To John Edwards: Pay back your campaign, or else

I am not sending you another penny. Damned straight. I wasn't pissed until I found out that the CAMPAIGN paid for your pricey haircut.

F*ck THAT. I am struggling to make ends meet but my belief in your candidacy and enthusiasm for you and Elizabeth made me want to give you a piece of the little "leftover" income I have. I sent you money and was planning to send you more.

I don't CARE if you get $1,000 haircuts- if you are paying for them yourself. This is not what your "small" donors are parting with their hard-earned money for. You can AFFORD to pay for your OWN haircuts!

I've been cutting my owned goddamned hair for 2 years to save myself $60 (what my hairdresser charges now).

I know Elizabeth used to read DU... i hope she gets this message. This is from someone who supports you. But I won't be taken for a f*cking ATM machine. I am contributing to a CAMPAIGN, not your lavish hair maintenance.

Oh please. :sarcasm:

And I can't believe that DU'ers are taking the bait.

by mentioning what a stupid thing it was to do in a political sense. My bad---

:spank:

Why should he get a pass for spending our political contributions for his coif? That's (20) $20 donations right there. I really really want Gore or Edwards to be our next president. But that doesn't mean we should hold him to different standards than we would anyone else. Why is he using our donations like a private savings account? The man is wealthy, he doesn't need to do that.

Greed.

:P Kidding of course.

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

Looks like it is working nicely, so early in the campaign....


(Sad, really)

If this is a bullshit lie, I'll treat it like a bullshit lie.

But the OP has every right to be pissed if this is true.

I think we'd all re-evaluate our campaign contributions if we thought the candidates would use them for lavish personal expenses that they can easily pay for themselves.

How many suits has Obama bought with CC?
How many haircuts has Romney had with CC?
How many makeup sessions has McCain had with CC?
How many makeup sessions or hairstyles has Hillary had with CC?

You don't have an answer to those because the issue is only being applied to Edwards. Who is applying it only to him?

It most definitely isn't fair to target John Edwards on this and not take a peek at what others are doing as well. And if others are doing it too, it means they all are wrong.

This is disappointing, but Edwards can repay the campaign and not do it again, and it will only be a small blip on the screen in the big picture.

To me, a haircut (even of the $400 variety) isn't what I would put into the "lavish" category.


But look at us all - - here we are arguing over a haircut that might somehow topple Edwards' drive toward the White House and why?


***Because HE is the *most* electable runner in the DNC field right now***


There are some who aren't ready to vote in either a woman or a minority as President yet - - and the RNC knows that, so they figure they will have last-minute-can't-push-the-lever voters back out in the 11th hour. But Edwards? Young, charasmatic, rich but still concerned about the poor, smart but not Gore smart - - Edwards is a real threat to the RNC. Where have the attacks been against Edwards? About his huge house, about not staying home to be a good hubby to cancer-stricken Elizabeth, and about a $400 haircut that is being considered "lavish". The RNC is behind this one and it is working, it is making people question Edward's integrity.

Well, I don't think $400 is all that much for a Beverly Hills haircut where the stylist comes to you. I don't think it is too much to have the campaign pay for it, since he is going to be having to groom himself more often than usual to keep up the image needed to run for president. Whether he can foot that expense or not is immaterial, to me - - he could probably foot a good many expenses that get paid for with contributions as "campaign expenses" - - and so long as he isn't buying furs and diamond encrusted shirts and such, I won't blink an eye, myself.

Of course it's not a lot of money for a Rich Person, but it is a lot to me. :boring: :boring: :boring: I just don't believe it's a true story; and it sounds just like the one they told about
Bill Clinton spending so much on a haircut. I try not to let things that worry me, for most of those
things are lies borne by the goofy right-wingers.

but he is spending CAMAPIGN money. I am not a class warrior. I don't give a crap if Edwards lives in a huge house.. as long as his CAMPAIGN didn't pay for it.

Can we all get past the fact that every candidate is spending lots of money on personal appearance? This has been a reality since campaigns began to be influenced by TV -- at least since the Kennedy-Nixon race.

Furthermore, his hair and wardrobe budget, lavish as they might be, represent something like 0.00001% of his campaign budget, so you aren't being ripped off by any measurable amount, even if you continue to interpret this as being ripped off. Let's move on.

Then I'm perfectly happy to subsidize a candidate's champagne tastes... they have to eat, don't they? No more hamburgers.. from now on steak tar-tar. Out with the fish filet, in with the loster au gratin.

If he wants to spend our donations in that manner, fine. Let someone else pay for it.

All the candidates have these kind of items in their budgets, but only the serious Democratic contenders like Edwards will have stories like this publicized in the MSM. There is a reason for that, which is to systematically feminize and/or delegitimatize Democratic candidates. It's one of the most successful GOP campainging techniques in history. It even works on Democrats.

on clothes and hair.

Glenn Greenwald has a great post on this "scandal" over at Salon. http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2007/04/18/beltway_wisdom/index.html

Needless to say, it is perfectly fine to criticize all candidates running for president. That is something that ought to be done, vigorously and frequently -- obviously including Obama and Edwards. There are plenty of grounds to question both of them. And, admittedly, a candidate's speech is obviously far more legitimate grounds for such criticism than the costs of his haircut or which spas he visits.

But none of this is substantive criticism. It is just petty, cheap personality-based mockery of the strain that dominates (and degrades and destroys) our political discourse -- it is Al Gore inventing the Internet and claiming to be the inspiration for Love Story, and John Kerry wind-surfing and speaking French. It is all just mindless gossipy shorthand intended to fuel right-wing caricatures and platitudes that have nothing to do with substance and everything to do with demonizing the personality of these political figures in order to render them ugly and embarrassing -- hence, Edwards is a girlish fop and Obama is an intellectual lightweight who relies on empty fancy-sounding buzzphrases in lieu of substance.

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

Andy why not, since it's clearly working just as well the second time around.

Remember, he is regularly in front of camera's, being interviewed, on TV, etc. In our media driven culture he _has_ to look good. He _has_ to look presidential. So answer me these two questions:

Given that TV interviews, photo-ops and such are part and parcel of being on the campaign trail, what expenses for making himself presentable and marketable are reasonable to charge to the campaign fund?

What do you think a reasonable budget would be to allocate toward those expenses would be?








OK, now consider the fact that Edwards has put in substantial sums of his personal wealth to fund his own campaign (I'll leave it to the sleuths to get the current actual $$). Should he put in a few thousand less and pay for some expenses out of his own pocket instead? Well, considering how the right wing spin machines can turn an expensive haircut into a feeding frenzy of Democrat self-destruction, maybe he should. Any big-budget operation will have a few stupid expenditures when viewed in hindsight. Did they total enough money (%) to hurt the bottom line? Now, if the barber (hair dresser, whatever) was a cousin or something, _that_ might be worth talking about.

My suggestion though? Put the red herring down - it doesn't taste good and isn't nourishing.

For only $10 + tip.

I will never understand anyone paying anything more than $50 for a haircut depending on how fancy their hair is being done. It's insane.

RAW

most of us don't have the money to do that and the money we contribute to a politician is often hard to come by. I think the poster has a point and I'm disappointed in Edwards' lack of judgment.

(Don't worry - - some of us little people consider grooming costs part of a campaign's cost, so we'll continue to donate our leftover dollars...)

Please.

needed one in CA now, true?


There is a difference in just how *spiffy* one needs to look if one is running for President vs if one isn't. Plus, he paid the Salon owner to travel to where John was - - John didn't just go visit his shop.


If this is the *worst* scandal people can come up with to smear Edwards, have at it. He is still my top runner, spiffy "do" and all.

all his flip-flops: for the war, not for the war. For the banking industry's predatory lending practices, for the poor. For this, not for that, but only if polls suggest I do such a thing.

I don't see his revising his opinions as flipflops or a character issue. Instead, I prefer to think that Edwards' is flexible.


We can cancel each other out at the polls :)

I gotta run for something quick so I can have my campaign pay for my hair, nails, waxes, facials and massages.

if so...


let it go.

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.

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

Look, I expect MORE from our candidates. Especially Edwards, whom I like. But I won't give if he is squandering my hard-earned money like that.

for the first family's haircuts or clothes.

i respect the OP's position.

Can we please leave the mess in GD/P where it belongs?

Oh that woman!

I know you just bought a carton! Own up!!!

I know you bought it back in 1984 with MY money!

I know you spent it on hookers & blow, you degenerate!

I bought it and you better share, damn it.

Clothes don't shop for themselves, you know! :spank:

He has to "look presidential" if he wants to be elected.

What's next? Are you going to complain about him eating in a restaurant rated higher than McDonalds? If I feel strongly enough about a candidate that I'm going to send him/her money that I really don't have to spare, I'm GIVING them that $$!

I rarelycontribute to campaigns. The ONLY one I ever sent money to was Howard Dean when he was running for Prez. I have no idea what he spent my whopping $15.00 on, and to be quite honest I don't care! He would have been a hell of a lot better President than the idiot we have now, and I'd bet the idiot spends YOUR money on a more expensive haircut than Edwards does! Allbeit, it's obvious Howard doesn't get $400 haircuts!

How do you feel about a candidate spending YOUR money on people to make sure they keep any possible objector OUT of their speeches? Betcha it's a lot more that $400!!!!!

(not Wal-Mart, for God's sake, although K-Mart's Jaclyn Smith line is pretty nice, Ms. Clinton) or not another dime from me, dammit!

(Nevermind that I haven't contributed a penny yet as I am still completely undecided).

I remember Dickhead Morris was spending DNC money to get his toes sucked at some fancy hotel. That wasn't OK, either.

In the form of the article published in the first place. How many haircut articles have you heard about Romney?

Ya think he'd have a political handler suggest to John that if he wants American's to buy into his 2 America's speech - that he would walk as if he gets it.

The haircut thing is indeed trivial - but it plays more into the Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous then it does to the regular folks who pay $30.00 for a haircut.

He needs those votes a hell of a lot more then a $400 haircut!

on his blog

http://blog.johnedwards.com/submit_blog_entry

unless the majority agrees with you

I call it the DU pile-on! It's not as bad as the kind over at Abu Ghraib.

if you are really angry at Edwards for these expenses, and you have a right to be, you are a donor, you should tell him how you feel. Posting on Edwards blog will get the attention of the campaign and, at least, in the future, will realize that going to a Beverly Hills stylist twice in two weeks, spending $400 each time may not be the way to earn votes.

And time away from the stylist's shop.

He basically had to pay the stylist for all the haircuts that the stylist couldn't do while away from the shop *and* the travel expenses, plus Edwards's own haircut.

:puke:

rather, someone from the campaign (not clear who) visited that Beverly Hills stylist

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3220783

…
One reason the cost of the cut was so steep even by Beverly Hills standards is that Torrenueva went to Edwards rather than the candidate coming into the stylist's salon.
…
http://www.denverpost.com/headlines/ci_5690196

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/politics/la-na-edwards17apr17,1,5765222.story?coll=la-news-politics-national&track=crosspromo

Edwards apparently visited Torrenueva Hair Designs in Beverly Hills, owned by celebrity stylist Joseph Torrenueva. And he paid Rodeo Drive prices. Twice.

that you're assuming a $400 haircut is extraordinarily expensive. Let me tell you, it's not. I live in California. If I go to a regular salon (I'm not talking one in Beverly Hills) and I get a wash, cut and a bit of color, I easily pay $200.

For Edwards to obtain a stylist, pay for travel expenses to bring the stylist TO HIM, etc...$400 is damn cheap.

The comments about steak tar-tar, etc. are ridiculous.

I've paid the same as you. That's just what it is.

for a man.

You spend a lot of time getting your hair cut in salons in Los Angeles?

Didn't think so. :eyes:

... but for my money the real deal is Barack, who inspires an energy that is very positive for this planet. Inspiration, love, positivity heals, sounds just the ticket.

video link...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YVynnbx1Xsc

The bullshit haircut "scandal" you endured is apparently being revived.

:eyes:

But this time by "democrats."

:eyes:

from one "democrat" to another.

Found a local barber/stylist who cuts hair for the unwashed masses, even if that would have risked a few hairs being out of place. I think it was a bad move on his part separating himself from the rest of us, putting himself on a higher plane so to speak.

Who gives a damn how the dude spends his money? Just as long as he's not out to exploit you or me or anyone else I could care less and you should too. I doubt anyone tells YOU how to spend YOUR money. :eyes:

where it's coming from: FREEPERVILLE! :puke:

John Edwards staying dapper with spa visits, $400 haircuts

By The Associated Press
Article Last Updated: 04/18/2007 02:19:05 AM MDT

Washington - Looking pretty is costing John Edwards' presidential campaign a pretty penny.

