Dancing With The Stars finale
Missing in America Memorial
Madison Commencement
Book Nook provides readers with insights into the world of books. Vick Mickunas takes you into the center of the publishing world with the latest book buzz, book reviews, and exclusive chats with authors..Home > Blogs > Book Nook > Archives > 2009 > May > 20 > Entry
Palin’s “Party Money” and other fashion tips…
Women’s Wear Daily reports that:
PALIN AND WAL-MART CLEARED: Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, the GOP vice presidential candidate who caused a stir last year when she spent $150,000 on a high-end fashion shopping spree during the election, has been exonerated by the Federal Election Commission. The FEC dismissed the case against Palin, a decision made April 30 but made public Tuesday by the Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, the watchdog group that originally filed the complaint. The group alleged Palin, the Republican National Committee and several operatives violated campaign finance laws by “improperly” using funds to glam up the candidate’s wardrobe at Neiman Marcus, Saks Fifth Avenue, Barneys New York and Macy’s for her debut on the national stage. The FEC agreed with Palin and the RNC that RNC money was used to purchase clothing and accessories and not Palin’s own campaign funds.”
and…..The FEC also closed a case filed against Wal-Mart Stores Inc. by labor groups alleging the retailer violated election laws by warning employees to vote against then-Sen. Barack Obama for president because he supported legislation that would make it easier for employees to unionize. (Women’s Wear Daily-May 20, 2009)
That FEC makes some pretty tough rulings. The Palin ruling was a no-brainer, right? Party money is party money, right? All those pretty clothes were just her way of saying Let’s Party!. I can’t wait to read Palin’s take on Apparelgate when she publishes her memoir next year…
And the Wal-Mart ruling almost seems quaint now. Apparently Wal-Mart’s opposition to “then-Sen. Barack Obama” didn’t mean much. They may be the world’s largest retailer but that and a quarter won’t even buy you a cuppa coffee these days.
And from the emailbox: Every day I get lots of e-mail from PR firms. Usually they are flacking some book or other but on occasion I get press releases pushing very non-bookish gear. For instance, I just got an e-mail with this subject line:
For More Voluptuous Lips
That stopped me. I opened it and they were pushing this product line:
DESIGNED TO MAKE EVERY WOMAN FEEL LIKE A MOVIE STAR
Three Piece Set Includes Lipstick, Lip Pencil and Custom-Designed Brush
Wowzers! They sold me. I’ll be watching closely for these women who look like movie stars. Maybe I’ll spot them at Wal-Mart?…..
I wonder what brand of lipstick Sarah uses? Maybe she’ll share that info in her memoir? I can’t wait….
Vick Mickunas
Permalink | Comments (28) | Post your comment | Categories: confessions of a galley slave
Comments
By Dscott
May 28, 2009 10:45 AM | Link to this
I guess raping the female prisoners, and even U.S.en raping male prisoners in the pictures that Obama now isn’t going to release isn’t torture either. Before the GOP’s take over by the neo-cons we as a people and nation were better than this, no matter if other countries weren’t.By Page Turner
May 23, 2009 11:06 AM | Link to this
Some people love Sarah Palin. Others consider her to be a form of torture.By irishguy
May 22, 2009 11:50 PM | Link to this
Alice, looks like we’ll never agree on this one. I can’t believe so many people consider it torture. As I said we do it to our own guys. I guess I figure if the guy walks out of the room under his own power, with no limps, bruises, or broken bones, he wasn’t tortured. As I understand it the 190 isn’t the number of sessions, just the number of “pours” used to get the info.By Alice
May 22, 2009 2:04 PM | Link to this
I do not deny that Asano tortured American POWs in other ways as well as through waterboarding, but in the statement written by the US courts addressing Asano’s conviction, the use of waterboarding, which is defined using the same techniques waterboarding is defined as using today, “the implication of drowning”, the US court clearly defines waterboarding specifically as torture, with or without Asano’s additional actions. I don’t know a greater declaration by the US of waterboarding as torture than the US justice department in 1947 and the US President in 2009. You can throw out all the defenses you want - a “doctor” is in the room, they don’t hold ‘em down as long, whatever… but simulating drowning - making someone think they are going to drown - is still torture. I can’t believe that anyone really deep down considers this to be “enhanced interrogation”. Interrogation is the formal questioning of someone about specific information, enhanced (or heightened) interrogation maybe includes bright lights, a slight increase in room temperature. When you actually physically connect with another human being and cause mental, physical, emotional or psychological harm over a prolonged period, it is called torture. The terrorist suspects that gave up info, according to you and Cheney, had to be waterboarded 190+ times??????? That’s “enhanced interrogation”????? Find a dictionary and look up the words “torture”, “enhanced” and “interrogation”. There’s no way anyone can define the process of water boarding as “enhanced interrogation” by the standard of Webster’s… only by the standards of Cheney-speak and only in justification of breaking a moral and legal code.By irishguy
