What's new
US Message Board 🦅 Political Discussion Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Romney spends 300$ on makeup

Truthmatters

Diamond Member
Joined
May 10, 2007
Messages
80,182
Reaction score
2,265
Points
1,283
OP
Truthmatters

Truthmatters

Diamond Member
Joined
May 10, 2007
Messages
80,182
Reaction score
2,265
Points
1,283
So was the Haircut story but that didnt stop the Media.
 

hjmick

Platinum Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2007
Messages
23,273
Reaction score
8,132
Points
910
Location
Charleston, SC
If the Kennedy-Nixon debate taught candidates anything at all, it was the power of good makeup, especially when on television.
 

Larkinn

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2007
Messages
5,598
Reaction score
174
Points
48
"because 'A' happened, it justifies 'B'"

Mit's and Edwards' situations aren't linked.

No. That is not a logical fallacy.

Here is a list of some of them for your pleasure. http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/

And by the way, why don't you think they are linked? They are both stories about politicians spending large sums of money making themselves more attractive. What do you think the defining difference is ?
 

dmp

Senior Member
Joined
May 12, 2004
Messages
13,088
Reaction score
746
Points
48
Location
Enterprise, Alabama
No. That is not a logical fallacy.

Here is a list of some of them for your pleasure. http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/

And by the way, why don't you think they are linked? They are both stories about politicians spending large sums of money making themselves more attractive. What do you think the defining difference is ?

That is a logical fallacy - and that's the page I sent to folk who fluster and buster on this site (and others).

"Dude lectures about 'Poverty' while living an obviously wealthy/extremely comfortable lifestyle - spending HUNDREDS of dollars on just a hair cut"

compared with

"Guy spends $300 on make-up."

My WIFE spends more than that, every year, on make up. It's really no big deal.
 

Larkinn

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2007
Messages
5,598
Reaction score
174
Points
48
That is a logical fallacy - and that's the page I sent to folk who fluster and buster on this site (and others).

"Dude lectures about 'Poverty' while living an obviously wealthy/extremely comfortable lifestyle - spending HUNDREDS of dollars on just a hair cut"

compared with

"Guy spends $300 on make-up."

My WIFE spends more than that, every year, on make up. It's really no big deal.

Consdering all the logical fallacies have names, please tell us which one it is.

By the way...if you know so much about logical fallacies, you should see what is wrong with the first one about "dude lectures about 'poverty'". Its called an Ad Hominem attack.
 

Gem

Rookie
Joined
Aug 11, 2004
Messages
2,080
Reaction score
783
Points
0
Make-up is a necessary part of any politician in an age in which every flaw is magnified on screen. As someone who had my make-up done for me for my 2001 wedding, $150 is not an extreme amount of money to pay for a personal make-up consultation by a professional make-up artist.

While I have no problem with the media showing us this information, I think that the difference lies in the fact that while $150 dollars isn't a lot for a makeup consultation (I would be very interested to see what the Kerry/Edwards campaign or any other campaign for that matter spends on makeup consultations)...$400 dollars is a lot for a men's haircut...especially when a politician is flying in a stylist (ahem...global warming) while lecturing about the evil of the wealthy exploiting the poor.
 

Larkinn

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2007
Messages
5,598
Reaction score
174
Points
48
Make-up is a necessary part of any politician in an age in which every flaw is magnified on screen. As someone who had my make-up done for me for my 2001 wedding, $150 is not an extreme amount of money to pay for a personal make-up consultation by a professional make-up artist.

While I have no problem with the media showing us this information, I think that the difference lies in the fact that while $150 dollars isn't a lot for a makeup consultation (I would be very interested to see what the Kerry/Edwards campaign or any other campaign for that matter spends on makeup consultations)...$400 dollars is a lot for a men's haircut...especially when a politician is flying in a stylist (ahem...global warming) while lecturing about the evil of the wealthy exploiting the poor.

It was $300 for makeup...not 150. Also, the stylist for Edwards was from LA. LA tends to be very expensive. As sad as it is, image and look plays a huge role in how the public responds to presidential candidates. I am sure each candidate spends thousands or tens of thousands of dollars on their look. Considering the guy is a stylist for Hollywood types, the price does not seem that surprising. Hell in NYC a decent guys haircut costs around $100...unfortunately.

*shrug* I personally don't find anything wrong with either action. They are merely jumping through the hoops that the public makes them jump through. Either don't judge them on their looks, or don't blame them when they spend tens of thousands of dollars on their looks.

As for your last point, that is just silly. If you really believe that, it will effectively eliminate anyone who wants to reduce poverty. Because to win an election, you have to campaign that way. Its sad, but its the reality.
 

dmp

Senior Member
Joined
May 12, 2004
Messages
13,088
Reaction score
746
Points
48
Location
Enterprise, Alabama
Consdering all the logical fallacies have names, please tell us which one it is.

