i knew what the rest of the question would be before clicking on it!
she has given some reason for it..
its kinda nice as in 'look at what you can achieve if you just believe' way but then hey sugar pawn your bling and we'll end third world debt.
2007-01-05 16:46:23
·
answer #1
·
answered by cas 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
IMHO, yes. I think jeans and a clean shirt, tennis shoes and something small in the jewelry line would have been more tasteful.
Another point of view, though: Perhaps she was giving the kids what she thought they wanted - 'glamour' and a 'star' to visit them. Perhaps it meant more to the kids that she looked all flashy and star-like!
2007-01-06 00:43:43
·
answer #2
·
answered by Baby'sMom 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
She should wear whatever she wants to wear. She does not have to dress a certain way to show she is humble, the time and money she is giving is enough humility. Life is short....if you got wear it.
2007-01-06 00:45:14
·
answer #3
·
answered by Lolitta 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
She could've just wore a simple shirt and jeans to not make the kids look bad.
2007-01-06 00:43:17
·
answer #4
·
answered by Lyrical Lie 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
did she seriously? that's bad taste. she should have worn jeans and a t-shirt. cheap ones.
2007-01-06 00:43:38
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
yes if that is true it is ridiculous. she is just silly with that stuff! she should have worn casual clothes
2007-01-06 00:42:50
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
yeah it was. couldnt she have stuck with a simple tshirt and khaki pants? i mean, come on! its a poverty stricken country
2007-01-06 00:44:25
·
answer #7
·
answered by Boop 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
Who cares?
2007-01-06 00:43:42
·
answer #8
·
answered by jasemay71 5
·
2⤊
1⤋
Well, she is always over the top !!!
2007-01-06 00:42:35
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
jeans and a t-shirt.
2007-01-06 00:47:24
·
answer #10
·
answered by Neev 7
·
0⤊
0⤋