McCain’s shockingly expensive loafers: $520; Michelle Obama’s sneakers: $540
posted at 5:01 pm on May 1, 2009 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
I honestly couldn’t care less, but the left’s politically calculated fake outrage about Maverick’s shoes last summer was even more annoying than their politically calculated fake outrage about how many homes he owns. I request, nay demand, a bit of politically calculated fake outrage in response.
While volunteering Wednesday at a D.C. food bank, the First Lady sported her usual J.Crew cardigan, a pair of utilitarian capri pants and, on her feet, a sneaky splurge: trainers that go for $540.
That’s right: These sneakers – suede, with grosgrain ribbon laces and metallic pink toe caps – are made by French design house Lanvin, one of fashion’s hottest labels. They come in denim and satin versions, and have been a brisk seller all spring…
“They’re shoes,” the First Lady’s reps sniffed when curious reporters inquired about the fancy footwear.
Haute couture at a food bank. We should chip in and buy a pair for Palin in hopes that she’ll wear them to a bake sale or something, just to watch the media scandal erupt over how such a supposedly “down to earth” woman could be so thoughtless as to flaunt her wealth in front of common hard-working people.
Lest you doubt that this was indeed an issue for a 24-hour media cycle or two last year, click the image and scroll down. CNN — bouncing off a HuffPo post, natch — devoted three minutes of airtime to it, emphasizing the contrast between McCain and the heroically modest Democratic candidate who owns but four pairs of shoes.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »
outrage! subject in 3, 2, 1 – what about Palin’s clothing?!
kirkill on May 1, 2009 at 5:04 PM
Lets call it. Imedla Marcos at the Food Bank!
rob verdi on May 1, 2009 at 5:04 PM
McCain’s shoes look like a pair I saw at WalMart just the other day.
kirkill on May 1, 2009 at 5:05 PM
Double standards are amazing, aren’t they?
Hawkins1701 on May 1, 2009 at 5:05 PM
Yawn… if she’d worn cheap shoes you’d be whining that she doesn’t have any class.
benny shakar on May 1, 2009 at 5:05 PM
While she’s out buying $540 shoes, homeless people are dying in the streets, babies are being thrown out windows, illegal aliens are dying in the deserts trying to get into America.
And her $540 shoes just got vomited on by a homeless guy who thinks he’s Napoleon!
lorien1973 on May 1, 2009 at 5:05 PM
Try harder. That’s even more pathetic than normal.
lorien1973 on May 1, 2009 at 5:06 PM
You know – if it is her money – who cares?
Personally, I’d rather not hear anything about her sneakers – or her.
Earlier when I went to the page – curiosity you know – I saw a headline for another story about a “Rare look at Michelle Obama” or something like that.
If only it were rare.
kybowexar on May 1, 2009 at 5:06 PM
She paid $540 for those?
Gullible or just plain stupid?
Or…just really doesn’t give a hoot about the “little people”…’cept when she needs a good photo op?
coldwarrior on May 1, 2009 at 5:07 PM
Here’s the deal: who cares if she owns them. I like her style, personally. I love J Crew. But, a HOMELESS SHELTER?! That’s kind of poor taste. Like museum trinkets and dvd sets, in my humble opinion.
Beyond that, those are some UGLY tennis shoes. Just goes to show that really stupid people do really stupid things with their money.
Mommypundit on May 1, 2009 at 5:08 PM
And her $540 shoes were photographed by a homeless guy with an iPhone.
WashJeff on May 1, 2009 at 5:08 PM
I suppose the only question to ask here is, is there any issue, no matter how insignificant, that the lefties are not complete hypocrites on? I’m attempting to come up with one and I’m spent.
Zetterson on May 1, 2009 at 5:08 PM
Darnit. You copied! heh.
Mommypundit on May 1, 2009 at 5:08 PM
How does her $540 shoes help her children?
Gracelynn on May 1, 2009 at 5:09 PM
Yeah, I don’t care that she bought expensive shoes.
I do care that the media would have been all over a republican FLOTUS if she had purchased such shoes during the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression.
Double standards.
carbon_footprint on May 1, 2009 at 5:09 PM
Bet the kids her husband’s administration and Congress are forcing out of good private schools in D.C. would take that $540 and put it to better use.
NebCon on May 1, 2009 at 5:10 PM
I am sure no one wants to there but does Michelle shave her legs?
