Obviously I’ve been living under a rock somewhere. Or maybe it was that $300 Walmart trip. Or the dance and gymnastics lessons. I’ve got it! It was the movie, “Annie”! I’ve been letting Baby Girl watch it entirely too much lately.
How did I miss this, Friends?!
If you’ve been hiding with me, too, go here, and here, and here.
First things first. $150,000? That’s alotta dough. That’s alotta dough-nuts. That’s more than the house that some people live in! That’s more than their house AND their car, People!!
Allow me to break it down for you:
* Saks Fifth Avenue: $49,425.74.
* Neiman Marcus: $75,062.63
* Macy's: $9,447.71
* Barneys New York: $789.72
* Bloomingdales: $5,102.71
* Hair and make-up: $4,716.49
Now, some of you reading this may not even blink about those expenditures. You might shop at these stores all the time and that’s great (unfortunately, none of these stores are in my area, and I would probably only be able to window shop anyway. Remember, all my money goes to Walmart).
Was Sarah Palin that frumpy before that she had to have a “presidential make over”? This was someone who had already spent time in beauty pageants and held a political office. She is the freakin’ governor of Alaska!!! I guess a dowdy governor’s wardrobe just won’t do for a vice-presidential candidate.
Bottom line, my beef is with the money. I like Sarah Palin. But for someone who classifies herself as “one of us,” a hockey mom that wears lipstick, a supporter of the American working class, how in the world – why in the world – would you spend this kind of money on clothes and makeup?
Palin promises that the wardrobe is not hers. She says that the expensive outfits will be donated to charity after the election. How many other women can you think of that have donated their dresses to charity while they were alive? I can think of just one. Princess Diana. God rest her soul.
Could it be that the reason Palin is receiving so much flack about her wardrobe is because this is the first time – since Geraldine Ferraro – that we’ve had a female in the presidential spotlight? Women’s fashion sense and attentiveness to it has changed drastically since the ’80’s, thanks to the very same media that is blowing the whistle on this story. Could it be now that women can actually hold important positions in government and NOT look like a man?
My final thought: why didn’t the Democratic party come up with the idea of a presidential make over for Hillary Rodham Clinton?
What do you think about this?