Skirting the issue

Newsnight

Much more importantly, to me in the UK and concerned with the BIG issues...

When are you going to be addressing (here's hoping) the vastly important, topical issue of... Mrs Palin's wardrobe. Everyone else is doing it!

Now, I have to say that I have in my wardrobe the same suit I had a decade ago for smart stuff, while the missus is on La Redoute's frequent buyer programme, so there is an 'issue' here.

As it wasn't mentioned on BBC Breakfast News, I still wonder who is paying, but if not the taxpayer whose business it is and hence who cares. Maybe Mr. Obama's helicopter has seats made from whale foreskins?

Maybe some are just still smarting over the expose over their bubbly bill... which is paid for by the licence fee and hence, in part...me.

When it comes to the BBC, might there be a danger of skirting (sorry) dodgy ground here, considering, how to say, more 'favourable', uncritical 'reporting' of the fashions sported by oh so many others 'approved' of (from Princess D through WAGS to Mrs. Brown), and from ladies who also don't seem to lob up each day in the same one-piece.

I merely note in passing a few of Newsnight's very own being involved, irony-free, with a progamme that is currently quite active in getting knickers in a twist over 'inappropriate' relationships.

Meanwhile, I have noted the ongoing quality of editorial riquor with their 'post 'n never check/read again' blogs...
McCain Suckered By Obama Over The Big Bucks

2. At 07:41am on 23 Oct 2008, JunkkMale wrote:
Just like New York...

McCain Suckered By Obama Over The Big Bucks

1. At 07:46am on 23 Oct 2008, JunkkMale wrote:
...New York... evidently a post that is thought so good, they post it twice!

(until it is without acknowledgement or explanation removed, put back in, taken out...).

Sorry, I appear not to be treating these with the gravitas some think they obviously deserve.

Can't think why.

Indy - Republican Party spent $150,000 on Palin's wardrobe
Obama still has questions to answer

Gaurdian - How to spend $1.5bn on elections - first lavish $150,000 on Sarah Palin's clothes
Tomasky talk: Palin v Tomasky clothing budgets

Like the money spent on other billboards is any different, or better, or of use to the poor.

Telegraph - US election: Sarah Palin's spending spree

Remind me, on whose dime was Jackie O's wardrobe when she was hitched to that geezer whose electoral chances seemed to do OK when she scrubbed up well?

Or is it OK only so long as the dosh gets blown on the arm candy? I remember thinking 'Nice barnet, Cherie. Worth every penny!'

Indy - Sarah Churchwell: Who's 'ordinary' in these clothes?

On a point of education for this non-US expert...

Where did these funds come from and how are they defined?

They money used is referred to as 'public funds' hence 'charg[ed] to the taxpayer'. Really?

Does that mean all electoral expenses, no matter what side of the political divide, are covered by the public?

In which case what are the party fund raisers for?

And of these public funds, might we learn what else, again from across the political divide, is spent by the various parties and (one presumes, on behalf of) the various candidates.

In a world of impressions the way a woman looks is given more heft. I seem to recall the media, well some, being quite happy with the image presented by Jackie Kennedy or, more recently, Sarah Brown when not being used as a prop by hubby. Or Cherie's multi-£ barnet.

I guess the message is that these ladies were somehow different? If not politically, maybe it's just that they were the main attraction's female eye-candy, so that's OK then.

Times - Republicans spent $150,000 on Sarah Palin's clothes - No answer to the above yet, but a quick Google leads me in a slightly different direction.

Telegraph - Barack Obama election night rally to cost Chicago $2 million - When in doubt... 2 wrongs! Ain't non-partisan, considered, objective media commentary just the best:)

Hotair.com - Jeri Thompson nukes Colmes, defends Palin’s wardrobe expenses

I guess I am capable of being swayed by a stereotype as the next... person... but Mrs. Thompson was simply the sharpest, most coherent and well-informed person in the exchanges. End of.

Frankly the BBC seems to have hyped an aspect and dropped it once the main line has served its function, namely Mrs. P blowing a wad on frocks. Little on the context vis a vis presentation or the activities of others in this regard.

Party funding is a wee bit more complex than that, and if running with an aspect I would maintain any sharing this either do it 'all or nothing'.

Mrs. T was not about to let Mrs. O get a free pass, but such 'two-wrongs' counters have to be skillfully used to a) make a point without sounding petty and b) giving the very entities that feel free to initiate such trivia techniques the opportunity to say, with all due pompous hypocrisy they can muster: 'well, we're not talking about that'.

Maybe the question should be asked more why they do not, in an even way, from the outset, from so-called 'objective' journalists who these days seem happy to be agenda-supporting shills for party Press Releases.

Telegraph - £92,000 on clothes in nine weeks? Way to go Sarah Palin!