Why on earth does Edwards need a $400 haircut? It's hard to be a man of the people when you're spending more than an average paycheck to go to the barber. Don't these idiots ever learn.

well, you raise a good point. my quarrel is with the "pretty" line. even if the story's legit, I just don't think the AP should be playing that game.

I'll bite. Look, I'm completely in agreement that the story is pointless and repeats a right-wing soundbite. I'm also supporting Edwards and have donated a small amount to his campaign (not apparently enough to cover even half the cost of a single haircut.)

But for crying out loud, this line of attack is one that they could have seen coming a mile and a half away. Why in the world, when the frame on your guy is his vanity and insincerity, do you put a $400 haircut on your campaign finance report?

Yes, we have a deeply demented media in this country and the result is often a maddening distraction from the issues. But thats not going to change just by pointing it out. And Im not saying that if he hadn't done this, the AP wouldn't have just made it up.

But why hand them the basis to write these stories?

The Democratic nominee, whomever it is, has got to be shrewder -- or at least more careful. One of the things I like about Edwards is the message discipline he shows when he speaks. His campaign has got to learn to do the same.

You got to admit. Ruch Limbaugh is a supreme idiot but he's got some funny bits once in a while.
Edwards windsurfing moment.

The $400 was not likely for a single cut, but could have included multiple cuts/services for his staff.

Can we stop wasting time with not just this story, but any and all stories and commentary about how Candidate X can't possibly be a "man of the people", due to being too rich or spending too much on Expense Category Y?

Let's get something straight, here. ALL of the credible candidates in this race are much richer than the average American. It'd be a bit odd if they weren't; by definition, this is a group of extremely successful people.

Whether or not Edwards is really a "man of the people" in any meaningful sense has nothing, nada, zero, zip, zilch to do with his haircut bill, and everything to do with his policy positions.

$400.? WTF? Are these people nuts? Doesn't his man-servant-valet-speech-writer carry scissors?

Sheesh. Is this really news?

If it is, could it be that the services weren't for John Edwards, but may have been for his wife and daughter accompanying him on the campaign trail?

I don't care how rich you are - $400 for a haircut is absolutely ridiculous and shameful. Stupid people do stupid things. Mr. Edwards deserves the scorn.

It's doubly troubling insofar as Edwards' campaign marches to his drumbeat about (very real) economic inequality, two Americas, etc. Petty of the AP or not (yes, petty), this ain't the way for the campaign to drive home its points.

Well, what do you expect?
It's election time, and that means it's time to make fun of the appearence of the Democratic candidates.
Earthones.
Pantsuits.
Botox.
Haircuts.
These are the issues that effect Americans the most!

I think there's a reasonable argument to be had about whether he should or shouldn't have done this. my main point, though, is that the Associated Press, whether or not covering this is fair game, shouldn't be playing the "pretty boy" game. That's my objection here...

This is a "Drudge Rules Our World" story, saw the headline over there at least a day ago, maybe two.
Didn't try the link, though.

And Laura Bush and her 700 dollar haircut gets forgotten about?????

This from Barbara Walters on the View last January.
From DU
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x2984219

"Meanwhile, our favorite TV nugget of the day so far came courtesy of Barbara Walters, who matter-of-factly informed viewers that Laura Bush recently had her hair done by famed New York City stylist Sally Hershberger, who charges $700 for a haircut. Just take a moment to think back to the go-go '90s, and try to imagine what the press' hysterical reaction would have been if word ever leaked out that Hillary Clinton had sat down for a $700 trim."

Ahhh, the two Americas lives on.

What kind of man gets a $400 haircut? girly man?

correction to my post above.

That previous post about Laura Bush and her $700 haircut was said January 2005 on the View.

@ Mike

While the particular haircut may have been a bit over the top expensive, these candidates frankly need to look good on TV. Nixon wouldn't wear makeup for TV appearances, and it cost him at times, like the debate with Kennedy. (if I'm not mistaken, and I only heard about this in poli sci. some of you older folks might have actually seen this) Kennedy looked good, and Nixon looked sweaty. Those kinds of things sway people.

