Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Neimansgate


(Robert F. Bukaty / AP)

I didn’t want to do it.

I didn't want to write about Sarah Palin’s $150,000 shop op.

Then my husband called to say that this was just up my alley. (Given the state of our family budget, I’m not sure that encouraging me to think about buying expensive clothes was entirely in his self-interest.)

And my (male) boss raised it at our morning meeting.

I was planning to spend the day doing some Very Serious reporting about how to handle this transition, which is going to be awfully tricky to navigate no matter who wins.

But, hey, if these guys insist on frivolity, so be it. As between reading a treatise on transitions past and clicking around the Neiman-Marcus website to figure out how Palin actually managed to drop $75,000 in one expensive swoop -- well, even though I am, alas, not one of those Marcuses, the latter’s a lot more tempting.

First, it is true -- just ask Hillary Clinton -- that it takes a lot more time and money for a woman politician to be in the national spotlight than it does for a man.

Second, assume that even though she was the governor of Alaska, Palin’s pre-nomination closet was nothing but North Face fleece and she needed to build a wardrobe from scratch. Assume she’s got a little over two months on the campaign trail, and her handlers said it’s simply not done to wear each outfit more than twice.

So, say, 35 outfits -- jacket, skirt, shoes, the whole shebang -- which seems like an awful lot. At $150,000, that would be $4,285 each. I’m on the Neiman-Marcus site now, and I’m having a hard time managing to spend that much. Here’s a lovely Armani Collezioni asymmetric jersey jacket ($1,635), white blouse ($775), and classic pencil skirt (a bargain at $475). Throw in a pair of Christian Louboutin Simple 100 Pumps -- I found them on-line at Saks for $575 -- and you’re still not there.

Talk about a proven capacity for executive decision-making. I’m impressed, really, that she could manage to spend so much so fast.

Third, what in the world were they thinking?

That no one would find this stuff buried in the Republican National Committee reports -- when these things are electronically searchable? (Good get, Jeanne Cummings!)

That even if she needed new clothes and maybe wasn’t interested in putting it on the Palin family Mastercard, it was a good idea to drop this big a bundle on Mrs. Non-elitist Hockey Mom -- even assuming this is a legitimate use of campaign funds? Hint: Macy’s has some handy 20 percent off coupons. Hey, Potomac Mills has some great buys -- and it’s in a swing state!

That it’s a good idea, when the shopping spree turns up on the campaign reports, to say: “The campaign does not comment on strategic decisions regarding how financial resources available to the campaign are spent." Strategic decisions -- like what, St. John vs. Dior?

The later explanation -- "It was always the intent that the clothing go to a charitable purpose after the campaign" -- reminded me of the Reagan White House scrambling to explain Nancy’s “borrowed” designer clothes.

And, by the way, what was Palin thinking?

For all that maverick reformer talk, Palin seems to have a problem with the walk part. The Associated Press reported yesterday on Palin’s habit of inviting her kids along on expensive official trips -- and billing the state.

“In October 2007, Palin brought daughter Bristol along on a trip to New York for a women's leadership conference,” the AP reported. “Plane tickets from Anchorage to La Guardia Airport for $1,385.11 were billed to the state, records show, and mother and daughter shared a room for four nights at the $707.29-per-night Essex House hotel, which overlooks Central Park.”

Given their governor’s taste in clothes, I guess Alaska taxpayers should be relieved Palin was frugal enough to share the room.

All of which leads to an update of the governor’s famous convention quip. What’s the difference between Sarah Palin and a pit bull?

Lipstick and $150,000 worth of designer clothes.

By Ruth Marcus  | October 22, 2008; 3:45 PM ET
Categories:  Marcus  | Tags:  Ruth Marcus  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Powell's Predictable Endorsement
Next: Thanks, But No Thanks to Absentee Voting

Comments

Where are the gaggle of Fox bots, dittoheads and Coltureites who went after John Edwards for his now infamous $400 haircut?

Posted by: MerrillFrank | October 22, 2008 4:25 PM | Report abuse


Field Dressed: Inside Sarah Palin's Excellent Shopping Adventure:
http://headofstate.blogspot.com/2008/10/field-dressed.html

Posted by: janawalter87 | October 22, 2008 4:30 PM | Report abuse

you know, at some point we're just going to have to ask whether they have just said to themselves, "nothing else is working, let's see if we can get the men with some f me pumps."

Posted by: JoeT1 | October 22, 2008 4:30 PM | Report abuse

Thanks for the update. That must have been one great shopping trip. Was this amount just for Sarah or did this amount cover clothes for hubbie and kids too?

Posted by: sed81650 | October 22, 2008 4:32 PM | Report abuse

JoeT1:

Great Winehouse reference!


Ruth:

What is so frivolous about a report on how much Palin has wasted on her clothing in a month and a half? Her wild spending at a time of national financial crises raises some pretty serious legal and ethical issues.

Posted by: birdaa | October 22, 2008 4:37 PM | Report abuse

I am a college graduate, have a good job (for where I live), and work very hard for what I have. It would take me five years of working at my current job, before taxes, to make $150,000. If you factor in my second job, it would take four years and ten months. Hockey mom or not, the GOP lost this mom's vote, not on big ticket issues, but on sales tickets.

Posted by: vankaypie | October 22, 2008 4:38 PM | Report abuse

Well Ruth, you totally missed the point, as usual.

so to spell it out for you, here is the point:

IT IS ILLEGAL FOR THE RNC TO BUY THE PALIN $150,000 IN CLOTHING.

ILLEGAL ACTIVITY FROM HYPOCRITES CLAIMING TO BE A LAW-AND-ORDER PARTY.

This is called "HYPOCRISY".

So the point? The shopping spree is illegal and hypocritical behavior from republicans... AGAIN!

Posted by: onestring | October 22, 2008 4:53 PM | Report abuse

Well, I guess we now know why she never had time for media interviews. She was shopping!!! Dropping cash was more important than informing the American people on issues that matter, like, "how am I going to dress my kids for school this fall".

Posted by: TX2stepindependent | October 22, 2008 5:01 PM | Report abuse

You won't find Gov. Palin's clothes on the website. You have to go to the exclusive designer boutiques located inside the stores. Those goodies are simply too exclusive to be put up on a website where the grungy masses can ogle them via computer monitor.

On a lighter note, perhaps this could be the latest GOP tactic, Extreme Makeover Political Edition. One lucky woman each week.....................never mind.

Posted by: lmidgarden | October 22, 2008 5:02 PM | Report abuse

Lemme get this straight McCain was a "champion of campaign finance" so he wrote a law that would allow Sarah Palin to get $150K + in clothes and Makeup and would allow him unlimited usage of his wife's personal jet? Does this concept sound fishy to anyone else?

Posted by: Beka13 | October 22, 2008 5:04 PM | Report abuse

Since when could Joe Sixpack or Joe the (non)Plumber afford $150,000 in designer clothes?

Posted by: jimcummings | October 22, 2008 5:06 PM | Report abuse

It makes me sick to my stomach—the ugliness of the Republican ticket. Can’t we vote now and put McCain-Palin out of their misery?

Posted by: LarisaVoronina | October 22, 2008 5:06 PM | Report abuse

Imagine that Governor Palin had gone on a televised shopping run through the outlets in the old knitting mill district in Reading, Pa instead of sending a political advisor on a high end spree.

For about one tenth the total cost of her new wardrobe, she could have had (free) ten million bucks worth of good "Joe" style political advertising in a critical swing state with a substantial number of lost jobs in the clothing industry.

Instead she gives us "Niemangate", which highlights one more trait her campaign shares with the Bush administration: utter incompetence. Heckuva job, Palie!

Posted by: tmeador | October 22, 2008 5:08 PM | Report abuse

I challenge the WaPo+Obama campaign to spread news about Sarah's "fashion problems" as far and as wide as possible.

You have tried to paint her as an Alaskan hick (which didn't work) and now you want to reverse course 180 Degrees, and smear her as an elitist fashion maven.

The metro-sexuals of WaPo may have their own opinions, but your attempts at lame negative PR against her will only serve to increase her publicity and image among normal Americans.

Posted by: pgr88 | October 22, 2008 5:11 PM | Report abuse

It is funny how this would be sexist, if it had been a democrat, racist and sexist if it had been an afroamerican spending money on straigtening hair.
But since Sarah Palin is not a democrat anything goes.
And by the way the story about bringing children on travels has been there since the nomination. At least at that time it was considered legal.
How much has been spent on cloth and make-up and lingeri by the democratic ticket?

Posted by: Gert1 | October 22, 2008 5:13 PM | Report abuse

Sherman Adams was Eisenhower's chief of staff for six years, and all he got out of it was a lousy vicuna coat.

Posted by: jbritt3 | October 22, 2008 5:13 PM | Report abuse

This whole thing is stupid. It reminds me of the "nannygate" scandal where political enemies of whoever was the President at the time attacked one of his nominees' domestic help payments.

Now we're just going to make it even harder to elect a woman to public office.

God, people are so shortsighted.

Posted by: ZZim | October 22, 2008 5:13 PM | Report abuse

The real 'tell' is in the already changing explanations. The spokeswoman explained that it was because she didn't have time to go home after being nominated.

Um, I thought she was whisked off home DIRECTLY after the nomination so she could be with her son who was shipping off to Iraq? (in reality it was both that and some now questionably effective 'cramming' on the issues)

Then there's the issue as noted that they won't answer if it was a one-time thing or an ongoing expense. The 'she didn't have time' argument says it has to be a one-time thing....so 150K in basically one spree? that's even worse...

And lets make sure that after the Dayton, OH introduction of Ms. Palin, that the campaign can show a direct flight to NYC for this shopping spree.

Posted by: rpixley220 | October 22, 2008 5:13 PM | Report abuse

For all of Palin's claim to be a reformer and one who goes after corruption, Palin wastes no time using her positions of public trust as a means of carrying out her personal agendas. First, we hear how she violated Alaskan ethics laws by pressuring someone to fire her ex-brother-in-law as he was divorcing her sister (and then firing the guy for refusing to fire the brother-in-law). Then we hear how Palin billed the tax payers of Alaska for tens of thousands of dollars in hotel fees for nights she spent at her own home. Then we hear how she charges her kids travel to the state of Alaska for such things as watching their dad in a snowmobile race. Now she uses campaign funds to charge $150,000 in clothes so she can talk to people about her hockey mom, small-town American values (of course, she chose to shop in "sinful" New York City instead of helping the economies of those small towns by shopping there). Is there any doubt how she will view the office of the Vice President?

Posted by: adifferentpointofview | October 22, 2008 5:16 PM | Report abuse

You gotta luv' it. You can tell how a person would govern by how they campaign.

I hope the Obama surrogates use this every time the GOP talking heads talk about elitist.

Posted by: swrightsr | October 22, 2008 5:20 PM | Report abuse

The real problem here is that after $150,000, she still dresses all frumpy. Jeez, you think Cindy would have given her a few fashion tips, y'know?

Posted by: MajorMelFunkshion | October 22, 2008 5:23 PM | Report abuse

I take it the libs are getting kinda scared...

Posted by: luca_20009 | October 22, 2008 5:26 PM | Report abuse

Imagine if you're a struggling working class family -- things are going south financially for you, rapidly -- but you really believe in your presidential candidate. So you scrape together a few bucks and donate to the campaign, assuming that your hard-earned money will go toward ads, literature, organizing ground efforts. I would be FURIOUS to know that I passed on buying a new pair of shoes for myself, to replace the one pair I owned which are scuffed and worn badly, so that Sarah Palin could buy a pair of red leather pumps from Neiman Marcus along with $150,000.00 worth of other clothing. What a slap in the face to all the middle class and blue-collar donors to the RNC and McCain-Palin campaign.

Posted by: DogBitez | October 22, 2008 5:28 PM | Report abuse

Obama is in trouble so let's change the subject.

Posted by: sam51 | October 22, 2008 5:36 PM | Report abuse

How much has been spent on cloth and make-up and lingeri by the democratic ticket?

Posted by: Gert1

take it the libs are getting kinda scared...

Posted by: luca_20009
******************************
That shaking you are seeing is of laughter, not fear - jaysus, the RNC spending $150,000.00 to gussy up Ms. Maverick and all you dupes can say is what did the dems spend (nada) or that we are scared - how about a little outrage? This tone-deaf campaign's whole premise is of being for the middle-class - the real working people, blah, blah. And here the RNC is spending over $100,000 to dress up their VP pick and her family with high-end store duds. That is our mortgage spent on clothes!!
But please vote for McPow and "Sarah Hilton" - they are just like you, right?

Posted by: LABC | October 22, 2008 5:37 PM | Report abuse

Hummm, I wonder how many Republican men will line up to purchase items such as used undergarments when the charity auction begins?

Posted by: haymarketbill | October 22, 2008 5:39 PM | Report abuse


Ms. Marcus, the point is her hypocrisy. Going around the country claiming to be "one of you," and attacking Obama as "not like US" while dropping seventy grand at Nieman and spending five grand for ONE MONTH's worth of makeup from a celebrity stylist.

This after the asinine "celebrity" attacks on Obama that the press couldn't snark about enough; this after John Edwards getting the crap kicked out of him for his deeply troubling haircuts.

Come on.

Posted by: monk4hall | October 22, 2008 5:42 PM | Report abuse

Where are the gaggle of Fox bots, dittoheads and Coltureites who went after John Edwards for his now infamous $400 haircut?

Posted by: MerrillFrank | October 22, 2008 4:25 PM
//

Sending out their resumes to CNN.

Posted by: Attucks | October 22, 2008 5:45 PM | Report abuse

I can't help but think that underlying Ms Marcus's and Jeanne Cummings' smarmy sanctimony on this is that it is killing them that they could spend TEN MILLION on fashion, and they still would look like old frumps next to Governor Palin.

That is Sarah's unforgivable sin...
.

Posted by: gitarre | October 22, 2008 5:48 PM | Report abuse

Mooselini: All hypocrisy, all the time, 24/7/365.

Eat your heart out, Mrs. Joe Six Pack; eat your heart out, Mrs. Joe the Plumber.

You just received an insight into the Republican party's true base: The Haves and the Have-Mores.

And no, you're not welcome -- even if you use the Tradesman's Entrance.

But please vote for us anyway.

Posted by: pali2500 | October 22, 2008 5:50 PM | Report abuse

While I'm glad to see anything that would make "MILF Mooseturd 1984" look worse in the eyes of the mouth-breathing 23%ers who still support the fascist ticket, it's too bad it has to be something this trivial.

Fact is, anyone allowed to run for high political office in the U.S. is going to be part of the upper class. They're not like you and me who have to work for a living. Once chosen to be among the politically annointed, they move in rareified circles and get to do/eat/buy things we can't dream of.

I'd rather see Palin denounced for her ties to the Alaskan separatist party that aims to do what the Confederacy couldn't do -- break apart the "United" States. I'd like to see her slammed for being an apocalyptic religious wack-job who would start a nuclear war to bring Jeebus back to Earth as soon as Johnny McCaincerface finally rots away. I'd like to see her exposed for having her house built by companies that got sweetheart deals to build that hockey rink in Wasilla -- just like her mentor Ted Stevens!

There are many things I'd like to see Sarah crucified for. (Religious reference intended -- remember there were thieves on crosses on either side of Jesus.) This is a small one. But hey, if the mud sticks, smear it! Especially when it's mud she rolled in herself.

Posted by: Bukkonen | October 22, 2008 5:50 PM | Report abuse

I've been commenting on this for ages -- there are photos of Palin in July in the most Gawdawful pink dress with big ruffles in the aisle of a grocery store so it's clear this cosmopolitan silhouette is not hers, it's just one more part of the Caribou Barbie package -- not only was she unprepared on the issues but also on her personal style????? Pathetic. Watch this for a laugh:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yTwAGmDLW4M

Posted by: Omyobama | October 22, 2008 5:53 PM | Report abuse


"I was planning to spend the day doing some Very Serious reporting about how to handle this transition, which is going to be awfully tricky to navigate no matter who wins..
But, hey, if these guys insist on frivolity, so be it.."

---------------------------------------------

THAT'S the journalistic SPIRIT!!!

No WONDER the country is going to Hell!!

Posted by: YouryellowribbonmagnetwontgetyouintoHeavenanymore | October 22, 2008 5:54 PM | Report abuse

While Mooselini was shopping:

"Senior officials of Russian energy company Gazprom, including personal associates of Vladimir Putin, met in Anchorage with Alaska's Department of Natural Resources to discuss investing in energy projects in the state. Governor Sarah Palin said that she did not know about the meeting." ~ Harper's Weekly Review.

Posted by: pali2500 | October 22, 2008 5:54 PM | Report abuse

Hell, I'm a doctor and I don't think I've spent $150,000 on clothes in my entire 52 years of life.
But it just goes to show you what "good old main street values" are to the "trickle down bunch"!
Give me a break!

Posted by: tmcn2 | October 22, 2008 5:58 PM | Report abuse

Okay, I admit this story is a pure puff piece, but when you do the math it really is extraordinary. That is why *true* conservatives in the historic sense not in the modern, right wing, nut job sense hate about big government. Given the opportunity to abuse power, people will abuse power. That's why we don't like more taxes or more government oversight. These things have a corrupting power that has been evinced throughout history. Mrs. Palin, with her weak intellectual curiosity and nonexistent moral discipline, is sure to succumb to the corruption that power carries with it like a virus... she did in Alaska, she has as a candidate, and she surely will as a vice president. "Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?"

Posted by: AmirA2 | October 22, 2008 6:03 PM | Report abuse

That is a lot of lipstick and clothing to dress up that pitbull...

You would think they would have changed the hairstyle.

I wasn't voting for the racist anyway, and this only confirms my opinion.

Posted by: jwallace1 | October 22, 2008 6:03 PM | Report abuse


"I was planning to spend the day doing some Very Serious reporting about how to handle this transition, which is going to be awfully tricky to navigate no matter who wins..
But, hey, if these guys insist on frivolity, so be it.."

---------------------------------------------

THAT'S the journalistic SPIRIT!!!

No WONDER the country is going to Hell!!

Posted by: YouryellowribbonmagnetwontgetyouintoHeavenanymore | October 22, 2008 6:05 PM | Report abuse

Admit it.

The REAL problem is most of you columnists sit on your flabby rumps nine hours a day and can't pull off a pencil skirt.

Posted by: YouryellowribbonmagnetwontgetyouintoHeavenanymore | October 22, 2008 6:08 PM | Report abuse

$130,000+ worth of purchases on Sept. 10th.

Yet another sign that Republicans really only use New York City for shopping and Ground Zero photo ops.

Oh yeah, and for railing against the 'Anti-Americans'. As Jon Stewart said...

Posted by: NYCer | October 22, 2008 6:09 PM | Report abuse

Don't forget that this is your tax dollars hard at work. Maybe this is why they don't like higher taxes, they don't really understand that those dollars can be used for silly things like education, roads and the like - pathetic

Posted by: interestingstuff | October 22, 2008 6:25 PM | Report abuse

"Admit it.

The REAL problem is most of you columnists sit on your flabby rumps nine hours a day and can't pull off a pencil skirt.

Posted by: YouryellowribbonmagnetwontgetyouintoHeavenanymore | October 22, 2008 6:08 PM"

No, the real problem is this fraudulent joke of a candidate is trying to pull a fast one on the American people. And dopes like you are oblivious to it. Please do us all a favor and stay home on Election Day.

Posted by: simpleton1 | October 22, 2008 6:25 PM | Report abuse

Got fifty bucks that says Ruth Marcus comes to work every day in a polyester-blend pantsuit with her swollen feet pouring out of a pair of $25 Sperry topsiders.

