All About McCain

[Tom]

If they want the pit bull moniker, they can have it.

LSPE and I were out yesterday morning and saw a pit bull nearly kill another dog. We walked into a little cheese store and there were some dogs with their owners milling around outside. After being inside for a few minutes, one of the dogs outside, a pit bull, attacked one of the other (smaller) dogs there, latching its jaws onto the dog's face and NOT letting go. It took several minutes of several people struggling with the two dogs (the smaller dog yelping in pain and terror the whole time) before someone was able to pry the pit bull's jaws open and free the other dog. LSPE and I were seriously afraid that the smaller dog was going to have it's face ripped off, or worse. Luckily, the only damage I saw after they were separated were some puncture wounds on it's snout, but we were literally shaking for a long time afterward.

I hadn't thought of Sarah Palin calling herself a pit bull until I logged in to this thread this morning, and it was jarring. Now it sounds to me like Sarah Palin is calling herself someone who viciously attacks the weak and helpless. Someone who will explode into violence with little or no provocation. And someone who is psychotic and needs to be put down. I know she didn't mean any of these things, and I don't think them of her, but wow, that line took on a whole new meaning for me this morning.

[scaeagles]

I'm not thinking her campaign was quite meaning it in that way.

[Cadaverous Pallor]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

I'm not thinking her campaign was quite meaning it in that way.

Hmm, I wonder how she defines "pit bull"...

[LSPoorEeyorick]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

I'm not thinking her campaign was quite meaning it in that way.

Neither does he.

Originally Posted by Tom

I know she didn't mean any of these things, and I don't think them of her, but wow, that line took on a whole new meaning for me this morning.

But, yeah, when considering a pit bull, what other definition is there?

[flippyshark]

I assume that Palin's pit bull comparison is meant to tell the world "if you're one of the bad guys, don't mess with me, I'll kick your ass, even though I am pretty and nice." There is a tendency that I seem to notice coming more from conservative figures (though I am sure this happens both ways round) to couch things in "good guy white hat vs. bad guy black hat" terms. For moderately wimpo/leftish types like me, this sort of rhetoric makes the speaker sound a) guilty of oversimplification and b) potentially dangerous.

Most of my family are conservative, and they are wonderful, compassionate, caring people to whom I owe my life. But I really don't get why they are so fond of political "don't mess with me, shoot the wounded, you bad guys better run" talk. Mostly just a matter of style, I guess. (i am often kidded by them for being a Mr. Softee.)

[Ghoulish Delight]

Originally Posted by flippyshark

Most of my family are conservative, and they are wonderful, compassionate, caring people to whom I owe my life. But I really don't get why they are so fond of political "don't mess with me, shoot the wounded, you bad guys better run" talk. Mostly just a matter of style, I guess. (i am often kidded by them for being a Mr. Softee.)

I recently had an interesting conversation with my father in law. The subject of Bill O'Reilly's "We'll do it live!" rant came up. He said that what it showed is that he's an honest man, and that eventually everyone has that kind of blow up at work sometime in their career. I said that no, I'm pretty I can say with a high degree of confidence that I will never in my entire professional life act like that. His response? "Well, any great man will."

Some people think that the only way to go through life is to attack your opponents viciously and decisively. Anything else is weakness, timidness, and dishonesty. It saddens me to think that someone would look at that video and think it's something to admire. It saddens me to think that someone would look at a VP candidate compare herself to a viscious animal and admire her.

[Not Afraid]

From my dog-knowledge perspective, I interpret the definition and meaning of her pitt bull description as someone who latches on to things and doesn't let go.

From my own perspective, I don't find this an admirable quality at all. But, I subscribe to the philosophy that it's better to bend a bit then to break. While I can be tenacious about things at time, I don't believe in the blanket statement that it is better to stand for something than to fall. Life is about compromises most of the time. That and one can only spend so much time imposing one's own ideals on others.

[scaeagles]

My interpretation is that she is not someone to be messed with.

I find it amusing that such a reference would be analyzed to find some deeper meaning. As if it really matters?

[alphabassettgrrl]

Originally Posted by Ghoulish Delight

"Well, any great man will."

Some people think that the only way to go through life is to attack your opponents viciously and decisively. Anything else is weakness, timidness, and dishonesty. It saddens me to think that someone would look at that video and think it's something to admire.

Originally Posted by Not Afraid

While I can be tenacious about things at time, I don't believe in the blanket statement that it is better to stand for something than to fall. Life is about compromises most of the time. That and one can only spend so much time imposing one's own ideals on others.

I agree completely. Pres Bush is also one to attack, and to never back down (even when you're wrong) and that leaves no ground for changing information. When you learn new information, and that changes your decision, but your personal worldview says that changing your decisions is a weakness, we get the current administration, who will never back down even when it becomes clear they are wrong. "I decided, and I'm always right, so anybody else is wrong". I'm not ok with this.

I don't think changing your views and changing your mind to suit new information is a weakness. Changing your views due to polling is quite likely a bad thing, but when the information says your initial analysis is wrong, please feel free to change it.

Originally Posted by scaeagles

I find it amusing that such a reference would be analyzed to find some deeper meaning. As if it really matters?

But that's the name of the game with politics! Politicians throw out veiled statements, and everybody interprets (and misinterprets) at will. Especially in our sound-bite culture, one has to say many things with few words.

I prefer a non-sound-bite world, where I can express myself at will.

[scaeagles]

Originally Posted by alphabassettgrrl

But that's the name of the game with politics! Politicians throw out veiled statements, and everybody interprets (and misinterprets) at will. Especially in our sound-bite culture, one has to say many things with few words.

I prefer a non-sound-bite world, where I can express myself at will.

Oh, certainly. I don't pretend that my side of the aisle doesn't play politics, too, I just think this is particularly funny....I don't know if this is being played up in the media anywhere, but I could just see Chris Matthews playing this bite repeatedly with various left leaning analysts talking about her deep psychological darkness and desire to hurt the weak as demonstrated by this comment.