McCain's $500 Dress Shoes were quite the hot topic amongst the limpwristed left, so I can't wait to see the outrage from you fruits over Michelle's $540 tennis shoes.

OK, who will be first?

I gotta give you a gold star for originality, but sneakers?

No outrage here, just sympathy for a pathetic thread.

A Woman has a FUNDAMENTAL right to spend as much money on Her footwear as She wants to. Huge difference between a Woman spending huge amounts on clothing and apparel and that of a Man doing the same thing.

Larry

I did a search on Cindy's shoes and this popped up

I miss The_A_Hole !

my shoes cost 25 bux

#2 | Posted by klifferd

What's the point in buying expensive shoes if you're training to be a suicide bomber?

Posted by Rob_The_A_Hole

#4 | Posted by LarryMohr at 2009-05-01 09:23 AM | Reply | Flag: Strike One

Is the name "Manchelle" an original 101 term or is it from elsewhere??
Is there a factory or something where righties manufacture insulting names for the Obama's??
Bet Manchelle could beat 101 in arm wrestling and look pretty doing it.

"OK, who will be first?"

Goddam bitch...doesn't realize that there's starving children in Biafra?

Danni -

Quick googling shows he lifted it, of course.

I "lifted" a grammar school taunt? Gawwwd, you're such a brute!

Jeepers golly, what an issue.

That, yodeling about toture, and parading his poorly repressed anxieties are about all Cher has, 726.

Hmmm, who were the limpwrists that were so enthralled with McCain's $500 shoes? Surely it wasn't a figment of my imagination.

Well I've got you worked up in a tizzy as usual, sweetchuck.

Is there a factory or something where righties manufacture insulting names for the Obama's??

----

What's your point? The lefties on this site had lots of insulting names for Bush and the right.

Is there a factory or something where righties manufacture insulting names for the Obama's??

#7 | Posted by danni at 2009-05-01 09:27 AM | Reply | Flag:

It's the same factory that produced "Dumbya" and about 900 variants of "Chimp" plus countless combinations of the name Bush with Cheney, Rumsfeld and a wide variety of names of unsavory WW2 figures.

Why do you ask?

"Well I've got you worked up in a tizzy as usual, sweetchuck."

Oooooooooooooo....good one.

Did the democrats really bitch about mccain's shoes?
I don't remember that. I do remember the palin wardrobe debacle. AND I remember the John Edwards haircut garbage.

Difference here is that I can see somebody paying 500 for a pair of Ferragamo's or something (especially when you're a millionaire), but I couldn't see a white guy with straight hair paying so much for a haircut he couldve paid 15 for at any barber shop.

#18 LOL - FF for the straight-hair $15 haircut!

Jeepers golly, what an issue.

#11 | Posted by 726 at 2009-05-01 09:37 AM | Reply |

A quick google search showed you thought enough of McCain's $500 shoes to comment on them.

Did the democrats really bitch about mccain's shoes?

#18 | Posted by Hagbard_Celine at 2009-05-01 09:46 AM | Reply

Google McCain's $500 shoes and take a gander. Long story short, absolutely they did.

I can't wait to see the outrage from you fruits over Michelle's $540 tennis shoes.
I have 1/500th the outrage for her shoes as I do for Sarush's $250,000 wardrobe.
I'm sure you share the same level of outrage, 101.

God, the right has moved from desperate to pathetic in record time.
To the teabags, patriots!

FALA
(April 7, 1940 - April 5, 1952)
R.I.P.

"my shoes cost 25 bux

#2 | Posted by klifferd

What's the point in buying expensive shoes if you're training to be a suicide bomber?

Posted by Rob_The_A_Hole "

hahah nice.

ahole was definately funnier then the other toolbox here 101whitepower

#22

I remember that being a $150k wardrobe, not a quarter mil.

I'm sure you'll adjust your comparative outrage accordingly.

Who paid for the shoes?

If the Obama's paid for them on their own, I don't care.

Most likely they were 'loaned' by the designer to get all this publicity.

The most I've ever paid for sneakers was about $120 for top-of-the-line New Balance. Wore them for years. I paid $200 for a pair of Red Wings -- several pair actually.

God, the right has moved from desperate to pathetic in record time.
To the teabags, patriots!

#21 | Posted by northguy3 at 2009-05-01 09:55 AM | Reply

Says the tool that has half the posts in threads about Sara Palin's half sister.

BTW, a quick google search shows you to be quite interested in John McCains shoes as well.

That's two hypocrites out of two google searches so far.

Hey Starvis,
Do you recognize this thread? Go clean yourself up, bitch.

And my $300 a pair socks are rolled between the thighs of Filipino virgins. - Verm

Oh lookie, 726 posted on that thread too, but without the "What an issue" crack...

You clowns are too easy.

A quick google search showed you thought enough of McCain's $500 shoes to comment on them.

#19 | Posted by 101Chairborne

Annnnnndddddd?

Have I leveled an attach at Obama for being an "elitist"?

The whole shit storm about McCain's/Obama shoes were in response to charges of Obama being an "elitist". Awwwfully hard to call someone an elitist while wearing $500 loafers.

Now has Michelle called someone an elitist?

Oh lookie, 726 posted on that thread too, but without the "What an issue" crack...

#30 | Posted by 101Chairborne at 2009-05-01 10:19 AM

Holy shit that Obama is an elitist!

I bet his Nike's cost $100!

Posted by 726 at 2008-07-30 09:58 PM

You better get yourself checked out, you are getting dumber by the minute.

Jeepers golly, what an issue.

#11 | Posted by 726 at 2009-05-01 09:37 AM | Reply

Annnnnndddddd?

#31 | Posted by 726 at 2009-05-01 10:28 AM | Reply

It's self explanatory. One you thought was a big deal, the other, not so much.
The link I posted wasn't your only commentary on the shoes.

Don't sweat it, we're all guilty of being hypocrites here. It's just that we're not all usually caught like you puds were.

You better get yourself checked out, you are getting dumber by the minute.

