So much has been made of Sarah Palin's - or should I say the RNC's - shopping spree to make the Republican Vice Presidential nominee look perty, and I've got some problems with this:
1. Who cares?
Sure, individuals make donations to the RNC assuming their hard-earned money will be spent to elect some anti-abortionist or guns-rightist or anti-gay marriage (ist?). But, when you give money to an organization (any organization), unless you provide guidelines on what the money is to be used for, the organization is free to do with it what it will. Plus, I'm not going to shed a tear about Republican cash being spent at Neiman's instead of on electing some conservative.
2. It's sexist.
I know plenty of time was spent talking about John Edwards' pricey haircut, but let's not pretend that coverage of the Sarah Palin shopping spree is ungendered. If she were a dude, people would look the other way. Perhaps more of the outrage should be used to belie Palin's claims that she is working class (she's not) than complaining about misuse of donor's cash.
3. The real issues.
Sarah Palin might have a new, high-class wardrobe, but the truth is she's the same broad who thinks all women should be forced to carry unwanted pregnancies to term, who thinks rape survivors ought to foot the bill for their own rape kits, who believes that "marriage" should only be available to one "Maverick Governor" and one "First Dude," who argues against sex ed in schools (see Exhibit A: Bristol Palin), and who likes to shoot animals with high-powered rifles from a helicopter.
Bitch is crazy.
And once this race is over, she can go back to Wasilla and her faux-leather patchwork jackets and keep her crazy to Alaska.
So maybe a little shopping spree isn't such a big deal.