Palin's clothes spree spending.

[mirrodie]

So she spends over 150,000 on clothes for her and her family, for campaign purposes.

(Mind you, I can't even begin to remember what color she wore during the debate, let alone the brand name of her clothes)
One of the stores names was Saks Fifth Ave, right?

And, surely in a desperate move to avoid media persecution, her campaign says the clothing will go to charity.

So let me get things straight....Over 150,000 bucks blown in a clothes spending spree, (from a hockey mom, no less. Sure thats normal everyday housewife spending :shock: ), only to have it go to charity.

Seems to me that savvy hockey mom could have gone to Macy's, saved a ton of money and also donated it to charity.

My point? It you can't reduce spending at home, my gosh, how can you claim to do the same for the country?

[T-Bird76]

Mario where did you read this? It would help if a source was provided. I highly doubt that 150 are just cloths alone. They are prob lumping in allot of other related costs, security, transportation, etc which can add up quickly.

[mirrodie]

heard it last night on the late news and this AM too

http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/200810 ... tico/14805

[Matt Molnar]

In fairness, I don't think either campaign is particularly thrifty with their donations, but donors don't seem to care very much.

[mirrodie]

Just having a difficult time receiving messages of cutting spending when it doesn't come from them.

[Matt Molnar]

As I told my friend who had just donated $50 to Obama's campaign, "congrats, you just bought a nice bottle of Grey Goose for the bar on the good Senator's jet."

I'm not donating money to any candidate until I have enough to actually buy me some AIG/Fannie/Freddie-style political favor. :)

[T-Bird76]

As I told my friend who had just donated $50 to Obama's campaign, "congrats, you just bought a nice bottle of Grey Goose for the bar on the good Senator's jet."

I'm not donating money to any candidate until I have enough to actually buy me some AIG/Fannie/Freddie-style political favor. :)

Obama likes Grey Goose? Hmmmm he's got some good taste.

[Matt Molnar]

As I told my friend who had just donated $50 to Obama's campaign, "congrats, you just bought a nice bottle of Grey Goose for the bar on the good Senator's jet."

I'm not donating money to any candidate until I have enough to actually buy me some AIG/Fannie/Freddie-style political favor. :)

Obama likes Grey Goose? Hmmmm he's got some good taste.

I have no confirmation of that, but if my plane had a bar, and I had raised $600 million to do with as I pleased, why not drink the good stuff? :)

[PhilDernerJr]

BOTH parties do similar things for EVERY candidate. It just happens that women do have more fashion needs than men. Campaigns spend a ridiculous amount of money on all kinds of things...and it belongs to the campaign. It's no one else's money, they can do what they want with it. In fact, the contributors to the campaigns can get upset if their money is NOT used.

[mirrodie]

BOTH parties do similar things for EVERY candidate. It just happens that women do have more fashion needs than men. Campaigns spend a ridiculous amount of money on all kinds of things...and it belongs to the campaign. It's no one else's money, they can do what they want with it. In fact, the contributors to the campaigns can get upset if their money is NOT used.

Again, I don't disagree there. However, I stand by my statement, "Just having a difficult time receiving messages of cutting spending when it doesn't come from them."

[PhilDernerJr]

It's not HER choice and has nothing to do with cutting spending.

[PhilDernerJr]

I should add to that.

It doesn't pertain because there's no need to cut campaign spending, so I think the cutting reference is unfair. It's like saying a dry cleaner cna't be good if he doesn't floss...two completely different things.

HOWEVER, I do strongly believe in campaign finance reform. I would like to see a little more regulation in terms of where the campaigns are getting their money and how, and how much of it can be used. Until those rules are made, it isn't even anyone's business how or what it's spent on.

[mirrodie]

Nah I dont think it unfair at all.


She made a choice walking into Alaska politics and getting rid of the big jet. You are saying she had no choice here?

Call me skeptical

[PhilDernerJr]

I'm saying her campaign sent her and set it up. I'd bet she never even saw price tags, but had people doing the shopping for her.

[Midnight Mike]

So she spends over 150,000 on clothes for her and her family, for campaign purposes.

(Mind you, I can't even begin to remember what color she wore during the debate, let alone the brand name of her clothes)
One of the stores names was Saks Fifth Ave, right?

And, surely in a desperate move to avoid media persecution, her campaign says the clothing will go to charity.

So let me get things straight....Over 150,000 bucks blown in a clothes spending spree, (from a hockey mom, no less. Sure thats normal everyday housewife spending :shock: ), only to have it go to charity.

Seems to me that savvy hockey mom could have gone to Macy's, saved a ton of money and also donated it to charity.

My point? It you can't reduce spending at home, my gosh, how can you claim to do the same for the country?

It is none of our business what people spend their money on

With a posting like this, & then we wonder why our political leaders do those stupid attack ads :roll: