WWTBAM Bored

No, I'm not talking about her new $150K wardrobe. Well, maybe I am. Because if the RNC is forking over all that dough for snazzy duds, don't you think they might not want to spend it on a scarf that encourages people to vote . . . for Democrats?

http://jezebel.com/5067233/is-sarah-pal ... of-herself

I have been searching the Internet (very briefly, as I'm at work) for evidence that there are elephants on this scarf, which would at least make it bipartisan, but all I can find are donkeys, donkeys, and more donkeys.

Can another Obama endorsement be far behind?

Annie posted yesterday that she had concluded the scarf depicted horses "drawn by Evil Squirrel." I trust her, as Annie knows her four-footers.

JBillyGirl wrote:No, I'm not talking about her new $150K wardrobe. Well, maybe I am. Because if the RNC is forking over all that dough for snazzy duds, don't you think they might not want to spend it on a scarf that encourages people to vote . . . for Democrats?

http://jezebel.com/5067233/is-sarah-pal ... of-herself

I have been searching the Internet (very briefly, as I'm at work) for evidence that there are elephants on this scarf, which would at least make it bipartisan, but all I can find are donkeys, donkeys, and more donkeys.

Can another Obama endorsement be far behind?

sigh

sweetie, elephants on a scarf makes ones cankles look fat

Maybe they're mules... half horse, half donkey.

I don't know what's on her scarf, but that looks like one of those terrorist scarves that Michelle Malkin claimed that Rachael Ray wore in that Dunkin' Donuts ad.

NellyLunatic1980 wrote:Maybe they're mules... half horse, half donkey.

I don't know what's on her scarf, but that looks like one of those terrorist scarves that Michelle Malkin claimed that Rachael Ray wore in that Dunkin' Donuts ad.

If you are gonna make fashion comments, get your scraves straight.

Those two scarves look nothing alike.

silvercamaro wrote:Annie posted yesterday that she had concluded the scarf depicted horses "drawn by Evil Squirrel." I trust her, as Annie knows her four-footers.

I don't think ES can draw horses that good.....

And certainly not asses......

lb13

littlebeast13 wrote:

silvercamaro wrote:Annie posted yesterday that she had concluded the scarf depicted horses "drawn by Evil Squirrel." I trust her, as Annie knows her four-footers.

I don't think ES can draw horses that good.....

And certainly not asses......

lb13

You are full-o-crap.

ES has drawn many of us asses really well.

peacock2121 wrote:

littlebeast13 wrote:

silvercamaro wrote:Annie posted yesterday that she had concluded the scarf depicted horses "drawn by Evil Squirrel." I trust her, as Annie knows her four-footers.

I don't think ES can draw horses that good.....

And certainly not asses......

lb13

You are full-o-crap.

ES has drawn many of us asses really well.

REC

At first I was angry about Palin. I thought Sen. Clinton's supporters were being played. I was wrong about that.

Then I was terrified. This anti-environment, anti-choice, porkbarrel-courting darling of the right wing could be a heartbeat away from the Presidency? I'm pretty sure I'm wrong about that -- I'm fairly confident that Sen. Obama will be our next President.

Now I feel sorry for her. She doesn't know that Republican scarves should have elephants on them? Heck, I'd put in a bid on that scarf, if it really does go to auction for "charitable purposes."

Donkey wrong: Sarah Palin wears 'Vote Democrat' scarf at Republican rally

By Gary Fennelly
Thursday, 23 October 2008

Hee haw: Sarah Palin is seen wearing a scarf emblazoned with donkeys at a rally in Nevada on Tuesday. The donkey has become the established political symbol for the Democratic Party.

Republican vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin has been photographed wearing a 'Vote Democrat' scarf at a rally in Nevada. The photographs show Ms Palin in Reno on Tuesday wearing the scarf emblazoned with donkeys and the words 'Yes' and 'Vote.' The donkey has become the established political symbol for the Democratic Party. Republicans are most commonly associated with the elephant.

Mr McCain's running-mate was criticised yesterday after it was revealed the Republican Party splurged $150,000 (£92,000) on her wardrobe in September alone. Under 'campaign accessories' figures show money was spent on Ms Palin's tailored jackets, pencil skirts and designer heels. Nearly $50,000 was spent at Saks Fifth Avenue and nearly $5,000 on hair and makeup.

