Topic: RNC Spends $150,000 on Palin's... | |
---|---|
Obama's camp raised more money and therefore has more capital to spend, not Obama's fault now is it I think that Obama didn't expect to get such a response. Fran, Somebody took Obama signs from the street next to mine. Explain that to a child that noticed. It happened over the weekend. It's happening in other places too. |
|
|
|
Clothes & make up. For her and HER family... Oct. 22) - 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. Politico asked the McCain campaign for comment, explicitly noting the $150,000 in expenses for department store shopping and makeup consultation that were incurred immediately after Palin’s announcement. Pre-September reports do not include similar costs. Spokeswoman Maria Comella declined to answer specific questions about the expenditures, including whether it was necessary to spend that much and whether it amounted to one early investment in Palin or if shopping for the vice presidential nominee was ongoing. The campaign does not comment on strategic decisions regarding how financial resources available to the campaign are spent," she said. But hours after the story was posted on Politico's website and legal issues were raised, the campaign issued a new statement. "With all of the important issues facing the country right now, it’s remarkable that we’re spending time talking about pantsuits and blouses," said spokeswoman Tracey Schmitt. "It was always the intent that the clothing go to a charitable purpose after the campaign." The business of primping and dressing on the campaign trail has become fraught with political risk in recent years as voters increasingly see an elite Washington out of touch with their values and lifestyles. In 2000, Democrat Al Gore took heat for changing his clothing hues. And in 2006, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) was ribbed for two hair styling sessions that cost about $3,000. Then, there was Democrat John Edwards’ $400 hair cuts in 2007 and Republican McCain’s $520 black leather Ferragamo shoes this year. FEED More from PoliticoMcCain ‘amazed’ by Palin treatment RNC shells out $150K for Palin fashion The generated international crisis? No cavalry coming for McCain McCain down in Va., up in Fla. More StoriesA review of similar records for the campaign of Democrat Barack Obama and the Democratic National Committee turned up no similar spending. But all the spending by other candidates pales in comparison to the GOP outlay for the Alaska governor whose expensive, designer outfits have been the topic of fashion pages and magazines. What hasn’t been apparent is where the clothes came from – her closet back in Wasilla or from the campaign coffers in Washington. The answer can be found inside the RNC’s September monthly financial disclosure report under “itemized coordinated expenditures.” It’s a report that typically records expenses for direct mail, telephone calls and advertising. Those expenses do show up, but the report also has a new category of spending: “campaign accessories.” September payments were also made to Barney’s New York ($789.72) and Bloomingdale’s New York ($5,102.71). Macy’s in Minneapolis, another store fortunate enough to be situated in the Twin Cities that hosted last summer’s Republican National Convention, received three separate payments totaling $9,447.71. The entries also show a few purchases at Pacifier, a top notch baby store, and Steiniauf & Stroller Inc., suggesting $295 was spent to accommodate the littlest Palin to join the campaign trail. An additional $4,902.45 was spent in early September at Atelier, a high-class shopping destination for men. Just a drop in the bucket compared to the wholesale fleecing the Bush Administration has been doing for the past 8 years. just a 1/2 drop in the bucket compared to what the obama campain is spending on negative ads and what about the lie obama made when he said he would stick to federal spending levels or is that ok because he is obama a liar if a mans word is no good then the man is not to be trusted 1) McCain has more negative ads than Obama. 2) McCain had a choice on which way to do the spending. before obama won the nomination he said he would yes the fed campaign finance when he realized the money that was coming in he changed his mind yes it is obamas fault he said one thing then did the complete opposite if that is what you want (liar imo) then vote for him obama's word is of no value thus what does that make him worth as a man |
|
|
|
Obama's camp raised more money and therefore has more capital to spend, not Obama's fault now is it I think that Obama didn't expect to get such a response. Fran, Somebody took Obama signs from the street next to mine. Explain that to a child that noticed. It happened over the weekend. It's happening in other places too. I wish I was able to go to sleep tonite and wake up to a more civilized and respectful environment. People are acting so stupidly, trying hard to twist, focus and misdirect others that it's quite embarrassing. I'm certain a lot of citizens were not aware nor did they expect Obama to raise as much funds as he did - so why the focus on how he spends the money he raised for the campaign? Why compare his spending (he raised more capital) to McCains (who couldnt meet the amt raised by Obama). let it go. oh well - hey winx, thanks again for the shoes you rock sorry! |
|
|
|
Obama's camp raised more money and therefore has more capital to spend, not Obama's fault now is it I think that Obama didn't expect to get such a response. Fran, Somebody took Obama signs from the street next to mine. Explain that to a child that noticed. It happened over the weekend. It's happening in other places too. I wish I was able to go to sleep tonite and wake up to a more civilized and respectful environment. People are acting so stupidly, trying hard to twist, focus and misdirect others that it's quite embarrassing. I'm certain a lot of citizens were not aware nor did they expect Obama to raise as much funds as he did - so why the focus on how he spends the money he raised for the campaign? Why compare his spending (he raised more capital) to McCains (who couldnt meet the amt raised by Obama). let it go. oh well - hey winx, thanks again for the shoes you rock sorry! I agree. I'll let you know the next time I go shopping. |