You believe that list shows EVERY logical fallacy eh? And that statement is a dishonest. I never quantified my amount of knowledge of fallacies. I simply stated I know of Fallacies, and that site. YOU changed the implied meaning to say 'I know SOO MUCH about fallacies'. See there?

The guy above - to whom I replied implied "...If Edwards' hair cut is news, Mit's Make-up must be news, too!"

Has elements of division, and common practice.

By the way...if you know so much about logical fallacies, you should see what is wrong with the first one about "dude lectures about 'poverty'". Its called an Ad Hominem attack.

Because I called him a 'dude'? Really? That's the SINGLE WORST claim of Ad Hominem I've 'ever' read online. Try again.
 

Larkinn

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2007
Messages
5,598
Reaction score
174
Points
48
You believe that list shows EVERY logical fallacy eh? And that statement is a dishonest. I never quantified my amount of knowledge of fallacies. I simply stated I know of Fallacies, and that site. YOU changed the implied meaning to say 'I know SOO MUCH about fallacies'. See there?

Nope, I don't. However every logical fallacy has a name. If its not up there , I'm sure you can find it somewhere.

If you know the site, you should know what an Ad Hominem attack is, as it is one of the most common and annoying attacks used. It is especially common in political attacks.

The guy above - to whom I replied implied "...If Edwards' hair cut is news, Mit's Make-up must be news, too!"

Has elements of division, and common practice.

No, actually thats NOT what he implied. Read what he said again.

Because I called him a 'dude'? Really? That's the SINGLE WORST claim of Ad Hominem I've 'ever' read online. Try again.

No. Not because you called him dude. Because you implied that his statements about poverty were false/misleading/shouldn't be listened too because of a fact about him.
 
OP
Truthmatters

Truthmatters

Diamond Member
Joined
May 10, 2007
Messages
80,182
Reaction score
2,265
Points
1,283
"because 'A' happened, it justifies 'B'"

Mit's and Edwards' situations aren't linked.


Yes they are linked , they are both under scrutiny while running for fucking president.

Buy a clue.
 

Gem

Rookie
Joined
Aug 11, 2004
Messages
2,080
Reaction score
783
Points
0
Larkinn Wrote:
It was $300 for makeup...not 150.
You need to re-read the article.
Romney paid $150 for a makeup session. He had requested two, but canceled one of them. He paid for it anyway. Hence, $300. Edwards paid $400 for each of his haircuts...a total of $800.

Also, the stylist for Edwards was from LA. LA tends to be very expensive. As sad as it is, image and look plays a huge role in how the public responds to presidential candidates. I am sure each candidate spends thousands or tens of thousands of dollars on their look. Considering the guy is a stylist for Hollywood types, the price does not seem that surprising. Hell in NYC a decent guys haircut costs around $100...unfortunately.

Absolutely...of course, one might counter with the fact that Edwards candidacy is based in no small part, on his continued insistence that he is just a simple man who takes his wife to Wendy's on their anniversary. This is hard image to maintain when he is flying his personal L.A. stylist around the country to give him the best possible hair cut. Additionally...while Romney hasn't made any public statements regarding the excess of the wealthy or the growing gap between the haves and the have-nots...he isn't as open to criticism for his $150 make-up as Edwards leaves himself for his $400 haircut.

(Not to mention the fact that the many, many Americans likely believe that Edwards hair cut is not a particularly complicated one...he would not have trouble finding a local stylist to give him a cut...rather than flying someone halfway around the nation while he lectures them on taxes and which lightbulbs to use)

*shrug* I personally don't find anything wrong with either action. They are merely jumping through the hoops that the public makes them jump through. Either don't judge them on their looks, or don't blame them when they spend tens of thousands of dollars on their looks.

I agree with you. I think that both of them have the right to spend money however they choose. If Edwards spends his campaign money on a haircut (he later paid out of pocket in an attempt to deflect criticism) and you don't like it...don't give to his campaign. If Romney's makeup fees bother you...vote for the sweaty, shiny candidate.

At the same time however, if Romney comes out tomorrow and asks Americans to cut back on their frivolous spending...or tries very hard to peg himself as a "everyman" and then flies his favorite makeup artist to North Dakota for a touch up...I might roll my eyes a bit...just like I do when Edwards and his "I'm just the son of a poor mill worker" card.

As for your last point, that is just silly. If you really believe that, it will effectively eliminate anyone who wants to reduce poverty. Because to win an election, you have to campaign that way. Its sad, but its the reality.

