Jackson Free Press

According to Marc Ambinder at Time, John McCain's campaign folks are squirming and defensive, now that Politico has broken the news (wonder how much that red leather jacket cost?) that the campaign spent more than $150,000 on Sarah Palin's clothes, makeup and hair—in a time when the country could be facing a depression. Even Republicans are disgusted, Ambinder says. And we can be pretty sure that trying to blame the "liberal media" won't work this time. (Betcha lot of those Saks and Bloomingdale designer duds are made in China, to boot.)

Palin is an attractive woman. They could have shopped at Steinmart and Macy's like the rest of Americans, or even H&M like Michelle Obama, and made her look just fine.

Meantime, Politico reports that McCain told Don Imus (!) that he is "amazed" that Democrats, Republicans and independents alike do not think Palin would be a good vice president. How out of touch can one man truly be!?!

Meltdown.

Previous Commentsshow

Why can't she do her own makeup, or have one of her daughters do it!?!+ John McCain's makeup is right out of "American Idol." Running mate Sarah Palin's is so "So You Think You Can Dance" -- and so much more expensive. McCain's September payments of $8,672.55 to "American Idol" make-up artist Tifanie White, who has also worked on the reality dance show "So You Think You Can Dance," are a drop in the bucket on the campaign's beautification front compared to the GOP vice presidential nominee. The Sleuth has learned that Palin's high-paid traveling make-up artist is Amy Strozzi, who was nominated for an Emmy Award for her work as head of makeup on "So You Think You Can Dance." Strozzi was paid $13,200 by the McCain-Palin campaign last month alone, according to the campaign's latest financial disclosure report filed this week. That's $4,527.45 more than McCain's make-up artist made last month. And as we mentioned yesterday in our exclusive on McCain's make-up artist, the 72-year-old Arizona senator, who has prominent scars from battling cancer, requires more work than does the more naturally telegenic 44-year-old Palin. I guess this is no surprise coming from a woman who had a tanning bed installed in the governor's mansion. At this point, all you can do is laugh, I guess.

DonnaLadd

Oct 22 2008

Then there's Michelle Obama, who proves you don't have to spent thousands, or even hundreds, of dollars on a dress to look great.

DonnaLadd

Oct 22 2008

That whizzing sound you hear is pure RNC spin: if all else fails, guilt-trip 'em. What else can McCain possibly say and still remain credible to staunch Republicans who like Palin (or Don Imus for that matter; I'm guessing it's the same audience)?

Ronni_Mott

Oct 22 2008

The campaign is trying to spin this, saying they always intended to donate the clothes to charity after the campaign. OK, then, how many MORE clothes and other necessities could one buy with $150,000 for poor people? Truly, most Americans do not want, or need, a multi-thousand dollar designer suit. Ridiculous.

DonnaLadd

Oct 22 2008

Quit hatin' y'all. It takes money to put lipstick on a pitbull.

Jeff Lucas

Oct 22 2008

Thanks Jeff. I do need some help. The fact of the matter is, Palin is not very attractive. If you take those pretty clothes off her, she's ugly physically, mentally, morally, socially, culturally, politically and otherwise. Ask any sober man! We may not know much, but we know a beautiful woman when we see one. Our eyes, homones and thangs never deceive us in this regard. Surely, she would look better when drunk. They all do. So, do we, I hear. And if we have lots of money, we always look good until the money runs out.

Walt

Oct 22 2008

What I don't get is the strategy: Most people do not know the difference between a $300 suit, and a $3,000 one. So who are they trying to impress? From the AP investigation about Palin charging the $700 hotel rooms overlooking Central Park for her and her daughters to Alaska, to all the per diem she collected for staying in her own home, to this, she really looks and acts very nouveau riche—that is, she's in the spotlight for this kind of stuff. She's playing at being rich. If she were there to actually serve America and her state, she'd study up more on foreign policy and, well, what the vice president actually does (not "be in charge of" the Senate, Sweetie). It's so insulting as a woman for McCain to put her there, considering all the women, including Republicans, who have worked so hard and without installing tanning beds in their office. I will be so glad when she's out of the spotlight and back dealing with her problems in Alaska, which are going to be very large now that the national media have vetted her.

DonnaLadd

Oct 22 2008

Baquan what Rust, the Buchannons, Hanniity and Gallo mean is that they haven't found anything really good to stop the Negro yet. They know there has to be something not quite right with Obama bceause after their heroes Ronald Reagan, Robert E. Lee, the Bushes and all have finished putting a wang dang doodle on the average black man he has cursed, cried, given up, stolen a packet of cigarettes or bottle of whsikey, peed outside or done something wrong to show his true character and nature. He's a N-word so has to have something illegals, wrong or debilitating. Now that it's this late and they don't have anything they don't know what to do. Anyway, I started calling her derailin' Palin week ago because that is certainly what I was hoping she would do. They hired her for a beauty queen to bring sex and maverick-like appeal from a women's perspective, and instead found her right off to be so ugly that she needed dressing up expensively. Later they learned she's one of the dullest pair of scissors in the drawers too. She hasn't learned foreighn policy and other matter of presidential or vice-presidential proportions because she's only marginally to average intelligent. Please note that slow or mentally ill-equipped people are often very good at hiding deficits. Performance is the neutralizer or true test and she fails every test, just like Bush.

Walt

Oct 22 2008

The U York Times is reporting that Jeff Larson, on of the guys behind McCains's robo calls, apparently did the $150,000 shopping for the Palins. The Gone Off Politically party later reimbursed him after taking a look at the before and after pictures of the Palins. LOL. I don't know for sure, but Jeff Larson may be a son or close relative of Liars Larson, conservative talk show host and repugnant individual.

Walt

Oct 22 2008

Palin is an attractive woman. They could have shopped at Steinmart and Macy's like the rest of American, or even H&M like Michelle Obama, and made her look just fine. posted by ladd on 10/22/08 at 04:29 PM. I really object to all of this positive attention to Palin's physical appearance. Her face is a little too scrunched up toward the middle, buzzard like, to be considered a classical beauty. Some might observe her nose is too pointy and lips too thin. Her looks are the last thing people should focus on...her attitudes and values are very unattractive. A lot of what Palin says and does is reprehensible.

HardTravelin

Oct 22 2008

When Michelle Obama appeared on The View a few months ago, she wore a $148 sundress she got from White House | Black Market, and after that, sales shot up. I want one myself. [img]http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/thedishrag/images/2008/06/20/michelle_obama_dress.jpg[/img]

LatashaWillis

Oct 22 2008

Thank God there's only 13 more days of this nonsense.

Jeff Lucas

Oct 22 2008

I didn't say she was perfect, HardTravelin; I said she was "attractive." She is, in a kind of plain, suburban mom-gone-shopping kind of way. That in no way helps make up for happens every time she opens her mouth and makes herself sound vicious and as dumb as a post.

DonnaLadd

Oct 22 2008

It turns out that the personal shopper is also the guy behind the robocalls. You can't make this stuff up. Here's what they bought in September (who knows what happened in October), per The New York Times: The full shopping list for Ms. Sarah Palin and her family, according to records of the Federal Election Commission, looks like this: • $75,062.63 spent at Neiman Marcus on Sept. 10. • $41,850.72 to Saks Fifth Avenue in New York on Sept. 10. • $7,575.02 to Saks Fifth Avenue in St. Louis on Sept. 10. • $5,102.71 to Bloomingdale's in New York on Sept. 10. • $789.72 to Barney's New York on Sept. 10. • Charges of $4,396.94 and $512.92 at Macy's in Minneapolis on Sept. 10. • $4,537.85 to Macy's in Minneapolis on Sept. 22. • $349.50 to Lord & Taylor in New York on Sept. 25. • $4,902.08 to Atelier New York, a men's clothing boutique, on Sept. 10. • Two separate charges of $98 to Pacifier, a high-end baby store in Minneapolis, on Sept. 10 and Sept. 25. • $98.50 to Steinlauf & Stoller, a sewing supply store, in New York on Sept. 25. • $133 to the Gap in Minneapolis on Sept. 25. And here are the legalities: Should she decide to keep the value of the clothing will have to be taxed as income. I.R.S. rules allow for employees to deduct thecost of uniforms worn for work — as long as the clothing has no use other than one's job. But if the same clothing can also be worn day-to-day, the cost cannot be deducted from income. And if paid for by someone else, as in this case, the value of the clothing must be reported as taxable income, Robert S. McIntyre, director of Citizens for Tax Justice, a nonpartisan tax policy research group, said on Wednesday. "If the clothes were only used for work, it would not be taxable income," Mr. McIntyre said. "But if you can use them to go to lunch with your husband, it would." The Republican National Committee confirmed the reimbursements to Mr. Larson, but said that the clothing bought for Ms. Palin and her family would eventually be given to charity. Mr. Larson did not return messages left for him today at his business in Minnesota.

DonnaLadd

Oct 22 2008

She should go on SNL again and jam to a video using that old song from years ago, "I'm...too sexy for these cloths, too sexy for these cloths, I'm...too...sexy."...with a $150,000 price tag dangling off her hat.

FreeClif

Oct 22 2008

Here's the personal shopper-Robo call guru.

DonnaLadd

Oct 22 2008

It's remarkable that even the children are going to have to give up their fancy duds. Mind-blowing, these people. And it's so sexist to think that a vice presidential candidate who happens to be a woman needs to be dressed up in uber-expensive red leather and F-me pumps in order to appeal to the public, and that some old dirty old operative from Minneapolis is making it happen, even as he is running nasty and dishonest robocalls against Obama. This just about turns my stomach. No, it does turn my stomach. This is what the Republican Revolution has come to. Can we have the old Lincoln party back, please?

DonnaLadd

Oct 22 2008

Did y'all see this? Think anyone's filled the Guv in on the difference, symbolically, between elephants and donkeys? Of course, she doesn't know what the vice president does, so maybe not. McCain is going to go down in the history as the man who tried to put this woman in the White House. She'll be his Lewinsky, of a fashion.

DonnaLadd

Oct 22 2008

The makeover is barely legal thanks to a loophole, per ABC News: When news broke that Gov. Sarah Palin and her family managed to spend $150,000 of other people's money on clothes after joining the McCain ticket, many scratched their heads. Is that legal? The Republican National Committee "appears to have spent more than $150,000 to clothe and accessorize vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin and her family since her surprise pick by John McCain in late August. Thanks to a loophole in federal law the answer, experts say, is yes. Handily, the loophole was codified into law by the landmark campaign finance law passed by her ticketmate, Sen. John McCain. It would be illegal for the McCain-Palin campaign to buy a new wardrobe for Palin and her husband, say campaign finance lawyers contacted by ABCNews.com. But the law is silent on whether such purchases can be made by the Republican National Committee (RNC). "The party committee has much greater latitude," said Kenneth Gross, a federal election lawyer. "I think it is permissible for the party committee to make that judgment." And Jake Tapper says she has to pay taxes on the clothes, *even* if she does give them away. Confirmed: She has to declare. It's comparable to the "gifts" that has Sen. Ted Stevens on trial right now. So much for the reform myth.

DonnaLadd

Oct 22 2008

Donkeys and elephants are just too hard to keep up with. So too is Nem and Marcus, Lawd and Taylor, and Norstrung, so to speak, (never mind the spellings) if you never knew they existed before high-end clothes from them were thrusted upon you to give you a look of elitism you don't really have. Palin is just a averick woman from Wasilla. This is why I don't want her as vice president or president. She would give Russia or China the keys to the Pentagon and the code for unleasing the nuclear warfare at America if they passed her some pearls, gold, diamonds and pumps.

