RNC shells out $150K for Palin fashion

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm sure the OP isn't an RNC donor so I can't imagine why she cares about this. I'd also point out that Michelle Obama wore a stunning Maria Pinto dress for her speech at the DNC, with a price tag over $2000, and another designer dress for Barack's speech. Barack wore a custom-made suit from Chicago-based Hart Schaffner & Marx. I thought they looked fabulous.

As I am not an RNC donor, I couldn't care less how the RNC spends its money. In fact, as a Democrat, I'd much rather see them put their money toward wardrobe than toward advertising. So let's hope the RNC keeps spending their money in this way instead of on attack ads!

I'm the OP. You have a good point about the RNC using the money on wardrobe vs. attack ads. I was pointing out that Joe and Josephine Sixpack don't shop at Saks/Neiman but maybe the RNC is not aware of this tidbit because they are so out-of-touch with redblooded Americans on Main Street.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm sure the OP isn't an RNC donor so I can't imagine why she cares about this. I'd also point out that Michelle Obama wore a stunning Maria Pinto dress for her speech at the DNC, with a price tag over $2000, and another designer dress for Barack's speech. Barack wore a custom-made suit from Chicago-based Hart Schaffner & Marx. I thought they looked fabulous.

As I am not an RNC donor, I couldn't care less how the RNC spends its money. In fact, as a Democrat, I'd much rather see them put their money toward wardrobe than toward advertising. So let's hope the RNC keeps spending their money in this way instead of on attack ads!

Not the OP, but I am curious now about what the general policy is on paying for campaign wardrobes. Is it standard for the national committees to pay? Or do the candidates take it out of campaign funds? Or do most pay for it themselves? Does anyone know?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm sure the OP isn't an RNC donor so I can't imagine why she cares about this. I'd also point out that Michelle Obama wore a stunning Maria Pinto dress for her speech at the DNC, with a price tag over $2000, and another designer dress for Barack's speech. Barack wore a custom-made suit from Chicago-based Hart Schaffner & Marx. I thought they looked fabulous.

As I am not an RNC donor, I couldn't care less how the RNC spends its money. In fact, as a Democrat, I'd much rather see them put their money toward wardrobe than toward advertising. So let's hope the RNC keeps spending their money in this way instead of on attack ads!

Not the OP, but its not the pricing of the clothes that bothers me so much as the fact that the source of the funds goes counter to what Palin is preaching on the campaign trail. If she were spending her own money on clothes (a la cindy mccain) I would not care a bit. Also, I could see how the RNC had an excuse to buy her clothes as she is a candidate, but her hudband and family. Did they also pay for Levi johnston's duds as well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Palin is puss.

There should be no mention of RNC in a thread about Palin-puss.

What does this remark mean?

You know -- puss. The stuff of infection.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm sure the OP isn't an RNC donor so I can't imagine why she cares about this. I'd also point out that Michelle Obama wore a stunning Maria Pinto dress for her speech at the DNC, with a price tag over $2000, and another designer dress for Barack's speech. Barack wore a custom-made suit from Chicago-based Hart Schaffner & Marx. I thought they looked fabulous.

As I am not an RNC donor, I couldn't care less how the RNC spends its money. In fact, as a Democrat, I'd much rather see them put their money toward wardrobe than toward advertising. So let's hope the RNC keeps spending their money in this way instead of on attack ads!

Not the OP, but its not the pricing of the clothes that bothers me so much as the fact that the source of the funds goes counter to what Palin is preaching on the campaign trail. If she were spending her own money on clothes (a la cindy mccain) I would not care a bit. Also, I could see how the RNC had an excuse to buy her clothes as she is a candidate, but her hudband and family. Did they also pay for Levi johnston's duds as well.

Why can't she buy her clothing? She can certainly afford to pay out of pocket, especially with all that she saves on travel and living at home.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm sure the OP isn't an RNC donor so I can't imagine why she cares about this. I'd also point out that Michelle Obama wore a stunning Maria Pinto dress for her speech at the DNC, with a price tag over $2000, and another designer dress for Barack's speech. Barack wore a custom-made suit from Chicago-based Hart Schaffner & Marx. I thought they looked fabulous.

As I am not an RNC donor, I couldn't care less how the RNC spends its money. In fact, as a Democrat, I'd much rather see them put their money toward wardrobe than toward advertising. So let's hope the RNC keeps spending their money in this way instead of on attack ads!

Not the OP, but I am curious now about what the general policy is on paying for campaign wardrobes. Is it standard for the national committees to pay? Or do the candidates take it out of campaign funds? Or do most pay for it themselves? Does anyone know?

14:36 here. It's legal for the national committees to pay for clothing. Campaigns themselves cannot. Most candidates who reach the nomination level have the wherewithal to buy their own designer clothes. Think McCain, Kerry, Edwards. Palin doesn't, really. Her clothes were being labeled dowdy, so they bought her an expensive jacket for her RNC speech and it went from there. Todd didn't take a suit to the RNC so they took him shopping. It's perfectly legal but now the campaign is embarrassed by it for precisely the reason the OP said: It looks out of touch. But, you know, what are you going to do? She needs to look good and they don't have the wardrobe or the money. It's much easier for Hillary now, or for the Obamas or Kerrys or Edwardses or McCains, because they're wealthy. The Clintons were the last non-millionaire couple to reach the White House; remember how Hillary was slammed for her clothes back then? In this case, I'm just happy those bucks aren't going toward ads that misrepresent my candidate. Spend away, RNC! Palins, you look marvelous!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm sure the OP isn't an RNC donor so I can't imagine why she cares about this. I'd also point out that Michelle Obama wore a stunning Maria Pinto dress for her speech at the DNC, with a price tag over $2000, and another designer dress for Barack's speech. Barack wore a custom-made suit from Chicago-based Hart Schaffner & Marx. I thought they looked fabulous.

