Which Is The Bigger Smear?

[MossMan]

Pretending Obama Called Palin a Pig
or
Pretending Obama Supports Sex Education to Kindergartners

The sex education ad has been roundly debunked by factcheck.org and even Bill O’Reilly is left scratching his head about pig and lipstick ad.

*​

In the lipstick and pig ad, Barak Obama makes reference to a metaphor that is quite common. The English language supports enough metaphors to require a thesaurus to keep track of the them all. Obama does nothing to suggest Palin is the pig, he uses the metaphor in it’s traditional manner. Yet the McCain campaign has construed the metaphor to claim that the “Pig” in the metapohor as if Obama was referring to Palin.

For those who have English as their first language, it’s quite obvious Obama was making no connection between pigs and politicians. That meant to make the smear ad, at least some in the McCain campaign team had to do so knowing Obama had made no such claim .McCain himself in on record using this metaphor. If Obama said

*​

In the sex education ad, Obama is accused of supporting legislation that will mandate sex education for kindergartners. Obama has made it abundantly clear he only supports age-appropriate sex education for all ages. For kindergartners this would have meant knowledge about what constitutes inappropriate touching.

So for supporting legislation that might help reduce instances of sexual abuse, Obama is accused of teched sex to 5 year olds. Even a quick glance at the information surrounding the so-called support quickly reveals it for the smear it is.

 

[MossMan]

I think I have to go with the sex ed smear. One reason it is a worse smear is that it had effectively debunked before. It's kind of of sad when you have to rely on smears that are already proven untrue. The McCain camp must desperate for smears.

 

[LoraJ]

I think I have to go with the sex ed smear. One reason it is a worse smear is that it had effectively debunked before. It's kind of of sad when you have to rely on smears that are already proven untrue. The McCain camp must desperate for smears.

yup. They really think Americans are stupid, don't they?

 

[Mr Man]

Pretending Obama Called Palin a Pig
or
Pretending Obama Supports Sex Education to Kindergartners

The sex education ad has been roundly debunked by factcheck.org and even Bill O’Reilly is left scratching his head about pig and lipstick ad.

*​

In the lipstick and pig ad, Barak Obama makes reference to a metaphor that is quite common. The English language supports enough metaphors to require a thesaurus to keep track of the them all. Obama does nothing to suggest Palin is the pig, he uses the metaphor in it’s traditional manner. Yet the McCain campaign has construed the metaphor to claim that the “Pig” in the metapohor as if Obama was referring to Palin.

For those who have English as their first language, it’s quite obvious Obama was making no connection between pigs and politicians. That meant to make the smear ad, at least some in the McCain campaign team had to do so knowing Obama had made no such claim .McCain himself in on record using this metaphor. If Obama said

*​

In the sex education ad, Obama is accused of supporting legislation that will mandate sex education for kindergartners. Obama has made it abundantly clear he only supports age-appropriate sex education for all ages. For kindergartners this would have meant knowledge about what constitutes inappropriate touching.

So for supporting legislation that might help reduce instances of sexual abuse, Obama is accused of teched sex to 5 year olds. Even a quick glance at the information surrounding the so-called support quickly reveals it for the smear it is.

I don't know. But, framing the question this way is like asking, "which is a worse extremity to injure, the arm or the leg? It depends on what is important to you.

I don't know for certain exactly what Obama was signing on for with his legislation. I do know that I am interested in understanding it better. This is why I am so interested in the Annenberg papers and the Obama Campaign's obvious interest in keeping these in the dark (heard those mysterious lawyers-who noone wants to admit are real-outsource from Disney?- were involved in this one too).

As far as what is important to me personally, I know metaphors (I use them sometimes). It is very clear after watching the video of Obama's speech that everyone in that audience knew exactly what Obama was saying. The implication of his words was very clear to them. Who am I to judge them and their misunderstanding his misstatement that was obviously so sophisticated and nuanced that it flew completely over their heads?

