REGISTER at Anabolic Steroid Forums, and become a member of our NEW community!
  • Check Out IronMag Labs® KSM-66 Max - Recovery and Anabolic Growth Complex

Barack Obama takes heat for 'lipstick on a pig' remark about McCain

Do you think Barack Obama's choice of the phrase "lipstick on a pig" was...

  • a shot at Palin?

    Votes: 5 25.0%
  • a gaffe? Not Giraffe stupid. That means a mistake

    Votes: 1 5.0%
  • no big deal?

    Votes: 2 10.0%
  • Ghetto code for I'd hit it!

    Votes: 2 10.0%
  • Who freaking cares

    Votes: 2 10.0%
  • Doublebase is gay.

    Votes: 8 40.0%

  • Total voters
    20
Muscle Gelz Transdermals
IronMag Labs Prohormones
all Obama needs to say is McCain = More of the same. :nerd:

I disagree... he's been saying that for a long time: it's become pretty much his entire campaign. It's wearing off, and people aren't buying it.

First it was Iraq is a failure (we've pretty much won in Iraq), then it was "change" which from the VP picks is now pretty even. He desperately needs new material. Watching him lately is embarassing.. he's flailing, and rightfully so.

He likes to point out that McCain votes with Bush 90% of the time, while ignoring that he votes with his party 97% of the time. McCain earned his "maverick" nickname.. Obama has only rhetoric: he's never gone against his party.

If the Democrats had any clue, they would have nominated Hillary at the top of the ticket (Obama at the bottom) & had the white house locked up for 16 years. If Obama loses now, he'll never recover or get another shot
 
Really, explain how.

First it was Iraq is a failure (we've pretty much won in Iraq),


Many Americans Say History Will Judge Iraq War a “Failure”PRINCETON, NJ -- Five years after the United States launched major air strikes on Iraq to remove Saddam Hussein from power, 42% of Americans believe history will judge the conflict a success, while 54% predict it will be remembered as a failure.

20080320iraq1.gif



This generally negative indictment of the Iraq war is similar to the view 59% of Americans now hold that sending U.S. troops to Iraq in theplace was "a mistake." Only 42% of Americans considered sending troops to be a mistake shortly after the first anniversary of the invasion that began on March 19, 2003, but by 2005, the figure was regularly 50% or more, and it has approached 60% for about the past year.

20080320iraq2.gif



Public opposition to the Iraq war does not appear to be based on perceptions that the Iraqi people have suffered from the conflict. As troubled as Iraq is today by sectarian violence and damage to the nation's infrastructure from the war, two-thirds of Americans (67%) believe Iraq will be better off in the long run than it was before the U.S. and British invasion.


20080320iraq3.gif


Rather, five years after President Bush directed the U.S. military to launch major air strikes on Iraq to drive Saddam Hussein out of power, a majority of Americans believe he overstated the dangers of that regime. More specifically, 53% agree with the statement that "the Bush administration deliberately misled the American public about whether Iraq had weapons of mass destruction," while 42% disagree.

A majority of Americans came to this damning conclusion about Bush in 2005, and have since maintained it.

20080320iraq4.gif

Aside from whether Americans believe the administration lied about the threat Iraq posed, many Americans simply believe the threat didn't exist. More than half of those who consider the war a mistake (representing 32% of Americans) say they hold that view because they believe the United States lacked sufficient justification to invade Iraq in the first place. Significantly fewer (18% of Americans) cite mishandling of the war effort as the main reason they consider it to have been a mistake. Another 8% say both reasons are equally important to their criticism of the invasion.

Implications

In a special one-night reaction poll conducted March 20, 2003, Gallup found 76% of Americans saying they approved of the United States' decision to go to war with Iraq, including 60% who strongly approved. Only 8% predicted the conflict would last more than a year, and only 11% thought more than 1,000 troops would be killed. A majority of Americans at that time said that simply removing Saddam Hussein from power -- even if he escaped capture -- would qualify as "success."

Five years and roughly 4,000 U.S. deaths later, Americans got more than they bargained for, and it shows in diminished support for the war.

Survey Methods

Results are based on telephone interviews with 2,021 national adults, aged 18 and older, conducted Feb. 21-24, 2008. For results based on the total sample of national adults, one can say with 95% confidence that the maximum margin of sampling error is ??±3 percentage points.

Interviews are conducted with respondents on land-line telephones (for respondents with a land-line telephone) and cellular phones (for respondents who are cell-phone only).

