Wednesday, October 22, 2008

Fashionably hypocritical

Do you remember a week or so back when McCain's Vagina waltzed into an Ohio Wal-Mart under the pretense of buying some diapers for her baby-prop, Trapdoor or Pygmallion or whatever the hell his name is*?

Remember how some conservatives gushed that this proved that she was an average, everyday mom because she got off the Straight Talk Express to buy store-brand? The implication was that name-brand nappies were too extravagant to catch the poops of a baby whose mom was so frugal as Alaskan governor that she fired her chef and put her her plane on eBay.

"She's a regular person," McCain has insisted. But this morning the news is telling a different story.

Apparently, Palin's clothing and personal stylist have set the GOP back a cool $150,000. That's right. One hundred fifty followed by three zeros. I know a lot of truly average people who'd like to have that kind of money; if they did I bet they wouldn't spend it on over-priced make-up and clothes, either. I know I wouldn't. That's enough to pay for a year of insurance coverage, buy a modest house or fund two years at a state college for two students.

I was genuinely surprised to see a female anchor on MSNBC defend Palin this morning. "It cost a lot of money for a woman in the public eye to look good!" she protested.

It's a good thing the kids weren't awake, because I was up and out of my chair when I heard that.

"Not that much, you stupid bitch!" I yelled, gesticulating at the television as I did. And then I cursed some more when I realized I'd managed to spill my coffee while attempting to flip off some news anchor who couldn't even see me.

The anchor pointed out that Obama's suits aren't cheap and on that point I agree. But I bet it hasn't cost that much. And the McCain campaign is showing its true colors by selling Palin as an average hockey mom while spending more on five weeks worth of clothes than most working mothers make in a year.

If Palin was able to turn down a plane and a chef because they were too extravagant, why has she suddenly become unable to turn down nearly $4,7000 of hair and make-up services - nearly $1,000 each week of the campaign - on the grounds that it was excessive? The MSNBC anchor complained that its the handlers fault. They're making her do this. So why not go all Super-Maverick on them and Just Say No? If Palin can't stand up to her campaign handlers, how is she going to stand up to Congress?

The McCain campaign is in a snit over the criticism. They contend that they were going to donate the clothes to a charity after the campaign, but it seems to me that given the depreciation of their purchases, a wiser route would have been for Palin to put that GOP money where her mouth is, pick up something from Wal-Mart or Target and donate what the campaign handlers wanted to spend to a children's charity.

Is this how a fiscal watchdog behaves? Or is this pitbull with lipstick only satisfied with lipstick that's part of an over-priced makeover? If her past record is any indication, the answer is 'yes.' As mayor of Wasilla, she spent $50,000 in unauthorized city funds to redecorate her office.

Of course, there's an upside to all of this. For me. With each passing day, a little more information comes out that raises Palin's negatives and broadens Obama's lead in the polls. McCain deserves a defeat for hanging this bimbo-shaped millstone around his wrinkled neck. Maybe he should let her keep the clothes. I'm all for Palin getting some lovely parting gifts so long as we never have to see her again.

*I refer to the baby as a prop because many of us still doubt it's hers.


Andrea said...

You're shitting me...they really tried to act like she was buying fucking store brand diapers??

Ugh, I won't even bother...they're flatlining anyway.

"Trapdoor" was funny :) I've been meaning to ask you if you're following that whole saga with all those pregnancies. I haven't really looked into any discrepancies myself so I can't say.

Morgan said...

I know. Can you believe it? People will believe anything. I've stepped in puddles less shallow than a Palin supporter.

I'm so happy that they are, as you say, flatlining. McCain's going to pop a blood vessel before this is over.

You really need to go to where a thorough analysis is being done over the controversy surrounding Trig's birth. The blog there is EXCELLENT and I think before all is said and done there are going to be more surprises than one that come out of this campaign.

Anonymous said...

A bimbo-shaped millstone. Oh, I love that.

My ultraconservative family is defecating razor blades that I would have the temerity to actually vote for a black man, after having toed the party line for so long.

