Sexism would be an odd charge… given the flak over Edwards and his manicures and his 400 dollar haircuts just a few years back.
Was it sexism when they did the same thing, FIRST, to a male candidate? Also a VP candidate, for that matter.

This is not so much about Sarah Palin, but actually much more about creating an image. Finding ways to influence people’s decision about who to vote for by wrapping the candidate in persuasive packaging. It says nothing about who Sarah truly is. If anything, it presents her in a disingenuous light.
I think its sad that the campaign would use this attention to bring up sexism. How is bringing the fact that the campaign is spending huge sums of money on a candidates appearance sexism? No doubt, sexism exists, but I don’t see it in the media’s reporting on her wardrobe expenditures.
Its shameful that Sarah and her family would accept this kind of treatment from the campaign. What was wrong with her own wardrobe? Doesn’t it change her image a little too much? Where are the Carhartts and steel toed boots? I think this campaign needs to allow Sarah to be Sarah, in her own wardrobe and all.

Palin should have left well enough alone. Another day talking about and explaining the $150,000 wardrobe and her highly paid makeup artist is another day those issues stay in the news, eating up the day’s news cycle. With nine days to go before election day, that’s a stupid move.
I’m amazed no one in the McCain campaign bothered to point this out.

It’s not sexism to point out that the Neiman Marcus Soccer Mom says one thing while her campaign and personal appearance say something profoundly different.

Like most of the others I don’t find the remarks about Palin’s wardrobe sexist…I do find them silly, whether they are from the left or from the un-named Republican who felt the money might be better spent. But, I also found Hasselbeck’s comments about the flag pin rather silly. Yes, Palin has one…so does Obama. Gee, people criticizing Palin did not comment about it, so that must make them against our troops and anti-Amercian. Do you think she really believes that? I guess there is enough political BS to go around on both sides.

The Bible would call it vanity! Michelle will not call sin-sin, when someone she worships does it. Edwards has a $400.00 haircut and you would thought democrats were full of greed by Michelle’s remarks. Again, the lack of even a very basic christian world view in this blog.

The country is in economic catastrophe. People are losing their life savings, their homes…
and they’re spending $150,000 to dress her?!
Some message they’re sending.

Scott: quick! How much do Obama’s suits cost and how many does he have?

I know that Obama buys his own clothes – and they even made a big deal of it.
The point is: why is it important? I remember what annoyed the folks I know about Edwards (and maybe Clinton as well) was that planes were held up on the runway so that he could get his hair done.

I’m no Palin fan, but I have no problem at all with Republican party funds going to Nieman Marcus on her behalf–in fact, I’d be in favor of $150,000,000 of McCain funds spent on her wardrobe, not just $150,000. As long as they aren’t tax dollars.

I think another question to ask would be how suitable was her personal wardrobe for traveling and being on the campaign trail?
parka’s and mukluks don’t really make it in the more southern states.
In perspective, Hillary Clinton’s pantsuits run around $6,000 a piece. Yes, she pays for them herself, but for a campaigning politician, money spent on clothing is part of the business.
No, tax payers shouldn’t be (and are not) paying for it.

This is important because it brings to light what a fraud she is. It is insulting that she would try to label herself as your typical hockey mom and than spend that kind of money on clothes. And not even her own money. I understand that she needed a practical wardrobe, and that she does not have the same wealth as all the other candidates, but WHY did they have to be so extravagant? Could she not have shopped at normal stores like real hockey moms and joe six packs do? I see no reason why her 7 year old daughter needs a Louis Vitton purse.

To put in perspective, Hillary Clinton’s pantsuits cost around $6,000 each. I don’t spend 1/3 of that on my entire wardrobe for a year.

MzEllen, you miss the gist again and again: hypocrisy. Nobody cares that Hillary’s suits cost $6,000, because she doesn’t go around calling everyone an elitist and pretending she’s a poor Jane 6-pack to manipulate voters. And as you said, she paid for them herself. (No, your dismissive mentioning of that doesn’t make the point disappear.) I might also add that $150,000 is a whole heck of a lot more than 6, especially considering it was spent in the span of 2 months. Not exactly a hockey mom’s budget.

I see no reason why her 7 year old daughter needs a Louis Vitton [sic] purse.
I don’t see a grown-up needing one! U-G-L-Y.

Gillian, how many pantsuits does Hillary own?
And it would seem that if the clothes are going to be given to charity, they are more like “on loan”.
Frankly, if Republicans donors are upset, they should call the campaign. If your money is not being spent (if you didn’t donate money) – why should it matter to you?
Just another reason to hate.

