If the difference between a hockey mom and a pitbull is lipstick, whats the difference between a hockey mom and a greedy politician with a $150,000 Fifth Avenue make-over? The conclusion I suspect a lot of beleaguered hockey moms will be forced to admit: probably a lot.
Let’s have another go: you can put lipstick on a pig, but it’s still a pig. You can brand a corrupt, inexperienced, self-righteous governor a maverick and a qualified choice for VP, but you still have a corrupt, inexperienced, self-righteous governor.
How can any campaign be this tone-deaf to the social and cultural nuances of its professed electorate?
The best account of this story of dumb, dumb excess so far is at the Washington Post, After $150,000 Makeover, Sarah Palin Has an Image Problem.
Wow. This may be the straw that breaks the camel’s back. This story is going to blow-up. After the huge amount of evidence that shows she used Alaska’s governship as a personal fiefdom, is anyone surprised?
And just how many outfits can be bought for $150,000? 150? 75? 30? Stop me when I’m getting close…
Simultaneously, new polls show Obama now commands a 10% lead.
1 Comment
October 23, 2008 at 12:34 pm
A pitbull is a dog, not a pig. Or do you call her a pig here? That would be mean towards pigs.
Maybe she’s like Lady Di who had a “shoe problem”. ^^ Don’t hurt me Lady Di fans for mentioning that.