emandink: (Default)
Poetical Thief ([personal profile] emandink) wrote2008-10-23 04:10 pm

[Politics] Sarah Palin and the $150,000 wardrobe

Pretty much anything I could possible say about this, [livejournal.com profile] ayun  has said better.  The knock off bag thing slays me.

I will add that evidently not even $150,000 worth of designer clothes which were probably purchased in some urban bastion of non-Americanism are enough to make Sarah Palin "elite."

[identity profile] pickleboot.livejournal.com 2008-10-23 10:42 pm (UTC)(link)
the thing is, so much of that wardrobe was bought here, in minneapolis/st paul. and if that bag is a fake, it was most likely bought at either the moa or one of the many stalls/purse shops near the downtown needless markups. i know that a friend that works at the jewelry counter there said that it was nuts- the amount of money being spent on her was insane. it was like they were going to close the store for her. and the hair- ugh. i am now hearing more and more about it, and man, she really pushed limits.

and the clothes for the baby? wow. i know that shop- that had to be one of the most expensive pieces in the place. they just sent people out willy nilly to buy stuff, and did it largely in minnesota because it is tax free on items like clothes, shoes, coats, etc up to a certain amounts. i think that some designer things are exempt, but i am not sure what the cut off is, and i know that kids clothes, no matter the price, are. so i am sure that is why they did the bulk here.

[identity profile] windsornot.livejournal.com 2008-10-23 11:16 pm (UTC)(link)
I can understand the idea of spending some money to update and upgrade her wardrobe to look a little more "presidential". I can get with that. But they could've easily done it on a tenth of that budget and still look "designer" or put together. Geez. And donate it to charity? WTF is that about? That just sounds weird. Again, there's a big disconnect. So much of that could've been advertising or put to some other use. This is why the GOP shouldn't be handling our money! They don't know how to budget and spend wisely!
(deleted comment)

[identity profile] judith-s.livejournal.com 2008-10-24 12:33 am (UTC)(link)
Reverse Cindarella. Sorry, missy, you lost the VP spot. Back to turtlenecks and stretchy pants. The fancy duds stay here.

[identity profile] emzebel.livejournal.com 2008-10-24 02:25 pm (UTC)(link)
Seriously. I completely read the "oh, it will all be 'put to cheritable purpose'" as a tacit admission that she's not going to have any need for a "State Function" wardrobe after November 4.