Quinn & Rose's Rose, whose co-host referred to NOW as the "National Organization for Whores," called Obama a "sexist pig"
SUMMARY: On the Quinn & Rose radio show, co-host Rose Tennent claimed that Sen. Barack Obama's remark regarding Sen. John McCain's policies, "[Y]ou can put lipstick on a pig; it's still a pig," was directed at Gov. Sarah Palin. After saying she was "offended" and "appalled" by Obama's remark, Tennent stated, "You know what, you're a pig, you're a chauvinist pig is what you are, Barack." On previous shows, Tennent's co-host Jim Quinn introduced a segment about Sen. Hillary Clinton by playing the song "The Bitch Is Back" and referred to the National Organization for Women as the "National Organization for Whores."
On the September 10 broadcast of The War Room with Quinn & Rose, co-host Rose Tennent aired Sen. Barack Obama's remark regarding Sen. John McCain's policies, "[Y]ou can put lipstick on a pig; it's still a pig," and claimed it was directed at Gov. Sarah Palin, stating: "I was so offended by that. I was so appalled by that. No, I know they're talking about the policy. But, let me tell you, that was deliberate. And -- because it was, you know, a reference to what she said about the pitbull and the lipstick." Later in the broadcast, after again airing a clip of Obama's remarks, Tennent said, referring to Obama: "You know what, you're a pig, you're a chauvinist pig is what you are, Barack. OK, you're a sexist pig. You want to talk about pigs? You're a sexist pig. I can't believe it. You know, the sexism, the ageism, is there no end to the -isms with the Democrats?"
As Media Matters for America has previously noted, on September 3, Tennent's co-host Jim Quinn referred to the National Organization for Women as the "National Organization for Whores." On the September 5 broadcast of his show, Quinn said of his previous remarks: "There is a reason for that. The reason is that's just what they are. They're political whores. They are whores for liberalism in general." Additionally, Media Matters documented that Quinn introduced an August 27 segment about Sen. Hillary Clinton by playing the song, "The Bitch Is Back." In response, Quinn asserted, also on his September 5 broadcast, "Apparently this intern that they've [Media Matters] got listening to our show every day, Greg Johnson, just started listening because we've been using that theme song for, oh, upwards of 13 years."
From the September 10 broadcast of Clear Channel's The War Room With Quinn & Rose:
TENNENT: Can you play that sound bite again of Barack Obama, please?
QUINN: How about if I shorten it and just say that he was talking about Bush's policies and then he said this.
OBAMA [audio clip]: You know, you can put lipstick on a pig; it's still a pig.
QUINN: You know, excuse me.
TENNENT: OK, you jerk.
QUINN: First of all --
TENNENT: Oh my God.
QUINN: -- could this guy deliver a line in a bucket or what?
TENNENT: Please, I mean, he can't even say something as simple as that. [Stammering].
QUINN: Here, let's listen to it again.
OBAMA [audio clip]: You know, you can put lipstick on a pig; it's still a pig.
TENNENT: I was so offended by that. I was so appalled by that. No, I know they're talking about the policy. But, let me tell you, that was deliberate. And -- because it was, you know, a reference to what she said about the pitbull and the lipstick.
QUINN: Oh, exactly. Of course.
TENNENT: How do you know the difference -- you know, what's the difference between a hockey mom and a pitbull? Lipstick.
QUINN: Lipstick. Right.
TENNENT: And by the way, that was ad lib because her teleprompter screwed up during the convention. She's a pretty slick lady.
QUINN: You know, that's true and that's what happens when her teleprompter screws up. She gets funny and she gets glib and she gets better.
[...]
OBAMA [audio clip]: You know, you can put lipstick on a pig; it's still a pig.
QUINN: No, Barack, it's a pitbull.
TENNENT: You know what, you're a pig, you're a chauvinist pig is what you are, Barack. OK, you're a sexist pig. You want to talk about pigs? You're a sexist pig. I can't believe it. You know, the sexism, the ageism, is there no end to the -isms with the Democrats?
QUINN: Oh --
TENNENT: Honestly, I thought we were the ones that were the party of hate.
QUINN: No, no, no, it's only an -ism if we do it. And, of course, for the most part, we never do.
