GOP REPUBLICANS SPEND $150,000 ON SARAH PALIN'S CLOTHES WARDROBE CLOTHESGATE PHOTOS
News has emerged that the GOP spent over $150,000 dollars on Sarah Palin's wardrobe. UPDATE: Washington Post Fashion Editor Robin Givhan gave the following critic about Sarah Palin's clothing. "Her clothes are unpretentious, but they are also unremarkable. They have nothing to do with Fashion."
Politico reports that the Republican National Committee "has spent more than $150,000 to clothe and accessorise vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin and her family" since August, with shopping bills at stores such as Saks Fifth Avenue, Neiman Marcus, Barney's and Bloomingdale's totaling as much as $75,062.63, and a one-month hair and makeup total expenditure of $4,716.49. It certainly wasn't a necessity with regard to the availability of fashionable clothes for modest prices. As Pam Spaulding aptly notes, "Michelle Obama buys off-the-rack (eg, the dress that she wore on The View was $148), and looks damn good in it without costing the campaign a fortune." source
Sarah Palin's expensive department store clothes were bought with campaign contributions. Remember when John McCain accused Barack Obama and Michelle Obama of being elitist? Michelle Obama's off the rack Donna Ricco dress that she wore during
her guest hosting gig on The View became an instant hit. The dress
costs only $149 and is selling quickly at White House/Black Market.
Here is the Gawker and Daily Kos' points of view on the Palin Clothesgate scandal.
On FOX News Channel, they are truly hilarious in their spin on the Palin wardrobe shopping spree, initially spinning that the shopping budget is the reason why she looks so good, and then quickly sputtering themselves into a strange rant on sexism and how TV personalities always get free clothes anyway. source
So the story of Sarah Palin spending $150,000 on clothes? Brother, it gets better. See, the RNC is required by law to list who exactly bought all the fancy clothes. And all the Sarah Palin fancy purchases—at Barney's, Bloomingdale's, and Saks Fifth Avenue—were made by one guy: Jeff Larson. Jeff Larson is one of the men behind FLS Connect, a Republican robocalling firm! They're famous this cycle for terrible robocalls about Barack Obama and Bill Ayers. source
Questions over the legality of Mrs Palin's wardrobe bill – paid for out of campaign donations – prompted her spokesman yesterday to say that the clothes would not be kept but donated to charity.
According to financial records obtained by Politico.com, a US politics website, the fashion spending spree started in early September.
The spending on so-called "campaign accessories" included bills from the fashion chain Saks Fifth Avenue in St Louis and New York that came to a total of $49,425.
There were also a couple of hefty splurges at another expensive fashion store, Neiman Marcus, in Minneapolis, including one worth more than $75,000.
The Republican National Committee also spent $44,716 on Mrs Palin's hair and make-up in September after reporting no such costs in August.
The rest of the Palin family made do on rather less. Around $295 was spent at Pacifier, an upmarket baby store, and just under $5,000 at Atelier, an expensive men's clothes shop.
The legality of such expenditure was questioned by campaign finance experts who cited the Federal Election Commission's opposition to campaign money being used to buy items for personal use.
Federal campaign finance law prohibits the use of campaign funds for personal use, which it defines as any expense "that would exist irrespective of the candidate's campaign or duties as a federal officeholder".
After initially refusing to discuss the spending, the McCain campaign issued a new statement as criticism mounted.
"With all the important issues facing the country right now, it's remarkable that we're spending time talking about pantsuits and blouses," said a McCain spokesman.
"It was always the intent that the clothing go to a charitable purpose after the campaign." source

![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=9c3b4a38-a704-4811-a31a-a69fb55ecf3d)






















Comments