here's how vanity fair broke it down:
# Oscar de la Renta dress: $3,000
# Chanel J12 White Ceramic Watch: $4,500
# Three-carat diamond earrings: $280,000
# Four-strand pearl necklace: $11,000 to $25,000
# Shoes, unknown designer: $600
# Total: Between $299,100 and $313,100
maybe that's not how everyone rolls @ the convention. laura bush was onstage for a whole heck of a lot less:
# Oscar de la Renta suit: $2,500
# Stuart Weitzman heels: $325
# Pearl stud earrings: $600 to $1,500
# Total: Between $3,425 and $4,325
and no, this really doesn't mean anything about whether or not her husband is qualified to run the country.
in other interesting political developments, it seems that john mccain and sarah palin aren't on the same page with sex education. this is interesting to me because i'd heard that she was abstinence only. apparently, she's okay w/teaching about condoms, and mc cain isn't.
"In a widely quoted 2006 survey she answered during her gubernatorial campaign, Palin said she supported abstinence-until-marriage programs. But weeks later, she proclaimed herself "pro-contraception" and said condoms ought to be discussed in schools alongside abstinence.
"I'm pro-contraception, and I think kids who may not hear about it at home should hear about it in other avenues," she said during a debate in Juneau."
and in true hypocrical fashion, the conservatives have nothing to say,
"Other conservatives who have backed Palin, including James Dobson of Focus on the Family, declined to weigh in."
one more quote from palin on the issue, "No, I'm pro-contraception, and I think kids who may not hear about it at home should hear about it in other avenues. So I am not anti-contraception. But, yeah, abstinence is another alternative that should be discussed with kids. I don't have a problem with that. That doesn't scare me, so it's something I would support also."
13 comments:
Qualified to run the what now?
Interesting..! It caught our attention, then, when First Lady Laura Bush and would-be First Lady Cindy McCain took the stage Tuesday night wearing some rather fancy designer outfit.
I wonder how much Michelle Obama's outfit cost. Strange that should be left out since the article basically made it seem like they were part of the rich elite and therefore out of touch with the rest of America. Had Michelle Obama's outfit been considerably less expensive they probably would have mentioned that but since it is noticably absent...
and I do not disagree that they both live a much more upscale life than the rest of us but lets be fair, the Obama's arent exactly in the poor house either. If you are going to write about how much the republicans candidates wives outfits cost, why not do the same for the democrats?
uh... because cindy mccain's outfit cost roughly $300,000, lulu. the story includes the cost of laura bush's outfit as a contrast that is more reasonable. and i'm willing to put money on it that michelle's outfit was more in the ballpark of laura bush's.
cindy mccain is a millionaire heiress who has never wanted for anything. michelle obama grew up on the south side of chicago, was raised by hardworking middle class parents, and through the work of the whole family, she was able to get through law school and make some money. i identify with that. i know michelle and barack remember where they came from and are appreciative of our country's education system (now experiencing years of decline due to underfunding) that helped them get there.
cindy mccain hasn't a clue what world the rest of us live in. she's never had to worry about money.
if you can blow $300,000 on an outfit without blinking an eye, i can understand why you'd choose to be a republican. but the rest of us might want to think about what the government is going to do to ensure that the divide between the rich and middle class does not continue to grow at such an alarming rate. that trend suits the mccains just fine, but not anyone i know.
I like Cindy McCain cause she's all about driftin'....hope she's in the next Fast & Furious!
http://www.breitbart.tv/?p=129943
I have to refer to Ed's original comment that "this really doesn't mean anything about whether or not her husband is qualified to run the country". Clearly she grew up privilaged. John McCain did not grow up as a billionaire and last I checked he was the person running for office.
Ed himself was not using this article to criticize her but because it is a rather staggering amount of money. You however are stating that because McCains wife is rich, she cant relate to normal people and therefore John McCain doesnt care about the poor/rich divide. There are some gaps in reasoning there.
And Obama's suit he wore at the convention cost $6,000, which does not include the price of shoes or a watch if he was wearing one. I am willing to bet he spends a small fortune on suits and clothing himself because in all honesty when is the last time you saw a candidate that wasnt rich?