TENNENT: No, we really don't, do we?
The drooling knuckledraggers who get their information from these Right Wing shows are not known for their critical thinking skills.
If they had critical thinking skills, they'd know how to switch their radios over to FM.....
All I have to say is, "AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!! ROTFLMAO!"
It would be THAT funny if the circumstances of this country and this election weren't so sad.
Message to Media: IT IS YOUR JOB TO FORCE EACH CANDIDATE TO STICK TO THE ISSUES!!! ASK THE TOUGH QUESTIONS OF BOTH CANDIDATES! ONE HAS ANSWERS, THE OTHER ONES HAS SLOGANS. DON'T LET THIS BE GOOD ENOUGH!!!
Quinn and Rose feature graphic photos of 9/11 on their web site gallery.
Last night Keith Olbermann did an excellent editorial about the outrageous use of the most graphic Twin Towers photos by the Republicans at their convention. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26645619/...so HOW does Quinn and Rose honor those who lost their lives during 9/11? ....with photo of victims of course.
The large photo on their site is of a single man leaping to his death, with a link to more photos. (Note, it should not be posted on MMFA either) These two are disgusting.
Quinn and Rose War Room photos start with this:
9/11 NEVER FORGET!
Click here for more photos of the Twin Towers, including military aerial photos.
The GOP played their gender card on it and has kept the Obama team off message for a day.
Lets move on.
Yeah, my account of it may be a little hazy, but I think Obama spent about 2 minutes addressing it initially, then spent another minute or so addressing it on Letterman.
Yep, he didn't talk about anything else all day.
I'm still pushing the shwag available over at Talking Points Memo online to combat the "liberal media's" disregard of the main issue:
I figure at least 15% will be sold to Republicans who don't get the concept.
(full disclosure: I have absolutely NO financial interest in these products)
I agree. It's definitely time to move on... time to move on exposing Palin for the fraud she is and the sellout McCain is and how STUPID half the electorate is for buying into this disgrace of a campaign.
Thanks, AA, for the advice. Much appreciated. :)
Now, don't get your snout all out of joint, but your ham-handed comment should have been "bringing HOME the bacon", you swine.
Those are the "GlamourShots" they had taken at the mall.
Or the discount portraits they got at Kmart.
Or those you take in those booths found in the seedy parts of town...
Anywhere Quinn & Rose are is the seedy part of town.
TENNENT: Honestly, I thought we were the ones that were the party of hate.
You are, Rose - you are.
OT, but just found this on thinkprogress. Are these people for real?
On 7th Anniversary Of Attacks, White House Claims Bin Laden Was Not The ‘Mastermind’ of Sept. 11
Tomorrow marks the seventh anniversary of the 9/11 attacks. In a press conference today, a reporter asked White House Press Secretary Dana Perino about the administration’s ongoing efforts to find Osama bin Laden, calling him the “mastermind” of 9/11. Perino interrupted the reporter, claiming bin Laden was not the true “mastermind” of the attacks:
Snoopdogger
Please tell me, which party is in a tizzy over someone's age and their gender? Which party wants groups to be linked as 'victims', whether they be identified by age, gender, orientation, race, socio-economic status?
By the way if you answer nicely, I would consider it to be awfully "non-racially/genderly/agely/religiously/culturally identified action on your part!"
Nothing-To-Be-Proud-Of Conservative:
Which party has to resort to dirty tricks like this because they have nothing constructive to offer the American people - just four more years of financial ruin and personal misery?
Why, it's YOUR party. Which is why you're gonna lose in a landsloide come Nivember.
lazyrider,
Didn't the messiah speak about this on Letterman last night?
The left should have ignored this from the get-go but they just couldn't help themselves. It would be gone from the news cycle but your pals here and in the media, are tripping over themselves trying to not talk about it.
Get back on the issues please, America needs to be reminded of what the left stands for and how Obama so well represents it!
Get back on the issues please, America needs to be reminded of what the left stands for and how Obama so well represents it!
And PC has to be reminded how to wipe his butt, and to stop dragging his knuckles on the ground as he walks upright.
You forgot the inbreeding part. He needs to break that cycle... desperately.
