"Gone rogue"

Oct 26, 2008 21:21

I love seeing these stories about how, due to disagreements and "precriminations" (i.e., recriminations in advance) in the McCain campaign, Sarah Palin has "gone rogue" and is making comments contrary to McCain's own beliefs. Mostly I'm just amused by the phrase "gone rogue." It's so Jack Bauer in "24." One of the unintentionally hilarious things ( Read more... )

Leave a comment

Comments 19

max_ambiguity October 27 2008, 01:52:25 UTC
I don't know how much it costs to outfit a woman for an election, but I do know that thus far it has cost me $500 to clothe myself for upcoming job interviews, and if all goes well and I get called back for second interviews, then that figure will go up. I'll bet Target and Wal*Mart sell suits, but you're expected to adopt certain standards for these things that are hard to pull off with bargain store items.

Reply


elemess October 27 2008, 02:31:00 UTC
Slate managed to spend $150K in one day. The writer needed help from an intern, but she pulled it off.

Reply


lemon_says October 27 2008, 02:46:40 UTC
It's got to be a shocking amount. Think about this: Obama wears suits that cost approximately $1500. (I use him as an example because his suits are known to cost between $1500-6000, and I'm going conservative.) You know he's not wearing the same one every day, and his shirts aren't from JC Penney. Add that up. She's wearing the same level of clothing that the men are, and it is appallingly sexist to go on about her clothing. McCain, Biden, and Obama aren't exactly slumming at the Men's Wearhouse.

They all dress like that. For all that Michelle Obama wears off-the-rack, she wears a lot of Moschino too, and that doesn't even come on a rack unless you're at Saks. A jacket is over a grand.

Reply

foodpoisoningsf October 27 2008, 03:15:26 UTC
It's not sexist in the least. You've never heard Hillary or Michelle refer to themselves as soccer moms. Far from it- they have never given up their elite positions.

But Palin can carry on about "the real Americans" while her hair and makeup people were the highest paid RNC consultants in September.

Reply

lemon_says October 27 2008, 12:25:26 UTC
I think that's a pat argument, made by people who already don't like her. Hell, I don't like her, but I'm also not a regular person who is on TV and constantly scrutinized. If she wore Target, you think she wouldn't get reamed for looking schlumpy?

Reply

galbinus_caeli October 27 2008, 15:52:15 UTC
You don't need the price of a small house to avoid looking schlumpy.

A quick look at Macys website shows me that most suits there are under $500. Saks 5th Avenue are mostly about $1000. (A few are up to $4000, but those are not "normal" looking in my eye, they are fancy dress stuff.)

Tops look like they are about $100 at Macys and $300-$500 at Saks.

Shoes seem to be all over the place. But $200-$500 a pair would seem to be enough.

So an outfit would be anywhere from $700 to $2000. (And I think if my wife were to spend that much we might have to have a chat about budgeting.)

Reply


galbinus_caeli October 27 2008, 15:39:17 UTC
I have commented several times that I could easily see $15,000 for Ms. Palin to play dress up. That should easily buy her a half dozen nice suits (with accessories) and an equal number of casual outfits. Which should be plenty in my mind.

We don't hire the president and vice president on their fashion sense. They should look acceptable in a corporate boardroom, that is it.

Oh, I also wonder how much of that money has gone to dressing her family. They seem to have gone through some makeovers recently too.

Reply

fierce_rabbit October 27 2008, 17:21:32 UTC
It's not the money that's the problem but comparing one's self to "Joe Sixpack" while spending that much money on clothing and makeup. It's shopping at Neiman-Marcus and Saks while implying that NYC is not part of "real" America (while also milking 9/11 as much as possible).

Reply


Leave a comment

Up