A Point that John Edwards' Steadfast Defenders May be Missing...

[Matsubara]

Maybe this is a kneejerk reaction among his boosters caused by the strong opposition some other candidates have often engendered, but

it seems to me that a lot of the Edwards devotees think that those of us have been critical of him over the haircut must also be opposed to his candidacy.



I can only speak for myself, but I most certainly am not. He has long been a favorite of mine along with Al Gore, and I still think he would be a damn good nominee.



I only hoped he would acknowledge that the haircut was an error (albeit a trivial one) and then move on, being careful not to make another such symbolic mistake in the future.

As a person who wants him to succeed, I think that would be the best way to defuse the situation (a little self-deprecating humor would also go a long way).



And being defensive and trying to act like $400 is what regular people (esp. men) pay for their haircuts is not doing the guy any favors. Just acknowledge it and move on.



Are any of you who were irked by the haircut opposed to his candidacy? Do you dislike him? I'd wager very few of us feel this way at all. This guy is not Hillary.

At this point he has not made a lot of enemies. Feel free to chime in if you think I'm wrong.

[Birthmark]

1. The whole thing is silly.

Those who raised the "issue" should be ashamed at their own desperation.

And for those people: What does your candidate spend for a hotel room? Are they staying in the local Motel6? I doubt it.

Like I said, it's silly.

[Matsubara]

2. It is silly, but unfortunately that's the game.

If I'm correct, it was La Drudge who dredged this haircut thing up. But the precedent was there with Clinton. I wish Edwards would have taken note of it...

[Beer Snob-50]

3. If it is such a trivial matter than why bring it up in the first place

it takes away from his message (which is why RW a-holes bring it up in the first place)!

[Matsubara]

7. WE didn't bring it up, they did.

But haven't we learned from the Swift Boat crap that remaining silent while these things fester does not work?

[Beer Snob-50]

15. But instead of saying that we are also upset about it

shouldn't we say "You are really full of crap, this is trivial!!!"

[Matsubara]

21. Honestly, I think any honest response from Edwards would be sufficient.

Doesn't really matter what it is. It is a trivial matter, but it should be answered because if it's not refuted, the right-wing echo chambers and chatrooms and those stupid e-mails they send out will be echoing with it from now until election day. I want Edwards to kill this stupid thing personally.

[Beer Snob-50]

36. I understand your frustration with him on this

but somehting this small will die it's own death I believe because it is just so trivial. The RW's will still bring it up because they are whores who have to spew this crap because their candidates have nothing of substance to say.

[bryant69]

4. The thing about that haircut is it makes him girly

I mean a manly man wouldn't spend $400 on a haircut; so his decision to get a $400 haircut must make him kind of a girl. And we don't want a girl running the country.

Or that's the message the right wing has for us with this particular story; they must be happy that so many of us are willing to pass it along.

Hey you hear the one about how Al Gore invented the internet? Or the one about how John Kerry is a wind surfing fop?

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[BeyondGeography]

5. Rooting for someone else, have been critical of Edwards BUT

also hate it when the MSM is handed an opportunity, as they were in this case, to feminize a leading male Democrat and portray him as someone whose private behavior is at odds with his rhetoric.

Especially one who could be our nominee.

[fasttense]

6. The right wing neocons are certainly spinning.

When der Fuhrer's party uses tax dollars to pay the salary of political consultant KKKarl Rove, they have no room to complain about a silly hair cut.

[w4rma]

8. Hillary Clinton's $1500 Haircuts, Expensed to the Campaign

HILLARY GATHERS AN ARMY
By IAN BISHOP
Post Correspondent

July 24, 2006 -- WASHINGTON - Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's campaign army has increased its ranks to 50 staffers and more than 20 consultants, specialists in everything from fund-raising to speech-writing to hairstyling and makeup.

Clinton, the likely 2008 Democratic White House front-runner, ponied up nearly $3,000 in campaign cash for her blond tresses to get some presidential pampering from acclaimed D.C. stylist Isabelle Goetz.

Recently released federal fund-raising records show Clinton shelled out $1,500 in April for Goetz to carefully craft her coiffure and another $1,000 for a camera-ready clip in May.

She passed off both styling sessions as "media production" expenses.

Clinton was so desperate for Goetz to style her gilded mane, she picked up the scissor siren's $405 travel tab in April and a $38 expenses tab in May.

Goetz, a fixture at the swank Cristophe salon and the favored stylist of John Kerry, has been clipping the former first lady's locks for years - she's credited for updating Clinton's coif from country to chic. To complement the touch-up of her tresses, Clinton invested another $3,000 for makeup maestro Barbara Lacy to brush on some blush.

Lacy is a Tinseltown pro who applied the makeup to actors' mugs in movies including "Minority Report," "Runaway Bride," "National Treasure" and "In the Line of Fire."

She can also take credit for working the West Wing - the NBC version. Clinton paid Lacy an eye-popping $1,600 for some eye-lining in mid-May and another mind-boggling $1,300 for some makeup two weeks later.

