--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" > <curtisdeltablues@> wrote: > > > > > Again, I strongly suspect Obama knew exactly what > > > he was saying. > > > > The metaphor he used has an obvious meaning. To try to > > connect this with a disgusting slur on women is such a > > stretch that I am amazed you could believe it. I can > > understand the right wing using it as a cynical tactic, > > but you surprise me here. As I said in my other post, > > there are plenty of things to go after Obama for. But > > this kind of connection seems completely crazy to me. > > I'm not as sure about the fish reference as I am > about the lipstick one, but I really wouldn't put > it past him. > > Both metaphors have "an obvious meaning." That isn't > the issue. The issue is whether he picked metaphors > with obvious meanings to disguise less-obvious nasty > swipes at Palin in order to give himself plausible > deniability. And as I said, these are far from the > only two instances from him of this sort of thing; it > appears to be a habit. > > It's symptomatic of a broader contempt for women, > especially working-class women, which he's shown > in his refusal to reach out to Clinton's > supporters, dismissing them by saying they'll get > over it and vote for him because there's nowhere > else for them to go. And if they don't, that's OK > because he doesn't need their votes. >
How many of CLinton's supporters are working class women? Lawson