Maureen Dowd rips Edwards in her column today

I am an Obama supporter. I am not flaming. I saw this on Solid Politics and thought I should let Edwards supporters know about this so you guys won't get blindsided.
I think it is an unfair column and Dowd is widely read by pundits and news hosts. This will spread. It will filter through to the msm. You need to be prepared.
This is only to warn you guys. Okay????

Whether or not the country is ready to elect a woman president or a black president, it's definitely not ready for a metrosexual in chief.... Mr. Edwards this week had to pay back the $800 charged to his campaign for two shearings at Torrenueva Hair Designs in Beverly Hills. He seems intent on proving that he is a Breck Girl -- and a Material Boy.... Someone who aspires to talk credibly about the two Americas can't lavish on his locks what working families may spend on electricity in a year.... All the haircuts in the world may not save John Edwards from a blowout.
FULL STORY

www.solidpolitics.com

will leave a mark, for sure!

nt

find ways to call people out on things that are small and petty.

I know people who live on less than $800 a month. Tell me again why this is petty. To stand and up and say you stand for the little guy and then turn around and routinely have your hair done at this cost is somehow sort of repulsive. Personally I could care less, but perception is all these days.

2004 census figures 20% of Americans were living on $7 a day.

I wonder do they have votes?

Either way seems like a potential presidential candidate prepared to spend that amount on their hair deserves all the ridicule they can get frankly.

and that's why you believe she *should* get a pass?

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

Nor do I think she'll appeal to the swing-Bubba voters, which, is, afterall, the point of this column.

...as he runs for the most powerful office in the world.

He's also rich.

Add these things together, and you can understand why he'd spend a lot on haircuts.

:eyes:

NGU.

This seems to be a very coordinated RNC-MSM effort against Edwards. DU'er's, please don't play along.

she attacked his character. Maybe the OP will share that one with us :D

Didn't Imus teach you anything about using gender-specific degregations?

For the record, I didn't like it last time around when Dowd complained about Wes Clark's sweater (in cold New Hampshire :eyes: ), but I didn't call her a "bitch."

I cannot believe that many voters are so incensed over this stupid haircut
BS. The man is RICH, and why does he not have the right to use his money as he chooses? He earned it. He did not inherit it from his parents!!!

Did JFK get cheap haircuts? I doubt it!!! Jackie wore DESIGNER clothes all the time and she was made a public icon for it.

Does anyone think that Reagan went the cheap way for his grooming? There is no question that Nancy was always covered in expensive goods. She even went to the designers' openings. I'm sure her haircuts were on the cheap...RIIIIIIIIIIGHT.
Barbara Bush, the old hag, must spend a fortune to keep looking like she is a human being.

Does anyone thnk the fortune that is spent to keep Cheney looking like he is among the living is coming from his own pocket?

Does anyone really think that Prez Shit-for-Brains(TYVM Bill Maher)does not spend money like he always knows there is more????
Sorry folks..there are no paupers in the running for President anymore, if they can be found anywhere in the public life these days.

Let's see a list of EVERY candidate's costs for grooming, from BOTH parties, and then make a comparison..if THAT is what you are going to base your vote upon.

If you are going to decide your vote for a candidate on how much he spends for a haircut, that is more than pathetic!! What about the REAL issues?
This haircut crap is all so much a Right-Wing, MSM ploy to distract from things that truly affect us in our daily living... PUL-EEZE!!!!

after campaigning in '04. What was he thinking??? Now it's got legs, and will dog him.

:eyes:

NGU.

No one "forced" Edwards to have that haircut. It was his choice. :eyes:

Mz Pip
:dem:

:eyes:

NGU.

to get raped twice.

Geesch.

trasher. And I agree, Edwards is hardly blameless. Seems I remember Kerry being criticized for a $75 haircut.

This is a question of perceptions. Edwards is entitled to get $175 haircuts. He can afford them. But he is running for president on this 'two Americas' theme. He needs to be a bit more careful about walking the walk, not just talking the talk.

Mz Pip
:dem:

by including it as a campaign expense on his FEC report. Some low level billing staffer and some senior knothead at the top of the campaign responsible for reviewing the report, didn't see how it would look when they released it to the public. The result is apparent. Colbert, Leno, Dowd all because he didn't have to show an expense under 400 bucks itemized that made him look bad. Most are focused on the cost of the hair cut, it is not the issue, it was on a public expense report which everyone goes through line item by line item. My focus is on how much does Edwards pay people on his campaign when they didn't know this would make him look bad. Sloppy staff work. So much for the experience of having run in 2004. :shrug:

she goes after both Senators Clinton and McCain for spending tons of money on image consultants.

I see this whole haircut thing as basically tone-deafness by the Edwards campaign, this is a rookie mistake, and he's not a rookie.