#32 | Posted by 726 at 2009-05-01 10:29 AM | Reply |

Holy shit, are you retarded? Did you or did you not comment on the thread? Was your comment about how stupid the thread was, or not? No? Then you're a hypocrite.

Own it, it's embarrassing watching you try to squirm.

Dumber by the minute.

"It's just that we're not all usually caught like you puds were."

right, you are consistently a douchebag

You poor bastard. How's the fat wife?

How's this thread "suit" ya, 726?

i wasn't really too worried about mccains 500 dollar shoes.

but what i did find funny was his 5000 a week makeup retainer

and palins 11,000 a week makeup retainer.

If they can afford to spend 500 bucks on shoes, which they're tax records clearly show they can, what is the problem.

I remember Cindy McCain was getting slammed for wearing expensive outfits and I thought the same thing. Of course it that case they'd be like a 500,000 dollar outfit, when the dress was like 5k and she was wearing some costly jewels. Which was also stupid.

I think it's a jealousy thing people get pissed when they see some famous person spent 500 bucks on a shoe or a couple grand on a dress. They're just pissed they don't have the money to do the same thing. I mean if I had 500 I could toss on a pair of shoes, I'd probably buy something else, but I'd like the money all the same.

Who cares what Michelle wears, I sure as hell don't. If you want to be mad, be mad at all the people who wasted money on Obama's book which is why she can afford 500 dollar shoes.

#28 | Posted by 101Chairborne at 2009-05-01 10:18 AM

Hey, lOlCherborn, where have I commented on this thread about the article you posted? Now, unwad your pantaloons and waddle off to the fern bar for your morning happy squeeze.

#11 Sweetchuck. Try to weasel your way out of that one...

Hey, lOlCherborn, where have I commented on this thread about the article you posted?

#41 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2009-05-01 10:43 AM | Reply

So, does this make you one of the hypocrites I mentioned in my first post?

I don't remember hearing about McCain's shoes. I guess it got lost in the discussion of his 13 automobiles and who knows how many houses (well McCain doesn't know anyway). Then there was him saying he gets divorced from day-to-day challenges that Americans face.

Can't forget about Sarah's $250K wardrobe; did those clothes ever find their way to that charity. Didn't Cindy have a $300K outfit on one night?

Step right up hypocrites and tell us all why McCain's $500 dress shoes were a big deal and the manbeast's $500+ sneakers aren't.

Posted by 101Chairborne at 09:08 AM | 44 COMMENTS | permalink | Comment on This Entry

Link? I don't think McCains shoes were of great interest to many liberals, no matter what they cost, since the goernment didn't pay for them. I guess you righties are the fashion conscious ones, whining about haircuts and shoes--get over it, whiner.

We will see if RCADE the Tool puts this on the front page like he said he would on the Ms. California Breast fascination thread.

McCain's $500 Dress Shoes were quite the hot topic amongst the limpwristed left

No, they weren't.

Google McCain's $500 shoes

K, did that.

No mention of them at the DR.

But they were mentioned.

They were only mentioned in the context of hypocrisy, however.

Rtards like yerself, Airhead, were in a lather over John Edward's 400 dollar haircut and McLame and Failin were calling Obama an elitist.

In response to that it was pointed out at HuffPo, Kos and on Jack Cafferty's segment on CNN that for a guy like McCain to stand in a pair of 520 dollar Ferragamos and call Obama an elitist was the height of hypocrisy.

That was also the context in criticising Scary Failin's little Imelda Marcos-esque shopping trips while hyping her "just folks" persona, in case you was wondering.

This story is currently considered news over on Matt Drudge's Retort parody site.

Qu'elle frrickin' surprise!

Here's the deal, punkin head.

This story is a non-issue.

Further Spud'll tell ya that if ya want yer party's fortune to ever stop sinking you might want to try discussing real and substantive issues that actually impact the country. Particularily in the time of two on-going wars, a melting economy, an immigration crisis, an almost complete corporate corruption of DC and an influenza outbreak.

All this shoe talk, these teleprompter jokes, these thinly veiled racist insults are doing you guys no good at all and, indeed, may be doing you actual harm.

Get yer shit together.

Be Well.

/Like he do
stage left.

#43 | Posted by 101Chairborne at 2009-05-01 10:49 AM

Treat yourself to a reading comprehension lesson. Wait, better make it a full course.

Treat yourself to a reading comprehension lesson. Wait, better make it a full course.

#48 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2009-05-01 11:46 AM | Reply

I read just fine. I read the thread you deemed important enough to post (the McCain shoes thread), and I've read this thread, where you conveniently fail to comment on Michele's shoes.

BTW Sweetchuck, what does the "That" in your #11 refer to? Be careful while answering, you wouldn't want to ruin your #41, Goldidocs.

Aside from that, I can see the rest of the DR Limpwrists are struggling to defend the hypocrisy as well.

Good job, ladies.

HC-
"Palin also used low-level staffers to buy some of the clothes on their credit cards. The McCain campaign found out last week when the aides sought reimbursement. One aide estimated that she spent "tens of thousands" more than the reported $150,000, and that $20,000 to $40,000 went to buy clothes for her husband."

"John McCain recently paid American Idol makeup artist Tifanie White $5,583.43 to apply cosmetics to his face for a TV appearance." Think that was for his Brokeback Mountain Church interview.

So 101 is ten times as outraged? And I'm betting the shoes outlast the make-up.

Non-Issue.

Now if Michelle bought the $500 pair of sneakers with money she attained through a mafia controlled industry then it would be a story.

Northtard has no idea, but he's making my point perfectly.

Tell me tard, what did Hillary spend on hair and make-up?

Tell me tard, what did Hillary spend on hair and make-up?
#53 | Posted by 101Chairborne at 2009-05-01 12:32 PM | Reply | Flag: Color Me Jealous

"what did Hillary spend on hair and make-up?"

Not enough.

"Now if Michelle bought the $500 pair of sneakers with money she attained through a mafia controlled industry then it would be a story."