That came up AFTER this became news.
And I’m sure that woman digging through the bins at Sally’s is really going to appreciate a 3000 dollar couture blazer.
And you can’t ‘donate’ hair, makeup, and the services of a multi thousand a WEEK stylist. Sorry.. communications consultant.
Once again, it is about the claim she keeps making that she’s ‘just like us’. That ‘those guys over there’ are NOT ‘just like us’.
US.. don’t have 150 a YEAR, heck.. period, much less a month to spend on fashion.

As others have expressed here, the point is that Palin has presented herself as just an average working mom. Her stated income is way above what the average working woman makes(yes, I realize she is a governor), she has billed expenses that are at the least questionable, if not illegal. The plain fact is most politicians are wealthy, and they often use their personal money to run for office. This is not a Disney movie or My Fair Lady, where a poor woman is remade into a glamorous socialite. I can understand that she might need new clothing, but wouldn’t you think she has some from being governor? The Palins acted like shopaholics let loose in high end stores. You can’t say you are an average person, then go on a six figure buying binge, plus have a personal hairdress and makeup artist on the payroll and not have it come back to bite you. Hillary Clinton and the other politicians that are wealthy and able to purchase their own clothing are not going around saying they are hockey moms, etc.

Karen and the rest…is it your money, or is it mine, as a donor?
Or is it just another dose of PDS? (I’m thinking I need to take the next week off of politics. I’m getting weary of being called names for having a difference of opinion.)
Hypocrisy? 1) she’s not keeping the clothes (and yes, I know you’ve basically called the campaign a liar, but accusations such as that is nothing new) 2) she’s traveling and I know what it’s like to travel without enough clothes 3) it’s not your money!
All the liberals here…I think that Palin could breathe and it would come back to bite her.

wow, palin is just like a regular joe, huh? except for her champaign taste. i bet you can count on her to control spending in washington, right? right!? just another fascist trying to climb to the top of the republican party.
it’s one thing to spend her own money, but when her pockets are lined with other’s money, it’s so easy!

I still think a valid question would be how appropriate her wardrobe was for weeks worth of travel.
It’s the pits having to travel without appropriate clothing and enough clothing. Lots of money? sure. Do those who aren’t paying for it need to be bothers? Only with PDS.

Let’s try this again, Mizellen.
First, you can’t donate services or perishables. Much of that money is STILL being spent on a stylist costing thousands per WEEK.
Secondly, not in the exact order, but minor point. Not one person is complaining that it is ‘tax’ money or ‘our’ money.
Finally, they are noting that her actions are NOT matching her proclaimed persona. That of a ‘Jane Sixpack’. Her own term.
She actively called the other party’s candidates elitist. She claims to be ‘of the people’. Then she spends more than twice what any of them make in a year, in 30 days, on clothes and services.
It is, once again, about that DISCONNECT between what she says she is, and how she is behaving.
I’ve travelled more than most people. Sometimes without clothes. (Though why she would be traveling without clothes, I have no idea. It isn’t like this isn’t a planned trip.. My excuse was lost luggage.)
At no point did I spend over 100k at couture stores on traveling clothes.
And if you honestly think a single one of those purchases is an ‘Ack, I have no clothes, I must purchase stuff in a hurry’, that is a wee bit naive. It is the purchases of a stylist, likely personally fitted for her.
If she really wanted to do some good with her clothes, I’d (and this is seriously) suggest an auction, then donate the FUNDS to a charity. Once again, that woman searching through the racks at Goodwill or the Salvation Army certainly wants something nice, fits, and maybe even works for an office job.
If you ask her to choose between a 3k jacket, and 3k, though, guess what she’ll pick.

Oh, and someone who keeps saying others have PDS shouldn’t be complaining about being ‘weary of being called names’. I haven’t called you a single name.
You’ve said I’m deranged.

The Sarah Palin Clothing and Beautician Meltdown:
see Maureen Dowd’s awesome editorial
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/26/opinion/26dowd.html?em

Karen, I gather you don’t like the treatment that liberals give other commenters here? You might want to encourage them to play nice then.
Not that I expect much.

Karen, you’re right…that is why I usually back off at the point I am first called a name. The temptation to respond in kind can be tempting indeed. Sorry.

It’s interesting to note that the McCain campaign said that Palin’s remarks on her wardrobe, “were not the remarks we sent to her plane this morning”:
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/1008/Going_rogue.html?showall
Looks like she went off message and in the process managed to keep a story alive that the McCain camp would rather bury.

I accept the apology. And it can be /hard/ to apologize on these forums. Its anonymous, and tempers run high.
I do my best, and if I do personally insult you, please let me know.
As for ‘other liberals’, I won’t treat you based on what Guy says in his posts, if you agree to the same for me.

I think many people just take the situation at face value and say “I don’t care about her clothes when the economy is in trouble” but it is so important to recognize the message being sent by her actions. This reveals her character and how she would respond to the economic issues facing the middle class.