It's fun voting for somebody with a brain for a change. Try it. It feels goooooooood...


Andrea said...

How does Palin running around talking shit while being dressed in Valentino make her a "real American?" How am I what's wrong with the country and she is what's right?

We may never know the truth about the kids. Palin seems to be a fan of having records changed after the fact.

Morgan said...

She's also a fan of Control. I've got a video on my blog under the post called, "Onward, Christian cheerleader" about how she surrounded herself with appointees from her church.

It borders on creepy.

Andrea said...

Yeah, I watched it...her church took control of the hospital board, right?

Have you checked today? They've added more of God's marvelous creations in the closet, and Roe v. Wade is in a particular office staple (guess which one).

Andrea said...

Back to this post - wouldn't the truly maverick thing for Palin to do have been to say "No thanks, this stuff is way too expensive. Let's use something more modest and sensible and it will look just as fine (plus we'll score MASSIVE political points)." Why didn't she do that?

Fiscal conservative my ass.

Remember when Edwards was flamebroiled for getting $300 haircuts?

Morgan said...

Jim, I've got family members who won't vote for Obama simply because of is race. I can't do anything about their entrenched ignorance, but I can volunteer to (hopefully) help N.C. swing towards Obama. I would be *thrilled* to rub it in the face of all my dumb-ass neighbors who are voting for McCreepy.

I signed up to volunteer to drive people to the polls for early voting!

Morgan said...

OMG. Andrea, I had NOT seen the animals in Palin's closet. I just shot them all. Twice. Maybe I would make a good Republican after all.

I'd already seen the Roe v. Wade decision in the shredder, but I'd somehow missed the additions to her closet.

It's interesting that her church took control of the board of Mat-Su General Hospital which was also where she allegedly gave birth to Trig.

I think the reason Palin didn't protest the clothing and hair expenses is because she's as vain as she is power-hungry.

JohnR said...

"because she's as vain as she is power-hungry."

Gee, imagine that from a politician.

ALL politicians play at being an average person and Americans demand it. It goes to the heart of American anti-intellectualism.

No one wants someone better than they are running things.

I still think Barak Hussein Mao Stalin Hitler Pol Pot Ayers BTK Killer John Wayne Gacy Susan Smith Caley's Mom Obama is going to win though.

Christopher said...

I still think Barak Hussein Mao Stalin Hitler Pol Pot Ayers BTK Killer John Wayne Gacy Susan Smith Caley's Mom Obama is going to win though.
Yep. Beats having Anti-Semite Wife-Leaving Pro-Torture Gay-Bashing Terrorist-Supporting John McCain in the White House.

JohnR said...

Lighten up, Francis

JohnR said...

Oh and it should be John Anti-Semite Wife-Leaving Pro-Torture Gay-Bashing Terrorist-Supporting Doesn't Know How Many Houses He Has Keating 5 I'm Not George Bush McCain.

Morgan said...

Not me, JohnR. I *do* want someone better than I am running the country. And by "better than I am" I mean more educated in foreign affairs, more knowledgeable about the constitution, more diplomatic (that'll be easy), more judicious, more inspiring.

I'm suspect of people who say they want someone who is a regular Joe. I look to the left and right of me down the road from our little farm and I see average Joes on both side. There's the average Joe who starves his hunting dog and the average Joe who admits never having read a book in his life.

The average person isn't fit to lead; that's why we have this exhaustive, grueling process. It's supposed to vet and test candidates to gauge who is the best. It's supposed to. But if we lower the standard because our criteria for leadership has now become who'd be the most fun at the bar with us then God help the nation.

And to both JohnR and Christopher I prefer
Barack Hussein Snob-face Left Wing Fist-Bump Wright-Way Peter-Robbing Paul-Paying Socialist Obama
John Post-Traumatic Creepy-Grin Loose Cannon Redneck-Pandering Wife-Leaving Gold-Digging War-Mongering McCain

So chill, guys. You two are like oil and water, I think.

JohnR said...

Nice sentiments Morgan but look who we got.

Neither candidate fits your profile.

Using your immediate neighbors is not a good barometer. You must know that Obama has just as many ignorant supporters as your McCain-loving neighbors.

I believe you said you supported Ron Paul which makes your support of Obama a little baffling as he is the exact opposite of Paul.

Obama is going to be as war-mongering as Bush and McCain. He will not withdraw troops from Iraq or Afghanistan.

Obama will barely win the election but he will not unite the country and he will be a disappointment to his base. Heaven on Earth will not appear.

As for Christopher, he just doesn't have a sense of humor.

Morgan said...

JohnR, I've watched all the debates and have found myself impressed with Obama. Impressed, in fact, to the point that I've volunteered to drive voters to early voter sites.

And you've never heard me say that voting in Obama will usher in Heaven on Earth, so please stop trying to put words in my mouth.

Per ignorant voters, I'm going to disagree with you. Sorry, but I think when it comes to the absolute bottom-of-the-barrel stupid white trash vote McCain has a death grip on that particular block. Did you even watch the videos I posted of the Paln supporters? I mean, this is how these people think, John.

Temperament matters. Discourse matters. Especially during these trying times. McCain rants and spews the same lines over and over again. Palin is shrill and provocative as she stirs the pork rind and chewing tobacco crowd. They are ALREADY trying to further divide the country. Palin said people in small towns are more patriotic.

And you really, really need to look at that Wasilla Project video I posted on her religious beliefs. JohnR, we do NOT need that kind of mentality in the White House.

Ron Paul was the only person on the stage who made any sense to me, and he favored getting the hell out of Iraq. Obama's position is a lot closer to Paul's than McCain's is.

And bottom line we have a choice. Do we want a reasoned man who has studied the constitution or continuation of leadership from a party that's wiped its collective ass with that document?

It's a no-brainer for me. And while the next four, eight, twelve years are still going to be tough for this country I think Obama will do a better job rebuilding our relationship with the rest of the world. We aren't an island, John. Like it or not we can't keep thumbing our nose at the rest of the world and then turn around and ask for cooperation.

And I think Chris does have a sense of humor. I just don't think he likes you. ;-)

I can't do anything about that. I like you both.

JohnR said...

Ignorant voters, like the Obama supporters who like his choice of Palin as VP or agree with his policy which is the exact opposite of his actual policy. They know nothing except a black guy is running for President, so he has their vote.

You have heard that clip, right.

Didn't claim you thought Obama would bring HOV. Don't put words in my mouth.

I believe McCain, Obama, and Paul have all read the Constitution.

The problem is that only Paul agrees with it. I have heard nothing out of Obama's mouth that says he actually agrees with it.

Obama voted to continue funding the war. If he was so principled, why didn't he vote against it?

Obama is the exact opposite of Paul.

You are right about Obama being articulate but so are $500 a night whores.

They do have to tell the client what he wants to hear.

Morgan said...

There are ignorant voters on both sides, but there are more people who will vote against Obama because he is black and don't want to see a black man rise to that level of power.

Oddly enough, I know some blacks who are leery of Obama because they seem him as not black enough and that's sad. The GOP have been used to the sterotypical hate-mongering blacks like Jackson and Sharpton, JohnR. They don't have that with Obama and the likes of racist politicians - and I put Bill Clinton in that category with his post S.C. primary slam - find themselves with a racially unconventional candidate with broad appeal and ability to communicate across racial, gender and party lines.

Per your slam at Obama's eloquence, it doesn't surprise me that the "whore" comment is the best you could come up with. High class whores may well-spoken people, but not all well-spoken people are high class whores.

What is it with this suspicion of people who are able to actually communicate? There seems to be some real hostility among conservative over folks who use all them big words.

And I don't see any contradiction with Obama's opposition to the war and vote to fund it. He opposed it when it was unpopular, which was a risk. Then he funded it when he knew it would anger his base - another risk.

It was a huge mistake to invade Iraq, but we are there now and until the troops come home we can't leave them without the tools they need to do their job. If you can't understand the difference I can't really help you.

But hey, John R. Keep your fingers crossed. Maybe McCain will get in. Then if he dies Palin will be president. She doesn't even know enough of the constitution to tell you what the Vice President does. She thinks the VP RULES THE SENATE!!! Would you please check your copy and tell me where it says that?

I love the way you are so rabid over Obama, JohnR. It honestly tickles me. You claim to support neither man but you can't stop harping on Obama. I wonder why that is. Sort of....

Christopher said...

As for Christopher, he just doesn't have a sense of humor.
I do have a sense of humor, and I can usually detect sarcasm. As Morgan pointed out, though, JohnR, you claim to think Obama and McCain are equally bad, but you never paint McCain as the embodiment of evil that you jokingly claim Obama is. You just say he's the opposite side of the same coin, although, if Obama is really that horrible, it makes sense that you'd go easy on someone who was his opposite.

Morgan said...

Christopher, that's just what I was driving at. I don't want to accuse JohnR of being infected with White Libertarian Black Fear, but I do have to wonder.

And I mean no offense, John, but your imbalance on this is kind of glaring.

Christopher said...

Oh yeah, and it may be that we're really more like oil and oil instead of oil and water. If I were an oil I'd probably be olive oil. You know--low smoke point, and bad about starting grease fires. ;)

Morgan said...

I'm patchouli oil.

Grace said...

Hi Morgan, I was having some issues with my other blog site so I will be here now my blog is titled is sea scribes. I will continue to follow your writing and thoughts. Cheers and have a great week.
Caroline Grace

Morgan said...

Caroline, I will change the link on my blogroll. Thanks for letting me know. I love your writing!

JohnR said...

Christopher: Per McCain as the embodiment of evil. It is self-evident, so why do I need to point it out.

If there were any big McCain supporters here, you would see comments regarding his volatile anger, judgment, and general unfitness for office. No one has said any good about McCain and neither have I.

And Ron Paul is the opposite of Obama, not McCain. I am a Ron Paul supporter and I will be writing his name in when I go to vote.

Morgan: He does speak beautifully and he has mastered the political art of speaking without actually saying anything of substance. He communicates nothing. I could read those speeches.

Obama voted to fund the war.

Every Iraqi killed by errant American bombs has McCain's and Obama's name of it (and everyone who voted yes) and they both have equally bloody hands. His votes were based on political expediency, not principle.

You do understand I don't want either party in office, right?

I do not relish a McCain/Palin administration any more than I do a Obama/Biden administration.

If I'm hysterical about Obama, you are stark, raving mad about Palin. I don't know what a liberal version of the Antichrist would be, but that is Palin to you.

At least I am not sending links to Obama conspiracy websites who are determined to prove Trig is not her baby. That is almost on par with Jew/Catholic conspiracy types.

Oh, and nice play of the race card. If everyone who disagrees with Obama is a racist, he will be a one-term president. Calling racist more than anything will drive voters away from him if he gets a chance for a second term.

I disagree with his polices, what little he has articulated, not his skin color.

Morgan said...

Palin isn't smart enough to be the antichrist, JohnR. If I attack this woman it is because she is the most dangerously stupid VP nominee in history. And. You. Know. It.

And you're again wrong about the war funding and I'll tell you why. Obama was opposed to attacking a nation that had done nothing to us because he knew it put many lives at risk - the lives of our soldiers, the lives of the people they'd fight and the innocent civilians caught in the crossfire. But he also knows that once we were there, his first loyalty had to be to the troops OF HIS NATION, which is why this argument that he's not patriotic isn't going to fly with people like me who actually think these things through.

Obama realizes it's not the military's fault that it was sent into a flawed war he voted against. But as I said and I stand by this - until they are home they have to be funded.

If you can't see the difference between McCain's vote to send troops into a stupid war and Obama's vote to fund them so they'll be safe until they come home then I'm afraid I'm reasoning with someone below my pay grade.

And the first line of your response is suspect. I like you, JohnR, but I'm not prepared to buy your argument that you bash Obama here because I'm pro-Obama. I suspect you don't see McCain the way you see Obama.

Could you please direct me a pro-McCain blog where you've expended the same amount of energy and passion against McCain as you have here against Obama?

I'm willing to offer you an apology if you're willing to provide evidence that what you've said here about your impartiality is true.

Morgan said...

On, and per that conspiracy Web site regarding Palin, you might actually want to read the top two posts today, provided you are willing to actually think critically about the possibility that the curious circumstances around Trig's birth might actually have some merit.

You may find the post written by a physician about the special challenges and needs of a Down's Syndrome delivery enlightening in light of Palin's decision to fly back from Texas eight hours after her water allegedly broke, bypass all major medical centers upon landing and drive out to a rural medical center to have the baby delivered by someone who is NOT an OB-GYN slightly suspicious.

Unless of course, good judgement and/or honesty isn't a requirement for your candidate. In that case, don't let me interrupt you as you stick your head back in the sand. ;-)

Grace said...

Thanks Morgan you rock!!!! Have a super slinkster cool amazing day!

Morgan said...

Thanks, Grace!
Sinkster cool amazing days are my favorite!

Anonymous said...

Hey, check out this link from the New York Times.

Trig may use store brand diapers - at least when the cameras are watching - but other than that, he needs clothes from a fancy-schmancy boutique. Paid for by campaign funds, of course. No Walmart for this tyke.

From the New York Times+

*There was similar confusion when The Caucus spoke with Jon and Wing Witthuhn, owners of Pacifier, a high-end children’s boutique in Minneapolis, where records show two charges of $98, one at Pacifier’s downtown location and another at its store in the northeast part of the city.

Mr. Witthuhn clearly recalled one of the $98 charges because it was the night of Sept. 3, just hours before Ms. Palin’s speech at the Republican National Convention. A woman burst into his store, he recalled, saying she needed outfits for several children, including a 6-month-old boy. Mr. Witthuhn explained they did not carry clothes beyond toddler age but helped her pick out a blue-striped convertible romper by Egg Baby ($60), a matching monkey-ear hat ($32) and Trumpette baby socks ($6).

After the woman explained her shopping was related to the convention and paid with a credit card number she read off of a Blackberry, it dawned on Mr. Witthuhn that he was potentially helping to outfit one of the country’s most famous infants—Trig Palin, Ms. Palin’s youngest.*

Morgan said...

$100 on baby clothes???

That makes me almost as sick as Palin's personal wardrobe choices. The kid's just going to drool on them and then outgrow them in two weeks. Who in the *hell* spends $100 on baby clothes?

This whole thing just gets sicker and sicker. And you're so right; the irony of her buying Wal-Mart diapers and then dressing that kid in $100 baby clothes just goes to show that image is all these people care about.

laughingwolf said...

i have one gripe, and that's with chris: you, of all folk here, should know, SEMITES are composed of a lot more than just jews, and include arabs

it's time ALL clowns out there QUIT equating 'anti-semites' as exclusively 'anti-jews'!

it's a non-sequitur...


laughingwolf said...

where the hell is my post? grrrrrrrrr

laughingwolf said...

ok... did not meet your approval....

Morgan said...

No, no, no. It's not that. I promise. I just have moderation settings on for posts older than three days because otherwise I forget to look at older posts and would let things go unread.

But I forgot to go to Dashboard and check for new comments to older posts, so I guess I defeated my own purpose.

You know your comments are ALWAYS good, Wuff.

Andrea said...

Um, that's a pretty technical gripe. Yes, Semitic people includes Jews and Arabs...but it's commonly understood that "anti-Semitic" refers to Jews. You know, like "gay" commonly means something other than "happy as a lark."

Morgan, I didn't realize you were moderating comments on old posts, but it probably is a good idea.