Posted by: YouryellowribbonmagnetwontgetyouintoHeavenanymore | October 22, 2008 6:27 PM | Report abuse

Fashion Fans for Obama/Biden '08

Favorite Budget Fashion Story: Michelle Obama in H&M Dress
http://www.thebudgetfashionista.com/archive/budget-fashion-michelle-obama-in-hm-dress/

Diesel 'Liquid Space' Holographic Fashion Show
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CCcTRjxP-Fc

Posted by: cooday | October 22, 2008 6:33 PM | Report abuse

I think it entirely fitting that the wives of Joe Sixpack and Joe the Plumber as well as Wendy the waitress get Missy Palin's clothing once she's done with them. Of course if McCain/Palin wins, she'll need a new wardrobe but I would assume they won't use campaign funds for those but simply charge them off the the tax payers.

If approximately 20,000 dollars for make up artist's and 150,000 more for Missy Palin's talking clothes, you shouldn't need much more convincing McCain's running a circus instead of a campaign. You betcha, by golly.

Posted by: 1ken | October 22, 2008 6:33 PM | Report abuse

I was amazed when I saw this photo of 7 or 8 year-old Piper Palin carrying Mom's Louis Vuitton purse.

http://bagnewsnotes.typepad.com/bagnews/2008/10/more-on-palins.html

Understandably, Sarah Palin would need a new wardrobe for appearing before the public (though NOT from campaign funds), but how do they justify the cost of a new designer purse?

Gov. Palin doesn't need to carry an expensive handbag to give speeches!

Sheer insanity!


Posted by: sofialee | October 22, 2008 6:42 PM | Report abuse


Associated Press poll today has the race tied.

Obama'a in trouble.

So let's write a column about where Sarah Plain got her jackets.

Posted by: YouryellowribbonmagnetwontgetyouintoHeavenanymore | October 22, 2008 6:43 PM | Report abuse

Gert1 raises the interesting possibility that some of this $150,000 may have been spent on lingerie. I doubt it; but some of it was apparently spent on her husband's wardrobe. Maybe some money went to the children, as well.

What a PR disaster for Palin!

Posted by: jchaney | October 22, 2008 6:46 PM | Report abuse

If you discount the $10,000 Palin may have needed out of necessity to upgrade her wardrobe, doesn't the remaining $140,000 look like theft from the public purse? I hope the RNC gives Sam the Plumber the money he needs to buy a business and to get his plumbing license so that he can be taxed by Obama.

Posted by: jchaney | October 22, 2008 6:51 PM | Report abuse

Yes, it would seem that the "real" Sarah Palin has been invented and the transformation wasn't cheap. The timing of this shallow frivolity on someone else's dime when so many real people are really suffering is emblematic of what is wrong with the GOP. Hopefully Joe Six-Pack feels pretty stupid about dipping into the grocery money to save the world from the black devil. Save the world from Sarah Palin!

Posted by: SarahBB | October 22, 2008 7:02 PM | Report abuse

Just when you think the mindless attacks on Gov. Palin could not possibly sink any lower...

The more Palin Derangement Syndrome I see, the greater my admiration for this generous, graceful and powerful new leader. Thank you for your service, Gov. Palin!

Posted by: zjr78xva | October 22, 2008 7:02 PM | Report abuse

I still haven't read what was spent on Sarah and what was spent on the kids -- someone bought something at Barney's and I'm betting it was for Todd and the shot-gunned son-in-law to be (not). It really doesn't matter it is illegal but I can just see them selling the clothes and handbag and shoes on E-Bay -- I'm betting that sells as fast as the Alaska plane -- oh wait it didn't sell on E-Bay. I know I'm picky but if I'm going to be lied to -- make it believable and impossible to disprove -- this is like I was against the bridge to nowhere but I took the money and built the road to nowhere. This is where a legal finding of guilt for abusing power is catagorized as I'm so glad I was found innocent of everything.

Posted by: Lemon722 | October 22, 2008 7:10 PM | Report abuse

First they attack her for being unsophisticated, then they attack her for being too sophisticated.

Ever get the feeling that the point is just to attack her?

Posted by: zjr78xva | October 22, 2008 7:11 PM | Report abuse

... The more Palin Derangement Syndrome I see, the greater my admiration for this generous, graceful and powerful new leader. Thank you for your service, Gov. Palin! ...

Yeah right. Thanks Governor, and please accept this $150,000 dollar Nieman-Marcus giftcard as a token of the RNCs appreciation. Feh!

Posted by: synykyl | October 22, 2008 7:15 PM | Report abuse

I think it's okay to spend that much on clothes by one's aprty if one is running for VP. You can't have the VP of a national party look poorly dressed it would be an embarrassment not only for the party but for the nation. When Prez Clinton visited our city and our mayor turned up looking like he had just returned from a casual night with the boys at the bar, many of us were mortified. Dressing well and in good taste is a part of the job and if that job involves the family then so be it.

If Obama or Biden's family could nto aford good clothes I would expect the Democratic national Committee to buy them campaign clothes. The US is already embarrassed on the international stage, let's not further tarnish our image by having our candidates dress like slobs.

Posted by: kxrc | October 22, 2008 7:16 PM | Report abuse

It is funny how this would be sexist, if it had been a democrat, racist and sexist if it had been an afroamerican spending money on straigtening hair.
But since Sarah Palin is not a democrat anything goes.
And by the way the story about bringing children on travels has been there since the nomination. At least at that time it was considered legal.
How much has been spent on cloth and make-up and lingeri by the democratic ticket?

Posted by: Gert1


Well, Gertie, you really don't get it do you? Sarah and her running mate have made an issue over her working class salary, her working class values, and her working class language. So don't you see just a teensy tiny bit of irony, no, hypocrisy, that she would spend $150,000 for clothes, even if it is for the entire family? Do you realize how many working class salaries that would cover for a year?

The entire country ohhh'ed and awww'ed over her natural style sense and now we find it wasn't natural at all.

As for the travel, no one said it's illegal, but it is pretty unethical for the woman who bragged about selling the government jet on e-bay and firing the governor's chef, to spend that much taxpayer money to take her daughter on trips. Guess it's a good thing she slashed all those costs...it covers her kids plane tickets.

So, I guess I could be VP too if someone would only pick me up off the street, Eliza Doolittle style, or maybe Julia Roberts style, and spend $150,000 putting lipstick on this pig.

What did we expect? Condi Rice was shopping for Manolo Blaniks while New Orleans flooded.

And let's not forget how much McCain spent on makeup to keep him from looking his age under the lights.

Posted by: agolembe | October 22, 2008 7:38 PM | Report abuse

This is what she meant by fresh breadth of air from small town Wasilla.

Posted by: smart_sha | October 22, 2008 7:41 PM | Report abuse

It does make that $400 haircut look cheap in comparison, right? RIGHT!!!!

Posted by: MajorMelFunkshion | October 22, 2008 7:41 PM | Report abuse

I can't believe that we spent decades trying to get women taken seriously only to have women like Marcus turn on a woman candidate and chew her appart. I guess it wasn't enough that they trashed Hillary. Do you actually think that Palin went shopping? GIVE ME A BREAK. Obviously the staff went running around to find enough suits to handle the schedule.If she looked like she just walked off the tundra I 'm sure Marcus et al would be making fun of that! Vicious. Mean girls grow up and become "Opinion" writers. My husband believes that we'll never have a female president because too large a % of women will pick her apart...Has anyone commented on Joe Biden's plugs? Ha ha ha...a man who needs to "deny" his dome shouldn't be allowed to serve under one! That would be considered silly commentary but talking about who is taking care of the children(and we know Marcus can't keep up so NOBODY could)and who does their dressing/clothes is ohhh sooooo important! I have voted and I didn't vote for McCain(nor Obama) but I didn't make the decision on their neckties! This election has set back the woman's movement because the mean girls continue to pursue. Serious writers would simply state the policy reasons why Palin should not be elected VP...but the mean girls wouldn't find that much fun, would they?

Posted by: gailmd | October 22, 2008 7:45 PM | Report abuse

Now we're just going to make it even harder to elect a woman to public office.

God, people are so shortsighted.
Posted by: ZZim

So wrong. Now it's going to be that much harder to elect the WRONG woman. You see, some of us who really are working class, who have fought every conceivable ceiling our entire working lives, understand that just any woman won't do no matter how much lipstick, makeup, designer clothes, designer pumps, and designer handbags you slap on her.

Just as we shouldn't elect just any man, we need to elect a smart, capable, insightful, and intelligent woman. Unfortunately for Ms. Palin, and Alaska, she doesn't qualify as any of the above.

Posted by: agolembe | October 22, 2008 7:51 PM | Report abuse

unbelievable,... just unbelievable, words cannot express my outrage at the hypocrisy of Ms. Palin and GOP. The silence from the Faux News and Ditto Heads is thunderous in their complicity with anything GOP, never calling out one of their own. Hope fully "real" Americans will vote them all out to the unemployment lines after Nov. 4.

Posted by: tniederberger | October 22, 2008 7:56 PM | Report abuse

The Russiaans are coming the Russians are coming!!!!! Didint she wave at them to swim across the Bearing sea to have a chat - Dogone it I am sure she did - or was that waving a cab to go shopping...maybe they are funding the Alaskan Indepenence party - Drill baby drill - US oil independance - yeh right thanks for this pali2500

While Mooselini was shopping:

"Senior officials of Russian energy company Gazprom, including personal associates of Vladimir Putin, met in Anchorage with Alaska's Department of Natural Resources to discuss investing in energy projects in the state. Governor Sarah Palin said that she did not know about the meeting." ~ Harper's Weekly Review.

Posted by: pali2500 | October 22, 2008 5:54 PM

Posted by: colinemery | October 22, 2008 8:09 PM | Report abuse

Ruth,

How does that $150K compare with the money Obama saved via Rezko when he bought his house? How much did Biden spend on hair restoration?

Once again, I have to admit you've stooped to a new low. This lady, Sarah Palin, scares the liberal left so much that they will stop at nothing to discredit her.

Posted by: jcyr4 | October 22, 2008 8:29 PM | Report abuse

So Palin gets $150,000 of new clothes from tax deductible contributions to the RNC. My question, does she need to pay income taxes on this?

What if she were given a $150,000 gift certificate? Or just given $150,000 and told she could spend it on clothes? Would those be considered taxable income?

If Palin (or the RNC as the giver of this) is paying taxes on this, I'm good. But it just doesn't feel very Joe Six Pack to me.

Posted by: zcezcest1 | October 22, 2008 8:57 PM | Report abuse

Once again, the McCain/Palin campaign is all about IMAGE and not about substance. And yet they have the nerve to claim, as they have many times, that Obama is all about style -- to the degree that they compared him with Brittney Spears and Paris Hilton. All the way around, this campaign has terrible judgment! Even on questions of IMAGE (and I thought they might get that one right).

If she's a hockey mom, let her wear the fleece, okay? If she's a Barbie Doll, then she can hardly expect the respect of women, especially Hillary supporters (who can tell substance from style).

Notice that Obama/Biden refrained from making ads comparing the expensively dressed Palin with . . . yes, Brittney Spears and Paris Hilton, even though that ad might now have made actual sense.

We need something more than the shallowness of McCain and his sidekick Palin.

Posted by: cturtle1 | October 22, 2008 9:05 PM | Report abuse

If McCain/Palin had even cared at all about substance, they'd have spent that money on tutoring for Sarah Palin.

I am counting more and more Republicans (ones I personally know) who are switching to Obama/Biden just for this reason.


Posted by: cturtle1 | October 22, 2008 9:11 PM | Report abuse

Hey Jcyr4: Hair restoration? Rezko again? Is that the best you got? How in the world can you compare those personal expenditures to the Governor's new clothes and the fact that her $150,000.00 wardrobe came out of the RNC campaign coffers? Yeah, I know, it's all going to be donated to charity after the campaign. Believe me, the charities that recycle clothing aren't going to care much if it's from Saks or Sears as long as it's in good condition.

Excessive displays of narcissism mixed with zenophobic world views are making this race easier that I ever dared to dream.

Posted by: cheryllyne | October 22, 2008 9:25 PM | Report abuse

Ironically, what we're really seeing is McCain/Palin actually being undressed -- in the sense of the Emperor with No Clothes. McCain the great "leader" goes erratic when actually faced with a crisis that calls for steadiness and brains. Meanwhile, Palin shows what she really thinks about fiscal conservatism.

Fiscally responsible??? Couple the shopping spree with her billing the state of Alaska for her childrens' travel and we can see just what sort of "maverick fiscal conservative" we have. None at all.

She's clearly fond of taking whatever she can from her powerful position. That wouldn't bother McCain, who is, after all, married to one of the richest women in the world. But it ought to bother all those real hockey moms and Joe the Plumbers out there.

Fiscal conservatism? Prove it.

Posted by: cturtle1 | October 22, 2008 9:33 PM | Report abuse

$400
x10
x30
= $120,000

John Edwards could have a $400 haircut 10 times a day, every single day for a month, and he still wouldn't break $150,000.

Posted by: kevrobb | October 22, 2008 9:43 PM | Report abuse

PS I detest Sarah Palin and always will, but she certainly does cut a fine figure in that photo up there. And she may be an extremist rabble-rousing demagogue of the worst sort, but those boots really suit her.

Posted by: kevrobb | October 22, 2008 9:51 PM | Report abuse


Marcus, yellow journnalist, strikes again!

WaPo yelllow journalists will do anything to help their chosen ONE, their second coming Obama. The more yellow the trashing the better they feel about themselves.

They must all be proud at the Washington Weekly World News Post!

Posted by: wj_phillips | October 22, 2008 10:04 PM | Report abuse

Obama's internet thugs are whining about the clothes.

If Palin did not have the clothes, you would be whining about how shabby she looked.

you're all hypocrites just like your glorious cult leader Obama!

Posted by: wj_phillips | October 22, 2008 10:07 PM | Report abuse

Palin spent four times as much on clothes last month than the average American woman earned in 2007. And she calls Democrats elitists?

Posted by: laSerenissima2003 | October 22, 2008 10:08 PM | Report abuse

I thought the $150k was to make her whole family camera ready, and maybe future son in law also? Some of the bills were for menswear and kids' boutique clothes.
Part of this is the newness of having a female candidate. I bet Mrs. Bush (either) and Mrs. Reagan spent more on campaign stuff than husbands (or any first wives, fill in blank.) A woman can't just have a gray suit and a navy one and some slacks and a sport coat.
Let's leave her alone for a while. I am sick of the trashing.
The real clothing story is the tee shirts that people proudly wear calling her a c---. How much were those, and who paid??

Posted by: OrlandoNan | October 22, 2008 10:17 PM | Report abuse

Palin isn't Palin. She's how we want to think of ourselves. But that said, her handlers could just as easily have used some creativity, bought her clothes at the same places ordinary Americans shop at, but accessorize them with such style and panache as to make ordinary women feel that looking that good is within our reach. As with Michelle Obama's white dress worn on the view. It had been purchased at an ordinary mall store, and when asked, she didn't mind saying where she bought it. That dress then sold out of the stores within 24 hours, according to reports. And we all know that Sarah Palin would make most anything look good.

Sadly, people who have never had to do without or adhere to a budget lack the experience to know what to "Jane the Office Manager" would see as the obvious thing to do. And to think, we elect these people to
manage the entire country's finances.
No wonder we're in such a mess.

Maybe instead of electing people who have managed large budgets, we would be better off electing those who have managed small ones. Those people have the sense to realize, without thinking very hard, that
$150,000 for clothes in the matter of a few weeks shows a lack of budgetary balance.
97% of Americans would know that.

Posted by: martymar123 | October 22, 2008 10:30 PM | Report abuse

Ya betcha I could spend that much given many hours. I'm a single woman making a great income and I rarely shop at NM or Saks - except for sales.

For someone who talks about the "real America". Real Americans don't shop at NM, Saks, etc. If she had spent the money at Macys, Bloomingdales, Nordstroms, etc. maybe people could relate.

Posted by: rlj1 | October 22, 2008 10:41 PM | Report abuse

Associated Press poll today has the race tied.

Obama'a in trouble.

So let's write a column about where Sarah Plain got her jackets.

Posted by: YouryellowribbonmagnetwontgetyouintoHeavenanymore | October 22, 2008 6:43 PM

Actually, the AP poll had Obama by 1. Get your facts right. ABC/Post has Obama by 11. Gallup has Obama by 8. Fox has Obama by 9. Kinda funny how you randomly picked that one to focus on, huh?

Posted by: JJMD | October 22, 2008 10:42 PM | Report abuse

I wish the RNC would take me clothes shopping.

Posted by: homer4 | October 22, 2008 11:18 PM | Report abuse


Ruth,

You totally missed out in your over-the-top attempt to smear this woman when you didn't have the wit and smarts to think of the obvious title "What Not to Wear" for your diatribe.

Now, go back to your (male) boss and politely tell him in the morning meeting you'll come up with your own columns from now on.

You'll be doing a service to both journalism and your gender.

(By the way, your column just tipped off to the outside world that you people at the Post ACTUALLY DO get together in a room every morning to conjure up articles to sabotage the election.)

Posted by: angrycrat | October 22, 2008 11:21 PM | Report abuse

SARAH FEEL'S PRETTY

(I Feel Pretty, West Side Story)

WilliamBanzai7


SARAH
I feel pretty,
Oh, so pretty,
I feel pretty and witty and even bright!
And I pity
Any trailer girl who isn't me tonight.

I feel charming,
Oh, so charming
It's alarming how charming I feel!
And so pretty
That I hardly can believe I'm real.

See the pretty hockey mom in that mirror there:
Who can that attractive mom be?
Such a pretty Vice Presidential face,
Such a pretty $5000 dress,
Such a pretty red lipsticked smile,
Such a pretty me!

I feel stunning
And entrancing,
Feel like running and dancing for joy,
For I'm loved
By a bunch of GOP red necked cowboys!

GIRLS
Have you met our good friend Sarah,
The craziest girl on Joe sixpacks block?
You'll know her the minute you see her,
She's the one who got a broken clock.

She thinks she's smart.
She thinks she's got a great campaign.
She isn't smart,
She's merely shopping McCain insane.

It must be the campaign heat
Or some rare hypocritical disease,
Or too much foies gras to eat
Or maybe it's media fleas.

Keep away from her,
Send for Gap Chinos!
This is not the
Sara we thought we knew!

SARAH
I feel pretty,
Oh, so pretty
That the District should give me its key.
A Senate committee
Should be organized to honor me.

GIRLS
La la la la . . .

SARAH
I feel dizzy,
I feel sunny,
I feel fizzy and funny and fine,
And so pretty,
That the Miss GOP title can be mine!

Posted by: williambanzai7 | October 22, 2008 11:35 PM | Report abuse

"What in the world were they thinking?"

...................


It's called 'television,' Ruth.

If you dressed better--and wrote better--you might find yourself on it someday.

Posted by: angrycrat | October 22, 2008 11:37 PM | Report abuse

I know, it was a McCain rouse to take our minds off the looming depression. But how is she going to look back in Wasilla after her 15 weeks of fame are over sidling up to those hockey moms in her California duds? After reading about this latest bout of stupidity by the imploding republican laugh machine,I've decided that it's not Kansas anymore, please tell me it's Albania and it will all be mercifully over in a few short weeks.

Posted by: sls213 | October 23, 2008 12:01 AM | Report abuse

Barack Obama spent millions on the stage setting for his nomination acceptance, columns and all.

Give me a break!!

This guy has a campaign plane that is a 757. Airforce One is a 747.

His grandiosity costs his supporters every day in every way.

This is just a continuation of the sexism you idiots practiced against Hillary.

I loved it when Obama and Hillary appeared in Florida and the crowd started chanting Hil lar ry....Hil lar ry....

Obama just stood for a few seconds and then started chanting slowly....what a doofus! As if anybody NEEDS his permission to chant their heroine's name.

Posted by: celested9 | October 23, 2008 12:18 AM | Report abuse

Ruth, I like your taste in writing but come on. Results matter, and Sarah the P looks great in that red suit! Money well spent! Let's just hope she gives up trying to speak in well-formed sentences and pursues a career where only appearance matters. Let's face it, Palin is no Kay Bailey Hutchison!

Posted by: fmcf | October 23, 2008 12:27 AM | Report abuse

celested9 you are an idiot

Posted by: mackiejw | October 23, 2008 12:36 AM | Report abuse

Maybe Sarah Palin will just borrow the clothes for several years in the same respect that Senator Stevens has been borrowing the $3,500 chair discussed at his trial.

If Sarah Palin wants to be the Walmart gal, then she should wear the talk. At least that would be honest.

Posted by: maryloucookie | October 23, 2008 12:39 AM | Report abuse

she is from Wasilla, right

read it backwards.... what does it say?

ALL I SAW

and she wants to be VP of our country.

NOT

Posted by: mackiejw | October 23, 2008 12:39 AM | Report abuse

Yeah, and the McSame campaign compared Obama to Britney Spears and Paris Hilton, huh?

This stuff makes you seriously miss the Wh0re of Babylon...

Posted by: braultrl | October 23, 2008 12:49 AM | Report abuse

Zing! Joe six-figure wardrobe... has a nice ring.

Posted by: AppeaseThis | October 23, 2008 12:50 AM | Report abuse

They should have skipped the wardrobe shopping and hired a tutor so she would be able to describe the Vice-President's job. It's beyond belief that this woman could be our next Vice President of the United States of America!!

Posted by: sharronkm | October 23, 2008 12:56 AM | Report abuse

She was doing exactly what Bush told us to do after a crisis, go shop and shopped she did.
When the going gets tough, the tough go shopping.

Posted by: oberst | October 23, 2008 12:57 AM | Report abuse

Was it the Republican National Committee that paid for it, or the McCain for President Campaign?

Is the RNC allowed to make such purchases for McCain's running mate? Wouldn't that be the duty of the presidential campaign itself? Federal election rules require specific fire walls between the two entities in terms of specific outlays.

If it was the McCain Campaign, then you can all see where your tax dollars go with public financing of presidential elections. ("Welfare! Socialism! Real America!")

Obama opted out of public financing; instead of feeding from the public trough, he decided to get raise his finances through the voluntary contributions from his millions of supporters.

Posted by: terry1960 | October 23, 2008 1:15 AM | Report abuse

I challenge the WaPo+Obama campaign to spread news about Sarah's "fashion problems" as far and as wide as possible.

You have tried to paint her as an Alaskan hick (which didn't work) and now you want to reverse course 180 Degrees, and smear her as an elitist fashion maven.

The metro-sexuals of WaPo may have their own opinions, but your attempts at lame negative PR against her will only serve to increase her publicity and image among normal Americans.

Posted by: pgr88 | October 22, 2008 5:11 PM

My GOD you're a fcking idiot.

Posted by: vmunikoti | October 23, 2008 1:24 AM | Report abuse

Sarah Palin is milking this for all it's worth. And what "charity" is going to take $75k worth of clothes from Neiman Marcus? The Salvation Army?

Posted by: smc91 | October 23, 2008 1:32 AM | Report abuse

I can't believe that we spent decades trying to get women taken seriously only to have women like Marcus turn on a woman candidate and chew her appart. I guess it wasn't enough that they trashed Hillary. Do you actually think that Palin went shopping? GIVE ME A BREAK. Obviously the staff went running around to find enough suits to handle the schedule.If she looked like she just walked off the tundra I 'm sure Marcus et al would be making fun of that! Vicious. Mean girls grow up and become "Opinion" writers. My husband believes that we'll never have a female president because too large a % of women will pick her apart...Has anyone commented on Joe Biden's plugs? Ha ha ha...a man who needs to "deny" his dome shouldn't be allowed to serve under one! That would be considered silly commentary but talking about who is taking care of the children(and we know Marcus can't keep up so NOBODY could)and who does their dressing/clothes is ohhh sooooo important! I have voted and I didn't vote for McCain(nor Obama) but I didn't make the decision on their neckties! This election has set back the woman's movement because the mean girls continue to pursue. Serious writers would simply state the policy reasons why Palin should not be elected VP...but the mean girls wouldn't find that much fun, would they?
Posted by: gailmd | October 22, 2008 7:45 PM

Please....stop thinking with your v@gina

Posted by: vmunikoti | October 23, 2008 1:37 AM | Report abuse

They should have got her "hooked on phonics" instead. What a pathetic sack of sh!t.

PS: For those of you moping about how "trivial" this issue is, I'd like to point out that my COLLEGE EDUCATION didn't cost this much, and I'm still paying off the student loans.

Posted by: vmunikoti | October 23, 2008 1:41 AM | Report abuse

Ruth,

You totally missed out in your over-the-top attempt to smear this woman when you didn't have the wit and smarts to think of the obvious title "What Not to Wear" for your diatribe.

Now, go back to your (male) boss and politely tell him in the morning meeting you'll come up with your own columns from now on.

You'll be doing a service to both journalism and your gender.

(By the way, your column just tipped off to the outside world that you people at the Post ACTUALLY DO get together in a room every morning to conjure up articles to sabotage the election.)

Posted by: angrycrat | October 22, 2008 11:21 PM

When I hear from people like this one, I think to myself..."maybe we should just take the warning labels off all appliances and let the problem solve itself"

Posted by: vmunikoti | October 23, 2008 1:49 AM | Report abuse

$400 Glasses so you can clearly see Russia from your window,

$2,500 Valentino jacket so you stand out in a crowd of redneck 'hockey moms';


Still claiming that you're the average man's candidate after a $150,000 shopping spree......Priceless.


For everyone else there's unemployment.

Posted by: Brigadere | October 23, 2008 2:44 AM | Report abuse

I do want to write about the SHOP OP.

I'm a consultant. The services people acquire from me,I do -- sorry for the graphics -- in my bathrobe or in my sweats from the living room. Now and then, I have to attend meetings. This means Ineed clothes. I buy them, but I don't deduct them from my taxes.

I want to know how Sarah is treating the clothes from a tax perspective.

I want JTP (Joe the Plumber) to know as well.

Posted by: exco | October 23, 2008 2:52 AM | Report abuse

Her Wasilla freakshow church's resident witchdoctor must have possessed her with the ghost of Imelda Marcos.

Posted by: light_bearer | October 23, 2008 3:05 AM | Report abuse

Well, you can put $150,000 of threads on a pig, but..............

Posted by: clive1 | October 23, 2008 3:14 AM | Report abuse

This gets dumber and dumber.
Two weeks before the election and the Republican party decides we need to dress her up. Why? It turns out it was the whole family that was decked out.
Was this a gift? For what reason? Will she pay taxes on it?
Don't tell us the campaign was thinking it will all be donated to charity. Can you see them taking away new clothes from the kids? I don't think so. Will she put them on Ebay? Yeah Right!
The whole Republican Campaign is erractic.
Sorry Joe and Jane of america they couldn't shop at the stores you do or support the local business, No Nieman Marcus and Saks. Way to go Sarah!
I don't give a blank.. about how cute they think you are: you are an opportunist.
You have cast your spell on them and they are too blind to see.
Your like a movie star, traveling with hair dressers, make up artist and a cast of people to fill your every need.
Good for you, you are a sly one.
If the Republican campaign folks wanted to donate stuff from Neiman and Saks to the tune of $150,000 why not just donate it?
There are many homeless Janes and Joes out there.
I think this is an example of what your spendoing habits might be in the White House. Can we Joe and Jane public afford you?
McCain you are just and old fool, wonder how your wife feels about you agreeing to deck out Mrs. Palin?
I am so discusted with the whole dog and pony show. People around the world are probably trying to figure out why a National Party is dressing a prospective candidate.
You will deserve the backlash and don't camplain about it you have it coming!


Posted by: crich520 | October 23, 2008 3:25 AM | Report abuse

What a ride! Small town girl wins lottery! Win or lose she'll be in our minds forever! Well, I'm not impressed with the way she governs so she won't be knocking around with the other thoughts in my mind for very long. But the one thought of her becoming President puts me on a road to find another place where values are more important than glitz.

Posted by: dmyers412 | October 23, 2008 3:52 AM | Report abuse

celested9 you are an idiot

Posted by: mackiejw

----------------------------------------------------------------

ditto Mackie...... oooooooooooh.

Ya Betcha!!!!

Posted by: celested9 | October 23, 2008 4:07 AM | Report abuse

I read often statements coming from regular (conservative) folks about Sarah Palin, 'she is one of us', 'she just like me'

My question to them would be, When did you last spend 150,000 on clothes for your family in a month?

Posted by: pattr1 | October 23, 2008 4:25 AM | Report abuse

Yonkers, New York
23 October 2008

Wow! Sarah Palin looks smashing in that photo of hers accompanying this article, she in that red Neiman-Marcus outfit complete with high boots!

She frankly looks like a model straight out of Vogue or Glamor magazine. I am impressed.

Quite a sight for sore eyes used to seeing women in those sorry-looking outfits from WalMart, or Target, or Goodwill.

But for Sarah Palin, money must not have occurred to her as something to worry about. That was a big budget she had her hands to dip into: $150,000 all in all.

The only problem is that this money belonged to the Republican National Committee--and this is money contributed by probably thousands of ordinary guys like you and me in hundreds of Republican fundraisers all over the country.

Is that money well spent? Let's ask Sarah Palin who lately has claimed that she is an "intellectual." She should have a good answer to this question.

Mariano Patalinjug
MarPatalinjug

Posted by: MPatalinjug | October 23, 2008 5:30 AM | Report abuse

Once again bias rears its ugly head.

Where is the outrage at the Obama "mystery shopper" who took the campaign credit card on a spree at Tiffany's? The Obama campaign refused to reveal who it was. It was more than likely the Obama who stomps about in thousand dollar Jimmy Choos.

Posted by: ophelia3 | October 23, 2008 5:34 AM | Report abuse

Palin to donate $150,000 wardrobe

Trickle down wardrobe. It's fitting all those rich neoconservative broadcasters (Limbaugh, Hannity, O'Reilly) donate their wardrobes to the middle class. After all, their republican party stole the shirts off the middle class the last eight years.

Posted by: RMB2 | October 23, 2008 6:09 AM | Report abuse

It's obvious: Palin is a fraud.

Posted by: pierredubois | October 23, 2008 6:10 AM | Report abuse

It seems as if many in the media are deriving a great deal of pleasure bashing Palin. Does Ruth Marcus really believe the Obama's and their BFF Oprah (the most superficial and materialistic woman in the world) haven't been shopping and purchasing together and spent a few ducats on "personal items" and shopping sprees, designer outfits and fittings? If Palin had bought outfits at less prestigious stores the same elite and snobby media would be bashing her for being tacky, Alaska trash.

Posted by: ophelia3 | October 23, 2008 6:20 AM | Report abuse

Seriously, the hypocrisy of the Repubs is astounding. Coulter et al savaged Edwards. Savaged him for his $400 in a move straight out of Karl Rove's top ten of how to play the ball and not the man ("Windsurfer" Kerry anyone?!).

And they have the gall to whine about Palin's spending more than her Governor's salary in essential beauty products and clothing.

It simply is astounding.

Guess what people - they are the American Dream. Seriously. They worked out early on that if you want to achieve wealth in life then you need to do it standing on the backs of others. In this case those that donated to the GOP - not to mention the public funding.

Posted by: Mikey6 | October 23, 2008 6:33 AM | Report abuse

Sorry "And they have the gall to whine about Palin's spending more than her Governor's salary in essential beauty products and clothing." should have ended "being under the spotlight".

Posted by: Mikey6 | October 23, 2008 6:35 AM | Report abuse

Did Levi get any of that Saks bling?

Posted by: hotdog3 | October 23, 2008 6:35 AM | Report abuse

Donor dollars have been going to candidate makeovers since TV became important. It hasn't become an issue until now. That said, Ms. Palin and her operatives should have learned "Public Relations 101" and avoided the shopping spree. Who knows? If Sarah had to campaign wearing what she wore in Alaska, it might have helped.

Posted by: rmpatera | October 23, 2008 7:00 AM | Report abuse

No one would have had any problem if they'd blown say 25 thousand, but 150,000!! It's incredible and has driven a bus through the hockey mom and joe the plumber bs, it was THE topic of conversatiion in my office yesterday well at least until the late PM when the markets lost over 500 points. Standby for another 12 days of jokes about Palin's clothes, wardrobe malfunctions, etc etc.

Posted by: johnbsmrk | October 23, 2008 7:29 AM | Report abuse

Dressing Sarah Palin for one month: $150,000. Losing the election for John McCain: PRICELESS.

Posted by: mountaindonna | October 23, 2008 7:32 AM | Report abuse

With millions coming in from overseas and laying out money for greek columns, Obamas supporters are getting desperate as the polls tighten up. Theres more pain coming so take it up a notch in your Palin slam-fest. Barry may well not be eligible to be POTUS and we'll have the DNC and the media to thank for the constitutional crisis. Way to go.

Posted by: yadid | October 23, 2008 7:33 AM | Report abuse

how clueless of her at a time ordinary citizens are losing their jobs right, left and centre because of the neocons mismanagement of the economy during the last 8 years.

Posted by: 1Nouri | October 23, 2008 7:47 AM | Report abuse

Wonder how much Saturday Night Live budgets for Tina Fey's Palin "costumes" -- maybe they could direct the v.p. hopeful to some budget-conscious shops.

Wonder, too, if the future son-in-law got to keep his spiffy duds from the convention.

Posted by: patty2 | October 23, 2008 7:48 AM | Report abuse

For you people who think this is not an issue; that a woman running for office should be able to spend money on good outfits...you miss the point. Palin stands up in front of crowds on a daily basis and says that she is just like Joe Sixpack and Jane Winebox. This is hypocrisy. How many of these people she says she is like can afford a $150,000 worth of clothes and other items? Yes she probably needs clothes but why go to Needless Markup? Isn't Macy's or Lord and Taylor good enough?

And this isn't "changing the subject". The Republicans put this out there and let it happen in the first place and of course, they have to disclose it. Did the GOP actually think that people would miss this? For god sakes, we aren't stupid.

BTW, can you really buy the idea that the clothes will be given to charity?

Posted by: cheez | October 23, 2008 8:02 AM | Report abuse

Do you want her wearing rags to the convention or rallies?

Posted by: hqpWash | October 23, 2008 8:03 AM | Report abuse

This reminds me of Julia Roberts and Richard Gere in "Pretty Woman."

Posted by: bginNC | October 23, 2008 8:09 AM | Report abuse

I suppose I could accept this "one-time" expenditure for the campaigns. My wife constantly "educates" me on the difference between men's and woman's clothing needs when I balk at her dry-cleaning bills. But my question is, is she does become vice president, would this need for fancy, expensive designer clothes continue for the next 4 to 8 years?

Posted by: ebleas | October 23, 2008 8:13 AM | Report abuse

Taking into consideration that Sarah Palin was uprooted from Alaska at the last minute, has a baby and other children and no time for shopping, it's very reasonable for the Republican party to buy her and her family some outfits.

$150K doesn't go far on high-end stores and if she was dressed in everyday clothes, the media would lable her "unsuitable" for primetime. Ruth, put yourself in her shoes and think if you could pull it through without help! Why not report on important issues like Obama's suspicious campaign contributions?

Posted by: voice2 | October 23, 2008 8:14 AM | Report abuse

kxrc writes: "If Obama or Biden's family could nto aford good clothes I would expect the Democratic national Committee to buy them campaign clothes."

Do you think there is no difference between "good clothes" and "$150K worth of wardrobe"? To see how unnecessary and plain stupid the RNC's spending was, you might want to read
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/23/us/politics/23style.html

Esp. because Ms. Palin actually CAN afford "good clothes", on taxable annual income of more than $100K in 2006 and 07 (from John McCain web site).
I think most business people can afford to pay for their clothes on such an income!

And just imagine the howls from the right wing of the chicken hawks if the DNC were shopping such elitist, "un-American" stuff.

But hypocrisy is the name of the Republican game, they just brought up a couple of new campaign slogans:

- Cronies first!
see: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/22/us/politics/22mining.html

- Style Over Substance

- No head over these heals

- Do as I say, not do as I do

- Read my $50 lipstick

- $150K First Empty Dresses

In Re: sexism, look no further than YourYellowRibbonMagnets... comments - "polyester-blend pantsuit with her swollen feet pouring out of a pair of $25 Sperry topsiders". Well, those "flabby rumps" you mentioned earlier obviously have to work for their money...

I gonna tell my WalMart's employees to dress better so they can get a better job the next time I am shopping there, just look at Appallin' Sarah - you betcha *sarcasm-mode-off*

Sincerely,
L. Stohlman

Posted by: om4n | October 23, 2008 8:15 AM | Report abuse

Well done, Ruth! As ever, accurate reportage, great wit. $150,000 worth of designer accoutrements to house, essentially, a political pea-brain who roams the campaign circuit accusing cash-strapped voters of being "un-American." The Empress bought some new clothes, but you still caught her with her pant(ies) down. Bravo!

Posted by: MickNamVet | October 23, 2008 8:32 AM | Report abuse

Excuse me... a $100K a year taxable income affords parkas, boots, gloves and head warmers for the coldest state in the Union.

Palin does not need a snazzy wardrobe as governor of Alaska because of the region she comes from. She may have a few suits that she uses, but the odds are she doesn't wear them everyday.

Now Obama, McCain and Biden do wear suits everyday to work, because they work in Washington. Duh!!! Do you liberal schmucks who lurk here really think she would have the clothing to match up with the other three candidates right from the start?? What is Palin supposed to do, show up at a rally in FL in a sweater vest with a moose stiched on it??


Also where is the clothing costs for the other three candidates. So to be fair, where are their expenses, and why does Sarah have to be singled out, AGAIN, in these kinds of biased reports. You can talk all you want about how she should have shopped at cheaper outlet malls, but the criticism after her debates and speeches would also include how she really does not look the part of the VP.

So for all you little lib trolls out there and Baby Ruth.... this is a very petty argument against Palin and you should, as Joe Biden said this week, FOCUS ON THE ISSUES.

Posted by: alutz08 | October 23, 2008 8:39 AM | Report abuse

Excuse me... a $100K a year taxable income affords parkas, boots, gloves and head warmers for the coldest state in the Union.

Palin does not need a snazzy wardrobe as governor of Alaska because of the region she comes from. She may have a few suits that she uses, but the odds are she doesn't wear them everyday.

Now Obama, McCain and Biden do wear suits everyday to work, because they work in Washington. Duh!!! Do you liberal schmucks who lurk here really think she would have the clothing to match up with the other three candidates right from the start?? What is Palin supposed to do, show up at a rally in FL in a sweater vest with a moose stiched on it??


Also where is the clothing costs for the other three candidates. So to be fair, where are their expenses, and why does Sarah have to be singled out, AGAIN, in these kinds of biased reports. You can talk all you want about how she should have shopped at cheaper outlet malls, but the criticism after her debates and speeches would also include how she really does not look the part of the VP.

So for all you little lib trolls out there and Baby Ruth.... this is a very petty argument against Palin and you should, as Joe Biden said this week, FOCUS ON THE ISSUES.

Posted by: alutz08 | October 23, 2008 8:40 AM | Report abuse

I bet Joe the Plumber could use a little of that money to pay his back taxes to the State of Ohio? Also, do "real" Americans shop at Neimans and Sax 5th Avenue? I wonder what the folks who are scrimping by at Costco, Walmart and Target are doing for duds these days? How do you say, "out of touch with the common folks". No wonder McCain doesn't want the rich people to pay taxes. They might not have enough money to sustain their wardrobes.

Posted by: cdierd1944 | October 23, 2008 8:42 AM | Report abuse

You libs still see Palin as a legitimate threat to Obama. Or else you wouldn't be stooping to these petty and biased attacks on something that has nothing to do with her candidacy.

Posted by: alutz08 | October 23, 2008 8:44 AM | Report abuse

By comparison how much does Obama spend on his elegantly tailored Italian suits & how much time does he spend preening in front of a mirror?

How much MSM coverage has been devoted to Obama's fashionplate look?

And then there were the Michelle makeover costs; it must have cost a fortune for that sophisticated look?

Dissing Palin without commenting on the others is BLATANTLY UNFAIR!

And not helpful in helping folks decide who is the better candidate to deal with
all the serious issues confronting the country: an unqualified risky fashionplate Obama
or the experienced, qualified ready to lead
McCain?

NO OBAMA! NO OBAMANATION! NO WAY!

Posted by: Concerned14 | October 23, 2008 8:48 AM | Report abuse

"First, it is true -- just ask Hillary Clinton -- that it takes a lot more time and money for a woman politician to be in the national spotlight than it does for a man."

But is this true, or have female politicians taken it to be true? Are you really saying that the voters will not vote for a female candidate who does not dress expensively? I do not believe it.

Posted by: rohitcuny | October 23, 2008 8:50 AM | Report abuse

You libs still see Palin as a legitimate threat to Obama. Or else you wouldn't be stooping to these petty and biased attacks on something that has nothing to do with her candidacy.

Let's get another thing straight, this money comes from donations to the RNC or the Campaign. The $$ is used to handle all expenses involved in campaigning. If they need to look good for the cameras, especially in today's HDTV world, then so be it. Or else you would be dinging her for looking like a regular American and not one ready to lead the country.

Also, where do the politicians in Washington shot for their outfits?? Where do they get their expensive Italian leather shoes?? Does everyone think that Washington politicians really live off their $165K a year salary alone?? Come on, they have supplemental expense accounts to assist for clothing, housing, and transportation while in Washington and doesn't even touch their salary.

Posted by: alutz08 | October 23, 2008 8:50 AM | Report abuse

As good looking as Palin is, I don't care how much was spent. BTW, focus on all the other politicians while you are at it.

Posted by: retiredinTennessee | October 23, 2008 8:51 AM | Report abuse

Hey Ruth,

I hail from Minneapolis (where, I believe, Gov. Palin had her big Neiman Marcus shopping spree), and I must say that, at least, the Republicans chose a state without a tax on clothing!

Funny you should be writing this, as a couple of my friends back in Minneapolis are going to Neiman's after work today with a calculator to try and figure out what she spent $75,000 on! Anothing thing that perplexes me is how she spent that much in a relatively small department store. It's not like she went to the flagship store in Dallas... which probably wouldn't have been a bad idea, it being in a Red state and all.

In any case, I'll let you know how my friends' shopping "spree" goes this afternoon!

Posted by: DavidMNDC | October 23, 2008 8:51 AM | Report abuse

I was under the impression that the Republicans were conservative. $150,000 shopping spree in 2 months . Usually, you buy your own clothes applying for a job. And her kids and husband also had to be outfitted? I guess when you associate with Cindy and her $3000 outfit and John with his expensive taste its like keeping up with the Jones in this case the Mc Cains. Her rallies, are filled with curiousity seekers to see what she is all about. In Ak. she charged the state with expensive hotel rooms for her and family $200 to $700 a night. And this is the future VP that is going to Washington to show us how to save money . Give me a break. OBAMA/BIDEN 08

Posted by: wilhelmina78 | October 23, 2008 8:52 AM | Report abuse

Let's get another thing straight, this money comes from donations to the RNC or the Campaign. The $$ is used to handle all expenses involved in campaigning. If they need to look good for the cameras, especially in today's HDTV world, then so be it. Or else you would be dinging her for looking like a regular American and not one ready to lead the country.

Also, where do the politicians in Washington shop for their outfits?? Where do they get their expensive Italian leather shoes?? Does everyone think that Washington politicians really live off their $165K a year salary alone?? Come on, they have supplemental expense accounts to assist for clothing, housing, and transportation while in Washington and doesn't even touch their salary. Does anyone really know how much a 2 bedroom apartment in the nice part of DC costs each month?? There is no way a Senator's salary can cover that and their home state residence.

Posted by: alutz08 | October 23, 2008 8:56 AM | Report abuse

If she wore cheaper clothes, the press, or as I like to call them, Obama for President Fan Club, would be talking about how trashy she looks.

Ms. Marcus, you've made a fool of yourself and shamed your chosen profession. The media, who are supposed to be watching out for us, are now the mouthpiece for the DNC and it's really a sad day when even Dan Rather calls you on your bias.

Your chosen candidate will fail, whether he's elected or not. He's a sham and with the MSM not doing their job of vetting him, we've all lost. Thanks.

Posted by: yadid | October 23, 2008 8:56 AM | Report abuse

"In Ak. she charged the state with expensive hotel rooms for her and family $200 to $700 a night. And this is the future VP that is going to Washington to show us how to save money . Give me a break."

This argument doesn't hold water specifically because Obama, Biden, John and every other national politician does the same thing when traveling. It gets billed back to our National treasury. Nothing is out of the ordinary with regards to this, because their salaries cannot cover the cost of their travels alone.

Posted by: alutz08 | October 23, 2008 9:00 AM | Report abuse

All of the people attacking Palin have no idea how much the Obamas have spent on clothes, hair, makeup. Nor do they care. And if by any chance anyone asked the Obamas how much they spent on any of the following, (clothes(and any woman knows Michelle Obama cannot wear clothes off-the-rack), on jewelry (Tiffany's ring a bell Michelle?), on designers, on hair) the questioner would be attacked and vilified.

Palin has had her hair, her clothes, her speech, her husband, her children attacked and attacked. Vicious blogger Andie Sullivan practically wants to pull the hair from her wee babe and have it tested for DNA evidence.

I have always voted Democratic and believe in liberalism, progressivism and agree with no Republican ideas. But I will vote for McCain/Palin because I deeply despise the methods and pure ugliness of the left wing elitist's attacks.

Posted by: ophelia3 | October 23, 2008 9:01 AM | Report abuse

I've never seen a campaign shoot itself in the foot so many times. They are digging a hole and tossing in more shovels.

Well, the McCain campaign said they would not run on the issues. No one should be surprised they tried to put a $150,000 wardrobe on a pig.

Posted by: bevjims1 | October 23, 2008 9:02 AM | Report abuse

Two comments:

(1) I believe it is illegal for the RNC to spend this money and I think all those who went after John Edwards ought to be doing some research and reporting on that.

(2) I do not believe the electorate needs to see its women candidates all "dolled up"
and to this point, I take issue with Hillary Clinton. That is sexist.

Posted by: canaldoc | October 23, 2008 9:04 AM | Report abuse

I love the comments from the Sarah defenders here- the same people who were posting about Edward's $400 haircut. This is only news because it is one more piece of the GOP hypocrisy and this shallow woman. We heard she was a reformer and uncorruptible. We find the only reform she did was to enrich her family and she was uncorruptible only in that she was already corrupt

Posted by: silverspring25 | October 23, 2008 9:05 AM | Report abuse

Campbell Brown has a nice take on it:
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/22/campbell.brown.looks/index.html?eref=rss_topstories

Posted by: PaulinMaryland | October 23, 2008 9:06 AM | Report abuse

So much about making non-essential items take the center stage (ahem,Powell, this is your cue). And when did Democrats become so upset about big spending?

Posted by: forgetthis | October 23, 2008 9:19 AM | Report abuse

Let's see; Michelle spent over $400 on hotel room service in one whack. In one tea time snack, she spent nearly twice my monthly grocery bill. For Palin, the RNC spent well over my yearly clothing budget. Neither campaign gets kudos for reining in excess.

Posted by: persugram | October 23, 2008 9:20 AM | Report abuse

I suggest Sarah Palin walk around these last 2 weeks in Wal-mart trash just to prove that the media is on a witch hunt.

Posted by: forgetthis | October 23, 2008 9:23 AM | Report abuse

Michelle Obama did NOT spend $400 on hotel room service. The NY Post has retracted that, Michelle wasn't at the Waldorf and the supposed receipt was a Photoshopped fake.

From the NY Post: "THE source who told us last week about Michelle Obama getting lobster and caviar delivered to her room at the Waldorf-Astoria must have been under the influence of a mind-altering drug. She was not even staying at the Waldorf. We regret the mistake, and our former source is going to regret it, too."

http://www.nypost.com/seven/10212008/gossip/pagesix/room_disservice_134490.htm

Posted by: hitpoints | October 23, 2008 9:32 AM | Report abuse

You can tell a lot about a person by the look in their eyes. Sarah's eyes convey confidence, honesty, courage and fairness. In these trouble times, it's about time we have another Esther, Joan D'arc etc...
The witch hunt was supposedly stopped in the middle ages?

Posted by: voice2 | October 23, 2008 9:46 AM | Report abuse

Do you know that even military personnel have to buy their own uniforms? Military get a uniform allowance to off-set the cost but it never covers all the gear.

Want boots that don't ruin your feet? Pay out of pocket. New ribbons that are a must-wear? Out of pocket. Cheap BDU material wears out fast? Replace out of pocket. Someone walk off with your cover? Another out of pocket.

Gee, Sarah, our boots don't even have three inch heels. Think you could spread the wealth a bit, or is that too just close to redistribution of wealth to suit your sensibilities?

Posted by: agolembe | October 23, 2008 9:55 AM | Report abuse

the first words out of her mouth slurred half the total population of the country.

Everything since has been the pottymouth for hire - saying whatever nasty McCain does not have the manhood to say himself.

The lies, the bridge, the plane, troopergate, travel costs for the kids, per deim at home, the sneering, the racist haters they attract to their rallys... none of it is our view of America. $150K for clothes for the hockey mom is just part of the shuckin and jivin.....

Watch McCain tout his $5000 credit for a $12,000 bill for the waitress that pays a larger tax share than he does...

We're in a crisis as a nation... and all we hear is Ayers, taxes and shuckin and jivin flim flam.

Tone deaf, the whole campaign...

If he gets elected, we deserve it.

Posted by: dutchess2 | October 23, 2008 9:57 AM | Report abuse

voice2

Let me guess.....

male - alone - without

Posted by: dutchess2 | October 23, 2008 9:59 AM | Report abuse

Maybe between hockey games, shooting defenseless animals with high powered rifles from a helicopter and taking her kids and family on political trips with her at Alaska taxpayer expense, maybe she still has time to stop on NYC's Park Avenue shops to buy Prada and Molo. Wow, what a Joe the Plumber mom she really is!

Posted by: buzziea | October 23, 2008 10:03 AM | Report abuse

With all her preaching about helping the Middleclass and now people are having trouble making ends meet. I find it ironic how she can spend 150k on clothes and stuff. She has got to be the biggest GOP hypocrite on the planet right now. She is nothing more than a phoney. The voters should send this hypocrite back to Alaska.

Posted by: sumo1 | October 23, 2008 10:06 AM | Report abuse

"I take it the libs are getting kinda scared..."

LOL. Why do I get the feeling this has become the standard Republican nervous tick? You know, kind of like when McCain says "my friends" over and over...

Posted by: lightgrw | October 23, 2008 10:12 AM | Report abuse

campbell is wrong - there is no double standard.

It is &&**&ed up to spend 150K of contributions on your wardrobe - man or woman. It is the wrong example to set, regardless of how the economy is doing.

It is inconceivable that they did this and for her to go along with it shows that she is hypocritical.

Posted by: dalvaprado | October 23, 2008 10:13 AM | Report abuse

Buy your own clothes like everybody else. Period

Posted by: J_thinks | October 23, 2008 10:20 AM | Report abuse

I WANNA SEE HER NAKED!

That would save everyody a helluva lot of dough!

Think of all the beer Joe Six-Pack could buy with 150K!

TAKE IT OFF, SARAH!!!!

Posted by: trenda | October 23, 2008 10:21 AM | Report abuse

So---is Palin John McCain's Eliza Doolittle? ---or his trophy VP? ---or one more woman that shoots down the GOP family values talking points?

Posted by: nlersch | October 23, 2008 10:24 AM | Report abuse

Considering how much money they spent to make her look good I'm not so sure you want to see her naked.

Posted by: bevjims1 | October 23, 2008 10:24 AM | Report abuse

First they attack her for being unsophisticated, then they attack her for being too sophisticated.

Ever get the feeling that the point is just to attack her?

Posted by: zjr78xva

No, I do not get that feeling.

She was not attacked for being unsophistiticated...her experience was brought into question as well as her ability to think on her feet and be well read, and intelligent. If your definition of sophisticated means being very well educated...they she is not that either. She is adequately educated methinks. Not well educated.

Sophisticated does not come with designer clothes. There is more to it than that, of course...but I do have to say she looks mighty sharp in that red suit and boots. I can see why Bill Kristol calls Sarah Palin his *hearthrob.* But the point is that the expenditures are absurd because she has painted herself over and over again as the average woman, just like all of us.

If I had made speech after speech claiming this, and then been presented with this type of lavish spending...I would have said wait here...lets do what we are saying we are doing...I cannot spend more than my voters make in 3 years in one month.

If I were the governor of my state, I would already have a few beautiful suits and basic pieces in my wardrobe that I could easily beef up if need be should I be called to serve as a veep hopeful.I love designer clothes, myself. I cannot, however, afford them. I only make 50K a year teaching. I am a single mom.

This is not really a big deal. I mean it is clothes. But the spirit behind it is indeed interesting.

I am a former Republican...I changed my party a few months before Palin was chosen. While she did well at the convention with comments she practiced and with her winks and jokes...I was not impressed...

John McCain's choice of her makes me question his ability to make good decisions.

I am annoyed that she is in the position to be the next president if something were to happen. And all to simply shake things up? Offer up a woman? Any woman would do Senator McCain? She is not Hillary, but isn't she great?

When I see Barack Obama, I see America at its best. He has risen from humble beginnings. Educated himself and how. Married a wonderful woman. Raising his children with wonderful values.

I am so impressed with this man. My sister and I can almost choke up when we speak of him and Michelle.

My European friends, shocked the last 4 years Bush was elected AGAIN...(I have had to endure a lot of teasing)...are delighted that Obama is being looked at by Americans in such a light.

Mississipians for Obama. There are not many of us...haha

Posted by: Sidda | October 23, 2008 10:29 AM | Report abuse

I don't like her wardrobe choices - her outfits are clearly meant to emphasize her physical attributes. I'm no prude, but I find this disgusting in a public figure.

Posted by: adrienne_najjar | October 23, 2008 10:29 AM | Report abuse

Claiming that she's a "maverick", Palin should have said thanks but no thanks to a $150K NYC fashionista wardrobe. But then, she really should have said thanks but no thanks to McCain in the first place when he dragged her into American voters' campaign choices, too. Wow, that woman is a farce. McCain too for picking her to run with him.

Posted by: buzziea | October 23, 2008 10:29 AM | Report abuse

Gov. Palin is coming from working class and is not as wealthy as other candidates. I am glad the GOP is paying for her wardrobe. She worked hard for the GOP ticket campaigning and fundraising. I think she looks great and deserves it.

Posted by: lynnL123 | October 23, 2008 10:30 AM | Report abuse

Can't resist a comment (or two) on this: First, if I had $150,000 of my company's money to spend on clothes, I'd buy something a little more sophisticated than a red leather jacket (guess she was looking for something to match her neck) and Second, I think taking Bristol along on business trips was a good idea! Look at what she was up to left on her own! Of course, when my company starts paying for my kids to tag along on my business trips, I guess the taxpayers can start paying for female execs to do the same. But business doesn't extend that favor to women workers and neither should government. If we women want equality, then we've gotta take equal inconvenience -- like our male counterparts have done for decades. I traveled the world on business for years when my kids were young; they survived and thrived (one's in med school, one's an engineer and one's top of his high school class). None of them have had out-of-wedlock babies or run afoul of the law. It isn't easy, but it doesn't take a lipstick slathered pit bull to pull it off well. Just hard work, honesty and integrity. Can you buy that with $150,000?

Posted by: BeverlyC1 | October 23, 2008 10:36 AM | Report abuse

vpice2 wrote: "You can tell a lot about a person by the look in their eyes. Sarah's eyes convey confidence, honesty, courage and fairness. In these trouble times, it's about time we have another Esther, Joan D'arc etc..."

Bush looked into Putin's eyes and saw a man he could trust. If all you are going to do is look into someone's eyes to determine who they are, then you are a fool.

And lets not forget that Palin was not "honest" when she said the AK legislative investigation report "vindicated" her when it clearly stated she broke ethics laws. And she said it with bright eyes and a smile. Her eyes may convey honesty to you but her mouth spews dishonesty in so many ways.

voice2 wrote: "The witch hunt was supposedly stopped in the middle ages?"

Then tell republicans, including Palin, to stop demonizing Obama for being Muslim, a communist, anti-American, a terrorist, etc, etc, etc.

Don't you see what 8 years of republican rule has done to this nation? And all you can do to sum up a candidate in these very troubled times is look into their eyes! I really wonder what planet Palin supporters live on cause it ain't earth.

Posted by: bevjims1 | October 23, 2008 10:36 AM | Report abuse

Oh the hypocracy. It just goes on and on and on.

Somehow the Republicans, over the years, have been able to sell themselves as the non-elites, the everyman, the Joe Six Pack, the soccer mom, the guy at the supermarket. How a bunch of rich, truly elitist white men did this is a stroke of brilliance. You know, rich white men isn't really too good of a voting block. So you have to give them credit for the scam of the century. To have pulled in blue collar America (including gun toters and religious nuts) into the fold and sell the Republican Party as if it was their party when really all along the strings are pulled and the power is kept by and used for the benefit of a small group of white rich men. The scam of the century I tell you.

And charity? Um really. What homeless person needs $678 pumps or what underprivileged person hoping for a job interview at McDonald's needs a $3166 suit? Give me a fricking break! Hey, here's one for you Palin, sell the clothes on EBAY and then give that money to charity.

Posted by: bmorebent | October 23, 2008 10:39 AM | Report abuse

Hockey mom 150,000 dollar wardrobe, how much more middle America can you get? Her annual salary as Gov. of Alaska was less. Middle America must hear more about this - could we call her an elitist?

Posted by: Billy1932 | October 23, 2008 10:41 AM | Report abuse

Now I understand why the McCain economic plan is to lower taxes for the rich; their clothes sure do cost a lot more than what the average American buys.

Posted by: ppease5 | October 23, 2008 10:42 AM | Report abuse

And it wasn't just clothes. The campaign spent some phat cash to have a speech coach for Palin. To de-redneck her and try to get some sophistication and gravitas in there.

Posted by: bmorebent | October 23, 2008 10:44 AM | Report abuse

I'm not a fan of Gov. Palin. In fact, I can't stand her. But too much is being made about how much was spent on her wardrobe for the campaign. So the Republican party spent a lot of money to make sure that their VP candidate - on which much of their hopes rest - looks attractive. They are within the law and it is their money to spend. The real issue is not the amount of money that was spent but the disconnect between being a woman of the people and wearing high fashion clothes. Nobody needed the revelation about how much money was spent to see that - you could see the outfits that she was wearing. And nobody connected those two dots until the price tag for it was revealed. The fact is, though, that people expect a woman in the limelight to look good. Is the Republican party guilty of hypocrisy with Palin's message vs. appearance or are they just trapped in the cultural reality that holds women - especially celebrity women - to ridiculously high standards of appearance. Would the "Joe Sixpack" men and women who support Palin really want to see her in the same Walmart/Target blouses and skirts that women in their daily lives wear? Not really. The real issue here is the absurd standards applied to women when it comes to their appearance.

Posted by: skrut003 | October 23, 2008 10:44 AM | Report abuse

Marcus.. go get a life..

Posted by: robinhood2 | October 23, 2008 10:45 AM | Report abuse

Can I please, please, please, pretty please, be the charity receiving the clothes after the election? Please? Is there a wait list already? I wear a size 6.

Posted by: FashionistaMomDC | October 23, 2008 10:46 AM | Report abuse

It's going to suck when all the clothes have to go back and Palin is left to be her OLD SELF governing Alaska in relative obscurity with no glory, no Louis Vitton, no endless closet, no speech coach or speech writer, no tutor, and no cheering crowd. Just a bunch of Alaskans in freezing cold and with their bubble completely burst about how wonderful their new Governor is. Pure justice.

Posted by: bmorebent | October 23, 2008 10:49 AM | Report abuse

Do the designer glasses have to a homeless person too?

Posted by: bmorebent | October 23, 2008 10:50 AM | Report abuse

Before, I was willing to cut Palin some slack on the clothing issue. A few thousand dollars is an appropriate expense to ensure that a person (even if she's totally unqualified) carries the proper appearance befitting the office she seeks.

But $150,000?!?!? That's just obscene.

It also seems to fit a pattern for Ms. Palin: it appears that she is of the belief that elective office confers upon her the right to use public money for personal expenses. She's already billed the state of Alaska for meals at home and gas to get back and forth from Wasilla, so why stop now? Why not go splurge at Neiman Marcus with $150,000 of Republican money?

A $150,000...that's money that (from the Far Right perspective) could be used far more productively running at least a few more slimy attack ads smearing Barack Obama's reputation. How do Republicans feel about her wasting that money on clothes?

Hmmm, on second thought, now that I think about it, maybe her spending spree isn't such a bad thing after all.

KEEP SPENDING, SARAH!!! BY ALL MEANS, SHOP TILL YOU DROP HONEY!!!

Posted by: Gladiator2008 | October 23, 2008 10:51 AM | Report abuse

I used my calculator to figure up how much she spend and how much I would have to spend EVERY YEAR of my life to spend that much money. (I am in my early fifties)There is no way that I have spent that much in my ENTIRE life. This is such a joke. I agree with one of the writers..VOTE NOW and let's end this game.

Posted by: maggiemae2 | October 23, 2008 10:52 AM | Report abuse

How funny is it that many of us who occasionally shop at Neiman-Marcus have seen more than $150K of our investments go down the toilet like the $3Trillion for Iraq? Palin is an irrelevant diversionary tactic.

Posted by: fmcf | October 23, 2008 10:53 AM | Report abuse

I didn't know small towns had Neiman Marcus' too. I thought those kinds of fancy schmancy department stores are in cities where elitists get their $400 haircuts.

Posted by: kcperlas | October 23, 2008 10:54 AM | Report abuse

Well I do like my clothes and I did notice that the governor was quite the fashionista, as much as I cringe when she opens her mouth ---and I don't mind giving a woman a compliment if she looks nice, I said to myself and a few friends that wow she is got some style--no substance but lots of style. Now I see why, what an embarrassement for the RNC.

Posted by: eaglechik | October 23, 2008 10:54 AM | Report abuse

I'm curious if Hillary paid for her trillion suits herself. I always wondered about that, and the men's suits for the candidates as well. To be honest, I expected that they'd have to get her some clothes and would help her with a style coach/personal shopper, but this is outrageous. Does she need to be Jackie O?

The Republicans are whack! I mean I sat with my mouth gaping when I saw good old Cindy McCain show up at the convention in some crazy crazy bling. Then I heard that the outfit and jewelry were $300k or more. The nerve. The bottom line is the Republicans know they call sell water to a man who lives on an island. We're the party of the people, yet our fearless leader has a closet full of Ferragamo shoes and his wife daily sports jewelry costing more than most plumbers yearly salary. And then this with good old average American Palin.

The shocker of it is that this is just for 1 months of clothes. Extrapolate that out and we've got a million dollars for a year's worth of campaign clothes. Good thing she was picked at the 11th hour.

Doesn't the RNC have better things to spend cash on? I mean Obama is all over the airwaves and they are paying for "terrorist" mailings and robocalls and pretty outfits.

Posted by: bmorebent | October 23, 2008 10:57 AM | Report abuse

Admit it; Sarah Palin is just you and me. I spend $150,000 on clothes and facials all the time, don't you? I have friends in high places that can fire pesky relatives with just a few phone calls, don't you?
Yep, just regular folks who can bill the state for their kids to fly around for free. Just like us!

Posted by: jaynashvil | October 23, 2008 10:57 AM | Report abuse

I'm so tired of GOP politicians railing against government spending and "big government" when they've made themselves wealthy and powerful while living on the taxpayers' dime. Sarah Palin receives government housing and transportion and charges for the use of her own. She brings her kids on business trips without paying the cost. (How many employed moms, or dads, can do the same?) Dick Cheney and Antonin Scalia, for instance, collect a government paycheck and have children who do or have done the same, at high levels. While the taxpayers aren't paying for the Palin family's wardrobe, spending $150,000 on designer duds sure seems "elitist." By the way, Neiman Marcus and Nordstrom are hardly the only shops where a career woman--or "populist" female V.P. candidate--can find fashionable, work-appropriate clothing. Similarly, baby Trig would look just as cute in clothing from Target as he did in a jumper from a tony baby boutique. Somehow, the wealthy, GOP elite seem to believe that regular people can get by on very little and no health care, etc., but they, the richer and more powerful, can't function without the comforts lots of money and access can buy. If the McCain campaign wanted Sarah Palin to wear only the best, they should have had Cindy McCain foot the bill.

Posted by: brimeli | October 23, 2008 10:58 AM | Report abuse

Comments like this astound me.....but your attempts at lame negative PR against her will only serve to increase her publicity and image among normal Americans.

Lame? Possibly illigal use of campaign funds is lame? Not to mention her pattern of unethical behavior.

Sorry, every "normal" American I know is outraged at this kind of spending. That is more than my mortgage!!!!!

Yes, she may have needed a new wardrobe. That's a given, but $150,000. Say it outloud now and let that sink in $150,000.

No excuse for a "hocky mom", I'm just like you real Americans struggling to get by.....with my $10,000 handbag.

Posted by: trisha4 | October 23, 2008 11:01 AM | Report abuse

RNC spending that much money on Sarah palin's wardrobe is a stupid decision.

MSM mounting an attack on this aspect is vicious, if predictable.

RNC's high falutin explanation is disingenuous.

Ruth Marcus terming this as another ---gate is unfortunate, mean, undeserving. This doesn't rise to the level of launching the big guns at WaPo (along with EJ Dionne).

Posted by: pKrishna43 | October 23, 2008 11:04 AM | Report abuse

It feel not very long time ago when Senator Hillary Clinton was being harrassed by the same way.
Women - I challenge you to start fighting back those harassments. Enough is enough.

Posted by: lynnL123 | October 23, 2008 11:06 AM | Report abuse

To all those saying this is a smear campaign etc. It's more than that...it's a potential legal issue. If nothing else, it's really bad PR to create an image for the VP candidate as a Hockey Mom and then spend $150,000 on clothes.

Why was it O.K. for the Repubicans to go ape over the cost of Edwards haircut as an example of how Democrats like to spend when we are talking $150,000 on clothes.

Posted by: trisha4 | October 23, 2008 11:12 AM | Report abuse

It feel not very long time ago when Senator Hillary Clinton was being harrassed by the same way.
Women - I challenge you to start fighting back those harassments. Enough is enough.

Posted by: lynnL123 | October 23, 2008 11:06 AM

WTF? Are you blind or just plain stupid? At a time when people are losing their homes, and not able to afford healthcare, this b!tch goes on a 150K shopping spree...and you are actually defending her? What makes it even worse is the fact that she claims to be on the side of the middle class - the average Joes and Janes of America. Do you not find this the least bit offensive? Are you really this dense?

Posted by: vmunikoti | October 23, 2008 11:12 AM | Report abuse

How dare she, in such hard economic times spend that much on clothes. At leaset create the illusion that you are on the side of the struggling tax payer. Not speak one pay in Ohio then drop $150,000 in Neiman-Marcus and Saks.

Another thing: I don't want to hear ANYMORE complaints about how your being outspent by the Obama campaign 4 to 1 when THIS is how your party chooses to spend its money

Posted by: DirtyDish | October 23, 2008 11:14 AM | Report abuse

To Ophelia: I don't believe you. I can't buy that you object to the scrutiny Governor Palin has been given by the media and the public at large. Her selection has alienated the moderates as well as many former undecideds, and not because she is a woman, but because she is not knowledgable enough or worldly enough to be second in command. She is eye candy. She is McCain's accessory, and she has certainly succeeded in firing-up the bucolic base of boot-licking, knee-jerk "patriots" who probably think that Lee Greenwood wrote our national anthem.

Because Governor Palin represents the first executive decision of Senator McCain, how can anyone have any confidence in his ability to command our nation? He's always been a sucker for pretty young things, but honestly, what was he thinking this time?

Back to the public scrutiny and political strategy employed by each side's campaign. Do you think the way people have questioned Palin's credentials is more aggregious than the implications that Senator Obama is a dangerous anti-American? If so, then I hope you don't answer the phone when the McCain robot calls. Nasty stuff when you start trying to manipulate the imagination of the electorate.

Posted by: cheryllyne | October 23, 2008 11:14 AM | Report abuse

At least Republicans will be happy to know that the money they donated to the RNC is being put to good use. SIKE! They got conned by their own party, yet they will continue to bend over for more!

Posted by: miknugget | October 23, 2008 11:14 AM | Report abuse

At least I know that Willow Palin bought the dress she wore to the vice presidential debate at H&M for about $35.

Posted by: Maite | October 23, 2008 11:16 AM | Report abuse

Onestring

Why is is ILLEGAL for the RNC to pay for the wardrobe of the GOP VP candidate and not ILLEGAL for the DNC to pay for Sen Obamas 757? The 757 burns $900 of fuel per hour...I'm sure the good Senator has spent more than 150 hours airborne in the last few months. It's a leased plane...the DNC pays for it...why are you crying about that?

Posted by: PanhandleWilly | October 23, 2008 11:36 AM | Report abuse

As an Obama supporter, I really could not care less about this. If someone has the money to spend on clothes, do it. I do, you do, we all do. Who cares?

Posted by: upland_bill | October 23, 2008 11:36 AM | Report abuse

Not sure what the big deal is. She looks great and why shouldn't she? Geez, if only the Obama campaign paid some attention to Michelle

Posted by: luca_20009 | October 23, 2008 11:47 AM | Report abuse

"Associated Press poll today has the race tied.

Obama'a in trouble.

So let's write a column about where Sarah Plain got her jackets."
******************************************


ahhhh...yeah...ok! Stop reading the national enquirer...I mean drudge! (same thing).

Posted by: not-me | October 23, 2008 11:50 AM | Report abuse

It only shows that when you put $150,000.00 on a bigoted, small minded, redneck moron, you end up with the same moron, only dressed better. She is a joke to most Americans. Just ask George Will, Colin Powell, and Peggy Noonan, just to name a few. All Republicants.
And if some think bigotry and hatred are hot, I'm sure that Mark Foley and Larry Craig would warm up to them.

Posted by: COLEBRACKETT | October 23, 2008 11:51 AM | Report abuse

Here's this, from Mike Murphy, McCain's 2000 Campaign Manager who has expressed disappointment in the way the 2008 Campaign has been conducted:

http://www.time-blog.com/swampland/2008/10/bling_zing.html

"Thought I’d offer a little help in a humorous vein; some other possible spin lines for the RNC.

1.) What you sneering critics in the liberal MSM fail to see here is… a Jobs Program! Saks floorwalkers, cashiers, a team of sweating porters to haul the merchandise from the store to the motorcade… chiropractors to treat those porters. Sarah Palin knows how to create jobs!

2.) What’s the difference between a Pit Bull and a Hockey Mom? You can feed a pit-bull for 483 years with 150 grand.

3.) Still cheaper than Mitt Romney’s hair products. We’re saving money here…

4.) William Ayres is a terrorist!

5.) New ad slogan: “Clothes for Gov. Palin? $150,000. Time machine to go back two months to late August and ask what the Hell were Schmidt and Davis thinking when they cooked up this idea and sold it to McCain?

Priceless."

Posted by: SarahBB | October 23, 2008 11:51 AM | Report abuse

Well let's see. Obama spent $450,000 on food for a few of his staff last month, he's spent over $90 Million in ads and such and his wife is out on the campaign trail stating that she can't afford to pay her student loans.... Who's the hypocrite... Other than you fools are latching onto this story because you have nothing of substance to talk about.... You're pathetic....

Posted by: lmcintyre | October 23, 2008 11:53 AM | Report abuse

We don't like our candidates talking one way about us in Scranton and acting another way in Saks....ha!

Posted by: Fuzzy21 | October 23, 2008 11:54 AM | Report abuse

I think that America is getting a real close look at some oxymorons: fiscally responsible Alaskan Republicans, lipstick wearing hockeymoms, and a beauty contest contestant from Wasilla who says she's a "maverick". Actually, we Alaskans can't get enough of our wingnut politicians as long as they bring in the earmarks and pork. Since none of us pay state income tax and all of us get our annual welfare check (I mean "permanent fund dividend"), getting exercised about our corrupt politicians is kind of a conceit. Afterall, a lot of what we spend on ourselves in Alaska comes out of some other suckers' (I mean "American taxpayers'") pockets. Remember: just because it passes the red-faced test in Alaska doesn't mean it will in the rest of the country. We Alaskans know better than to send one of ours to be a heartbeat away from the presidency!

Posted by: calidris1 | October 23, 2008 11:58 AM | Report abuse

So the RNC paid full retail.

S-A-L-E must be a 4 letter word for the super rich.

And with the high fashion needs she now has we can understand why Sarah now "tolerates" gays - unless Obama wins the election.

Posted by: KHMJr | October 23, 2008 12:02 PM | Report abuse

See Joe you have a choice between two forms of spreading the wealth. You can contribute your hard earned cash to the RNC so they can spend as much money on Sarah's clothes as your mythical plumbing business. Or wealthy people who make more than $250,000 can pay their fair share to pay for $700B wall street bail outs and the $100B Iraq war supplementals.

which makes more sense Joe?

Posted by: del3 | October 23, 2008 12:04 PM | Report abuse

The only problem I have with this story is why Marcus has to blame it on her husband and "male" boss. It sounds like she's saying the men in her life tell her what to do, even against her better judgment. Bleck!

That said, the issue is worth commenting on. I've got nothing against people spending their own money as they choose. But $150,000 of campaign money for clothes and accessories really stands out when the candidate claims to be a conservative populist who smears people on each coast and in big cities as loathsome elitists.

Who does she thing designed and marketed those suits? Joe" the plumber"?

Posted by: MontaraCA | October 23, 2008 12:04 PM | Report abuse

For the party that is supposed to represent fiscal responsibility this is the very definition of hypocrisy.

I have no problem with where a candidate shops with their own money, but spending tax-free campaign contributions to buy clothes most Americans could not afford burns me up.


Posted by: vegmom | October 23, 2008 12:10 PM | Report abuse

Shows how unorganized and politically un-astute (?) that campaign is. They could have buried the expense under "advertising" or done a gradual buy. In anycase I have suspected a diddle of the whole clothing spree...ya think someone bought some Armani for themselves and Sarah just got what was needed?...ya think anyone at the RNC did some auditingof who is actually wearing the clothing? Hellooo Cindy. Do I hear a "yu betcha"?

Posted by: mendonsa | October 23, 2008 12:12 PM | Report abuse

ANOTHER CHEAP SHOT AT SARAH PALIN a woman who obviously cannot afford to buy all the clothing needed in the campaign. She has 5 kids and is not rich. Obama on the other hand is spending 180 million dollars on ads just in the next 10 days or so. He has make big money with his books. Who pays for his lavish suites in the best hotels? Who pays for his beautiful custom made suits and shirts and ties? WHO PAID FULL PRICE FOR THE LOT NEXT TO OBAMA'S MANSION SO OBAMA COULD GET A 300K DISCOUNT ON THE 1.925 MILLION DOLLAR PRICE AND BUY PART OF THE LOT NEXT DOOR? HIS NAME IS A. REZKO AND HE IS IN PRISON. WRITE ABOUT THAT CONNECTION. OBAMA IS THE ONE RUNNING FOR POTUS.

Posted by: mharwick | October 23, 2008 12:12 PM | Report abuse

Who cares? We just spent $700,000,000,000.00 bailing out a bunch of crooks for which Biden and Obama were responsible for and you all are worried about $150000? "You just don't get it"

Posted by: Trysthens | October 23, 2008 12:13 PM | Report abuse

Why didn't she just go on "What Not to Wear?" They give you a complete wardrobe makeover for $5,000...

Posted by: freddigby | October 23, 2008 12:24 PM | Report abuse

Well let's see. Obama spent $450,000 on food for a few of his staff last month, he's spent over $90 Million in ads and such and his wife is out on the campaign trail stating that she can't afford to pay her student loans.... Who's the hypocrite... Other than you fools are latching onto this story because you have nothing of substance to talk about.... You're pathetic....

Posted by: lmcintyre | October 23, 2008 11:53 AM

_________________________________________

Well lets see...I'll take your word for it that the 450K was spent on food.Now how many of Obama's staff chowed down on that...3 or 4?...did it happen on a weekend?...or was it some spa in San Fran.? Re: the monies spent on ads and M. Obama decrying student loans...it's supporters like you why many conservative writers have a bad feeling about your ticket's chances. You have to know that political ad money comes out of campaign contributions and it is ILLEGAL to use it for personal purposes. Even Sarah's expenses came from the RNC funds and the clothing has to be returned or it is treated as income for Sarah and the First Dude.

Posted by: mendonsa | October 23, 2008 12:26 PM | Report abuse

If you think this article points out how much the MSM is in the tank for Sen. Obama--read this


http://www.ldsmag.com/ideas/081017light.html

Posted by: PanhandleWilly | October 23, 2008 12:27 PM | Report abuse

I would never have voted for the McCain-Palin ticket anyway, but I am astonished at the bad judgment this woman has shown, first in her use of Alaskan taxpayer money for personal/family use and now in her acceptance of "donated" clothing from the RNC. I realize that the latter is more the work of her handlers, but, what, she couldn't say "No, JC Penney is all I need"? If these 2 were to get elected by some miracle or fraud, how much federal taxpayer money is going to go toward keeping her & her family in the style to which they have become accustomed?

Posted by: mat00 | October 23, 2008 12:35 PM | Report abuse

Just saw the article in SLATE that said spending 150k on clothes was really tough to do. So...just looking for a simpler answer here...maybe there's more to the story or perhaps the story isn't exactly true. Perhaps Ms Marcus could use that journalism degree and hard earned reputation and figure out what the real story is instead of just jumping on hyperventilating hyperbole bandwagon.

Posted by: PanhandleWilly | October 23, 2008 12:36 PM | Report abuse

Palin thinks that she is doing her part save American jobs: "The good ole trickle down effect will just take that $150,000 and pull the whole country up by the bootstraps, by golly! Ronnie Reagan told me so, last night!"

Posted by: Chagasman | October 23, 2008 12:37 PM | Report abuse

"First, it is true -- just ask Hillary Clinton -- that it takes a lot more time and money for a woman politician to be in the national spotlight than it does for a man." --Ruth

What a lot of hooey! Men buy a suit and a few ties and get along fine changing the tie every day. But women are compelled by culture and marketing to feel compelled to buy a dress, wear it one time, and never wear it again or be banished to some fantasy Hell. And forget it if they show up and somebody is wearing the same clothes!!! How many men show up in a black suit or blue suit and never a word is spoken!!!

