Where Everybody Knows You're Numb

Psych Lit · Guru

RE: what not to wear

BoxDog · Guru

Psych Lit wrote:

BoxDog wrote:

http://www.sofiasreplica.com

High end LV replicas at $115.00. Welfare kids buy, steal or kill for $200 MJ sneakers.

Psychlit>
there is a lovely faux coach bag on the 3rd page? of the coach section its sort of a cornflower blue? at least on my monitor it is lol. i am soooo coveting that bag:) i dont buy knockoffs tho because it takes food from the table of the original designer. i might add i also almost never buy designer stuff either but thats because i am frugal and prefer sallys to neiman marcus. i do have a coach bag tho and its getting worn and is nearly 6 years old now, i wonder if the original is as nice as the knock off and i wonder if i can afford it? oh well certainly not this month mebbe ill start dropping xmas hints bwahaha!

Me>
I'll be carrying the following flag and wearing my "queer" shirt Sunday to the rally. I kinda want to get the photos for myself. And, since she admittedly doesn't "personally" know any homosexuals, I am willing to introduce myself to see just how "tolerant" she is. We'll see how close I get once inside. Especially with that gosh darned t-shirt.

Psychlit>
well hell, theyll prolly put you up on the stage so they can show the world that they have gay and lesbian support! take lots of pix. i wanna see her feet:)

-- Edited by BoxDog at 18:41, 2008-10-24

-- Edited by BoxDog at 18:43, 2008-10-24

I manage to avoid the whole issue by not buying purses at all. Whatever fit's in my Docker pockets is what I carry. That said, I think there's a world of difference between stealing music and buying faux, anything. Though a "name" does have an intangible value, the faux stuff is usually pretty easy to spot. The reality is Kalvin Kline and Goochi have nothing to worry about. Nor does Chinatown and most flea markets.

And really, is there a valid argument for a pick and choose manner of protecting musical artists or designers yet condemning those that purchase, legitimately, their product? Those that spend the cash that could save the world... I don't see it if there is. If there is, then BO should be the first to continue passing the collection plate until every last person on this planet is fed and clothed and housed by those little bitty five and ten dollar donations.

p.s. rest assured of two things. I will be the LAST woman SP wants up on stage with her, (at least while her rally is happening) but the most likely to capture a shot of those world famous FMP's.

Good luck with the Xmas hints! Amazingly it's right around the corner again. Just when we got everyone so excited about gift cards, turns out the companies may be going under quicker than we can use them. Careful with the gift cards this year!

I saw Baby Mama last night and laughed till it hurt. I highly recommend it for anyone who could use a laugh, a really good, long laugh. Tina Fey is twitter. I'm hoping she shows up tomorrow.

Psych Lit · Guru

BoxDog wrote:

http://www.sofiasreplica.com

High end LV replicas at $115.00. Welfare kids buy, steal or kill for $200 MJ sneakers.

there is a lovely faux coach bag on the 3rd page? of the coach section its sort of a cornflower blue? at least on my monitor it is lol. i am soooo coveting that bag:) i dont buy knockoffs tho because it takes food from the table of the original designer. i might add i also almost never buy designer stuff either but thats because i am frugal and prefer sallys to neiman marcus. i do have a coach bag tho and its getting worn and is nearly 6 years old now, i wonder if the original is as nice as the knock off and i wonder if i can afford it? oh well certainly not this month mebbe ill start dropping xmas hints bwahaha!

I'll be carrying the following flag and wearing my "queer" shirt Sunday to the rally. I kinda want to get the photos for myself. And, since she admittedly doesn't "personally" know any homosexuals, I am willing to introduce myself to see just how "tolerant" she is. We'll see how close I get once inside. Especially with that gosh darned t-shirt.

well hell, theyll prolly put you up on the stage so they can show the world that they have gay and lesbian support! take lots of pix. i wanna see her feet:)

-- Edited by BoxDog at 18:41, 2008-10-24

-- Edited by BoxDog at 18:43, 2008-10-24

Psych Lit · Guru

Nightowlhoot3 wrote:

i dont care how much any candidate spends for their outfit as long as they pay for it themselves. <Psych

I don't agree. Granted, if I were a republican, I'd be somewhat ticked, I suppose, but really, it's the RNC's "right" to spend those campaign donations any way they see fit, isn't it? With the assumption that it's going to get their candidate elected?

on a technicality perhaps but it violates the spirit of the mccain feingold campaign finance law. kind of ironic, yes?
here is the ap article on this:

AP STORY ON PALIN WARDROBE

WASHINGTON (AP) -- When the Republican Party decided to coordinate
expenses with John McCain's presidential campaign, who knew it would be
color coordinated.

The Republican National Committee spent about $150,000 on clothing, hair
styling, makeup and other "campaign accessories" in September for the
McCain campaign after Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin joined the ticket as his
running mate.
...
The RNC has been helping the McCain campaign financially now that McCain
is locked into spending only $84 million for the fall campaign under his agreement to accept public financing. Barack Obama, the Democratic nominee, chose not to participate in the public system and raised a
whopping $150 million in September.

The RNC is allowed to spend up to $19 million in "coordinated expenses"
with the campaign. In September, it spent a a total of $4.4 million. The clothing and styling was part of that, but most was spent on postage for
campaign mailings.

So why did the RNC and not McCain's committee pay for the accessories?

The 2002 campaign finance law that bears McCain's name specifically barred any funds that "are donated for the purpose of supporting the activities of a federal or state office holder" from being used for personal expenses including clothing. A quirk in the law does not
specifically mention party committees, however.

