Washington Post Is Back On The Edwards $400 Haircut Beat -- Two Mentions Today Alone
December 11, 2007 -- 12:14 PM EST // //

Updated below.

Yesterday I heard that The Washington Post was set to weigh in today with a big profile of John Edwards, so a friend and I started gaming out the key question: Is there any chance that the piece won't mention Edwards' $400 haircut high in the piece?

Well, today we have our answer: Nope. Here's what WaPo's piece had to say about it:

Always describing himself as "the son of a millworker," he tells stories of family hardships -- the one about his father having to borrow $50, at 100 percent interest, to bring his newborn son home from the hospital is a favorite -- and says he identifies with "the little guy."

But he does so with such glibness, and frequency, and it contrasts so greatly with who he is today -- a polished former trial lawyer worth millions -- that the truth of his biography is sometimes lost. These days, Edwards's $400 haircuts and $6 million house garner the lion's share of attention, and he is testimony to the fact that youthful good looks aren't necessarily a political asset.

Well, yes, WaPo, Edwards' $400 haircut does get "the lion's share of attention," because...

...YOU KEEP FRIGGIN' WRITING ABOUT IT!!!

Apologies for the capital letters. But nothing gets this blog into a funk quicker that the site of a big news org passively making observations about a candidate's public image when that same news org played a big role in shaping that image.

After all, WaPo's reporters and commentators have probably talked about the haircut more than the employees of any other news organization have. Indeed, though this story broke back in April, the paper carries two mentions of it today alone. Here's a partial list of WaPo's multiple haircut mentions -- and keep in mind that these are only the gratuitous ones:

WaPo's Dana Milbank made another mention of it today:

Sounds like a bit of class warfare -- coming from a man with a 28,000-square-foot house, $30 million in assets and a $400 haircut.

WaPo columnist Richard Cohen, a few months ago:

Lest you think I am some sort of partisan hack, I have similar misgivings about John Edwards and his $400 haircuts. Here, too, the issue is not what he paid his barber but his apparent willingness to trim the truth. He can't -- I can't stop myself -- brush that away.

WaPo reporter Perry Bacon, Jr., in an article (aaarrrggghh) about Edwards' poverty tour in July:

Edwards has been unable to make much headway in part because of a series of controversies that cast doubt on the image he has cultivated as a millionaire lawyer who as the son of a millworker understands the plight of those with less than he has.

First there was publicity about the 28,000-square-foot mansion in North Carolina he was building, then the disclosure that he had charged a pair of $400 haircuts to his campaign...

WaPo reporter John Solomon, in a profile of Edwards' hair stylist in July:

It is some kind of commentary on the state of American politics that as Edwards has campaigned for president, vice president and now president again, his hair seems to have attracted as much attention as, say, his position on health care. But when his campaign reported in April that it had paid for two of his haircuts at $400 each, the political damage was immediate. With each punch line on late night TV his image as a self-styled populist making poverty his signature issue was further eroded.

The Washington Post, in another article on Edwards' anti-poverty efforts in May:

For some who study poverty, the question is not so much what Edwards is proposing, but whether, for all his focus on the problem, he is the candidate best suited to effect change. Edwards has become late-night comedy fodder for his new 28,000-square-foot mansion and the $400 haircuts his campaign paid for.

WaPo's John Solomon hits the haircut in an article about Edwards' hedge fund work and anti-poverty efforts in May:

More than any other 2008 presidential candidate, Edwards has made poverty an issue and sought support from organized labor. But his image has suffered because of publicity surrounding the family compound he is building on 102 acres in North Carolina. By the time the compound is completed, it is expected to be assessed at $6 million. And his finance reports disclosed that his campaign had paid for two $400 haircuts.

Look, the man does have nice hair, no question about it. But really, WaPo, it's time to stop this. Oh, it won't be easy to quit. It will be very, very painful. But you can do it. We're behind you all the way. Be strong.

Update: It's actually worse than I thought -- it turns out that WaPo mentioned the haircut three times today.

Comments section temporarily disabled. To reach the homepage of this blog, click here.

---

---