It may be too late....
wizzywronger and bunnyfondler,
Wow, you have managed to encapsulate the ideas of both the 'nah-nah-nah,nah-nah' and 'so am I but what are you', retorts to a level that mankind can only marvel at. Keep those synapses firing!
Keep those synapses firing!
Try getting one of your synapses to fire, PC. You might enjoy it for a change.....
Yes, PC, I agree, back to the issues. 80+% think that America is on the wrong track. The Republicans nominated a man who brags that he agreed with the current president over 90% of the time. Let's see McCain campaign with the man he agrees with the most and see what happens. Let's make it an honest campaign where Palin admits to taking the money for the bridge even if she didn't build it. Let's hear how McCain, in part, blamed the bridge $$ in AK for the bridge collapse in MN. Let's investigate the causes of 9/11 and the Iraq War. Let's hear solutions to the foreclosure mess.
Let's have the media investigate the filibustering issue in the Congress. Let's put the truth about drilling and other alternatives out there. Let's hear why Palin placed a windfall tax on the oil companies in Alaska and what that could mean for the nation (I haven't taken a position, but would love to hear her thoughts).
I'm in!
friedburgherboy,
Yes I agree. When America sees leftist tendincies in candidates they run for the hills, or the most conservative of available candidates!
Would that others on the left want to stand tall as you in bringing the issues to fore and clearly saying who they are and what they stand for.
Socialized medicine-when the government tries something that the private sector does better, they always screw things up. Just look at the VA. The private sector would never have allowed conditions to get so bad. Support for the same educational system-everyone says that public education is substandard so rather than make schools accountable to parents and give them choice, let’s get NEA money and tell people we just need to tax more of their money and give it to places that continue to underperform when compared to private schooling. See note about VA above. Anti-capitalist-the economic freedom of individuals to use their talents and ambitions is anathema to leftists. Economic excellence is to be diminished or attacked rather than celebrated. Those people are the oppressors by using workers to make profits. Just look at oil companies, they bring a product to market we need at a cost that provides for jobs, tax revenue and profit for the corp., a rather reasonable amount given the volume of work they do. Yet Obama and other leftists want to have more taxes applied (any chance those wouldn’t be passed on to consumers), raise taxes on corporations in general, thereby ‘punishing’ the rich. Again product costs go up, pension values go down but the government gets their dough. Environmental extremism-most Americans recognize the way to sustain and improve our way of life is to use the resources we have. It makes economic and environmental sense. But the left is more interested in ‘saving the planet’ no matter the cost to our security, economic vitality and comfort. When people are exposed to the science that confirms that man has nothing to do with global warming, they run even faster away from the leftists. Why even the good Madame Pelosi has over a matter of weeks gone from refusing to discuss drilling for our oil because ‘we need to save the earth for our grandchildren’ to being willing to increase our carbon footprint. Why? Because she has heard plenty from Americans that are tired of that kind of foolishness.Weird, man. That's plain weird.
Fried,
I agree with all of it even though I doubt you'll see Bush on the campaign trail. Lets see what McCain and Palin can actually bring to the table. I'd love to see Obermann or Matthews or Maddow interview either of them. Hopefully they will get a chance.
Well PC, I would have to say the answer is republicans. Why else does fox news continue to show pictures and videos of McCain from 10-20 years ago vs. how he looks now? Why else are they playing the victim card over a well known phrase like "lipstick on a pig"? Why else are right wing christians bringing up the muslim meme again like their religious beliefs are under assault and on the verge of collapse?
Does that answer your question?
Snoop,
I'm curious, who have you noticed on the religious right keeps bringing up the muslim meme?
The florida christian coalition, for one...
Dennis Baxley, the executive director of the Christian Coalition of Florida, told the Miami Herald yesterday that he was “suspect” of Sen. Barack Obama’s (D-IL) “Muslim roots and training,” calling them “scary”:
Baxley said he was “particularly” concerned about Obama’s heritage given the “active movement by radical Muslims to occupy us.”
Thanks for the link.
I noticed even in the article linked, Baxley said he was just speaking for himself. It is hard to make a case about everyone on the religious right based on this one person's personal opinion.
Had you ever heard of this guy before going to look? I have never heard of the Florida Coalition or this guy. Did he ever make it to mainstream media?
If this guy is all you got, your original reason is more of a personal rant based on very fringe people. To draw a conclusion about the religious right based on this guys 15 seconds is really stretching it.
So first of all, the christian coalition of florida is a sub-chapter of the christian coalition of america which was founded by pat robertson. If you go to that site you will find this article:
Another Evangelical Questions Obama's "Christianity"
- 2008
- Barack Obama
- Politics
Full story: http://onenewsnow.com/Election2008/Default.aspx?id=162248The head of the Christian Anti-Defamation Commission has joined the chorus of evangelical leaders who are questioning Barack Obama's Christian credentials.
Dr. Gary Cass of the Christian Anti-Defamation Commission has joined Dr. James Dobson of Focus on the Family, syndicated columnist Cal Thomas, and others who have questioned Barack Obama's recent attempts to woo Evangelicals away from their traditional support of Republican presidential candidates.
Note "leaders" is plural, as in more than one. So, do you still want to insist that right wing christians (plural) aren't really bringing up this muslim meme?
Snoop,
You should read your own links. Those Christian leaders are wondering if Obama is really talking about Universalism, not Islam.
Thanks for proving my point!
You should check your glasses. Also, too bad you just glance and dismiss. If you had clicked the link provided by think progress you'd have found that the guy was being interviewed by the miami herald. Not exactly some liberal blogsite.
But I can understand where you're coming from. Having to admit right wing christians are more interested in power than they are in God and are willing to say anything to win (including calling Obama a muslim) is difficult for the 29%. You are definitely proof of that.
Here's the part you purposely left out:
Cass says while the presumptive Democratic presidential candidate is trying to pass himself off as a devout Christian, his beliefs are more in touch with Universalism. "I think that Obama is not a traditional evangelical Christian. He's confused about Christian theology or rejects it – one or the other. I think he is more of a Buddhist, Muslim, Jewish, Universalist than anything," Cass contends.
Despite the fact that he says he is speaking only for himself doesn't change the fact he is getting significant coverage.
If he were just some regular guy no one would care.
Repeating things like this is a major tactic in Rovian politics - it doesn't have to be true, it just has to be repeated.
Remember how effective Bush was with his continual pairing of Iraq/al Qaeda, Hussein/bin Laden when talking about 9-11? How many people STILL believe that Iraq/Hussein were involved in 9-11?
Al,
I never heard of this guy except for now and the link to a progressive blog is hardly mainstream
As for Snoops reference to some more well known Christians, I do not see by his examples of anyone making the claim or inferring that Obama is Muslim.
furrywoodstockpal,
Just about every lefty poster here makes describes his age, McGrumpy, McGrampy, etc. You yourself have alluded to it. Look at what the dems say, this is serious and needs to be considered in deciding your vote...
http://www.democrats.com/is-john-mccains-age-just-a-joke
And didn't Obama need to be corrected by Stephanopolis that your candidate was a christian, and not a muslim as he had just stated? Was that a Freudian slip or a 'senior moment'?
Fact is, conservatives like me care less about religion than his connections to the radical left. We have seen enough of his church experience to know his mentor is offensive to American and Americans.
Thank you for the prompt and pleasant reply!!!
Fact is, conservatives like me care less about religion than his connections to the radical left.
The true fact is that conservatives only care about themselves.
The right must be scared of the age thing, they sure are trying to cover it up! I'm not worried about Obama's one slip, it's not like he needs losermann to correct him every time he flubs one, or needs campaign aides to tell him how many houses he has or what car he drives.
I rarely discuss his age though, with the exception that it is a fair statement to say it should be a concern. He is the oldest person ever to run for president, and the odds are he could very well die while in office. All the more reason why his VP pick needs to be thoroughly vetted by the press.
Now can I have one of those PC statements you promised me?
dawggie,
Actually, it's not McCain that has excited the conservative base of the republican party, it's governor Palin.
It means that maybe he will actually lead more conservatively than he has shown. Her addition to the ticket gives us something to vote for, rather than just against a leftist candidate. I care little for the age factor although it seems the left looks for 'victimized' groups and the 'isms' that follow. It's just funny to see how, in the words of that great compassionate minister, "Your chickens have come home to roost!"