As I am not an RNC donor, I couldn't care less how the RNC spends its money. In fact, as a Democrat, I'd much rather see them put their money toward wardrobe than toward advertising. So let's hope the RNC keeps spending their money in this way instead of on attack ads!

Not the OP, but its not the pricing of the clothes that bothers me so much as the fact that the source of the funds goes counter to what Palin is preaching on the campaign trail. If she were spending her own money on clothes (a la cindy mccain) I would not care a bit. Also, I could see how the RNC had an excuse to buy her clothes as she is a candidate, but her hudband and family. Did they also pay for Levi johnston's duds as well.

Why can't she buy her clothing? She can certainly afford to pay out of pocket, especially with all that she saves on travel and living at home.

I actually read that before landing on the national stage, Palin shopped at a second hand store in Anchorage and favored Escada.

[Anonymous]

here's a Post article on how stupid the decision was to shop at Needless Markup.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/10/22/AR2008102202187.html?hpid=artslot

[Anonymous]

Any candidate with half a brain in this economy would NOT spend that kind of money. It should have occured to her that these expenditures could have gotten out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
14:36 here. It's legal for the national committees to pay for clothing. Campaigns themselves cannot. Most candidates who reach the nomination level have the wherewithal to buy their own designer clothes. Think McCain, Kerry, Edwards. Palin doesn't, really. Her clothes were being labeled dowdy, so they bought her an expensive jacket for her RNC speech and it went from there. Todd didn't take a suit to the RNC so they took him shopping. It's perfectly legal but now the campaign is embarrassed by it for precisely the reason the OP said: It looks out of touch. But, you know, what are you going to do? She needs to look good and they don't have the wardrobe or the money. It's much easier for Hillary now, or for the Obamas or Kerrys or Edwardses or McCains, because they're wealthy. The Clintons were the last non-millionaire couple to reach the White House; remember how Hillary was slammed for her clothes back then? In this case, I'm just happy those bucks aren't going toward ads that misrepresent my candidate. Spend away, RNC! Palins, you look marvelous!

Thanks for enlightening us on this. Just one more piece of evidence that most people have to be rich to run for higher office. Sad what our country has come to.

[Anonymous]

Palin actually makes enough money to dress herself-- her tax returns indicate that she and her husband are in the top 5% income-wise. She has made a cottage industry of extolling middle-class, small-town virtue. but apparently she doesn't think that it looks good on her.

Last time she had an opportunity to live large off of someone else's dime-- the Alaska taxpayers-- she chose expensive accommodations for herself and her kids in not-real-America destinations. This time, it's $150,000 for clothing for two months of campaigning.

Joe Biden is the other middle-class candidate, and the DNC has spent nothing on him.

As for John "my wife has $100-million so I can fly her plane to rallies where I get people angry at low wage earners for "not paying taxes"" McCain, he said that he chose this candidate because she was like other Americans. She doesn't dress like them anymore, does she?

At the very least, it's terrible judgment on all of their parts.

Surprise, surprise.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
14:36 here. It's legal for the national committees to pay for clothing. Campaigns themselves cannot. Most candidates who reach the nomination level have the wherewithal to buy their own designer clothes. Think McCain, Kerry, Edwards. Palin doesn't, really. Her clothes were being labeled dowdy, so they bought her an expensive jacket for her RNC speech and it went from there. Todd didn't take a suit to the RNC so they took him shopping. It's perfectly legal but now the campaign is embarrassed by it for precisely the reason the OP said: It looks out of touch. But, you know, what are you going to do? She needs to look good and they don't have the wardrobe or the money. It's much easier for Hillary now, or for the Obamas or Kerrys or Edwardses or McCains, because they're wealthy. The Clintons were the last non-millionaire couple to reach the White House; remember how Hillary was slammed for her clothes back then? In this case, I'm just happy those bucks aren't going toward ads that misrepresent my candidate. Spend away, RNC! Palins, you look marvelous!

Thanks for enlightening us on this. Just one more piece of evidence that most people have to be rich to run for higher office. Sad what our country has come to.

I think that Obama has proven that you do not have to be rich (I do not consider $4 million of gross income to be "rich" BTW) to run for higher office - you just have to be able to raise money for the campaign. Also, Palin did not have to buy designer clothes. They could have spent a fraction of the $150k at a J Crew, Ann Taylor or Banana Republic and she would have looked just fine AND it would have been in keeping with the image that they are trying to sell. What does it say about the RNC that they think that they need to dress their candidate in the "togs of the elite" in order to make her appealing. Honestly, if this article had not come out I would not even have notice Palin's clothes -- but then again I am not a supporter so that may explain it.

[Anonymous]

Surely someone at the RNC must have know that they would eventually be disclosured - I think they were hoping that it would come out after the election.

[Anonymous]

Pus.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
I do not consider $4 million of gross income to be "rich" BTW

You can't be serious.