Blue Mass Group

Reality-based commentary on politics.

Putting the Swift into Swift Boating

By

This is too much, Jane Swift, our esteemed half-term ex-governor, is actually on the John McCain “Truth Squad” a/k/a John McCain Swift Boat crew.

From FoxNews.com:

But McCain supporter Jane Swift, former Republican governor of Massachusetts, said the line [about putting lipstick on a pig] was clearly directed at the Alaska governor.

It was “pretty clear to the crowd that he was leveling” the insult at Palin, she said.

“It’s clear to me … that Senator Obama owes Governor Palin an apology,” Swift said, calling Obama’s comments “disgraceful.”

She said, “This is just the latest in a series of comments that many folks like me will find offensive.”

Of course, Obama has been using the lipstick on a pig reference for many months, long before Palin was picked for the GOP ticket.

Next: The Truth Squad will accuse Obama of using the lipstick refernce before Palin was picked because the devil gave him a vision of the future.

If it weren’t so serious it would sure be funny.

Please share widely!
fb-share-icon
Tweet
0

Comments

  2. PJ has a diary up that reminds us of McCain’s deep misogyny.  Just like Larry Craig championing any anti-gay legislation he can lay his hands on, McCain will champion fair treatment of women to cover his own history of abuses.  It’s the oldest trick on the book.

    • It has long been Republican practice to project their attacks — i.e., attack the Democrat on the Republican’s worst flaws. That’s why war-dodging Bush could attack Kerry, who actually served and served honorably, and why McCain, who called his wife a c*nt, can accuse Obama of sexist attacks.

      <

      p>This is sometimes referred to as attacking your opponents on their strengths, but that’s a different strategy. Their lowest, most under-handed, sleaziest trick is this one.

      <

      p>And it’s very difficult to defend against. If your child-molesting opponent accuses you of fondling five-year-olds, it sounds so hollow and self-serving if you defend yourself by saying “But, but, but, he’s the real pervert!” By the time the Republicans levy the attack, it’s too late to defend against. The only solution is to hit them first, and even then, unless the press picks it up (which they seldom do for Democratic attacks, but always do for Republican), it will still fail.

      <

      p>It’s enough to make one cynical about politics.

  3. where McCain doesn’t have to talk about his record and policies.  Just keep making stuff up and see what sticks with the media.

    • can’t you?  

      <

      p>i agree of course that mccain needs to be examined relentlessly on his policies.  but that doesn’t negate the importance of the “morals” aspect of the campaign.  not all voters respond to the policy stances of candidates.  mccain’s policies won’t matter to people who understand him to be morally bankrupt.  his record includes almost 30 years of pandering and policy reversals (e.g. no moral grounding).  that’s important.

      <

      p>if you are concerned about the content of the diaries, may i humbly suggest that you start a series of “mccain on the policy issues” diaries?  i would be as happy to contribute to those as to this one.  i’m sure others would as well.

      • I see you have one up on McCain wanting to ditch the Dept of Ed.  Excellent.  Thanks, and I look forward to many more substantive diaries from you.

      • I made a point that McCain can continue to avoid topics that he wants to stay away from, like the economy, foreign policy, eduction, etc. by playing this game.

        <

        p>Obama just said it in response just recently.

        <

        p>

  4. … that we react with so much panic to obvious inconsequentialities?  

    <

    p>

    If it weren’t so serious it would sure be funny.

    <

    p>Jane fuckin Swift?  “Lipstick on a Pig”?   Serious?   IT IS FUNNY.

    <

    p>It is, without a doubt, on of the most ridiculous fall-down-laughing moments of a thoroughly ridiculous  campaign.

    <

    p>But what does it say about us that we expect some people to fall for it? What does it say about our view of our fellow Americans that we expect lightweights like Jane Swift are going to effect ANYTHING?  And why should we care even if they DO fall for it?   They’ll get the politics they deserve.  And if there are more of them then there are of us…?  Well… That’s it, then. Democracy over… see you on the cattle cars to the gulag…

    <

    p>John Cleese can die now… the ridiculous has indeed become the sublime.

    <

    p>

    • But it is at least a little serious that dear old, nearly forgotten Jane Swift is getting ink about lipstick and the press can’t find some real issues to talk about.

      <

      p>OK, so now I will be not serious. I will be lighthearted: I would like to see who can come up with the best comparison similar to the pit bull one-liner (fill in the blanks):

      <

      p>What’s the difference between McCain/Palin and ? !

      • There’s got to be some funny way to point out the following:

        <

        p>McCain: Shot down over Vietnam.
        Bush: Drinks shots down in Texas.

        <

        p>Palin: Shoots Moose.
        Cheney: Shoots his friends.

        <

        p>No?

        • … would phrase it somewhat differently:

          <

          p>McCain: Shot down over Vietnam
          Bush:  Downs shots in Texas

          <

          p>Palin: At least my pregnant daughter is not a lesbian.
          Cheney:  At least my lesbian daughter isn’t pregnant

          <

          p>Palin: Shoots moose with friends.
          Cheney: Shoots friends.

          <

          p>Palin: Q: What’s the difference between a hockey mom and a pitbull?  A: Lipstick.
          Cheney: Q: What’s the difference between Dick Cheney and a pit bull?  A:  nothing.

          <

          p>

  5. Bill O’ and Mike Huckabee were on last night, saying this war of words and phony indignation must end.

    <

    p>I agree with one corollary – an unintended parallel like LipStickGate, or a slip of words, like ‘my Muslim faith’ must be reciprocal – so enough with tagging McCain on similar slips of the tongue, claiming it proves he’s senile, and other charming assertions.