Snoop,
Where do you get your stats that say odds are McCain will die on office?
In fact the odds are just the opposite. Below are actuarial statistics taken from Social Security Administration.
odds of surviving each year of the presidency based on McCain's age when assuming office at age 72:
first year: 96.5%
second year: 96.2%
third year: 95.9%
fourth year: 95.5%
If I were a betting man, I'd like those odds.
AA-
Based on your survival rates, there is a
3.5% + 3.8% + 4.1% + 4.5% = 15.9%
chance that McCain dies in office from natural causes. Add to that the risk associated w/ being CiC, the pressure and stress, and the history of cancer, and you are easily in the 25-30% range. Are we really willing to take that risk on an unknown like Palin?
Kyle,
It looks to me like you made up the 25-35% figure. Got any link proving that?
Kyle,
The use of your statistics is misleading. One cannot die in each of the four years so adding them up four years of percentages does not mean McCain's chances of dying are any greater than they were in any one year.
Lest you forget, Obama smokes. (Or at least he did until very recently.) What does that do to his mortality rate?
President's also get extraordinary healthcare that improves their mortality. Recent Presidents:
Nixon died at age 81. Ford - age 93. Reagan - age 93. Carter still alive at age 84. George Bush alive at age 84.
AA-
You're wrong about adding up the percentages. If he survives year 1 (97%) chance there's still a 4% chance he dies in year 2. So the probability he dies in year 2 is (97%)*(4%). I didn't apply the survival rates to each of the 4 years because it was an approximation, but the probability that he dies some time during the 1st four years is still around 15% if you calculate it actuarially. I should know this, as I am an actuary by profession.
The 25-30% was an estimate (hence the range) based on the additional risks of being President (which Obama would also face) and the history of cancer. Obama used to be a smoker, but he is otherwise in perfect health.
To paraphrase Mortimer Brewster from "Arsenic and Old Lace"
Melanoma runs in my family. In fact it practically gallops.
Snoop,
I remember seeing this and thinking it funny...
I’M GOING TO BE BROUGHT OUT IN SHACKLES, IN A HANOI HILTON STYLE CELL, WHERE l’LL SINGLE-HANDEDLY OVERCOME MY NORTH VIETNAMESE GUARDS, THEN STOP AN ABORTION IN PROGRESS, AND FINISH UP BY DRILLING FOR OIL RIGHT THROUGH THE CONVENTION STAGE.”
Gidget and Geezer = B rated movie
Gidget and Geezer! Got to love it and maybe you are not so (what were your words...) pure as once thought.
What PC statements?
"Which party wants groups to be linked as 'victims', whether they be identified by age, gender, orientation, race, socio-economic status?"--PC
What on Earth are you trying to say here? Is it your contention that fighting for equal opportunity and equal rights makes people/groups victims? I would say that having equal rights empowers people and gives them opportunity.
Of course, if you are an oppressor, I can see how you would have a different point of view. It is a zero sum game to you guys. Any freedom and opportunity for someone else is a loss for the oppressors.
Kromangnon,
The Left is hitting its mark? Ouch, I'd hate to have you on my darts team.
Quinn and Rose must be doing something right. A few weeks ago some poor lefty was on here bemoaning the fact that their liberal radio station in Pittsburgh had been thumped so badly by these two, that they were going to have to listen to 24 hour programming that would probably focus on cooking/gardening and school closings.
Well at least some solace can be taken, maybe it will be organic gardening shows. Too bad, I'm sure there are literally tens of dozens of poor lost souls who have lost another hotair america radio station.
PC, I believe you were referring to moi, the real POW. To answer your unfounded post, Quinn and Radon Rose are on from 6-9am.....The progressive show was from 9a-12P. Then Hartmann was on 12p-3p. So the Idiot and the Phony Christian had nothing to do with the good shows being dumped. So, look at your watch and have mommy explain the Big hand and the LITTLE hand idea of time. Also, based on the Con theory of letting the market work, Hartmann had a better rating than Limbaugh who is also on from 12p-3p.
