Would you pay 540 dollars for a pair of sneakers?

Michelle Obama's 450 dollar sneakers - A picture of sneakers from the Lavain designer.
@Fortunata (1136)
United States
May 1, 2009 1:37pm CST
Michelle Obama wore a pair of designer sneakers that cost 540 dollars to a charity where she was feeding the 'poor'. I remember the hell Sarah Palin went through for her borrowed clothing during the campaign. Hypocrisy much?
4 people like this
17 responses
• United States
1 May 09
they won't say a word about it and you know it. Because anything that the Obama's do is perfect and everything a conservative does is wrong.
2 people like this
• United States
1 May 09
Did she buy them with her own money? Or were they donated to her?
• United States
1 May 09
That is more than one car payment for me and I am not sure where I will get the cash for it next month. I do not think that I spent that much money on clothes last year, I hit the thrift shops for everything except shoes and even then they are less then $50.
2 people like this
@spalladino (17926)
• United States
1 May 09
Ok, I have a question. Why is it a crime to be rich and to be able to afford to spend that kind of money on shoes? Michelle used her own money to buy those shoes...Sarah Palin's wardrobe, which I haven't heard one word about the auction that was supposed to happen after the election, was paid for with money that people had donated to the campaign...it was not her money. My husband's older brother is worth millions. He and his wife live well and dress well. We all attended a nephew's wedding this past Saturday and the dress my sister-in-law was wearing was a designer dress I'm sure and one that I couldn't begin to guess the cost of. I don't begrudge anyone who earns an honest living their wealth or believe that I have the right to judge how they choose to spend the money they earn.
@Fortunata (1136)
• United States
1 May 09
How do you know Michelle Obama bought the shoes? It's my understanding that her clothes are 'donated' to her. And I'm not against rich people or people who can afford to dress nice. I'm just saying that there's hypocrisy here on the part of the democrats, that skewered Palin on her wardrobe, howling about the cost of her clothing. I could care less if Michelle wore a garbage bag. Hell, it'd probably be an improvement over what she normally wears anyway.
@Taskr36 (13925)
• United States
1 May 09
"Why is it a crime to be rich and to be able to afford to spend that kind of money on shoes?" It's not a crime at all and personally I couldn't care less what she pays for shoes. The relevance though is that Obama has been calling on people to cut back, save energy, not waste money on luxuries, etc. Regardless, i don't care unless it was taxpayer dollars spent on those shoes. As for Sarah Palin's wardrobe. You're right, it was campaign money, not hers that was spent on it. It wasn't her that spent the money either despite the lies on liberal blogs claiming so, the RNC did the spending. The clothes were returned to the RNC promptly after the campaign where a few people made some noise about them sitting on the clothes instead of donating them immediately. Some started claiming that the clothes were thrown in the trash even. Eventually the RNC did officially state that all the clothes were donated. http://www.politicsdaily.com/2009/04/02/exclusive-rnc-says-all-of-palins-clothes-have-been-donated/
@spalladino (17926)
• United States
1 May 09
Some fashion designers do give the First Lady clothes in order to get their names mentioned...this has been going on for a very long time...but that doesn't mean that everything she wears is donated. I still don't see the hypocrisy. People who donated money to John McCain's campaign for president ended up paying for new wardrobes for Sarah, Todd and all the kiddies. I didn't have a problem with the RNC dressing Palin...my problem was with the rest of the family jumping on that bandwagon.
• United States
1 May 09
Would I pay $540 for a pair of shoes? NO! They would have to do something pretty darn special (I'm talking "allows wearer to travel through time!" special) before I would spend that much money on something like shoes. And, like it was said, you can count on that no one in the Media will be talking about that very much or at all. It is very hypocritical.
1 person likes this
• United States
1 May 09
After reading the comments, I have to admit that spalladino does have a point. If she bought them with their own money, then really there's nothing wrong with that. Still, I wouldn't regardless of how much money I have.
1 person likes this
@spalladino (17926)
• United States
1 May 09
The mindset is completely different when you have money and when you've had it for a long time. You don't have to choose between buying something for yourself *or* your kids and you don't have to worry about putting money away for a vacation. My one sister-in-law talks about quality and my other sister-in-law and I talk about catching a good sale. I've never felt that she and my brother-in-law flaunt their wealth. They're very down to earth people and do a lot for their community...would give anyone in the family anything we need...but they are who they are. Should the First Lady of the United States be expected to dress down when she's doing something to help the poor? No. Would anyone old enough to remember expect Jackie Kennedy to have done so?
@cher913 (25893)
• Canada
1 May 09
nope, not ever, not even if i had all the money in the world. i wouldnt even spend 100. i am just not into luxury that much. but that is just nuts. what kind of message is michelle obama trying to send? i am rich and you are not? HA! seriously, thats horrible.