Posted by: jjcrocket | October 23, 2008 12:38 PM | Report abuse

What is your point? Do you think it's going to make a difference who I vote for? What I find disturbing is that you admitted going to the Neiman-Marcus website to find prices. Now Ms. Marcus, as I understand, Gov. Palin is going to auction off clothes after election for charity. Are you going to report on that story? Nah, I didn't think so.

Posted by: tcdifla | October 23, 2008 12:52 PM | Report abuse

PUBLIC CAMPAIGN FUNDS ARE FOR CAMPAIGNING NOT for personal shopping sprees.
Palin has worn the same 2 suits since we first heard her proclaim she's "just like us". If PALIN is JUST LIKE ME she needs to shop at TARGET, KOHL'S AND MACY'S. How can she call herself an "average American" and even ACCEPT such gifts?

I've NEVER MET A HOCKEY/SOCCER MOM who shops at Neiman's and Sac's, and if she did- THEY WERE RICH.

MCCAIN IS FOR RICH WHITE AMERICANS and he is spreading FEAR to OLD PEOPLE (PEOPLE HIS AGE) to get their vote. His "OBAMA WILL RAISE TAXES ADS" have the "poor people" thinking he means them when they have NO PLACE in McCain's plans for America. "Rednecks for Obama" know the REAL DEAL.
MONEY IS ALL PRIVATE DONATIONS, but it's NOT being used for shopping sprees for Michelle and the girls-

Posted by: lioness_ohyes | October 23, 2008 1:02 PM | Report abuse

The McCain campaign has just announced that for a contribution of $150,000.00 or more, you will receive a pair of panties that Sarah Palin purchased on her GOP sponsored shopping spree and that she actually wore on the campaign trail.

According to the website, the panties are suitable for sniffing and other GOP approved deviant sexual practices. The panties will arrive in a hermetically sealed plastic wraper along with a certificate of authenticity signed by Nancy Pfotenhauer, and shipped in a a discreet, plain brown wrapper. Supplies are said to be limited so hurry while supplies last!!

www.johnmccain2008.com/sniff_veeps_panties.html

Posted by: VeloStrummer | October 23, 2008 1:09 PM | Report abuse

Waste? How about extortion? How about this one, 85 millions from "Monster" Paulson's son:

"Like father, like son. Meet Merritt Paulson, the offspring of Henry Paulson. I suppose naming his child "Legacy" would have been too blunt.

The 35-year-old Merritt owns the Portland Beavers, a minor-league baseball team, and the Portland Timbers, a USL First Division soccer squad. While his father is demanding $700 billion of our money to bail out the banks, Merritt wants his own little piece of our hide. He is insisting upon $85 million in public funds from the city of Portland to build a new sports complex for the Beavers and an upgrade on the Timbers' stadium.

Merritt is not the sole owner of the Beavers and Timbers; he has only an 80 percent stake. The man with the 20 percent stake is his father, Hammerin' Hank. If you can keep the bile out of your throat for a moment, you have got to give the Paulson family credit for cheek. You can almost imagine the scene: the Paulsons sitting around the dinner table, munching on bald eagle pate, ruminating on their $700 billion credit line and saying, "What's $85 million more?"

We haven't seen a family of rustlers like this since Frank and Jesse James. Keep in mind that Hank Paulson is worth $700 million on his own (he just loves that 700 number). So forget the obscenity of any sports owner having the temerity to ask for public funds for a sports stadium at a time when we are collectively bailing out the nation's banks. Forget the lunacy of making the case for $85 million from a city that, despite its lush rose gardens and micro-breweries, has 16 percent of kids living below the poverty line. Forget all humanitarian and economic considerations. The fact is that the cash between the cushions at the Paulson family compound could pay for the new stadium in Portland and yet Merritt wants more. These aren't masters of industry. They're grifters. " The Nation

The Zionist need to be rained in.

Posted by: cintronlourdes | October 23, 2008 1:20 PM | Report abuse

I find it ironic that Palin has on a Polar Bear pin today (wonder how much it cost?) seeing as how she refuses to believe Polar Bears should be on the endangered species list and would probably rather shoot one and put it's head up on her wall. Regarding the clothes, I get excited when I can afford to go to Target and buy something new. This woman can't possibly think she can call herself 'Joe Six-pack' while spending that much on a wardrobe. How patronizing!

Posted by: Cait08 | October 23, 2008 1:23 PM | Report abuse

Big Whoop....Its the RNC's money, they can do with it what they want. Since when have they been concerned with things like legality, ethics and hypocrisy?.....Besides, now the rednecks have their Cinderella / Eva Peron.

Posted by: nonsensical2001 | October 23, 2008 1:31 PM | Report abuse

You know - I got to thinking. Who's smarter - Sarah or me? Let me count the ways.

She's being promoted for the 2nd highest office in the US and a job, mind you, where you don't do much.

She can bring her kids with her to work.

She has an unlimited expense account with Saks and Neimans that she doesn't have to pay for.

Me? Oh, I'm work full-time for pennies despite the fact that I have my doctorate.

I think I need to channel Sarah Palin...

Posted by: allie7 | October 23, 2008 2:11 PM | Report abuse

Sarah is the chief 'publican cheerleader. She has to look good on the sidelines as she cheers the crowd. Cheerleaders are nice, I like them. I like looking at them. They have a role to play in the entertainment, but I don't think they make suitable quarterbacks.

Posted by: Dr_Peabody | October 23, 2008 2:13 PM | Report abuse

That amount is obviously excessive. However, to make a big political deal out of it is absurd. Consider the insane amounts of money the Obama Campaign is spending to get elected. Could he not have come up with a way to save the entire nation money, given the backdrop of an economic crisis? Was all of this spending needed? The 150K is minute in comparison to this. So, save the moral tone.

Posted by: mspector1 | October 23, 2008 2:17 PM | Report abuse

My God, Sarah Palin is good looking and incredibly sexy !

Democrats for John McCain and Sarah Palin in 2008

Posted by: hclark1 | October 23, 2008 2:21 PM | Report abuse

First of all, Did Mrs. Palin actually go shopping for the clothes herself? I think it more likely that some staffers went shopping and brought back stuff for her to try on and perhaps some of it was sent back. But lets not try to find out all the facts ok? Second, perhaps these same staffers picked up a few items for themselves figuring no one woud notice. With all of the nasty politicking going on, even Abe Lincoln could't get elected today. We all need to stop being so negative about everything and instead of criticising..try to be part of the solution.

Posted by: katesgram | October 23, 2008 2:27 PM | Report abuse

So... will your next column be on the other VP candidate's expense for his hair plugs, facelift and botox? How much does it cost for Michelle Obama to have her hair straightened?

Posted by: waterfrontproperty | October 23, 2008 2:34 PM | Report abuse

I have a question.

While Obama's money is his campaign's own (proceeds from his book sales OR private donations to his campaign), isn't the $150K coming from taxpayer money ultimately - since McCain accepted federal funds? Isn't this coming out of the $84.1M taxpayer money?

Looks like we are indeed a Socialist nation. We tax everyone and 'spread the wealth' to fund Sarah Palin's Day Out in Manhattan!

Nice! Very nice!

Posted by: cpatwork | October 23, 2008 2:35 PM | Report abuse

My God, Sarah Palin is good looking and incredibly sexy !

Democrats for John McCain and Sarah Palin in 2008

Posted by: hclark1 | October 23, 2008 2:21 PM
__________________________________________

Well, you had me up thru the first sentence. She's certainly got a nice @$$ and looks great in thigh-high FMBs.

What this has to do with Democrats voting against their principles, I have no idea.

Posted by: youarestillidiots | October 23, 2008 2:38 PM | Report abuse

There you go again Ms. Marcus. You state you and your husband are having a difficult time making your budget. Give it a rest. You and he probably make over 150,000 between you. Stop the whinning. Some of us live on half that or less. Oh but I forgot you want us all to have the same amount of money. I forgot your Socialist in your thinking.

Posted by: pechins | October 23, 2008 2:54 PM | Report abuse

Let her have the clothes. It's just payment for publically embarassing herself on the national stage and committing political suicide.

Adios Sarah

Posted by: ColeM | October 23, 2008 3:00 PM | Report abuse

For those of you who think this issue is drawing overblown scrutiny, what else is there to right about with respect to McCain/Palin. They have articulated no coherent policies or even understanding of major issues. The campaign veers in different directions on different days. There is nothing substantive for journalists to analyze. No wonder they grab on to two-dimensional perception issues, that's all they have.

As for Obama getting a pass, his skeletons were thoroughly picked over during the primary. Obama paid market value for his house and the piece of adjacent land. Rezko facilitated the extra land acquisition by selling a piece of the adjacent lot. Certainly a little bit shady, but in the world of political backscratching, this doesn't even register as a minor tremor. Duke Cunningham it ain't. The prosecutor of the Rezko case is Patrick Fitzgerald. If he had anything on Obama, I have no doubt the hammer would have come down long ago.

You righties had your shot at running the show and blew it big time. Enjoy your long vacation in the political wilderness. It is richly deserved.

Posted by: JoeBewildered | October 23, 2008 3:13 PM | Report abuse

Michelle Obama, eats $300.00 caviar and drinks $100.00 bottles of champagne, at the Waldorf.
And looks like she models for Goodwill, doing it.

all though I do love her green dress, she looks like,
"The Grinch That Stole Christmas"

Now as for Marcus, what can I say other than,
She dresses like she models for the front cover of can of,,, Alpo Dog Food.

Posted by: dashriprock | October 23, 2008 3:13 PM | Report abuse

Ah dash?

The Waldorf story was retracted, never happened. Does it not worry you how easily duped you are?

Posted by: JoeBewildered | October 23, 2008 3:18 PM | Report abuse

She got an entire wardrobe for less than half of Cindy McCain's convention outfit. It's a great deal by Republican standards.

Posted by: caribis | October 23, 2008 3:20 PM | Report abuse

There's a new joint ad put out by Nieman-Marcus, Barney's and Saks:

YOU, TOO, CAN HAVE THE "SOCCER MOM" LOOK
FOR ONLY $175,00!

Posted by: OCPatriot | October 23, 2008 3:22 PM | Report abuse

Heck, McCain could have selected a triple bacon cheeseburger for a running mate. Would have provided roughly the same appeal to the base, would have been no less insulting to thinking Americans, would not fall in the polls every time it opened its mouth, and would have been a lot cheeper to dress.

Posted by: JoeBewildered | October 23, 2008 3:25 PM | Report abuse

Really Joe,

Retracted ? by whom this liberal rag of a newspaper ?
Or the Huffington post ?

But then you must, agree that Mechelle, dresses like she models for Goodwill.

Otherwise you would have, taken exception to my statement.

Have a nice day in your world of make believe Joe.

Posted by: dashriprock | October 23, 2008 3:31 PM | Report abuse

Retracted by the rag that originally published the story, The New York Post. As for your latent self-loathing issues suggested by your comments, what's to agree or disagree with. I find Michele Obama to be bodaciously bootylicious. My apologies to those who find my objectifying the future first lady to be offensive or sexist.

Posted by: JoeBewildered | October 23, 2008 3:40 PM | Report abuse

"Distrust any enterprise that requires new clothes." — Henry David Thoreau

If Palin didn't already have some stuff in her gubernatorial wardrobe suitable for some meet 'n' greets, and didn't trust her own taste or budget, then maybe she should have thought twice about this job offer.

Usually things that are too good to be true, are. An unlimited budget in procuring fashion and making over yourself into the girl you've always wanted to be is just dandy, but she should have remembered that there'd be a day of reckoning. Especially for a bill which, as someone above noted, is more than most people's entire college education. It costs way more than my 6 years of higher ed.

Even to outfit seven people...heck, you could take them all on safari for less.

Posted by: undercover_hon | October 23, 2008 3:42 PM | Report abuse

Jeez Dashriprock, you really love the Goodwill reference, don't you? I just came back from the thrift store, bought a couple of winter jumpers, two blouses (one still had its original JC Penney tag on it) and a tote bag for less than $30. I am fashionable and anticipate receiving many compliments on the "new" additions to my wardrobe.

I noticed that the parking lot was full with a diverse array of vehicles that would suggest an eaqually broad spectrum of incomes. The patrons inside were reasonably well mannered. You should try it sometime. The way the economy is headed, most people will need to find outlets like Goodwill, the Salvation Army, Habitat for Humanity, St. Vincent DePaul, etc. just to get by.

It's not surprising that you don't like the way Ms. Obama looks. I doubt you'd appreciate the kind of independent thinking pragmatist that she is no matter what she were wearing what with those conservative cataracts of yours.

Posted by: cheryllyne | October 23, 2008 3:56 PM | Report abuse


1. She still doesn't know what VP's job is because she is just too busy shoppin'! Can you imagine how long it takes to try things on and make these hard choices?!

2. She didn't mind wearing clothes designed by GAY designer, didn't stink that much this time, Sarah?

3. Country First! Which is why she prefers clothes made in EUROPE, not in America. Dear Sarah, there are plenty of young, perhas unknwn designers in the USA who can dress you well for much lesser or even for free!

4. Is McCain hot for Sarah? It sounds like he is spoiling her with luxury gifts... intresting...

5. Joe the plumber donated $100 for McCain's campaign. He can proudly say tha he bought ONE cute bodysuit with matching hat for Sarah's baby! $92 for ONE bodysuit... Yes Joe, you took 100 bucks away from your family and bought this ridiculously expensive outfit for Sara's baby. Your donation was that insignificant... it wasn't enough for that $249 trench coat for her youngest daughter....

6. She is not even a VP yet and already spends $150K in two months just for clothes... how expensive is she doing to be IF elected? Million bucks (or more) per year JUST for clothes? SPENDING FREEZE!!!!

Posted by: YourInsanity | October 23, 2008 3:56 PM | Report abuse

I would like to thank the writer for pointing out how the Republican vice presidential candidate actually paid for her clothes when Hillary's clothing designer stated that Hillary got all of her campaign clothing (3000 per pants suit) for free.....

I notice that there has not been a comparable report shwoing how much Mr. Obama paid for his suits or his wife's campaign clothes. If such information actually exists, this would be an excellent story for a good inquring reporter.

Posted by: Paladin7b | October 23, 2008 4:02 PM | Report abuse

I find it somewhat telling that there are three separate articles or opinion pieces about Gov. Palins shopping habits, and three more about how Sen. McCain is behind in the race.

Yet there is not one word describing what Sen. Obama is actually planning to do to our country, or examining his habits, actions or history with anything like the scrutiny the WAPO is applying to the Republicans.

If there were any journalists worthy of that title, there would be some stories about both, with equal skepticism and investigative energy applied to both campaigns.

Instead, Obama/Biden gets a pass while McCain/Palin is put under a microscope. And if clothing is such a big deal, how much is Obama spending on his suits, or is any of Obama's campaign money being spent on "frivolous" purchases?

Posted by: dwgerard | October 23, 2008 4:11 PM | Report abuse

Heard this story from a friend of mine. He claims Sarah Palin is a "Post Turtle". Read this story adn see if you agree.

While suturing a cut on the hand of a 75-year old Texas rancher whose

hand was caught in a gate while working cattle, the doctor struck up a

conversation with the old man. Eventually the topic got around to Sarah
Palin and her bid to be a heartbeat away from being President.

The old rancher said, 'Well, ya know, Palin is a post turtle.'

Not being familiar with the term, the doctor asked him what a post turtle was.

The old rancher said, 'When you're driving down a country road and you come across a fence post with a turtle balanced on top, that's a post turtle.'

The old rancher saw a puzzled look on the doctor's face, so he continued to explain. 'You know she didn't get up there by herself, she doesn't belong up there, she doesn't know what to do while she is
up there, and you just wonder what kind of dumb a*s put her up there to
begin with.

Posted by: agapn9 | October 23, 2008 4:14 PM | Report abuse

Some of my wife's friends call it "Needless Markup."

With the loony decisions that McCain and his "advisors?" made, including Palin, how can anyone want these people leading this country?

A scary note: On a recent trip south we saw a campaign sign in someone's yard with Palin in big letters on the top and McCain in smaller letters beneath, in the spot usually reserved for the VP candidate. Is this a prediction for the future?

Posted by: mtndance | October 23, 2008 4:16 PM | Report abuse

Wouldn't Obama's spending be subject to the same disclosure rules that exposed Palin excesses? It would have already been revealed, which means it didn't happen. He's smarter than a pig in lipstick to make that kind of gaffe. Go fish!

Posted by: HumanofEarth | October 23, 2008 4:19 PM | Report abuse

Dutchess2

Wrong guess... female, democrat with a beautiful family and a head above her head.

Posted by: voice2 | October 23, 2008 4:20 PM | Report abuse

I just wanted to say that I wouldn't vote for MCPAIN and FAILN' if my life depended on it.

Posted by: AC10 | October 23, 2008 4:24 PM | Report abuse

dashriprock |
You should get out more and actually READ something except other nut-jobs post. YES, it was retracted. Mrs. Obama was not in that hotel and the receipt was a photoshop forgery. Think before you post, if you're capable.... probably NOT! It is evidenced by your attack on her (Mrs. Obama) "look". Your true colors are showing. But, I guess you can't fix stupid, can you?

Posted by: HumanofEarth | October 23, 2008 4:26 PM | Report abuse

Even though I have no real interest in listening to Ann Coulter, the ultra-conservative who dresses like a lady who props up lamp poles, I wonder what she thinks about her anti-elitist candidate for #2 who manages to spend $150K in less than two months.

Palin said that her definition of elitist is someone who thinks he is better than someone else. Could she be describing herself? I certainly have not heard this from the Democratic campaign. I have heard a lot of this from the Republican candidates as they describe themselves as possessing better character than the opposition. Doesn't this sound like her definition of elitism. I have never heard either Obama or Biden declare that they are any more or any less than any other American. In fact, Obama suggests that he wants to be a servant of the people.

Sorry, Sarah, you are an elitist-acting pseudo-qualified candidate. Polish your stand-up comedy routine and maybe you can do SNL after Nov. 4.

Regarding executive qualifications, I have watched the top two candidates for many months now. Obama is the one who has exhibited superior executive qualifications. He has been on display. Remember, neither McCain nor Obama have executive experience as President. It is the first time in this position for either of them.

Posted by: EarlC | October 23, 2008 4:33 PM | Report abuse

it wouldn't matter what Obama or Michelle paid for their clothes, they didn't use campaign contributions to do it. and if anyone at Fox recognized Obama's suits as costing, say, $1000, we would have heard about it by now to counter the $500 McCain shoes.

She is worth 2mil. she doesn't need to bend, let alone break, the limits of legality for use of campaign funds. so why is she? because she thinks she can get away with it, like she thinks she can take kids with her on state taxpayer's money and alter expense reports to make it look like the kids were invited or on official business when they weren't.

Posted by: JoeT1 | October 23, 2008 4:38 PM | Report abuse

To add to my previous post, there is an ad in our area that shows the chair in the Oval Office, or so office. I respectfully suggest that McCain hasn't made decisions from that chair either. I just cannot get over the flagrant audacity of McCain to suggest that he has made decisions from a chair that he has never sat in either.

Posted by: EarlC | October 23, 2008 4:39 PM | Report abuse

Sounds like the "Straight-Talk Express" got hijacked.
Now it's the "Gravy-Train Express"
Sarah, Todd, Bristol, Willow, Piper, and Trig are riding it for all it's worth.
WooWoo!

