It's certainly not a crime but spending RNC funds on high-end shopping trips for Palin neither sends the desired message nor, I suspect, thrills Republican donors.
Hey JJV, I bet they embroidered your name into her panties as recognition of your contribution to the cause!
13 comments:
Stylegate 2008. Saks and Needless Mark-up, what were they thinking? Please don't answer that question.
I almost peed my panties with the embroidery comment.
I am assuming you mean just JJV's initials as it would be hard to fit his whole name onto a designer thong.
Hey, YOU started it.
If they can write the Bible on a grain of rice they could certainly get his full name plus "Esquire" to fit on butt floss.
I started it and I am RUNNING with it!
There's a crack with a lawyer in there somewhere... ; )
Should my initials be that close to Sarah Palin it would be the best contribution I ever made.
I suppose only people who marry the widows of Republican billionaires should have nice cloths for campaigning. Sarah Palin is middle class. The price tag also includes her family.
Part of the problem is she looks so great in them. Liberal women hate that.
Finally, the money was well-spent, unlike commercials about "earmarks."
JJV, I am sure your spouse will be delighted to hear that you have dramatically raised her allowance.
Btw, I doubt anyone, as in Democrats, would object to the purchase of campaign clothing. But $150,000 in three months is a bit extreme or excessive, especially when most of the people attending your rallies don't make that much in a YEAR.
Banana Republic and Ann Taylor have very nice threads for much less, as do department stores more typically frequented by your average hockey mom. Similarly, if Palin herself had paid for the clothes, not the RNC, there probably wouldn't be as much fuss.
All we are saying is give fleece a chance.
I also note it is the same amount as the DNC paid for the fake Greek columns for Obama and the clothes are reusable. (and believe me if you start auctioning off clothes worn by Palin you will recoup more than 150k).
The bigger issue, however, is the use of campaign funds for this purpose. Not only might donors prefer their money to go to advertising etc., it may also be against campaign finance laws. I ran across something earlier but lost track of it; I will try to update tonight.
JJV, thanks for the false equivalence (is this really all you've got?), and are you suggesting that the donation of the clothes to charity (as stated with impeccable timing by the campaign) will be in the form of an auction?
I would like to retract my snark above about auctioning off the clothes - apparently this is a pretty common occurrence so it would be reasonable for the RNC to do so.
I don't mind that SP looks great and love the fact that she wears skirts and heels. I don't care about the clothes allowance or if for whatever reason her family had to be outfitted.
The store choices were ridiculous regardless of party affiliation.
I just bought 5 suits, 2 pair of shoes and a sweater at Macy's, plus 2 dresses, 2 sweaters and 4 tops at the Ann Taylor Loft. Granted, most items were on sale, but I spent about $1,100.00. Full price, I'd still come in under 2K. Not to be all snotty, but I look and feel really good in my new clothes.
If someone wants to drop 150K of their own money on clothes and shoes - good for them.
This won't change my vote, but there is no argument I can make to support the asinine decision to shop at Saks.
Why am I suddenly reminded of Richard Nixon's Checkers speach? "My wife Pat has a good Republican cloth coat..."
JJV: How are Greek columns not reusable? (Some fraternity might pay $100 for those for its next toga party.)
MLR
MLR raises a good point. The ancients often re-used parts of old buildings, including columns, when constructing new ones. You could ask McCain about it. BA-DUMP!
Post a Comment