Wednesday, September 10, 2008

Lipstick On A Pitbull

This is the self-analogy Governer Palin made last week. The entire analogy went: "what's the difference between a hockey mom and a pitbull? Lipstick" Effectively, she compared herself to an animal that is bred to fight other animals of the same breed in a pit, sometimes to the death. In addition, if the animal does not perform the the owners satisfaction, the owner will kill the dog.

Pitbull owners will defend the animals as being quite pleasant natured, and lay the blame on the owners. Truth be told, however, a 'pleasant natured' pit bull will not be bred, and will usually be killed, unless it's lucky enough to be adopted. Make no mistake about it, however, Pitbulls are bred for their temperament. An aggressive and tenacious dog can defeat a less aggressive dog, even if the less aggressive dog is bigger and stronger.

This leads me to question why she would pick such an analogy. The image of a mother, devoid of compassion, singularly devoted to the goal of killing her opponent, is not one that I particularly feel is appropriate for the second in command to this great nation of ours.

Analogies aside, her behavior so far in this campaign has confirmed that temperament.

we know that, as mayor of Wasilla, she faced a recall only months after her election, in the wake of her dismissal of town employees who had backed her opponent. The dismissals were made without reason, and it was only after she offered them their jobs back that the recall was canceled.

We know that she demanded the firing of her ex-brother in-law from the state police force. Her supporters claim it was due to conduct issues, but doesn't it seem a bit odd that a governer would take such a heavy interest in the case of one lowly state trooper, never mind the appearance of conflict of interest?

Then we have the infamous 'I turned down the bridge to nowhere' claim, Which we now know to at the very least to be a gross distortion of the truth. At the very least, as someone who allegedly was taking an interest in waste full government spending, She had no qualms in keeping the money.

Mccain followed this up with blatantly stealing the democratic agenda of change.

Now we have the latest example of hypocrisy from the palin people, the accusation of a sexist remark from obama, for calling the mccain 'change' plan 'lipstick on a pig'.

She already compared herself to a fighting dog with lipstick, as well as making public statements denigrating women in politics who hide behind sexism as defense against political attacks.

Yet, Now, she pulls the sexist card herself, even in the wake of mccain himself using EXACTLY the same rhetoric in referring to hillary clintons health care plan.

What we see is a man who claims to be independent and yet has become just another cog in the GOP attack machine, complete with the abject hypocrisy and lies they used on him in the 2000 primary season.

I think this response from the obama campaign says it well:

"The McCain campaign's attack tonight is a pathetic attempt to play the gender card about the use of a common analogy - the same analogy that Senator McCain himself used about Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton's health care plan just last year," she continued. "This phony lecture on gender sensitivity is the height of cynicism and lays bare the increasingly dishonorable campaign John McCain has chosen to run."

I'm an optimist. I see the wheels flying off the 'straight talk express' as the bus heads down a north slope oil field into a heard of caribou, then blaming the democrats for not allowing them to pave the route and exercise mass aerial culling of the caribou heard. (yes, I know the aerial hunting program is supposed to cull predators and not caribou, but the way these motherfuckers lie, I'm sure they twist it around somehow). Then I see the american public seeing the mccain/palin ticket for what it is: A former independent and respected conservative brainwashed by the neoconservative military industrial complex and his pet pitbull, bred by the neocons for only one purpose.

The question is, if she fails, will they politically euthanize her?

No comments: