Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Good thing Palin's against corruption...Follow

#77 Oct 22 2008 at 2:50 PM Rating: Excellent
I can't believe I agree with Knox either, but I don't wear makeup as I'm breakout prone.
#78 Oct 22 2008 at 3:10 PM Rating: Decent
****
4,512 posts
gbaji wrote:
Jophiel wrote:
You know, Sarah Palin's clothing & make-up bill for the month of September was $163,000


Is that high for someone who's just been selected as a running mate for president?


I don't know, I seem to recall a big deal over a certain $400 haircut last election. Of course, now they're saying that the intention all along was that the clothes go to a charitable purpose and why aren't we focusing on the big picture at hand?

Cause, ya know, the poor need Neiman Marcus.
#79 Oct 22 2008 at 3:20 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
Is that high for someone who's just been selected as a running mate for president?
It's about equal to what Biden spends on tooth whitener in a week.
CBD wrote:
Of course, now they're saying that the intention all along was that the clothes go to a charitable purpose
Must be hard to donate $13,000 in make-up.

Man, I bet Palin threw the queen of all hissy fits when they told her last night she'd have to give all her clothes to charity Smiley: laugh

Edit off of some CBS news story...
Quote:
The Obama campaign says it has paid for hair and makeup costs for the Obamas and the Bidens associated with interviews or events but campaign officials say neither the campaign nor the Democratic National Committee(DNC) has paid for clothing.


Edited, Oct 22nd 2008 6:52pm by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#80 Oct 22 2008 at 4:51 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
See. Now you're all just being sexist and elitist. You'd think that you'd all be happy to see a middle class woman go into politics, but instead you're attacking her because she cant afford all the outfits she needs to go campaigning...
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#81 Oct 22 2008 at 5:05 PM Rating: Excellent
***
3,829 posts
gbaji wrote:
See. Now you're all just being sexist and elitist. You'd think that you'd all be happy to see a middle class woman go into politics, but instead you're attacking her because she cant afford all the outfits she needs to go campaigning...


Uh huh. A Hollywood makeup artist is a requirement for campaigning? $150K in designer clothes IN A SINGLE MONTH are a requirement for campaigning?

A Chanel label does not a potential president make. I don't give a rat's *** if she's in Old Navy or Christian Dior, if she ain't qualified I don't want her second in line for the Oval Office. The fact that SHE thinks designer clothes are what she needs to make herself seem presidential is extremely telling about just how UNqualified she is--how about she spends that time it took her to go on a $75,000 shopping spree and spend it learning something about the plethora of issues on which she is humiliatingly ignorant?

It's neither sexist nor elitist to expect something more of our would-be leaders than for them to be spend-thrift clothes horses who are more concerned about APPEARING like they're serious people than actually, you know, BEING SERIOUS F'UCKING PEOPLE!
#82 Oct 22 2008 at 5:05 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
You can't give a speech without a $2,500 Valentino blazer! AMIRITE??
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#83 Oct 22 2008 at 5:17 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Screenshot
.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#84 Oct 22 2008 at 6:28 PM Rating: Decent
***
2,511 posts
Quote:
Uh huh. A Hollywood makeup artist is a requirement for campaigning? $150K in designer clothes IN A SINGLE MONTH are a requirement for campaigning?

A Chanel label does not a potential president make. I don't give a rat's *** if she's in Old Navy or Christian Dior, if she ain't qualified I don't want her second in line for the Oval Office. The fact that SHE thinks designer clothes are what she needs to make herself seem presidential is extremely telling about just how UNqualified she is--how about she spends that time it took her to go on a $75,000 shopping spree and spend it learning something about the plethora of issues on which she is humiliatingly ignorant?

It's neither sexist nor elitist to expect something more of our would-be leaders than for them to be spend-thrift clothes horses who are more concerned about APPEARING like they're serious people than actually, you know, BEING SERIOUS F'UCKING PEOPLE!


You're not American, are you?
#85 Oct 22 2008 at 6:31 PM Rating: Decent
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
17,302 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Screenshot
.


Hmmm, do you think her "daughter" will make an appearance in "Nailin' Paylin"?
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
#86 Oct 22 2008 at 6:37 PM Rating: Good
***
3,829 posts
Blowy wrote:

You're not American, are you?


Only by virtue of my address.
#87 Oct 22 2008 at 6:39 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Ambrya wrote:
Uh huh. A Hollywood makeup artist is a requirement for campaigning? $150K in designer clothes IN A SINGLE MONTH are a requirement for campaigning?


Strange. Can you honestly say you've heard anyone make note of the clothing that Sarah Palin was wearing prior to hearing about the fact that it was purchased by the RNC? Anything? Did you once see her on TV and think "Wow. That outfit is just too high class for the occasion..."? Ever?

Assuming not, it would appear then that what she was wearing isn't considered unusual for someone on a presidential ticket to wear, right?

The difference isn't what she's wearing, but that she can't afford that level of clothing on her own.

Quote:
A Chanel label does not a potential president make.


No. But we (the American people) apparently don't think it's unusual for a potential president to wear it. That's the real point here, isn't it?


Quote:
It's neither sexist nor elitist to expect something more of our would-be leaders than for them to be spend-thrift clothes horses who are more concerned about APPEARING like they're serious people than actually, you know, BEING SERIOUS F'UCKING PEOPLE!


Again. You didn't seem to mind what she was wearing until you heard that she didn't own the clothes she was wearing. So you're basically saying she's not qualified to be vice president because she's not wealthy enough to afford those clothes on her own. Which makes you elitist. It's ok for her to wear expensive clothing, but only if she's actually rich, right? And since the cost for formal and semi-formal clothing is massively greater for women than men, it also makes you sexist. Afterall, if she were a man, the cost to get her (him?) an acceptable, dare I say it "presidential" wardrobe would be far less and you might not think so much about it.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#88 Oct 22 2008 at 6:53 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
Again. You didn't seem to mind what she was wearing until you heard that she didn't own the clothes she was wearing.
Personally, I never would have guessed that what she was wearing cost $150,000. Do a Google image search of her and tell me if the outfits she's wearing look like they're worth more than a house.
Quote:
So you're basically saying she's not qualified to be vice president because she's not wealthy enough to afford those clothes on her own. Which makes you elitist. It's ok for her to wear expensive clothing, but only if she's actually rich, right?
Smiley: laughSmiley: laughSmiley: laugh

Too bad she's been trying to sell herself as a regular, Wal-Mart shoppin' gal, huh? I guess those Wal-Mart clothes weren't really good enough for her once she got to spend someone else's money.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#89 Oct 22 2008 at 7:02 PM Rating: Decent
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,781 posts
gbaji wrote:
See. Now you're all just being sexist and elitist. You'd think that you'd all be happy to see a middle class woman go into politics, but instead you're attacking her because she cant afford all the outfits she needs to go campaigning...
Did you really just write that?

The woman is a Govenor. Bet she had some old things around. If not, the Good Will has a nice selection that I'm sure would be within her budget.
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#90 Oct 22 2008 at 7:07 PM Rating: Good
Vagina Dentata,
what a wonderful phrase
******
30,106 posts
Quote:
It's ok for her to wear expensive clothing, but only if she's actually rich, right?


Well, given the credit crunch and the need for fiscal responsibility, it's a good idea for her to have the money to buy her clothes.

Quote:
And since the cost for formal and semi-formal clothing is massively greater for women than men, it also makes you sexist.


No, it makes the fashion industry sexist.
____________________________
Turin wrote:
Seriously, what the f*ck nature?
#91 Oct 22 2008 at 7:08 PM Rating: Excellent
I know for a fact that the Goodwill in DC has haute coutre too. Goodwill recently did a charity fashion show, and the DC fashionistas grabbed designer coats, pants, dresses, and minks all for under $100 a pop.

Remember, Michelle Obama made a big splash with her $150 black and white dress on The View. Michelle has admitted that she does most of her shopping at The Gap, quite a far cry from Saks Fifth Avenue.

Obama, on the other hand, needs a new pair of shoes.

#92 Oct 22 2008 at 7:09 PM Rating: Good
Vagina Dentata,
what a wonderful phrase
******
30,106 posts
Michelle Obama is a supercool lady. She makes me happy. :)
____________________________
Turin wrote:
Seriously, what the f*ck nature?
#93 Oct 22 2008 at 7:14 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Elinda wrote:
gbaji wrote:
See. Now you're all just being sexist and elitist. You'd think that you'd all be happy to see a middle class woman go into politics, but instead you're attacking her because she cant afford all the outfits she needs to go campaigning...
Did you really just write that?


Yes. I did. They purchased those clothes for her to wear on the hundreds of appearances she had to make over the couple months she'd be campaigning. Do you really think the RNC would have done that if she had a closet full of outfits laying about?

Quote:
The woman is a Govenor. Bet she had some old things around.


I'm sure she did. Probably has about a half dozen or so nice outfits for official occasions. Which, when you're working as a governor is just fine. When you're going to be making multiple appearances a day 6 days a week for 10 weeks in a row, all on national TV, that's *not* going to be sufficient.

Again. The proof is that no one took note of what she was wearing. It wasn't considered unusual or out of place for someone running on a presidential ticket. It's kinda silly to assume that she had all that stuff but the RNC just decided to buy her a whole new set anyway, don't you think?

Doesn't it make much more sense to assume that the campaign looked at the schedule of appearances she was going to have to make, asked to see her wardrobe, gasped in shock at how sparse it was and decided to pony up the cash to make her look presidential.

She's a middle class working woman from Alaska. Even as Governor, exactly how many really "nice" outfits do you think she owned? The only thing this really highlights is the fact that she actually has come pretty much directly from a middle class family background. She's as middle America as you can get, so you're all bashing her because they had to buy her clothes so she'd fit in at all the events she was going to attend?

Quote:
If not, the Good Will has a nice selection that I'm sure would be within her budget.


Lol. You're kidding right? Again. No one once said that she was overdressed for any of the appearances or events she's been at. I'm pretty sure they'd have noticed (and you all would have derided her) if she'd shown up in hand-me-downs from Goodwill...
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#94 Oct 22 2008 at 7:16 PM Rating: Decent
Vagina Dentata,
what a wonderful phrase
******
30,106 posts
Quote:

She's a middle class working woman from Alaska. Even as Governor, exactly how many really "nice" outfits do you think she owned? The only thing this really highlights is the fact that she actually has come pretty much directly from a middle class family background. She's as middle America as you can get, so you're all bashing her because they had to buy her clothes so she'd fit in at all the events she was going to attend?


You like to act as if she's not like evil Obama, all urban and unknowable. Sure, we don't KNOW anything about her sketchy background but she's like everyone else (all white and sh*t). She must just be a regular lady and not someone who has all sorts of ethics issues and desire to play fast and loose when she can. :P

Edited, Oct 22nd 2008 11:17pm by Annabella
____________________________
Turin wrote:
Seriously, what the f*ck nature?
#95 Oct 22 2008 at 7:17 PM Rating: Decent
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
17,302 posts
Commander Annabella wrote:
Quote:
And since the cost for formal and semi-formal clothing is massively greater for women than men, it also makes you sexist.


No, it makes the fashion industry sexist.


I only thought this was true with Wedding Dresses and Tuxedos because of the whole "Buy a dress, rent a tux" thing.

Is there really that much of a difference in prices, or is it just that the majority of men don't care and buy tshirts and jeans from walmart?
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
#96 Oct 22 2008 at 7:17 PM Rating: Decent
Vagina Dentata,
what a wonderful phrase
******
30,106 posts
TirithRR wrote:
Commander Annabella wrote:
Quote:
And since the cost for formal and semi-formal clothing is massively greater for women than men, it also makes you sexist.


No, it makes the fashion industry sexist.


I only thought this was true with Wedding Dresses and Tuxedos because of the whole "Buy a dress, rent a tux" thing.

Is there really that much of a difference in prices, or is it just that the majority of men don't care and buy tshirts and jeans from walmart?


I don't know. I think it's just easier to sell women expensive **** so it costs more.
____________________________
Turin wrote:
Seriously, what the f*ck nature?
#97 Oct 22 2008 at 7:18 PM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,781 posts
gbaji wrote:
I'm pretty sure they'd have noticed (and you all would have derided her) if she'd shown up in hand-me-downs from Goodwill...
Oh no, not at all. There's lots of stuff that's new, or brand new looking. It's usually the first place I go if i need to look specially spiffy.

Look, if the RNC wants to buy her spensive cloths, well so-be-it. But aint' no one in their right mind, gonna convince me that it was necessary, and they were getting good value for their money.
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#98 Oct 22 2008 at 7:20 PM Rating: Decent
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
17,302 posts
Commander Annabella wrote:
TirithRR wrote:
Commander Annabella wrote:
Quote:
And since the cost for formal and semi-formal clothing is massively greater for women than men, it also makes you sexist.


No, it makes the fashion industry sexist.


I only thought this was true with Wedding Dresses and Tuxedos because of the whole "Buy a dress, rent a tux" thing.

Is there really that much of a difference in prices, or is it just that the majority of men don't care and buy tshirts and jeans from walmart?


I don't know. I think it's just easier to sell women expensive sh*t so it costs more.


I guess it doesn't help that even the frugal women buy 10+ pairs of shoes.

Not counting snow boots, I've never owned more than one pair of usable shoes at a single time.
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
#99 Oct 22 2008 at 7:21 PM Rating: Decent
Vagina Dentata,
what a wonderful phrase
******
30,106 posts
If she was really a maverick, she and her minions would be whipping up an outfit on her Singer sewing machine. Christ, she'd even score some points by joining hte interests of the indie feminist crowd and the Eagle forum. I wish I could sew. Maybe i'll buy me a sewing machine too. Or take up knitting.
____________________________
Turin wrote:
Seriously, what the f*ck nature?
#100 Oct 22 2008 at 7:24 PM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,781 posts
Commander Annabella wrote:
If she was really a maverick, she and her minions would be whipping up an outfit on her Singer sewing machine. Christ, she'd even score some points by joining hte interests of the indie feminist crowd and the Eagle forum. I wish I could sew. Maybe i'll buy me a sewing machine too. Or take up knitting.
I understand Caribou hair spins up into some nice sturdy wool.
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#101 Oct 22 2008 at 7:24 PM Rating: Decent
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
17,302 posts
Commander Annabella wrote:
If she was really a maverick, she and her minions would be whipping up an outfit on her Singer sewing machine. Christ, she'd even score some points by joining hte interests of the indie feminist crowd and the Eagle forum. I wish I could sew. Maybe i'll buy me a sewing machine too. Or take up knitting.


There was a really odd girl in my high school graduating class. During junior high she was really superficial, tons of makeup, designer clothing, etc. Then one year about 10th grade or so she suddenly goes all Vegan and Green. No makeup, sewing her own clothes in her free time during class, anti-war, peta type.

Crazy people...
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 206 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (206)