
Now let me get this straight--you can spend inordinate amounts of money on clothing on the GOP campaign trail all the while talk about how you're different from the Washington elite? Wow! What would Joe the plumber say?
I don't know any hockey moms with 5 kids who can spend or need to spend over $75,000 at Neiman Marcus on a shopping spree. All they know is that they pass by Neiman on their way to their favorite, affordably priced retailer. Can somebody tell me what the h-e-double hockey sticks happened to shopping at Target, TJ Maxx and Walmart? That's where the hockey moms I know shop. If I knew being a hockey mom could bring-on that kind of shopping, I would have signed up for a puck and a stick a long time ago.
Even if a clothing allowance is legal, it doesn't look good for the GOP campaign when its discovered the woman they've billed as an everyday woman has spent more than $150,000 on clothes in just over 2 months. From what I'm seeing in receipts, its the same game--nothing's changed for "McCalin!"
To those who would say "...Glo, what about the Democrats?" I say Sarah Palin's "clothing allowance" pales in comparison to Hillary's $3,000 haircuts back in 2006 or even McCain's $520 Ferragamo shoes from earlier this year. Palin may be a reformer but she spends money like a shopaholic.