Page 1 of 1
Another example of WDWB?
Posted: Tue Nov 11, 2008 8:27 am
by Jim O'Bryan
Sarah Palin was just on TV saying, "No I do not believe there is a bunch of lawyers coming up to audit my clothes."
Which would be insane, and cost more than the clothes.
The next comment troubled me even more.
"I was never going to keep those clothes. They were going to
go back into the RNC closet. I never thought I was going to keep
those clothes."
Why on earth shouldn't see keep those clothes? Why would she ever
be made to think they were going to charity? the RNC closet?
Why shouldn't the little red jacket be hanging in her closet?
I would hope for $150,000 they were tailored for her.
They came in swept her up, used her as a tool against women,
and made her give the damn used clothes back?
WDWB?
Re: Another example of WDWB?
Posted: Tue Nov 11, 2008 8:31 am
by Jim O'Bryan
This is what I meant.
If they are willing to lie over something like what kind of jelly was on the PBJ.
Why should we ever trust them again, what alone with running the country?
Three stories over the clothes.
Should have been one.
"One of the perks running for President"
.
Posted: Tue Nov 11, 2008 8:48 am
by Valerie Molinski
Her dad was talking to the media about how she was sorting through the clothes to return to the RNC, but that it was a tough task because "kids misplace underwear" or some bulls**t like that.
Firstly, ewww if they're even thinking of returning undergarments. Second, why the hell does the RNC have to buy the kids anything? And third, why is her dad talking to the media?
Good lord, please let this circus end.
celebrity
Posted: Tue Nov 11, 2008 9:03 am
by ryan costa
celebrity women are not supposed to appear in the same outfit twice.
ok
Posted: Tue Nov 11, 2008 10:26 am
by ryan costa
The clothes probably were not worth 150,000 dollars. that is simply what the Republicans paid for them. There is no telling why they did that. It kind of reflects on the consistent enormous deficits Republican leaders have piled up since Reagan. At least they are consistent.
During the debates Senator McCain made a nice point about reining military contracting cost overruns once he manages to become President. Harry Truman managed to do that when he was just a Senator.
Posted: Tue Nov 11, 2008 11:17 am
by Stephen Eisel
Breaking News YAWN!!!!
Nevermind that Rahm Emanuel was on the board of Freddie Mac when Freddi engaged in a fraudulent scheme that deceived investors about its true performance, profitability and growth trends. Freddie Mac misreported its net income in 2000 by 30.5 percent, in 2001 by 23.9 percent and 2002 by 42.9 percent, according to the SEC... Nice Red herring Jim!
Posted: Tue Nov 11, 2008 3:44 pm
by Jim O'Bryan
Stephen Eisel wrote:Nice Red herring Jim!
Stephen
You must learn to read.
I could care less about the clothes. I expect anyone running for preisdent or vice president to have really nice clothes. I never cared if the RNC or for that matter I paid for them with taxes.
I never got that, but why tell three different stories.
It is like Bill Clinton, I really hope our president, leader of the free world has at least the same groupie status as Keith Richards, or one of the Jonas Brothers. I mean he is "the leader of the free world."
Why lie about it?
That is what I do not understand.
No red herring.
clicky
.
Posted: Tue Nov 11, 2008 3:55 pm
by Stephen Eisel
Stephen
You must learn to read.
I could care less about the clothes. I expect anyone running for preisdent or vice president to have really nice clothes. I never cared if the RNC or for that matter I paid for them with taxes.
Did you read your own post???
Posted: Tue Nov 11, 2008 4:01 pm
by Stephen Eisel
Palin clothes vs. one the Captains of the Titanic Rahm commanding a bigger more complex ship
Posted: Tue Nov 11, 2008 4:16 pm
by Stephen Eisel
They came in swept her up, used her as a tool against women,
and made her give the damn used clothes back?
And you care about Sarah Palin