Palin's Nice Clothes And Makeup Threatens Democracy?

CAMPAIGNS SPEND MILLIONS ON ADS NOBODY WATCHES, WHO CARES?

ELECTION'08:
the race to clean up the place

If you ever wanted a poignant storyline to illustrate the conservative mantra of a left wing media bias, point to the Sarah Palin wardrobe controversy.

The New York Times reported this week that Hollywood makeup artist Amy Strozzi was paid $22,500 for two weeks of work by the McCain campaign. The story serves up the juicy tidbit that the expediture made Strozzi the campaign's top earner.

As Sarah Hepola writes at Salon's Broadsheet blog, "does the story matter?"

No, it does not.

It is quite ignorant to believe that campaigns that rake in hundreds of millions of dollars don't spend hundreds of millions of dollars on their campaign.

Is $150,000 on Palin's wardrobe really that much in the scope of millions of dollars that the McCain people have spent?

11 DAYS TO GO

The price tag, though, to regular American voters would seem outrageous. It's silly enough for poor inner city kids to pay $300 for "vintage" baseball jerseys, but the Times doesn't report that one.

The story reeks of false populism. Should we expect Palin to attend events in clothes bought from the Chico's catalog or picture her ironing Todd and kids underwear with curlers in her hair.

Of course, this isn't about populism really, it's about sexism. Sen. Obama and Sen. McCain can campaign in the finest suits and loafers and not be skewered for it. Sen. Joe Biden can get away with the vanity of suspected botox applications and hair plugs, but a woman cannot.

As Washington nears closer to Democratic rule, again, it is subjects like these that flash contempt into the Americans who prefer to see the country and family life differently. Democrats, led by Obama's example, need to be cognizant that mocking poor conservative whites and women voters is risky when attempting to hold power. More importantly, reaching out to these Americans is the key to healing eight years of Bush.