Tuesday, October 21, 2008

Sarah Palin is an elitist and a socialist

There, I've finally said it.
Remember how people were livid when Edwards got a four hundred dollar hair cut. (I go to super cuts or have a fellow seminarian buzz it, so I think 40 dollars, let alone 400 is excessive) Well. Sarah Palin's hair and make up have cost over 4,000 dollars IN ONE MONTH! Further, her wardrobe since becoming VP material has cost the Republican party 150,000 dollars!
Oh, while we're on the subject of Palin spending other people's money she's bilked the state of Alaska out of $21,012 in travel expenses for her kids traveling commercially, $55,000 for them traveling on state planes, and charged Alaska $17,000for living in her own home! In addition, she charged the state at least $4,161 for housing her children at five start hotels in New York (overlooking Central Park), Philadelphia, and Fairbanks!
For a supposed Maverick Reformer who is going to cut spending and keep the personal perks of public office from becoming pork-barrel spending this is unacceptable. She's freekin' mooching off the government, and not just a little bit!
She's no reformer, no uncurruptable outsider, no average Jane. She's more of the same, just packaged a little different and held together with $4,000 worth of hairspray!

2 comments:

Judah Himango said...

Chris, this is dumb.

Sorry, gotta be honest. :-)

It's dumb because spending money on self does not make you a socialist or elitist. (Not very frugal or wise perhaps, but little to do with socialism.)

I mean, the right could just as easily criticize your man Obama and friends - you think your guys don't spend money on suits and travel expenses?

Heck, a quick google search shows a signed receipt from Michelle Obama for an afternoon snack at Waldorf's:

2 lobster Hors D'oeuvres
2 whole steamed lobsters
1 Iranian osetra caviar
1 Bollinger champagne

Totaling just under $500.

But I'm not gonna call her socialist or elitist over that.

Spreading the wealth - now that is often a principle of socialism. So if you're truly concerned about socialism, you'd be questioning your political pick.

But I suspect you're not really concerned with socialism in American government, you just wanted to take a cheap shot at Palin.

Blech. This is why I hate politics.

Christopher said...

Spending money on self is fine, but spending the states money on yourself/family is wrong, you could even call it socialism (or theft take your pick).
Spending money on self is fine, but spending massive amounts of your party's money (150,000 dollars) on expensive 5th avenue clothing yet claiming you are just like the average working man/woman and represent populism is hypocritical and elitist.
Spending 4,000 dollars in a month on hair care products and expecting a free pass when both Clinton and Edwards got hounded about spending 400 dollars is, I would say, not fair.
The point of my using Elitist and Socialist was to show how silly those who throw those terms at Democrats are.
I'm glad you don't call Michelle Obama an elitist, but a bunch of folk have.
With all the money flowing around the election LP has a better idea of what it could be used for than what it was (http://lutherpunk.wordpress.com/2008/10/17/the-great-tragedy-of-the-election-season/)
At any rate I'll be good when the election is done.
On an unrelated note there's a congregation member at Tabernacle who attends my Hebrew Bible study that is way into Messianic Judaism I think you'd like.
Peace,
Chris