So I can deal with the fact that Edwards is spending a bunch of money on his appearance.

Edwards, say thank you and move on. To all others on both sides, GET A LIFE!

You got to be able to take it on the "chin." I for one would love it if Edwards responded to inquiries about limpbaugh remarks by saying, "Limpbaugh Is A Big Fat Idiot."

Okay, two sources make it a trend according to media rules, and they were, according to Google news, New York Post and LA Times, looking for something — anything! — in the campaign spending reports.

Edwards is taking flak from Rush Oxycontin Limpballs for a $400 cut.

Laura Bush paid $700 for what appears to have been a bad cut, or she just can't be helped by the hair experts.

code: degree as in bush must have bought his.

Edwards is a gaymetrosexual. He reeks metrogay.

Check out Mademoiselle John Edwards giving some tender love to his oh-so-fine hair,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2AE847UXu3Q

I don't carry a brief for Edwards. I think he's a lightweight.
However, this dumbass story was also in the LA Times today.
I emailed the reporter, told him it was drivel.
He replied that "...it will be a long campaign and there will be many stories..."

Looks like another silly season of Gore earth tones, Hillary's thighs, Kerry's underserved awards for valor and so on ad nauseum.

Interestig the Limbaughs don't focus on, say, Giuliani's cross dressing and other scandalous behavior.

Dems must fight back.

Code is "blood"

I might call that shop to see if the story is true.

salon carried the news of the $700 haircut Laura got about tewo years ago

http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/2005/01/20/ratings/index.html

code:birth as in Nov 2008 a democrat gives new life to this country as the new POTUS

No Nedra Pickler byline on this? Surely she had a hand in it, even if she isn't taking credit. (Really: how sleazy does a story have to be for Nedra Pickler to disown it?)

When the buzz and flurry finally settles down, we'll likely learn that the 400 clams was for a staff of some 200 people. But the MSM and especially AP had long ago proven their utter lack of journalistic integrity. Why the outrage? Mainstream print and broadcast journalism may finally be waking up to its irrelevance--and like the reproductive frenzy that accompanies a population verging on extinction, they seem to be playing the cheap celebrity lines while TPM and other news blogs carry the day.

It's not just AP. And they are following the Politico's and Drudge's lead, as usual.

Just remind people that Laura Bush just had an $800 haircut, but there is no word on how much all those botox injections are costing her. It doesn't really matter, but the fact that they don't mention it doubles the bias.

But it's not about the haircut. The press is selling the Republican talking points on each of the candidates. Obama is too green, Hillary is too robotic and manipulative, Edwards is too pretty and elitist.

It might might be nice if the Dems stopped giving the Republicans ammunition - Clinton/Lewinsy - Kerry/voted for it before I voted against it - Edwards/$400 hair cuts. You know the Republicans will leap and some of the public will buy into it. So think before you do things, please. We've got a republic to save.

Jeff Fields,

Thanks, most brilliant post on this non-story with no value, except we learn again that Coulter and Limbaugh are still willing to turn themselves into clowns every single day.

$400 for a haircut??

How much freakin hair does he have...??

I wrote the AP and CNN (who ran with the story) expressing my anger about the hypocrisy of editorial decisions like running the pretty hair story as Blackwater, Haliburton, and Carlysle Group profit off of an illegal war.

Fair and balanced? Lol. I also noted that I am eagerly anticipating their stories on Hillary travelling to Newport Beach for a visit to a botique gynecologist, Black grandma registers to vote twice in Minneapolis, and the liberal bias in the MSM.

It felt good to write to these idiot editor, but I'm sure the RNC lost my email.
Rich

Unfortunately, judging by this thread, it looks like this right-wing talking point is working like a charm.

News flash #1: Extremely wealthy people pay a lot of money for stuff.

News flash #2: EVERY Presidential candidate is extremely wealthy.