“With all of the important issues facing the country right now, it’s remarkable that we’re spending time talking about pantsuits and blouses,” a McCain spokeswoman said.

JBillyGirl wrote:No, I'm not talking about her new $150K wardrobe. Well, maybe I am. Because if the RNC is forking over all that dough for snazzy duds, don't you think they might not want to spend it on a scarf that encourages people to vote . . . for Democrats?

http://jezebel.com/5067233/is-sarah-pal ... of-herself

I have been searching the Internet (very briefly, as I'm at work) for evidence that there are elephants on this scarf, which would at least make it bipartisan, but all I can find are donkeys, donkeys, and more donkeys.

Can another Obama endorsement be far behind?

OK, I feel even sorrier for her. The scarf looked a little off in the photos -- it wasn't attractively tied, or anything, so it seemed unlikely that it was part of the $150K shopping spree. What happened was, some ostensible supporter handed her the beautiful scarf as a gift in a greeting line, and it didn't occur to her exactly how off it would look.

I was hoping it would go in the charity bidding box, but I'm confident that it's ashes to ashes by now.

I can't feel sorry for her. Tried. Didn't work.

5LD wrote:I can't feel sorry for her. Tried. Didn't work.

I tried to feel sorry for Bush and for McCain; couldn't do it.

I think I'm able to bring it off for Palin because of the women hunters part -- we're in that same boat. We're also in the same boat of not being qualified to be VP of the U.S.

SportsFan68 wrote:

5LD wrote:I can't feel sorry for her. Tried. Didn't work.

I tried to feel sorry for Bush and for McCain; couldn't do it.

I think I'm able to bring it off for Palin because of the women hunters part -- we're in that same boat. We're also in the same boat of not being qualified to be VP of the U.S.

For me it's that they paid so much money in two months for clothes and over 22 grand for the services of a stylist/cosmetician during that same period when people are losing their houses and jobs and retirement savings, and then say we're sexist for bitching. And aren't they taking 84 million (taxpayer) dollars in matching funds to run the campaign in the first place? I don't want to hear "tax and spend" from someone like that.

Maybe he needs to stop surrounding himself with high-maintenance pageant veterans.

Hello, Mini! wrote: For me it's that they paid so much money in two months for clothes and over 22 grand for the services of a stylist/cosmetician during that same period when people are losing their houses and jobs and retirement savings, and then say we're sexist for bitching.

I have an image in my head of hard-working Joe the Plumber realizing that his $100 donation paid for a fifth of one of her pairs of pumps. It's not a nice image.

Hello, Mini! wrote:

SportsFan68 wrote:

5LD wrote:I can't feel sorry for her. Tried. Didn't work.

I tried to feel sorry for Bush and for McCain; couldn't do it.

I think I'm able to bring it off for Palin because of the women hunters part -- we're in that same boat. We're also in the same boat of not being qualified to be VP of the U.S.

For me it's that they paid so much money in two months for clothes and over 22 grand for the services of a stylist/cosmetician during that same period when people are losing their houses and jobs and retirement savings, and then say we're sexist for bitching. And aren't they taking 84 million (taxpayer) dollars in matching funds to run the campaign in the first place? I don't want to hear "tax and spend" from someone like that.

Maybe he needs to stop surrounding himself with high-maintenance pageant veterans.

You've GOT to be kidding? How much do you think Obama spent on fuel flying his personal 757 to Hawaii to 'visit his sick grandmother'? About $60,000 round trip (Chicago to HI). That doesn't include wear and tear on the plane, the crew, his Secret Service detail additional expenses, ect. Give me a break! And that used fuel can't be donated or auctioned off. It was just added to our global warming situation.

Oh wait. If forgot. It was Obama. So whatever is O.K.

Hello, Mini! wrote:And aren't they taking 84 million (taxpayer) dollars in matching funds to run the campaign in the first place?

No, they aren't.

BackInTex wrote:

Hello, Mini! wrote:

SportsFan68 wrote: I tried to feel sorry for Bush and for McCain; couldn't do it.

I think I'm able to bring it off for Palin because of the women hunters part -- we're in that same boat. We're also in the same boat of not being qualified to be VP of the U.S.

For me it's that they paid so much money in two months for clothes and over 22 grand for the services of a stylist/cosmetician during that same period when people are losing their houses and jobs and retirement savings, and then say we're sexist for bitching. And aren't they taking 84 million (taxpayer) dollars in matching funds to run the campaign in the first place? I don't want to hear "tax and spend" from someone like that.

Maybe he needs to stop surrounding himself with high-maintenance pageant veterans.

You've GOT to be kidding? How much do you think Obama spent on fuel flying his personal 757 to Hawaii to 'visit his sick grandmother'? About $60,000 round trip (Chicago to HI). That doesn't include wear and tear on the plane, the crew, his Secret Service detail additional expenses, ect. Give me a break! And that used fuel can't be donated or auctioned off. It was just added to our global warming situation.

Oh wait. If forgot. It was Obama. So whatever is O.K.

Did he charge it to his campaign?

Is his campaign publicly funded?

Is he the one talking about being "folksy"?

No, no, and no.

Hello, Mini! wrote:

BackInTex wrote:

Hello, Mini! wrote: For me it's that they paid so much money in two months for clothes and over 22 grand for the services of a stylist/cosmetician during that same period when people are losing their houses and jobs and retirement savings, and then say we're sexist for bitching. And aren't they taking 84 million (taxpayer) dollars in matching funds to run the campaign in the first place? I don't want to hear "tax and spend" from someone like that.

Maybe he needs to stop surrounding himself with high-maintenance pageant veterans.

You've GOT to be kidding? How much do you think Obama spent on fuel flying his personal 757 to Hawaii to 'visit his sick grandmother'? About $60,000 round trip (Chicago to HI). That doesn't include wear and tear on the plane, the crew, his Secret Service detail additional expenses, ect. Give me a break! And that used fuel can't be donated or auctioned off. It was just added to our global warming situation.

Oh wait. If forgot. It was Obama. So whatever is O.K.

Did he charge it to his campaign?

Is his campaign publicly funded?

Is he the one talking about being "folksy"?

No, no, and no.

I don't know who paid. I doubt it came out of his own pocketbook. Do you have real evidence who paid for it?

Who cares about whether his campaign is publicly funded. Most of his base is.

Folksy? WTF does that have anything to do about it or anything else.

LOLDonkeyScarf now on the PunditKitchen voting page:

I guess that it is because I have lived in rural, farming states my entire life, but I have no trouble distinguishing between a horse and a donkey.

Hello, Mini! wrote:

SportsFan68 wrote:

5LD wrote:I can't feel sorry for her. Tried. Didn't work.

I tried to feel sorry for Bush and for McCain; couldn't do it.

I think I'm able to bring it off for Palin because of the women hunters part -- we're in that same boat. We're also in the same boat of not being qualified to be VP of the U.S.

For me it's that they paid so much money in two months for clothes and over 22 grand for the services of a stylist/cosmetician during that same period when people are losing their houses and jobs and retirement savings, and then say we're sexist for bitching. And aren't they taking 84 million (taxpayer) dollars in matching funds to run the campaign in the first place? I don't want to hear "tax and spend" from someone like that.

Maybe he needs to stop surrounding himself with high-maintenance pageant veterans.

This was RNC money, not public money. It was politically tone-deaf, but I don't see anything else wrong with it. --Bob

This was RNC money, not public money. It was politically tone-deaf, but I don't see anything else wrong with it. --Bob

Yep. I can't imagine why we Democrats should care one way or the other how the RNC wastes their money. However -- the Republican contributors ought to be raising holy heck!

Why aren't they?

VAdame wrote:

This was RNC money, not public money. It was politically tone-deaf, but I don't see anything else wrong with it. --Bob

Yep. I can't imagine why we Democrats should care one way or the other how the RNC wastes their money. However -- the Republican contributors ought to be raising holy heck!

Why aren't they?

Maybe Republicans save their outrage for silly, inconsequential things like the murder of unborn children.

Bob78164 wrote:This was RNC money, not public money. It was politically tone-deaf, but I don't see anything else wrong with it. --Bob

That's what I was trying to think of! Politically tone-deaf describes the folksy candidate with a stylist and a 6-figure wardrobe.

I thought McCain took out a loan for campaign funds using future matching funds as collateral. Either he didn't or he found some other way to pay. I'm not even going to try to understand why banks give money to anyone these days.