Walt

Oct 22 2008

Don't hate on Palin because she is beautiful and dresses to impress. That sounds socialist to me :-) (sarcasm alert). I bet if Michelle or Barack were outfitted like that at campaign donor's expense the Fox Nuts pundits would be filled with righteous indignation at those socialist celebrities! These people are sick. At least they use the high road (more sarcasm for the CL folk). I am looking at her on NBC. HardTavelin, I am legs man and I gotta tell you, in my expert opinion she has tens.

FreeClif

Oct 22 2008

I watched Palin on Saturday Night Live and was surprised she was able to raise her hands and arms in unison or rhythmically as the young folks do, and that she could move her body from side to side without bumping into the other actor. All the hatred I had witnessed in her made me think she was more of the head-banging and rhythm-less type. Sure, I know many white folks have soul too, but I just couldn't see Palin having any considering all the hating on Barack and his kind. I wanted her to stand up so as to see if she could dance as well, but the Real Nasty Commies party told her to not go on there acting like she knew any blacks or good regular white people such as the cast of Saturday Night Live and most of us here.

Walt

Oct 22 2008

I bet if Michelle or Barack were outfitted like that at campaign donor's expense the Fox Nuts pundits would be filled with righteous indignation at those socialist celebrities! Yep. And the Dems and liberal pundits like Olbermann would jump all over themselves to defend her. Just the nature of partisan politics.

Jeff Lucas

Oct 22 2008

Right, If her only offense was getting dolled up, she would not be offensive, but the image this woman looking out over seething, hate-filled mobs screaming threats is ugly.

FreeClif

Oct 22 2008

That's true. If the RNC wants to spend obscene levels of money to dress up Caribou Barbie I guess that's their choice, but someone with sense should have called a TO when the first Neiman-Marcus bill rolled in. It's a little contradictory to the the public image of the *hockey mom from Wasilla* who can relate to "Joe six-pack/Joe da Plumber". Especially hypocritical when one of their earlier arguments against Obama was his Britney/Paris *rock-star* image, then they go out and spend ridiculous amounts of money just like the Hollywood celebrisluts dressing Palin.

Jeff Lucas

Oct 23 2008

it's a strange world we are living in when so much time is spent talking about what a woman is wearing instead of the issues...and i dont know that I've ever seen any reports about the costs of men's suits and shoes, etc. While it is sickening to know how much Princess Cindy McCain and Failin' Palin are spending on their wardrobes, surely there are more important things to discuss?

jxngrl03

Oct 23 2008

it is a strange world we are living in when so much time and energy is being spent on discussing and dissecting what a woman is wearing during a presidential campaign. Shouldn't the issues matter more? Have we ever discussed the cost of what the men wear while campaigning? I agree, it is sickening what these women -- Princess Cindy McCain and Failin' Palin spend on their wardrobes. But really, does it matter?

jxngrl03

Oct 23 2008

i didn't mean to post twice. sorry people. i'm new at this.

jxngrl03

Oct 23 2008

The problem, jxngirl, is Palin's hypocrisy—she presents herself as an everyday hockey mom struggling to pay the bills, when in fact her clothes bought in September costs several times more than most people in the state of Mississippi make in a year. The other problem is the sexism inherent in thinking that the GOP needed to turn her into a Barbie Doll fashion plate with scads of suits, boots and so on, not to mention her family and the Gucci bags. If she needed to shop for the trail, buy her five dark-colored (or not) basic suits and a variety of blouses, and three good pairs of shoes. She has accessories already. You could do that for well, well under $5,000. Most importantly, it is a symbol of how out of touch the McCain campaign is that they did this not understanding how crazy it would look. As for spending time on it, we here have spent time on every possible issue in this campaign, including running heavily researched issues stories each week to help people know where the campaign stands on various issues. Click here for a list of the issues stories down on the right side. We are all perfectly capable of engaging in all of those issues, and haven't a conversation about Gov. Palin's extreme hypocrisy.

DonnaLadd

Oct 23 2008

ladd -- she didn't purchase her clothes, the campaign did. it is sexist to continue dissecting what she wears to events. i just don't care what she wears. i care that she stands for completely anti-feminist values. these other details about her fashion are simply symptoms of that more serious fact.

jxngrl03

Oct 23 2008

let me rephrase -- she is SCARY because she is anti-feminist. And her clothes are the least of our worries.

jxngrl03

Oct 23 2008

Yes, the campaign bought the clothes. McCain's campaign—the only example of executive experience he has ever had. But is the message that she has no say whatever in what people clothe her in and how much they pay for it (and whether it's bought legally)? That's a terrifying thought, and one well worth discussing. I will say it again: The sexism with Palin has been putting up a pretty face with no grasp of foreign or domestic policy and then playing expensive dress-up with her. There is nothing sexist about calling that what it is. And of course she's scary because she's anti-feminist and anti-education and anti-intellectual and anti-Americans-who-don't-agree-with-her and anti-truth and anti-following-the-law-in-Alaska. See Ronni's lengthy issues-cover story about Palin's extreme views on women's issues last issue.

DonnaLadd

Oct 23 2008

For me, hypocrisy is a character issue. THEY have made character an issue! They showed a transcript on MSNBC yesterday of John the High Roader criticizing a candidate for spending $200 on a haircut and some other similar amount for a tie from campaign donations back in the early nineties! But look at them! They seem like a bunch of hypocritical butt heads. EVERY time they begin to rail against their opponent for something, without fail, journalists who care can look into their background and find something FAR worse. OH! Celebrity elitists! What will we do?!!

FreeClif

Oct 24 2008

Barbie-gate gets wackier by the day. New York Times today: Who was the highest paid individual in Senator John McCain's presidential campaign during the first half of October as it headed down the homestretch? Not Randy Scheunemann, Mr. McCain's chief foreign policy adviser; not Nicolle Wallace, his senior communications staff member. It was Amy Strozzi, who was identified by the Washington Post this week as Gov. Sarah Palin's traveling makeup artist, according to a new filing with the Federal Election Commission on Thursday night. Ms. Strozzi, who was nominated for an Emmy award for her makeup work on the television show "So You Think You Can Dance?", was paid $22,800 for the first two weeks of October alone, according to the records. The campaign categorized Ms. Strozzi's payment as "PERSONNEL SVC/EQUIPMENT."

DonnaLadd

Oct 24 2008

Wardrobe Mysteries Linger: http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/10/23/wardrobe-mysteries-linger/

Tre

Oct 24 2008

OK, it gets even weirder. She is denying that the whole $150,000-on-clothes actually happened—even though the campaign doesn't deny it, and it was filed in campaign reports. The most important question is: Does she lie every time she opens her mouth, or every other time? This is absurd: - Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin insisted in an interview with the Tribune on Thursday that she did not accept $150,000 worth of designer clothes from the Republican Party and "that is not who we are." "That whole thing is just, bad!" she said. "Oh, if people only knew how frugal we are. "It's kind of painful to be criticized for something when all the facts are not out there and are not reported," said Palin, saying the clothes are not worth $150,000 and were bought for the Republican National Convention. Still, she has been wearing pricey clothes at campaign events this fall. She said they will be given back, auctioned off or sent to charity. Most of them, she said, haven't even left the belly of her campaign plane. Reminds me of her saying specifically that the Troopergate investigation did not find that she "abused power" when those are the *exact* words the report used. I swear she thinks we're as dense as she apparently is.

DonnaLadd

Oct 24 2008

And while on the subject of campaign gifts, does anyone know what the law saws about how all those McCain campaign attorneys and operatives who took over the handling of Troopergate in Alaska are to be paid and then how it is to be reported? What a "gift" that was to the Palins.

DonnaLadd

Oct 24 2008

Looks like the clothes will cost Palin personally at least $36,000 in taxes next year—and that's if she gives them away. Betcha nobody told her that.

DonnaLadd

Oct 24 2008

This roller coaster never stops. Palin testifying in Troopergate investigation today.

DonnaLadd

Oct 24 2008