Again, Clinton justified the makeovers as a media production expense.
…
http://www.babalublog.com/archives/003657.html
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=698126&mesg_id=698126

Edwards Flattens Coif Controversy
April 18, 2007

ABC News' Raelyn Johnson Reports: You can tell it's political season when people are putting a fine tooth comb to, well hair. A report filed with the Federal Election Commission last weekend revealed that former Sen. John Edwards' D-N.C., presidential campaign twice shelled out $400 for haircuts he received from a Beverly Hills salon.

Just as fast as gossip spreads in the fashion salon, ABC News has learned the money will be returned. "As for the haircuts, the bill was sent to the campaign, it was paid in error, and Edwards will be reimbursing the campaign," says campaign spokesperson Eric Schultz.

The hair cut revelation did little to minimize what some call Edwards' 'Breck Girl' image. Earlier this year, YouTube showcased a video of Edwards fixing his hair before a televised interview, demonstrating the unforgiving power of the site.
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2007/04/edwards_flatten.html
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=3224029&mesg_id=3224029

[William769]

19. Defelction, have you no shame?

At least use something recently. Only looks bad on you.

[w4rma]

20. Less than 1 year, during the same campaign is recent. (nt)

[JNelson6563]

23. I am no supporter of Sen. Clinton

But this doesn't really bother me. I know how anxious I am when I am going to give a speech to 200 regular people in the middle of nowhere. If I had to go on a national level appearance I would do anything within my power to feel confident in both substance and appearance.

Julie--noticing stones are must readily thrown by those who have no clue what it can really be like

[w4rma]

25. I'm trying to kill the entire *manufactured* "issue". (nt)

[William769]

27. By adding fuel to the fire?

Good job.

[w4rma]

29. This "issue" is dead now. Many of the folks attacking Edwards were cynically Hillary supporters.(nt)

[William769]

32. I am a Mrs.Clinton supporter, and I challange you to find even one post

Where I chastised him for it. Actually you will find I have posted about the subject as who cares.

ON EDIT: thats how you kill a subject.

[w4rma]

35. "Many [not all. I never included you, specifically] … were cynically Hillary supporters." (nt)

[JNelson6563]

34. I don't think it was fuel to the fire

IMO it was a good way to highlight the fact that this is a non-issue.

Julie

[JNelson6563]

33. Mea Culpa

w4rma, my apologies for having written my reply in such a way as to make it appear you were included in those I was talking about. I don't see it that way, I think your post actually reinforces my point. Edwards isn't alone in spending on this sort of thing and it's silly to throw stones over it. I couldn't agree more that it is a manufactured "issue" and it saddens me to see so many willing to be so consumed with it.

I really feel the candidates need to be confident on every level, they will be put under microscopes. I know I'd certainly do the very best I could afford to if I were going to be in such a situation.

Cheers,
Julie

[Czolgosz]

9. If you have a national television appearance scheduled, and you have your hair cut and the other

usual preparations for a television appearance (make up etc.), and you have a tight schedule where you are flying to four cities that day and so, to facilitate scheduling, the person who is providing these services comes to the studio where you are scheduled to appear, what do you presume that costs?

What do you presume Hillary pays for such services?

What do you presume Obama pays for such services?

What do you presume Romney pays for such services?

What do you presume McCain pays for such services?

[Matsubara]

11. That's a fair point.

If that's how Edwards wants to address it, great, but he should address it and get it out of the way.

In fact that may be the best way to address it, and then use the platform to get out some choice talking points while he's at it.

[salin]

10. While I have read many stories over the years about Dems and haircuts

I have never read the same about repubs haircuts. Do we really think that those campaigning don't also do the - high pressure (ala little time, but about to be infront of the media) type hairstyling that is more akin to "makeup" prior to a tv or movie filming session than like a regular relaxed (and cheap) haircut that most of us get? I don't buy it (that it isn't a story about repubs because they don't do expensive haircuts). I think this is more of the media trivializing dem candidates than anything else. Ala Gore's "consultants that suggested wearing warm earth tones". As if prominent repubs don't hire scads of media/image consultants as well.

[Matsubara]

12. There has been a lot of talk about Katharine Harris' makeup...

And I am dating myself, but I know that Nancy Reagan got criticized for some of her Galanos & Halston dresses, as well as her decision to replace all the white house china.

It's not unprecedented, but true that the GOP-loving media of recent years has not gone after GOP candidates on these things (or much of anything else for that matter).

[elehhhhna]

13. We shoudl not pay as a party for Reeps crappy-looking hair and poor grooming.

[salin]

16. I think it is just one more reality (and problem) of the modern

media campaigns. I would bet that someone is riding with McCain on his bus and doing his hair/image work between stops - and that person is likely a paid staffer and thus it doesn't show up the same way on campaign disclosure reports. Just guessing.

I am not a big fan of the modern media campaigns. I am not a big fan of stretching the primarys as long as we do - and now with the big rush so early in the season. Forces campaigns to rely more and more on "image" and the "photoops" in order to try to sell folks very early in the game. This whole "haircut" issue, imo, is a symptom of a bigger problem per modern presidential campaigns.