Posted by: bcblue84 | October 23, 2008 4:44 PM | Report abuse

Go Sarah! You look great and you are an inspiration to all women!

Posted by: voice2 | October 23, 2008 4:51 PM | Report abuse

McCain should smile more...show his yellowing dentures to give the proper "elite" comments validity. Perhaps part of the $150k should've been spent on fixing that dude's teeth?

Posted by: MooseHunter52 | October 23, 2008 4:51 PM | Report abuse

Spend Sarah Spend! Spend Sarah Spend! Spent Sarah Spend!

Bargain Rack NOT for 666 Palin...

Palin has many new dresses... short dresses... many high hills shoes, new jackets, suits etc. BUT they are NOT from Wal*Mart. They are not from a bargain rack!

Sarah Palin is a stylish hypocrite!

All these find new clothes come straight from the treasures of the Republican National Committee’s bank account. WHY? ‘She needed clothes at the time,’ McCain told a group of Florida reporters. CHANGES YOU CAN BELIEVE IN…

In just 7 weeks Sarah 666 Palin spent $150,000.00 for clothing. This is 6 TIMES the annual wage earned by most American women! http://www.fact.on.ca/newpaper/wm990630.htm

McCain wants Sarah to reform Washington. Is this a sneek peak of what is to come?

For more information of McCain and Palin visit http://www.ibelievethis.us

Posted by: voicewithin | October 23, 2008 4:55 PM | Report abuse

I am just wondering if that guy, Joe the Plumber has ever bought anything from Neiman-Marcus for his Wife?? .

Posted by: ADFromVA | October 23, 2008 5:13 PM | Report abuse

I just found out what John McCain meant when he was talking about “American’s Dream”.
MY Friends Joe and Other Joes around the Country, You work Hard 7 days a Week AND I “John McCain” Will Give you Barbie PALIN

Posted by: ADFromVA | October 23, 2008 5:21 PM | Report abuse

The Palins made six figures last year - in addition to the perks she took as governor. The only problem was her wardrobe was soiled with moose and deer blood, and it was easier to hit N/M than to try to wash it all out.

Posted by: jonthes | October 23, 2008 5:21 PM | Report abuse

Gov. Palin's female supporters like it that she has the opportunity to wear designer clothes. They identify with her and take vicarious pleasure in her appearance. What opponents dislike about Gov. Palin is mostly what her supporters like. Educate her about the Constitution, geography, economics, and so on and current opponents will think her more qualified. But current supporters will see her as more of an elite insider.

Posted by: jfox1 | October 23, 2008 5:25 PM | Report abuse

McCain answers critics of $150,000 spent on Palin's clothes saying...they're going to be donated to charity? So that means some homeless person will be wearing Sarah's $2,500 Valentino jacket and $1,240 red high heels? Wow! Those McCain folks are really swell.

Posted by: logcabin1836 | October 23, 2008 5:27 PM | Report abuse

I found out all I needed to know about Sarah Palin's judgment when I heard her kids' names. Lucky she didn't have a few more or we'd be reading about Door Knob, Tractor and who knows what.

Posted by: eomcmars | October 23, 2008 5:31 PM | Report abuse

It's no wonder the place is nicknamed Needless Markup!

Posted by: dergans76 | October 23, 2008 5:39 PM | Report abuse

Let's hear it for the Rainbow Tour . . .

Posted by: mmebahorel | October 23, 2008 5:42 PM | Report abuse

Obama campaign and the liberal press have spent about 3 billions dollars to make Obama look good and you are complaining about Palin? Yeah, right.

Posted by: KMichaels | October 23, 2008 5:51 PM | Report abuse

Again, I'm not surprised by the excess and materialism exposed by this recent shopping spree. I'm not sure why the "real" Americans to whom Governor Palin appeals aren't outraged by this ear-marked entitlement.

Posted by: cheryllyne | October 23, 2008 5:52 PM | Report abuse

Anything will do as news. As if nobody saw her clothes?

What next? Her transportation? Or education?

Posted by: gary4books | October 23, 2008 5:58 PM | Report abuse

Please make your opinion count: VOTE.
No opinion counts unless you VOTE.

Increase your voting power by getting others to VOTE.
Please use the next 2 weeks encouraging others to VOTE!

Focus on CHANGE WE NEED: Obama '08

Posted by: ford9504 | October 23, 2008 6:07 PM | Report abuse

Please make your opinion count: VOTE.
No opinion counts unless you VOTE.

Increase your voting power by getting others to VOTE.
Please use the next 2 weeks encouraging others to VOTE!

Focus on CHANGE WE NEED: Obama '08

Posted by: ford9504 | October 23, 2008 6:10 PM | Report abuse

I guess the hockey mom mentality was displayed in the sharing of a room with the daughter. You live in a pretty fancy hotel and then you take only one room. I mean - either you do the posh thing and go the whole mile, or you go budget!

But you are into something there, Marcus - she should have bought her clothes in swing states. That would have been excellent PR.

Posted by: asoders22 | October 23, 2008 6:18 PM | Report abuse

The Democrats are indeed a party of hypocrites and thieves.

Senator Biden doesn’t even know who the president of the United States was in 1929 but he is considered a sage while Governor Palin is considered a lightweight because her interpretation of the nebulous concept of “The Bush Doctrine” (a term which has been at various points in time used to describe four different policy approaches) differs from that of some pompous drive-by media fool who isn’t even settled on the latest definition.

It’s no big deal that the Marxist Messiah buys his mansion with the help of a convicted public slumlord felon but it’s a scandal when Governor Palin legally uses her power as Governor to dismiss an employee that she views as less than responsive to the public trust.

The Marxist Messiah can’t even remember how many states there are in the United States of America but he’s considered “bright” while the drive-by media stokes the issue of Senator McCain’s age.

The Marxist Messiah’s political career was launched at the home of an unrepentant domestic terrorist while his spiritual advisor of some 20 years is a ranting racist anti-American Reverend Doctor, again, mere distractions, but Senator McCain’s political inclusion in the Keating Five hearings, even after the Democratic lead investigator cleared him 100 percent of any wrong doing, is fair game.

The Marxist Messiah’s training and financial support of ACORN is in reality at the heart of the affirmative action lending spree that has caused the collapse of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, a fact about which your read nothing in the drive-by media but Senator McCain is considered “unsteady” in a crisis.

Senator McCain and the Republicans attempted to reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac by increasing Federal oversight way back in 2005 and were thwarted by Senate Democrats including Dodd, Clinton and Obama who claimed that increased regulation of these GSEs was unnecessary but all you hear from the drive-bys is how the Republicans caused the financial crisis by “deregulating the banking industry”, a complete 180-degree reversal of each party’s actual position on this issue.

And now any attempt to vet the Marxist Messiah whatsoever is dismissed as a distraction but Governor Palin’s wardrobe is a topic of serious discussion.

We can’t even get the Marxist Messiah to produce a bona fide birth certificate to refute the claim of his own grandmother that he was born in Kenya not Hawaii and is hence constitutionally ineligible to serve as President of the United States.

The largest con in the history of the United States goes unreported while the drive-by media fixates on the wardrobe of Governor Palin. We have no independent media anymore, just a propaganda machine for the Marxist Democrats.

Posted by: PauvrePapillon | October 23, 2008 6:24 PM | Report abuse

Of course the clothes won't be auctioned off. You don't buy her clothes and then rip them off her and sell them, that's cheap.

They should give her some kind of allowance and let her buy her clothes herself. "Let Sarah be Sarah", right?

Posted by: asoders22 | October 23, 2008 6:30 PM | Report abuse

Who would've ever thunk it, Hockey Mom Palin brought down by the image very symbol of her definition of elitism.

LOL what a joke the Republicans are, falling all over her with their tongues hanging out. It sure looks like the empress has no clothes.

Posted by: AverageJane | October 23, 2008 6:31 PM | Report abuse

Who would've ever thunk it, Hockey Mom Palin brought down by the very symbol of her definition of elitism. Fashion designer clothes.

LOL what a joke the Republicans are, falling all over her with their tongues hanging out. It sure looks like the empress has no clothes.

Posted by: AverageJane | October 23, 2008 6:33 PM | Report abuse

Earmarks=Not Good
Earrings=OK

Posted by: jeffshowell | October 23, 2008 6:47 PM | Report abuse

Well, funny how you spend time on this lame topic. Anyone take a look at Obama's suit and pressed white shirt budget? (yeah, I'm sure he's buying off the rack at K-mart.) How about his campaign dropping 21 million on polling... Last I heard, there were about 10 groups at least doing polling...do they really need to spend that much on top of all the other efforts? What one might take from this shopping spree is that she hadn't spent a lot of money on clothes before and they felt with all the media (sharks) coming after her she better look good. Cause, gee, no one ever made fun of Hillary and her pant suits... and I love how the left will jump on her for not having time for her kids, then for taking them with her on trips. Yet, no one mentions that unlike, say, CA, MD and VA, her state has a budget surplus!!!!! I guess she did something right.

Posted by: lostein | October 23, 2008 6:53 PM | Report abuse


Let's see, she makes $125,000 a year as Governor of Alaska. In two months she spends $150,000 on clothes, which would be $750,000 a year.

That's $625,000 a year deficit spending in her family alone -- just for lookin' good.

If my "Fuzzy Math" is correct, that's just about how Bush ran up the deficit. She sounds like a true Republican.

And with the new outfits, she is looking like a modern-day Marie Antoinette. Instead of "Let them eat cake" she's telling us "If they have no mortgage money, let them wear Prada."

What this country needs now are some 250-year old grumpy French folks and a sharp guillotine.

Posted by: colonelpanic | October 23, 2008 7:12 PM | Report abuse

Palin has a habit of using her position for gain - the travel for her kids and husband, being paid for living in her own house, and now a $150,000 wardrobe. Don't forget the First Dude and the kids also had some RNC money buying them new clothes. It wasn't just Sarah.

I don't believe for a minute that the intent was always to donate those clothes to charity.

Why don't they auction them off on Ebay and then donate the proceeds to charity. I'm sure Meg can give them some advice so they're more successful than with the plane.

Posted by: FauxReal | October 23, 2008 7:12 PM | Report abuse

Tens of millions of dollars in campaign funds get spent in slanderous, negative campaign ads by candidates on either side of the aisle and no one bats an eye. Palin is allowed to spend $150K for a family wardrobe and she's treated like a war criminal. I don't condone the latter behavior, but I actually prefer it to the former.

Posted by: randysbailin | October 23, 2008 7:34 PM | Report abuse

I understand the favorite charity they were planning to donate the clothing to is actually the wife of a Wall Street CEO.

Poor Sarah, first she disses Tina Fey on SNL, now it's leaked that Sarah has a $150,000 wardrobe.

I don't think it is smart to dis the funniest woman in America -- one who does a drop-dead imitation of you -- and then drop 150 big ones on togs.

Lorne Michaels is not crying today.


Posted by: colonelpanic | October 23, 2008 7:41 PM | Report abuse

I absolutely do not like Mrs. Palin, and I already voted for Obama/Biden, but I still think you should have gone with your first instinct and refused to report on this story.

This story, as well as the "took her daughter to NY" are pure diversions. We should not be talking about this.

If one wants to pick on Palin, maybe one should better ask about her academic record: maybe someone who flunked four schools and needed the fifth to eventually graduate, someone who seems to have enormous problems understanding very simple questions (let alone answering them), and even harder difficulties with the English language, in short an intellectually challenged person, should not be appointed to a position one heart beat away from the presidency.

But please, do us all a favor and get off the nonsense about clothes and who foot the bill.
It's pure distraction.

Posted by: Reader24 | October 23, 2008 7:42 PM | Report abuse

I understand the favorite charity they were planning to donate the clothing to is actually the wife of a Wall Street CEO.

Has anybody gotten Imelda Marcos' take on this?

Poor Sarah, first she disses Tina Fey on SNL, now it's leaked that Sarah has a $150,000 wardrobe.

I don't think it is smart to dis the funniest woman in America -- one who does a drop-dead imitation of you -- and then drop 150 big ones on togs.

Lorne Michaels is not crying today.


Posted by: colonelpanic | October 23, 2008 7:44 PM | Report abuse

Palin was chosen to entice the joe six packs with her sexuality - not to compete with HRC. It probably isn't illegal (not as illegal as torture and all the other violations of many pols). Of course it makes sense for her to buy these clothes. Did people see her 6-8 yo looking daughter carrying the $1000K Louis Vitton bag on HP?

Someone above assumes she only has LL Bean and similar clothing. Don't you believe that. I live in a town that is just as granola and hickey as Alaska, and I shop at Saks and Nordstroms; however it is my money.

What I find interesting, is that despite the price tag, the clothes are really ugly. She is terribly accessorized. That awful ass sniffing scarf - why not ass sniffing elephants and moose?

For 150K, she should look MUCH better. The clothes are too tight, out of style, etc. They don't look like Saks and NM. I really wonder where the money went. I doubt it is the clothes.
No way!

Clothes to nowhere and tax rebates in
Alaska again next year. THINK ABOUT IT!

Posted by: plumbingoil | October 23, 2008 7:49 PM | Report abuse

I agree 700 billion dollars is alot of money. I hope that we get a chance to see some of that money. Watch Funny Videos http://www.frizle.com

Posted by: roverfind | October 23, 2008 8:19 PM | Report abuse

You got to be kidding me, look at the pants suits Hillary wore, Goodwill would not take.

However an outfit that Sarah Palin has worn, take that and offer it up for sale or auction it off on eBay, and I guarantee someone will buy it for more then $150,000 for just that one outfit alone.

Cook Barela, Riverside, Ca

Posted by: cookbarela | October 23, 2008 8:23 PM | Report abuse

I don't know why people are making such a fuss here. She won the GOP VP nomination contest, fair and square. Isn't the wardrobe award part of the contest prize? Ms. Marcus couldn't come up with the $4,285 amount because she forgot about the cost of the diamond-studded tiara which she also received as part of the prize.

Seriously, people who try to trivialize this grave incident need to have their heads examined. One good way of judging someone's true characters is through looking at seemingly small matters. Furthermore, this incident follows Palin's many previously reported illegal (at least unethical) activities. She and the RNC apparently take after the CEOs of the collapsing banking and financial institutions (huge bonuses using bail-out money! - "are you kidding me?" per Senator Kucinich).

Posted by: KT11 | October 23, 2008 8:26 PM | Report abuse

Back in the 1930's, the "liberal" media outlets supported the socialist Hitler and trashed the conservatives.

Today, the "liberal" media outlets support the socialist Obama and trash the conservatives.

But, here is the difference. Hitler came to power and Obama will not.

Anyway, the most disturbing thing is that the "liberal" (in fact, they are godless socialists) media outlets are in the tank of the party of hate, racism, slavery, intimidation, and violence -- the Democrats.

Setting the Record Straight (part 1)
http://www.freedomsjournalmagazine.com/blog/?p=207

Posted by: loan4ever | October 23, 2008 8:27 PM | Report abuse

This $150,000 shopping spree shows whats wrong, not only with the Rep. party, but also everyone in government.

Noone, in our government, has the common sense to shop for bargains.

I never buy anything unless its on sale or marked down because I have too, to survive.

There is too much money being made in Government.

And I believe the whole system is now corrupt.

Posted by: Ciap | October 23, 2008 8:31 PM | Report abuse

$150,000 equals one 15 second TV ad in prime-time.

Are we also suggesting that Sen. Obama is "out of touch" with the American people because he is spending so much money on TV ads? Should he start giving out campaign donations to the poor instead of padding the pockets of "Big TV."

I look forward to the future column about how Sen. Obama blew through $500 million dollars to get elected. If he were truly fiscally competent, he could have done it for $100 million.

Posted by: ptltd | October 23, 2008 8:57 PM | Report abuse

This sounds like a job done by RNC campaign consultants. I don't know how they managed to spend that much, but I'm sure elite washington insiders know how to do it. (They might have had to buy some threads for the kids too since they are in campaign appearances.) I also find it hard to believe that Sarah had any idea how much it cost. They probably picked out the clothes for her in a real rush job, made sure they fit, (or were custom fitted), and bought them on the RNC charge card.

As for the second item, this is the price Sarah Palin must pay for getting rid of the governor's airplane. If she had kept the plane, it wouldn't have cost any more for the family to be on board. There wopuld be just one charge to staff and fuel the plane.

"“In October 2007, Palin brought daughter Bristol along on a trip to New York for a women's leadership conference,” the AP reported. “Plane tickets from Anchorage to La Guardia Airport for $1,385.11 were billed to the state, records show, and mother and daughter shared a room for four nights at the $707.29-per-night Essex House hotel, which overlooks Central Park.”"

Posted by: andrewp111 | October 23, 2008 9:05 PM | Report abuse

I suspect they couldn't just give her a clothing allowance and let her buy them herself. First of all, they would want expensive TV consultants to pick out things that look good on TV. Second, the Palin nomination has all the appearance of a last minute, rush job. My suspicion is that John McCain actually wanted someone else who either declined or had to be rejected for other reasons, and she was probably picked out of the blue the day or two before it was announced. They probably had only one day (or less) to buy her a wardrobe, and probably just told their consultants to just get it done.

"Of course the clothes won't be auctioned off. You don't buy her clothes and then rip them off her and sell them, that's cheap.

They should give her some kind of allowance and let her buy her clothes herself. "Let Sarah be Sarah", right?

Posted by: asoders22 | October 23, 2008 6:30 PM "

Posted by: andrewp111 | October 23, 2008 9:15 PM | Report abuse

Not $300K of threads, not $600K, would help Marcus. Like putting lipstick on a pig.

Posted by: craigslsst | October 23, 2008 9:45 PM | Report abuse

The focus should be on McCain, not Palin. McCain and Joe the Plumber, McCain and the multi-trillion economic loss for which he voted, McCain and the Savings and Loan Scandal, for which he was indicted, McCain's malignant cancer with a high rate of reoccurrence and no cure rate (see NYT article this week), McCain calling his wife a "C" in public, McCain and the comments about Chelsea Clinton at a convention speech, THE ROBOCALLS, THE ROBOCALLS, THE ROBOCALLS, THE ROBOCALLS, DIRTY POLITICS, DIRTY POLITICS, NO ENDORSEMENTS FROM HIS PARTY, HIS APPARENT DEMENTIA, his ignorence, his horrible nastiness, BAD TEMPER, POOR DECISION MAKING AND POOR NEGOTIATING SKILLS, and complete inferiority to OBAMA!!

Posted by: plumbingoil | October 23, 2008 10:24 PM | Report abuse

The real clothing story is the tee shirts that people proudly wear calling her a c---. How much were those, and who paid??

===

Again, the irony is lost on these people. The T-shirts were privately made by certain young Obama supporters who were making fun of John McCain's well-substantiated instance of using the same word on his wife.

It was supposed to be a poke at "McCain the Promoter Of Women's Issues," which is, as anyone could see, a complete farce. It was not gratuitous name-calling, but I don't expect you to see the political statement therein. Too stupid.

And nobody in the Obama campaign paid for it, and if you believe the DNC did, you're willfully ignorant.

..

Posted by: bracken1 | October 23, 2008 10:33 PM | Report abuse

I read elsewhere that paying for it from rnc funds makes it legal. Private parties paid for this....maybe they were foolish, but it is for the republican donors to complain. ms. marcus shouldn't have listened to her sexist boss and husband, and spent her time on something else.

Posted by: later | October 23, 2008 10:37 PM | Report abuse

What do I expect from the 2nd most biased newspaper the washingtoncompost. HOW about Baraks $6000 suits and Ms. Hillary's $5000 pantsuits. WHY won't you deliver ANY negative but True info about them. There's plenty out there but your bias just won't let you write about it. Your to be pitied I guess... There's all those parties you'll get to attend if you just keep spouting the Pravda lines.

