Posted by REALITYTV
on Nov 9th, 2008 and filed under 
During the Presidential campaign, the Democrats found this tidbit of information regarding Palin.
We found it amusing because Obama took in well north of 600 million dollars in his campaign. As a percentage of that amount, this was .02%. Read that again. .02%.
Most of the items the Democrats qualified as wardrobe were props for appearances in various parts of the country, worn for the appearance and returned or given to charities to help cancer, orphaned children, etc. We would like to see Obama give back his 600 million to the poor, or John Edwards return his $1250 for his haircut to feed a starving child.
But the Democrats have made it a historic article, even though the election is completely over.
Let’s put this in perspective. If Sarah had earned this much in a year, Obama would have given her a tax cut.
One liberal rag even published this article that poses a lie about Sarah that she wants to be the ambassador to Africa. This after more lies about comments she made about Africa. They then blocked all comments from readers. The man that wrote the article isn’t worth the dirt on the bottom of Sarah’s borrowed shoes.
The same political rag published this nonsense about Africa. The writer looks like she is 12 and writes like it is her IQ. Get something real to say guys. There are important issues. Lying about Sarah and imaginary people doesn’t help your cause.
Get over it dudes, we know you liberals love Sarah, but the election is over.
Loading ...
You are kidding right Hoop. The “satire” you cite was not started off telling people what it was. It had fake quotes in it to completely mislead the public. Then, they blocked all comments.
In any statement made in this article, state the falsehood or disortion. There are none. Now go to any, and I mean any HuffingtonPost artlcle and you will likely find dozens.
We all know which liberal blog wrote about her wanting to be an ambassador to Africa. The funny thing is though, that the article that you are referencing was clearly a piece of satire, much in the vein of Letterman’s Top 10. How do you bash the so called “liberal rag” for being biased when you are as well obviously distorting the facts.
Sweety,
That was $1250 for a haircut, and it was published by a liberal rag during the Democratic Primary.
At least though, that was just Democrats infighting and Edwards did actually spend the money. This was a total fabrication and lie that was distorted by liberal rags like the one that starts with the letter H.
Tit for tat, why the attack on Edwards for a $400 haircut. All the glass houses here need to quit throwing stones–period.