Outrage over Obama’s “Lipstick on a Pig” remark says much about hard right conservatives
“No one in this world has ever lost money by underestimating the intelligence of the great masses of the plain people. Nor has anyone ever lost public office thereby.” Henry Louis Mencken
So Barack Obama's use of the "lipstick on a pig" line has caused hurt feelings among wide swaths of suddenly pro-feminism Republican right wing conservatives, chief amongst them, Sen. John McCain, a guy who openly called his wife a "cunt" after she teased the 72 year-old about his thinning hair.
To these folks, who seem to fancy themselves as Obama's own personal domestic abuse victims, I say, get over it.
After all, possibly inferring that your opponent's running mate, Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, is a Revlon-endowed swine, pales in comparison to the opponent saluting his own spouse with the wife-beater's equivalent of the N-word.
Then there is the GOP's own glowing post-convention concurrence with Palin's characterization of herself as a "pit-bull in lipstick." Now the last I heard, a pit bull is a dog. Might I dare to infer that the term used to describe a female dog, popular among rappers, has apparently caught on with the GOP?
In any event, Palin looks like neither a dog or a pig. Unless, that is, a pig looks like a beaver.
In all seriousness, given its pathetic and repulsive history regarding social matters as they impact women and minorities, is it really worth considering the “feelings” of GOP voters and right-wing conservatives?
Should we empathize with, perhaps even assuage a psychic wound they claim was delivered by Sen. Barack Obama, the "elitist Chicago pretty boy community organizer" -- a wound they contend is made even more complete by the blatant sexist overtones found in remarks like, lipstick, pigs and rotten fish.
Should we make a Clinton-esque effort to "feel" the synthetic pain claimed to be experienced by the aggrieved from the wound opened via the "Palin slight?"
Hardly. Considering the perversely vacuous machinations of logic-deprived mania that occur when hard-right conservatives undertake their version of critical thinking, how can one take seriously their artificial expressions of indignation?
Quite plainly, such concern is completely unwarranted. The underlying hatred by the American hard-right and its standard-bearer, the GOP, for certain groups of fellow Americans has reduced to nil, the cognitive components necessary for its adherents to properly interpret any statement made by their liberal "enemies."
It seems to me, in this case, with their howling indignation over an “inference” by Sen. Obama regarding Palin -- an Elaine Benis look-alike who, with each passing moment is emerging as a complete whack job -- that perhaps they “doth protest too much.”
In their eyes, does the shoe fit? Or perhaps more specifically, is the lipstick‘s shade appropriate?