|
|
|
Obama's camp raised more money and therefore has more capital to spend, not Obama's fault now is it it is more obama's fault than the wardrobe that was bought being palins fault funny how it is ok for obama's party to spend the money but when palins party spends the money she is condemned racist sexism at its best |
|
|
|
before obama won the nomination he said he would yes the fed campaign finance when he realized the money that was coming in he changed his mind yes it is obamas fault he said one thing then did the complete opposite if that is what you want (liar imo) then vote for him obama's word is of no value thus what does that make him worth as a man are you saying that federal funds should have been allowed to be used for this election, because McCain was unable to raise his own??? isnt that one of the reasons why we needed to be bailed out, the misappropriation of funds? Mind you I have repeatedly said, I am voting for Mickey Mouse but the focus is Obama lied, changed his mind on using federal funding - wow |
|
|
|
Obama's camp raised more money and therefore has more capital to spend, not Obama's fault now is it it is more obama's fault than the wardrobe that was bought being palins fault funny how it is ok for obama's party to spend the money but when palins party spends the money she is condemned racist sexism at its best Palin didn't have to buy such expensive clothes. But..when she went to the Saks by my house, we can thank her for paying that sales tax. |
|
|
|
Obama's camp raised more money and therefore has more capital to spend, not Obama's fault now is it it is more obama's fault than the wardrobe that was bought being palins fault funny how it is ok for obama's party to spend the money but when palins party spends the money she is condemned racist sexism at its best I dont condemn either party, I condemn them both jmo |
|
|
|
Obama's camp raised more money and therefore has more capital to spend, not Obama's fault now is it it is more obama's fault than the wardrobe that was bought being palins fault funny how it is ok for obama's party to spend the money but when palins party spends the money she is condemned racist sexism at its best Palin didn't have to buy such expensive clothes. But..when she went to the Saks by my house, we can thank her for paying that sales tax. again you say palin bought them she did not buy them if she bought them then obama is spending the money on the other side can not have it one sided either they both are spending it or neither of them are spending it |
|
|
|
Obama's camp raised more money and therefore has more capital to spend, not Obama's fault now is it it is more obama's fault than the wardrobe that was bought being palins fault funny how it is ok for obama's party to spend the money but when palins party spends the money she is condemned racist sexism at its best Palin didn't have to buy such expensive clothes. But..when she went to the Saks by my house, we can thank her for paying that sales tax. again you say palin bought them she did not buy them if she bought them then obama is spending the money on the other side can not have it one sided either they both are spending it or neither of them are spending it I will be more accurate. Palin picked the clothes. Adju, even the Rep. Committee looked into it. |
|
|
|
Obama's camp raised more money and therefore has more capital to spend, not Obama's fault now is it it is more obama's fault than the wardrobe that was bought being palins fault funny how it is ok for obama's party to spend the money but when palins party spends the money she is condemned racist sexism at its best Palin didn't have to buy such expensive clothes. But..when she went to the Saks by my house, we can thank her for paying that sales tax. again you say palin bought them she did not buy them if she bought them then obama is spending the money on the other side can not have it one sided either they both are spending it or neither of them are spending it I will be more accurate. Palin picked the clothes. Adju, even the Rep. Committee looked into it. now that is a possibility and does change the atmosphere of the discussion |
|
|
|
Obama's camp raised more money and therefore has more capital to spend, not Obama's fault now is it it is more obama's fault than the wardrobe that was bought being palins fault funny how it is ok for obama's party to spend the money but when palins party spends the money she is condemned racist sexism at its best Palin didn't have to buy such expensive clothes. But..when she went to the Saks by my house, we can thank her for paying that sales tax. again you say palin bought them she did not buy them if she bought them then obama is spending the money on the other side can not have it one sided either they both are spending it or neither of them are spending it I will be more accurate. Palin picked the clothes. Adju, even the Rep. Committee looked into it. now that is a possibility and does change the atmosphere of the discussion |
|
|
|
only the facts ma'am only the facts (in best jack webb voice) lmao |
|
|
|
Obama's camp raised more money and therefore has more capital to spend, not Obama's fault now is it I think that Obama didn't expect to get such a response. Fran, Somebody took Obama signs from the street next to mine. Explain that to a child that noticed. It happened over the weekend. It's happening in other places too. I wish I was able to go to sleep tonite and wake up to a more civilized and respectful environment. People are acting so stupidly, trying hard to twist, focus and misdirect others that it's quite embarrassing. I'm certain a lot of citizens were not aware nor did they expect Obama to raise as much funds as he did - so why the focus on how he spends the money he raised for the campaign? Why compare his spending (he raised more capital) to McCains (who couldnt meet the amt raised by Obama). let it go. oh well - hey winx, thanks again for the shoes you rock sorry! Because McCain stuck to his promise and now CAN NOT raise money the way Obama is (to do so would be a violation of his own ideas on campaign reform. Principles he has maintained!)... I saw the 'promise' Obama made when he was still in the primaries. And like many other things he has said... He lied. I am amazed by the short memories people have... If the talking heads spout their party spin often enough it is believed even in the FACE OF HISTORICAL FACTS TO THE CONTRARY. |
