‘Some acts’ and ‘almost universally’ are far from the same thing.
Yea who cares, you can’t smell their crotches on TV anyway right?
Look, I don’t disagree that her clothing went overboard, but there is a lot more to it and it happens in nearly all Presidential campaigns.
You can retool this comment to yourself as well.
If it makes you feel better I’ll change ‘almost universal’ to ‘a metric fuckton of acts’
In what regard?
My point is simply that you claimed it was almost universal. One cite you provided said that it was some acts and another named 3 specific ones that were considered ‘memorable’. That makes it sound to me like it is an unusual thing.
I suspect Edwards paid for his own damn haircut. Cindy McCain wore enough jewelry during the convention to bail out AIG, but it was hers and no one objected.
It was a campaign promise. I could care fuck-all about how much money the RNC wasted decorating her, and whether or not they violated campaign finance rules.
You stand in front of the American People and make a specific declaration of your intentions regarding these clothes, you damn well follow through. It shouldn’t take weeks of pressuring from the media to get you to do it either.
If the McCain/Palin campaign wasn’t simply an exercise in dishonesty, this whole issue would have been taken care of with a 5 second statement to the press on Nov 5. “Ms. Palin’s campaign wardrobe will be auctioned off to benefit the March of Dimes on December 15, at the Waldorf Astoria, NYC.” Of course, nobody in the campaign actually intended to follow through, the whole charity auction concept was a throwaway statement in an attempt to deflect criticism.
He had two of those $400 haircuts paid for by the campaign as well as a $250 visit to a day spa.
He used the same hairdresser he always does, why the campaign paid for those two instead of him I don’t know.
Um, what? Even if they were so busy that they couldn’t send off their laundry (and if this is the case, a small baby with special needs had no business being in this environment), surely Palin isn’t so damn broke she couldn’t buy some Hanes and Fruit of the Looms with her own credit card. And what about Todd? What kind of man accepts free underwear when he’s fully able to buy his own?
I hate to do this, but CITE? If this was par for the course, it wouldn’t be in the news. And Obama and McCain would also be laughing stocks because they would be just as guilty.
Do I need to cite $ 400 haircuts by John Edwards? I mean I’m not going to go all investigative journalist for some tit for tat BS on this forum.
Weeks eh? From where I’m sitting the election was last week. I think 7 days of busy schedules is not such a big deal to get this stuff dealt with. Maybe she’d have more time to go through the clothing if she wasn’t having a microphone thrust in her face asking her about it every day. 
I’m sure she’ll sort it out telekinetically from Miami for you though.
Of course because all of this is just the campaign meltdown where disgruntled employees speak out of school. It’s a pretty common occurence.
When something is specifically called out as memorable, it does to me.
Then why didn’t you just say that the first time someone questioned your use of ‘almost universal’?
I’m wondering if Mr. mswas started seeing starbursts during the debate…
-Joe
In my viewing of riders I’ve seen it fairly commonly. shrugs YMMV The links I posted also talked about how it’s not uncommon.
I did.
I consistently overestimate the intelligence of this board. I thought my sarcastic quip about semiotics and superlatives would get the point across. I guess I was wrong.
Oh, I didn’t realize that they had scheduled the auction already. When is it?
Even if we accept that a service and a tangible good are the same thing, do you not really see the difference between giving something to the candidate and giving something to the candidate’s familial entourage?
A better analogy would be if John Edwards’ wife and kids also got $400 haircuts and spa treatment. If you can find evidence of something like this (bonus points if it happened with impunity), then you will be successfully defending Palin.
Perhaps just say what you mean next time, I know I would appreciate it.
So you keep saying, but you have yet to offer evidence.
And the reaction of the RNC puts to lie the notion that this sort of thing happens in nearly all Presidential campaigns.
“Country first”, eh, Sarah?
There are suggestions that a candidate has received something worth $150,000, ultimately paid by political donors. There is plenty of fluff in the story. I don’t care who picked them out. I don’t care if it’s Saks Fifth Avenue or L.L. Bean. I don’t care if it’s baby jumpers, home renovations, or cash in the freezer. But there are laws against politicans receiving “gifts”, because we don’t want the giver to come back later and expect a private favor from a public servant. It’s not “prurient recreational outrage” to make sure politicians meet their ethical and legal responsibilities.
All she has to do is find the clothes, make sure they (or the proceeds from their sale) go to a reputable charity, and you’ll hear no more about it from me.
Then you’re lucky that some people are more diligent than you are about looking for cites:
Edwards reimburses campaign for haircuts
I don’t give a good goddamn if Palin wants to keep the clothes that the RNC bought for her, as long as she pays for them.
The campaign and the RNC were the ones who hastened to assure the public that all Palin’s new clothes would be sold for charity, because they were afraid that voters would be turned off by the lavishness of their spending when contrasted with Palin’s “simple hockey mom” image. And Palin’s the one who has repeatedly said that the clothes aren’t hers, they belong to the RNC.
So no, they don’t get to shrug it off now that the campaign’s over by pretending it’s a trivial matter that nobody cares about, and I think honest Republicans should be ashamed to encourage that kind of irresponsibility and unaccountability.