Regards,

 

[WildernessBride]

I think I have to go with the sex ed smear. One reason it is a worse smear is that it had effectively debunked before. It's kind of of sad when you have to rely on smears that are already proven untrue. The McCain camp must desperate for smears.

You nailed it there....desperation, that's for sure. When you have nothing to run on you pull out the pig in lipstick.....if they were proud of their record we would have an election about the issues, but since that's not the case we are stuck with the McCain camp disrespecting voters by actually thinking we will fall for their "misrepresentations."

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/thefix/2008/09/mccain_manager_this_election_i.html

 

[ntsammy5]

They want to detract as much attention as they can from the real issues ----- look for lots more of this!

 

[MossMan]

They want to detract as much attention as they can from the real issues ----- look for lots more of this!

Interesting how some of Obama's supporters have chosen to cynically defend their candidate from the lies being told about him. It's almost as if they are afraid of lies.

Hey Obama fans, if your guy is so great why not let us smear him.

 

[Mr Man]

Interesting how some of Obama's supporters have chosen to cynically defend their candidate from the lies being told about him. It's almost as if they are afraid of lies.

Hey Obama fans, if your guy is so great why not let us smear him.

psssst.....I heard Obama really doesn't like Arugala.........he had a steak last night.......said he ate it reluctantly and only because John McCain had a steak too......

 

[ntsammy5]

Interesting how some of Obama's supporters have chosen to cynically defend their candidate from the lies being told about him. It's almost as if they are afraid of lies.

I'm a Republican and have been all my life and I'll vote for McCain - that doesn't mean I'm blind. Both sides are doing this.

 

[bsnyder]

Pretending Obama Called Palin a Pig
or
Pretending Obama Supports Sex Education to Kindergartners

The sex education ad has been roundly debunked by factcheck.org and even Bill O’Reilly is left scratching his head about pig and lipstick ad.

*​

In the lipstick and pig ad, Barak Obama makes reference to a metaphor that is quite common. The English language supports enough metaphors to require a thesaurus to keep track of the them all. Obama does nothing to suggest Palin is the pig, he uses the metaphor in it’s traditional manner. Yet the McCain campaign has construed the metaphor to claim that the “Pig” in the metapohor as if Obama was referring to Palin.

For those who have English as their first language, it’s quite obvious Obama was making no connection between pigs and politicians. That meant to make the smear ad, at least some in the McCain campaign team had to do so knowing Obama had made no such claim .McCain himself in on record using this metaphor. If Obama said

*​

In the sex education ad, Obama is accused of supporting legislation that will mandate sex education for kindergartners. Obama has made it abundantly clear he only supports age-appropriate sex education for all ages. For kindergartners this would have meant knowledge about what constitutes inappropriate touching.

So for supporting legislation that might help reduce instances of sexual abuse, Obama is accused of teched sex to 5 year olds. Even a quick glance at the information surrounding the so-called support quickly reveals it for the smear it is.

Have you read the actual bill?

For kindergartners this would have meant knowledge about what constitutes inappropriate touching.

Yes, it would mean knowledge about inappropriate touching. But it would also include more than that:

From the actual text of the bill - in the first main paragraph;

Each class or course in comprehensive sex
education offered in any of grades K 6 through 12 shall
include instruction on the prevention of sexually transmitted
infections, including the prevention, transmission and spread
of HIV.

The inappropriate touching stuff is much further down, in the bill. So, if that was really what the only intent of the bill was, it would have been written much differently.

So the McCain ad isn't a smear. It's the truth. I realize why Obama and his supporters are spinning so fast and furious on this, because for most voters, the idea of comprehensive sex education for kindergardners (age appropriate material or not) sounds like an extremely left wing, liberal one.

 

[Par8hed]

The inappropriate touching stuff is much further down, in the bill. So, if that was really what the only intent of the bill was, it would have been written much differently.

So the McCain ad isn't a smear. It's the truth. I realize why Obama and his supporters are spinning so fast and furious on this, because for most voters, the idea of comprehensive sex education for kindergardners (age appropriate material or not) sounds like an extremely left wing, liberal one.