|
|
|
Obama's camp raised more money and therefore has more capital to spend, not Obama's fault now is it it is more obama's fault than the wardrobe that was bought being palins fault funny how it is ok for obama's party to spend the money but when palins party spends the money she is condemned racist sexism at its best Palin didn't have to buy such expensive clothes. But..when she went to the Saks by my house, we can thank her for paying that sales tax. again you say palin bought them she did not buy them if she bought them then obama is spending the money on the other side can not have it one sided either they both are spending it or neither of them are spending it I will be more accurate. Palin picked the clothes. Adju, even the Rep. Committee looked into it. Incorrect information... Palin stated that she DID not do ANY of the shopping... The cloths were brought to her along with a makeup artist. She stated exactally where she shops... but I reckon you would not have seen that interview since it was done by a news service that Obama has stated 'NEEDS TO BE BROUGHT DOWN'. Can you say censorship of the press. |
|
|
|
Because McCain stuck to his promise and now CAN NOT raise money the way Obama is (to do so would be a violation of his own ideas on campaign reform. Principles he has maintained!)... I saw the 'promise' Obama made when he was still in the primaries. And like many other things he has said... He lied. I am amazed by the short memories people have... If the talking heads spout their party spin often enough it is believed even in the FACE OF HISTORICAL FACTS TO THE CONTRARY. sounds like a personal problem that he CAN NOT, WILL NOT or CHOOSES NOT TO raise the money, let it go. I am glad he changed his mind, would piss me off something awful to have more funds misspent look at the bail out, enough with improper spending. (jmo) I definitely do not suffer from lack of attention nor a short attention span - I'd just rather face the facts, the campaigning should be done through our public school system - that would be fair, truthful and more civilized than at present. Vote your conscience, I could sit here and go pro/con both candidates, rather not, as my understanding and my opinion is that both candidates are bound to fail. Neither candidate will be victorious as it is impossible to please all of the people all of the time. I believe both candidates are doomed and bound to fail as the clean up process or a fresh start is needed to get this country back in shape. Fire everybody, start fresh, no political affiliations, no political ties, no hush monies etc. But then again I'm sure most think I am too optimistic but it works for me. Vote your conscience and good luck to us all |
|
|
|
Obama's camp raised more money and therefore has more capital to spend, not Obama's fault now is it it is more obama's fault than the wardrobe that was bought being palins fault funny how it is ok for obama's party to spend the money but when palins party spends the money she is condemned racist sexism at its best Palin didn't have to buy such expensive clothes. But..when she went to the Saks by my house, we can thank her for paying that sales tax. again you say palin bought them she did not buy them if she bought them then obama is spending the money on the other side can not have it one sided either they both are spending it or neither of them are spending it I will be more accurate. Palin picked the clothes. Adju, even the Rep. Committee looked into it. Incorrect information... Palin stated that she DID not do ANY of the shopping... The cloths were brought to her along with a makeup artist. She stated exactally where she shops... but I reckon you would not have seen that interview since it was done by a news service that Obama has stated 'NEEDS TO BE BROUGHT DOWN'. Can you say censorship of the press. She was in St. Louis and the Saks where the clothes were bought is not far from me. You better believe that the St. Louis news stations covered that one! What news service are you talking about? |
|
|
|
Because McCain stuck to his promise and now CAN NOT raise money the way Obama is (to do so would be a violation of his own ideas on campaign reform. Principles he has maintained!)... I saw the 'promise' Obama made when he was still in the primaries. And like many other things he has said... He lied. I am amazed by the short memories people have... If the talking heads spout their party spin often enough it is believed even in the FACE OF HISTORICAL FACTS TO THE CONTRARY. sounds like a personal problem that he CAN NOT, WILL NOT or CHOOSES NOT TO raise the money, let it go. I am glad he changed his mind, would piss me off something awful to have more funds misspent look at the bail out, enough with improper spending. (jmo) I definitely do not suffer from lack of attention nor a short attention span - I'd just rather face the facts, the campaigning should be done through our public school system - that would be fair, truthful and more civilized than at present. Vote your conscience, I could sit here and go pro/con both candidates, rather not, as my understanding and my opinion is that both candidates are bound to fail. Neither candidate will be victorious as it is impossible to please all of the people all of the time. I believe both candidates are doomed and bound to fail as the clean up process or a fresh start is needed to get this country back in shape. Fire everybody, start fresh, no political affiliations, no political ties, no hush monies etc. But then again I'm sure most think I am too optimistic but it works for me. Vote your conscience and good luck to us all I'm not voting for Mickey Mouse. I'm going for Marvin the Martian. |
|
|
|
Hmmm....Mice vs. Martians.
|
|
|
|
Marvin has better weapons and is the ruler on Mars, so he has the political experience. He was born in CA so he's a USA citizen also.
|
|
|