Who Knew Neiman’s Was on Main Street?
Well, so much for Joe the Plumber. He couldn’t replace washers fast enough make the kind of money John McCain was willing to spend on outfitting his vice-presidential candidate. We won’t be hearing about Joe any more.
Another silver lining: Sarah Palin won’t be saying much about Main Street America any more, where the question of the day is no longer about the economy, per se, but about the GOP economy, plus speed. How long does it take to spend $75,000 in one visit to Neiman Marcus? Would the boxes fit into the kind of Main Street car that gets 35 miles per gallon?
So that’s what they meant by pro-America and spreading the wealth around. I can’t think of an American, starting with my wife, who would object to spending $150,000 in one month on clothes, and you have to believe that Neiman’s, Sak’s, Bloomingdales, Macy’s, Barney’s of New York, and Atelier are beaming today over McCain’s spread-the-wealth campaign.
I can’t believe they spent $4,716.49 in one month on Sarah’s hair and makeup.I would expect more in the way of results, but Karen didn’t think that was the point. She could easily see spending $75,000 in one sitting at Neiman’s, but she was totally shocked that it was possible for one woman in one month to spend $4,716.49 on her hair and makeup. No way I could have known that, as a man. I figure $1,000 a month would be outright extravagant, but the economy could be a lot better than it is now, and we still wouldn’t have to worry about that.
So it is the women voters of America who have the better sense of what kind of money we are talking about here. As a man, I can understand things like knowing where the interview time went. Sarah couldn’t give any interviews because she was busy shopping. She crammed for the debate from reading summaries taped to the walls of the fitting booth. She carries Trig because somebody has to carry the luggage.
But the women. Talk about a distraction. At the office, at lunch, in board rooms, playing a game of break-it-down, the things Sarah most likely bought that would add up to $75,000 in one sweep. I think it would be more fun if, instead of spending the money on Michele Bachmann’s proposed study of Congress to see who is pro- or anti-America, the media studied Main Street women for their conclusions on how that much money could have been spent that fast. (Michele’s hair is looking a lot better – fuller, more body – this week than it did last Friday, by the way.) McCain’s men have to come up with a way to capitalize. How about, “A chick in every pot”?
Share This
Related Posts
-
Candid Obama Says ‘Hand Wringing’ After Debate Will Ebb
Posted on Oct 10, 2012
-
Mitt Romney Tells Voters: If I’m elected, Don’t Expect Huge Tax Cuts
Posted on Sep 26, 2012
-
Obama: No Retreat, No Surrender
Posted on Jan 25, 2012
-
Do Only Conservative Victories Count?
Posted on Nov 11, 2010
gee…I guess those $400 haircuts that Edwards got reamed over won't be mentioned any time soon by the GOP (Grooming Our Palin) party.
I was not surprised at the amount of money spent. I mean you would want to dress and look your best for the campaign trail.
Besides, it does take a lot of money to make a middle-aged woman, with five children, who is being run ragged on her shopping sprees and cramming the Cliff Notes versions of law, American history, public policy, geography and politics to look good on the campaign trail.
So, far all the bitching and moaning about how the Republicans don't want to focus on the issues, we get three top-level posts in a row that the RNC decided to try and stop the snarking about Palin being 'unsophisticated' and buy her better clothes and change her style a bit for the campaign trail.
Good issues oriented posting there, TMV team!
BTW – $4,800/30 days = $160 per day for hair and make-up. Allowing for the fact that given the long, grueling campaign schedules she likely had multiple sessions a day, that is not extravagant.
I'd rather have an intelligent, well-rounded person with good judgement who dresses like a clod in the WH than someone who tries to cover up her (or his) lack of knowledge and judgement by dressing smartly.
I view this as primarily an issue between the campaign and the campaign's donors. Are the donors happy with how this money is being spent? Up to them.
Some GOP supporters have pointed out $150000 is a week's worth of airtime in CO in a good timeslot. Not to mention that this amount is unprecedented in any campaign — no one can find a comparison.
McCain, who touts himself as Mr. Campaign Finance Reform, should read the Federal Campaign Finance Laws @ http://www.fec.gov/law/feca/feca.pdf, page 58, article 439a, section b, subsection 2B which states that a clothing purchase is a prohibited use for contributions accepted by a candidate.
http://www.fec.gov/law/feca/feca.pdf – Go look it up for yourselves.
The “Maverick” is long gone.
Hi, lotus, in another comment trail, however, someone posted an update saying it might be legal for the RNC, just not for a campaign directly. We will hear more, I'm sure….
I honestly could care less how much money the RNC spends on dressing up Palin to make her look pretty. In fact the more they spend, the merrier. I just enjoy my snarky little comments, which is about right for such a superfluous issue….
The real issue as we've discussed ad nauseum is that Palin is an idiot, or at least a dolt, and the majority of Americans do not think she is ready to be prez… She may be fully capable in other areas but she is not ready to be the most powerful person on Earth (the role of VP if something were to happen to the prez).
I actually enjoy this distraction…. It's stupid but fun and gives me a chance to roll my eyes over something that isn't serious.
This issue should not influence anyone's voting decision, however, the story smacks of the same type of delicious irony of Bristol's underage, out of wedlock pregnancy. I love watching underservingly pius public figures be undermined by their own reality.
“Good issues oriented posting there, TMV team!”
Meanwhile, Bush is a more “compassionate conservative” than ever, and rounding up the other nations to coordinate an attack on deflation or at least on a slump that is feared might happen world-wide; or is it an attack on the banks, or on the bankers (many nations want internationally-coordinated regulations that include caps on income), or on the speculators (working to coordinate currency moves to thwart the Soroses of this world — sorry, Dems!) and what it all seems to point to, to me, is the smell of bailout of bankers and the banks, who will be _really_ smiling.
And how much of the effort on Bush's part is meant to show, indeed, “compassionate conservatism” (which to date means going along with big government and engaging in entitlements along with the Dems) in order to boost the GOP's chances next month or at least reduce the expected losses next month?
I suppose others would rather ponder a GOP-RNC takeover of the defunct Mervyn's chain of stores (run into the ground over several years by Easterners from bluer and rustier parts of the nation; the stores were in growing, vital parts of the nation) and call it “Sarah's” (with that eastern-directed “California” pastel neon removed from the signage!) and revert to decent-quality merchandise at attractively low prices.