3
   

Cindy McCain's $300,000 Outfit, but the McCains are not elitists?

 
 
OCCOM BILL
 
  2  
Reply Fri 5 Sep, 2008 01:04 pm
@eoe,
eoe wrote:

And how many less than flattering Obama stories have we been bombarded with in the last eighteen months? From terrorist jabs to questioning his patriotism to scathing editorials about his wife? The press hasn't been any more obscene with Sarah Palin than they are with anyone else. That's the arena she stepped into, and dragging a whole lot of baggage in with her. Why enter the lions' den and then get pissed when they bite you?
She didn't get pissed. She handled it with poise... nearly to perfection, IMHO. Neither that nor your Tu quoque argument excuses the slanderous accusations in any way. Tone back your partisanship and you'll recognize wrong is wrong regardless of who's targeted.
Diane
 
  2  
Reply Fri 5 Sep, 2008 01:13 pm
Cindy McCain is quite wealthy in her own right, so I can't blame her for wearing designer clothes, that's most likely what she's always worn.

The problem is the message. I agree with the others who have wondered why she didn't tone it down? The McCain advisors must have mentioned it, unless they were afraid of being chewed out by John McCain. They are experts on the phsycology of appearance

That old saw, "Perception is reality" is most important in politics. The spin, the appearance, even the look on one's face, all have an impact when in the political public.
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Fri 5 Sep, 2008 01:15 pm
@BumbleBeeBoogie,
Somebody's jealous.
0 Replies
 
eoe
 
  4  
Reply Fri 5 Sep, 2008 01:30 pm
@OCCOM BILL,
OCCOM BILL wrote:

eoe wrote:

And how many less than flattering Obama stories have we been bombarded with in the last eighteen months? From terrorist jabs to questioning his patriotism to scathing editorials about his wife? The press hasn't been any more obscene with Sarah Palin than they are with anyone else. That's the arena she stepped into, and dragging a whole lot of baggage in with her. Why enter the lions' den and then get pissed when they bite you?
She didn't get pissed. She handled it with poise... nearly to perfection, IMHO. Neither that nor your Tu quoque argument excuses the slanderous accusations in any way. Tone back your partisanship and you'll recognize wrong is wrong regardless of who's targeted.



You're right. As my mother used to say, 2 wrongs don't make a right.

But what is this poise that you speak of? She flips everything around and lies about the Obama-Biden campaign being behind the "attacks". She accuses the press of jumping in her ass, asking legitimate questions (IMO), and then uses them to jump into someone elses' ass with lies and falsehoods. Wrong is wrong, right?
OCCOM BILL
 
  3  
Reply Fri 5 Sep, 2008 04:28 pm
@eoe,
eoe wrote:

OCCOM BILL wrote:

eoe wrote:

And how many less than flattering Obama stories have we been bombarded with in the last eighteen months? From terrorist jabs to questioning his patriotism to scathing editorials about his wife? The press hasn't been any more obscene with Sarah Palin than they are with anyone else. That's the arena she stepped into, and dragging a whole lot of baggage in with her. Why enter the lions' den and then get pissed when they bite you?
She didn't get pissed. She handled it with poise... nearly to perfection, IMHO. Neither that nor your Tu quoque argument excuses the slanderous accusations in any way. Tone back your partisanship and you'll recognize wrong is wrong regardless of who's targeted.



You're right. As my mother used to say, 2 wrongs don't make a right.

But what is this poise that you speak of? She flips everything around and lies about the Obama-Biden campaign being behind the "attacks". She accuses the press of jumping in her ass, asking legitimate questions (IMO), and then uses them to jump into someone elses' ass with lies and falsehoods. Wrong is wrong, right?
Poise in that she didn't skip a beat during her speech. Poise in that she didn't overreact to the slanderous lies, told about her and those dearest to her. I can't tell you how impressed I am that she didn't seem to lose her cool one iota. That's poise. That the McCain campaign will now use anti-Palin BS dirt against the Obama campaign is par for the course. That is politics and it is the only real way to discourage further outrageous slander. I really don't think Palin can be blamed that the campaign will blame the opposition for the slime job that was perpetrated against her. I seriously doubt she’s making those decisions.
OCCOM BILL
 
  2  
Reply Fri 5 Sep, 2008 04:37 pm
@Diane,
Diane wrote:

Cindy McCain is quite wealthy in her own right, so I can't blame her for wearing designer clothes, that's most likely what she's always worn.

The problem is the message. I agree with the others who have wondered why she didn't tone it down? The McCain advisors must have mentioned it, unless they were afraid of being chewed out by John McCain. They are experts on the phsycology of appearance

That old saw, "Perception is reality" is most important in politics. The spin, the appearance, even the look on one's face, all have an impact when in the political public.
Hi Diane!
I've got to disagree with you. I think she could have had them talk about her fancy clothes, jewels and wealth or she could have had them talk about her lack of fancy clothes and jewels despite her wealth. (Look how she's dressing down in a phony attempt to identify with the poor and middle class! <-- That would have been phony.) Either way they were going to talk, and they were going to talk about her wealth, so why not look good?

Those looking for something to criticize will always find it. I thought she did a marvelous job, for a non politician who isn’t used to speaking to such audiences. She isn’t a professional. I don’t know if I could pull that off with as much grace.

When I am old; I shall wear purple.
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Fri 5 Sep, 2008 04:56 pm
i driveporshebbbbbb dives VOLVOL
0 Replies
 
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Fri 5 Sep, 2008 05:17 pm
@OCCOM BILL,
Well, I haven't seen or heard Cindy McCain or Palin speak - I just read.

My personal ad hominem for Palin is 'walking talking lampoon', but that of course is from my whole life point of view and very partisan. I gather she has great ebullience and presence and appreciate that. I don't know about lying, one way or another, but she is certainly right out there saying what she thinks, somewhat refreshing in itself, ne'er mind that circumspection on the world stage can have value. On her family, I wish them well. On her candidacy, not so much do I wish her well, eh, but I prefer it fall to the matter of issues.

On Cindy McCain, this is McCain's wife, not McCain. I get wives are of interest if they are promoted as part of the general presidential candidacy, getting speeches (Where's Mamie?), and sometimes they do have influence. We can all name wives of influence on sides of the aisle.

Jewels? (I haven't see the photos if there are any). Short of arriving to make a covention speech dripping in royalty type drapes of jewels, which would be a situational faux paux (sp), as it would in a business meeting.... so what?
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Fri 5 Sep, 2008 05:25 pm
@ossobuco,
Heh. Convention speech..
0 Replies
 
Diane
 
  1  
Reply Fri 5 Sep, 2008 06:07 pm
@OCCOM BILL,
O'Bill wrote:

Quote:
and they were going to talk about her wealth, so why not look good?


Quite true and she really knows how to dress! I was talking about how far the advisors go in suggesting clothing, what looks best in front of the camera, and what will the voters identify with the person on camera.

She's gorgeous, in her polished, almost brittle way, but the clothing could even have been designer without looking like it was right off the runway at Dior. Look at Hillary, John Edwards wife (she should be running for pres. in my opinion).

I'll bet you a quarter that all the women mentioned were wearing clothing from very expensive stores, but they didn't look like they were with the ladies who lunch at the country club.

And, I'm not criticizing Cindy McCain. She is probably is the same quandry as a woman who has never owned an expensive dress. "Oh god, I don't have anything to wear!" Except Cindy probably doesn't know what is appropriate in a middle class crowd. That isn't her fault. She has never been middle class. If there is any criticism, it should be directed at the advisors, spinners, whoever does that kind of stuff!
0 Replies
 
Diane
 
  2  
Reply Fri 5 Sep, 2008 06:09 pm
@OCCOM BILL,
And, I'm sure you would look good in purple. I, on the other hand, being really old, find that I am drawn to red and sparkly anything.
OCCOM BILL
 
  2  
Reply Fri 5 Sep, 2008 08:20 pm
@Diane,
Hi Osso!
Click HERE to see Cindy's speech, in her outfit. I see nothing to complain about. Nothing.
Here's a close up screen shot:
http://img296.imageshack.us/img296/5449/cindyclosewq5.jpg
Here's one that shows the whole outfit:
http://img179.imageshack.us/img179/3857/cindyfarnc5.jpg

Diane, I won't really wear purple. My grandma used to say that. She liked red and EVERYTHING sparkly, too! Wink

I really don't understand your complaint. Her outfit was smart and she wore it well. Neither the stones nor the pearls stuck out... they blended perfectly. Most everyone who wears a designer label wishes they looked like they just walked off the runway. Can you really hold it against the woman for coming closer to pulling it off?
Diane
 
  4  
Reply Fri 5 Sep, 2008 10:52 pm
@OCCOM BILL,
I see nothing to complain about either, except for the advisors who might not have been thinking about clothing right about then.