Posted by: perryd5 | October 23, 2008 10:40 PM | Report abuse

Since Caribou Barbie knows so little about the duties of the Vice President, someone needs to clue her into the fact that the American people will not be picking up the tab for her for future shopping adventures if the American people are so stupid as to actually elect the McCain/Palin ticket.

Posted by: lavinsr | October 23, 2008 10:42 PM | Report abuse

Well, looks like the McCain spin masters are now trying to counter Palins hypocritical shopping spree -by slamming Obama about using his 767 to go see his ill gramdmother.!!!

"Look at Obama, using that expensive plane just to go see his granny. He should get on a commercial flight, just like everybody else."

Yeah, right...bet the Secret Service thinks that is a great idea.

One of those "health of the mother" moments the Republican's are so adept at.

ARE MCCAIN'S ADVISORS AND SPOKESPEOPLE ALL MENTALLY ILL?

Do they have any idea how stupid they look?

Posted by: plaza04433 | October 23, 2008 10:55 PM | Report abuse

Wow...Breathtaking how gentle some of you folks are with the uhhh -("lady" should be a slap and insult to real women) - the ahhh female person from Alaska.
It's okay for Rovian neocon rethuglicans to slander and smear others; but when the shoe is on the other foot, you mofos cry, 'race card' and 'sexist'. Yeeechh! Gimme a break.
Is there anything to McCain's Alzheimer's meds; or Paylend's sex tapes?

Posted by: williams172166 | October 23, 2008 10:58 PM | Report abuse

Say it ain't so, Hockey Mom. Did you just drop $150,000 in overpriced clothes, shoes, and accessories? Joe the Plumber can't even afford a $150,000 house!

Posted by: mashie | October 23, 2008 10:59 PM | Report abuse

Oh... All this nonsense about turkey dressing is much too boring. I want to know how much Obama spent on dressing up Joe Biden.

Posted by: andro1 | October 23, 2008 11:29 PM | Report abuse

I can't help but think that underlying Ms Marcus's and Jeanne Cummings' smarmy sanctimony on this is that it is killing them that they could spend TEN MILLION on fashion, and they still would look like old frumps next to Governor Palin.

That is Sarah's unforgivable sin...

No, the sin for her and the RNC is stupidity...Obviously, there is no sense in explaining the hypocrisy to you and the other defenders of this foolishness...I hope you are happy with they way they spent YOUR money.

Posted by: mykaladrian | October 24, 2008 12:01 AM | Report abuse

"HOW about Baraks $6000 suits and Ms. Hillary's $5000 pantsuits. WHY won't you deliver ANY negative but True info about them."

Gee, even if they'd bought 10 such each that's still 60k & 10k...

I think some of the stuff Palin got was impregnated with gold - or one of those other things the wise men bought with them... it is nearly Christmas after-all :)

Posted by: Mikey6 | October 24, 2008 12:10 AM | Report abuse

hey she has a great bod for a MILF i would like to see her in some tight jeans and a middi t-shirt top with no bra uuuRAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!

Posted by: JudgeAlan | October 24, 2008 12:10 AM | Report abuse

$150,000 on clothes. Spent over a less than 2-month period.

I never liked Palin, but now I truly hate her for what she has done to the chances of other, better-qualified women to run for President or Vice-President. Men can get away with John Edwards' $400 haircut -- I mean, let's face it, he was always a metrosexual anyway. But I can hear Joe Six-Pack now. "I'm voting for Palin 'cuz Obama bin Laden is a terrorist. But to spend our money on her clothes -- isn't that just like a woman."

Posted by: zeny_dlc | October 24, 2008 1:04 AM | Report abuse

Must da been da draws.

Posted by: bluemonday | October 24, 2008 4:54 AM | Report abuse

PGR88 Wrote: "your attempts at lame negative PR against her will only serve to increase her publicity and image among normal Americans."

Which normal americans will praise Sarah Palin and the GOP for spending $150,000 on costuming an Alaskan pitbull with lipstick?

I am sufficiently conceited to imagine myself a normal American. I am also one who has learned long ago that whatever it is, "It is OK if you're a Republican but a dirty shame or felony if you are not."

To think that $150,000 for clothes in less than 2 months is something the majority of America will aprove of is to be utterly oblivious to America's morals, ethics and sense of integrity. There is no monarchy in this country other than in the minds of the silliest of Republicans who worship Mammon.

Posted by: palnicki | October 24, 2008 7:27 AM | Report abuse

This is the big NON STORY of the year. These are not Palin's clothes. They belong to the RNC where they will be returned when the campaign is over.

Now the rest of this is WHO HAS PAID FOR THE OBAMA CLOTHES. He wears suits that cost at least $1,500 a piece not including shirt, tie, etc. And he has never made enough money to pay for the things he has. Someone has always paid. WHO? Sad, but you will never know. HIS RECORDS ARE SEALED!! And he is running for POTUS. The real story you do not print is the "sham I am" about Obama!!!

Posted by: annnort | October 24, 2008 8:02 AM | Report abuse

Trivial? Isn't it fair to expect our politicians to practice what they preach? To lead by example? We are on the brink of economic disaster. Sen. McCain has persistently claimed that the govt. needs to cut spending across the board, eliminate earmarks, he plays the maverick card every chance he gets, his campaign du jour is "Joe the Plumber" economics of the working guy, and then his campaign spends $150,000 to dress up its showcase to make her more physically appealing? Are we so easily fooled? I don't think so. We know hypocrisy when we see it. Americans are paying attention. Isn't it a bit elitist to describe "elitists" as people who think they're better than everyone else, yet so brazenly spend this kind of money on clothes? Who in this country can go out and spend $150,000 on clothes and accessories, particularly in these economic times? Not Joe the Plumber. Not MOST Americans. Only a very, very, small percentage of Americans can do that. I'd say that only elitists can do that. Busted. Again. Americans are sick of doublespeak and they'll prove it at the polls.

Posted by: mindfuldiscourse | October 24, 2008 8:58 AM | Report abuse

"Strategic decisions -- like what, St. John vs. Dior?"

That was funny.

As for the lipstick, there were rumors that it was a permanent tattoo on her lips. Barack Obama was wrong, after all. It wasn't lipstick on a pig. It was tattoo on a pig! (okay, he wasn't referring to Palin.)

Posted by: aranherunar | October 24, 2008 9:17 AM | Report abuse

Double standard? These people here are claiming a double standard? It was them who pounced on every hundred-dollar-haircut or thousand-dollar-suit from Democrats. Edwards lost because of a $400 haircut. Hillary lost partly because of her thousand-dollar-pantsuits. Kerry (and to a small extent Gore) was accused of the same thing. That was hundreds of dollars. Not a hundred and fifty grand, for God's sake. And people here are claiming a double standard? Exactly.

Posted by: aranherunar | October 24, 2008 9:20 AM | Report abuse

Blogger: "And [Obama] has never made enough money to pay for the things he has."

So utterly false. But then Republicans have always been devoid of facts. Obama wrote two bestsellers himself and earned all of his own money. Palin earned hers from oil interests, and even with her wealth is reluctant to spend any of it on her own clothing. And McCain? Through divorces and seduction.

Posted by: aranherunar | October 24, 2008 9:23 AM | Report abuse

Obama ‘Morally Justified’ for Votes Against Helping Aborted Babies Born Alive, Say Dems

Posted on Friday, October 24, 2008
Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama was morally justified to oppose legislation in the Illinois State Senate that would have ensured that a child who survives a failed abortion received medical attention, according to Democratic leaders.
While in the Illinois Senate, Obama opposed three bills that proposed protection in three different legislative votes, a decision that Republican presidential candidate John McCain said was wrong in the last presidential debate.
After the debate, Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean said that Obama did the right thing and defended his position.
Watch the Video.
“If you looked at those little meters, McCain lost that debate,” Schumer told CNSNews.com. “Most Americans are pro-choice. Most Americans don’t want to repeal Roe v. Wade, and I thought Obama was great there. He had his views but he was very respectful of the other side. Sometimes the left is a little too condescending to the other side.”
Earlier this month, CNSNews.com Editor-in-Chief Terry Jeffrey reported that, in 2001, Illinois State Senator Patrick O’Malley introduced three bills to the legislature. One said that if a doctor performing an abortion believed there was a likelihood the baby would survive, another physician must be present “to assess the child’s viability and provide medical care.”
Another bill gave the parents, or a state-appointed guardian, the right to sue to protect the child’s rights. A third bill said that a baby alive after “complete expulsion or extraction from its mother” would be considered a “person, ‘human being,’ ‘child’ and ‘individual.’”
Obama voted against all three.
During the last presidential debate, Obama responded to McCain’s allegation that his votes aligned him with the most “extreme aspect of the pro-abortion movement in America.”
I’ve noticed that everyone who is for abortion is already born”. Ronald Reagan.

Posted by: 4elise | October 24, 2008 10:49 AM | Report abuse


OBAMA IS A MONSTER FOR VOTING TO MANDATE THE MURDER OF LITTLE INFANTS, BORN ALIVE, HAVING SURVIVED AN ABORTION ATTEMPT!
NO ONE WHO VOTES LIKE THIS CAN POSSIBLY RESPECT THE LIFE OF OTHERS. EVER.
I’ve noticed that everyone who is for abortion is already born”. Ronald Reagan.

Posted by: 4elise | October 24, 2008 10:51 AM | Report abuse

Nice job of staying on topic, 4elise. Keep wandering off to subjects of your own choosing and you could be ready for a vice presidential debate.

Posted by: gretel1 | October 24, 2008 12:20 PM | Report abuse

I don't care whose money it was (even her own) or whether it was a permitted use of campaign funds -- $150K is too freakin' much to spend on clothes. Male or female, no matter who you are or what your job is. And there's little redemption in "donating" the used clothes to charity. Ask a homeless mother what she'd rather have for her kids -- a used size six designer suit, or the $5,000 someone paid for it.

Posted by: susang73 | October 24, 2008 1:28 PM | Report abuse

Oh let me paraphrase John McCain. The RNC just dosen't get it, they just don't get it!

See, he fell for the hockey mom who was governor of Alaska. Being a governor, but not dressing like a model for Saks or pick you favorite high end store, Palin probably had some quitessential "real American appeal to the Senator from Arizona.

Then they had to change the package, so it would more closely resemble the image they wanted to portray. Look how it backfired, it would be easier to let slide her lack of real knowledge on important issues if she looked like the hockey mom..

Now dressed better than almost all American women, accept Cindy McCain, the hockey mom is invisible and only a smug politico with nothing of value to say remains.

Still, give her points for trying....but take points away from the RNC for their inept fine tuning on wardrobe.

Posted by: Thatsnuts | October 24, 2008 2:18 PM | Report abuse

This is an important story because it goes to John McCain's judgment, and the way he views women.

What kind of adult woman allows a man who is not her family to buy her a new wardrobe? A strong, independent maverick? Or a kept woman, barbie-doll, decoration for the campaign? I'm not suggesting an intimate relationship between them, (EWWW!) but she sets us all back by accepting gifts like this. Hilary bought her own clothes. Professional women take care of themselves and are proud to do so.

Her accepting these clothes--and his offering them--betrays the way he views her, and her own self-image as a woman who needs to be taken care of, and is easily lead. And it's clear why he didn't pick Kay Bailey Hutchison, an accomplished, experienced, right-wing GOP woman who actually reads and can speak clearly, and owns her own clothes.

Palin makes herself look cheap, or like a con-woman just out for whatever she can take. She'll turn on him before this is over, and will certainly keep those clothes after the media spotlight if off.

Posted by: newcindyadams | October 24, 2008 4:01 PM | Report abuse

Boo frickin hoo. Obama spends money on creating his own presidential seal, setting up the whole "Greek God-Olympus thing" at his convention, paying off his cronies, etc., and all you are worried about is what Palin paid for her boots?

MSM is getting beyond pathetic. You are so in the tank you might as well have gills.

Posted by: luca_20009 | October 24, 2008 4:11 PM | Report abuse

Oh come on now Ruth as it sounds more like
you and screwball hateful Kathleen Parker
must be insanely jealous of Gov Sarah Palin
and her being a beautiful,successful young
woman and you are both obessed with trying
to destroy Gov Sarah Palin since both you
and Parker also are WAPO Obama Shills!

So,Ruth where are your and Parker's stories
about "Let's Bail Out AIG Stockholder"
the $66 Million Dollar Woman.Democrat
Speaker Nutty Nancy Pelosi and her endless
costly Botox Treatment,Comestic Surgery,
Never Ending Make Overs,and Constant Expensive Daily Wardrobe Changes now?

Or, how much did the DNC and Obama/Biden
Bunch totally waste on all the failed
Michelle Obama make overs? And on Big Mouth
Know It All Old Loud Mouth Joe Biden's
New Hairplugs,Botox and Face Lifts and
on Messiah Barack Hussein Obama Costly
Italian Made Suits now then? So Ruth since
your apparently the New WAPO Fashion Editor how about explain all those apples
to us as well? GOD WAPO Hires LOSERS!

Posted by: SherryKay2004 | October 24, 2008 6:57 PM | Report abuse

I think that the Republicans (who wouldn't vote for a democrat no matter what) are getting scared. Let's try to dress the hockey mom up and make her "look" classier than she really is. It's too bad that she has a hard time putting words together. But, maybe she doesn't...let's see...Neiman Marcus. Hey there's two of them.
I bet they doesn't donate her clothes after the race. Who would they donate them to....the Gov. of Alaska by any chance?
I can't see them donated to a homeless shelter. Sarah, you should be ashamed of yourself!

Posted by: JoeCool1 | October 24, 2008 9:55 PM | Report abuse

WOW! So all the Obamabot Cult is out again
in force tonight to help Ruthie and Crazy
Kathleen Parker continue to attack and
smear Gov Sarah Palin and showing their
jealousy and envy of Palin like rabid
Socialist/Democrat/Communist Attack Dogs
Guarding the East Berlin Side of the Wall
During the Cold War!

Posted by: claudinelong | October 25, 2008 12:17 AM | Report abuse

The Washington Post's "One Trick Pony" is back at it again. I had never read her OpEds before she went on her Palin writing streak, and sadly, after the election I will go back to not reading her again.

Ruth,
What are you going to do after the election is over? You better move up to Alaska to see if you can get on the Anchorage paper's editorial staff so you can keep riding this meal ticket.

Posted by: d-35 | October 25, 2008 2:19 AM | Report abuse

Weak non story about Palin. Bad enough she used her office for a personal issue, but when you consider creationism, what do you think of banning books, AIP, laughing with and honoring a vile radio misogynist, replacing Monegan with a masher, naivete on issues, her true religion and true Americans, her terrorist Obama, 19 million deficit as mayor, the Pebble mine, appointing cronies over talent, non-belief in global warming and endangered species, poor academic college record, and praying for a pipeline, I wonder why she is polling lower than the low 40's. If socialism is medicare, the prescription drug plan, food stamps, the EIC, special education, social security raising the low end payments and Pell grants, call me a socialist. Democrats like Pelosi also have to take a hit on being divisive as shown by her bailout statements where both parties are to blame.

Posted by: jameschirico | October 25, 2008 10:34 AM | Report abuse

I wonder what the reaction from the right would have been if Michelle Obama had done something like this. Talk about hypocrisy...

Posted by: wontwo_onetwo | October 25, 2008 12:06 PM | Report abuse

I do think the clothes budget is high, but Sarah really likes her shoes and they can be very expensive.

We are so wrapped up in someone's appearance, what else could they have done. If they did not spend the money on the clothes, the party would be critized for not spending the money.

The party was stuck between a "rock and a hard place."

Posted by: bksews | October 25, 2008 3:54 PM | Report abuse

I wonder what the reaction from the right would have been if Michelle Obama had done something like this. Talk about hypocrisy...

Posted by: wontwo_onetwo | October 25, 2008 12:06 PM
------------------------------------
So let me get this right, you've asked a rhetorical question, presumed a response and then called the response that you presumed hypocritical. I haven't seen logical reasoning like this in a long time.

Posted by: d-35 | October 25, 2008 4:46 PM | Report abuse

CMN News item:

Gov. Palin told a reporter in Ohio, "Election Night is just eleven days away and I have nothing to wear."

She went on to say:

"The McCain-Palin campaign has allocated thus far 150 grand for outfitting me for my daily Sarah Palin Shows. All that money is gone by this time for different dresses, purses, perfumes, and the like. So I have asked for another 30K out of donor contributions to our campaign so that I could go to Neiman Marcus for outfitting me for the Election Night.

"I saw the other day a b..e..a..u..t..i..f..u..l completely see-through skin colored gown hanging on a special hanger in Neiman Marcus; i think it was there though the hanger seemed to have nothing on it; for there was a sign on the hanger describing the dress with the price tag of 20,000 dollars. And that the gown I wanna wear on that special night.

"You will remember the story of the empress about whom one little kid had said to his father, 'Look, Pa, the empress has nothing on,' and the father had replied, 'I know. I am thoroughly enjoying the sight' ?

"Well, that's the eye-catching way I want to look on election night."

============================================

Posted by: AMemberofHumanSociety | October 25, 2008 11:38 PM | Report abuse

By the way, why aren't Palin's children in school???? Whose paying for their tutors??

Posted by: cghjoyce | October 27, 2008 10:20 AM | Report abuse

This neimansgate was the October surprise the McCain-Palin ticket sprang onto themselves. What a better way to stop oligarchy except to give them enough rope to hang themselves.

Posted by: buzziea | October 27, 2008 12:46 PM | Report abuse

Didn't the media say that the $150,000 was for Sarah Palin AND her family? If that's the case, then it's easy to spend that much at Neimans or Saks or both!

Posted by: clarue1003 | October 27, 2008 2:11 PM | Report abuse

Claims of Palin Derangement Syndrome are uproariously hilarious considering the right wing radio gabfest over John Edwards' $400 hair cut. I guess largess is bad if you're an "elitist, liberal" but just fine if you're Mrs. Joe Six-Pack AND it's someone else's money! Lemme see... John Edwards could have gotten a haircut everyday for the cost of that wardrobe.

Laughable right wing idiots.

85 days till the end of the Bush administration.

Posted by: CardFan | October 27, 2008 4:21 PM | Report abuse

Palin also bought her five year old daughter Piper a Louis Vuitton purse! They sell for THOUSANDS! What gall, for this "fiscal conservatinve" to go wild spending the RNC's money to make her look better than a pit bull! I'm thankful I wasn't one of their contributors!

Sarah, it didn't work. You still look like a pit bull with liptick, and still sound like a screeching bat!

Posted by: cashmere1 | October 27, 2008 6:33 PM | Report abuse

Ya know, they wanted her to look good. They bought a lot of stuff to try out. Big deal. Is anyone at the post truly knowledgeable about the actual freakin' issues? People crack me up with talk about how this "behavior" is indicative of the republican attitude, etc. Voters should be aware of what will happen when Obama raises the tax rate on the top 5%. Please, folks, it is reprehensible that America's wealthiest pay such a little percentage of their income (though they do pay 61% of the aggregate federal tax bill). The problem here is one of prudence. If you discourage investment with the threat of higher taxes, the federal system will suffer and so will jobless rate. Pay attention folks!

Posted by: primegrop | October 28, 2008 6:05 PM | Report abuse

Ruth Marcus wrote: I was planning to spend the day doing some Very Serious reporting about how to handle this transition, which is going to be awfully tricky to navigate no matter who wins.

Please, PLEASE write this column at some point! I have this horrible certainty that this transition will be far worse than any we have seen, even in the unlikely event of a McCain victory. After an Obama victory, I fully expect that his administration will have to file lawsuits to get the records of the current administration, especially those of the office of the Vice President.

Posted by: kcc3 | October 29, 2008 12:01 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company