I wonder what kind of car Rudy drives, or how much he pays for his suits. I wonder what kind of seats Mitt Romney gets to Red Sox games. How much does McCain spend for a typical dinner?

It's just amazing that the Rove spin machine can make this stick, but comments in this very thread demostrate that the people will eat up this BS every time.

And of course I wholeheartedly agree that tha AP has no place repeating partisan Rovian spin. It's disgraceful.

I don't believe AP is a news organization any longer. Over the last few years, they've been pretty overt in demonstrating that they've turned themselves into another partisan PR firm with an agenda. They've decided what's best for them and/or what they think is best for the country, and they slant their news coverage to help influence the situation. And one thing that's always good for a news organization is a nice, close presidential election with lots of controversy. Ya gotta keep 'em readin'.

Are all you people who are berating Edwards trolls? No offense, but I really hope you are. Because if a stupid, superficial story like this one can get so many nontrolls to internalize the "Edwards is a girl" line of attack, I'm afraid we are all doomed.

greg sargent is hurt by this story. AP betrayed him.

if the price of milk is fair game, then the price of a hair cut is too.

AP isnt pushing Repug line, it is pushing f---ing moron line.

The only more offensive that the AP's characterization of Edwards as "pretty" (although he is pretty sexy) is his having gotten such a ridiculously expensive haircut.

Sorry, I'm gonna have to balk at this one. He has no business spending that much money for a friggin' haircut. I pay $15 at SuperCuts. So can he.

Edwards isn't as pretty as Laura Bush then, her's cost $700.

the hatchet job is one thing, but why in hell is the campaign picking up tabs for haircuts? Now I wonder (and so should've the AP) if the other campaigns have similar outlays? If so, what are they for? Hair/makeup for public appearances, maybe?... okay, I get that... sort of (gotta look good, after all). But if not - if other candidates don't list $400 haircuts, then Edwards made a really stupid, meaningless mistake... that could dog him for the rest of the campaign.

The man of the people should get his hair trimmed by a locally-owned barber in every major city in America as penance. It would make a great local story in every paper along the way, while simultaneously turning this Republican Talking Point on it's head.

Why, why, why, do the spewings of Ann Coulter still amount to anything?

You don't have to be a blind conservative not to see it, just an ignorant one to deny it.

I have not yet begun to financially contribute to the Edwards campaign, or to any of the primary campaigns. However, if I had, I would be rather upset to learn that he had spent my contribution on a $400 haircut. He should at least have the decency to pay for his personal grooming out of his own pocket.

It's pretty clear that the haircuts were in preparation for interviews and photo shoots, done most likely on location. For example, one of them was for "a picture of Edwards published Tuesday in The Los Angeles Times." Other expenses include "doing Edwards' makeup for television appearances."

Too bad Kennedy was a girly-man, getting make-up and all that for his appearances. Man, what a crappy president he turned out to be.

Perception is everything.

In the year 2000 the perception of the people was that Bush was a regular Joe, had 'family values' and would be a uniter/not divider. This led a minority of the people to cast their vote for him for President of the United States.

That perception was wrong.

In the year 2007 Edwards has missed the lesson from Bush 2000; appearance is everything.

We as a country expect more from our kindergarteners than we expect from our presidential candidates.

My perception is this; if we keep electing presidents as directed by political manipulators, we will get what we deserve, unfortunately for us and the world.

The AP just had an article on the 15th basically saying Dems were "weenies" for not debating on FOX and how Repugs were not scared of the "liberal" biased CNN, MSNBC etc. This type of garbage is constant with AP (didn't a Moon organization shoot off buy it or was that UPI). AP "reporters" have a right wing agenda, end of story, and expect more Operation Mockingbird type propaganda as the country goes down the brown shirt hole . . .

Ok, someone answer this. Why is the $400 on Edwards campaign account? Isn't this supposed to be a personal expense? This is weird, and if its true, its an abuse of trust by Sen. Edwards. If I send money to a candidate, I don't want them spending my money on personal grooming.

It's worth $400, he looks hot.

