« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Hope, Handbags, and Hypocrisy

This morning’s Wall Street Journal reports on Obama’s “Runway to Win” fashion fundraiser tonight, where the campaign will begin hawking campaign-themed apparel and accessories from high-end designers. The article also raises some serious issues about potential campaign finance law violations:

“Jan Baran, an election lawyer with Wiley Rein LLP, said designers can’t ask employees to work on political projects unless they willingly volunteered their time. ‘Someone who is paid to do campaign work is not a volunteer,’ he said. If the designer or staff are paid by anyone other than the campaign, it would be considered a campaign contribution from a company to a candidate.”

These are serious questions and deserve a serious investigation—and an honest answer from the self-proclaimed “most transparent administration in history.”

But visitors to www.RunwaytoWin.com may find themselves asking yet another question: Is the Obama campaign promoting a president or a product?

The high-priced T-shirts ($45), totes ($75), and scarves ($95) are designed by the likes of Vera Wang, Marc Jacobs, and Beyoncé, and feature logos (the Obama ‘O’), slogans (“Greater Together”), and images (of the president himself).

While the products’ prices are high by conventional standards, it all speaks to a certain cheapening of the commander-in-chief. It underscores yet again the Obama campaign’s desire to run on something—anything!—other than the president’s record.

In 2008, Barack Obama had no record, so he ran on empty slogans. In 2012, he has a record, but because that record is so abysmal, the campaign has calculated that they must run a campaign that deliberately avoids mentioning it.

The campaign has new slogans, old logos, and equally vapid platitudes—all meant to distract from high unemployment, rising debt, and the overwhelming sense that America is headed in the wrong direction.

The American people won’t be distracted, but the Obama campaign has managed to distract themselves from reality. Team Obama talks about “fighting” for the middle class and about vague notions of “fairness”—and then they peddle a $95 scarf.  In the Obama economy, few can realistically afford to be campaign-chic—even if these are supposed to be discounted prices. (See the RNC’s video, “The Obama 2012 Fashion Show”)

This tone-deafness comes on the same day that Team Obama took hypocrisy to a new level—embracing the very Super PACs that the president once called a “threat to democracy.” It’s just the latest broken promise from Barack Obama and, like the fashion fundraising, directly undermines the administration’s own rhetoric.

Seeing an opportunity for millions of dollars of pro-Obama cash, the campaign decided politics trumped principle and reversed their own position on Super PACs, encouraging donors to support the third party group Priorities USA.

Barack Obama once declared that as a result of Super PACs, “every American might end up suffering.” Now, the Obama campaign has decided that, in the words of a $50 pin designed by Eddie Borgo, Barack Obama and his Super PAC could be “greater together.” Never mind the effect on “every American.”

It really is all about “Priorities.” Obama now prioritizes fundraising over fighting supposed “suffering.” It doesn’t take a fashion designer to see that’s a bad look on him.

COMMENTS

  • acat

    While it doesn’t play well outside urban centers, conspicuous consumption – $200 for Air Jordans or $100 for the right jeans – plays very well in urban areas. Clearly, Obama hopes to retain or grow his popularity among young trendsetters, still living off mommy or daddy’s dime.

    This is likely a #Fail .. but it’s also an early point in the campaign season.

    On the upside, if Obama does tank in November, these will all disappear into the back of the hipster closets and reappear a year or two later as donations …

    The thought of a homeless panhandler on the Madison Street bridge wearing a $95 Obama shirt makes me grin.

    Mew

  • redcal

    The last four paragraphs are so much more important than the bulk of this. Why not go into depth on the PAC reversal? That’s a far more damning indictment — what’s the ideological reason for his original position and then why doesn’t the reversal completely and utterly break it?

  • demsaresatanic

    told Obama off. Hitting those “serious issues about potential campaign finance law violations,” so hard gives me more confidence that you will enforce the RNC rules on proportional delegates in Florida.

  • Locked and Loaded

    We couldn’t keep him out in 2008. What’s it gonna say if we can’t throw him out in 2012?

  • acat

    is of interest to inside-politics folks who are active on Red State and elsewhere, but the designer stuff appeals to the folks who watch “What Not To Wear” …

    Hint: Ratings for CSPAN still fall below “What Not To Wear”.

    Mew

  • znjs

    my first thought when reading

    Is the Obama campaign promoting a president or a product?

    was “Is there a difference anymore?” If it wasn’t already taken we could rename President to American Idol.

  • veritaseequitas

    arsenal than worrying about the crap going on at Fashion Week. You need to get serious and bring out the big guns Reince. Your little essay on who is designing what has about as much relevance as snot on a fingernail.
    If we are to have any hope of annihilating The Communist in November, you better be prepared to fight as down and dirty as the leftists do. Write about Fast & Furious, the transparent attempt to take away our religious freedom, our freedom of speech, our gun rights, foreign policy, the economy. If you can’t, find someone who can.

  • veritaseequitas

    Barack’s Frankenstein Bride would do well to watch it.

  • lizfstone

    ..one of my favorite designers, is one of the o’s designers. I wrote to tell her that even though I loved her product, I loved my country more, so bye bye Tory. I’ve never received a response.

  • Locked and Loaded

    I don’t know how this ended up as a reply to acat – but since I’m here…

    That is a beautiful picture you’ve painted there.

  • runner12

    Very disappointed.

    Is it me, or is there something rather creepy about this? We elect a President, not a dictator who likes plastering his face and logo all over apparel.

    I am a bit of a fashionista myself, but this just goes over the top. I would even say that if it were someone from the GOP. It just comes across as narcisstic and insensitive to what most Americans are going through right now with the economy.

    Just another despicable move by Obama and Co.

  • jeffperren

    ” high unemployment, rising debt, and the overwhelming sense that America is headed in the wrong direction.”

    He may have broken a lot of *relatively* unimportant promises – about campaign funding, closing Gitmo, etc. But on the big stuff – implementing Progressive policies, skyrocketing energy prices, hampering development, socializing medical care, ignoring the law to ‘get things done’ and the like – he has kept every single one.

    Hence, the high unemployment, rising debt, and overwhelming sense that America is headed in the wrong direction.