We had a pretty good discussion on this earlier, but I’d like to repeat my original request: has anyone out there found complete video of the alleged “Alaska Pig Woman” speech, or at least a snippet that gives a good solid context–say, a minute to 30 seconds before “lipstick” and at least a minute to 30 seconds after the “fish” line, without editing? I keep searching and I’m about to give up, but I cannot believe that in the YouTube era this is so effing hard to find.
Defending the liberal tradition in history, science, and philosophy.
{ 1 trackback }
{ 33 comments }
I’ve looked for an hour and a half to maybe 2 hours throughout the day, and I can’t find squat.
I’m not big on conspiracies, but I’m beginning to wonder if it’s being held back intentionally. It’s odd.
Isn’t it though? I’ve looked many different ways myself, and it’s not frickin’ there. I was hoping someone would say, "oh, no, I just saw that over here," but so far nada.
Weird, eh?
Maybe ya’ll are looking in the wrong mailbox ?
For myself it was an intended all purpose smear:
Lipstick, pigs, dead fish, old newpapers and eight years.
It didn’t require specificity.
Other than that, what video would prove whatever point it was ya’ll was looking for ?
Uh, I explained it already. I’d just like to see the video or at least hear the audio please. If you can’t help with that, then, go play in another thread. ;-)
Some of you guys aren’t much fun anymore.
I may have to curtail this
insultcomment,primarily because Larry King is now on CNN,
with his purple shirt and purple and white striped suspenders,
with a female democrat strategerist who is gonna ‘splain,
“lipstickgate”
That is all fer now.
I be back after the ‘splainations from the female democrat strategerist.
Dean, I looked, but I couldn’t find it. I’ve seen it on TV, and I think one of the occasions was on Brit Hume’s show, where he said, "Let’s play the whole thing…" Damned if I can find it on the web though – everybody’s got the same CNN tape you had.
The Black Republican’s last blog post..An American Carol
I’m seriously thinking about spending $7 for a one month subscription to the Rush Limbaugh site, so I can listen to today’s audio, and hopefully grab it from there.  I KNOW I heard it on his show today.
But at least two principles are holding me back from that…Â
 Anybody out there already a subscriber? It’s OK, I won’t hold that against you ;)
Jams! I have been listening to Rush for a few months, I think since the end of June. I think your $7.00 would be money well spent. I have been listening to him because despite his flaws, he really cares about this country. My favorite program is Bill Bennet’s, "Morning in America" I know it is early, early in the morning but I have irregular sleep patterns and enjoy Mr. Bennett. I respect him that he is on Oz….bama’s channel, CNN. I was so obvious during the Republican Convention that Bill was odd man out.
I just watched Mrs. Todd Palin arrive in Alaska! It is so wonderful to see and hear people chanting, USA, USA,USA!!! We need that! I hope Sarah keeps getting huge crowds. She is an EXCELLENT speaker and she does not need a teleprompter. She was genuinely excited to be back home in Alaska.
People are more interested in the Dude, lil’ Piper and the genuine love that comes from the Palin family. They deeply love America and they walk it and talk it. I can only imagine what Sarah and Todd are going through sending their son to Iraq.
People were going nuts, I mean, crazy over Oz to the point where they fainted. If Oz were a principled man with integrity, he would have immediately come out and said that he did not mean his comment to be sexist. Instead, he shoots from the hip and acts lame. If he stays with this jealousy, it will hurt him a lot. He had what? 19 months of mania? Step aside, leave Mrs. Palin alone and go tear out McCains throat.
McCain’s got a temper? Sometimes I like a little temper. Lets see Ozbama in the debates. I think day by day, he is losing his followers down that yellow brick road.
Joe Biden today said that Hillary would have been a better pick than he was for Veep. Those may have been the most intelligent words Joe Biden has ever spoken, but they were politically unfortunate and will probably go down as today’s Obama/Biden gaffe of the day. McCain’s camp hit back hard saying basically that Obama’s own VP pick questions Obama’s judgment on the biggest decision Obama has made so far.
Now this is clearly a case of Biden trying to say nice things to an old friend without really thinking about the consequences of what he was saying. But it was a supremely foolish thing to say.
Tune in tomorrow for another episode of "Gaffe-omatic, the Obama/Biden Show"
CosmicConservative’s last blog post..The Gaffe-omatic express lumbers on?
