Lipstick on a Lie

The McCain campaign is quickly becoming an embarrassment to honest Republicans and thinking people everywhere. Instead of elevating the discourse and talking about why Conservatism is America’s best hope for the future, which it is, they have chosen to prey on the most ignorant of our citizens.

Yesterday I saw a commercial in which Obama’s support for preventative education to protect kindergartners from child molesters and pedophiles was distorted into “sex ed for kids”. An outright lie directed at the most intellectually vulnerable of Americans. Meanwhile, a You Tube clip was edited to conveniently make it look like Obama accidentally “slipped up and revealed his Muslim faith”…when he was actually defending John McCain against the accusation that the man claimed he was a Muslim. Then this morning, another ad in which Obama used a widely-known colloquialism (lipstick on a pig) to describe McCain’s attempt to prettify the Bush years…and these sleazebags had the sack to suggest he was calling Sarah Palin a pig.

I want to win, but I DO NOT WANT TO WIN LIKE THIS.

I can’t imagine that John McCain truly approves of these messages. This kind of blatant dishonesty is not just Un-American, it is Un-Christian. Sarah Palin, if Jesus Christ is truly your Savior and you wish to live your life by his Word, make them stop. The Americans being targeted by these ads are defenseless–they’re simply not intellectually equipped to think critically and see how dishonestly their vote is being earned.

I have never in my life been so embarrassed to be a Republican. Conservatives and Christians alike, I beg of you, take a stand. We are better than this. Only months ago, we had agreed to campaign on the issues. What happened? I’m starting to think it would be worth paying higher taxes just to avoid rewarding this kind of disgusting campaign with the Presidency of the United States.

If the douchebuckets behind these ads really think they’re going to fare well when they come before the Almighty, I’d hedge your bets and pack sunscreen. May I suggest SPF 10,000?



Filed under September 2008

16 responses to “Lipstick on a Lie

  1. Dave

    Are we better than this? Maybe, but I don’t know why you are so surprised. McCain has a huge boner for the presidency, and he is willing to screw anything or anybody to get it.

  2. oh please! was there violin music playing when you wrote this? politics is (dirty) business. are you serious? “sarah palin if jesus christ is truly your saviour…make them stop.” was that a joke? geez-louise! that was sooo not funny.

  3. Carolina Anole

    Darlin’, this is not my Dad’s GOP, nor has it been since 2000 and the disgraceful way Bush allowed Rove to manhandle McCain here in SC. I’m sure there are any number of Repubs who truly, truly wish that they had nominated McCain way back when and avoided these last horrible 7+ years entirely, and not have to witness this sad and tawdry display now. Clearly Rove is back in charge, behind his supposed curtain as a Fox talking head, so its going to get even uglier and more disgraceful. I feel a tad sympathetic; Guy, you’re flippin’ around like a fish on a dock! But as long as Rove is near a Blackberry your bunch are a soul-less lot, and devoid of a moral compass.

  4. Joyce

    By Michael Graham | Thursday, September 11, 2008 | | Op-Ed

    Let’s start with the obvious and inarguable:
    Of course Sen. Barack Obama’s comment about “lipstick on a pig” was a reference to Supergirl Sarah Palin.
    You know it, I know it and the partisan crowd that literally rose to their feet and cheered when they heard it know it. And it’s nothing new.

    Democrats shot the lipstick line at Gov. Palin on their official Web site last week with a posting entitled “McCain’s Selection of Palin is Lipstick on a Pig” – accompanied by what I’m sure was intended to be a flattering photo of the Alaska outdoorswoman.

    And – coincidence or something more? – the same day Obama made his crack, a Democratic congressman introducing Joe Biden said of Sarah Palin, “There’s no way you can dress up her record, even with a lot of lipstick.”
    If there was anyone in the audience still too dense to get it – say, an employee of CNN, perhaps – Obama immediately followed up with a reference to the McCain/Palin campaign wrapping “an old fish in a piece of paper called ‘change.’ ”
    A lipstick-wearing pig and an old fish? Gee, who could he possibly be talking about?

    So please, my Obama-supporting friends, let’s stop the nonsense about how Obama’s lipstick talk was, as he put it yesterday, an “innocent comment,” or that the reaction is “phony outrage.”

    Smart people are asking why Obama would do something so dumb. He couldn’t have meant to say it, they argue, because he had to know it would exacerbate his biggest political problem – women voters abandoning the Democratic ticket.
    I agree. This wasn’t a political plot. It was a Barack Obama point of personal privilege.
    What we’re seeing is how Barack Obama performs under pressure. And so far, it isn’t pretty.
    I believe Obama knows it, which is why I believe he indulged that moment of unbecoming snarkiness on Tuesday. He did the same thing back in April when, during a speech about Hillary’s attacks, he carefully “scratched” his face with his middle finger. And, then as now, the crowd picked up on his digital communications.

    Obama is frustrated. He’s cranky. He was on his way to a coronation and now finds himself in a catfight that, so far, he’s losing.

  5. Crass

    First, you are very crass and second, read the bill itself and tell me if it’s what you want your child being taught in kindergarten.

  6. wendelljackson

    All sex education courses that discuss sexual activity or behavior shall satisfy the following criteria:
    (1) Factual information presented in course material and instruction shall be medically accurate and objective.
    (2) All course material and instruction shall be age and developmentally appropriate.

    Yeah, that sounds pretty horrible. What cretins these legislators are, forcing developmentally appropriate scientific facts on innocent children.

  7. barbara

    Black men for republicans only proves that “tokens” will never go out of style and ignorance don’t care what color you are. Stupid is as stupid does!

  8. In response to Crass:

    It appears that you have not read the bill that you linked to. The majority of it pertains to 6th graders and up, not Kindergarteners. Kindergarteners are taught “good touch/bad touch”, which is something I’m already teaching my two year old daughter. Every child should understand “good touch/bad touch”, but some parents aren’t conscientious enough to teach it. That part of the bill is an attempt at thwarting pedophiles. You’re not pro-pedophile, are you?

  9. Alaskan

    At this stage, I believe either “lipstick on a kindergartner” or “lipstick on Tanya Harding” or gimme a break “reducing the size of government” w/o a retort of: oh, you mean, reducing financial services oversite, FDA, EPA, … just how much “smaller government” do you want? What a load of cod whallap.

  10. AC

    In response to Michael Graham up top, your logic is incredibly flawed. First you didn’t address the fact that McCain used that same line last year when talking about Hilary Clinton’s Healthcare plan. This is a commonly used phrase.

    If you listen to the speech in context when Barack Obama said this, he was speaking about McCain’s policy points and basically saying no matter how you dress it up, its flawed (not that i agree, just saying that its obvious).

    Lastly, if you are as smart as your purport to be, you would see that the logical outgrowth of including Sarah Palin in that line would mean that she is the lipstick, not the pig. To say ‘he knew what he meant and so did hte crowd’ is so asinine, arbitrary and meaningless. Theres people out there that argue that when Palin criticized community organizers she made a racist comment and said that the crowd’s reaction tippified that. I disagree but its a good example of how FOOLISH it is to site a crowd cheering (commonplace at rallies) as that having to do with a specific candidate.

  11. Really?


    Depending on your belief system … God, gods, aliens, cosmic detritus, or some primordial series of random occurrences gave you two eyes and one mouth. Why not try reading more and commenting less, at least until you have some facts (maybe not all the facts, but some)?

    By observing this little suggestion, you will save us from having to read and respond to drivel and yourself the embarrassment of having written it.

    Regarding the kindergarten sex-ed issue, Byron York has a pretty good handle on it:

    Going forward, let the rule be: Get facts; pen thoughts. Don’t want to tell you how to run your blog, but come on! Strive for some small measure of balance here!

    As for the McCain advertisement, I, too, was taken aback. But, I withheld comment (and judgment) because I had very little information. I knew nothing about the topic (apparently you and I were in the same boat; however, I got out).

    After reading several pieces on the subject, including York’s, I have a better measure of the ad’s veracity. Were you to have done some research—instead of reflexively responding—you might have found the same.

    Or, is it yet another instance of your applying your instinct?

  12. lcx

    oh my gosh this website really exists, you blackmen should go and kiss rush limbaughs feet he just lovvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvves you guys…you all probably hate other black people…..we also know that your conservative dribble has done absolutely nothing for people of color this past eight years…what in the world makes you relevant?

  13. melpomene

    Oh my. I suppose i shouldn’t be surprised by the comments but this IS a blog… which means the blogger can blog about whatever he/she wants and put his/her opinion all over it. Complete with judgement even!

    Who is this guy hurting with his opinion? No one. I find it entertaining. If it was being passed off as “news” then it could be an issue.

  14. porky

    Michael Graham- You’re having a hard time parsing metaphors, aren’t you? It works like this: If I say that picking Palin is like putting lipstick on a pig, I’m much closer to calling Palin lipstick. She’s the lipstick on the pig that is McCain’s policy. See? Calling McCain’s policies an old fish wrapped up in a paper called ‘change’ isn’t calling Palin a fish. It’s calling McCain’s policies a stinking old fish. Get it?

  15. MHLib

    Wow, I thought I was a hardcore (christian) liberal but I just ran across your website. I now think I am a true conservative. It’s like you took the words right out of my mouth. I was never really able to believe what tools the mainstream republicans are. Thank you thank you thank you for calling for dignity and grace back to the republican party.

  16. Excuse me? When Barack Obama had stated that comment, HE WAS NOT TALKING ABOUT HER. He was refering to Mccain’s policies. Also, Mccain had done the same thing to Hilary Clinton months earlier. Had Mccain apologized to her? Nope!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s