[Matsubara]

17. LMAO

Like this?

[salin]

18. Gack! (or is it rubberneck gawk?)

that needs a warning!

[ShortnFiery]

14. Because the gap between the rich and the poor hasn't been larger since the 1920s

JE is IMO honestly unaware of The LARGE Working Class America now that he has reached the status of the ultra-wealthy and political elite, i.e. The SMALL Ruling Class America.

No, I don't blame him but don't pretend that we are NOT on the eve of worldwide Class Warfare because we see the signs all around us. Specifically, the large corporations, interest groups and media conglomerates run the CONGRESS, not the American Constituency.

Please also understand that since JE can not begin to understand why a $400 haircut is obscene, he is also insulated from abject poverty despite his thoughtful rhetoric.

Many of us believe that since there's not FREE Press or FAIR Campaigns, there's not one major Presidential Candidate, Democratic or Republican, who's not willing to "Waltz Around" but in the end always have the result be in the best interest of Corporate, Ruling Class America.

Personally, I will vote for Obama because, deep down, I WANT TO BELIEVE, that he will be able to somewhat balance the stranglehold Corporate and War Profiteering America has on working and middle class taxpaying Americans.

All I have is that "I want to believe" in Obama and "I do believe" 100% in the integrity of Clark. :shrug:

No, I have nothing against JE, but ever since his wife first hinted to a non-permanent staffer about how great it would be to have a new Play station 3, as well as the Mc-Mansion, the populist ticket is not what JE FEELS in his soul ... or at least, NOT today. :shrug:

In general, I believe that those within the upper 5% Ultra-Wealthy in the USA, can NOT fathom how difficult it is to *survive* in Peasant Class America. And yes, for that sense of entitlement and blissful ignorance regarding the value of a dollar, I resent ANYONE who will piss away $400 for a haircut. Is this illustrious "hair designer" the alpha and omega? No, my beauty school trained mother of 76 could have done as quality of work, but without the TITLE and ARROGANCE. :thumbsdown:

Obama and HRC would do a great service to their campaigns if they soon choose to visit an inner city Beauty Academy and enjoy the use of their services for a trim and manicure.

Two Americas? JE now only knows what it's like to enjoy privilege. And IMO, dynastic (Kennedys, Bushes, Clintons, etc) and Roosevelt types will NOT demonstrate moral courage in this Modern Day Roman Empire (on the decline) to serve those who are disenfranchised and downtrodden.

It will take a generation to vote in populists ... IF we haven't already sunk irreputably into Fascism. :(

[frylock]

38. finally, someone who gets it..

you can't ride the coattails of the "workin folk", then turn around and drop $400 on a haircut.

[Skinner]

22. I think the manner in which people discuss this...

...gives some indication as to whether their intent is to tear him down.

Obviously, one can admire and support John Edwards while simultaneously thinking the $400 haircut was a mistake, or being disappointed that he would do such a thing. I think most people have acknowledged that, at the very least, getting a $400 haircut and charging it to your campaign is a mistake.

But I am not so naive as to think that everyone criticizing Edwards has the best interests of John Edwards in mind. It seems to me that a large proportion of posts on this topic are likely intended to hurt John Edwards' and his presidential campaign.

For the record, I am not familiar with your posts on this issue so I am not suggesting that you personally are an opponent of John Edwards. But I have seen plenty of posts from plenty of different people on this topic that sure sound like they are coming from people who oppose his candidacy.

I think it is safe to assume that people who sound like they oppose John Edwards probably do.

[Matsubara]

24. For the record, I emphatically do not. My two fave Prez's were super-rich.

And they wore BORN into money, too, unlike Edwards.

Franklin Roosevelt and John F. Kennedy.

Luckily for them they didn't have to deal with the insane corporate media Edwards will have to contend with.

[salin]

26. I would agree, I would also suggest that most folks are missing

what the modern constant media campaign (how presidential primary races function) requires some aspects of tv/movie set staging - its a reality. Perhaps if we talked about that - and then wondered whether the impression given by the media that such "haircuts", or "image consultants for the color of clothes", etc are only hired and expensed by dem candidates? For real? Look at the elaborate stagings for jr you think that *their* folks (running campaigns) aren't spending on image presentation as well? But, commentators and detractors find examples - only of dems and use it to a) ridicule, b) fake outrage, and c) trivialize the message of the dem candidate being picked on at the time.

[blondeatlast]

28. It belongs in GD/P. I have no candidate, I stay out of that dreck pool. nt

[npincus]

30. "dreck"?

:rofl:

Now that's a word I miss hearing.

[blondeatlast]

31. Who'da thought GD was THE place for intelligent political pissing matches?

I can't even look over there anymore.

[gollygee]

37. He's running for president!

I would be surprised if every single candidate from both parties isn't spending a good amount on grooming, and in every single case it is indeed a campaign expense. How a candidate looks is very very important in a campaign. They also have tailored suits, actual employees who work as image consultants, etc. Image is a big expense in a campaign.