Of course its silly to say that because someone gets a $400 haircut they can't care about the poor. But they may want to be careful when they are speaking to people who CAN'T afford a $400 haircut about what they should do...and they might want to think about how they portray themselves...because continually playing up the "oh, i'm just an average joe" while spending money on things most Americans can't imagine just doesn't ring true.
 
  • Thanks
Reactions: dmp

dmp

Senior Member
Joined
May 12, 2004
Messages
13,088
Reaction score
746
Points
48
Location
Enterprise, Alabama
Nope, I don't. However every logical fallacy has a name. If its not up there , I'm sure you can find it somewhere.

If you know the site, you should know what an Ad Hominem attack is, as it is one of the most common and annoying attacks used. It is especially common in political attacks.

It's clear you do not understand what Ad Hominem is, as your usage was horrible.


No, actually thats NOT what he implied. Read what he said again.

....right...as justification of the 'news'....because 'the media covered the HAIR CUT....

No. Not because you called him dude. Because you implied that his statements about poverty were false/misleading/shouldn't be listened too because of a fact about him.

No I didn't. I said He spoke about 'poverty' - while he makes no apologies for his affluent lifestyle. It's not Ad Homenem, it's pointing out the OBVIOUS Irony. It's like asking Barry Bonds to speak on "how to hit Home Runs without Steriods."

The ONLY problem with Mit's MakeUp (How long before it's called "MakeUpGate"? would be if he were lecturing about how Women should NOT be driven by the beauty industry - even when on TV, women should go natural.



No
 

Larkinn

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2007
Messages
5,598
Reaction score
174
Points
48
Larkinn Wrote:

You need to re-read the article.
Romney paid $150 for a makeup session. He had requested two, but canceled one of them. He paid for it anyway. Hence, $300. Edwards paid $400 for each of his haircuts...a total of $800.

Fair enough. Although in a counter-point (mostly for fun) the $150 was for "We basically put a drop of foundation on him … and we powdered him a little bit." "

Absolutely...of course, one might counter with the fact that Edwards candidacy is based in no small part, on his continued insistence that he is just a simple man who takes his wife to Wendy's on their anniversary. This is hard image to maintain when he is flying his personal L.A. stylist around the country to give him the best possible hair cut. Additionally...while Romney hasn't made any public statements regarding the excess of the wealthy or the growing gap between the haves and the have-nots...he isn't as open to criticism for his $150 make-up as Edwards leaves himself for his $400 haircut.

I agree that it opens him up to criticism, but I think it is silly. This is because it essentially implies that someones personal beliefs must line up with the things necessary to do to run for president.

(Not to mention the fact that the many, many Americans likely believe that Edwards hair cut is not a particularly complicated one...he would not have trouble finding a local stylist to give him a cut...rather than flying someone halfway around the nation while he lectures them on taxes and which lightbulbs to use)

Again...considering Americans pay a huge deal of attention to appearance, he would not have trouble finding someone, but thats not the point. He needs it done extaordinarily well...because it matters a LOT how candidates look.

At the same time however, if Romney comes out tomorrow and asks Americans to cut back on their frivolous spending...or tries very hard to peg himself as a "everyman" and then flies his favorite makeup artist to North Dakota for a touch up...I might roll my eyes a bit...just like I do when Edwards and his "I'm just the son of a poor mill worker" card.

Its not frivolous is the thing. Its necessary for the goal he is trying to achieve...that is achieving the nomination for US president.

Of course its silly to say that because someone gets a $400 haircut they can't care about the poor. But they may want to be careful when they are speaking to people who CAN'T afford a $400 haircut about what they should do...and they might want to think about how they portray themselves...because continually playing up the "oh, i'm just an average joe" while spending money on things most Americans can't imagine just doesn't ring true.

Well then any candidate who speaks against poverty "won't ring true". Which in my eyes is a terrible terrible shame. Which is why I allow candidates to do what they think is necessary on the campaign trail, as long as its not unethical or immoral.
 

Larkinn

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2007
Messages
5,598
Reaction score
174
Points
48
It's clear you do not understand what Ad Hominem is, as your usage was horrible.

Incorrect.

....right...as justification of the 'news'....because 'the media covered the HAIR CUT....

I take it you didn't go back and read what he said.

Alright then I will spell it out for you. He said that this, like Edwards, was a non-story. Not that this should be covered because Edwards was covered, but that NEITHER should have been covered.

No I didn't. I said He spoke about 'poverty' - while he makes no apologies for his affluent lifestyle. It's not Ad Homenem, it's pointing out the OBVIOUS Irony. It's like asking Barry Bonds to speak on "how to hit Home Runs without Steriods."

You are attacking HIM, not what he is saying.
 

USMB Server Goals

Total amount
$295.00
Goal
$350.00

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top