Dude: Give it up already. You're either mis- or uninformed.

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/off_base_on_sex_ed.html

 

[akhenaten]

Interesting how some of Obama's supporters have chosen to cynically defend their candidate from the lies being told about him. It's almost as if they are afraid of lies.

Hey Obama fans, if your guy is so great why not let us smear him.

Interesting that you assumed ntsammy5 was an obama supporter....

 

[MossMan]

psssst.....I heard Obama really doesn't like Arugala.........he had a steak last night.......said he ate it reluctantly and only because John McCain had a steak too......

Stop driving me crazy. Obama loves Arugala and he would never eat non-organic meat. Everybody knows that.

More smear. More smear.

 

[Took]

Interesting how some of Obama's supporters have chosen to cynically defend their candidate from the lies being told about him. It's almost as if they are afraid of lies.

Hey Obama fans, if your guy is so great why not let us smear him.

Come on, MossMan. You're being over-the-top disingenuous here. No one likes lies being told about themselves or people they like. Besides, isn't all of this distracting us from real political debate over issues?

 

[Took]

Stop driving me crazy. Obama loves Arugala and he would never eat non-organic meat. Everybody knows that.

More smear. More smear.

 

[MossMan]

Have you read the actual bill?



Yes, it would mean knowledge about inappropriate touching. But it would also include more than that:

From the actual text of the bill - in the first main paragraph;



The inappropriate touching stuff is much further down, in the bill. So, if that was really what the only intent of the bill was, it would have been written much differently.

So the McCain ad isn't a smear. It's the truth. I realize why Obama and his supporters are spinning so fast and furious on this, because for most voters, the idea of comprehensive sex education for kindergardners (age appropriate material or not) sounds like an extremely left wing, liberal one.

Sorry everyone. Please don't believe factcheck on this. Believe where ever it is this poster gets their information.

Remember, if you don't agree with this poster you are under the influence of the liberal press. That's right, the same liberal press the kidnapped a lady's baby in Oregon. I pray everyday for that baby's return. Then maybe the American people will recognize the liberal press for what it really is.

 

[bsnyder]

Dude: Give it up already. You're either mis- or uninformed.

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/off_base_on_sex_ed.html

And you obviously didn't read the factcheck. It doesn't refute Mccain's ad, because it sets up a strawman argument:

Obama, contrary to the ad's insinuation, does not support explicit sex education for kindergarteners.

The ad doesn't insinuate that Obama supported "explicit" sex education. The ad states (correctly) that Obama supported legislation to teach "comprehensive sex education" to kindergarteners, which is the exact text in the bill. McCain didn't use the word explicit anywhere, nor did he insinuate it. The rest of the factcheck is just more straw man arguments - that it would make the cirriculum medically acurate, and age-appropriate, and included an opt-out clause for parents. So what? McCain's ad didn't make any claims with regard to those things. Factcheck's only reason for adding those statements was to help soften the stark truth of what Obama voted for.

 

[bsnyder]

Sorry everyone. Please don't believe factcheck on this. Believe where ever it is this poster gets their information.

Remember, if you don't agree with this poster you are under the influence of the liberal press. That's right, the same liberal press the kidnapped a lady's baby in Oregon. I pray everyday for that baby's return. Then maybe the American people will recognize the liberal press for what it really is.

I got my information from reading the bill. How about you?

 

[MossMan]

I got my information from reading the bill. How about you?

Oh my goodness, this is worse than I thought.

The liberal media is like a fungus that is seeping into all we hold precious. I think there are very few of us left. If anyone is out there listening and is able to respond, please send more evidence that the liberal press exists.

 

[MossMan]

I got my information from reading the bill. How about you?

You mean the bill that Obama followed party lines by voting on but never passed.

No, I haven't read it. But I will. Let me go out to the shed where I keep all state bills that reach a vote but don't pass. Give me the state and year again. I got to know where to start looking.