Look at the closeup of her sneakers.
peterargus on May 1, 2009 at 5:10 PM
A quality kick in the arse when they misbehave. These shoes allow you to thump your kid on the butt without leaving a traceable mark incase DCFS visits.
WashJeff on May 1, 2009 at 5:11 PM
I heard she was only charged $10 for the shoes. It was purely out of the goodness of her heart that she gave the poor shoe salesman an extra $530.
Zetterson on May 1, 2009 at 5:11 PM
You people forget – now that those feet have been in those shoes – the shoes are now priceless.
Priceless, I tell you!
(Not worth a thing to a sane person, but can you imagine the bidding frenzy at the local Goodwill when she gives those things away? Oh wait – they don’t give to charity. Never mind.)
kybowexar on May 1, 2009 at 5:12 PM
Shoes? Meh.
Wouldya’ look at those arms on Michelle? Wow!
:-/
connertown on May 1, 2009 at 5:12 PM
Fugliest First Lady since Mary Todd Lincoln (who could only afford old Converse canvas basketball sneakers).
Most toned arms since Rosalyn Carter.
Largest nalgas since William Howard Taft.
TexasJew on May 1, 2009 at 5:13 PM
That’s the best defense you can come up with? If she wore cheap shoes, we wouldn’t know about it. Or it’d be praised by the media as evidence of her frugality and average American-ess. Try again.
amerpundit on May 1, 2009 at 5:13 PM
Oh, and I’ve never begrudged an individual for shopping at Shoe Carnival.
amerpundit on May 1, 2009 at 5:14 PM
I’m not outraged by the liberal hypocrisy demonstrated by the MSM, the Obamas, and trolls here at Hot Air on a daily basis. I expect nothing more or less from them. Please try to surprise me.
Loxodonta on May 1, 2009 at 5:14 PM
……… Vomit!
Seven Percent Solution on May 1, 2009 at 5:14 PM
Somehow I missed the McCain shoe caper. The last one I remember was O.J. Simpson’s “ugly ass shoes” Bruno Maglis caught on film. I am not going to take a shot at Mrs. Obama’s looks but I will have to disagree with the majority of media who think she has great taste in clothes. I don’t get it.
Cindy Munford on May 1, 2009 at 5:15 PM
I really couldn’t care less. Her money, her choice. Just don’t like the media double standard.
Allahpundit on May 1, 2009 at 5:16 PM
Hope some homeless guy spilled soup on those sneakers.
Otherwise we’ll have to count on BO’s Bo the puppy to chew on them or go walkies on them.
For that price, I could keep my son in sneakers for 10 years.
Steve Z on May 1, 2009 at 5:16 PM
Hey, he’s a troll. Give a guy a break. You want him to use logic or facts? What are you biddening him to do something he cannot hope to do.
kybowexar on May 1, 2009 at 5:17 PM
It’s worse that she has no class but tries to compensate for that lack with $500 tennis shoes.
myrenovations on May 1, 2009 at 5:17 PM
I can only think that if a Republican were in the White House we would be hearing endless stories of how extravagant everything was while millions of Americans were suffering.
Apart from that, if I had $20 million I still would never spend $540 on a pair of shoes. And I’m sure Mo didn’t buy these herself, either.
BigD on May 1, 2009 at 5:18 PM
The real tragedy here is that she paid $540 for one of the most hideous pairs of shoes I’ve ever seen.
Of course she’s going to give them to one of the homeless people, right?
thevastlane on May 1, 2009 at 5:18 PM
You’re right – it is annoying, but I think it is – sadly – almost a given.
kybowexar on May 1, 2009 at 5:18 PM
Look for that French union label….
The left also went after Condi for allegedly shoe shopping during Katrina.
rw on May 1, 2009 at 5:18 PM
I don’t begrudge the wealthy for buying expensive items. But Obama benefited from the tearing apart of Palin and McCain for having expensive clothes or being wealthy. It’s more than a media double-standard. Obama’s own campaign engaged in class warfare against McCain’s wealth and Palin’s clothes.
amerpundit on May 1, 2009 at 5:18 PM
Hey! First lady’s gotta have some standard to show who’s at the top of the food chain.
That’s OK… she’ll get another pair on the TAXPAYER’S DIME and you’ll be able to pick this pair up at the next White House Rummage Sale for $250.
It’s either that or gift them to Sarkosi’s wife…..
CynicalOptimist on May 1, 2009 at 5:19 PM
Of course, Bill Cosby has been called an Uncle Tom by many on the Left, but episode #8 of his classic “Cosby Show” series was when his son bought a $90 “Gordon Gartrell” shirt.
Cos informed him that he didn’t have a $90 shirt, and he had a job., He also told Theo that the only way he would need a $90 shirt was if he was going onstage with his 4 brothers.
As for the fake outrage about McCain’s real estate last summer and fall, that was as double-standard as the Left can get. After all, all of the real estate was in reality owned by Mrs. McCain.
In addition, the Left had absolutely no problem happily voting for a Boston gigolo whose wife owned a similar number of much more expensive houses in 2004.
Del Dolemonte on May 1, 2009 at 5:19 PM
The Queen can only be addressed through her representatives now?
fogw on May 1, 2009 at 5:19 PM
Good headline. The minute I read this morning about Michelle at the Food Bank and her footgear I immediately thought, not of Sarah Palin’s shoes, but John McCain getting bashed (and bashed, and bashed, and bashed) for wearing Italian loafers but not at a Food Bank.
KittyLowrey on May 1, 2009 at 5:19 PM
At least John’s shoes were attractive and worth the money.
That broad has the worst sense of style that I have ever seen. Why won’t Oprah give her the name of a good stylist?
Rae on May 1, 2009 at 5:20 PM
I think the outrage was that McCain’s shoes were made in Italy, showing his disdain for America manufacturing, whereas these are made in Italy, showing us what a worldly and sophisticated first lady we have. After all, it’s not as though her husband urged us to buy American in speech and legislation…. Wait….
At least McCain got quality shoes for his money, rather than trendy overpriced Chuck Taylors.
calbear on May 1, 2009 at 5:20 PM
$540 shoes, while
having a photo opvolunteering at a food bank?Does she have any idea how many needy people served by that food bank she could have helped by getting less expensive shoes and donating the excess?
Is the above okay, or do I need to fake more outrage?
And good for her for volunteering. Even if it was a photo op (which I suspect), if it leads to more people helping it’s a good thing.
malclave on May 1, 2009 at 5:20 PM
After those two leave the White House, we’re going to have to do what the British did in 1814 and burn the damn thing down.
TexasJew on May 1, 2009 at 5:21 PM
If those shoes on McCain were white I would have suspected that he stole them from Clark Griswold.
Scroll to 8:15 in that video if you don’t remember Clark’s white shoes.
BrianBoru on May 1, 2009 at 5:21 PM
Like the TARP recipients, she received money from the government, albeit a paycheck via her husband, so we can dictate how they spend their money (using disfunctional statist logic).
WashJeff on May 1, 2009 at 5:22 PM
I demand blood for this!!!!
…nah, I’m having trouble caring about this too.
frankj on May 1, 2009 at 5:23 PM
From that HuffPo article:
They all kept whining about the coverage Edwards’ hair cut received, but they don’t seem to get it. It’s not just that the hair cut was expensive. It’s that his hair cut is something that came from Super Cuts, something he could have had for ten dollars, and the fact that he’s a man who’s obviously very vain.
Plus it’s about the proportion of what it cost versus what a hair cut normally costs. Shoes are normally already more expensive anyway, especially nice dress shoes. Even cheap ones can run at least $100.
Esthier on May 1, 2009 at 5:23 PM
That’s like a 0.5 on a scale of 10.
I couldn’t muster much more either, though.
lorien1973 on May 1, 2009 at 5:23 PM
Oh brother. They can’t keep enough cutesy phrases in the cookie jar for the offenders. Worse, Michelle wears these to some homeless event.
Can the press please show the same respect and restraint when covering Sarah Palin?
Vermont Neighbor on May 1, 2009 at 5:23 PM
Except for her hideous inagural outfits… And only in the rich people world is J Crew considered a low price option. Most of us make due with Gap instead.
BTW, is this what she’s doing with her time as First Lady? Sort of rich society lady volunteering rather than publicizing some sort of cause. I’m all for volunteering, but she’s doing the sorts of things that I-banking executives, lawyers, and heiress that don’t have to work do all the time (and us peons do on the weekend). But I guess they really cannot have her do anything more high profile, because then we’d all get a taste of her quite rude personality and whiny political views.
Illinidiva on May 1, 2009 at 5:24 PM
Ding Ding Ding.