Hmmm, Joe Biden said what?! Now that IS a bona fide gaffe. It amazes me that the Democrats have not figured out how the media works yet. Then again, the Obama/Hillary primary shows how the Democratic party cannot unite over even the most basic of issues.
There is a certain effect that the mob mentality has on an election. The Republicans have a very strong mob mentality. Their leaders can do no wrong. The Democratic campaign started tanking when Hillary Clinton continued to run despite the fact Obama maintained a constant lead and she never pushed ahead. It shows that they can’t put their foot down and even pick a candidate.
Biden was right, Obama’s VP pick probably cost him a lot of points.
Bill O’Reilly had a fairly lengthy version of the video on his show the other night, which made it clear that the pig was the policy of eeeeeevil Republicans like Bush and McCain, and to the extent Palin played any role in the analogy at all, she was the lipstick. I don’t know if this video is available on the web or not, but O’Reilly’s web site would be a reasonable place to look.
Xrlq’s last blog post..Another Sullivan Award
I agree that Obama’s overt purpose in making the comment was to ridicule the "change" mantra of McCain and Palin.
But I still assert that he made that statement KNOWING that it would be perceived as a direct hit on Sarah Palin.
If you think Obama is incapable of writing and speaking words that have TWO intents, you are underestimating the man.
I have said all along that Obama thought he was being clever. That’s what I mean by it. His "cover" for making the statement was to say that he was hitting McCain’s policies. But the silver knife in the velvet glove was the implication that Sarah was the pig as well.
His audience certainly got the message. And so did I.
You guys are all falling for the cover story. That’s all.
CosmicConservative’s last blog post..Pride goeth before the fall
Michael Graham is playing the full clip fairly often, if you want to listen to the radio online it’s:
http://www.wtkk.com/ and click on listen live or go to on demand for yesterday… although i can’t seem to find the full context quote atm they played a minute or so of the context many times.Here is the full speech:
http://www.tricities.com/tri/news/local/article/video_barack_obama_talks_about_differences_endorsements_and_the_issues_duri/13737/
the full context begins with about 40 min left, 2/5 of the way through.
No what this is, is an attempt to spin circumstance into context. There is no context for this accusation. However, the Biden statement was a terrible and foolish statement. I would drop this, and be all over that if I were a Republican.
I saw the clip and don’t think Obama meant to insult Palin personally. It is, truly, a tempest in a teapot.
Nevertheless, there is a certain amount of schadenfreude in seeing the democrats getting the same treatment that they have been dishing out for over 20 years. Think James Watt, Clarence Thomas, and Trent Lott. Kinda sucks doesn’t it.
There is a certain effect that the mob mentality has on an election. The Republicans have a very strong mob mentality. Their leaders can do no wrong.
Talk about the pot calling the kettle…
Oh, wait a minute! Can’t say that. That would be racist!
found the full context audio:
http://www.wtkk.com/Everyzing/wtkk-everyzing.html
go to Michele McPhee’s link, and listen to the 9/10 show at 4 minutes in.
Nevertheless, there is a certain amount of schadenfreude in seeing the democrats getting the same treatment that they have been dishing out for over 20 years. Think James Watt, Clarence Thomas, and Trent Lott. Kinda sucks doesn’t it.
Democrats would argue that the constant smear attempts that came non-stop from the Republicans during Clinton’s administration started this all off. Trent Lott sort of led the whole impeachment motion and made himself high profile for an attack. When you say things like "Strom Thurmond would have taken care of all the problems we have today, we voted for him" (Paraphrasing) you’re asking to get pounded by just about everyone.
Then again if you go further back people would say the Smear campaign against Regan fueled the Republican spin-machine into action. Regan was constantly attacked by the hard left and especially gays, although his association with Anita Bryant was a clear message as to how he felt about that community to many.
Actually Anita Bryant’s smears and her little "religious right" movement were nasty and promoted a lot of biggotry. But Her movement rose from others and so forth and so on until it becomes a cloudy mess with Aaron Burr shooting Alaxander Hamilton and goes back further still.
This treatment is universal from politician to politician. So while it’s still schadenfreude it’s more along the lines of stimulation such as watching the Jerry Springer show, or MTV’s "Jackass". It is not the justifiable or noble sentiment that you imply. This goes for politics in general.
Talk about the pot calling the kettle… Oh, wait a minute! Can’t say that. That would be racist!
