Palin's non-answers to the Chicago Tribune on the shopping spree
The Jill Zuckerman of the Chicago Tribune interviewed Palin:
Q: You're giving this policy speech tomorrow, but has this journey been worth it to you when you're getting nitpicked on wardrobe and pollsSo where are the followup questions?SP: "It is all worth it because we know we are on the right path here in providing Americans a choice on Nov. 4th. You can support a children that will do all that we can for children with special needs and we support policies that will create jobs and get the economy back on track. Of course it's worth it. But I'm glad you brought up the wardrobe.
"That whole thing is just, bad! Oh, if people only knew how frugal we are."
"The clothes that were loaned to us during the convention. And I don't think it was anywhere near...What did they say, Tracey? $150 grand? It wasn't anywhere near that. Those are not ours. We give those back, those go to charity or they'll be auctioned off or whatever. That's not even my property. So to be criticized for that, that is not who we are."
Q: So you're not carrying around cartons of brand new clothes that people have gone out and bought for you
SP: No, I think some of them were in the belly of the plane. No, yeah, that's not [how] we live.
"It wasn't anywhere near that. Those are not ours." Interesting lines. Was the $150,000 reported on RNC filings for clothing and accessories for people other than the Palin family? If so, why hasn't the RNC said that? Or is she saying that the RNC filing is mistaken? Or what? What is Palin saying?
Zuckerman allowed her an incomprehensible denial. She says they're storing a bunch of unworn brand new clothes in "the belly of the plane."
So what does Zuckerman say next?
Q: This must be painful for you.Can I share some of that pain? The sweater I've got on has a hole in the elbow. Does this pain come with a stylist?
Empathy for someone who has just confessed to flying around in a plane stocked with unworn designer clothes is not the right response.
(Crossposted from KathrynCramer.com.)
Palin is a well-practiced liar - as Andrew Sullivan has thoroughly documented. She does it reflexively. Keep her far, far from public office.
October 24, 2008 11:16 AM | Reply | Permalink
Let's be frank:
Palin is a BULLSHITTER who is used to being able to put it over on people. She isn't even a sophisticated bullshitter, which is why her BS is so transparent to those in the "lower 48" who have experience with BS that is greatly more sophisticated -- yet still transparent.
That makes her a liar who lies all the time, but it does not make her "well-practiced". Consider: she was a "beauty queen"; she is practiced at putting on a smile regardless whether it fits how she feels at the time. So she's all genreate-a-posit-ve-image/statement, truth being irrelvant to the degree of not even being a consideration. It isn't whether one IS good; it's whether one looks and SOUNDS good.
She's an empty barrel, which more would see if they'd get over the presumption that barrels are always rotund.
October 24, 2008 12:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
WHY SO MUCH MONEY ON MAKEUP? THAT’S BECAUSE WHEN PALIN TOLD MCCAIN SHE WOULD NEED A 3 MONTH SUPPLY OF MOUSSE, MCCAIN WENT OUT AND BOUGHT HER A HERD!
October 24, 2008 11:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
The New York Times is looking into that $150,000 claim, and so far has found two charges attributed to particular stores which find no record of those charges, or any charges in the amounts cited.
Will the RNC being suing itself? Its own?
October 24, 2008 12:02 PM | Reply | Permalink