John Edwards was a good-looking VP choice. But, sorry dude! Sarah Palin is now the only VP in history to bring sex appeal to an election. Before Sarah Palin came on the national scene, she was on “The Late, Late Show”. The host couldn’t help but bring up her attractiveness. Craig Ferguson said she had that “naughty librarian” look! He looked like he was about to ejaculate! Since she became the VP pick, she is now known as the “VPILF“. I don’t think we’ve ever had a vice presidential pick that made people horny until Sarah Palin.
Even though she ridicules her IQ, Tina Fey had to applaud Sarah Palin’s stunningly good looks. Here’s an excerpt from Eonline which has a statement from Tina Fey & Alec Baldwin on it:
“I’ll tell you, that lady is five times better-looking than I am,” Fey says in the latest issue of TV Guide. “She’s 44? She’s got none of that droopy s–t. She’s keeping it tight!”
Even 30 Rock costar Alec Baldwin seemed to share Fey’s feelings when he told Palin on last weekend’s SNL, “You are way hotter in person. Seriously, I can’t believe they let her [Fey] play you.” (End of excerpt) Link here to read the rest: (http://www.eonline.com/uberblog/b64846_whos_hotter_tina_fey_vs_sarah_palin.html)
So, what the hell was the RNC thinking when they spent that $150,000 on Sarah Palin? She’s no Greta Van Susteren! This chick is a total babe already! They could have saved themselves all the scandal. Here’s an excerpt from (www.politico.com:
“The Republican National Committee has spent more than $150,000 to clothe and accessorize vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin and her family since her surprise pick by John McCain in late August.
According to financial disclosure records, the accessorizing began in early September and included bills from Saks Fifth Avenue in St. Louis and New York for a combined $49,425.74.
The records also document a couple of big-time shopping trips to Neiman Marcus in Minneapolis, including one $75,062.63 spree in early September.
The RNC also spent $4,716.49 on hair and makeup through September after reporting no such costs in August.
The cash expenditures immediately raised questions among campaign finance experts about their legality under the Federal Election Commission’s long-standing advisory opinions on using campaign cash to purchase items for personal use.” (End Of Excerpt) Follow this link to read all about it: (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1008/14805.html)