That doesn't mean the expenditure would not be subject to a challenge before the Federal Election Commission.

Lawrence M. Noble, former general counsel at the FEC, noted that as a coordinated party expense, the clothing purchase could be considered a contribution to the campaign.

"And if it was a contribution, then it could not have been used for buying clothing," Noble said. "I don't know how the FEC would come outon that question."

"If it is covered (as a personal use expense), the argument that we were going to give it to a charity doesn't help," he added.

Fifteen years ago, McCain himself complained that restrictions on political contributions for personal use at that time were too broad and
he wrote an amendment to tighten the law.
"The use of campaign funds for items which most Americans would consider to be strictly personal reasons, in my view, erodes public confidence
and erodes it significantly," he said on the Senate floor in May 1993.

whats also interesting in this article is the mention of the 19 million to supplement the 84 million in fed funding and then there are those private groups who seem to have raised all sorts of funds. ive yet to see a mccain palin ad from the mccain campaign in this area. not in mass and not in ct. i have seen some really slimy ads done by others who apparently can raise as much as they want and say whatever they want and as long as they identify themselves as not being in the mccain campaign its all ok. i saw one today, a 3 to 4 min one on sarah palin which repeats a lot of the half truths about airplane auctions and bridges to nowhere and frames this election as being one about spending money wisely vs obama the tax and spend democrat. can only assume they booked the time before this hit the press. it ends with a plaintiff help us defeat barak obama and its paid for by some organization and it would take 3 researchers a week to uncover who is backing them.

It's hard to discuss this without sounding diminishing of Gov. Palin, really, but honestly ... aside from the "woman" thing, and the "maverick" thing, what's her "selling point" from the GOP's POV? Are we to guess that her looks don't come into play in their minds? And if they think that translates to votes, then it would seem this a fair use of the money, right?

today sp did an interview concerning special needs kids and she was very articulate. its clearly something she cares about or is beginning to become aware of anyway. if she were going to be the first lady shed be in shown in a good light for this effort. i mean isnt this what always gets assigned to first ladies? the women and kids stuff while the real manly men deal with the real issues. and i saw her on one of the early morning news shows today being interviewed with mccain sitting right next to her staring intently at her as she spoke and i swear i could see his lips moving as she answered questions:) add to that the strategy to put her on the ticket in the first place. biden cant yell at her cause shes a perky soccer mom, shes got ovaries so shes our interchangable woman candidate and any criticisms made about anything she does brings on the sexism complaints. ya cant have it both ways. real change for women in politics means that they can stand the heat or change the system so the kitchen gets some ac and ive not seen her do either. she goes all girly when things get tough and that is the anti feminist position. i havent seen obama delegate the special ed stuff to biden and why not? this woman needs to be involved in far more issues. so no, i dont think its a fair use of money if wed define fair as being something that we would do with mccain if he were the vp candidate instead of palin. when i see him on tv his shirt is usually wrinkled, his shirt collar open and his shirts and suits look like sears suits all of which goes well with his stated maverick policies. if how one looks is important in winning an election then why havent they turned him into a ken doll? probably because its off message for the campaign and if its off message for him why isnt it off message for her? that would be the fair thing. to exploit a woman for her appearance seems like a horrid thing to do. what do you suppose her future chances will be for reelection in alaska if this doesnt work out for her? has this hurt her or helped her?

and for those who like to count on their fingers heres a glimpse into tomorrows headlines the ny times had this article in todays edition:

"In August, Todd and Sarah Palin eloped, summoning witnesses from a senior citizens home beside a courthouse. Their families learned of the marriage by looking in their garages, said Jim Palin, Todds father, where each family found a clump of flowers and a note.

Theyre just very, very private people, the elder Mr. Palin said.

The first of their five children, Track, was born about eight months later, and the couple soon moved back to Wasilla. As their family grew, Ms. Palin joined the local PTA."

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/24/us/politics/24palin.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

Nightowlhoot3 · Guru

Psych Lit wrote:

)
-------------
Now, that's just harsh. You don't give a woman like Sarah Palin clothes like that, and then take them back. Good luck trying. She said herself she "doesn't even wear most of them" which tells me there's an unspoken "yet" at the end of that sentence, and that she does have future plans for them.

So I'm thinkin' "they'll be given to charity?" Like, what -- dropped off at a women's crisis center? Naw, that can't be. Maybe what he meant was they'll be put on Ebay, and the money from their sale will be donated to charity. Hmmm.

arggghhhh muh post got eaten again. damn. ok lunch is over and ill try again later.

oh wait i can back arrow and copy and paste! lol. ok lets see if this works

I know, it'd be like cinderella after the ball. that hurts. aols headline today said that she herself didnt think they all added up to 150k but apparently thats how much the RNC paid her shopper for them. so my question is, if it didnt really go to clothes, where did the money go? and if shes barely worn any what an extravagant waste of resources sheesh. mccain will say anything wont he? didnt he pass legislation about this very thing in his pre candidate time? something about campaign funds used for strictly personal items? i dont care how much any candidate spends for their outfit as long as they pay for it themselves. <Psych

I don't agree. Granted, if I were a republican, I'd be somewhat ticked, I suppose, but really, it's the RNC's "right" to spend those campaign donations any way they see fit, isn't it? With the assumption that it's going to get their candidate elected?

