Skip to main content.

Tuesday, October 21, 2008

From the start it's been apparent that Sarah Palin's chief recommendation for the job of Vice President is that she accessorizes well. Several observers have noted that on the campaign trail she wears a new, high couture outfit every day; some estimated that the cost for these clothes must run into tens of thousands of dollars and have wondered who is paying for them.

This evening The Politico's Jeanne Cummings reveals that the Republican National Committee has been picking up the tab for Palin, to the tune of $150,000 during September. No doubt the RNC is paying for all the Palins' trips to high-end stores at McCain's behest; it would have been (even more) unseemly for McCain's taxpayer-funded campaign to foot the bill for Sarah's expensive new wardrobe.

This will do serious damage to what is left of Palin's public reputation.

The details won't resonate well at a time of extreme economic duress for many Americans. In fact, Palin's luxury shopping sprees call to mind the high lifestyle that Wall Street executives have been treating themselves to after taxpayers were dragooned into bailing out their firms.

Here's what the Politico uncovered about Palin's RNC expense account:

According to financial disclosure records, the accessorizing began in early September and included bills from Saks Fifth Avenue in St. Louis and New York for a combined $49,425.74.

The records also document a couple of big-time shopping trips to Neiman Marcus in Minneapolis, including one $75,062.63 spree in early September.

[...]

Politico asked the McCain campaign for comment, explicitly noting the $150,000 in expenses for department store shopping and makeup consultation that were incurred immediately after Palin’s announcement. Pre-September reports do not include similar costs

McCain's campaign refused to comment, however. The RNC listed these expenses among its "itemized coordinated expenditures" in September's report.

It’s a report that typically records expenses for direct mail, telephone calls and advertising. Those expenses do show up, but the report also has a new category of spending: "campaign accessories."

McCain's campaign accessories have grown stranger and stranger since he nominated Sarah Palin, the most costly accessory of them all.

Comments

9 comments

[1]
Wow. She spent more on clothes in one month than I have spent in my entire life.

Posted by shirah at Wednesday, October 22, 2008 07:37:36

[2]
I doubt I've spent much more than one-fiftieth of that sum of money on clothes in my life.

The wider point is that it's illegal to spend campaign funds on items of personal use. But, then, it was not permitted for Palin to have billed the state of Alaska for air-line tickets and luxury hotel rooms for her children by pretending that they were conducting official state business (as documented here at unbossed in the past).

I guess that Palin thinks "maverick" and "reformer" are just synonyms for "con-artist".

Posted by smintheus at Wednesday, October 22, 2008 09:15:28

[3]
Palin's fans assume she is just like them. Just like them if they are millionaires, fly everywhere at taxpayer expense, and have a wardrobe that rivals Imelda Marcos' shoe collection and all on someone else's tab.

Talk about beholden to special interests.

Posted by shirah at Wednesday, October 22, 2008 10:14:05

[4]
Imelda Marcos or Eva Peron.

Here's the relevant law on prohibitions in the use of campaign funds:

>>2 USC 439b(2)(B)

(b) Prohibited use

(1) In general

A contribution or donation described in subsection (a) of this section shall not be converted by any person to personal use.

(2) Conversion

For the purposes of paragraph (1), a contribution or donation shall be considered to be converted to personal use if the contribution or amount is used to fulfill any commitment, obligation, or expense of a person that would exist irrespective of the candidate's election campaign or individual's duties as a holder of Federal office, including--

(A) a home mortgage, rent, or utility payment;

(B) a clothing purchase;

...<<

In a similar vein, nearly all clothing is considered to be for personal use under tax law; it's not permissible to write off expenses for clothing unless the clothes are used exclusively on the job (such as a uniform) and can't be used outside the job.

So the McCain campaign's excuses for spending money on Palin's clothes are beyond ridiculous.

Posted by smintheus at Wednesday, October 22, 2008 15:34:05

[5]
And then there is this sort of related story.
Questions raised over Sarah Palin's expenses
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/...

An investigation into Sarah Palin's expenses as governor of Alaska has raised new questions over her conduct in the post.

Mrs Palin charged the state for her children to travel with her, including to events where they were not invited, and later amended her expense reports to specify that they were on official business.

The charges included costs for hotel and commercial flights for three daughters to join Mrs Palin to watch their father in a snowmobile race.

There was also a trip to New York for a five-hour conference which entailed the governor and her 17-year-old daughter staying for five days and four nights in a luxury hotel overlooking Central Park.

In total, the Republican vice-presidential candidate has charged the state $21,012 (£13,000) for her three daughters' 64 one-way and 12 round trip airline flights since she took office in December 2006.

In some cases, she charged Alaska for hotel rooms for the girls, according to an investigation by Associated Press.
etc etc

~~~~
For those who wonder, I guess this is how you become a millionaire on a public official's salary, a seasonal fishing job, and winnings from snowmobile races.

Posted by shirah at Wednesday, October 22, 2008 17:27:08

[6]
A correction to an earlier comment: It looks as if the GOP found a way to skirt [ahem] the law prohibiting the spending of campaign funds on clothing. By spending the money in "coordination" with the RNC, they can claim that the funds actually spent were not McCain's campaign funds but strictly the Party's funds (which are not bound by that prohibition).

http://www.politico.com/new...

Still, the point remains, why didn't she spend her own money on clothes? Or just have her wardrobe packed up and shipped to the lower 48 (she was known as a clothes-horse even before her election as governor)?

Posted by smintheus at Thursday, October 23, 2008 09:00:58

[7]
I note that they are just trying to put their best foot forward. The politico story has one of the interviewees saying that the Palins are people of modest means. I guess by the Republican standard modest DOES include millionaires like the Palins.

Now, if the shoe were on the other foot, the Republicans would be all over this issue like a cheap suit.

Posted by shirah at Thursday, October 23, 2008 14:44:25

[8]
And remember the Good Old Days of the Grand OLD Party? When they were proud to have the wives of their vice-president wear a good old Republican cloth coat?

Posted by shirah at Thursday, October 23, 2008 14:45:24

[9]
Now we know where the McCain campaign's priorities are. According to AP:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/...

But McCain's Oct. 1-15 filing showed that the campaign paid $22,800 to Palin's traveling stylist, Amy Strozzi, an acclaimed celebrity makeup artist. In contrast, McCain's foreign policy adviser, Randy Scheunemann, was paid $12,500, the report showed.
~~~
In other words it's more important to look mahvelous than to be mahvelous?

But, of course, McCain needs no foreign policy advice. That must explain the differential.

Posted by shirah at Friday, October 24, 2008 10:04:57

Add Comment

This item is closed, it's not possible to add new comments to it or to vote on it

buy viagra viagra alternative order viagra online viagra sale buy viagra online generic viagra online cheap viagra