You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #109: sure she does -- eyesroll [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
pitohui Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-30-10 11:39 AM
Response to Original message
109. sure she does -- eyesroll
Edited on Wed Jun-30-10 11:45 AM by pitohui
if something is stupid-ass on the face of it and does not have any relation whatsoever to consensus reality...it's OK to call bullshit...really

have you ever met any woman who spent that kind of money on shoes? no, i don't mean imelda marcos on CNN, i mean live in person?

huh, thought so...

i have 19 pairs of shoes, i don't doubt it, total cost probably around $200, i mean some shoes cost literally $2 (flipflops in my local walgreens, in fact, i was cussing myself because they had a sale and they were down to 99 cents but i already had too many cute flipflops)

now i am an EXCEPTIONALLY skilled shopper but even an idiot can find a better deal than paying over $1,000 per pair of shoes/boots in her closet...$25K my happy ass

as for the people who say, well, if she buys $500 worth of shoes a year...um, i have news...your feet don't grow for several decades between the time you're a teen-ager until i guess you have a stroke or something and now your feet are all puffy and changed...there's no need/reason to buy shoes every year, if you are a serious hiker/walker, then you break in the shoes and you stick with THOSE shoes to the bitter end, unless you enjoy the torture of breaking in new shoes...there are plenty of years where you don't buy any shoes at all and when you do, even if it's for serious sport, well, it's not blahniks, then is it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC