Biden, the elitsit, pays for his own clothes

[Red Dawn]

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.

 

[DavidS]

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.

Yeah I think Clinton bought her own pantsuits....

 

[Caligirl]

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. (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.

 

[elvis]

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.

 

[CornbreadOracle]

My guess would be that many of the major democrat candidates are wearing designer clothes given to them by the designers. I know celebrities get that treatment so that the designers' clothes are seen, and since most of Hollywood (which would include big name celebrity designers) are leftists, it makes sense that they'd outfit their favorite candidates. It's a mutually beneficial relationship.

So, I doubt Hillary bought those ugly pantsuits. I bet they were given to her.

 

[Caligirl]

Haven't heard about Cindy one way or the other, but the whole problem is Sarah didn't buy the cloths, the RNC donors did.

Some are fiscal conservatives and have asked for their donations back.

 

[busara]

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

 

[del]

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.

it's not her money; it's RNC money, i think. this is every bit as important as the debunked lobster story, IMO, but i could be wrong.

i'm more concerned about what my next 401(k) statement is gonna look like, than this petty bullshit. yikes!

 

[elvis]

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

if that's the case, damnit.

 

[CornbreadOracle]

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.

No, the problem is that people don't give her credit for buying her wardrobe instead of accepting it as a gift from some designer. The simple act of buying her own wardrobe means two things: she is beholden to one less "donor" to the campaign AND she's putting money back into the economy.

Go, Sarah, Go!!!!

 

[Caligirl]

Not with her money though, she is buying it with your money.

Not much of a role model.

 

[elvis]

Not with her money though, she is buying it with your money.

Not much of a role model.

if the suits meant the difference between your candidate winning and losing, would you want your money back?

 

[Red Dawn]

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.

I totally understand. Its kind of not fair.

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..

Bingo!

 

[CornbreadOracle]

Not with her money though, she is buying it with your money.

Not much of a role model.

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.

 

[Caligirl]

I totally understand. Its kind of not fair.

It's *totally* not fair, you guys never get to go on shopping sprees with your girlfriends.

 

[Caligirl]

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.

 

[CornbreadOracle]

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.

Sure, there are probably a lot of expenditures that would cross the line for me. Clothes and airline tickets, however, ain't it.

As for Palin's choice not to buy American -- sure we have excellent designers, but sometimes just because it fits doesn't mean it fits you. As a woman, you know what I mean. Maybe there isn't an American designer that suits her taste -- who knows? Who cares? Taste in clothes is a very personal thing and I am not about to quarrel with it.