Who knew Neiman's was on Main Street?
Well, so much for Joe the Plumber. He couldn't replace washers fast enough make the kind of money John McCain was willing to spend on outfitting his vice-presidential candidate. We won't be hearing about Joe any more.
Another silver lining: Sarah Palin won't be saying much about Main Street America any more, where the question of the day is no longer about the economy, per se, but about the GOP economy, plus speed. How long does it take to spend $75,000 in one visit to Neiman Marcus? Would the boxes fit into the kind of Main Street car that gets 35 miles per gallon?
So that's what they meant by pro-America and spreading the wealth around. I can't think of an American, starting with my wife, who would object to spending $150,000 in one month on clothes, and you have to believe that Neiman's, Sak's, Bloomingdales, Macy's, Barney's of New York, and Atelier are beaming today over McCain's spread-the-wealth campaign.
I can't believe they spent $4,716.49 in one month on Sarah's hair and makeup.
I would expect more in the way of results, but Karen didn't think that was the point. She could easily see spending $75,000 in one sitting at Neiman's, but she was totally shocked that it was possible for one woman in one month to spend $4,716.49 on her hair and makeup. No way I could have known that, as a man. I figure $1,000 a month would be outright extravagant, but the economy could be a lot better than it is now, and we still wouldn't have to worry about that.
So it is the women voters of America who have the better sense of what kind of money we are talking about here. As a man, I can understand things like knowing where the interview time went. Sarah couldn't give any interviews because she was busy shopping. She crammed for the debate from reading summaries taped to the walls of the fitting booth. She carries Trig because somebody has to carry the luggage.
But the women. Talk about a distraction. At the office, at lunch, in board rooms, playing a game of break-it-down, the things Sarah most likely bought that would add up to $75,000 in one sweep. I think it would be more fun if, instead of spending the money on Michele Bachmann's proposed study of Congress to see who is pro- or anti-America, the media studied Main Street women for their conclusions on how that much money could have been spent that fast. (Michele's hair is looking a lot better – fuller, more body – this week than it did last Friday, by the way.) McCain's men have to come up with a way to capitalize. How about, "A chick in every pot"?
Another silver lining: Sarah Palin won't be saying much about Main Street America any more, where the question of the day is no longer about the economy, per se, but about the GOP economy, plus speed. How long does it take to spend $75,000 in one visit to Neiman Marcus? Would the boxes fit into the kind of Main Street car that gets 35 miles per gallon?
So that's what they meant by pro-America and spreading the wealth around. I can't think of an American, starting with my wife, who would object to spending $150,000 in one month on clothes, and you have to believe that Neiman's, Sak's, Bloomingdales, Macy's, Barney's of New York, and Atelier are beaming today over McCain's spread-the-wealth campaign.
I can't believe they spent $4,716.49 in one month on Sarah's hair and makeup.
I would expect more in the way of results, but Karen didn't think that was the point. She could easily see spending $75,000 in one sitting at Neiman's, but she was totally shocked that it was possible for one woman in one month to spend $4,716.49 on her hair and makeup. No way I could have known that, as a man. I figure $1,000 a month would be outright extravagant, but the economy could be a lot better than it is now, and we still wouldn't have to worry about that.
So it is the women voters of America who have the better sense of what kind of money we are talking about here. As a man, I can understand things like knowing where the interview time went. Sarah couldn't give any interviews because she was busy shopping. She crammed for the debate from reading summaries taped to the walls of the fitting booth. She carries Trig because somebody has to carry the luggage.
But the women. Talk about a distraction. At the office, at lunch, in board rooms, playing a game of break-it-down, the things Sarah most likely bought that would add up to $75,000 in one sweep. I think it would be more fun if, instead of spending the money on Michele Bachmann's proposed study of Congress to see who is pro- or anti-America, the media studied Main Street women for their conclusions on how that much money could have been spent that fast. (Michele's hair is looking a lot better – fuller, more body – this week than it did last Friday, by the way.) McCain's men have to come up with a way to capitalize. How about, "A chick in every pot"?
Labels: Politics
![michaelgrant2 [at] cox.net](http://www.michaelgrant.com/blog/uploaded_images/email.gif)
Did not see anywhere that you wrote about John Edwards' $400 haircuts or Hillary's two hair stylings for $3,000. Guess it is only out of line when a Republican spends admittedly way too much money on fashions? To me it is Republicans' and Democrats' business to spend what they want on anything as long as the taxpayers are not paying for it. Obama and McCain are like shooting fish in a barrel for writers, bloggers and comedians this year. A shame that out of 300 some odd million people in this country, these two are the best we can come up with. I think a lot of people will be voting against this year rather than for a candidate.
Posted by
Ray Finfer |
10/22/08 6:21 PM