1 person likes this
@bestboy19 (5482)
• United States
2 May 09
I don't have any problem with anyone spending their money any way they please. If Michelle Obama bought those shoes with her own money, let her wear them. As far as wearing them while she feeds the poor, they could be an example of what good things can come to you if you're willing to work hard for them. Now if she got the shoes with taxpayer money, she can bloody well take them off and give me back my money.
• United States
2 May 09
lol. I like that comment. Especially the last part!!!
@bobmnu (8160)
• United States
2 May 09
I like to buy quality things but I buy them at outlet stores or on sale. I have never paid over $75.00 for a pair of shoes but have owned shoes that cost more than that. Designer shoes and clothes are purchased to show people that you don't have to worry about money or that you are better than others. Most people do not buy a BMW because of the safety or handling they buy it as a status symbol. That is what her designer shoes and clothes are - status symbols.
@spalladino (17926)
• United States
2 May 09
Bob, don't think I'm picking on you but I disagree. My brother-in-law can't convince financial backers to write large checks for the projects he develops if he's dressed in Walmart clothes and driving a Ford F150. Their entire lifestyle is different from ours and they have every right to live it because they have worked hard for years to get to where they are so why should anyone begrudge them that or look down on them because they can afford certain things? I've never felt that they believe that they are better than anyone else. This "hate the rich" attitude is wrong. I doubt that anyone at the event Michele Obama attended gave her shoes a second thought.
• United States
6 May 09
There's a double standard, so it's OK for Michelle Obama to do this, but not Sarah Palin. It would also be OK if she had a medical condition that required special sneakers, but I can't imagine even prescription shoes costing that much. Come to think of it, it seems nuts for anyone for any reason to pay that kind of money for sneakers.
@gewcew23 (8011)
• United States
3 May 09
Why would anyone pay $540 for those shoes? I have seen twenty dollar shoes from Walmart that look better than those shoes.
@mermaidivy (15417)
• United States
2 May 09
If it was HKD540, I will consider about it, but if it is US dlloar, NO way. It is way too expensive for a pair of sneakers whatever if it is brand name designer or normal ones. It would be too much a luxurious stuff for me.
@santau (223)
• United States
2 May 09
I dont have the money to spend on shoes that expensive. Nowhere near it. I buy my shoes at Wal-Mart lol. But Michelle Obama lives in a world of hypocrisy. If she wore clothes like the majority of people I see on the streets, she would be tarred and feathered by the news agencies, the fashion community, and even the average american population. She is expected to look nice and be an icon, but she gets torn into when she wears the clothes needed to make her one. That sounds like hypocrisy to me. Now, I am not defending $540. That is a little extreme. But if she has the money to wear them, then let her.
@Bevsue (251)
• United States
2 May 09
Yep. It annoys me too. Pretty offensive in these economic times. Just the 2009 version of "Let them eat cake"
• United States
2 May 09
Everything is all about money with people in politics isn't it? Why not just donate the shoes to someone who doesn't have "nice" shoes. Why on earth does it matter? I'm pretty sure she could've gotten something a little cheaper from some other place, that looks just as good, and probably would've lasted longer. So yes, I agree, its total hypocrisy. I would never pay that much for shoes. There's so much more you could do with 540 dollars, than buy a pair of shoes. People need to stop worrying about the outward appearance and more about the inner appearance of a person. Clothes and shoes can be taken away, burned, or damaged... the inner beauty of a person lasts forever.
@Adoniah (7515)
• United States
2 May 09
It does not matter if she bought those shoes or if someone gave them to her. It is just too much that she wore a pair of sneekers that cost that much to a charity function. What kind of message does that send to the people that need the fruits of that charity function. Hey, look at me, HA HA! I get to wear $500+ shoes and you get to wear what ever! Shalom~Adoniah
@dlr297 (5384)
• United States
1 May 09
Their is no way i would ever pay that much for a pair of shoes, Their is no way i would spend that much for a whole outfit. But i guess when you have it to spend..You have to spend it on something. Even if it is something so foolish.
• United States
1 May 09
I would not even if I had that much extra money to spend on shoes I wouldn't buy shoes. There is a lot better things in my opinion that I could spend that amount of money on. I am not a shoe person, I have maybe three pair and that is enough for me...I could take that five hundred dollars and spend it on my kids or put it away for a vacation with my family. I think spending that much on a pair of shoes is being selfish and ridiculous.
@dragon54u (31605)
• United States
1 May 09
I certainly don't begrudge her the shoes if she can afford them but it's in bad taste to wear them in a place like that. Mrs. Obama would look good dressed in a feed sack, she's very stylish and that befits a First Lady. But I do think she should have dressed more simply out of respect for those people who can't even afford to buy their own food.