It's hard to discuss this without sounding diminishing of Gov. Palin, really, but honestly ... aside from the "woman" thing, and the "maverick" thing, what's her "selling point" from the GOP's POV? Are we to guess that her looks don't come into play in their minds? And if they think that translates to votes, then it would seem this a fair use of the money, right?

BoxDog · Guru

Psych Lit wrote:

)
-------------
Now, that's just harsh. You don't give a woman like Sarah Palin clothes like that, and then take them back. Good luck trying. She said herself she "doesn't even wear most of them" which tells me there's an unspoken "yet" at the end of that sentence, and that she does have future plans for them.

So I'm thinkin' "they'll be given to charity?" Like, what -- dropped off at a women's crisis center? Naw, that can't be. Maybe what he meant was they'll be put on Ebay, and the money from their sale will be donated to charity. Hmmm.

arggghhhh muh post got eaten again. damn. ok lunch is over and ill try again later.

oh wait i can back arrow and copy and paste! lol. ok lets see if this works

I know, it'd be like cinderella after the ball. that hurts. aols headline today said that she herself didnt think they all added up to 150k but apparently thats how much the RNC paid her shopper for them. so my question is, if it didnt really go to clothes, where did the money go? and if shes barely worn any what an extravagant waste of resources sheesh. mccain will say anything wont he? didnt he pass legislation about this very thing in his pre candidate time? something about campaign funds used for strictly personal items? i dont care how much any candidate spends for their outfit as long as they pay for it themselves. john mccain spends 500 bucks on shoes? he and the wifey are worth millions so that isnt out of the question tho if anyone could use a wardrobe makeover itd be mccain. and his wife with the 300K dress up for the convention? no problem as long as she paid for it and it didnt come from any donated campaign funds. same with obama 1500 dollar suits? ok by me as long as they came from the obama checking account.
that sp thinks it is sexist for the media to comment on this speaks much to her lack of understanding about sexism. its sexist for mccain et al to pick a candidate ill suited for the task because shes conventionally pretty and that will bamboozle folks for a bit. its sexist for her handlers to dress her in leg showing garb and f*** me pumps to meet with middle eastern leaders. its sexist for mccain to sit in on all of her press interviews these days to protect her from herself and the press. its not sexist to question why they felt the need for her to have such extravagant purchases to be considered a viable candidate. i dont think many of the electorate would base their decision to elect mccain o the basis of whether palin wore a 2500 dollar valentino jacket vs a 75.00 version from jc penney. hell 99% wouldnt notice the difference so who is that kind of extravagance for?

-- Edited by Psych Lit at 13:04, 2008-10-24

http://www.sofiasreplica.com

High end LV replicas at $115.00. Welfare kids buy, steal or kill for $200 MJ sneakers.

I'll be carrying the following flag and wearing my "queer" shirt Sunday to the rally. I kinda want to get the photos for myself. And, since she admittedly doesn't "personally" know any homosexuals, I am willing to introduce myself to see just how "tolerant" she is. We'll see how close I get once inside. Especially with that gosh darned t-shirt.

-- Edited by BoxDog at 18:41, 2008-10-24

-- Edited by BoxDog at 18:43, 2008-10-24

Psych Lit · Guru

)
-------------
Now, that's just harsh. You don't give a woman like Sarah Palin clothes like that, and then take them back. Good luck trying. She said herself she "doesn't even wear most of them" which tells me there's an unspoken "yet" at the end of that sentence, and that she does have future plans for them.

So I'm thinkin' "they'll be given to charity?" Like, what -- dropped off at a women's crisis center? Naw, that can't be. Maybe what he meant was they'll be put on Ebay, and the money from their sale will be donated to charity. Hmmm.

arggghhhh muh post got eaten again. damn. ok lunch is over and ill try again later.

oh wait i can back arrow and copy and paste! lol. ok lets see if this works

I know, it'd be like cinderella after the ball. that hurts. aols headline today said that she herself didnt think they all added up to 150k but apparently thats how much the RNC paid her shopper for them. so my question is, if it didnt really go to clothes, where did the money go? and if shes barely worn any what an extravagant waste of resources sheesh. mccain will say anything wont he? didnt he pass legislation about this very thing in his pre candidate time? something about campaign funds used for strictly personal items? i dont care how much any candidate spends for their outfit as long as they pay for it themselves. john mccain spends 500 bucks on shoes? he and the wifey are worth millions so that isnt out of the question tho if anyone could use a wardrobe makeover itd be mccain. and his wife with the 300K dress up for the convention? no problem as long as she paid for it and it didnt come from any donated campaign funds. same with obama 1500 dollar suits? ok by me as long as they came from the obama checking account.
that sp thinks it is sexist for the media to comment on this speaks much to her lack of understanding about sexism. its sexist for mccain et al to pick a candidate ill suited for the task because shes conventionally pretty and that will bamboozle folks for a bit. its sexist for her handlers to dress her in leg showing garb and f*** me pumps to meet with middle eastern leaders. its sexist for mccain to sit in on all of her press interviews these days to protect her from herself and the press. its not sexist to question why they felt the need for her to have such extravagant purchases to be considered a viable candidate. i dont think many of the electorate would base their decision to elect mccain o the basis of whether palin wore a 2500 dollar valentino jacket vs a 75.00 version from jc penney. hell 99% wouldnt notice the difference so who is that kind of extravagance for?