    <

    p>Can we agree to disarm bi-laterally?

    • Everyone has a slip of the tongue now and then.  But only McCain repeatedly makes serious errors in foreign policy statements: doesn’t know that Czechoslovakia no longer exists, forgetting that Iran (that he’s Jonesin to bomb bomb bomb) lies between Iraq and Pakistan, needing his minder Lieberman to remind him that not all resistance fighters are Al Queda, not understanding that Iran and Iraq are mostly populated by people from different, unreconciled arms of Islam, etc.

      <

      p>McCain is either showing early signs of senile dementia, or is just terrifyingly ignorant.  Which is it?  So no, PP, when it comes to McCain’s inability to talk cogently about the big picture, I will not agree to shut it.

        • Laurel referenced many, many separate incidents there – it’s way more than one clip on an endless loop.  Please debate honestly if you’re going to debate at all – and see my comment below, I welcome a chance to talk about issues – of course, I will insist that we talk honestly about them, this response of yours is weak…

        • Here are videos of two separate occasions where McCain made the CZ mistake.  And what’s more, he’s made the mistake more times than that.

          The Czechoslovakia gaffe is very surprising:

        • McCain first made it in 1999 in front of the Czech Republic’s ambassador. That should be very embarrassing.
        • In 2000, Bush made fun of him over it. So you’d expect him to be extra careful.
        • This campaign he’s made the same gaffe at least three times going back to 2007 when the primary campaign began.

          • <

          p>Personally, I’ve never understood why some BMG users hold you in such high esteem.  Your resort to a personal attack on me is unbecoming.

        • Formerly you were capable of gentle mockery and generosity. When did you become so embittered, PP? Could you perhaps return to being the ideological opponent that it might be fun to converse with?

          <

          p>I miss that person.

          • capable of gentle mockery,  generosity and not embittered… chat with maryscott.

            <

            p>Now there is someone I would not miss.

            <

            p>PS I still have my account here but please continue with your efforts to stifle a differing view from yours. BTW, since you are so much smarter than me… would you term the attempt at silencing me “Moral”, “Political” or some other form of Censorship? Or is there a better term (English please, no Latin).

            • BMG is not the whole world. If your “contribution” here is not helpful, there are plenty of other places to “contribute” in that big world of ours.

              • Is there a “contribution threshold” on this site where any posters falling below it renders them “marked for deletion”? Certainly there are zealots worse than me leaning in either direction that should go before me.

            • JohnD, you write an enormous number of comments every day filling conversation after conversation with content-free, petulant crap.

              <

              p>Maryscott does not.

              <

              p>I don’t have to wade through a bizillion “KBusch said this” and “KBusch said that” from Maryscott. I don’t have to converse with Maryscott.

              <

              p>Nor has Maryscott called anyone a “fartbreath” as you have.

              <

              p>Nor has she said anyone’s ears were “full of feces,” as you have. Quite a difference in degree.

              <

              p>You write an occasional diary (or post). Maryscott writes occasional diaries. One can ignore diaries and posts. For what it’s worth, I mostly ignore Maryscott and I mostly didn’t read her when she posted on Daily Kos. I decided against reading her most recent offering here.

              <

              p>Maryscott, by the way, has some national fame. (I forget which newspaper or television station did a portrait of her.)

              <

              p>You have not achieved national fame.

    • The msot encouraging thing to come out of this pseudo-controversy over the past 24 hours is how genuinely sick of this sort of thing most reasonable people seem to be.  I just got done listening to Eagen and Braude at lunch.  They’re sick of it, the callers are sick of it, and I’m sick of it.  And now, it appears, so is everyone else.

      <

      p>Excellent.  There is hope for this country yet.

      • There’s no attack so low that Carr won’t pander to it on his “radio show” every afternoon. Eagan & Braude are mature grown-ups compared to Carr, and that’s saying something. And Severin on 96.9, who actually calls Hillary Clinton a pig and worse, will be in high dudgeon today, because he’s that much of a tool.

        <

        p>The Boston radio market is really crap these days. Where’s David Brudnoy when you need him? (And yes, I know where he is, so no need to depress me further by pointing it out.)

      • how sick everyone is of it.  Maybe it’s not really true, judging by what people want to talk about.

        <

        p>I’m ready to talk about other issues that need to get aired.  Let’s see if anyone else is.

    • I’m all for a discussion of the issues, PP – how about tax policy?  Big article about the two candidate’s plans today in Business Week – if I write a post about it, will you join in and debate honestly with me?  I’d like that…

      • Try to make it informative without too much bias.  I’d love to see a clear explanation of their tax plans, and have a good discussion on it.

        <

        p>A thread about their health insurance plans would be good too.

    • … is just too great.

      <

      p>

      so enough with tagging McCain on similar slips of the tongue, claiming it proves he’s senile, and other charming assertions.

      <

      p>You do not, it seems, take seriously the notion that he is, in fact, senile.  you seem to think it is baseless accusation made to ‘fling mud.’  But you do not seem to take it seriously. Why is that?   It is not outside the realm of possibility for a 73 year old man to be senile.  

      <

      p>In 2003, many many people took George Bush seriously on the issue of WMD. Why? Because the possibility, however slight, that he was right and Saddam DID possess WMD was of grave concern. Rogue WMD remains a grave concern and recent reports  of incipient chaos in North Korea makes me worry…   Same goes for recent Pakistani events.

      <

      p>So, the possibility of a senile person in the position of President is of grave concern.  Do you agree? That is to say: regardless of whether you think McCain is senile, do you agree that someone with dementia in that position is a real problem…?

      <

      p>

Archives