Why were they taken off...I know it wasn't because of the Sexual Harrasser and the Church Lady. P.S. Until you get a third letter, respect your Alphabetists.
lordoftheflats,
I responded to your general lamenting, so sorry to have missed a proper explanation of why your wildly popular radio hosts were given the boot.
The private sector does respond to the power of a humongeous community of consumers. Might I suggest a boycott of the former advertisers of your preferred listening tastes. They may have included Ted's Toffu Palace, Barney's Bicycle Exchange or Earl's House of Ripple. I'm sure the numbers of offended consumers would get their attention.
Perhaps a midnight vigil, nothing like the smell of candle wax to get a crowd of disenfranchised liberal listeners in a frenzy. Can you imagine the feeling of enpowerment the dozen of you would feel as you bring your demands by ox cart to the front doors of the radio station?
As far as the third letter, I'm not understanding your comment there.
Why do you think it is (IF it is) that tighty-righty talk radio does so well, while progressive radio struggles?
Is it because the limpaughs and becks echo-fests are so much more entertaining? Or do you think it's because only conservatives have to have the same talking points shoved down their throats every day so they don't forget what to think?
Because I've got a pretty good idea of the correct choice, but I'm not letting on which just yet...
gaseoussaharia,
It could be alot of things but ultimately it comes down to a message resonating with enough people that is able to be financially supported. Conservatism resonates, leftism clanks instead.
...tighty-righty talk radio does so well, while progressive radio struggles?
I think most of the top rated shows are during the day when liberals are working. The retired, unemployed and unemployable, the addiction rehab crowd, or "conservative base", that I hear calling in when I catch am radio during drive time probably would have trouble keeping up with progressive programming.
I could be mistaken. Do large numbers of people listen to am radio at night? Besides people on camping trips?
See my insightful and entertaining post above concerning the show times.
By the way, The Harasser and Radio Rosie are piped into many trailers in the valleys of Ohio and Pa. Most people in Pittsburgh think they are jerks including most Republicans. And as someone mentioned before.........Rose, don't you ever listen to your show? You,as a good Chriostian, should never put up with the crap that Quinn spouts..or your own hateful rants. My God must be different than your god.
kernal,
You sound just like the dear Obamanator!!!
Why of course the people who listen are the ones clinging to their bible and guns!
The more the left discloses itself in attitudes and ideology, the more Americans move away. That is why we need to keep trying to get Obama, front and center asap!
Hopefully the left has some rising stars.
I have XM have only caught a segment or two of Tom (Thom?) Hartman, but I liked what I heard.
I also have caught Rachel Maddow on MSNBC. I was impressed with her analysis while watching the conventions.
Needless to say, I disagree with them on most issues, but it is good to hear both sides.
I caught the end of Olbermann last night and again he seemed to be foaming at the mouth over the 9/11 video shown at the RNC. (I did not see it.)
I hope Maddow is not sucked into this type of ranting.
Flipping back and forth from Fox I have started watching Hannity and Colmes and am amazed at how Hannity completely dominates Colmes in tone and content. I would much prefer to see someone like Bob Beckle or that guy with the Irish? name replace Colmes.
Ahh Donahue... He would be more interesting... Anyone would be more interesting.
Watching the show I would like to see a clock on the bottom of the screen showing how much time each side gets. Everytime Hannity speaks or says anything while Colmes has his turn the producers should deduct one minute from Hannity's turn.
I'd say the same for Colmes but I doubt he ever breaks in on Hannity.
I don't know. Watching the last few days it looks to me like Colmes is very tired. Is he suffering from something?
"Mr. Marlo Thomas". Pure sexism.
Hasn't he already tanked about a gazillion times?
You're an idiot. He invented the modern talk-show format. He was on national tv for 26 years. I used to watch him in Dayton OH as a kid (hey, we only had 5 channels).
...it looks to me like Colmes is very tired. Is he suffering from something? - anotheramerican
He has to sit next to that ignorant screeching imbecile Hannity for an hour a night.Maybe we have different definitions for "suffering", but do you really need more reason for a man to look tired?
Aren't these the same kooks who suggested that Howard Dean instructed the Kansas governer to slam Dubya about Iraq after that big tornado?
Yeah, their credibility is rock solid.