[andi*pandi]

I know that if I wanted my family to travel with me on a business trip, my work would only go as far as letting me share the hotel room with them. If I tried to pass off their airfare, extra room, food etc as well? At best there'd be laughter and pondering if I was high. At worst I'd be fired.

Again, it's not quite as evil as kicking puppies (or shooting wolves?) but it does speak to entitlement as Paco said.

[tie]

Originally Posted by RAILhead 

Yep, like when I was growing up and my Dad had to go to Washington DC for meetings and he'd take us along so that we would get the experience and fun and learning from seeing the city, museums, libraries, etc., etc. And you know what? The people that foot the bill didn't give a rat's ass -- just like the people that paid for Palin's stuff don't give a rats ass.

You don't give a rat's ass about how your tax dollars are spent? That seems odd.

In your business, what do you think would happen to someone who claimed $20K reimbursement for their family's airfare and separate luxury hotel rooms for their family? Would the company just pay up, without giving a rat's ass?

[ironknee]

Originally Posted by RAILhead 

Actually, it's patently known that purchases of this sort, when made with campaign funds, end in said purchases not being kept. That's why so may people are wondering why this is news, simply because it's a poor attempt at a smear based on idiocy.

that $150,000 could help a lot of "Joes" out there for a few years.

what about the hair and makeup? how is that to be donated?

[Paco500]

I wonder if I would be defending my chosen candidate with such vehemence and patent intellectual dishonesty if the roles were reversed. While my dream would be that no candidate worthy of my support would ever put me in such a position, I'm bright enough to know that is likely not the case.

But I'd like to think that when they did, I'd also be bright enough to just keep my mouth shut.

[tie]

$32,800 for hair and makeup for the first two weeks of October. I am impressed.

[olePigeon]

I can't wait to see a hobo in a $20,000 designer dress.

[tie]

That was my image, too. A candidate spends $150,000 on designer clothes in the middle of a recession---and it is okay because the clothing is going to be donated to charity?! What is the charity going to do with the clothes? And the $23,000 spent on makeup isn't going to be donated to charity.

[ironknee]

at least spend the money wisely



never go full retard

[TheMosco]

Originally Posted by tie 

$32,800 for hair and makeup for the first two weeks of October. I am impressed.

For all the flack that Obama got for being a "celebrity", it seems like McCain/Palin are the only ones living the life...

[RAILhead]

Originally Posted by tie 

You don't give a rat's ass about how your tax dollars are spent? That seems odd.

In your business, what do you think would happen to someone who claimed $20K reimbursement for their family's airfare and separate luxury hotel rooms for their family? Would the company just pay up, without giving a rat's ass?

It would depend -- and where has anything been said about this being under-the-table like so many of you are making it out to be?

I have no problem whatsoever paying for my employees, when they need to go on a work-related trip -- and they want or need to take their underage children with them.

You see, I'm not such a mean, rich, capitalist, elitist, Conservative, hum-bug after all.

[RAILhead]

Originally Posted by ironknee 

that $150,000 could help a lot of "Joes" out there for a few years.

what about the hair and makeup? how is that to be donated?

Taxpayers aren't paying for the wardrobe/makeup...

[ironknee]

Originally Posted by RAILhead 

Taxpayers aren't paying for the wardrobe/makeup...

that's not really the point is it?

[RAILhead]

Originally Posted by ironknee 

that's not really the point is it?

Then what is? It's not "right" for her to use campaign funds to get a wardrobe suited for public appearances as the next, potential VP of the US?

What's wrong with you humans?

[ort888]

The reason it's funny is because she's running on her small town appeal and going from town to town and spreading the message that she is just this folksie down to earth hockey mom, all while wearing $6,000 suits. It's just ironic. That's all. It's hypocritical.

They keep talking about Joe the Plumber, yet she has paid more for clothes in one month then his house is worth. It highlights the true disparity between what they are selling themselves as and their actual position in the world compared to us commoners.

It also highlights the amount of effort the Republican party is putting into selling her appearance. Since there doesn't appear to be much substance, they have to go all out with the glitz and glamour.

[RAILhead]

...and no one else has ever done this? Are you really so partisan that you can't even see how idiotic this hullabaloo is?

[ort888]

Name another candidate who has spent $150k in clothing in a month. Who would even be in the position?

Hell, name another human.

Maybe Paris Hilton... Hmmm.... where have I seen her before?

[ironknee]

Originally Posted by RAILhead 

Then what is? It's not "right" for her to use campaign funds to get a wardrobe suited for public appearances as the next, potential VP of the US?

What's wrong with you humans?

as ort888 plainly explained, it's all about message.

How many hockey moms buy expensive clothes that costs $150,000.00?

How would Joe the plumber react if his wife spent $150,000.00 on cloths, makeup and hair in less than 90 days?

Whatever to the respectable "Republican cloth coat?"

[ort888]

Look, it's their campaign money. They can spend it however they wish. Nothing wrong has transpired here. It's not taxpayer money. It's probably ultimitally more valuable then 2 prime time commercials, so being in high fashion does have a value to the campaign, especially for a candidate largely picked for her image.

All that said, it's just comically. After hearing John Edwards $400 haircut mentioned over and over, the fact that the right wing talking heads are trying to downplay 150k is farcical.

She goes from small town to small town talking about how much better small America is then big america and how they are going to protect them from big bad washington and the east coast elitists... all the while wearing clothes that are worth more then many people's homes.

[tie]

Originally Posted by RAILhead 

...and no one else has ever done this? Are you really so partisan that you can't even see how idiotic this hullabaloo is?

Has any other politician ever done this? Not at the national level, in my memory. As the country is in a recession, it just stupid that one party is running candidates who spend $150K on clothing in a month, $500K on a credit card bill, and can't remember how many houses or cars they own. These same candidates propose cutting taxes for the rich (extending Bush's tax cuts and further cutting capital gains) and increasing taxes on everyone else (taxing health care coverage)---and they are claiming that it is the Democrats who are the elitists. I certainly don't have a problem with them spending campaign money however they wish, provided it is legal. I don't really care if McCain's shoes cost $500 or if Palin's makeup cost $30K (!), as long as they aren't tying up airports à la Clinton. But the image they project is just crazy. Does McCain want to lose this election, or is he just stupid?

[amazing]

After McCain chose Palin as VP running-mate, can you doubt that he's just stupid? Do you really think she passed any vetting process whatsoever?

Just think about how different the campaign would be if he'd managed to persuade Condoleeza Rice to run as his VP? Naturally enough, she had better things to do, but surely McCain could have exercised better judgment than choosing Palin?

Because choosing her guaranteed that he is going to lose the election. Even Colin Powell says she's not ready to step up to being president, if anything should happen to McCain. And Joe Lieberman laughed when asked that same question...

[Eug]

I think we're getting off track here. The money on wardrobes is excessive, but it ain't public money. Personally I think both sides spend WAY too much money on their campaigns. However, the money donated is basically for PR anyway, so I'm not faulting her for that, cuz wardrobe is PR. This is ironic to a certain extent yes, but not unethical.

OTOH, charging the taxpayer for unwarranted expenses knowingly on a repeated basis is unethical IMO.

[RAILhead]

Yes, because Obama's O Plane with the embroidered, leather seats is so low rent...

[spacefreak]

How much did Michelle Obama's 2 makeovers cost?