Or with the tripling of her salary when obama was elected senator in exchange for millions in grant money.

Treat yourself to a reading comprehension lesson. Wait, better make it a full course.

#48 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2009-05-01 11:46 AM

It is lost on him as is nuance.

He is the typical GWB republican.

Uh huh, nuance. That's what made Starvis post a thread about McCain's shoes, and you post repeatedly on such an important topic as Cindy McCain's gown...

Golly Jeepers, those riveting issues...

Own your hypocrisy, cupcake.

726 - Diagnosis sounds about right.

#58 | Posted by 101Chairborne at 2009-05-01 12:55 PM | Reply | Flag: Still Doesn't Get It

No Goldidocs, I get it. You guys can post about such trivial matters, but when you're hypocrisy is pointed out, it magically becomes "nuance".

Now, how about #49? Don't hurt yourself contorting.

According to Danni's post the other day, blacks are incapable of fiscal restraint.

This is merely Exhibit 104569825-H. Kudos to Danni, who saw this coming.

Doc,

He is either to dumb to see it, or too arrogant to admit it.

Either way.....

I've never spent $500 for a pair of shoes, but I could see why somebody might want to. You know, bling and all that.

Unless, of course, they're really ugly. Or French.

Didn't Cindy have a $300K outfit on one night?

#44 | Posted by johnny_hotsauce

I think so. But that included jewelry which is bullshit. I mean the cost of an outfit should be the actual clothing (ie dress, shoes). Jewelry is it's own category. It generally is wearable in a lot of other situations, like Michelle's pearls.

"Didn't Cindy have a $300K outfit on one night?"

Why is everyone going on about shoes, dresses and hairdo's? Can't we go back to talkin' about tits? Tits are are a MUCH more important topic when discussing the course of politics...right?

Michelle returned the custom running shoes when she realized that they could legally keep all the cool stuff in The House, courtesy of the misguided voters.

Didn't Cindy have a $300K outfit on one night?

What does this have to do with the first lady?

Hey,

They (GOP) are grasping at straws, give them SOMETHING.

Pretty lame if this what the GOPhers have been reduced to whining about. Once again, evidence of just how marginalized the rightwing of America has become. $500 running shoes as a rightwing talking point? Wow.

No wonder Specter declared himself a Democrat this week. I have to believe that the GOP has better arrows in it's quiver than the First Ladies footwear. If not, they should just pack it in and resign as the Opposition Party. I'm sure even the Libertarians can do better.

This is not new...Edwards' $400 haircut anyone? They love to make the DNC seem like the elite party, yet it was the GOP forcing people to sign loyality oaths to hear the president.

What does she wear on her knuckles and how much does it cost?

Kanrei,

That was the point of it. That McCain standing in his $500 loafers, 9 houses, private plane screaming that Obama is an "elitist".

It was not about the shoes, but the hypocrisy.

Of course the mentally challenged thinks it was about the shoes.

I'm still trying to figure out who is stupid enough to spend $500 on a pair of shoes -- especially sneakers!

I mean besides the Obamas, of course.

On this one Goatman, I agree with you.

#3 | Posted by LarryMohr

Did you have this same feeling when it was Sarah Palin's wardrobe? ;o)

As to Michelle and the cost of her shoes--so what.

What I would worry about is the appearance of the size of her foot.

Looks like a size 10?

"Did you have this same feeling when it was Sarah Palin's wardrobe? ;o)"

Did Palin pay for her own wardrobe? ; 0!

Did Palin pay for her own wardrobe?

Are you kidding? Only a dumbshit spends that kind of money on clothes for themself

No--she didn't buy them. But you might have missed the 10 threads or so on the subject.

Then the additional 10 threads that the clothes were sent back to the RNC and supposedly going to be sold for charity.

The usual suspects haven't put up a new thread to tell us what happened.

Did you have this same feeling when it was Sarah Palin's wardrobe? ;o)

As to Michelle and the cost of her shoes--so what.

What I would worry about is the appearance of the size of her foot.

Looks like a size 10?

Posted by MURPHY at 2009-05-01 03:33 PM | Reply

Sarah Palin declared She was just Your average soccer mom while wearing high falutyent hoity toity (I would say prickazoidal but pussyzoidal sounds kooky)Clothing that no average soccermom would wear. She was phonier than a 3 dollar bill. Oh and Michelle being a size 10 ain't nothing. My sister My biological sister ( I have several "Sisters" wears a 10 1/2 in mens. So whats the big deal??

Larry

The Obamas made 2.7 million last year--$450 bucks for a pair of sneakers is par.

And again--so what.

larry - that's 12.5 in women's. it takes a special man to appreciate a big boned gal.

"My sister My biological sister ( I have several "Sisters" wears a 10 1/2 in mens. So whats the big deal??"

IN MENS???

OMGosh...I only wear a 7 1/2 in mens.

How tall are your sisters?

Then the additional 10 threads that the clothes were sent back to the RNC and supposedly going to be sold for charity.

The usual suspects haven't put up a new thread to tell us what happened.

#79 | Posted by MURPHY

The most recent thing I could find was from Fox News that said she returned the clothes to the RNC, but at least as of early March they hadn't done anything with them.

Larry--

If you don't care about Michelle and her size 10 sneakers for $450...

Then you shouldn't give a damn about the cost of Palin and her family's clothes came to.

It's called consistency.

Or if you are saying--since the Palins' only earned about $200,000 (?) for the year before that she needs to wear stuff from the Goodwill?

Nanc I love big boned Women. Hell Amazoinian types thrill Me. See I want one thatil kick My ass without breaking a sweat. They are yummyo.

Larry

#84 | Posted by SanAntonioRogue

Thanks San--lol

Nanc I love big boned Women. Hell Amazoinian types thrill Me. See I want one thatil kick My ass without breaking a sweat. They are yummyo.

Larry

#86 | Posted by LarryMohr

TMI Larry!

If you don't care about Michelle and her size 10 sneakers for $450...

Then you shouldn't give a damn about the cost of Palin and her family's clothes came to.

It's called consistency.

Or if you are saying--since the Palins' only earned about $200,000 (?) for the year before that she needs to wear stuff from the Goodwill?

#85 | Posted by MURPHY at 2009-05-01 03:44 PM | Reply | Flag: Flag: (Choose)
FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusiv
e

You don't understand sweetie. Michelle Obama wasn't running for office making believe SHe was just Your average soccermom and middle class Woman at the very same time wearing duds that cost more than My whole fricking wardrobe from birth on. HUGE DIFFERENCE.

Larry

My sister is 5'9" Lisa. She used to be fat too but SHe lost a lot of weight. But the Shoe size remained. My dad wears 15's I wear 15's so She gets it from Her Dad.

Larry

And my $300 a pair socks are rolled between the thighs of Filipino virgins.

#29 | Posted by Corky at 2009-05-01 10:18 AM | Reply

A 'Filipino' is a boy. A 'Filipina' is a girl. It's the Spanish influence.

What's the matter, Cork? Did you wake up again from a dream about an 11-year-old boy?

It's called consistency.

Larry is very consistent. He always toes the DNC party line and says what he is told to say by them no matter how idiot or hypocritical. He is quite consistent on that point.

Michelle Obama wasn't running for office

Larry, you always find the most idiotic and irrelevant justifications to stand up for the DNC who controls your brain. Why didn't you just say, "Palin wears glasses. Big difference".

You are such a sheeple, Larry.

A 'Filipino' is a boy. A 'Filipina' is a girl. It's the Spanish influence.

#91 | Posted by vernon

I think he knows that.

Why don't You fuck off Goatman. You love ruining threads don't You?? You dig??

You love ruining threads don't You??

You only considered it 'ruined' because I spoke a truism about you that you didn't like. If I had said teh same thing about Bush, you would not have considered the thread ruined, would you?

Yeah, I dig.

Goatman pointing out wot he percieves as faults on the left while giving the right a pass?

Well, he may be an enormous pain in the ass and a troll but at least he's consistent.

I'm still trying to figure out who is stupid enough to spend $500 on a pair of shoes -- especially sneakers!

I mean besides the Obamas, of course.

~HeadButt-boy

Calling the Obama's "Stupid"? That's it?

Man, yer not even trying anymore.

1/10.

Be Well.

I still think spending $540 on a pair of sneakers is stupid, deth. If Laura Bush had done it you would too.

The idiocy of going through life wearing partisian blinders . . . geez

Goatman pointing out wot he percieves as faults on the left while giving the right a pass?

That sounds familiar. Where did I hear that before. OH! post #96. Too bad your twist on it isn't true.

Got anything new other than that faggy 'K' thing you've recently added to your cutesy but phony persona?

Yeah, I dig.

#96 | Posted by goatman at 2009-05-01 04:00 PM | Reply | Flag: Rains on Parades

"Goatman pointing out wot he percieves as faults on the left while giving the right a pass?"

Not true. He's nonpartisan. Just ask him.

#98 and #99. Both my favorite trolls show up at the same time? The 69 session must be over.

Excuse me, #99 and #100. Both coming up for air.

"The idiocy of going through life wearing partisian blinders . . . geez

Posted by goatman at 2009-05-01 04:27 PM"

The irony of railing about partisanship when you are partisan.

The 69 session must be over.

#101 | Posted by goatman at 2009-05-01 04:29 PM | Reply | Flag: Fantasizing

The 69 session must be over.

#101 | Posted by goatman at 2009-05-01 04:29 PM | Reply | Flag: Projecting

"#98 and #99. Both my favorite trolls show up at the same time?

#101 | Posted by goatman at 2009-05-01 04:29 PM"

Yes, how odd. Why don't you search the internets to figure out why this happens. Here's a hint: you post something stupid, we all see it, and more than one of us might just feel like telling you how stupid it was. But if you want to fantasize about gay sex instead, have at it Big Guy.

Projecting

No, projecting is when you say something about someone else as if first person for them. Stating a fact is not projecting. I've explained this to you twice with references. YOu'll have to look it up yourself this time. LOL

poor m'boor

blubber, blubber, blubber

LOL

...post something stupid, we all see it,

But what I posted wasn't stupid. It was absolutely true.

You ought to pick your battles better. If you are going to defend one of your own, stay away from obvious idiots like Larry Mohr. Defend someone with a brain (yes there are a lot of lefties out there with one) and whose partisianship isn't so glaringly rigid.

Flag: Fantasizing
#104 | Posted by nullifidian

Flag: Projecting
#105 | Posted by mOntecOre at 2009-05-01 04:31 PM | Reply | Flag: Didn't get their stories straight

Flag: Fantasizing
#104 | Posted by nullifidian

Flag: Projecting
#105 | Posted by mOntecOre at 2009-05-01 04:31 PM | Reply | Flag: Didn't get their stories straight

#110 | Posted by JOE at 2009-05-01 04:45 PM | Reply | Flag: Doesn't Understand Not Mutually Exclusive

But what I posted wasn't stupid.

#109 | Posted by goatman at 2009-05-01 04:43 PM | Reply | Flag: Stupid

Flag: Fantasizing
#104 | Posted by nullifidian

Flag: Projecting
#105 | Posted by mOntecOre at 2009-05-01 04:31 PM | Reply | Flag: Didn't get their stories straight

#110 | Posted by JOE at 2009-05-01 04:45 PM | Reply | Flag: Doesn't Understand Not Mutually Exclusive

#111 | Posted by mOntecOre at 2009-05-01 04:47 PM | Reply | Flag: Let's add another flag to this

Flag: Fantasizing
#104 | Posted by nullifidian

Flag: Projecting
#105 | Posted by mOntecOre at 2009-05-01 04:31 PM | Reply | Flag: Didn't get their stories straight

#110 | Posted by JOE at 2009-05-01 04:45 PM | Reply | Flag: Doesn't Understand Not Mutually Exclusive

#111 | Posted by mOntecOre at 2009-05-01 04:47 PM | Reply | Flag: Let's add another flag to this

#113 | Posted by JOE at 2009-05-01 04:49 PM | Reply | Flag: Uno Mas

#114 | Posted by mOntecOre at 2009-05-01 04:50 PM Flag: le gustan las banderas tontas

"According to Danni's post the other day, blacks are incapable of fiscal restraint."

Please explain....

Larry and a doberman under a tree F-U-C-K-I-N-G

(at least my version has some truth to it. LOL)

Posted by goatman at 2009-04-27 12:12 AM | Reply

The real Goatboy!

Where did you go old man?

Must have time to change the channel!

I forgot.

LOL!

I still think spending $540 on a pair of sneakers is stupid, deth. If Laura Bush had done it you would too.

O rly?

Thanx fer trying to force a pair of partisan blinders on Spud.

When you go fer a walk in farm country?

Do the scarecrows tremble with fear?

that faggy 'K' thing

Hey, you sed that the use of K was "emulating a teenage girl" and now it's a sign of homosexuality?

If yer gonna be a massive troll the least you can do is be consistent in yer WOBby ways.

#117 | Posted by jerrytarkanian

While Spud appreciates the goal of that particular postage yer methodology ignored a crucial truth.

You gotta understand that taking something offa the deleted comments thread and then reposting it is verboten hereabouts.

Anyone who's read this blog with any consistency and honesty is well aware at this point of Goat's hypocrisy, partisanship and mean-spirited nature.

Be Well.

Hi, itsy. Can't keep away from me, can you? LOL

Michelle Obama wasn't running for office making believe SHe was just Your average soccermom and middle class Woman at the very same time wearing duds that cost more than My whole fricking wardrobe from birth on. HUGE DIFFERENCE.

Larry

#89 | Posted by LarryMohr

Larry--MO is running the office of the First Lady.

She proclaims to represent the poor people but yet goes and buys sneakers that cost $540 busck.

You also said--

A Woman has a FUNDAMENTAL right to spend as much money on Her footwear as She wants to. Huge difference between a Woman spending huge amounts on clothing and apparel and that of a Man doing the same thing.

Larry

#3 | Posted by LarryMohr

Soooo this applies to every woman except Sarah Palin?

And Larry--if Sarah had kept the clothes--that would be a reason to be pissed (and illegal). But she turned them over to the owner--the RNC.

She returned her clothes and the clothes they bought for the family.

And she went back to AK to her little consignment store that is her regular store.

You'll have to forgive Larry. He is one of the more heavily brainwashed partisian zombies on the DR. He can't help himself.

OK, this has been said before, but I have to echo... who cares?

We have a war (or 2), a possible pandemic, gov't attempting to take ownership of everything, Crysler dying quickly, GM in a mess, the economy is crap...

Can we focus on something important? Was it her money? If that is how she wanted to spend it, fine by me.

'course, the shoes were probably made by 12 year old slave labor in China.

It's not the biggest issue in the world, but image is important in politics, and I can see why the First Lady is getting kicked in the shins over this. Wearing ridiculously overpriced sneakers to work a food bank is pretty comical.

However, is $540 really that extravagant for sneakers, considering the ridiculous prices that some Nike shoes cost these days? I've seen them go for $200 or more.

I love the way you libs justify this yet you were all over Sarah Palin. I love your double standard.

However, is $540 really that extravagant for sneakers,

YES!!! IT IS!!

so how many pair of $540 sneakers do you own because for myself I get mine at payless or walmart.

I love the way you libs justify this yet you were all over Sarah Palin. I love your double standard.

#126 | Posted by chickenrancher at 2009-05-02 11

BRAVISSIMO.

so how long will it take for cnn or msnbc to run with this story and talk shit about how its not right.
CLUE...dont hold your breath.

so how many pair of $540 sneakers do you own because for myself I get mine at payless or walmart.

I don't waste money on expensive sneakers. But a lot of people do, or else Nike couldn't get $275 for these ridiculous basketball sneakers:

However, is $540 really that extravagant for sneakers

The advertising revenues from the DR must be very good if you have can ask that question.

Advertising's in the toilet since the economy broke. But I ain't complaining.

here is an interesting article about it
interesting in that if you will take the poll the results so far will pop up and you will see that a much larger number than I thought say that she should look good..I guess even in the face of the terrible irony of wearing them where she apparently did...

Typical woman.

she has to rub it in, after all she is the wife of the almighty anti-christ

I care more about the fact Obama helped out at the food bank than the fact she wore a pair or pricey sneakers.

People on the right will find anything to attack the Obama's about, it's almost a joke anymore...

#135 - I agree she did a good thing by helping at the food bank but really it's in poor taste to show up in a pair of $540 sneakers. Have you ANY idea how many bottles of Thunderbird that would buy for a homeless guy?

WTF cares?
This country is pathetic.

#40 | Posted by astrobuckeye at 2009-05-01 10:41 AM

Who cares what Michelle wears, I sure as hell don't. If you want to be mad, be mad at all the people who wasted money on Obama's book which is why she can afford 500 dollar shoes.

She's uglier than sin with her lantern jaw and what have you. I'd be willing to contribute for her wardrobe to make her look at least a bit presentable and not like Jim Brown in drag.

Don't knock her. The woman is doing the best she can with what she's got. Not everyone can be naturally attractive as are Sarkozy's wife and the Argentine President. Some can't even be attractive with augmentation, which is Michelle's problem. Even the extensive airbrushing doesn't help much. But her looks can be improved so that she doesn't appear to be totally plug ugly.

So yes, I would even contribute some extra money for her clothing and accessories, and even spa and makeup, if it makes her look more presentable. And I encourage her to do whatever she can to improve her appearance.

As I see the issue made it to the front page, my apologies to RCADE. It is as much of a non-news story as the fake breasts but glad to see it received the same attention.

Perhaps we can now concentrate on more important issues like congress is - a playoff system for college football - what the hell are we paying these guys for?

I would make this suggestion for those who object to Michelle Obama's sneakers.

Don't vote for her next election, you whiny small minded nits.

Is Michelle planning to run to replace Barack after his four year term or after another term if term limits still apply?

You must be privy to this secret information through your space alien contacts. Share.

-Is Michelle planning to run to replace Barack after his four year term or after another term if term limits still apply?

Paranoia strikes deep
Into your life it will creep
It starts when your always afraid
Step outta line the man comes
And takes you away

Obama will be a Sosh'list Diktater by then, so not to worry about Michelle.

Don't vote for her next election, you whiny small minded nits.

LOL. Says a member of the party that obssesses over what Palin's daughter's boyfriend's mother is doing.

If you don't like what Palin's daughter's boyfriend's mother is doing---whoever that is---don't vote for her next election either, you whiny small minded nits. Simple isn't it.

don't vote for her next election either,

What office is she running for?

What was the point of this thread again?

She can afford pricey shoes? Is that the story?

Say, please don't question Buffalo Bob concerning the sources ande nature of "his" precognition information. He receives "signals." It's a time-space thing, and he is the only Earthling who can tune in.

By the way, Bob, do you think it is ethical for you to cash in on your skill sets, these signals you receive that provide you with information concerning the future that you can cash in at the betting windows?

Does Palin's daughter's boyfriend's mother have pricey shoes, or is she one of "the people," a revered class, who only has cardboard shoes and a cloth coat?

What was the point of this thread again?

That Michelle Obama is clueless and is an idiot for spending over half a grand for a pair of sneakers.

Powerdrunk, adulation-addicted monkeys. GASP!

What was the point of this thread again?

That rtards aint got nothing left in the tank.

They are reduced to trying to make political arguments based on shoe prices, tenuous relationships, false charges of socialism/communism, flag pins, Obama's birth certificate, "they're coming to take out guns", false charges of anti-Americanism, racism and facism etc etc ad nauseum.

Basically, they are continuing to march themselves over the cliff into the sea of irrelevance.

Thanx fer askin'.

Be Well.

hey now, a girl has to be comfy doesn't she?

That Michelle Obama is clueless and is an idiot for spending over half a grand for a pair of sneakers. #149 | POSTED BY GOATMAN

Did you ever buy nice, expensive stuff in your life? Something you could have gotten a different version of for less?

The Obama's made over a million last year. $500 for a pair of shoes is the same percentage as someone making 100k spending $50.

An idiot would be someone making 50k and spending $100!

The women can do what they want with their money.

I think the point is that she was at a food bank wearing the expensive shoes.

These people don't have enough money to buy food and she's wearing shoes that cost the same amount of money that would feed a family for month or more.

I've seen kids show up to servant events in good clothes and then not want to get them dirty.

It comes off as insensitive is all.

Did you ever buy nice, expensive stuff in your life?

Not when there is a cheaper version that has the exact same function. That is sheer idiocy no matter what you make.

I don't make what the Obamas do, but I make plenty enough that if I was stupid enough to buy $540 sneakers, I would. But that would not be fiscally responsible if I can get shoes that function identically at Payless for $60.

Granted, they wouldn't have the pink toe . . .

Also: Don't pretend you don't see the issue with her husband preaching fiscal responsibility and she wears shoes like that to a food bank. Please don't insult me by being that obtuse.

Everything is relative. It's no coincedence the richest person in the world's money is behind the largest charity foundation. Do you expect the worlds benefactors to be driving around in Yugos?

How do you feel about about Cindy McCain- a huge charitable person- buying million dollar jewlery? As long as she gives, who cares? People in shelters arent stupid- I dont think they're as easily insulted by the First Lady's shoes as you are.

When you say 'function identically', do you mean like a Chevy functions identically to a BMW?

Jewelry: If Cindy paid $100,000 for a bauble that she could get at the mall for $10,000, she is ignorant.

Funtionality: More specific models, please. In general, they do not have the same functionality, but there are 'Vettes that function better than some Beemers.

Still, it is stupid for the wife of a president preaching fiscal responsibility to be so publicly ostentatious.

I guess I don't understand spending money on something that isn't necessary. I make 6 digits/year. Yet I drive a 2000 pickup truck with 140k miles. I live in a 1550 ft^2 house (P&I=$255/mo) in a middle/middle class neighborhood. I wear tshirts and levis.

I have no debt other than the mortgage, so I could easily afford a huge house with a huge mortgage and a flashy car, and yes, $540 sneakers.

But what's the point?

The point is.... they would have pink toes. =)

You want to talk about ugly, gaze your eyes on the hideous visage of the critter that expelled Chimpy.

She is an UGLY ass hag and a bitch to boot for doing this.

#160 | Posted by utastaff at 2009-05-03 02:27 AM | Reply |

What does that make you? Creep? Moron? Asshole?

Nah - just a simple-minded fool.

It's the same factory that produced "Dumbya" and about 900 variants of "Chimp" plus countless combinations of the name Bush with Cheney, Rumsfeld ....

but they earned it.

i see the Ku Kluxers, Nazis, and anti-Semites are out tonight.

Laura is pot head (which is ok in my book, but not yours so i mention it). and you, well your just an asshat.

What was the point of this thread again?

That Michelle Obama is clueless and is an idiot for spending over half a grand for a pair of sneakers.

#149 | Posted by goatman at 2009-05-02 08:54 PM | Reply | Flag:

So, she's an idiot because she can afford pricey shoes? WOW. I guess it doesn't take much to be an 'idiot' these days.

.....and yes, why can't Obama preach fiscal responsibility to the retarded masses that have run up huge debt on their credit cards all while having no way to pay it off? The man worked hard and made his own money and now they get to spend it however they want.

If anything, he's the perfect example of someone that should be preaching fiscal responsibility? Would you rather be preached to about 'fiscal responsibility' by someone who is flat-broke and up to their ass in debt?

So, she's an idiot because she can afford pricey shoes? WOW. I guess it doesn't take much to be an 'idiot' these days.

Clearly it does. You are an example. I did not say that. I said she is an idiot for spending $540 for sneakers, not affording. Get it?

I can afford to pay $5 for a bottle of water. I can afford to pay $500 for shoes. But I'd be an idiot to do so when each can be had for $1 and $60 respecdtively

"...and you, well your just an asshat."

#163 | Posted by ichiro at 2009-05-03 04:56 AM | Reply | Flag:

My just an asshat? Wow.

Hey Einstein, don't be calling people Ku Kluxers and anti-Semites if you know nothing about them. I am not in these categories, even if it seems to you that just because someone points out faults on both sides of the political fence they are automaltically this type.

The man worked hard and made his own money and now they get to spend it however they want.

Of course they can. But no matter what you earn, it is still possible to make stupid purchases. Even Bill Gates can overpay for something. And anyone, regardless of income, who pays $540 for a pair of sneakers is a friggin' idiot!

#168 - But really the worst part is wearing them to a food bank. It is insensitive.

But really the worst part is wearing them to a food bank. It is insensitive.

You'll never get Obamanicas to admit this though. I give 'em credit in that I'm sure they understand, but the debits they amass from the blind partisianship obfuscation wipes out that credit.

this is a country where kids with welfare moms wear 200 dollar sneakers -i guess the 1st ladies income is somewhat over that-----get real what she wears or don't wear has nor should it have on the status of the us
jasman

"I guess I don't understand spending money on something that isn't necessary." #158 Goatman

Good for you. You're frugal. So if someone can spend less than you while having more money, I guess by your definition, that would make you a complete idiot. If you were to own something that you dont really need or a better version of something, by your definiion you are an idiot.

Taking it to it's conclusion, the least idiotic people out there are the ones who spend the least of their money on 'things'. So much for the 'trickle down' theory. So much for freedom of choice. Are you sure you're an American?

BTW- no- not a 'Vette. A Malibu will hold the same cargo and get you to work in the same amout of time as a Beemer. But even if you had more than enough money for the BMW, you'd be an idiot for not getting the Chevy. Got it.

If you were to own something that you dont really need or a better version of something, by your definiion you are an idiot.

Why do you twist my words? Or did you just not read my post? I even gave examples.

I see nothing wrong with spending money on something unnecessary. AAMOF, I just spent $1,700 on a Canon L series lens. (70-200mm zoom f2.8 IS. Sweet piece of glass, but I digress) Did I need it? No. But that doesn't make me an idiot. But if I paid $5,000 for the same lens or one that operated exactly the same, I would be an idiot.

Likewise, spending $540 for a pair of sneakers that 'operate' exactly as a $60 pair is stupid.

A message from the right:

I don't give a shit about this at all.

"A Woman has a FUNDAMENTAL right to spend as much money on Her footwear as She wants to. Huge difference between a Woman spending huge amounts on clothing and apparel and that of a Man doing the same thing." #3 | Posted by LarryMohr

Unless it is Sarah Palin.

--- The Left ---

Unless it is Sarah Palin.

--- The Left ---

Posted by KBM at 2009-05-03 01:21 PM | Reply

Hey Sarah is the one who claimed to be Your average soccermom and all around average person. I can'tr help Her behavior was contrary to that.

Larry

"Is the name "Manchelle" an original 101 term or is it from elsewhere?? Is there a factory or something where righties manufacture insulting names for the Obama's?? Bet Manchelle could beat 101 in arm wrestling and look pretty doing it." #6 | Posted by danni

Danni, where was your faux hypocritical outrage during the "McSames, reTHUGiclians, rightards, Bush monkeys, c**t Palins, McToast, moron in chief, Douchebag and many more. That is not to mention the names people here use for other posters.

Or are you just being a good little Democrat tool who knows how to obey.

Goat, it's not about "operation" when it comes to clothes.
It's about style.
Some can do it on a budget, some need to spend a bit more to have a designer do it for them.

If you think $540 for sneakers is expensive, you should check out the ones at A Bathing Ape. A line of Japanese cats down the block waiting to spend $1k+ on some (in my opinion) hideous nylon. Then again, when Pharrel is bumping them and hipster girls are checking you out for the right labels, hey, that may be some well spent money.

As for women though, at least in NYC, $500 is the starting point for nice shoes. Go to Jimmy Choo and you're looking at easy $800+ for some admittedly killer heels.
Combine with Wolford lingerie (available down the block) and the career girl turns into a vixen instantaneously.
Now, she could have gotten the same "operation" out of walmart heels and granny panties, but, I assure you, it wouldn't have created the same effect--not on her, or on her chosen target.

As to the alleged outrage concerning her wearing expensive sneakers to the food bank, have you ever seen the Queen of England go to a cancer ward or orphanage? She's not wearing Wranglers. She's wearing what makes her comfortable, and it happens to be expensive. Cool, she can afford it, and hey, she's royalty right? Now, sure, we're a democracy, but should an American President's wife dress like crap just because she's visiting the homeless? Wouldn't that be a tad disingenuous?

We now have a First Lady who has more style than any other since Jackie O. Michelle didn't wear heels and a cocktail dress, she wore comfortable, albeit expensive sneakers. Nobody in the shelter would have been offended even if they could have identified the price of that particular model--they know she's rich already. She's the President's wife, after all.

Regime - see #169.

And also - are you still calling for regime change?

#175

Best point yet of whole thread

Hey Sarah is the one who claimed to be Your average soccermom and all around average person.

And I remember michelle Obama opining how difficult it was to raise kids on $500k/yr. Maybe if she got cheaper shoes?

I can'tr help Her behavior was contrary to that.

Y:ou can't help Michelles' behavior either, but you are tripping all over yourself to apologize for her.

Likewise, spending $540 for a pair of sneakers that 'operate' exactly as a $60 pair is stupid.

#173 | Posted by goatman at 2009-05-03 11:15 AM | Reply | Flag: WEARS KEDS

#173 | Posted by goatman at 2009-05-03 11:15 AM | Reply | Flag: WEARS KEDS

Those weren't my shoes you were sniffing. They belonged to the 11 YO fat boy down the street. I wear New Balance. $60 at Payless.

