You dont get to post bogus unsubstantiated crap as fact and then demand proof when people call you out.
Perhaps you should have started by posting proof that the campaign paid for Obama's suits.
Candidates and staff eating on the contributers dime is a campaign expenditure. The staff are also paid on the dime of the campaign contributers. (that is exactly why contributions are meant for in part)
Are you seriously this ignorant about american presidential campaigns?
Please quote where I said the campaign paid for the suits. I only said I would bet that is the case. Big difference. Learn how to read.
And i'm saying this because I think it's perfectly legal under the campaign laws. Clothes are nothing more than a prop, just like a stage or a flag. If you are so sure then post a link to the law saying clothes worn at campaign events are not a legit campaign cost. I posted noting unsubstantiated, but you sure posted like only assholes do.
Last edited:
Federal campaign finance law prohibits the use of campaign funds for personal use, which it defines as any expense "that would exist irrespective of the candidate's campaign or duties as a federal officeholder".
If food is not a cost that would exist irrespective of the campaign then it could just as easily be argued the same applies to suits for the candidate.
If food is not a cost that would exist irrespective of the campaign then it could just as easily be argued the same applies to suits for the candidate.
No your exact quote was that you bet more was spent on clothing Obama.
You didnt say Obama spent that on himself, you said "they" implying that Obama's campaign bought the clothes, or spent more than 150k on clothes for him.
And no you would be wrong. Buying yourself items for personal use is illegal by law and this is exactly why the Mccain campaign stated that items would be donated to charity and are property of the RNC so the palin's and her troop do not get to keep them. (This only after they had been caught)
No matter how you put it, it is seedy, it is hypocritical ,it is atypical of the Mccain/palin trailer park trash to blow that kind of money(especially other people's money) when the economy is in the tank, when they are pimping her as some wholesome small town woman.
Mccain is the same one who tried to sell obama as some elite celebrity who likes soy chai latte, look who has been caught blowing 150k on blouses and skirts?
Even members of the RNC fighting for their political life are questioning the absurdity of this move. This after borrowing 5 million from a govt fund just to help republicans in danger of losing their seats.
Whether you were speculating or not, is besides the point. Fact remains you cant ask some one to post proof that your ridiculous bet is boneheaded.
You still read things while completely ignoring what was said.
""I bet" implied my thought that the odds are high that campaign money is spend on clothes for campaigns and legally. "I bet" certainly doesn't imply any kind a claim of fact. Learn how to read idiot. You are just trying to pick a fight because you drool over Obama.
As for me asking for proof...you are the one who stated as fact that Obama paid for the suits himself, which was nothing more than your guess. So like some retard said just a couple posts ago, you don't get to just post anything without something to back it up....at least not if you want to be taken seriously.
Last edited:
You know? For someone to call Obama an elitist, she sure as hell dresses well for someone who's supposed to be a PTA, hockey mom. Jesus, Neiman Marcus? I freak the fuck out when my girl wants to steer me in there.
LOL! I thnk the $150k woulda been better spent on Sarah Palin's TUTORING!!:lol:
LOL! I thnk the $150k woulda been better spent on Sarah Palin's TUTORING!!:lol:
uke1:
So, they quickly decide to do a left turn and claim all the clothes (even the children) will be donated to charity after the election. Man that is smooooth.
And a crock of shit.
Don't leave out the fact the Puggies spent 20,000 on makeup and makeup artists in September alone....all on the contributor's dime.
:nono5:
