Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
REPORTER: Sen. Biden, who paid for your suit?
BIDEN: I pay for my suits. I pay for all of my own clothing.
Exclusive 1-on-1 with Joe Biden | WSLS 10
The salary of a US Senator, and a State Governor can't be that different. And Biden's buying his own clothes, and not going on 150k $ shopping sprees, courtesy of DNC money.
To be fair though, I'll have to defer to the ladies. I'm sure women have to spend more on their wardrobe. You all would know better than me.
Clinton's pantsuits were free, from the designer(s), who estimated they would be 6000 or more apiece.
Women do not have uniforms like men, which means we need more clothes for this sort of thing, and also since there is not a set "way" to look there is some effort put into defining oneself through wardrobe, unlike men.
The part that is a problem about Palin's spending is that it doesn't fit with her rhetoric. (It also seems wrong from the 'cut spending' maverick. It also is weird that the hubby and kids got in on the action.)
don't you think the designers gave cindy her clothes for the convention, also?
and, if it's sarah's money, she can spend it however she likes.
don't you think the designers gave cindy her clothes for the convention, also?
and, if it's sarah's money, she can spend it however she likes.
have you not been paying attention? it wasnt sarah's money. it was money donated to the campaign. well, actually it was donated to the RNC and not mccains campaign, which allows palin to avoid mccains law of not using campaign donations to buy things such as clothes
The part that is a problem about Palin's spending is that it doesn't fit with her rhetoric. You can't be a walmart mom and spend the equivalent of three median annual incomes on a wardrobe in eight weeks. (It also seems wrong from the 'cut spending' maverick. It also is weird that the hubby and kids got in on the action.) She should have gotten her clothes at Talbots or similar. She would still be well dressed, but would have bolstered the Hockey Mom cred.
Not with her money though, she is buying it with your money.
Not much of a role model.
Clinton's pantsuits were free, from the designer(s), who estimated they would be 6000 or more apiece.
Women do not have a pre-defined all-purpose suit like men, which means we need more clothes for this sort of thing, and also since there is not a set "way" to look there is some effort put into defining oneself through wardrobe, unlike men. Palin is defining herself as a little bit racy, a little classy, a little sexy. Clinton defined herself as very practical. Men's suits do not do this sort of defining past details like french cuffs and pinstripes vs no such embellishment.
The part that is a problem about Palin's spending is that it doesn't fit with her rhetoric. You can't be a walmart mom and spend the equivalent of three median annual incomes on a wardrobe in eight weeks..
Not with her money though, she is buying it with your money.
Not much of a role model.
I totally understand. Its kind of not fair.
If I trust them enough to VOTE for them, doesn't it stand to reason that I'd trust them to spend tax payer money and party donations?
This is much ado about nothing.
I agree that there is a lot of hoopla about nothing, on the other hand your first statement is weird - surely there are a lot of expenditures that would cross the line for you.
I hope my donations are not buying tickets to disneyland for the kids, for example.
Some people are little upset that she didn't at least buy american, for example. it's not like we don't have excellent designers.
