GOP spends over $150,000 on Palin's chlothes

CPT. SURF

On one level, I don't care about this. But when McCain/Palin make such a big point of being holier-than-thou, I think it is all fair game, and I think this establishes a relatively low-level of morality to be on such a spending spree when so many in the nation are suffering. It also evidences pretty lousy judgment, and that, is the strongest reason why McPalin doesn't deserve my vote. As someone else said: no more DUMB presidents. We've learned our lessen over the last 8 years on dumb presidents.

I guess you have to package the product to consumers and everything, but this certainly isn't going to help to dispel the "Caribou Barbie" image, now is it? Dress her up! Pull the string to hear one of 20 phrases! CHOO BECHA. It's like a cheap knockoff of a Julia Roberts movie script: Whisked out of Alaska wearing only a fur-lined burlap sack, Sarah is taken on a glamorous shopping spree by the GOP at Saks Fifth Avenue! AND NOW SHE'S A PRINCESS! Your donations hard at work, people! lulz.




From Politico

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1008/14805.html


RNC shells out $150K for Palin fashion

By JEANNE CUMMINGS | 10/22/08 6:50 AM EDT Updated: 10/22/08 6:50 AM


The Republican National Committee has spent more than $150,000 to clothe and accessorize vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin and her family since her surprise pick by John McCain in late August.

According to financial disclosure records, the accessorizing began in early September and included bills from Saks Fifth Avenue in St. Louis and New York for a combined $49,425.74.

The records also document a couple of big-time shopping trips to Neiman Marcus in Minneapolis, including one $75,062.63 spree in early September.

The RNC also spent $4,716.49 on hair and makeup through September after reporting no such costs in August.

The cash expenditures immediately raised questions among campaign finance experts about their legality under the Federal Election Commission's long-standing advisory opinions on using campaign cash to purchase items for personal use.

Politico asked the McCain campaign for comment, explicitly noting the $150,000 in expenses for department store shopping and makeup consultation that were incurred immediately after Palin’s announcement. Pre-September reports do not include similar costs.

Spokeswoman Maria Comella declined to answer specific questions about the expenditures, including whether it was necessary to spend that much and whether it amounted to one early investment in Palin or if shopping for the vice presidential nominee was ongoing.

“The campaign does not comment on strategic decisions regarding how financial resources available to the campaign are spent," she said.

But hours after the story was posted on Politico's website and legal issues were raised, the campaign issued a new statement.

"With all of the important issues facing the country right now, it’s remarkable that we’re spending time talking about pantsuits and blouses," said spokeswoman Tracey Schmitt. "It was always the intent that the clothing go to a charitable purpose after the campaign."
Slideshow

Palin Fashion



The business of primping and dressing on the campaign trail has become fraught with political risk in recent years as voters increasingly see an elite Washington out of touch with their values and lifestyles.

In 2000, Democrat Al Gore took heat for changing his clothing hues. And in 2006, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) was ribbed for two hair styling sessions that cost about $3,000.

Then, there was Democrat John Edwards’ $400 hair cuts in 2007 and Republican McCain’s $520 black leather Ferragamo shoes this year.

A review of similar records for the campaign of Democrat Barack Obama and the Democratic National Committee turned up no similar spending.

But all the spending by other candidates pales in comparison to the GOP outlay for the Alaska governor whose expensive, designer outfits have been the topic of fashion pages and magazines.

What hasn’t been apparent is where the clothes came from – her closet back in Wasilla or from the campaign coffers in Washington.

The answer can be found inside the RNC’s September monthly financial disclosure report under “itemized coordinated expenditures.”

It’s a report that typically records expenses for direct mail, telephone calls and advertising. Those expenses do show up, but the report also has a new category of spending: “campaign accessories.”

September payments were also made to Barney’s New York ($789.72) and Bloomingdale’s New York ($5,102.71).

Macy’s in Minneapolis, another store fortunate enough to be situated in the Twin Cities that hosted last summer’s Republican National Convention, received three separate payments totaling $9,447.71.

The entries also show a few purchases at Pacifier, a top notch baby store, and Steiniauf & Stroller Inc., suggesting $295 was spent to accommodate the littlest Palin to join the campaign trail.

An additional $4,902.45 was spent in early September at Atelier, a high-class shopping destination for men.

Trojan

GOP wrote:

"With all of the important issues facing the country right now, it’s remarkable that we’re spending time talking about pantsuits and blouses," said spokeswoman Tracey Schmitt. "It was always the intent that the clothing go to a charitable purpose after the campaign."

rofl... sure, that was always the intent. There was never any intention of the Right Honourable Mrs Palin keeping them herself...

Look forward to seeing pictures online in 6-12 months time of her wearing same.

Victor

CPT. SURF wrote: »

"With all of the important issues facing the country right now, it’s remarkable that we’re spending time talking about pantsuits and blouses," said spokeswoman Tracey Schmitt. "It was always the intent that the clothing go to a charitable purpose after the campaign."

**cough** Paid out of federal election funding. **cough**

brianthebard

The things I could've done with that money...

CPT. SURF

Like these are the kind of clothes that homeless are desperately in need of.

"Hey Willy I am freezin"

"Here try on this delicious little blouse I got from Sarah Palin. It won't make you warm but it cost 7 Grand!"

is_that_so

CPT. SURF wrote: »

Like these are the kind of clothes that homeless are desperately in need of.

"Hey Willy I am freezin"

"Here try on this delicious little blouse I got from Sarah Palin. It won't make you warm but it cost 7 Grand!"

It's like Enable Ireland here or even SVP shops. They donate them and the money raised from selling them is used for charitable purposes.

TBH $150K is nothing compared to the truly offensive amounts Obama has spent. Personally would rather see candidates required to use public funding or a cap placed on what can be spent.

As in all campaigns the one with the deepest pockets can often be best placed, and not necessarily because they are any good.

CPT. SURF

is_that_so wrote: »

TBH $150K is nothing compared to the truly offensive amounts Obama has spent. Personally would rather see candidates required to use public funding or a cap placed on what can be spent.

Ah yes, but it is where and how the money is spent that makes things like this an issue. You do remember the Republicans/Faux News/Limbaugh going absolutely stir crazy over John Edward's $400 haircuts? We saw what happened to his campaign after that. Politically, this kind of stuff will put a nail in your coffin.

Manic Moran

With Obama receiving $150million last month to basically make him look good, I'm not going to begrudge $150K on clothing to his opposition. At least clothes are durable, haircuts tend not to last long.

I saw two Obama campaign vehicles yesterday. I was astounded, one was a BMW 5-series of some sort (Base retail of some $50K), the other a brand spanking new Mercedes CLS 550, which you will pick up in the shops for a mere $70K. Granted, I'm in Silicon Valley where expensive cars aren't particularly unusual, but that's a bit pricey, isn't it?

Heck, he's even bought out his own TV station. I'm not kidding, there is an Obama Channel. It's not entirely unprecedented, Honda bought out a local radio station here for a couple of months playing nothing but adverts for the Honda Element (but at least it brought us Gil the Crab), but a whole TV channel for at least the last two months?

Yeah. I don't think I'm going to lose much sleep over $150K. The amount of money spent by all sides in the whole campaign season would probably do a great deal for solving the healthcare problems that both sides are yakking about all day.

NTM

CPT. SURF

Well considering that McCain had to suspend his campaign in Michigan due to lack of funding, this news would suggest that his campaign's fund allocation is misguided at best.

spank_inferno

while the examples given (BMW & Merc) may seem like excessive spending by the Obama campaign at least it isnt tax payer money funding it.

And those cars may have come for a lot less than sticker price ie: "with compliments - BMW/Mercedes USA.. ps: remember us when your reviewing CAFE standards"

Having said that the money spent on this election over the last 2 years is mind boggling

BenjAii

spank_inferno wrote: »

Having said that the money spent on this election over the last 2 years is mind boggling

Whats more mind-boggling is that it needs to be spent in that quantities given that most of it goes on TV advertising.

It seems somewhat pitiful in the internet age that the majority of people seem to be so swayed by television advertisements.

Hobbes

Manic Moran wrote: »

With Obama receiving $150million last month to basically make him look good,

Where did you hear that from? I don't recall any stories of Obama blowing insane amounts of cash on clothes. You can't wear cars.

I love how the GOP made a big deal over the certain democrats spending on their fashion but completly try to rationalise Palins actions as OK. I saw on TV some guy saying it was normal for an average American family to spend 150K on clothes over the period of a couple of months. o_O. Another story claiming that you need to look good for the press.

But what I really find funny about the whole thing and why I am confused why people who vote for McCain aren't annoyed. Basically that is 150K of peoples donations spent on Palins familys clothes which isn't being spent on the campaign. McCains funds is hurting.

axer

Hobbes wrote: »

But what I really find funny about the whole thing and why I am confused why people who vote for McCain aren't annoyed. Basically that is 150K of peoples donations spent on Palins familys clothes which isn't being spent on the campaign. McCains funds is hurting.

Is McCain not on matching funds?

Does that mean that they have just blown 75k of the tax payers money on clothes?

"we're gonna reign in wasteful spending"...sure...:rolleyes:

Trojan

This just in from the GOP: unequivocal proof that Palin has not been spending excessively on clothes - she's had to borrow a scarf from her friend, Joe Sixpack:

Manic Moran

Hobbes wrote: »

Where did you hear that from? I don't recall any stories of Obama blowing insane amounts of cash on clothes. You can't wear cars.

The 150m is what he raised in campaign funds. i.e. making him look good to the voters, it's exactly the same purposes as clothes.

Unless I misheard the car radio this morning, in the last week he's bought five suits valued at an average of $1,500. Whilst obviously far less than the $150K, it's probably fair to say he had a pretty Presidential-Campaign-suited wardrobe before last week so had less requirement to spend.

I, for one, cannot afford to spend $7.5K on suits, let alone in a week.

NTM

axer

Manic Moran wrote: »

The 150m is what he raised in campaign funds. i.e. making him look good to the voters, it's exactly the same purposes as clothes.

Unless I misheard the car radio this morning, in the last week he's bought five suits valued at an average of $1,500. Whilst obviously far less than the $150K, it's probably fair to say he had a pretty Presidential-Campaign-suited wardrobe before last week so had less requirement to spend.

I, for one, cannot afford to spend $7.5K on suits, let alone in a week.

NTM

1,100 euro per suit - I would have thought a presidential candidate would be spending more on than that on his suits. All he needs now is another 92 suits to catch up to Palin's spending.

I would have thought that the 150m would mostly be spent on advertising, events and staff and not on his clothes or your stretching of "making him look good to the voters".

axer

Trojan wrote: »

This just in from the GOP: unequivocal proof that Palin has not been spending excessively on clothes - she's had to borrow a scarf from her friend, Joe Sixpack:

I wonder how much that blouse cost? Gucci?

brianthebard

Trojan wrote: »

This just in from the GOP: unequivocal proof that Palin has not been spending excessively on clothes - she's had to borrow a scarf from her friend, Joe Sixpack:

Are those donkeys on her scarf? Is she making so many gaffes that her clothing has to get in on the act too?

Manic Moran

axer wrote: »

1,100 euro per suit - I would have thought a presidential candidate would be spending more on than that on his suits. All he needs now is another 92 suits to catch up to Palin's spending.

Well, if my wife is anything to go by, the relative expense is going to be higher for the woman anyway. However, I personally think that $1,500 is a little high for a suit unless you happen to be financially a little more secure than most people.

I would have thought that the 150m would mostly be spent on advertising, events and staff and not on his clothes or your stretching of "making him look good to the voters".

Forgive me, but isn't that the entire point of a campaign? Getting across to the voters the message "I'm a great person, vote for me?" The clothes will be as much a part of this process as buying air time. They're not buying her and her family clothes just to make her feel good about herself.

NTM

Black Swan

How does Sarah Palin get through those long checkout lines of Alaska hockey moms and Ohio Joe the Plumbers' at Bloomingdale's, Neiman Marcus, Saks Fifth Avenue, and Macy's?

Hobbes

Manic Moran wrote: »

The 150m is what he raised in campaign funds.

Sorry raising 150 million and blowing 150K on clothes is not the same and disingenuous to imply it. Likewise trying to justify it by pointing out the other person spent 5% of the the same amount.

bobbyjoe

Remember the fuss over Gore's $400 haircut?
Doubt Joe the Plumber spends that much on clothes.

Fox at it again.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R0jLd441YbM

Lawlord007

Most people dont buy goods for the packaging, they buy for quality - and shoddy goods are shoddy goods, however packaged.

FatherTed

Never mind the $1500 suits. Obama sure could do with new shoes:

Trojan

brianthebard wrote: »

Are those donkeys on her scarf? Is she making so many gaffes that her clothing has to get in on the act too?

Delighted someone spotted it

Macha

Oh for the love of...now they're crying sexist over the whole thing:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/oct/24/sarah-palin-clothes

It really irritates me when people throw words like that around for no good reason. They start to lose their meaning. I do think there have been very sexist undertones to the campaign against Palin but this isn't part of it! I don't see her crying sexist over the half-naked photos of her doing the rounds.

Trojan

taconnol wrote: »

Oh for the love of...now they're crying sexist over the whole thing

Pathetic. See her speaking at 5m19s here:

http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=184086&title=sarah-palin-gender-card

spinandscribble

FatherTed wrote: »

Never mind the $1500 suits. Obama sure could do with new shoes:

hmm i wonder when this pic was published

Macha

Trojan wrote: »

Pathetic. See her speaking at 5m19s here:

http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=184086&title=sarah-palin-gender-card

Just had a rethink and...well it's a fact that women are more judged by their appearance than men. So if Palin spends more on clothes than McCain or Obama, isn't she just doing what she has to do to get accepted?

Remember all the stories about what Hilary Clinton used to wear? Never heard or read anything similar about Obama or McCain.

The hypocrisy with her trying to pass herself off as a regular hockey-mum still stands but there is also a double standard at play.

Edit: Plus the obvious hypocrisy of her trying to be the sexy woman next door. Jesus, could McCain have just NOT picked her??