Isn't this one of Sarah Palin's suits?

[GinaMaria]

http://www.lordandtaylor.com/eng/WomensApparel-Suits-SkirtSuits-Knit_Shirt_And_Skirt_Set-lordandtaylor/35548

It's a Tahari and it's on sale for $180.00. How the hell did they spend 150K? I understand they went to Needless Markup, but still. People on What Not To Wear get 5K for a new wardrobe and they buy some high end stuff. Maybe they should have had Sarah on the show save the RNC some $$$$$$$!!!!!

[Maven]

1. If you read the NYT article that was just posted

it seems that was among the cheaper items. She was also buying more expensive items like a $2500 Valentino jacket.

[Believing Is Art]

3. Is that the red leather jacket?

I HATE that jacket. So ugly.

[Maven]

7. Agreed.

It's a mess.

[Fuzz]

13. This jacket?

[CoffeeCat]

5. OMG...

...that is so over the top. So whacked.

I would not begrudge anyone for having a $2,500 Valentino jacket. But geez...I would think
that traipsing around "Ed's Hoagie Grill" in Akron, Ohio is probably not a good place to wear
a $2,500 Valentino jacket.

Maybe it's just me.

Was that the red, leather jacket she had on?

[Maven]

6. Nope, it's this one

On the left. That red leather thing is hideous, and probably cost a fortune.

[Believing Is Art]

8. That's pretty awful, too

It's boxy and shapeless. The only women that can pull that look off the stick-thin, super-tall runway models. She has too much of a feminine figure. The black leather (or pleather?) suit in the middle would be better if it was a different material, but I like the pumps. The boots in the right photo are completely inappropriate for business attire and don't go with the otherwise frilly feature of the suit, and that red skirt is not flattering.

Sorry, being surrounded by engineers all the time leaves me missing fashion talk :(

[GinaMaria]

12. I'll dish

The red suit is really pretty. While I like the red pumps, I do not think they are appropriate for a debate. A lot of the items bought for her have a sexual tone to them: Leather, red, high heels. Separately, or individually these items might not convey a blatant promotion of her sexuality, but as a collection certainly show their hand.

These items in conjunction with her wigglin' and winkin' at the debate indicate what her 'team' thinks her appeal is to voters. At this point she's decoration and used the same way women are used in muscle car mags to sell Mustangs etc. It's not very vice presidential or respectful of the intelligence of the voters they think will be plied with this nonsense.

[Believing Is Art]

2. Accessories n/t

[hlthe2b]

4. I'd love to try....!

She did all her shopping at Neiman's and Saks Fifth Avenue.... Hell, I used to shop Lord and Taylor before they closed in Denver. I can't say I'd ever shop for clothes at "Needless Mark UP" or Saks...

But, hell, I'd sure like to try...:eyes:

[ColbertWatcher]

10. Check the link at my post below (#9) n/t

[ColbertWatcher]

9. We tried to figure that out earlier ...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=4287971&mesg_id=4287971

[hlthe2b]

11. Funny... I wonder how much was jewelry....

I haven't paid close attention to what she's wearing, jewelry-wise, but given the price of gold, a nice set of pearls, some gold earrings and bangles-- it would add up.


Geebus, though... To spend like this to dress this "elitist" and then go down to the WalMart crowd to lay down the propaganda. They certainly don't lack nerve, do they?