In addition to sampling error, question wording and practical difficulties in conducting surveys can introduce error or bias into the findings of public opinion polls.
 
September 10, 2008

Americans are fairly evenly divided as to how history will judge the U.S. mission in Iraq. The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey found that 37% now believe it will be considered a success in the long-term while 41% expect it will be seen as a failure. Twenty percent (20%) are not sure (demographic crosstabs are available for Premium Members).

These figures reflect a stunning turnaround over the past year or so. During the summer of 2007, only 27% believed that history would deem the Iraq mission a success while 56% held the opposite view.

Not surprisingly, most Republicans now believe that Iraq will be seen as a success while most Democrats disagree. Voters not affiliated with either party offer a mixed assessment.

Forty-nine percent (49%) of all voters now expect things to get better in Iraq over the coming six months, the highest level of optimism ever recorded. Just 20% believe the situation will get worse in Iraq. Republicans overwhelmingly expect things to get better as do a solid plurality of unaffiliated voters. Among Democrats, 29% say conditions in Iraq will get better while 32% say they will get worse.

Overall, optimism about the War on Terror remains high—54% say the U.S. and its allies are winning. Just 20% believe the terrorists are winning.

President George W. Bush receives little credit for the perceived improvements in Iraq, just 31% say he is doing a good or an excellent job handling that situation. Forty-eight percent (48%) say he is doing a poor job. Overall, the President’s Job Approval ratings remain just slightly above the lowest levels ever recorded.

Forty-two percent (42%) say the U.S. is safer today than it was before the 9/11 terrorist attacks. Thirty-eight percent (38%) disagree and say it is not.
 
I'm not convinced McCain is "More of the Same". Unless you are drawing that conclusion based solely on his party affiliation, his gender, his race, or all-of-the-above.

McCain has been one of the most outspoken Republicans who has been critical of Bush. To state or even imply that he's going to march in lockstep with the "Old Republican Guard" is a misrepresentation of demonstrated fact.

Given the fact that he has nominated a WOMAN (and a damn good one at that) to be his running mate - another unprecedented act in the Republican party, he continues to demonstrate his abillity to think outside the box.

He's hardly "Rank and File". He's certainly earned the title "The Maverick".
 
I would like to hear or read this from place that's neutral.

The whole place is plastered with VOTE FOR McCain.

Well I don't know what to tell you. I don't see any 'Vote for McCain' ads.. if there are, they are paid for by McCain anyway. Rasmussen has McCain tied with Obama, whereas Gallup has McCain up by 5, 10 among likely voters. If Ras had an agenda, I'd think now would be the time to exploit it.

Regardless, IMO any outfit could get away with bending the truth but this drastic of a change in public opinion wouldn't fly if it wasn't legit.
 
I was just want to know if it's true and where did you get this info from.

McCain is all over the place there.
20aw937.jpg

23vgpu.jpg

28w2l3r.jpg



Is this part of the Fox network?
 
If I owned an unbiased news company wouldn't it be wrong to put Ads from just one party?
No?
 
W Rasmussen has McCain tied with Obama, whereas Gallup has McCain up by 5, 10 among likely voters. If Ras had an agenda, I'd think now would be the time to exploit it.
They just updated it, just like I needed to do earlier with the Gallup poll I posted. :D
 
If I owned an unbiased news company wouldn't it be wrong to put Ads from just one party?
No?

McCain purchased those ads. I can guarantee if Obama wanted ads on Rasmussen, he would get them.
 
The real gaffe people should be talking about is Biden saying if Palin really cared about special needs children, then she'd support stem-cell research.

Now that was a terrible thing to say.

but do you disagree??



didnt think so..
 
If I owned an unbiased news company wouldn't it be wrong to put Ads from just one party?
No?
Not if the other side refuses to pay the advertising/sponsorship fees. Free market and all.

Of course, I'm sure demographics and target audiences have a lot to do with deciding who's add gets precedence. For example, I really doubt you'd see James Dobson put an ad for the porn industry on his Focus on the Family website - no matter how much cash Seymour butts offered to pay.

The other side is, the Dems will look at a predominately conservative site and decide it's probably better to spend their millions in a market where viewers are more likely to click the advertisement. Can't say I blame them.
 
but do you disagree??



didnt think so..

I absolutely disagree. He has the balls to question whether she really cares about her child by suggesting that to do so she must be willing to destroy a fetus/abandon her belief system?

You may disagree with her stance on stem cell research, but that's a horribly insensitive accusation to make. Like her, I would do anything for my child, but not at that cost.

She walks the walk... she should be applauded, not questioned whether she cares about her child.
 
but do you disagree??



didnt think so..
:wtf:

Do you have any idea where stem cells come from? Who you propose pays for it?

who are you to presume anything about anyone who doesn't agree with using taxpayer dollars to fund the wholesale slaughter of unborn children for the sake of harvesting stem cells for the "betterment of mankind".

Of course... advocates of Stem Cell research will immediately condemn anyone who opposes thier position regardless of the ethical reasons that underscore the reasons for objection.
 
Of course, the stupid internets are moving slower than usual today so by the time I get my response out, BusyLivin has already answered it.

Well done.

Imma go get me some dinner :)
 
Obama Talks Lipstick and McCain

Obama Talks Lipstick and McCain | The Trail | washingtonpost.com
Updated 11:27 p.m.
By Peter Slevin
NORFOLK, Va. -- Sen. Barack Obama branded the McCain campaign's assault on his "lipstick on a pig" comments as a "phony and foolish" diversion that diminishes political debate and hurts American voters.

"Enough," Obama declared. "I don't care what they say about me. But I love this country too much to let them take over another election with lies and phony outrage and Swift Boat politics. Enough is enough."

"We've got an energy crisis," Obama said at a campaign event where he had planned to focus entirely on education policy. "We have an education system that is not working for too many of our children and making us less competitive. We have an economy that is creating hardship for families all across America. We've got two wars going on, veterans coming home not being cared for -- and this is what they want to talk about.

"You know who ends up losing at the end of the day? It's not the Democratic candidate. It's not the Republican candidate. It's you, the American people. Because then we go another year, or another four years or another eight years without addressing the issues that matter to you."

Obama made the lipstick comment Tuesday night in Lebanon, Va., while dismissing Republican rival Sen. John McCain's claim to be an agent of change in Washington. Listing a host of issues on which he said McCain has the same position as President Bush, Obama said, "That's not change."

"That's just calling something that's the same thing something different," Obama continued. "You can put lipstick on a pig. It's still a pig. You can wrap an old fish in a piece of paper and call it change. It's still going to stink, after eight years.

"We've had enough of the same old thing."

The McCain campaign immediately saw an opening to attack. Surrogates said Obama was targeting Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, who had likened herself to a pit bull with lipstick at last week's Republican National Convention in her speech accepting the vice presidential nomination.

Within minutes, Republican operatives arranged for former Massachusetts governor Jane Swift to talk with reporters by conference call. She called Obama's comments "disgusting" and contended that Obama had called Palin a pig.

"As far as I know," Swift said, when asked by a reporter how she could be so sure, "she's the only one of the presidential candidates or vice presidential candidates who wears lipstick."

By dawn, the McCain campaign had issued a video press release, quickly picked up by television, calling the remark a "smear."

The McCain campaign has been saying that this year's campaign will be decided by the candidates' personalities and biographies, and less by their positions on the issues.

In the Washington Post/ABC News poll released this week, 48 percent of respondents said the candidates' positions on issues are their main concern, compared with 37 percent who said they place greater weight on personal qualities such as experience and leadership.

Among issue voters, Obama is leading McCain 56 to 37 percent.

Among so-called personal quality voters, McCain is ahead 56 to 39 percent.

In the past 24 hours, Obama has held substantive events in the battleground states of Ohio and Virginia to discuss education policy and a press conference to set out his thoughts about Iraq and Afghanistan. Neither got the nearly attention the McCain camp received when it made an issue of the lipstick and the pig.

Obama criticized the media's handling of the McCain camp's allegation.

"What their campaign has done this morning," Obama said, "is the same game that has made people sick and tired of politics in this country. They seize on an innocent remark, try to take it out of context, throw up an outrageous ad, because they know that it's catnip for the media."

Obama told his audience here about his remark and the McCain campaign's response. People laughed.

"See, it would be funny," Obama replied, "except of course the news media all decided that was the lead story yesterday."

A questioner at Norfolk's Granby High School asked Obama how he will combat the McCain campaign's attacks.

"Our job is to just drum home, day after day, the facts. I still have faith that the truth will out in the end," Obama said. "We are going to hammer away at the fact that the stakes in this election are too high."

Asking the assembled press corps to take notice, he said the McCain campaign is using the media all too well.

"The other side, they're not good at governing, but they're good at running campaigns. They're very good at understanding what piques the media's interest," Obama said. "This whole thing about lipstick, nobody actually believes that these folks are offended.