Buy Danish on May 1, 2009 at 5:24 PM
My wife is an ebay-aholic. She could probably get those shoes for $20 or less.
lorien1973 on May 1, 2009 at 5:24 PM
If the Viet Cong broke McCain’s toes he may need custom shoes. For Zero it is pure, empty vanity as usual.
viking01 on May 1, 2009 at 5:24 PM
Thats what you can afford when a hospital magically creates a useless 300k per year job and hires you due to your husband’s political standing.
V15J on May 1, 2009 at 5:25 PM
I don’t really care about this except:
1. The previously mentioned hypocriteness of the Media.
2. They are some seriously fugly shoes
3. I’m wearing 40 dollar sketchers that are cuter than those things.
4. The McCain loafers are something like my dance shoes. They’d get a lot, a lot of wear out of them. Those fugly Obama shoes will quickly go out of style and end up in the trash at some point.
mjk on May 1, 2009 at 5:25 PM
Oh not at all. She’s got all kinds of class. The Donald Trump kind.
TheUnrepentantGeek on May 1, 2009 at 5:25 PM
Me too, but am I the only one who thinks they look like cheap Keds?
Esthier on May 1, 2009 at 5:25 PM
make that “For Zero’s wife”
viking01 on May 1, 2009 at 5:25 PM
Don’t be too sure about that. During the campaign, one of the glowing profiles written about MO (by a London paper, IIRC) reported that she had a large collection of diamond jewelry and Jimmy Choo shoes (which average about $600 – $800 a pair).
AZCoyote on May 1, 2009 at 5:25 PM
And you know they picked out shoes that were just ever-so-slightly more expensive than McCain’s cuz no one would say anything and it’d be good for a laugh.
lorien1973 on May 1, 2009 at 5:26 PM
I agree with you there.
And I really hate some of the nasty comments about her looks. Looks you’re born with, but those shoes never had to see the light of day, yuck!
thevastlane on May 1, 2009 at 5:26 PM
How do we know they’re not orthotics?!
** hand over mouth, snorting sound coming out of nose, tears swelling in eyes **
ericdijon on May 1, 2009 at 5:26 PM
Yes… people shouldn’t be allowed to use their own money to buy new shoes. It shows the true nature of Barry’s supporters. They’re bitter that other people are successful and they’re losers and whiners and either A. want the gov’t to give them what the Joneses (or the McCains have) or b. want everyone else to be as miserable as they are.
And yes.. I’m tickled pink when I can find a pair of women’s dress shoes for under $100.
Illinidiva on May 1, 2009 at 5:28 PM
Women :/
$100 for shoes? I won’t wear shoes that cost more than $20.
Payless! FTW!
lorien1973 on May 1, 2009 at 5:29 PM
Well, I’d argue something a little cheaper still. Their jeans are $60. Old Navy and Target work for me, but then I have few reasons to dress up.
Esthier on May 1, 2009 at 5:29 PM
That broad has the worst sense of style that I have ever seen. Why won’t Oprah give her the name of a good stylist?
Rae on May 1, 2009 at 5:20 PM
With that visage, I don’t see how anything short of Joan Rivers’ sixteen favorite plastic surgeons could even begin to help.
TexasJew on May 1, 2009 at 5:30 PM
I recall the press castigated Nancy Reagan for her style and clothes choices during an economic recession.
That sword cuts both ways, CNN et al.
tru2tx on May 1, 2009 at 5:31 PM
The Left does this because McCain and his campaign portrayed Obama as elitists. Since the Left loves elitism, they see no problem with their candidate wearing anything that is expensive. Its sort of like their chickenhawk argument where their side can be draft dodgers because they don’t like wars while our side likes wars.
Speedwagon82 on May 1, 2009 at 5:31 PM
My tax money is paying for those shoes!!!
That’s the most outrage I could fake. Lame, huh? I did wonder, for a moment, what it would be like to live in a world where I had the resources to buy, or choose not to buy, $500 shoes.
I go to Big 5 and get the closeout sneaks for 19 bucks. Then I’ll swing buy the gun rack to see what they have in military surplus firearms. Loves my Big 5.
pugwriter on May 1, 2009 at 5:31 PM
Lorien, she lives in Illinois. We have a HIGH sales tax.
WashJeff on May 1, 2009 at 5:31 PM
I wonder if they were made by kids in Kenya.