Oh you assume to know me! Well let’s compare the Democratic party with the Republican party shall we? The Democratic party is quite divided on the choice of candidate, many disgruntled party members have threatened to either vote for the opposition or abstain. It is divided on the protest front as well. You have moderates, Anarchs, different stances on gay marriage, different stances on gun ownership, etc.
The Republicans are more united as a party it is that simple. Yes you have the Log Cabin Republicans and other fringe groups as well. However, despite that the number of RINOs is well under the number of DINOs. In fact it is harder to determine what a DINO is.
It is a simple fact that the Republicans as of late use the media in a much more savvy manner. You get nice little mobs of people chanting the new catch phrase of the year and a better image of unity because of that very reason. They also know how to create an effect with imagery and the proper use of said images at the proper time.
As for me, I already declared that I welcome our new overlord John McCain months ago. If John ends up being as center of right as his track record shows I will enjoy his stay in the White House. Until his RNC speech, however, I was convinced that he had gone back on his core values that made him a maverick and decided to run as a Republican stooge.
The reason why I am here to bother you so much is not so much a lack of support for McCain ( although last week I was ready to write him off as another low-life sell-out politician), but to point out the intellectual dishonesty in all of the spin surrounding his campaign. Sorry if I pissed in your cheerios, but I actually like McCain, at least if he’s the McCain he used to be.
You get nice little mobs of people chanting the new catch phrase of the year and a better image of unity because of that very reason.
Seriously, have you looked at the monoculture messages from the left?
The only reason the left is so disjointed this year is because they have two very popular candidates. If either one of them had been run over by a bus 18 months ago, the Democrats would be walking away with this race — in lockstep.
The only reasons the right is so united this year (though I think you vastly overstate the unity) are two-fold: Governor Palin appeals to the largest bloc of disenchanted on the right, minimizing what would otherwise have been a fatal split; and after spending most of the year convinced that disastrous defeat loomed, a newly energized right sees a chance to win, and doesn’t want to let disagreements risk that. Two to three months ago, the Republicans were a model of disunity, with a lot of people in the hold-your-nose camp and many unwilling even to do that. Today, I’m starting to think I may be the last no-way-I’m-voting-for-McCain holdout out there. I thought Kevin was there, but not any more.
Man I never tire of hearing people on both sides argue "We are the GOOD ones! You are the BAD ones!"
Seriously, it is debate at the kindergarten level.
But that’s where most of it stays.
Anyone who truly does not realize that both sides do more or less exactly the same things, in more or less exactly the same measure, with more or less exactly the same intent, is naive at best and a fool at worst.
What happens over time is that new strategies and tactics are introduced and then either rejected or absorbed by both sides.
If you want my opinion where this round of the personal destruction technique all started, I’d say with Robert Bork. It escalated with Clarence Thomas, and then with Bill Clinton and has reached a peak now with both sides slinging as much dirt as possible at every opportunity.
It’s sad, but to say one side or the other is “worse” is plain ignorant. Sure, mathematically one may be 1% or more “worse” than the other, but in terms of actual impact and effect, both sides have been sliming each other for years now.
CosmicConservative’s last blog post..Pride goeth before the fall
I agree with CosmicConservative completely. Anyone who thinks their own party has a lock on virtue and it’s the OTHER guys who resort to low blows and partisan tactics and smear campaigns is delusional. It’s the way it works. Read any blog with any amount of political content on any given day and there’s going to be outrage over whatever horrible offense the other guys have committed today, which justifies whatever totally fair and reasonable response our guys are going to fire back – and that "fair and reasonable response" is going to be the horrible offense that’s enraging the other side tomorrow. And so on.
Did you try C-SPAN?
Elizabeth:
Yep, I’m sure if you asked a liberal who was around and involved at the time, they would say the shameful and unprecedented attempts to vilify Robert Bork were completely justified because of something the Republicans did a week or a year before, and it was only fair to stick it back to them.
That’s exactly how this works. And it escalates and escalates until it finally exhausts itself or the American people, and then things calm down for a while, and then it starts all over again.
It’s politics, which is generally not easy to distinguish from the subtle dynamics of a nursery school recess.
CosmicConservative’s last blog post..Pride goeth before the fall
I blame Socrates. He started it! Smug bastard…
I have seen some analysis of this political divide and the acrimony that is associated with it that suggests the start of it was between John Adams and Thomas Jefferson.
Their political campaigns were nasty even by today’s standards.
