>I thought the "pig" comment was a bad move - it showed lack of judgement in choice of words but I didn't think he was actually calling her a pig.
>
>And then I found the context.....
>
>http://www.democrats.org/page/community/post/elizabethberry/Cgsq
>
>That's essentially the same comment and *does* call her a pig and it's the official party website! Also, and I can't find the reference from this computer, when Obama was introduced for that speech there was another pig reference by the politician who introduced him.

I checked the site, and I disagree. I think the site is calling the republican party's culture a pig and the hiring of Palin is the attempt to put lipstick on the pig. They're just saying that getting Palin changes nothing in the party culture.

>
>So, my conclusion now is that he intentionlly came as close as he could to calling her a pig as he could and still leave some deniability. The crowd hooted, so they knew what he was insinuating.
>
>But then McCain's camp makes the his mistake of the incident and cries foul, playing victim. He should have laughed it off and said something to the effect that his opponent must be desperate and that he and Palin could take it, no big deal. That would have left his side with the moral high ground and people still would have thought Obama was calling her a pig.
>
>Now comes the third and final mistake: Obama, flustered, starts denying he meant it and launches into swift-boating and Karl-Rovian tactics. That was a mistake because it keeps this whole issue alive and, using "swift-boat" and "Karl Rove" appeals to no one but Democratic kool-aid drinkers anyway and is not going to send your indepedent or Republican into indignant outrage.
>
>So there's my analysis and I'm sticking to it. :-)
>
>>>>>>>Let's not change the subject. You started a thread with the apparent premise that any articles about Palin that do not put her in a flattering light are smears. I responded that I think the concerns about her use of state money for herself and her family are legitimate avenues of inquiry. I truly don't understand why you insist on viewing everything through the lens of Democrats or Republicans, or liberals and conservatives, as though we are two different species.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Wow, where did you get that?
>>>>>
>>>>>Just from reading, ma'am.
>>>>
>>>>The article was written to capture the readers attention and suggests corruption where none existed. It was definite media slant. I'm surprised you didn't read that.
>>>>
>>>>Obama just experienced the same nonsense about his pig and lipstick comment. I'm sure you read that as media slant...
>>>
>>>That was the most ridiculous accusation of a slur campaign I've ever heard and I can't see how anyone could have interpreted that as referring to Palin. So if Obama had been unknown and they'd referred to him as "a dark horse" then that would have been a racial slurr?
>>
>>I absolutely guarentee you that ANY reference at ANY time to Obama as a "dark horse" would have been met with EXTREME outrage (and possibly seen as justification for urban rioting and seizing TV sets from Korean owned stores)
>>
>>The governor of NY is currently enlightening us that Palin's mention of Obama being a "community organizer" was code for "He's black." (which had previously never been mentioned)
>>
>>Do remember that Obama's running mate was excoriated during the primaries for being a cruel racist for saying Obama was "articulate".
>>
>>The lipstick remark is equally silly and there is not a doubt in my mind that Obama meant nothing by it.
>>
>>I will vote for any candidate who will outlaw political correctness !