The Obama campaign has been claiming
that there was no intent to imply anything about Palin when he mentioned lipstick and that he is amazed that anyone could draw that conclusion.
"A top Obama aide e-mailed Politico to say it was "crazy" to insinuate that Obama was talking about Palin. "That expression is older than your grandfather and has nothing to do with her," the aide said."
Well, the Politico mentioned
"Though on a day when Obama's surrogates were joking that Palin's record can't be concealed with lipstick, it was hard for those following the campaign not to hear the echo."
I think that this gets to intent. But as if that wasn't enough, Obama's audience laughed
and started chanting "No More Pitbulls, No More Pitbulls." If Obama's audience and staff see the link, Obama has a hard road to claim that it wasn't obvious to him also. Note also that the laughter starts as soon as Obama says "lipstick" even before
he got to the punch line. From the AP
"You can put lipstick on a pig," he said to an outbreak of laughter, shouts and raucous applause from his audience, clearly drawing a connection to Palin's joke. "It's still a pig. You can wrap an old fish in a piece of paper called change. It's still going to stink after eight years."
Given the crowd's reaction to Obama's comment, it is hard to see why Obama claims that it is amazing that people can think that he was talking about Palin. Why didn't Obama offer a correction when the audience reacted to the word "lipstick" if there was no connection? Possibly he wasn't listening to the audience. That is surely possible, but it is harder to square with the comments of his staff mentioned above.
One additional thought is needed here. Obama has continually found racial discrimination
where nothing was involved -- just ask Bill Clinton (unless you think that Clinton is a racist, which I don't).
UPDATE: I was listening to ABC Radio news at 3:30 PM
, and it showed amazing bias. The entire news report was how Republicans have used the "lipstick on a pig" comment, and suggested that Obama was simply using a common phrase. Common phrase, fine, but the notion that Obama didn't use this on purpose for Palin seems weak.
UPDATE 2: Dennis Prager noted on his show today that "lipstick" had been mentioned earlier in the same presentation by Obama. Why would the Obama people want the term "lipstick" raised twice in the same presentation? (Note: Prager doesn't think that Obama deliberately used "lipstick" to go after Palin, though Prager does say that Obama should have realized that was the way that it was taken as soon as the audience reacted.)
UPDATE 3: Not surprisingly, most people
now regard the media as biased.
A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 50% of voters think most reporters are trying to help Obama win versus 11% who believe they are trying to help his Republican opponent John McCain.
Labels: mediabias, Obama, Palin