Tzetzes on May 1, 2009 at 5:32 PM
Hey, at least the little people will be able to get a ‘knock-off’ pair at Payless Shoes within a month and look cool too.
thomasaur on May 1, 2009 at 5:32 PM
Goonie Goo Goo!
NSFW
carbon_footprint on May 1, 2009 at 5:32 PM
Errr…swing by…
pugwriter on May 1, 2009 at 5:32 PM
Didn’t Barry give her a ridiculously expensive ring for Christmas or something? It was in Chicago.
BTW, talk about an extravegent waste of money. I wonder if she was always like this with money or if it is a new thing? No wonder it took them so long to pay off their Harvard student loans if she was charging Jimmy Choo shoes on her Visa.
Illinidiva on May 1, 2009 at 5:33 PM
carbon_footprint on May 1, 2009 at 5:32 PM
thomasaur on May 1, 2009 at 5:34 PM
Like their so called ‘caring about the people’, the obama’s are full of crap. They don’t contribute much to charity, they wear ugly ass expensive shoes to peoplt that can hardly eat, and they are going to raise our taxes to pay for bailouts to pay countries that we already support half of their welfare state.
What a load of crap.
HornetSting on May 1, 2009 at 5:35 PM
Yes… guys can get away with that. Women need to be pickier about what they wear. (Witness the Sarah Palin clothes-gate scandal).
Illinidiva on May 1, 2009 at 5:35 PM
When Sarah Palin was being called ugly names for wearing nice (borrowed) clothes, Michelle Obama sneered that SHE shops frugally, advertising J.Crew.
So, J.Crew sells $540./sneakers?
maverick muse on May 1, 2009 at 5:35 PM
Could be the size 14 Klingon width that ups the price of her sneakers. I don’t think Target carries up to that size. Maybe online though.
Seriously though, If I were going to spend over half a grand on footwear, I’d pick ones that don’t closely resemble Target $19.99, end-of-the-aisle promotions from the weekly sale flyer. But that’s just me I guess.
caygeon on May 1, 2009 at 5:35 PM
McCain will wear his shoes more than once, though.
desertdweller on May 1, 2009 at 5:36 PM
I’m resisting the temptation to get a sketchers catalogue and sending it to the White House.
They have some seriously adorable shoes.
mjk on May 1, 2009 at 5:36 PM
lol
That entire Delirious performance is hilarious.
carbon_footprint on May 1, 2009 at 5:37 PM
A tad bit of overstatement – but hilarious nonetheless!
kybowexar on May 1, 2009 at 5:37 PM
Imagine how $540 could improve George Obama’s circumstances.
Disturb the Universe on May 1, 2009 at 5:37 PM
Agreed. I just bought a pair of dress shoes for…well, a lot. BUT! Those tacky things on her feet are just plain UGLY. Tennis shoes for $540? Really? REALLY???
Not worth it.
pullingmyhairout on May 1, 2009 at 5:38 PM
HornetSting on May 1, 2009 at 5:38 PM
How much does the average family spend on groceries in one week?
Answer
THe average family spends about $600 per month for a family of 4. With a dog is an extra $20.
Wow those are some nice shoes you have Mrs.O.
canditaylor68 on May 1, 2009 at 5:39 PM
Those are damn ugly sneakers for $540.
McKenz59 on May 1, 2009 at 5:39 PM
Money does not buy class, Mr. Shakar, nor is it equivalent with class.
In any case, Michelle doesn’t have much. Of the latter.
Alana on May 1, 2009 at 5:39 PM
Have you ever looked in the J Crew catalog? Not in the same range as Gucci and Prada, but I wouldn’t consider spending $200+ on a dress frugal.
Illinidiva on May 1, 2009 at 5:40 PM
I wonder if they were made by kids in Kenya.
Tzetzes on May 1, 2009 at 5:32 PM
Well, that’s where Obama was made.
TexasJew on May 1, 2009 at 5:40 PM
As long as we’re plugging shoe outlets, online Drew Shoes clearance; get steel shanks and room for walkfit inserts.
maverick muse on May 1, 2009 at 5:40 PM
There really needs to be a windfall shoe tax.
I swear that either Dexter or Linds released bowling shoes that looked like those things several years ago. They were probably at least $400 cheaper. It’s scary that even high end bowling shoes are spendy.
rw on May 1, 2009 at 5:41 PM
The funny thing… I love Doc Martens.
Illinidiva on May 1, 2009 at 5:41 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »