Do pigs wear lipstick?

Posted on by
Reply

A pig wearing lipstick is stil a pig!…

The immediaete thougt that crossed my mind after reading this was; Well, what else would it be, but a pig?…  At most a painted pig, I guess. Do pigs even at all wear lipstick except from Miss Piggy?

I simply do not get, why the Republicans want to make such a big fuzz out of Barack Obama´s lipstick metaphor. Of course it could obviously be understood as an anwer to Sarah Palin´s hockey mother vs. pittbull metaphor. But so what? Wouldn´t their time be spend better by hiring a communications expert to teach Sarah Palin eloquence and thereby learn to be able to avoid, that her own words fall back on her?

Actually I find it out of place when politicians use bad metaphors like the hockey mother vs. pittbull metaphor. The electors are better off with politicians that speak their minds and do not wrap up their messages and political statements in useless puns or idle talk.

 Metaphors and other verbal decoration can be used appropriate when you want to give your words cogency or make something abstarct become visible, and thereby leave a mark in the minds of your audience.

Sarah Palin´s hockey mother vs. pittbull metaphor has gotten a lot of attention now and will be remembered for a long time. But not because it was a good metaphor, because it really wasn´t, but because of Obama´s metaphor of pigs wearing lipstick. So maybe the Republicans should thank Obama for that instead of working themselves all up about it.

Presidential Election Campaign Finance

Posted on by
Reply
The Presidential Election is of course a money game, and this time it seams like their is an overwhelming favorite when it comes to funding.
I found this widget at youcalc.com
You can get it too at Presidential Election Campaign Finance 

[clearspring_widget title=”Presidential Election Campaign Finance” wid=”48a576467c4d44bd” pid=”48ce44781d2cf94b” width=”300″ height=”295″ domain=”widgets.clearspring.com”]

The hope for a better future

Posted on by
Reply

Seven years ago an illusion of safety was brutally torn apart by the terror bombing of World Trade Center.

More than 2000 innocent people were killed, and even more suffered a loss strong enough to mark them for life.

And eveything changed that day – not only in The United States but around the world.

On the anniversary for this devastating event, the political opponents Barack Obama and John McCain chose to agree on a temporary ceasefire in the middle of their electioneering campaigns in order to unite in the national commemoration , not as a Democrat and a Republican, but as Americans.

In my opinion it is the onlyn right thing to do not to politicize such an important day and instead let it be emphazised by the memory of the innocent victims and the hope for a better world living in peace without terror and rancorous attacs.

If enemies could have met just as human beings living in the same world seven years ago, maybe there would be no need for a national commemoration on September 11th., innoncent people would not have been killed, and the world would not have been at war.

Of course this is a naive illusion, but it is my hope, that when the American people choose their furture politial leader, they wil elect a person, who can win the sympathy world-wide and thereby be a natural spokesman and pioneer for world peace by changing the image of American foreign politics from war-making to war-preventing.

What to do with Sarah Palin?

Posted on by
Reply

The Internet is a powerfull tool when it comes to distributing information to a large public world-wide and within a minimum of time.

This rapid distribution of information has in co-operation with the other mass media within a short period of time caused the Republican running mate Sarah Palin´s credibility and moral character to be called in question.

I have read, that Sarah Palin is now apparently the female, whose name is the most searched for at Google world-wide and that interest in getting to know information about her can mainly be put down to the many accusations of bad moral standards, that have sprung up as many sceletons in the closet have been revealed in the investigation of Sarah Palin´s past and personal life: her teenage daughter is pregnant, her son has been involved in drug crime, accusations of both infidelity and corruption, dishonesty regarding support to Alaska´s secession from The United States of America, etc.

 

But how shall the electors evaluate this revelation of Sarah Palin´s character? Does Sarah Palin with her apperently unstable private life simply represent human errors people can relate to and sympathize with as long as she strives to improve and be a hard-working politician? Or is her moral character so corrupted, that she is not worthy of representing an American ideal and make strong and vital decisions on behalf of the American people?

In my opinion, it seems like there is just too much of a hipocritic gap between talk and actions for Sarah Palin. But I am very curious to know, how the American elector sees her.

Do we tend to overlook the political point of views while concentrating on evaluating the moral character?

Posted on by
Reply

In a Danish newspaper it was resently claimed, that if the American presidential election was held in Denmark, Barack Obama would most likely be voted the next president, and that – among other things – as a result of the Danish media´s favouring exposure of Obama.I generally see Obama portrayed as an innovative and visionary candidate, while McCain is poetrayed the opposite way as a conservative and rooted candidate.

In Denmark our political system is founded on several different political parties divided into two main wings. But parties belonging to the same wing can easily have different political point of views and characteristic issues. The wings in Danish politics are therefore not synonymous with one person in the same way, as it is the case with the American presidential election.

In The United States, an important part of the electioneering campaign seems to be digging up dirt and smudging the canidates´ moral characters. Of course I find it important, that the people know the personal values and integrity of their candidates, and thereby can sort out hypocrits and double standards. The candidate whose moral character can go through this unhurt, has passed the ultimate test.

But winning a person´s vote is often a strange complex. I have met Danish people, who based their choice of which political party to support on their supposition of, who might be most likely to win the election. As well as I have met people who based their choice on their perception of an engaging and strong leader. But what about the political point of views, that the canidates stand for? Do we tend to overlook them in favour of concentrating on evaluating the candidate´s moral character?

The American presidential election

Posted on by
Reply

A presidential election is a democratic proces wich gives a nation the opportunity to elect their political leader who is given the power to lead the country and make crucial political decisions and arrangements on behalf of an entire nation. An election is therefore the most important collective decision, a nation can make.

The politics of every nation in the world influence each other, and so the whole world is watching closely, when a nation holds an election.

The United States of America is the world´s most powerfull nation and has a dominant and vital influence on the world peace, and therefore the world´s eyes are naturally fixed upon the American presidential election.

The American presidential election