-- Edited by Psych Lit at 13:04, 2008-10-24

Nightowlhoot3 · Guru

Associated Press article:

McCain Says Palin Needed Pricey Duds

By BRENDAN FARRINGTON

AP

ORMOND BEACH, Fla. (Oct. 23) - Presidential candidate John McCain isn't happy about having to explain why the Republican Party has had to buy running mate Sarah Palin $150,000 in clothes, hair styling and accessories.

McCain was asked several questions on Thursday about the shopping spree and he answered each one more or less the same way: Palin needed clothes and they'll be donated to charity.

"She needed clothes at the time. They'll be donated at end of this campaign. They'll be donated to charity," McCain told reporters on his campaign bus between Florida rallies.

Asked for details on how they'll be donated, McCain said, "It works by her getting some clothes when she was made the nominee of the party and it will be donated back to charity."

Asked if he was surprised at the amount spent, McCain said, "It works that the clothes will be donated to charity. Nothing surprises me."

McCain offered no further comment, except to say that the Republican National Committee doesn't buy his clothes.

News of the purchases, largely from upscale Saks Fifth Avenue and Neiman Marcus, contrasts with the image Palin has crafted as a typical hockey mom. (article continues -- end of snippet)
-------------
Now, that's just harsh. You don't give a woman like Sarah Palin clothes like that, and then take them back. Good luck trying. She said herself she "doesn't even wear most of them" which tells me there's an unspoken "yet" at the end of that sentence, and that she does have future plans for them.

So I'm thinkin' "they'll be given to charity?" Like, what -- dropped off at a women's crisis center? Naw, that can't be. Maybe what he meant was they'll be put on Ebay, and the money from their sale will be donated to charity. Hmmm.

Nightowlhoot3 · Guru

BoxDog wrote:

Nightowlhoot3 wrote:

"This Sept 11, 2008 photo shows Piper Palin carrying a $750 Louis Vuitton bag at an Alaska airport. "

What? No mention of the McDonald's cup? :)

Does it look to anyone else as if this kids head is literally "on backward". Like it's about to spin around?

LOL. It's probably because of the two buttons on the back. I don't know why there would BE two buttons on the back (seems it would be uncomfortable when you sat back in a chair) but maybe that's "high fashion" these days. Or maybe she has it on backwards. :)

BoxDog · Guru

Nightowlhoot3 wrote:

"This Sept 11, 2008 photo shows Piper Palin carrying a $750 Louis Vuitton bag at an Alaska airport. "

What? No mention of the McDonald's cup? :)

Does it look to anyone else as if this kids head is literally "on backward". Like it's about to spin around? One thing's for sure here, you can bet it's not a super-sized cup of obama-juice.

BoxDog · Guru

Nightowlhoot3 wrote:

BoxDog wrote:

Psych Lit wrote:

Nightowlhoot3 wrote:

Apparently, the $ was from the RNC, and is for the whole family. I just read an article that said they went to ....

"...Saks (where they spent $49,425.74) and Neiman Marcus (where they spent a whopping $75,026.63 -- in one visit!)."

hell there are parts of this country where people can buy houses for a lot less than this. id have been a lot more impressed if the rnc had donated 150k in her name to one of those organizations that helps people dress for job interviews. that might have been a worthy expenditure. honestly, i dont think ive spent that much collectively for myself and my kids cumulative over the course of a lifetime.

On the surface that sounds honorable. Have you seen what people interview in? And, really, McDonalds clerks I've seen wear their uniforms hip hop style hold yer pants with one hand and my iced coffee in the other look anyway. The people that may benefit from the interview clothing donations don't have JOBS TO INTERVIEW for. Bottom line? It's the RNC's money to spend and it went back into the economy, period. It did NOT go to a hunting trip, a party (as AIG just threw) or some other intangible, instant gratification what the hell happened last night moment. Wanna talk about worthy or worthwhile spending? How about the bazillion bucks in <$200 donations that Barack Hussein Obama has rolling in? Did Mickey Mouse REALLY send in a hundred bucks? C'mon. Maybe, maybe not. But ACORN sure the hell registered MM. It's ridiculous. The 199.00 donations are NOT coming from unemployed, underemployed, homeless, hungry Americans. It can't possibly be. Americans For Change, wanna talk about doin the right thing? Maybe BO should have been a fundraiser rather than a "community leader". He may actually have been effective in Chicago.

It's time for baseball, and yeah, I said his middle name now. My bad. My level of contempt for him has never mellowed, it won't. And really that saddens and frustrates me. As much, if not more than it does my yellow dog friends.

Just please, be sure you don't catch that nasty xenophobia bug that's going around in familiar haunts ...

"my people" aren't even "real Americans. We didn't get even get here till the very start of the 20th century. I am immune to that "x-bug". And while we were regular old Western Catholic Euros, we were, nonetheless, "not from round here". As far as I can tell, at first, all we wanted to do was start a few construction companies, own a few small businesses and start new lives. In the land of the free...not the home of the terrorist. But, sure, I promise.

Nightowlhoot3 · Guru

BoxDog wrote:

Psych Lit wrote:

Nightowlhoot3 wrote:

Apparently, the $ was from the RNC, and is for the whole family. I just read an article that said they went to ....

"...Saks (where they spent $49,425.74) and Neiman Marcus (where they spent a whopping $75,026.63 -- in one visit!)."

hell there are parts of this country where people can buy houses for a lot less than this. id have been a lot more impressed if the rnc had donated 150k in her name to one of those organizations that helps people dress for job interviews. that might have been a worthy expenditure. honestly, i dont think ive spent that much collectively for myself and my kids cumulative over the course of a lifetime.

On the surface that sounds honorable. Have you seen what people interview in? And, really, McDonalds clerks I've seen wear their uniforms hip hop style hold yer pants with one hand and my iced coffee in the other look anyway. The people that may benefit from the interview clothing donations don't have JOBS TO INTERVIEW for. Bottom line? It's the RNC's money to spend and it went back into the economy, period. It did NOT go to a hunting trip, a party (as AIG just threw) or some other intangible, instant gratification what the hell happened last night moment. Wanna talk about worthy or worthwhile spending? How about the bazillion bucks in <$200 donations that Barack Hussein Obama has rolling in? Did Mickey Mouse REALLY send in a hundred bucks? C'mon. Maybe, maybe not. But ACORN sure the hell registered MM. It's ridiculous. The 199.00 donations are NOT coming from unemployed, underemployed, homeless, hungry Americans. It can't possibly be. Americans For Change, wanna talk about doin the right thing? Maybe BO should have been a fundraiser rather than a "community leader". He may actually have been effective in Chicago.

It's time for baseball, and yeah, I said his middle name now. My bad. My level of contempt for him has never mellowed, it won't. And really that saddens and frustrates me. As much, if not more than it does my yellow dog friends.

Just please, be sure you don't catch that nasty xenophobia bug that's going around in familiar haunts ... cry

Psych Lit · Guru

On the surface that sounds honorable. Have you seen what people interview in? And, really, McDonalds clerks I've seen wear their uniforms hip hop style hold yer pants with one hand and my iced coffee in the other look anyway. The people that may benefit from the interview clothing donations don't have JOBS TO INTERVIEW for. Bottom line? It's the RNC's money to spend and it went back into the economy, period. It did NOT go to a hunting trip, a party (as AIG just threw) or some other intangible, instant gratification what the hell happened last night moment. Wanna talk about worthy or worthwhile spending? How about the bazillion bucks in <$200 donations that Barack Hussein Obama has rolling in? Did Mickey Mouse REALLY send in a hundred bucks? C'mon. Maybe, maybe not. But ACORN sure the hell registered MM. It's ridiculous. The 199.00 donations are NOT coming from unemployed, underemployed, homeless, hungry Americans. It can't possibly be. Americans For Change, wanna talk about doin the right thing? Maybe BO should have been a fundraiser rather than a "community leader". He may actually have been effective in Chicago.

id agree with you about the no jobs thing. i still think tho that people are missing the silver lining in all of this tho. gas is down to 260 a gallon. it will cost less to heat homes this winter, food prices may drop, restaurants are all doing these 5 dollar lunch specials. lobster can be had for 2.99 a lb. i paid 12.99 a lb for it this summer. housing will once again fall to affordable levels, probably to levels we havent seen in 15 -20 years and if they do nothing other than rehabilitate the credit for those who have been affected by the home mortgage crisis people could get back into homes at far more affordable levels and heck wiser now to the banking tricks maybe they could stay in them too. its a great time to invest, everything can be picked up for a song. people are finding things to do that dont cost any money. families are having game nights, people are rediscovering picnics and hikes. honestly if i didnt look at my retirement accounts id say this is really not a bad thing for consumers. im wondering if all of the panic has to do with the wall street fat cats losing all of their wealth. i do understand that for those who are right at retirement age or those who have retired who depend on investment income this is a very hard time but for the rest of us it would appear that we have a lot more disposable income these days. and rumor has it that the govt santas are going to gift people with another tho in spending money. i didnt get it the first time but if they raise the income limits i promise to not save it and to go out and spend recklessly!

I

BoxDog · Guru

Psych Lit wrote:

Nightowlhoot3 wrote:

Apparently, the $ was from the RNC, and is for the whole family. I just read an article that said they went to ....

"...Saks (where they spent $49,425.74) and Neiman Marcus (where they spent a whopping $75,026.63 -- in one visit!)."

hell there are parts of this country where people can buy houses for a lot less than this. id have been a lot more impressed if the rnc had donated 150k in her name to one of those organizations that helps people dress for job interviews. that might have been a worthy expenditure. honestly, i dont think ive spent that much collectively for myself and my kids cumulative over the course of a lifetime.

On the surface that sounds honorable. Have you seen what people interview in? And, really, McDonalds clerks I've seen wear their uniforms hip hop style hold yer pants with one hand and my iced coffee in the other look anyway. The people that may benefit from the interview clothing donations don't have JOBS TO INTERVIEW for. Bottom line? It's the RNC's money to spend and it went back into the economy, period. It did NOT go to a hunting trip, a party (as AIG just threw) or some other intangible, instant gratification what the hell happened last night moment. Wanna talk about worthy or worthwhile spending? How about the bazillion bucks in <$200 donations that Barack Hussein Obama has rolling in? Did Mickey Mouse REALLY send in a hundred bucks? C'mon. Maybe, maybe not. But ACORN sure the hell registered MM. It's ridiculous. The 199.00 donations are NOT coming from unemployed, underemployed, homeless, hungry Americans. It can't possibly be. Americans For Change, wanna talk about doin the right thing? Maybe BO should have been a fundraiser rather than a "community leader". He may actually have been effective in Chicago.

It's time for baseball, and yeah, I said his middle name now. My bad. My level of contempt for him has never mellowed, it won't. And really that saddens and frustrates me. As much, if not more than it does my yellow dog friends.

