A retort to the Edwards "Haircutgate" nonsense.

Edwards got a $400 haircut paid for out of campaign funds. The yelling starts.

Hm.

OK.

1. That is what campaign funds are there for. In a campaign realm where TV rules, the grooming, personal appearance and general telegenic appeal of candidates is of vast importance. Ergo, the upkeep of said appearance is as important to a campaign as polling, ads and voter lists. Name for me, please, the last poorly-groomed candidate who got anywhere. Example:

Remember the goofy Kucinich hairdo that wound up on all those buttons? Remember when they got him a better haircut as the 2004 campaign started? Hmmm...

Every candidate you've ever supported has received haircuts, makeup (for ads and debates) and other grooming/appearance things that were paid for by the campaign. Cope with it. If you still don't get it, you either have no concept of how campaigns work, or...

2. I smell manufactured outrage from those who support other candidates. There, I said it.

damn haircuts. We saw him before he announced. He wasn't a mountain man. He had haircuts then. Its not a campaign expense.
Bad judgement on his part.

Edwards is my preferred candidate among the currently announced choices

for election law purposes. He is not merely getting haircuts at home.He has had to bring people in and get them while traveling. Those have to be declared campaign expenses.He cannot just "pay for them himself".It would probably not be legal.

or manicure on a business trip its most likely not a deductible business expense.

to personally purchase" such things as lunches for people.Campaign expenses are strictly defined and not what one thinks!

deodorant, toothpaste, and kleenex?

As a candidate you can't walk around smelling bad, with garnly teeth and snotty nose either.
Paying for someones lunch is different than paying for your own personal hygiene

remeber "shoes" being included.I am assuming that grooming for appearanaces is included. It certainly is included as part of commercial filming. As is wardrobe.

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.
…
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

and are we looking at everyones financial reports?

Torrenueva Hair Designs 800.00

http://query.nictusa.com/pres/2007/Q1/C00431205/B_PAYEE_C00431205.html

there is stuff on everybody on that site.

the edwards expense reporting appears to be unusual.
I couldn't find haircuts on Clinton, Obama, McCain or Guiliani.
Its possible it's there. But it sure isn't obvious.
Edwards have unusual expensing. I think I saw that they expensed something like $5 to a drug store. Must have been his deoderant.
Nothing like it in Clinton, Obama, McCain or Guiliani.

Guiliani seems like a spendthrift
McCain is frugal

But I didn't see any significant personal hygiene expenses on anyone else report.

Lots of things I didn't expect to see there.
$500,000 IRS payment
>$50,000 health insurance payment

I probably should have expected those but I didn't.

Bet those donors didn't think their money would go there. Scroll down
http://query.nictusa.com/pres/2007/Q1/C00431569/B_PAYEE_C00431569.html
Now I'm sure there is a good reason for it but it sure looks funny when you just lob it out there.
We could pick stuff all night long on every candidate now can't we?

I didn't pick up on the 'for president' piece.

It was eyeopening to look at them.
Rudy ought to be seriously disturbing to the GOP if they bother to look.

I have no particular objection to seeing the dem candidates support each other. But I don't expect to see it.

want to base my opinions on this stuff.
Could be possible VP consideration and needed help covering his debt.

I found it last year and was watching it before November election

Trying to figure out where my donations would be most effective.

it kind of locked me in also. I think SEIU backs him too.

house and senate races to support.
Did okay with who I supported.
Regret a couple of painful losses like Kissell.
Supported a few very long shots because I thought the men/women were the type I wanted to see in government.

pulling together the numbers so you could see how both the Dem and Rep candidate was set up going into the home stretch.
Just in case, you didn't see that before. Look at it as we get closer to 2008. I admit I was too damn lazy to collate the numbers for head-to-head comparison. They did for us.

would he strengthen the ticket?

I fear she's not electable. I really like Edwards (if I can't have Gore).
But I hate seeing him with stupid moves like $800 for haircuts.
He's a gorgeous man, he doesn't need a hollywood stylist.

Of course, his best asset is his wife.

but why give THEM ammunition if you don't have to.

if your job is being "on camera".

:shrug:

they don't appear to be expensing their haircuts.

Hillary, McCain, Obama, and Guiliani.

If I had, I'd be upset that he wasn't paying for his own haircuts. People make sacrifices to send their candidates their hard-earned money; if I were on a fixed income and had scraped together the most I could afford to send to his campaign, because I believed in the importance of getting his message out and not in the importance of his hair, I'd be pissed.

But people who've made contributions to his campaign don't seem to mind, and there are certainly bigger issues to worry about than haircuts.

The mass of voters to whom it somehow makes a difference.

I agree it is shallow, but the candidates probably have to do it, so the contribution to the candidate is not wasted to the extent it went to that.

Everybody can relax I have given enough to his campaign so far to cover that hair cut, he can use my money. And John if you are viewing, from now on, as a little reward to myself, my future contributions will be arriving Five bucks at at time. I will donate five bucks every time I read a trivial little smear blip, so be cool ok man, I don't want you tappin into my beer money.
:sarcasm:

which cost plenty of money too.

GO TO YOUR ROOM!!!!!!!! :-)

:P

…
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

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.

label the expenditure "office supplies."

;)

True.

We take our expense reports seriesly!

:rofl:

It's a stupid argument that is wasting our precious DU time.

But a $400 haircut is ridiculous, effing ridiculous. Think of how much good that could have done in a place like Calcutta. All candidates need to walk the walk. And if they do not, well, they are hypocrites.

Just like campaign finance reform. I hear a lot of hollering about it until you ask any of them to support it specifically. Watch the crawfishing begin. I expect that from a puke, but geez, I have a hard time turning my head toward hypocrisy.

I love that argument. Any money spent on something one isn't down for should have been sent to *insert place* instead.

I hope you've never spent any money on anything besides bare necessities, so Calcutta can benefit from your largesse.

I never quite got the logic behind that either.

haven't used it on my child.

Yet. :rofl:

Waste is a privilege enjoyed by full bellies, and awareness of suffering is important. But when it becomes this "He didn't help everyone so he sucks" thing, that's crap.

'If you don't eat all your food, you are causing other children to starve.'

'If JE wouldn't get $400 haircuts, then he would stop causing the suffering in Calcutta.'


Both faulty logic.

I said that $400 would have done some good in Calcutta. It would have, correct? It all boils down to what values one holds.

I absolutely love John Edwards, his wife, and his children. I love the fact that as a trial lawyer he has helped many poor people achieve redress from nasty corporations. I made a special effort to go see him speak.

Any candidate who is willing to place a target like a $400 haircut in the middle of his or her forehead is asking for a comment about it, diverting attention from real issues. It's foolish. Bill Clinton already taught everyone about a haircut on the tarmac at taxpayers' expense. We can learn a lot from his mistakes, but oftentimes humans have a difficult time learning from history. The "logic" of wasting money does escape me, and a $400 haircut is wasteful in my opinion. I wonder if Jimmy Carter had a $400 haircut. I do recall that he asked to be transported in a Chevy Impala, I believe, rather than a limo, and was derided for that. I liked his values.

My daughter gets $150 per 1/2 hour session & $500 per day
as a trained professional make up artist.

And then there's the stylist, who coordinates the entire look
for each occasion on the campaign trail.

This haircut hating is just the tip of the iceberg.

Why shouldn't a professional be payed what they are worth.

Aggravating circumstnaces: I do my OWN roots (I believe in the biz they call it self-inflicted haircolor :rofl:).

I got your back in that other thread, CV. This is the stupidest candidate issue yet.

Some people can do their own roots and some people can't. It depend on many factors like what color you start with, what your target color is, what your underlying tones are, what texture hair you have and how much gray you have. I bet if Edwards tried he would either come out way too dark or with orangy hot roots. Then people would be bitching that he should have had a professional do it. I think he did the right thing. Dying a mans hair to look natural isn't as easy as it looks. He definitely got good service.


I'm finding these threads maddening.

:shrug:

:spank:

I gave up on "dignified discussion of the issues" around 1964.

If the right is so worried, what are they saying about KBR charging double rates for providing contaminated water for our soldiers to wash in?

support our troops my ass!

Lucky barber!

Give it a frikkin' rest, DUers.

I want him to look like Jerry Garcia.

Or Bob.



Although Bob is kind of walking proof that the beard thing doesn't work for everyone.

:rofl:

Putting this on the campaign tab makes Edwards look stupid and shallow.

It's TWO $400 haircuts, 14 days apart by the way.

he may have every right to do it, but we have every right to say it's politically tone-deaf to do so.