The Democrat's campaign paid for two haircuts at $400 each by celebrity stylist Joseph Torrenueva of Beverly Hills, Calif., according to a financial report filed with the Federal Election Commission.

FEC records show that Edwards, 53, also availed himself of $250 in services from a trendy salon and spa in Dubuque, Iowa, and $225 in services from the Pink Sapphire in Manchester, N.H.

A spokeswoman for Edwards' campaign did not respond to requests for comment.

One reason the cost of the cut was so steep even by Beverly Hills standards is that Torrenueva went to Edwards rather than the candidate coming into the stylist's salon.

more: http://www.denverpost.com/headlines/ci_5690196

If it were untrue, it is curious that the Edwards campaign is doing nothing to bring out the truth.

PEOPLE VOTE BASED ONLY ON APPEARANCES.

THAT IS A REALITY!!!!!

using campaign donations for 5 star hotels, shopping necessities, limos, etc. that's all part of ALL candidates campaign expenditures...

WHO'S REALLY MISSING THE POINT HERE?

was it not? So many haircuts, so few candidates. Anyhoo...Kerry HAS and had more money than even that dastardly Edwards and could afford it himself. Which as I remember was a reason to not trust him. Do we have any poorhouse candidates? Oh YES NADER does his own hair and sews his own suits.

Sex sells. We need it to overcome the insanity factor. That is the whomever these people are that would want to have a beer with Bush and thus make him likeable. We need the women vote. We need Mr. Edwards to be as handsome as he can. So really, it's as important as money as you could ever get from a campaign. And yes, I'm serious. Whatever it takes. Clinton was the last women go wild for a man candidate we had. (yeah I had a thing for Kerry but many thought he was not attractive-everyone knows Edwards is hot-RUN WITH IT)

DU is so muchlike high school lately, Ithought I was there for a minute....

Can't recall ever feeling such strong impulse to say "grow up" so often.

Julie

Or is he being singled out for some other reason?

n/t

campaigns today are one long media event. Move quickly from point a to point b and c with little time between - but at each point expect tons of cameras - more focus on the event than the substance said at the event. I would expect that some times there is a moment akin to being on a movie or tv set where one has "hair and makeup" done before the fourth or fifth event of the day (lest one looks a bit haggard or windblown/scruffy) when the cameras are rolling.

We have heard about haircuts per both Clintons (now and earlier campaigns)- but we never hear about it per republicans. Do we really think that they are not as image conscience? Seriously, after all of the photoop stunts that jr does? I think it is probably standard operating procedures in the modern media campaigns. Just reported about per dems for points of trivialization of the current target of the "hair" treatment (so to speak.)

Hey, got a question for ya bub: Do you actually think he got the haircut for his own benefit, whilst abusing the funds for personal enjoyment outside of campaign legitimacy? I mean, do you really fucking believe that? Orrrrrrr, do you think maybe APPEARANCE IS IMPORTANT during presidential campaigns and these funds were used appropriately to help attain such?

See, the former I can understand a smidgen of a level of outrage. A smidgen. But the latter is 100% appropriate, logical and sensible. Since it is OBVIOUS it is the latter, the fact I'm actually seeing people here not only outraged, but outraged to the point of drama stated in the OP, is nothing short of astounding to me. I mean, holy fucking cow you've got to be friggin kidding me.

I'm sure all of the candidates use campaign funds to cover their personal expenses while campaigning - that's what the funds are there for! Edwards is on TV; so he's got to think about his appearance, as do all of the candidates.

As a man losing his hair as he gets older, I clung tenaciously to the dream that a balding gentleman could indeed someday be President again. Now I see the remnants of that hope fade like wisps of fog in the heat of a rising sun, it sinks faster than my diminishing strands down the shower drain. If a candidate must pay $400 simply to primp his coiff, surely there is no hope for the follically challenged. Rest easy, supporters of Hillary and Obama, and know with at least some measure of optimism that at least your candidates face an easier rode than those of the balding pates

...is that line from "Werewolves of London" : His hair was perfect!