- BitsBlog - http://bitsblog.theconservativereader.com -

The Tail of the Pantsuits

Ya know I was waiting for this kind of attack, but from the Politico [1]?

The Republican National Committee has 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.

According to financial disclosure records, the accessorizing began in early September and included bills from Saks Fifth Avenue in St. Louis and New York for a combined $49,425.74.

The records also document a couple of big-time shopping trips to Neiman Marcus in Minneapolis, including one $75,062.63 spree in early September.

The RNC also spent $4,716.49 on hair and makeup through September after reporting no such costs in August.

The cash expenditures immediately raised questions among campaign finance experts about their legality under the Federal Election Commission’s long-standing advisory opinions on using campaign cash to purchase items for personal use.

Gov Sarah Palin [2]

Gov Sarah Palin

Well, first off, I’d question the phrase “Personal use”. Television… and by logical extension, political campaigns, are very much a cosmetic business. Always have been… politics particularly so, following the advent of TV. And in that realm, particularly so for women. 

Anyway, what on earth would Sarah Palin be doing with clothing like that, save wanting to put in a good appearence, because she’s running for VP? Very much a campaign- related expense, in my view. Frankly, I think it’d be hard to argue otherwise, using logic. Then again, this kind of thing always seems to ride on the emotional, doesn’t it?  Secondly… look; A hundred and fifty large does not exactly make Sarah Palin into Imelda Marcos, by any stretch, which seems to be the cast behind a lot of blogging on this topic this morning from the lefties.

Hmmmm…OTOH, consider BO’s suits [3]… who paid for THEM, I wonder?  Funny how we don’t see much in the press about that. Or, blogging for that matter. Are we talking about sexism, here, or simply opportunism on the part of the Democrats?

Aren’t the people who are now complaining about the ‘excessive’ nature of Palin’s outfitting, the ones who just a few short months ago were complaining about her clothing chocies?  Can we just make the assumption from now on that the Democrats are going to bitch about anything anyone opposing them does or says, regardless of the senselessness of it, and move forward from there?

What male, does anyone suppose, would be questioned on how much they spent for clothing from campaign expenses? When such questions do happen, they do tend to get weird. As an example, John “I feel pretty” Edwards getting $400 haircuts leaps to mind.

Before I forget, I’m told that the outfits will be auctioned off for charity after the election season. So, again, “Personal use”? I don’t think so…. But if you really want to talk about excessive, let’s discuss $400 and change for two lobters, Champaigne and Iranian caviar at the Waldorf [4], shall we?

Hmmm. That brings up a question: How does one auction off a used lobster?