May 22, 2009 1:18 PM | Link to this
Yukio Asano poured a continuous stream of water on the victims face until he lost conciousness. When Mr. Navarro awoke he found Mr Asano sitting on on his stomach until Navarro vomited all the water he swallowed. Which is nothing similar to what we did to the terrorists in our custody, who were subject to short, intermittent pours. All this was preformed with doctors present to insure the safety of the detainee. Quite unlike the Japanese during WWII. Those POWs who only suffered the “water cure” still had their heads. Cheney’s argument: since you’ve already release the memos detailing our methods, release the ones which show the information we obtained from these EITs.By Alice
May 22, 2009 11:49 AM | Link to this
I had to add something else - if it were my family? Having two children, I’ve often put myself into that frame of mind. We read about some pedophile or some kid being kidnapped and every parents wonders what they would do. What would I do if some creep had my kids somewhere and I had the suspect in my custody and he had the information that would maybe lead me to my children? In the darkest recess of my soul, I’d like to think that I’d beat him to a bloody pulp until he talked and then I would finish him off if given the opportunity. Would that save my child? I don’t know… but I do know that regardless of my motivations, I would expect to be held responsible for my actions by a court of law. I would want to accept my part in the mistreatment of another human being before God. And finally, I don’t want to take every base animal instinct within me and turn it into national policy.By Alice
May 22, 2009 11:33 AM | Link to this
It is considered a form of torture by legal experts, politicians, war veterans, medical experts in the treatment of torture victims, intelligence officials, military judges, and human rights organizations. Bent Sorensen, Senior Medical Consultant to the International Rehabilitation Council for Torture Victims and former member of the United Nations Committee Against Torture has said: “It’s a clear-cut case: Waterboarding can without any reservation be labeled as torture.” Lt. Gen. Michael D. Maples, the director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, concurred by stating, in a hearing before the Senate Armed Services Committee, that he believes waterboarding violates Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions. Red Cross investigators concluded last year in a secret report that the Central Intelligence Agency’s interrogation methods for high-level Al Qaeda prisoners constituted torture. In the case in which a Japanese soldier was tried and convicted of torture against US soldiers, the US asserted that ‘in the charges with regard to “water torture” consisted of “pouring water up [the] nostrils” of one prisoner, “forcing water into [the] mouths and noses” of two other prisoners, and “forcing water into [the] nose” of a fourth prisoner.’ In 2005, the U.S. Department of State formally recognized “submersion of the head in water” as torture. On September 6, 2006, the U.S. Department of Defense released a revised Army Field Manual entitled Human Intelligence Collector Operations that prohibits the use of waterboarding by U.S. military personnel. Steven G. Bradbury, acting head of the US Department of Justice (DOJ) Office of Legal Counsel, on February 14, 2008 testified: “There has been no determination by the Justice Department that the use of waterboarding, under any circumstances, would be lawful under current law.” On January 22, 2009 President Barack Obama signed an executive order that requires both U.S. military and paramilitary organizations to use the Army Field Manual as the guide on getting information from prisoners, banning the use of waterboarding as torture. Apparently the only people defending the use of torture IN THE WORLD are minions of the Bush administration, third-world dictators that like to torture people as recreation, and all the Republican candidates for the presidency, save two - John McCain and Ron Paul. “To say that all water boarding is torture in all cases is to say that everyone who murders should get the death penalty.” Really? Because I kind of think that to say that all waterboarding is torture in all cases is to say that everyone that kills someone is a murderer - we’re talking about the definition of an act, not the sentence for that act. My argument is more about calling a spade a spade and not whether waterboarding is justified in one particular case. If it is justified in one particular case, then why do you need to re-brand the technique just to make yourself feel better about it? And yes, Irish, Cheney’s argument: Obama has made us all less safe for releasing memos but please release some more.By irishguy