I'd like to second the comment by Bribes.
No one is reporting how much of the tax payers money W and Dick are spending for grooming and make up every time they do a public appearance. I can, however, guarantee you that the price of a theatrical make up artist is significant (unlike the rest of America's working class, they haven't seen their wages cut by the 'Right to Work' and union busting that have been the rule in this country since RWR was elected president.) In this scheme of things, $400 for a hair cut which guarantees an acceptable appearance to a public which evaluates their candidates as much on personal appearance as anything is not unreasonable.
Without contextualization (a comparison with how much other candidates are spending on their appearance), Edwards' $400 cut is a meaningless factoid. Until someone can show me that this is actually out of keeping with other candidates spend, I will donate money to the Edwards campaign.
Finally, I would like to express my appreciation of the AP for its willingness to hire staff, regardless of their sexual orientation. After all, who else but a gay man would notice that John "looks pretty?"
What a load of shit.

This is bullshit. I can only conclude that this site is being swarmed by wingnut trolls trying to slander Edwards. No REAL progressive would care about this obvious non-story.

Greg is right: the real story here is the MSM once again sucking up to Republican spin. Edwards's critics do NOT have a valid point: I'd bet dollars to donuts Republicans spend about the same amount of money on their hair. They just don't have reports who are out to get them.

You think the candidates would learn about the damn haircuts by now. How many times do we have to go here?

And don't go hunting if you don't hunt. Don't ride in a tank, EVER.

I am not a rightwing troll. Quite the opposite. But I really have to question JE's judgement.

This is bullshit. I read the firs dozen comments or so and what I want to know is how much are the leading turd candidates paying for haircuts? I bet at least as much as Edwards-no doubt.

Mitt Romney has nice hair. Wonder how much he spends? What about Bush and his wife? What about Barney? Who does Barney's hair? This is so irrelevant. One thing the story about Edwards' showed is that he has worked hard for all the things he has in life. So, why should we begrudge him that. That is what America is all about. I don't have a great job; but, it gets me the things I want. One of things I have always wanted from before I started working for a living was to have my hair done on a regular basis. I love the pampered feeling I get and I can never do my hair as well as someone else. Thus, even at my poorest, I would starve to make sure I had enough money to get my hair done once a month. This is all a distraction to keep us from thinking about the fraud, waste, and abuse of our taxpayers' monies by the Republicans. At least Edwards uses his own money on his hair. There are Republicans in jail for using our money for luxury items. There are investigations showing how the DOJ was being turned into a partisan bunch of hacks to work only for the Republican Party. They don't want to work for ALL Americans only the few they select to work for. If writing about Edwards' hair is the best the right wing can do, that in itself should show that they have nothing to offer America or Americans.

JOAN LOWY is the AP Author ( google the first line of the story) - does she have any cred? if so , why pen this crap?

I had fired off a letter to the authors, Joan Lowy and Beverley Wang, when I saw the story pop up on Yahoo. This crap will keep coming at a furious pace. I agree with Greg that it is the "pretty" meme that Lowy and Wang are helping perpetuate that is the issue. Getting a $400 haircut, even though the price includes the stylist travelling to Edwards location, will interest people (if that makes something newsworthy).

They also throw in "Edwards, 53, who has made alleviating poverty the central theme of candidacy, has been criticized for building a 28,000-square-foot house for $5.3 million near Chapel Hill, N.C. The complex of several buildings on 102 acres includes an indoor basketball court, an indoor pool and a handball court."

And they wind it up with a reference to a high-dollar Clinton haircut in the closing paragraph.

Sorry, I know you can read the story yourself. It just hacked me off.

PK, I can't confirm she is one in the same, but there is a Joan Lowy who wrote a 2003 biography of former Congresswoman Pat Schroeder. Perhaps nothing to do with credibility but it did appear complimentary. Titled "A Woman of the House"

You have to be a peabrain not to understand that the issue is WHAT IS EVERYBODY ELSE PAYING FOR A HAIRCUT AND WHAT DOES IT MATTER.

Um, as a representative of the peabrains of the world I stand corrected.

Remember the cardinal rule of the mainstream media:

IOKIYAR

John Edwards can pay $10,000 for his haircuts for all I care. What bothers me about this whole thing is that he chose to pay for his haircut with campaign dollars. That's a violation of supporter trust. You don't do stuff like that.

If he wants a haircut, he should pay for it out of his own pocket. That's the ethical thing to do.

How long must we be saddled with this rich drug-addict Limbaugh?

Oh! Noooooooooooooooooooooo. . . not at long as we'll had to put up with King George?

AUGH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

If Obama can spend $339,987 on luxury VIP private jets, then Edwards can spend $400 on his hair. There were 11 instances for payments to Air Charter, a private jet company based out of Kansas City, in his 1st quarter report.

I like Edwards beacause he was the first to speak out about the "two Americas".

It is instructive, however, to remember which of the two he lives in.

How in the world can any one support Edwards now? I mean this guy is showing absolutely no political sense at all. When you know that this expense will need to be reported why not just pay from your own pocket? I mean this guy has more than enough money to pay for it himself. Good lord! This guy is a total dweeb if this story is at all true. For our sake and his I hope this story is a huge mistake.

Apparently Horse's Mouth has never heard of Bob Somerby or the Daily Howler. That mainstream media would frame a major Democratic candidate as effeminate is one of the arrows in their quiver to knock out Democratic candidates. I am surprised you are "shocked" to see that this is going on.

Personally I could careless how much any candidate spends on their grooming. I figure if they can afford it go for it. As to the real meaning of the article "pretty", "breck girl" are all perjoratives that have been used agaisnt Edwards for years. It's to stop the politics of personal destruction.
Now for the wingnuts yammering about the cost of haircuts especially since Lowrah got a 700 dollar cut and we really have no idea how much else she and the whatever pay for their grooming. I suggest until the Bush's come out and give us a rundown of what they spend and where they spend it you might try to shut up for once. I'm sure they don't go to a chain salon nor do they shop at Target. I'm sure one of either one of their suits costs more than most of us posting on here make in a month.
Security code is idea as in get an idea on the realities of life wingnuts.

I seriously doubt the $400 cost. Kinda like Clintons cut in California way back when.
If Rush would have spent $400 to have his anal cyst removed way back when, we wouldn't have to listen to his words now?

kag224, to give Greg his due, he does cite Bob Somerby of the Daily Howler from time to time, this despite the fact that Somerby has been rather aggressive going after Greg's boss (Josh Marshall) from time to time. Here's Somerby on the current issue:

http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh030507.shtml

PS kag224, check out this comment thread for some (I think) excellent discussion re Somerby and the Horses' Mouth with multiple points of view represented. (Unfortunately, there's a ton of spam at the bottom.)

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/horsesmouth/2007/02/post_37.php

Greg, a technical suggestion re spam: Do you close old comment threads after a delay, say 5 or even 30 days? (See e.g. the comment thread I referenced above.) If not, that would be a good idea because of spam. For closed threads, perhaps an intern could go through and delete the spam you're currently hosting on TPM's servers.

To the people who can't fathom why this is a campaign cost, I tried explaining it above. I didn't seem to get through to everyone. Let me try explaining more explicitly.

These haircuts are for photo ops, tv, major speeches, and for CAMPAIGNING. Even if Edwards spent his own money, and nothing in the article says anything about the source of these funds, he would have to report it because these are obviously CAMPAIGN expeditures. It would, essentially, be Edwards donating to his own campaign, and thus he would have to report it. They are campaign expenditures, thus they are reported. Period.

And most important of all, this has nothing to do with whether Edwards would be a good president. Like I mentioned above, Kennedy was a pretty-boy who was accused of being a girly-man because he used makeup on television. Luckily, he and not Bush was in office during the Cuban Missile Crisis.

