GOP spends $150,000 for Palin's wardrobe

Perhaps part of the problem is that people are worried about what someone else does with their own money. If the RNC wants to spend their money on this, let them do it. It was money that was given to them for the election, and they get to spend it on election issues. Perhaps less time worried about silliness like this and more time worried about substance would help the whole issue.

 

Our church doesn't give money to people. But that is not even a good comparison. People voluntarily gave their money to the RNC presumably to help win an election. The money belongs to the RNC to do with as they wish. I don't tell people what to spend their money on, and you shouldn't either.

I think it makes perfect sense. Go try to tell your neighbor how to spend their money and see if they think that makes sense. I bet they agree with me, even if they spend it unwisely.

I am fairly sure that 150,000 won't do anything to save money in the nation's economy. That is statistically non-existent in the federal budget. Overall, the Republicans are spending less money than the Democrats are. So this is a non-story and a silly attempt at personal politics. This is not a matter of national political interest. This is worse than stories of Obama's birthplace.

 

I think that you have drawn the wrong conclusion.

Perhaps Sarah Palin showed up and the RNC looked at the clothing which she bought herself and normally wears - you know Wal-Mart style - and said to themselves "well, we have to do something here to spiff her up a little before putting her out there."

You see, she is the "Wal-Mart hockey mom".

 

As a pastor, if I were to do that (which would be very unwise), I would certainly be involved in financial management. But ultimately when you give someone money, it is theirs. No one gave the RNC to buy groceries for their barren cabinets. You made a bad comparison.

Again, a bad comparison. The government is spending our money. The RNC is spending their own. The RNC is not accountable to us; the government is.

Everyone.

You didn't miss my comment because I didn't make one. I don't know what the story was and don't care what Michelle Obama eats or wears or anything else.

So you are not saying that they shouldn't have spent 150K on clothes? If not, then I am confused. Just what is your point?

I don't think that is true at all. I have several $1000 dollar suits which I wear. But I didn't buy them, and they say nothing about my spending habits or the places I shop at.

So what you are saying is that you are not a man of principle. You hold different people to different standards on teh same issue. I disagree with that approach.

Nope, didn't even read it because I don't care.

It should be because it is. A statement like this simply says that you don't evaluate issues very well for substance.

No it doesn't. Again, please think about it. What this story shows is that someone bought her clothes. It says nothing about where she shops with her own money. Can't you see that?

 

I personally think it's idiotic to spend that kind of money on clothes; don't care how good they look.

If I were a millionaire, I seriously doubt that I'd ever spend even half that much on a car. I probably would get something a little nicer than my '97 S-10, but nowhere near a $75,000 vehicle.

Point is there are some things I WOULD spend a $150,000 on, but you probably wouldn't; and as long as I'm spending MY money, and you're spending YOUR money, what difference does it make????

And if I should give you $150,000 with no strings attached, IE no preconditions or limitations, then why should I try to tell you, even then, how to spend it??

Now if I put conditions on the gift, you have the option of following the requirements, OR refusing the gift.

So, why does it make any difference if the RNC spends $150,000 or $5,000 on Palin's clothes. If you have given to the RNC, and did not put any conditions on the gift, they are free to spend it anyway they see fit as long as it is generally in line with the implied/understood purpose of the gift - which is to campaign for the R party.

As for Michelle, I would never spend that kind of money for an afternoon snack- or even dinner, but that's just me. It's her money, and AFAIC she can spend it anyway her little heart desires.

Now when her husband is wanting to spend MY money, we're talking a whole 'nother ball game!!!! But that's another topic

 

She's a woman. Hillary?

This is a manufactured non- story.

 

The New York slimes has been a bastion of liberalism for a long time.

They quit pretending to to be unbiased, come election time, about 20 years ago.

 

You need to see hair and make-up bills to determine that? All most people needed to do was look.

 

Probably used her own money since she pretty financed her own campaign. She gave herself more loans than she received donations.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by carpro
Non story.

Remember John Edwards hairstyling tabs?

Campaign spending on personal items is.

Edwards, Kerry, and the Clintons are fair game. They have set the standard on extravagant spending for personal items

The difference is that conservatives laugh at the vanity of candidates, like Clinton and Edwards, while liberals foam at the mouth ...

if the spender is a Republican.

 

You're guessing.

Proof?