jdobbin Posted October 23, 2008 Report Share Posted October 23, 2008 (edited) http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/081022/.../palin_clothing Who knew looking like a hockey mom was this darned expensive?Certainly not Wanda Routier, a proud hockey mom in Hewitt, Wis., who spends her time in sweat pants, turtlenecks, ankle boots and heavy coats. She was dismayed to hear Wednesday that the Republican party had spent $150,000 in two months on clothes, hair styling and accessories for Sarah Palin and her family from such upscale stores as Saks Fifth Avenue and Nieman Marcus. Palin's just doing her part to help the economy. Edited October 23, 2008 by jdobbin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil Simon Posted October 23, 2008 Report Share Posted October 23, 2008 http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/081022/.../palin_clothingPalin's just doing her part to help the economy. Is image really worth $150,000? Is it deserved money, even? Justified spending? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shakeyhands Posted October 23, 2008 Report Share Posted October 23, 2008 psychic bills covered under that as well??... oh wait a minute... wrong person. My bad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted October 23, 2008 Report Share Posted October 23, 2008 Makes John Edward's $400 haircut seem pale by comparison. And even McCain's loafers are not much of a big deal compared to this. I understand she has to look good and present herself well. But if you want to still relate to hockey/soccer moms out there. A really expensive handbag for her youngest daughter is not the way to go. Also doing her part for the economy? I wonder if it came from campaing money, or tax payer money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevoh Posted October 23, 2008 Report Share Posted October 23, 2008 This is exactly the thing Palin is supposed to stand against. Wasteful spending. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guyser Posted October 23, 2008 Report Share Posted October 23, 2008 This is exactly the thing Palin is supposed to stand against. Wasteful spending. No, wasteful GOVT spending. This is Rep money. And yes, I agree wholeheartedly with them spending thier own money. She has to look good (and does) and those knee high boots she has arent cheap. .....and oh my she looks good in them. Her, Ruby (Dhala, not Jack) and me for dinner....yowser. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Bandelot Posted October 23, 2008 Report Share Posted October 23, 2008 Nice. Especially at a time when many are losing their jobs, their savings and their homes... some whose homes would cost 150,000 and now have no place to live. She pads her ass with a house, and then goes around telling people how shes just like them, just another Joe six-pack. Read the clues, people. This is the extravagance of the elite. The smiling liars Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guyser Posted October 23, 2008 Report Share Posted October 23, 2008 Nice. Especially at a time when many are losing their jobs, their savings and their homes... some whose homes would cost 150,000 and now have no place to live. She pads her ass with a house, and then goes around telling people how shes just like them, just another Joe six-pack.Read the clues, people. This is the extravagance of the elite. The smiling liars Get a hold on reality. If she showed up in Alaskan Moose wear, a nice quilted shirt over some cotton thermals with jeans and duck boots....what would be the howls then? If it were govt money, you would have a point. It aint, and you dont. Optics are everything. She has to look good , especially since she sure as hell doesnt know much. If you want to rant , and be on target , then and this is my estimation, the money should not be buying expensive purses and clothing for her daughter and the rest of the family. But for Palin. Ya gots to look good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BC_chick Posted October 23, 2008 Report Share Posted October 23, 2008 (edited) IMO, this issue of Palin's clothes isn't so much about her per se as it about the double-standard that women face everyday, and even more so in business and politics. Men can wear the same suit to work, to most functions, and they'll be fine unless the dress code calls for a tux. We need cocktail dresses, power-suits, evening gowns, all types of different attire for the same functions where the man gets away with a suit. Palin's spending on clothes goes against the image she's trying to build as Jane six-pack, sure, but it's not fair to chastise her as the sole cultprit of this excess. There is a bigger culprit at work here and that's society's expectations of women. Edited October 23, 2008 by BC_chick Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drea Posted October 23, 2008 Report Share Posted October 23, 2008 I shop at Value Village and look every bit as professional as any "suit" out there, including women politicians. Shame shame shame on her and her handlers for this unwarranted, unnecessary excess. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.Canada Posted October 23, 2008 Report Share Posted October 23, 2008 I shop at Value Village and look every bit as professional as any "suit" out there, including women politicians.Shame shame shame on her and her handlers for this unwarranted, unnecessary excess. Why is her wardrobe even an issue? It never is for men. Who cares honestly? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riverwind Posted October 23, 2008 Report Share Posted October 23, 2008 (edited) Why is her wardrobe even an issue?Because women who wish to be successful need to shell out 10x what a man would need to pay for the same image.Who cares honestly?Can't you imagine how must she would be mocked if she actually wore value village specials? It may seem irrelevant now that her words have turned her into an object of mockery but when the money was spent the assumption was she would be a credible candidate and shoddy clothes could have undermined her image. Edited October 23, 2008 by Riverwind Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drea Posted October 23, 2008 Report Share Posted October 23, 2008 (edited) Because women who wish to be successful need to shell out 10x what a man would need to pay for the same image.Can't you imagine how must she would be mocked if she actually wore value village specials? It may seem irrelevant now that her words have turned her into an object of mockery but when the money was spent the assumption was she would be a credible candidate and shoddy clothes could have undermined her image. I am currently wearing a Danier off-white leather skirt and matching suit jacket... $24.99 for the set. And yah, I look better'n Ms. Palin in her overpriced ill-fitting suits. No one need know you buy clothes from the VV boutique. If you don't tell them, how will they know? LOL Excess makes me sick to my stomach... always has, always will. So people actually care (or even notice) if a handbag, shoes or a suit is a "brand"? Pfft. Edited October 23, 2008 by Drea Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riverwind Posted October 23, 2008 Report Share Posted October 23, 2008 No one need know you buy clothes from the VV boutique. If you don't tell them, how will they know?I know I could not tell the difference but these things are easily noticed by people who make it their business to know. If one are selling an image like politicians then one can't take chances. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drea Posted October 23, 2008 Report Share Posted October 23, 2008 I proudly tell people how thrifty I am. I remember a number years ago an aquaintance's new husband had bought her a $4000 refrigerator. $4000! for a fridge! Gold plated? Nope, just stainless steel.... Waste and excess are marks of insanity imo. LOL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueblood Posted October 23, 2008 Report Share Posted October 23, 2008 It`s the republican`s money, they can spend it however they want. If they want to drop a 150K of donated money on Palin then have at it. If repubs are upset about campaign spending, then don`t donate and vote for the other ticket. This is a non issue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted October 24, 2008 Report Share Posted October 24, 2008 It`s the republican`s money, they can spend it however they want. If they want to drop a 150K of donated money on Palin then have at it. If repubs are upset about campaign spending, then don`t donate and vote for the other ticket. This is a non issue. Exactly. Nobody seemed to care about Hillary Clinton's $6000 pant suits. And nobody seems to care about Obama or Biden's $2000 suits. Nobody seemed to care about the millions spent for the greek pillars and such during his acceptance speech. And I haven't heard anyone complaining about the $6 million that's being spent on an election night party in Chicago. It's all selective and manufactured outrage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BubberMiley Posted October 24, 2008 Report Share Posted October 24, 2008 I think the point was that she tries to pretend she's Joe-Sixpack-Hockey Mom while wearing the 150K wardrobe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted October 24, 2008 Author Report Share Posted October 24, 2008 Why is her wardrobe even an issue? Probably because she is more about image than substance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted October 24, 2008 Report Share Posted October 24, 2008 I think the point was that she tries to pretend she's Joe-Sixpack-Hockey Mom while wearing the 150K wardrobe. Kind of like Obama, except he lives in a $4 million house. She doesn't. Probably because she is more about image than substance. Kind of like Obama. How much did those greek pillars cost again? Oh right, just $5.3 million. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted October 24, 2008 Author Report Share Posted October 24, 2008 Kind of like Obama. How much did those greek pillars cost again? Oh right, just $5.3 million. Well, please do bring those things up if you think they're relevant. I have no doubt that they're about image. In terms of substance though, I think I have to agree with Powell that we have seen Obama grow in substance through the campaign. It is probably one of the reasons why the polls showing Obama holding a lead against McCain. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted October 24, 2008 Report Share Posted October 24, 2008 Kind of like Obama, except he lives in a $4 million house. She doesn't. And how many homes does McCain own? I bet that total is way more than 4 mill. Kind of like Obama. How much did those greek pillars cost again? Oh right, just $5.3 million. 5.3 mill was the total for the cost for the entire convention. Pulling numbers out of the air is fun eh? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted October 24, 2008 Report Share Posted October 24, 2008 ....In terms of substance though, I think I have to agree with Powell that we have seen Obama grow in substance through the campaign. It is probably one of the reasons why the polls showing Obama holding a lead against McCain. Obama has grown in substance.....he realized he wasn't Jesus after all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liam Posted October 24, 2008 Report Share Posted October 24, 2008 (edited) I think the issue is only relevant in two ways: 1. it opens the discussion about the extent to which Palin's entire public persona has been stage crafted by the campaign 2. it speaks against her authenticity as an ordinary hockey mom. I heard that the highest paid staffer on the McCain campaign in the first two weeks of October was Palin's makeup artist. $22k over two weeks. Astounding if true. I'm sure the campaign could have extended her a $10,000 allowance at Macy's where she could have bought herself 10-15 very nice suits and many pairs of shoes, etc. It would be completely understandable to give someone who does not have a massive walk-in closet of suits a clothing allowance before going out in front of the media (oops, she never did that! LOL) and in front of crowds. She would look just as professional as she does in the Valentino stuff they got at Nieman Marcus. Not everyone can be Cindy McCain. Edited October 24, 2008 by Liam Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guyser Posted October 24, 2008 Report Share Posted October 24, 2008 I think the issue is only relevant in two ways:1. it opens the discussion about the extent to which Palin's entire public persona has been stage crafted by the campaign 2. it speaks against her authenticity as an ordinary hockey mom. I heard that the highest paid staffer on the McCain campaign in the first two weeks of October was Palin's makeup artist. $22k over two weeks. Astounding if true. #1 is normal for everyone who runs for office, and triplely (is that a word?) so for someone at that level. Harper had a makeup artist. She wasnt so good, the canvas was pretty beat up.Not to mention she had him wear a leather vest. She forgot the assless chaps. #2-well, kind of true, but if you knew the cost for hockey in the US, then that sort of money is not unheard of for a hockey mom Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.