Nightowlhoot3 · Guru

Psych Lit wrote:

Nightowlhoot3 wrote:

"This Sept 11, 2008 photo shows Piper Palin carrying a $750 Louis Vuitton bag at an Alaska airport. "

What? No mention of the McDonald's cup? :)

they say the knock off booths shine bright on broooadway
they say theres always "louis" in the air
but how you gonna get some boots
if they wont give you the loot
why you can raid the treas--ur---eeeee
on broadway
forget about old chinatown
the goods they got aint worth a dime
but go uptown for one good time
on broadwayyyyyy
and you can shop on fifth and then
get some spa and come back again
cause when you spend its hard to wear those monkey shoes
on broadway

Brava!

Psych Lit · Guru

Nightowlhoot3 wrote:

"This Sept 11, 2008 photo shows Piper Palin carrying a $750 Louis Vuitton bag at an Alaska airport. "

What? No mention of the McDonald's cup? :)

they say the knock off booths shine bright on broooadway
they say theres always "louis" in the air
but how you gonna get some boots
if they wont give you the loot
why you can raid the treas--ur---eeeee
on broadway
forget about old chinatown
the goods they got aint worth a dime
but go uptown for one good time
on broadwayyyyyy
and you can shop on fifth and then
get some spa and come back again
cause when you spend its hard to wear those monkey shoes
on broadway

Psych Lit · Guru

Nightowlhoot3 wrote:

Apparently, the $ was from the RNC, and is for the whole family. I just read an article that said they went to ....

"...Saks (where they spent $49,425.74) and Neiman Marcus (where they spent a whopping $75,026.63 -- in one visit!)."

hell there are parts of this country where people can buy houses for a lot less than this. id have been a lot more impressed if the rnc had donated 150k in her name to one of those organizations that helps people dress for job interviews. that might have been a worthy expenditure. honestly, i dont think ive spent that much collectively for myself and my kids cumulative over the course of a lifetime.

Psych Lit · Guru

Nightowlhoot3 wrote:
Really, this whole thing must be the thrill of a lifetime for S.P. Can you imagine what her last couple of months have been like for her? One minute, she's governor of the most sparsely populated state in the nation, (or at least one of, if not "the") and the next, she's jetting around the country, meeting with heads of state from other countries, dropping $75 grand in Neiman Marcus, and appearing on SNL. She's gotta be pinching herself ever night, right?

uh huh. she appears to be acting like someone who just got hold of mommys credit card and went on a spree. the rest of todays news has it that she also charged her kids personal travel to the state of alaska. per the state rules she would be allowed to do this if the children had an official reason to be there. apparently after she got the big call she went back and back dated some of the receipts and put on them that the travel was official tho the event planners say this is not so. some travel was also made by the childrens friends on the state of alaskas private governors plane. ( didnt she say she sold that on ebay?)

what with the economic crisis and all youd think she wouldnt be treating the election funds or the state of alaskas budgetary allowances as her own personal piggy bank. hopefully this is not a pattern tho i am sure the press is all over this now and if it is a pattern there will be more in the days to come.

Nightowlhoot3 · Guru

Really, this whole thing must be the thrill of a lifetime for S.P. Can you imagine what her last couple of months have been like for her? One minute, she's governor of the most sparsely populated state in the nation, (or at least one of, if not "the") and the next, she's jetting around the country, meeting with heads of state from other countries, dropping $75 grand in Neiman Marcus, and appearing on SNL. She's gotta be pinching herself ever night, right?

Nightowlhoot3 · Guru

Psych Lit wrote:

theres a cable show by that name and on the show two fashionistas pick from the write ins someone to make over. they are given a clothing or shopping allowance of i think 2,000 dollars and they are able to come up with many outfits for that amount. now i cant imagine throwing down even 2 grand at a shot for clothing since one can only buy by season and this years fashion hit will be next years back of the closet item.

so i was rather amazed to read this morning that sarah palin plopped down 150, 000 for her fall campaign wardrobe.

Apparently, the $ was from the RNC, and is for the whole family. I just read an article that said they went to ....

"...Saks (where they spent $49,425.74) and Neiman Marcus (where they spent a whopping $75,026.63 -- in one visit!)."

150k...i cant imagine that. back in sept i was wondering about this because it was apparent that her clothing was not affordable on her gov salary and now it turns out that the RNC has been footing the bill. whats the matter, dont they like flannel and mooseskin? ok i am kidding but if she were really a maverick looking to keep a tight rein over our tax dollars i would imagine shed continue with her wardrobe from lands end and carhartts. i mean 150k is prolly the whole budget for wasilla for at least a year or two and a nice pair of wolverine pants will only run ya 50 bucks. ill bet thats what joe the plumber pays for em anyway.

what was especially mind blowing tho was the response by republican spokespeople about this tho. with all that is going on in the world why are we having a conversation about pantsuits? or something to that effect. i guess they are oblivious to the idea that her fall clothing wardrobe allowance is double or triple what the average family has to live on yearly and that from that money comes taxes, mortgages, insurance, food, clothing, and everything else. dressing her up like barbie does not make her more versed on the issues or give her better creds for the role of vp but it does get her a certain amount of attention for her appearance and perhaps the mccain folks are thinking that people will vote for her on the basis of how she looks rather than what she knows.

Nightowlhoot3 · Guru

Digg

Did you catch her speech about the "real" Americans, and where they live? "Real" Americans, it seems, don't live in big cities. I think
someone might mention to her that "real" electoral votes hang out there ...

