<snip> > > What is so impossible about seeing that the pig in lipstick kerfuffle> is about Palin, when Obama's audience absolutely got it?
The line brings laughs every time it has been used including when McCain used it when speaking about Hillary. It is a zinger line that gets laughs just as Palin's line did, folksy wisdom, like a Mark Twain one-liner always brings laughs. You cannot detect from the laughter what the audience was thinking. Calling someone a "pig" is a stupid insult but using it as a way to illustrate the McCain "change" bullshittery was clever and was what Obama obviously meant. I can understand the rumor mongers trying to manufacture controversy out of this but more thoughtful people like Judy and yourself joining in the fray makes we really wonder, WTF? The reason > they whooped and hollered grandly was not because he slammed McCain. Psychic hotline is closed. The line got a laugh. It was meant to. That is what we know. > That intensity of response could only have happened because his little> "in joke" was about Palin. It always gets a laugh. Even FOx news has backed off this absurd premise. His sneaky insults have become an art form. As has your "reading in" hidden meanings. > > No, Hillary supporters are not crazy or hysterics. And I hope you are> not insinuating that Judy, in not so veiled code, needs to get laid. At least your are consistent. Everything has a veiled meaning that you can read. Got it. > That would be about as helpful as your cure for the ladies who have > probably been faking it. True colors showing. There are too many quacks waddling around > here. If I need help, I'll seeĀ http://tinyurl.com/6nvl5b Lot of bluff and bluster in our posts. I'm still trying to figure out if the tone is all tongue in cheek of if you are just a caustic personality like Richard. I'll keep reading and time will tell. > > > > > Again, I strongly suspect Obama knew exactly what > > > he was saying. > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" > > > <curtisdeltablues@> wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "raunchydog" <raunchydog@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > It's difficult to explain away Obama's "lipstick > > > > > on a pig" remark that he wasn't referring to Palin. > > > > > But, what follows is equally damning in Obama's > > > > > own words, "You can wrap an old fish in a piece of > > > > > paper called change, it's still gonna stink after > > > > > eight years." Women get it that Obama was referring > > > > > to a woman's lady-parts as stinky fish. Obama > > > > > just lost the election. Bets are on. > > > > > > > > Dude, you are being the sexist, disgusting, pig > > > > here. I'm guessing you haven't had much actual > > > > contact with the opposite sex if that is your > > > > immediate association. > > > > > > In the first place, raunchydog isn't a dude, > > > she's a dame. > > > > > > In the second place, you're fortunate if you've > > > never encountered the insulting association of > > > smelly old fish with a woman. Sorry to be > > > clinical, but it's a reference to menstrual blood, > > > which does smell a little fishy as it's drying. > > > > > > It's a slightly elderly association from pre-Tampax > > > days when the odor was much more of a problem for > > > menstruating women. No older woman would fail to > > > recognize that association, and older women, of > > > course, are Hillary's base, those who may be most > > > tempted to vote for McCain because of Palin. > > > > > > Again, I strongly suspect Obama knew exactly what > > > he was saying. > > > > > >