If you can't understand the above, you're an idiot, troll, or right-winger. But I repeat myself.

from the LA Times...some facts on Edwards' spending:

"His $3.3 million in expenses were significantly less than those of his two main rivals for the Democratic nomination, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) and Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.).

Based on his campaign reports, Edwards flies on commercial airlines and stays in chain hotels.

At a recent Bay Area fund-raising stop, he traveled with a single aide and rode in a minivan, rather than the limo or SUV favored by some candidates."

The man is constantly in the public eye--cameras, public appearances, tv interviews, etc...let him spend some money on a nice haircut.

Our first lady spent $700 on her haircut--so what!

Well, well, John Edwards must be scaring the far right pretty badly for them to attack his hair. I thing everyone other than dittoheads is hip to this by now.

Rush is just jealous becaus he doesn't have enough hair to warrent a cut from Supercuts. And Ann Coulter probably wears a wig, because SHE'S A MAN, BABY!!

I'm sorry, has the AP ever EVER referred to George Bush as a "peppy cheerleader?"

There have been multiple occasions when Bush has put on a costume and cheered the American people. Have we ONCE heard him referred to as a cheerleader-in-chief?

No. Never. Not once.

Why haven't we ever called George Bush a cheerleader? Because Drudge has never called him that. Because Rush has never called him that. Since when did THEY become the people who set the narrative for respectable reporters?

And remember, George Bush was a Yalie cheerleader. John Edwards went to state school, played football, paid his own way, and earned his money as a trial lawyer. If you know about trial lawyers, you know they are NOT pretty boys. They are tough motherf*ckers. Unlike Yale 5th generation legacy cheerleaders.

Whereas Mitt Romney has staffers that write 77 slide PowerPoint’s fretting over HIS hair -- found on FOX news of all places:

Internal Romney Campaign Document Shows Concern About His Hair

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2...s/ youdecide2008

Here's another in which Romney tells us all how his silken locks of black hair are ALL NATURAL -- he doesn't dye HIS hair -- even though like all L’Oreal girls "He's worth it."

http://www.boston.com/news/local...tural_not_dyed/

What a cream puff…

How they can get away with this when they are ANYTHING but thrifty with OUR MONEY escapes me

They yell and scream about $400 hair cuts, but say NOTHING about (just ONE example) setting aside $20 million of our tax dollars to celebrate our upcoming victory in Iraq/Afghanistan

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/0...873ac09& ei=5088

http://www.crooksandliars.com/20...dent-bushs-job/

Hypocrites.

Here's FOX and Friends GOP synchophants obsessing over Romney's hair for over FOUR MINUTES!

http://www.thebluestate.com/2007/02/video_fox_frien.html

Before Bush became President that same haircut was probably only $4.00.

Bribes is totally correct. Its part of the cost of doing professional media appearances. Not only do they bring in hair and make-up professionals, they usually have to pay them a minimum hours/fee guarantee. This can easily be at least a half day minimum. Those people that feel that these are personal grooming expenses miss the point completely. Its part of the cost of running a modern media campaign.

The reason this is news is because a $400 haircut is at odds with his stated policies of helping the poor and working class.

It is the same reason that Ted Haggard made news. Larry Flynt having gay sex and using meth would not be news. A conservative Christian leader doing the same is news. Right? Anyone who argued for Haggard that it was his personal life and had nothing to do with how effective a public leader he was can continue to criticize the AP on Edward's haircut story.

Nobody cares how much Warren Buffet or Snoop Dogg pay for a haircut - BUT - when you run for office and try to portray others as being greedy and insensitive to the poor, you maybe shouldn't spend a month's rent on a haircut.

For the doubters - Yes, Edwards really did spend $400 on a single haircut. In fact, he did it twice. He also spent over $200 at least twice, but that was in Iowa, not Hollywood and I suspect you have to look hard to find a haircut over $80 there...

Call it slander or whatever, but I believe that this incident is the end of Edwards. It may seem trivial, but it reinforces the suspicions that most people already had about him. It is an iconic moment and one I don't think he can escape from.