May 22, 2009 8:21 AM | Link to this
Alice, I don’t believe in torture and I don’t believe waterboarding is torture. I don’t consider sleep depravation torture either. Or a female interrogator in a low cut tight shirt. I would never condone our people using the barbaric methods of the terrorists. As the result of the 3 scumbags that were waterboarded, American lives were saved. Those are the memos Mr Cheney would like released.By TRS
May 21, 2009 6:40 PM | Link to this
Some arguments against waterboarding -America has never declared water boarding illegal and has had plenty of opportunity? To say that all water boarding is torture in all cases is to say that everyone who murders should get the death penalty. Those prosecuted in the past did it in a sadistic manner cauing their victims to pass out. KSM and the others water boarded were medically supervised and the those doing it were under orders as to how far they could go which amounted to about the same as we submit our troops to in training. To use familiar words, waterboarding should be safe but rare. Three people were waterboarded in a period from 2002 to 2003. Context is important and no one advocates any and all means such as those used on Senator McCain by the VC. There are people alive now in LA and NY because of information KSM gave up - perhaps we should ask them. Again, the question - if it were your family?By Barbara Delaney
May 21, 2009 5:44 PM | Link to this
The clothes went to Charity? Her neice sold a pair of Sarah’s bright red stiletto “f**k me” shoes on ebay for over $20,000. What charity is that? And the Toddster’s sister has been arrested for a series of B&E’s in Alaska, she’s currently out on bail facing burglary charges. And let’s not forget Levi and his Mom and their drug lab. They give hillbillies a bad name.By Alice
May 21, 2009 1:38 PM | Link to this
The question of whether waterboarding is torture has only come up in recent years when the argument needed to be used in defense of our President’s actions. Up until the last few years, the US has had a historical record of regarding water torture as a war crime from prosecuting war criminals that tortured Americans and also prosecuting Americans for specifically waterboarding - yes, torturing - foreign AND American suspects and prisoners. If you believe that the citizens of our country should be protected using any and all means regardless of their effectiveness, fine. But don’t try to redefine something just to fit your argument. At least have the b*lls to say that you believe in torture if it gets results, or at least gives the appearance of results. And considering the increasing rates of suicide and mental and psychological health problems of our brave returning vets, and the condition of the treatment they receive for it, I’m not sure that we should be holding our country’s treatment of its veterans up as a shining example of safety and efficiency.By irishguy
May 21, 2009 12:12 PM | Link to this
I’d take the CIA’s word over Mrs Pelosi’s anytime. Yea, she’s never done any “policital posturing”. I can’t believe people even consider EIT’s torture. If you want to see real torture, do a search for “Al Queda torture guide”. After a look at what those animals do, maybe you’ll look at things a bit differently. Sleep depravation and waterboarding are nothing compared to whips, chains, drills and ironing clothing to ones body! Heck, we waterboard our own guys in training to toughen them up!By Mike
May 21, 2009 11:26 AM | Link to this
Sarah Palin????—Yaaaawwwwwnnn…. As for the Nancy Pelosi comments and all the calls for investigations, I say “Bring ‘em on” and let the chips fall where they may. If Pelosi did anything wrong she should be held accountable. But my suspicion is that all these calls by Gingrich and the GOP for “investigations” of Pelosi are all just so much political posturing and an attempt to control the narrative on torture by diverting from the real issues surrounding it. I would suspect the Republicans and former Bush administration officials have one hell of a lot more to hide concerning torture than does Pelosi. So let’s have an open and thorough investigation concerning the timeline of torture, who knew what and when, and especially, who authorized it before it was deemed “legal” by the Bush controlled legal team. Hey, even Pelosi thinks we should investigate it. So what do you say we take the GOP and Pelosi up on their offer and have a full and open accounting on this? How about it? Any takers on the GOP side??? As for the belief that the CIA would never lie about anything…..If anyone out here truly believes that, then I have some prime real estate in Florida that you can buy reeeeal cheap.By Alice
May 21, 2009 10:34 AM | Link to this