They all have way more money than I can ever even imagine. My point was the article frivolously played up the Republicans as being rich and elitist and it wasnt even based on the actual candidate but his wife, which is interesting considering the readers of Vanity Fair are not your avergae Joe blow but are financially well off themselves.
Clearly all the article was meant to do was make her look bad and it was trivial at best. What she wears or does not wear does not effect anything of material in this election. To me it is just another unneccesary article that distracts from the real issues that need to be discussed more in this election.
you're right, lulu. cindy mccain's $300,000 outfit is not proof that john mccain is out of touch with regular people or does not care about the rich/middle class divide. it's republican economic policy and mccain's endorsement of it that tells me he doesn't care.
and now a rant (that's not meant to put you on the spot):
trickle down economics has failed the middle class time and time again, but that doesn't seem to matter to the republican party. the whole party is kept afloat by the religious right and the NRA. imagine if those folks ditched the economic "conservatives" and started their own socially conservative party that looked out for their own financial interests and the future of their families. No idea why this hasn't happened before. (Not that I'm all for it; I kinda think a woman's right to choose is a good thing.) I just don't get how a party can survive with an economic policy that works to the disadvantage of a majority of its own supporters.
lulu,
i don't think they included michelle obama's outfit because they were comparing the two women on stage with each other and the difference in cost of what they were wearing.
a large portion of the difference is cindy mccain's 3 karot diamond earings. and, her watch costs about the same as l.bush's total outfit. well, basically the dress and suit are about the same cost. everywhere else is where the $296k difference comes in.
now, i do think that if you're routinely wearing $300k outfits you probably can't relate well with the common american citizen. but, lulu, you are also right in commenting that all of these people are currently coming from position of privilege and some disconnect.
i would say that it is the economic policies of the republican party that makes me feel that they are elitist and looking out for the rich elite rather than the common american, the working class, or the poor. no one else has to agree with me on this, it's just my feeling.
now, the second half of my post really deals with my frustration with the "moral" groups that have bought into the republican party lock, stock, and barrel who celebrate a candidate's morality that agrees when it with them, but ignore it or claim it's not an issue when it doesn't.
oh, and i'm not sure what a four star general makes, but that's what mc cain's dad was. probably not a millionaire. i wonder how much that played a role in mccain's stance on preemptive military action?
Yes the jewelry in this case really makes the astronomical difference and yes it is probably easier to relate to someone if you have been in their shoes but that doesnt mean you cant do good from a priviliaged position and from what I understand she is a fairly philinthropic individual.
Irregardless, I have no problem with disagreeing with a policy or a parties ideals. Just elucidate that with facts and/or something more meaningful than she has expensive jewelry therefore etc., which Mellow got to his second post and Ed discussed as well.
It just irritates me how often I come across this from both parties. Since everyone I hang out with are liberals it might come across as me being defensive of Republicans, but I do the same with Republicans when they criticize liberals without validity. We seem to wear reverse rose colored glasses when we look at the other party and put them right back on when we look at our own party.
Nicely done Lulu, I really don't know why you don't talk politics more. You have so much to add to the discourse.
and really, mellow is just trying to cover for his own closet republican leanings.
1. a nice pair of earrings is a staple for any womans wardrobe. some of us chose diamonds, while some of us chose gold hoops. i think her earrings are a nice, although expensive, adition to a very clean and professional outfit.
2. mellow, i am a bit offended, or mad, or something, that you imply that because cindy is a rich heiress that she cannot connect with her parties people. she went to college like i did, she goes to church like i do, she has kids like i do, she was a cheerleader as i was, and i am sure we have a number of other shared experiences. to make it seem like rich people dont know what we less wealthies go through is just wrong. while i understand that she probably never had to worry about how to pay the morgage, i dont think that she floated through life, untouched by any of the problems i have had in my short life. also, you dont mention the things she has done with some of her beeeelions of dollars. in my opinion she has worked hard for her causes, and seems to be a woman with a huge heart.
Post a Comment