They eventually patched up their differences and became lifelong friends, but during their heyday, whoah, they could both throw some nasty mud.
CosmicConservative’s last blog post..Pride goeth before the fall
Well, when they and their compatriots had recently fought and some even died for the right to self-governance, they probably took it a little more personally than we do today — even more than most rabid partisans. If you’re willing to die for your system of government, throwing a little mud seems like nothing.
And yes, our troops today promise to defend and protect the Constitution; but most still grew up in a self-governing society. They’re fervent, but not in the same way.
Dean, Rush has the audio of Obama making the "lipstick on a pig" comment, through the "fish" comment and a little past that as he works up the crowd. Basically, it starts just before the end of the video you posted. He played it at the top of the first hour on 9/10. I can get it for you so you can hear it, but it’s not post-able.
The Black Republican’s last blog post..The missing day
 And I’ve FINALLY found what is supposed to be a video of the entire speech. I’m about 15 minutes into it now, and haven’t heard it in this one yet  (it’s 70 minutes total run time L). I found excerpts at another site earlier toady, about 45 minutes worth.  I listened to those damn things twice before I figured out they didn’t include the clip.  ARGHH!!! I’m getting Obama overload….. Anyway, if any one wants to listen to the whole thing, here’s the link. http://www.wdbj7.com/Global/story.asp?s=8976499#
It’s in there!!!! The line comes up at 31 minutes into the video at the link above.   The speech itself ends at 35 minutes in, and it appears as if the rest is Q&A.Â
I have no idea if I can grab and edit something like that, but I’ll play around with it a bit tonight.
Crap.  Now I see that my link doesn’t take you directly there.Â
Scroll down the left hand side to the “Video Galleryâ€, click page 2, and pull up the 69:35 video.Â
Sorry, but my HTML skills are lacking when it comes to stuff like this
Thank you very much for the links guys!!! (And yes, I tired C-Span.)
By the way, nit to pick with JRogge: Trent Lott didn’t lead the Clinton Impeachment effort. Whatever else you might dislike about the man (I can name a few of my own), it’s not fair to tag him with that. In fact, pro-Impeachment forces really reamed Lott because he was very reluctant to have much to do with it, and he was quoted by political sources at the time as saying, privately, to the leader of the House Impeachment effort that he regretted they’d bought "this shit" to the Senate.
That was mostly a House effort all the way. You have to go after Henry Hyde & co. on that one.
And for the record, I’ve always liked Congressman Hyde, and don’t actually blame him for doing what he thought was right. I’m just correcting the record; I actually think the whole thing went down pretty much the right way once Ken Starr uncovered the tawdry business; it was right to impeach the President, and it was right to leave him in office. Which makes me popular with neither side, but it’s what I’ve always thought. (I also think Ken Starr shouldn’t have been appointed in the first place, and shouldn’t have been given the go-ahead to snoop into the President’s sex life, but that’ll get us way too far afield.)
My point is, if you want to savage someone for the Clinton impeachment, Lott is not the man to go after. He actually tried to avoid it, and was also instrumental in basically calling a private, closed session of the Senate to discuss the whole thing out of the public eye, which gave the Republicans and Democrats in the Senate both the ability to speak candidly and vote the way they really wanted to–with a hung jury that everyone knew would not lead to the President being thrown out of office.
My point is, if you want to savage someone for the Clinton impeachment, Lott is not the man to go after.
Nah, I wasn’t really savaging the guy for the impeachment effort. If anything it’s the Thurmond comment that makes me dislike the guy more than anything. The impeachment effort was conducted on many levels by many people. I am aware of that. My point about Lott was he was heavily involved in it, so involved that I was under the impression he led it, and his later comments opened himself up to a brutal attack. He was the easiest to go after.
Gingrich was another high profile guy and the left still pounced on the chance to rub in the fact that there was infidelity on his behalf during this whole proceeding and that didn’t come out for many years.
Clinton purjured and while the whole thing shouldn’t really have become an issue in the first place he should have been impeached, and should have been allowed to keep office. The whole thing went down sort-of like it should have. However, do not discount Lott’s involvement, it is one of the main reasons that the left decided to make him a punching bag when they were able.
I actually wasn’t really trashing anyone, but making the point that you can’t just go as far back as the left’s attacks against Trent Lott to justify the spin machine we have right now but this goes way, way back and is in effect part of politics.
Comments on this entry are closed.