"Everybody knows it's cynical. Everybody knows it's insincere," Obama said. "The media knows it."

While Obama was still speaking, McCain spokesman Brian Rogers fired back.

"Barack Obama can't campaign with schoolyard insults," Rogers wrote in an e-mail to reporters, "and then try to claim outrage at the tone of the campaign."

Washington Post polling director Jon Cohen contributed to this report from Washington.
 
I listened to it and I really don't think he aimed that remark at Palin.
 
I'm still hangin' my hat on it being slang for "I'd hit it" :grin:
 
first beer is on me.

You can pay for the strippers.

I am in for you paying for the first beer, but I can't tip your Canadian strippers with my American dollars. Wouldn't that be the equivalent to throwing quarters at them now?
 
I absolutely disagree. He has the balls to question whether she really cares about her child by suggesting that to do so she must be willing to destroy a fetus/abandon her belief system?

You may disagree with her stance on stem cell research, but that's a horribly insensitive accusation to make. Like her, I would do anything for my child, but not at that cost.

She walks the walk... she should be applauded, not questioned whether she cares about her child.
CHILL.. i was simply pointing out that you had not really taken a position, but made a rather bold statement.. Not that i agree completely with stem cell research, but at the end of the day, I am behind it. Yes, I do recognize that Biden's comment is quite insensitive, but do you not understand what he is getting at?(if you're calling me insensitive then you can simply kiss my ass ;) )

I do not question what or who she cares about, but let us put this in a different situation (totally hypothetical and off the wall, but think about it) if your child was in danger, and a stranger's child was in danger, and only one could survive, and the parents of the unknown child were willing to let their child go to save the life of your child, would you rather sacrafice your own child???? Its just a thing to think about, i dont want an answer, because its too difficult to imagine, but really, just think of the good that could come from further stem cell research.. IDK its just my opinion that im spewing anyway..

You didn't let him answer.
of course i didnt let him answer, it was a rhetorical question
Leave the kids out of this I say.
i agree, the children, wives (or husbands lol) should be left out of the picture.. but it is politics, not business, laws and rules don't always apply here
:wtf:

Do you have any idea where stem cells come from? Who you propose pays for it?

who are you to presume anything about anyone who doesn't agree with using taxpayer dollars to fund the wholesale slaughter of unborn children for the sake of harvesting stem cells for the "betterment of mankind".

Of course... advocates of Stem Cell research will immediately condemn anyone who opposes thier position regardless of the ethical reasons that underscore the reasons for objection.

ugh.. yes i am fully aware of where stem cells come from, trust me, i am more intelligent than you presume. as for who to pay.. well, if not the tax payers, there are more than enough private funds out there to help this along, however, the issue will then become when something profound is discovered, then it will be marketed like a car or a new cell phone, instead of a public health issue/solution..
I presume nothing about how people feel about the distribution of tax dollars(when the fuck did i presume something about anyone?!?! it was a rhetorical question, jeez), i personally feel that there are millions and millions every year that essentially go to waste, but that is my opinion. the term "wholesale slaughter of unborn children " is really off key and fucked, but i guess thats your opinion..
also, i do not know what advocates you're speaking of, but me personally, and quite a few people will listen to your argument and ethics speech and all the other bs you can get mad and stomp your feet about, and simply rebut, and reply with our facts and opinions, as you just did. you have your opinions and i have mine.

from the looks of things you look at abortion as unethical, however, I personally feel that someone who is an unfit parent and beats, starves and/or sexually abuses their own children is acting beyond any code or standard of ethics and decency. I am not saying there are kids that would be better off dead, but ahh fuck it i dont know i agree with abortion and stem cell research 100%. It is how i feel and that is that, we can go back and forth until we are blue in the face (or fingers since we're typing) but what good does that do anyone? If i offended you with my little jab at palin (ok and maybe busylivin as well) I'm sorry, but honestly, do you know anyone who has had an abortion? Do you personally know anyone who could possibly benefit from stem cell research? (feel free to answer or ignore those 2)

Polls say differently.....DB is still gay.


lol.. looks like obama's pig comment was a nice way of saying DB is gay.. hmm
 
I am in for you paying for the first beer, but I can't tip your Canadian strippers with my American dollars. Wouldn't that be the equivalent to throwing quarters at them now?

it would be funnier if you actually brought a roll of quarters and threw them one by one at the girls... ok maybe not really but think about strippers dancing on stage trying to duck quarters.. lol im an immature fuck sometimes, i know
 
Back
Top