Also, I'd be willing to bet that many, if not most, women wouldn't have recognized the value of her outfit if the press hadn't filled them in. After all, who amongst the average American has seen, or tried on, something that expensive, except in thrift stores or consignment shops?
LionTamerX
 
  1  
Reply Fri 5 Sep, 2008 10:55 pm
@Diane,
They did make her remove the diamond studded twin towers tiara before going on stage.

But only because it would have confused the faithful.
LionTamerX
 
  2  
Reply Fri 5 Sep, 2008 11:04 pm
@LionTamerX,
BTW.

If it hasn't been said already, it costs a ton of money to look that cheap. Just ask Marilyn Quayle, Dame Nancy, or Roxxx.
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  0  
Reply Fri 5 Sep, 2008 11:10 pm
@Diane,
that is not really on the mark....it was going to be noticed, and she should have know this. It is another example of Cindy McCain having poor political instincts, just as M Obama does. Spouses seem to figure that political skill goes to them through osmosis, that if hubby can do it so can they......no, politics is a skill, and very few can do it well. Spouses need to stop getting the wild hairs that tell them that they can do what they think is best, and start listening to their husbands and the staff who know how the game is played.

Besides, she is rich, and has always been rich. The rich know that wealth can not be flaunted with out problems. Cindy was stupid, plain and simple.
0 Replies
 
OCCOM BILL
 
  3  
Reply Sat 6 Sep, 2008 12:44 am
@Diane,
Diane wrote:

I see nothing to complain about either, except for the advisors who might not have been thinking about clothing right about then.

Also, I'd be willing to bet that many, if not most, women wouldn't have recognized the value of her outfit if the press hadn't filled them in. After all, who amongst the average American has seen, or tried on, something that expensive, except in thrift stores or consignment shops?
I wouldn't take that bet. I'd have assumed she was wearing designer clothes, because she is indeed rich and did look real good, but that's assuming I would have noticed her outfit at all before the sliming began. I didn't. I can't see it as anything but partisan nonsense: If she showed up wearing average clothes I am sure she'd be taking more flak for being a "phony" or a "fake." Take the misogynistic idiot above: Can't you just hear him calling her stupid for thinking the American public was stupid enough to be fooled by her wearing ordinary clothes? She couldn't have won.

And didn't I see somebody use Hillary as a better example?
http://www.counterfeitchic.com/Images/Hillary_orange_pantsuit_DNC_BBC.jpg
Here we see at least four different people fussing over Hillary's outfit before her speech.
And this is what we got:
http://www.counterfeitchic.com/Images/Hillary_orange_pantsuit_DNC_Reuters.jpg
I would not have known Cindy paid more than Hillary (still don't for that matter), but I could easily opine that she looked better doing it to me. Ultimately, I can ill imagine why anyone cares. Surely there's something more important than how much the independently wealthy potential first lady paid for the outfit she wore on what may very well be night of the biggest speech of her life. Stupid, in my opinion, would have been to pretend she was someone other than who she is. She’s rich. People who pay attention already know she's rich... and make no mistake; the press wasn't going to fail to inform everyone else, whether she wore a prom dress or overalls.

BumbleBeeBoogie
 
  2  
Reply Sat 6 Sep, 2008 08:51 am
@OCCOM BILL,
OB, I posted this thread because John McCain accused Barack Obama of being an elitist when that description really applies to the McCains.

BBB
ossobuco
 
  2  
Reply Sat 6 Sep, 2008 05:29 pm
@BumbleBeeBoogie,
(I still have my grandmother's purple hat, with purple veil. Born in 1871...)
Sglass
 
  2  
Reply Sun 7 Sep, 2008 01:23 am
@ossobuco,
I havenn't heard one word about Sarah Louise Palinnnnnnn's outfit.

J.C. Penny?
 

Related Topics

My Fellow Prisoners... - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Afred E. Smith Dinner - Discussion by cjhsa
mccain begs off - Discussion by dyslexia
If Biden And Obama Aren't Qualified - Discussion by Bi-Polar Bear
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
McCain lies - Discussion by nimh
The Case Against John McCain - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
 
Copyright © 2022 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/25/2022 at 02:46:02