Seems to me that when we start looking at the 1st, 2nd and whole bunch more in line with the Presidency, then we can be concerned with also looking at the 3rd in line. (And just for the record I would gladly watch the person who READ A MEMO go down as long as those responsible for WRITING AND AUTHORIZING the memo and the actions behind it go down with her. And just for good measure you can have Reid too.)By alaskanriley
May 20, 2009 8:00 PM | Link to this
Sarah did nothing wrong? As an Alaskan I beg to differ. Her abilities as a politician notwithstanding, her actions as a governor leave many a voter wondering what they were doing electing her. Her divisive comments on the national scene with no regard for her job at home still aggravate us up here. Her unwillingness to put her job aside to run for VP - yes, she did both jobs rather than let her lieutenant run the state - coupled with her current predilection to attend Indiana conventions rather than the final days of our legislature still bug us. She is still flitting around the lower 48 while villages up here are washed away. Then she bakes cookies for them. Seriously. She refuses to accept free federal weatherization money in the arctic because we might have to change our building codes! And she’s a big supporter of victims buying their own rape kits for forensic testing. Helps hold down those unnecessary expenses you know. Her entire approach is oriented toward her own political and financial gain and calling good citizens traitors and enemies of the union seems rather like something wrong.By Gail
May 20, 2009 6:35 PM | Link to this
What about Michelle Obama’s “designer basketball tennies”?? …AND all of the other designer this & that she commissions. Give us all a break—Sarah did nothing wrong!By TRS
May 20, 2009 5:44 PM | Link to this
Vick - perhaps thats the point.By vick
May 20, 2009 5:16 PM | Link to this
TRS, have I ever made any positive comments about Nancy Pelosi? Ever? I don’t think I ever have, have I? Remind me. I’m sure if I ever uttered one iota of praise for Ms. Pelosi that I would surely recall it…By irishguy
May 20, 2009 4:19 PM | Link to this
Silly me Vick, I thought you said the Media was gushing over Sarah,not Mitt Romney. I can’t recall any Main stream press saying anything favorable about Mrs Palin. the Wonkette posting sounded a bit sarcastic to me. I think most of those houses belonged to Mrs McCain, the wealty beer distributor. I’m guessing some were commercial properties that didn’t concern Mr McCain.By TRS
May 20, 2009 3:46 PM | Link to this
No violations, the clothing went to charity - its a non issue. I realize its your blog but a little equal opportunity might be nice. That “deep thinker and stateman” Nancy Pelosi certainly hasn’t presented herself well; yet, not a peep here. Seems to me when the 3rd in line to the Presidency calls the intelligence arm of government a liar, thats worth looking at.By VietVet
May 20, 2009 3:15 PM | Link to this
Are we still talking about Palin? Why? She went away months ago, hopefully never to return to major politics. We don’t need to dumb down Washington anymore than it is.No, she’s better off living with the bears and moose in Alaska with Trip, Tram, Topper, Tiddly Wink, Toadboy,Goober and others there in old Moosetracks. ehh?By vick
May 20, 2009 2:57 PM | Link to this
OK, Irish. I’ll assume you were not paying any attention during the McCain/Palin campaign. Here’s one: “On Sunday, Mitt Romney suggested that Sarah Palin was �beautiful.� This was very sexist, because everybody knows Palin is famous for being a thinker and a statesman, not for being, say, the most attractive female pro-life Republican governor available to give the McCain ticket some �juice.�(from the blog Wonkette)By irishguy
May 20, 2009 2:23 PM | Link to this
Vick, you’ll have to give me some examples of the media gushing over Mrs Palin’s looks. I sure can’t recall any, other than your pal Ann Coulter who called her the “beautimous Sarah”By vick
May 20, 2009 2:17 PM | Link to this
Philman, remind me again how many houses John McCain owns? Was it seven? Remember how he forgot how many houses he has? Now, that was funny…By Philman
May 20, 2009 1:23 PM | Link to this
Man Vic you sound like a SORE loser, but your team Won.how about doing a story about Michele Obama wearing $550.00 shoes to a soup kitchen, how TACKY..or about the sweetheart her Hubby got from Mobster Tony Rezko on their 1.6 million dollar house,By vick
May 20, 2009 1:18 PM | Link to this
Irish, the press has been gushing about Sarah’s looks since day one. Is that what you mean by a double standard?By irishguy
May 20, 2009 1:00 PM | Link to this
Vick, as far as lipstick goes, I’m guessing Mrs Palin uses Mary Kay’s Ravishing Red.By irishguy
May 20, 2009 12:11 PM | Link to this
Vick, you sound surprised by the FEC finding. Mrs Palin has said since day 1, she had nothing to do with it. You didn’t believe her? I’m shocked, shocked! I haven’t seen the media fussing over Mrs O’s $500.00 running shoes, or any part of her wardrobe. Other than to gush over how great she looks. No double standard there.