I think this conversation is done now.

You're back? So you are capable of holding two opinions on the same subject. I guess only Obama is incapable of that.

I'm not making any attempt to continue this conversation. I only continue to point out the truth in my original case. Perhaps I should use the thread to create a non-humor post here at OTB called the 'Angry Left' to demonstrate how some continue to fly in the face of fact and reason.

I've already outlined the all evidence I'll ever need. I don't need a scientific poll as I don't need to show a fair distribution of who believes what. I only needed to demonstrate a lot of people got Obama's intent to call Palin a Pig. The Instapoll serves that purpose without being a scientific poll.

If you wish to continue, you'll know where I'll be.

So really, rodney, why should I think that continuing this conversation will ever accomplish anything?

I don't need a scientific poll. I can read his meaning, just like his audience, just like most of the right, and just like most of the left that are denying it happened.

You don't need facts, everybody who agrees with you is right, and everybody who disagrees with you is lying.

Okay, I think this conversation is done now.

by inferring she's a pig.

You said that, not me. I saw no inference in anything that Obama said.

Words have meaning
context has meaning
perception has meaning

His words, in that context, meant that what McCain and Palin were doing was dressing a pig. If you believe that the perception was otherwise, take a real, scientific poll to determine that.

Did Obama insult Palin? Yes

you said it. by inferring she's a pig.
Words have meaning
context has meaning
perception has meaning

Meaning the double meaning was foreseeable by everyone, both left and right, and yourself, and Obama is protected from being a sexist because he has a 'plausible' excuse. Sound along the lines of 'depends on what the definition if IS is.'

I still don't see what evidence you have that lets you draw the conclusion that the majority of people, left and right, would take that comment to mean "Palin is a pig".

I'll say publicly that Obama's recent attack ads are simply him throwing feces, and trying to toss a simian wrench into the election process.

Given the context of Obama, what do you suppose is being implied by the statement?

That he's gone negative in his ads and is trying to undermine the election process. You can use all the animal analogies you want, but unless you directly label Obama as that animal, it's not racism and it's not an ad hominem.

Did Obama insult Palin? Yes, he said she's dressing up an ugly policy and trying to deceive the American people, that's insulting to anybody who believes it's not true. But the insult was not labeling Palin a pig, it was labeling her a pig dresser.

Oh, you're still in this conversation? A lot has happened since that post, which should suffice to answer your question.

Not much, actually. You're still trying to duck the obvious.

Tell you what, Mike, I'm gonna make this easy on you...

I'll say publicly that Obama's recent attack ads are simply him throwing feces, and trying to toss a simian wrench into the election process.

Given the context of Obama, what do you suppose is being implied by the statement?

We basically agree on everything except whether or not the phrase as used was calling Palin herself a pig.

Meaning the double meaning was foreseeable by everyone, both left and right, and yourself, and Obama is protected from being a sexist because he has a 'plausible' excuse. Sound along the lines of 'depends on what the definition if IS is.'
Your just pretending he didn't intend it, but I will continue to point out that the emperor has no clothes.

Which is what I've been saying all along. You're coming dangerously close to seeing my point of view.

No, you've been saying all along that Obama called Palin a pig, whether intentionally or unintentionally. I'm saying it wasn't a gaffe, that is it wasn't a mistake, slip up, or misspeak, Obama intended to say exactly what he said, which just so happened to not be insulting. We basically agree on everything except whether or not the phrase as used was calling Palin herself a pig.

What part of the south did you say you were from? you've never heard someone imply a racial slur without actually saying it. You're denying something that happens all the time.

There's a huge difference between calling or even implying that Obama is a monkey, and saying that the actions of his party mimic monkey behavior. Your example would not be racist, nor would it be labeling Obama as a monkey.

Its disingenuous for Obama to claim that he couldn't have seen the implications.

Well a lot of people, myself included, don't see the implications that you seem to see, so why should I believe that Obama would? Going back to McCain's sneeze, if enough people on the left decide that it'll help their candidate if they feign outrage over it, does that mean that McCain should have seen the implications? No.

Well it obviously was not a gaffe, the intended to say exactly what he said.

Which is what I've been saying all along. You're coming dangerously close to seeing my point of view.

I still don't get how a parable about monkeys behaving like monkeys could possible be considered racist.

What part of the south did you say you were from? you've never heard someone imply a racial slur without actually saying it. You're denying something that happens all the time. Its disingenuous for Obama to claim that he couldn't have seen the implications.

Later.