Soccer Dad

In a poke

There's a lot of commentary on Sen. Obama's "lipstick on a pig" comment. But lipstick on a pig is an idiom. I don't think that the comment was comparing either McCain or Palin to a pig.

I think that Marc Ambinder has this one correct.

I think the outrage of the McCain campaign is really misplaced.
John Podhoretz notes:

Jen, Obama's remark -- "put a lipstick on a pig, it's still a pig" -- is being treated by the McCain campaign as an attack on Sarah Palin. I'm not sure that's what's going on here. Syntactically, the remark is not about Palin; it's about John McCain. She's the lipstick. He's the pig.

Rhetorically, Barack Obama likened his rival to a pig.

I think he got the first part right; but he's overreaching with the second.

Here's the Weekly Standard:

The McCain campaign has a press conference call in a few minutes to respond to Obama's statement. I'm guessing there's a pretty strong temptation to cry sexism. Hopefully everyone remembers that Palin's RNC speech was so effective not because she was outraged but because she delivered a devastating attack on Obama with a smile on her face and a stiletto in her hand.

Gov. Palin was effective because she presented a strong image. Going and saying "He called my running mate names" does not project strength. Even if Sen. Obama's remarks had clearly compared either Palin or McCain to a pig responding directly to it wasn't the correct approach.

McCain had a much bigger (and better) fish to fry yesterday. It was the Washington Post's front page "investigation" into Gov. Palin's use of per-diem reimbursements. This would have been an excellent approach keeping with the current themes of the campaign.

"The media has been demanding that the campaign be a campaign of issues. But this morning a major American newspaper featured a major story about Gov. Palin's term as governor of Alaska. Instead of showing anything substantively wrong with her activities, it showed that she followed the law. But given that the story was headlined with words to suggest scandal, one can only conclude that this paper was looking for ethical lapses on the part of Gov. Palin, and found none.

We have a campaign going for the President of the United States, the most powerful position in the world. I'm disappointed that this paper chose not to illuminate the policy differences between me and my opponent Sen. Obama. Instead it chose to play a game of "gotcha," so much a part of the old politics.

Gov. Palin and I are for real change unfortunately a good deal of Washington is not. And it's not only politicians who seem interested in keeping the status quo."

A statement like that would have put the press further on the defensive. The public already views the media as biased and a statement like the one outlined above would have served to reinforce that perception. Explicitly making Palin into a victim was a bad idea.

Jennifer Rubin looked at Sen. Obama's complete statement and concludes:

John, I think the passage, read in its entirely, bespeaks panic and anger.

While I don't agree with her about the personalization of his opponents, if she's right that Sen. Obama is showing signs of panic, it would be better for McCain to let him melt down himself instead of changing the narrative about Gov. Palin.

Posted by SoccerDad at September 10, 2008 5:15 AM