Comments on: Michelle Obama likes upscale clothes too

By: mary

mary — Tue, 28 Oct 2008 20:54:37 +0000

Totally!

By: Ann

Ann — Tue, 28 Oct 2008 20:41:08 +0000

IMHO – Bill Clinton = narcissus

By: mary

mary — Tue, 28 Oct 2008 17:56:19 +0000

Yeah, and then take say Churchill or Roosevelt. I’m certain Churchill was a narcist (sp?) As for FDR – I think he needed attention but somehow he did not seem narcissistic (sp?). Both great leaders for the time.

By: Evan

Evan — Tue, 28 Oct 2008 11:23:14 +0000

Mary,
It’s a whole lifestyle. Many people want power over others (politics) and attention from them (Hollywood?) because they need it very badly, anyway, more than others. They’re not necessarily bad leaders (or actors) because of that. If you go to high-class meetings and events, you have to look your best so there’s nothing unusual that Palins, Obamas and McCains pay a lot of money for that. The problem is if their outfits are paid using taxpayers’ money.
I agree with you that they should be judged only based on their performance. Let’s take JFK, for example. How much of his legendary status comes from his performance and how much from people’s infatuation with the glamour, the story of rich educated families that made the news with their outfits, their big gestures and expensive marriages? JFK was crushed by the Russian president, Khrushchev, in only one face-to-face meeting, according to his own words. Well, expensive upbringing and a smart suit didn’t help him at all in negotiating with a leader born in a peasant family, who learned leadership at the School of Hard Knocks.

By: mary

mary — Tue, 28 Oct 2008 03:20:22 +0000

Narcissism may be found in many leaders however, it has also been shown that they do not necessarily make the best leaders. The clothes issue may be an indication where the interests are of a certain person. And it would be a good idea to see not their accomplishments in terms of which leadership positions they held but what did they take that organization from and to. Did they really lead succesfully.

By: minty

minty — Tue, 28 Oct 2008 01:42:05 +0000

this should put an end to lobster-gate:

THE source who told us last week about Michelle Obama getting lobster and caviar delivered to her room at the Waldorf-Astoria must have been under the influence of a mind-altering drug. She was not even staying at the Waldorf. We regret the mistake, and our former source is going to regret it, too. Bread and water would be too good for such disinformation.

http://www.nypost.com/seven/10212008/gossip/pagesix/room_disservice_134490.htm

By: Evan

Evan — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 21:53:45 +0000

You discovered that politicians are not Gandhi. Pfffffft!! If you want to get there, you would do the same. Some psychologists found that those who are recognised as leaders in a group score highest on narcissism. Leaders, politicians, notables need a lot of status to quench that thirst. Nice cars, smart clothes -- they're doing their job keeping the luxury economy going. It's a trickle down effect, right there.;)

By: Warren

Warren — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 20:30:08 +0000

Andrea – Could you provide a link to where this was exposed as a lie. I saw the initial report but have not seen the debunk. Be glad to post if so.
By now, Palin has cleared up that she did not shop for the clothes, the RNC did and they are not hers.

By: Andrea Smith

Andrea Smith — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 17:51:24 +0000

That Michelle had caviar and lobster at the Waldorf Astoria was exposed as a lie. I don’t remember if facts showed that she was not even at the hotel that night. But the room services charges are a lie, which does not disuade the gullible and careless from spreading it still.
Palin has been charging the home state a per diem while staying in her own home, yesr-round.
$92 bought the Palin infant an outfit only part of which was worn on TV–the other part was a hat with monkey ears–gee. Now tell me could the Palin’s not dress their own infant?
The notion that Palin would be donating the clothes for charity purposes was contrived after the purchases were discovered by a sharp-eyed reporter. I would guess that the real reason is that Palin does not want to be liable for the gift tax rightly owed on the clothes.

By: Kass Moreland

Kass Moreland — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 12:42:22 +0000

2006, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) two hair styling sessions $3,000.
Democrat John Edwards’ $400 hair cuts in 2007.
Republican McCain’s $520 black leather Ferragamo shoes this year.
Michelle Obama; 447.39 Room Service at the Waldorf (hmmm the basic prescription cost for some of our elderly). Can you return consumed food?
At the end of the day unless either one of the candidates has had to scrape that extra dime out of their pocket to purchase that gallon of milk for their children. Or use some of their food or utility bills to pay for that NEEDED doctors visit then they have NO business being PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA! How can you be for the people when you have never lived LIKE THE PEOPLE. How can you represent something that you do not understand. Michelle Obama certainly is not concerned about how the average AMERICAN struggles in this CRAP ECONOMY this is clear when she is ordering LOBSTER TAILS at the WALDORF! I am sure she slept well that night! Guess that nakes her a NOW PROUD AMERICAN….!