New Balance: shoes for Southern old white guys (what's left of the GOP, that is.)

Goatman, the older man with style. Shoes from Payless, four year old Fruit-of-the-Loom's with skidmarks, and a nice polyester blend dress shirt from Wal-Mart tucked into Sansabelts from K Mart. You go old guy.

"the 11 YO fat boy down the street.

#184 | Posted by goatman at 2009-05-03 04:58 PM"

Aka Goatman's next victim.

The Obamas pawned themselves out as regular folk who understood the needs of the common man. Then, they get in the White House and serve up $100/lb Wagyu beef ON THE TAXPAYER DIME while discussion the need for a Stimulus Bill and serve food to the poor in $540 designer sneakers.

Goatman, the older man with style. Shoes from Payless, four year old Fruit-of-the-Loom's with skidmarks, and a nice polyester blend dress shirt from Wal-Mart tucked into Sansabelts from K Mart. You go old guy.

Still builiding your fantasy man, I see. I'll help. I don't mind being your target as long as cyberspace is as close as you get.

Yep, I'm all that you say, m'boor -- skid marks and all. Enjoy the fantasy, dude! LOL

I see your very exciting life is fantasizing with a fat oil rig dude with skidmarks. Charming.

I'm glad when I'm onshore I can find better things to do than talk about DR members' underwear.

@MrFair:

Yeah, I'm still calling for regime change, although in this sense it's less the political head (as before), and more the hegemonic lifestyle that's perpetuated by the mass media and our governmental policy choices.

If you're asking my thoughts on Obama in particular, I'm relieved to have a guy who can think in office. Is he beholden to many of the same special interests? Probably. Is he able to make some real changes? I think probably so as well--but anyone who thinks they can derail the American mil-industrial complex in 4 or 40 years is wrong.

We'll likely have to wait until there's a real War for Resources (read: not Oil but Water). I hope it doesn't come to that, but...

Why the hell would anyone pay $540 for tennis shoes? Ridiculous.

On the other hand, anything to deflect from Obama's popularity. What's next? "He wears a gold ring! He wears a $5000 gold ring on his left hand! Irresponsible!"

" I just spent $1,700 on a Canon L series lens. (70-200mm zoom f2.8 IS. Sweet piece of glass, but I digress) Did I need it? No. But that doesn't make me an idiot. But if I paid $5,000 for the same lens or one that operated exactly the same, I would be an idiot."

Not twisting your words- I kinda agree with you. But those aren't the SAME sneakers as the $60 Payless are. To someone in a different bracket, they might think you could achieve the same thing with a Sigma lens for less than half the price. Some might think you can take a good enough picture with a $250 Elf. You don't have the time to teach them about photography and they don't have the time to teach you about fashion. And I dont have time to explain why my speakers cost $4000.

But your point is that Obama has sold himself as fiscally responsible and these shoes prove he isn't. In the end it's as much of a straw man argument as connecting Al Gore's flying privately with the cause of global warming. Besides, is better irony not made by the clothing excesses of the 'fiscally responsible' conservatives Palin and C. McCain while trying to appeal to us common folk?

I live in a 1550 ft^2 house (P&I=$255/mo) in a middle/middle class neighborhood.

#158 | Posted by goatman at 2009-05-03 01:07 AM | Reply | Flag: A Dump in a Slum

Does that make it harder for you to cum?

#195 | Posted by goatman at 2009-05-04 05:22 AM | Reply | Flag: CALIFCHRISTINE'S SOUTHERN GENTLEMAN

She must be so proud.

So what, Montecore. Goat was talking to you not to me.

So what, Montecore. Goat was talking to you not to me

I think he's telling me that the fat rig boy with skidmarks in his underwear he fantasizes about should be more of a gentleman.

He's still building his fantasyman. It's a work in progress.

Goat was talking to you not to me.

#197 | Posted by CalifChris at 2009-05-04 12:57 PM | Reply | Flag: STANDS BY HER OLDER SOUTHERN WHITE GUY

#200 | Posted by goatman at 2009-05-04 01:08 PM | Reply | Flag: LIKES MONTECORE'S USER PAGE

he can't find anything more fulfilling to occupy his time?

#200 | Posted by goatman at 2009-05-04 01:08 PM | Reply | Flag: MORE THAN TWENTY POSTS TO EVERY ONE OF MONTECORE'S; HYPOCRIT

Montecore's "fantasy man"

fat
southern
fat
white guy
fat
spincter problems
fat
gentleman
fat
works on an oil rig
fat
skid marks in his undies
fat

Did I leave anything out, Montecore?

Hope you'll post a pic of your fantasy guy for all of us to see once your "work in progress" has been completed. LOL

Oh yeah, LOL.

200 | Posted by goatman at 2009-05-04 01:08 PM | Reply | Flag: MORE THAN TWENTY POSTS TO EVERY ONE OF MONTECORE'S; HYPOCRIT

When more than half my posts on the DR are about you, get back with me, Mr. obsession. LOL

Honestly -- surely there must be at least one woman near you who is more interesting than me. One who would actually appreciate an obsessive admirer. Isn't there?

I forgot to add on to Montecore's "fantasy man" work in progress

lives in slum
wears four year old Fruit-of-the-Loom undies
wears polyester blend dress shirt from Wal-Mart
wears Sansabelts from K Mart

Old, CC. Like your tits.

Lucious ones you'll never see or ever get your hands on. lol

Lucious ones you'll never see or ever get your hands on. lol

#208 | Posted by CalifChris at 2009-05-04 01:25 PM | Reply | Flag: LOL

"Old, CC. Like your tits."

He's jealous, his don't get him the attention anymore.

Goatman's gonna be pissed you posted that picture of us. Where did you get it? Did Grandma CC give it to you?

"Where did you get it?"

Your couples yoga instructor used to date the cousin of a guy who met the guy at an airport who backed into my car.

Thanks, now i have to fire up the old arc welder without a mask to get that out of my head.