I understood what she meant, of course, and have no problem with the singing of the praises of "The Heartland" but just because they're not farmin' the south 40, doesn't mean that cities don't drive the economy. It was a poor word choice, IMO -- "rookie mistake."

I saw a poll the other day which indicated the blush has left the Palin bloom, and that now, voters think she's more a handicap to the McCain campaign than is G.W. Bush.

I tend to dismiss costs of haircuts, and shoes and wardrobe of candidates, as long as they're paying for it with their own money. I don't know, though, that most "real Americans" identify with that kind of budgeting. It's odd, too, IMO, for her to even "go there" with the "real Americans" stuff since she (like Obama) doesn't hail from "the lower 48."

Just checked ... apparently, she's retracted her statement(s).

Palin Apologizes for 'Real America' Comments

Two Congressmen Face Backlash After Their Own Remarks Questioning Others' Patriotism

By Lyndsey Layton

Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, October 22, 2008; Page A04

Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin apologized yesterday for implying that some parts of the country are more American than others, even as similar comments by two Republican congressmen were causing a backlash that threatened their chances for reelection.

In an interview on CNN, Palin said comments she made last week in North Carolina praising small towns as "the real America" and the "pro-America areas of this great nation" were not intended to suggest that other parts of the country are less patriotic or less American.

"If that's the way it has come across, I apologize," she told CNN's Drew Griffin.

In Minnesota, little-known Democrat Elwyn Tinklenberg announced yesterday that he has raised $1 million over the past four days for his House campaign, after Republican Rep. Michele Bachmann questioned Sen. Barack Obama's patriotism and recommended that the news media investigate whether other members of Congress are "pro-America" or "anti-America."

') ; } // -->

The money began flooding in from across the country after Bachmann made the comments in a seven-minute appearance on MSNBC's "Hardball" on Friday. "I wish the American media would take a great look at the views of the people in Congress and find out: Are they pro-America or anti-America?" she told host Chris Matthews.

The backlash from Bachmann's remarks gave Tinklenberg enough donations to quadruple his television advertising, prompted the nonpartisan Cook Political Report to flip its take on the race from "likely Republican" to "tossup" and inspired a Republican who lost to Bachmann in the party's primary to launch a write-in campaign.

Republican Rep. Robin Hayes, who is locked in a closely contested House race in North Carolina, has also been criticized after telling a crowd Saturday that "liberals hate real Americans that work and accomplish and achieve and believe in God." Hayes initially denied making the remarks, but he was forced to acknowledge them after an audiotape of the speech surfaced.

"I genuinely did not recall making the statement and, after reading it, there is no doubt that it came out completely the wrong way," Hayes said in a statement released by his campaign. "I actually was trying to work to keep the crowd as respectful as possible, so this is definitely not what I intended."

Hayes had spoken at a campaign rally in Concord, N.C., where Sen. John McCain appeared. The 10-year congressman told the crowd he wanted to "make sure we don't say something stupid, make sure we don't say something we don't mean."

He then went on to praise Palin. "Folks, there's a great American," Hayes said. "Liberals hate real Americans that work and accomplish and achieve and believe in God."

A spokesman for Hayes's challenger, Democrat Larry Kissell, said the Republican's remarks revealed how he truly feels. "Mr. Hayes often talks about being able to reach across the aisle and not be limited by party loyalty," said Thomas Thacker, Kissell's spokesman. "This indicates his hypocrisy knows no bounds."

Kissell is making his second run at Hayes after coming within 329 votes of unseating the veteran lawmaker in 2006. This time, Kissell is better funded, as the national Democratic Party is putting more than $1 million into his race.

The party is also spending heavily to help Tinklenberg unseat Bachmann, who was expected to cruise to victory before her comments.

"This is quite phenomenal," said John Wodele, a spokesman for Tinklenberg. "We were doing fine, we had a good campaign going. But this has got us in a position we never thought we'd be in."

More than 17,000 individual donors sent money to Tinklenberg in the days after Bachmann's television appearance.

"Almost instantly, the first contributions came in, before I could get on the phone and talk to the campaign manager and the candidate to think about what our reaction was going to be," Wodele said. "Then I just realized we didn't need to discuss it because it was going on its own. It was happening, and it was coming in from around the country."

Michelle Marston, Bachmann's spokeswoman, said the campaign has benefited from the controversy surrounding the congresswoman's "Hardball" appearance and it too has received additional contributions, though she would not say how much.

In fact, Mike Gula and Associates, a Capitol Hill fundraising and consulting firm, has sent an e-mail seeking donations to her campaign with the subject line "Bachmann HELP -- Under Fire."

(end of Washington Post Article)

Nightowlhoot3 · Guru

Psych Lit wrote:

theres a cable show by that name and on the show two fashionistas pick from the write ins someone to make over. they are given a clothing or shopping allowance of i think 2,000 dollars and they are able to come up with many outfits for that amount. now i cant imagine throwing down even 2 grand at a shot for clothing since one can only buy by season and this years fashion hit will be next years back of the closet item.

so i was rather amazed to read this morning that sarah palin plopped down 150, 000 for her fall campaign wardrobe. 150k...i cant imagine that. back in sept i was wondering about this because it was apparent that her clothing was not affordable on her gov salary and now it turns out that the RNC has been footing the bill. whats the matter, dont they like flannel and mooseskin? ok i am kidding but if she were really a maverick looking to keep a tight rein over our tax dollars i would imagine shed continue with her wardrobe from lands end and carhartts. i mean 150k is prolly the whole budget for wasilla for at least a year or two and a nice pair of wolverine pants will only run ya 50 bucks. ill bet thats what joe the plumber pays for em anyway.

what was especially mind blowing tho was the response by republican spokespeople about this tho. with all that is going on in the world why are we having a conversation about pantsuits? or something to that effect. i guess they are oblivious to the idea that her fall clothing wardrobe allowance is double or triple what the average family has to live on yearly and that from that money comes taxes, mortgages, insurance, food, clothing, and everything else. dressing her up like barbie does not make her more versed on the issues or give her better creds for the role of vp but it does get her a certain amount of attention for her appearance and perhaps the mccain folks are thinking that people will vote for her on the basis of how she looks rather than what she knows.

Did you catch her speech about the "real" Americans, and where they live? "Real" Americans, it seems, don't live in big cities. I think someone might mention to her that "real" electoral votes hang out there ...

I understood what she meant, of course, and have no problem with the singing of the praises of "The Heartland" but just because they're not farmin' the south 40, doesn't mean that cities don't drive the economy. It was a poor word choice, IMO -- "rookie mistake."

I saw a poll the other day which indicated the blush has left the Palin bloom, and that now, voters think she's more a handicap to the McCain campaign than is G.W. Bush.

I tend to dismiss costs of haircuts, and shoes and wardrobe of candidates, as long as they're paying for it with their own money. I don't know, though, that most "real Americans" identify with that kind of budgeting. It's odd, too, IMO, for her to even "go there" with the "real Americans" stuff since she (like Obama) doesn't hail from "the lower 48."

BoxDog · Guru

Psych Lit wrote:

theres a cable show by that name and on the show two fashionistas pick from the write ins someone to make over. they are given a clothing or shopping allowance of i think 2,000 dollars and they are able to come up with many outfits for that amount. now i cant imagine throwing down even 2 grand at a shot for clothing since one can only buy by season and this years fashion hit will be next years back of the closet item.

so i was rather amazed to read this morning that sarah palin plopped down 150, 000 for her fall campaign wardrobe. 150k...i cant imagine that. back in sept i was wondering about this because it was apparent that her clothing was not affordable on her gov salary and now it turns out that the RNC has been footing the bill. whats the matter, dont they like flannel and mooseskin? ok i am kidding but if she were really a maverick looking to keep a tight rein over our tax dollars i would imagine shed continue with her wardrobe from lands end and carhartts. i mean 150k is prolly the whole budget for wasilla for at least a year or two and a nice pair of wolverine pants will only run ya 50 bucks. ill bet thats what joe the plumber pays for em anyway.

what was especially mind blowing tho was the response by republican spokespeople about this tho. with all that is going on in the world why are we having a conversation about pantsuits? or something to that effect. i guess they are oblivious to the idea that her fall clothing wardrobe allowance is double or triple what the average family has to live on yearly and that from that money comes taxes, mortgages, insurance, food, clothing, and everything else. dressing her up like barbie does not make her more versed on the issues or give her better creds for the role of vp but it does get her a certain amount of attention for her appearance and perhaps the mccain folks are thinking that people will vote for her on the basis of how she looks rather than what she knows.

I can't help it. I'm finally going to make the comparison of the word versed with the medication versed. (ver-said). It's a hypnotic sedative used during surgery in conjunction with other anesthetics. So yeah, enough versed and they all sound versed. Really. And, the best part? In the end and twenty years down the line it's all been forgotten, forgiven or re-written. Gotta love temporary amnesia. And those "move me" shoes. ;)

Psych Lit · Guru

theres a cable show by that name and on the show two fashionistas pick from the write ins someone to make over. they are given a clothing or shopping allowance of i think 2,000 dollars and they are able to come up with many outfits for that amount. now i cant imagine throwing down even 2 grand at a shot for clothing since one can only buy by season and this years fashion hit will be next years back of the closet item.

so i was rather amazed to read this morning that sarah palin plopped down 150, 000 for her fall campaign wardrobe. 150k...i cant imagine that. back in sept i was wondering about this because it was apparent that her clothing was not affordable on her gov salary and now it turns out that the RNC has been footing the bill. whats the matter, dont they like flannel and mooseskin? ok i am kidding but if she were really a maverick looking to keep a tight rein over our tax dollars i would imagine shed continue with her wardrobe from lands end and carhartts. i mean 150k is prolly the whole budget for wasilla for at least a year or two and a nice pair of wolverine pants will only run ya 50 bucks. ill bet thats what joe the plumber pays for em anyway.

what was especially mind blowing tho was the response by republican spokespeople about this tho. with all that is going on in the world why are we having a conversation about pantsuits? or something to that effect. i guess they are oblivious to the idea that her fall clothing wardrobe allowance is double or triple what the average family has to live on yearly and that from that money comes taxes, mortgages, insurance, food, clothing, and everything else. dressing her up like barbie does not make her more versed on the issues or give her better creds for the role of vp but it does get her a certain amount of attention for her appearance and perhaps the mccain folks are thinking that people will vote for her on the basis of how she looks rather than what she knows.

Where Everybody Knows You're Numb

Associated Press article:McCain Says Palin Needed Pricey Duds

Palin Apologizes for 'Real America' Comments

Two Congressmen Face Backlash After Their Own Remarks Questioning Others' Patriotism

Associated Press article:

McCain Says Palin Needed Pricey Duds