You'd think he would have the sense to understand how it would be used against him. It represents, on the surface, how out of touch he is with normal people. Not that republicans don't do the same or worse, but he's a smart guy, and he should know already that he will be smeared for it, and should bend over backwards to ensure that he gives them nothing to use against him.

Defending him here is useless. How about offering suggestions to him on how to control the damage instead?

:shrug:

You jest.

and I certainly can't even begin to comprehend the wealth that Edwards has.

If I had it, I might spend more. :shrug:

In the Duckworth campaign, she had a personal assistant attending to her constantly. Would that fall under "outrage" if someone was there to get her a bottle of water???

Well there is.....

And don't forget......

And since all the other candidates have released specifics to their ideas it is shameful that John Edwards did not give any specifics about his plans....wait.... he did? Hmmmmm..... And they did not? None of them?

Oh well, .... never mind.

I guess we have to concentrate on his hair and his home. That's all we got? Sheesh!

to conceive of such a dastardly plan?....

Hmmmm. Let me think.

Are you fucking kidding me? Oh my fucking god how petty some are. Jesus christ get a grip people.

That people are getting their knickers in a twist over a haircut seems batshit crazy to me.

It's simply the unbelievability of a $400 haircut. Or millionaires building houses without implementing EVERY possible green technology. Whether it's Edwards or Obama or Kerry or Bill Gates. When are the people with the money going to be expected to use the power of their money the way they tell us we're supposed to.

If Democrats don't get this through their heads in a hurry - kiss 2008 good-bye. Voters will not tolerate this kind of economic hypocrisy. Do not bitch to me about Walmart when you're spending $400 on haircuts. You clearly don't know anything about my world, even if you once did.

Which doesn't preclude the fact that this IS a manufactured "issues". Our people shouldn't be so out of touch. Where was the staff telling him not to do this as well.

:applause:

Stop making sense.

Hey, anybody seen the receipt? Does anybody know exactly what services were delivered/performed for the $400? And where? Where were these services delivered/performed? At a salon or on location?

Whole buncha people talking out there asses, I think.

"John Edwards' campaign for president spent $400 on February 20, and another $400 on March 7, at a top Beverly Hills men's stylist, Torrenueva Hair Designs."

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0407/The_Hairs_Still_Perfect.html

JMHO

And itemized accounting? Nope. Nor do I see a copy of the campaign finance report. No one knows what services/productes were purchased. He might have bought hair cuts for several people. he might (as has been alleged) have also received makeup services for a television appearance. He may have purchased a meal or meals through the salon.

Sorry, proof has been demanded. I call shenannigans.

It's up to his campaign to document the details. It surfaced in an AP story - they've had adequate time to provide a rebuttal. They've decided to ignore it and hope it goes away, reminding EVERYONE of the way John Kerry handled the Swiftboat Veterans for Truth.

The pollyannaish defense of every stupid thing a candidate does isn't going to produce a strong candidate for the general election nor a good president.

Shrub's barber, who would (and I think DID) get terminated from Supercuts for incompetence, would definitely cut John Edwards' hair for less than $400. And it would be worth every cent he paid.

We would, of course, have to contend with Edwards looking as bad as Bush does.

<<We would, of course, have to contend with Edwards looking as bad as Bush does.

I am sure that Edwards' ASS looks much better than Bush's FACE, regardless of how artfully the hair is arranged around it. :P

Just surprised at him. Argg $400.00 haircut. Spew puke :puke:

There,I said it.

Cope with it.

Don't know how well your job pays,but there a lot of people who think spending that much on a haircut is just wrong man.That's more money than my buddy makes working 40 hours a week driving a forklift.It would pay for enough oil to heat this house for three months.Are you going to tell me the guy pouring cement all week is going to see this and say,"Hey,no big deal."? Ever wonder why some people think politicians are out of touch with the average working men and women?

And besides,Edwards is the best damn looking guy running already,how much better does he need to look? He doesn't even have a fancy cut for crying a loud.I'm not saying he should get a fucking Flowbee cut.I get the concept of campaigning Will.

Point out all the others doing it.I'll gladly slam them for it to.

Laura's haircut? Stupid.
Kucinich? Stupid.
Edwards? Stupid.

You cope with it.

and, even though I have supported JE, he lost my respect today ...
it was a TOTALLY STUPID thing to do ... union people, poverty and then,
WTF was he or his campaign thinking???

As Henry Ford once said: "all the while you speak,
your actions thunder over you so loudly,
I can't hear a thing you're saying"

going to a ladies salon makes him effeminate. Haven't you read the GOP talking points yet?

That was when I had an annual income of $50,000. It looked good. Now that my income is below $10,000 I cut it my self mostly and splurge once in awhile on a $7.00 cut at a beauty college. It looks like crap.

During the good times I made charity contributions that were equal to my income. Now I budget maybe $10-$20 a year.

The point is: If I had that kind of income I would have expensive clothing and haircuts and homes and I would be donating a much larger amount to charities.

I imagine Edwards gives plenty to charity.

This whole thing is silly. The more there are stupid outrages about Edwards the more I begin to look seriously into his candidacy.

Instead of the big house, and expensive hairdo, howabouts he live in a tiny, expensive house, with a very large hairdo.

We say...the bigger the hair, the closer to God. :rofl:

Lee

Yet, I also understand an individual making 25K per year and who donated $200 to the campaign feeling a little odd about how his money gets spent. But, as WP says, that's the way campaigns work these days, appearance is at least as important as content.

for $400. haircuts.

My first thought was, John Edwards is a self-made wealthy man who can spend whatever he wants on his hair. But when I hear about it coming from campaign donations it gives me pause.

say, Kuchinich's resolution to impeach Cheney...
In fact all Edwards defenses take more space on DU than many more substantive issues... That's all I have to say on the subject.

to bring it up and FORCE me to think about it, I'm kinda upset now because at the very least I think it shows poor judgment on SOMEONE's part (and he runs the show), for a candidate who's supposed to be all about poverty.

Add to that a multimillion dollar house, and maybe it's appropriate to question his overall judgment and capacity for the top job.

Thanks for forcing me to face this issue.

tells you that this is all rhetoric - no substance candidate. It's his Iran rhetoric that tells me that his contrition over his IWR sponsorship is phony.
But somehow, this shell of a candidate is worth defending by the big bad media which wouldn't even mention someone like DK.

Good points, I'm afraid. I'd SO like to like Edwards. And then I keep remembering or being reminded of this, and then that, and then the other.

I do know that no candidate is perfect, but damn! Could we get "really good" for a change?? I haven't seen any "really good" since Dean was a candidate.

Edwards has done an excellent job of outlining his positions on the issues. He has developed a new appeal for those, like me, who want a bit of substance with their charisma. He's now in my top three--even though I had thought I not vote for him because of his support for the IWR.

Unfortunately, there's always been a nasty perception that John Edwards is something of an empty suit pretty boy. Paying for a $400 haircut with money that had to be reported just helps feed that perception. Frankly, if he'd paid for it with his own money it would not have had to have been reported and no one would have known how much Edward's attractive do really cost.

The one thing politicians want to avoid is feeding their negative perceptions whether these perceptions are true or false. The media had proclaimed Howard Dean to be hot tempered and well, you know, a tad unbalanced--despite the fact that he'd been elected Governor multiple times. When Dean let out the infamous scream, it fed a perception that had already been created. I don't want to see that happen to Edwards or any other candidate.

I didn't post on those "trash Edwards Freeper posts" but thinking about it...Edwards should have "pre-empted" this attack on his hair.

Haven't our DEMS LEARNED ANYTHING...all THESE YEARS? :shrug:

you think it was a good political move on his part?

hair was natural. Some Men and Women don't go grey until their 60's and I thought his hair was really neat. :shrug: Also many men don't have "balding problems" and I thought Kerry was one of those with GREAT GENES...but Edwards with no "thinning spots".. he has to COLOR HIS GREY?

I don't know...there's much to like about him...and some to worry about...

Who is PERFECT...No One..but many of us are hoping for HONESTY...

:shrug: again.

But $400 for a haircut using donated money is wasteful and irresponsible. Period.

institute a policy where all candidates must campaign COMPLETELY using their own money! That way, we'll ensure that the one with the most toys always wins! That's got to guarantee success, right?

:sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm:

but it's this on top of several other things that (to me) indicate of lack of judgement. I trust his wife more than I trust him. She seems much more practical and full of common sense.

It would immediately diffuse the whole thing.

Will a BALDING Whig do? ;)

:rofl:

If they had any brains or integrity, they'd be embarrassed. I'm embarrassed for them.