Is there anything or anyone MoDo doesn't hate?

As Dowd said, how can he possibly justify talking about two Americas when he spends more on a couple of haircuts than some people spend on electricity a year.
And it wasn't his money he spent.

And up til now I was an Edwards supporter. I'm re-thinking that.

I did not contribute to him so I honestly do not care about his haircuts.
But, I felt really bad when I saw this. I know how it feels. Remember, Dowd did the Obambi column.

He's also stated it was an error and has begun to add a little self-depricating blurb on it when he talks to a crowd, or at least he has once so far. Anyhow, with him actually paying for it and the mistake unlikely to be repeated, I doubt this is an issue for his donors at this point.

As to Dowd, yeah, she's a nasty one. She will viciously attack each and every Dem without exception. It's apparently Edwards' turn, Obama's had his, there will, no doubt, be many sequels for each.

Wait till the GE and one main candidate is the focus all the time. Hoo-boy! That's going to really suck. At least here at DU there will be no trashing of our candidate (& running mate), if that rule doesn't fall by the wayside (like some of the others).

Julie

... a particularly pathological condition - perhaps stemming from not getting a date for the prom? She seems obsessed with some bizarre expectation regarding "real men" and compulsively rants on their sexuality. "Metrosexual" indeed. MoDo's world must have a very hallucinatory-colored sky. MoDo seems to be a very, very bitter person. She unerringly focuses on the petty and the trivial - 'issues' of questionable merit at most.

She is clearly dealing with some "issues".

cause, IMO, over his consulting Naomi Wolf on image.

Now with Gore out of the race -- at least to this point anyway -- she targets Edwards for a similar "transgression."

Yet I doubt if she attends banquets and public functions looking like someone who just hauled their carcass out of the sack. From appearances, her appearance is impeccable.

"How come it's ok for her to look that good and be that fashion-conscious and not Gore or Edwards?", Old Crusoe asked.

In MoDo's "world," geese and ganders clearly have separate and unequal 'goods.' She seems singularly unconcerned about getting her rocks off while residing comfortably in her glass house. That she seems adept at turning a phrase or making a play on words doesn't mask her "victim journalism" - engaging in smears based on trivialities for her own self-aggrandizement.

tickets in 08. Or two gay men.

Dowd would have to come up with a whole new line of attack, all the while looking fabulous, of course.

liked to have signed her autograph book, and they didn't.

I like her so much better when she writes about Bushworld :D

In fact, that's what leads me to think she's more than a little bit pathological. I've been a great fan of Dorothy Parker in my life - and the Algonquin Round Table. Parker's wit was razor sharp - able to eviscerate her targets with great mastery. I see MoDo as a clumsy parody of Dorothy Parker. Sad.

Succinct, accurate...I give it a 10 out of 10!

Julie :toast:

MD wasn't saying Edwards was wrong to get these haircuts; she was saying it was stupid. The Repugs are already trying to crucify him with the 'Breck Girl' image. This just feeds this crap like when Kerry went windsurfing. The 'average' John Doe does not get $400 haircuts, go windsurfing, or get facials. And he votes for the guy with the 'fun to have a beer with' image.

Of course this is idiotic and exactly the wrong way to pick a President. But... it is the truth and Edwards is killing himself with stuff like this. He should do a photo op at the local barber shop getting a $10 haircut incl. tip. That's all Maureen was saying.

for the cameras after Katrina, or any of the OBVIOUSLY SETUP PHONY shots that the idiot-in-chief does?
Sorry. I do not resent his $400 haircuts, even tho I could never afford one.
I am thrilled that someone has done well for themselves, by thier hard work and determination. They and thier family are entitled to reap the rewards. If that includes a $400 haircut.. so be it.
Damn! This shit is getting so tiresome.

Sorry, Dowd is clever enough to try and make her column appear to make a commentary as you suggest.

But I read the whole thing. She goes on to inject Edwards' daughter's job into it.

Does no one meet her lofty standards? She's just the Top Heather, ain't she?

"You wanted to be a member of the most powerful clique in school. If I wasn't already the head of it, I'd want the same thing."

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0097493/quotes

to write about a damn haircut after the week this country has had. No mention of Bedtime for Gonzo playing at the Senate this week, no mention of the extended Iraq tours for our military, no hint of scandals with two more repugs getting raided, no discussion on war funding, or Supreme Court abortion rulings but she finds time to dish about haircuts.

Jeez, Louise, Maureen, how about working yourself up to a real outrage now and then? A haircut? This week? Really?

This is her regular beat - the occasional relevant articles are the exception.
When assigned to break the Walter reed story, she refused - it was too bleak for her. That's our MoDo.

Another excellent DUer summary on this character. Well said. :toast:

Julie

c-spin callers, evidently a large portion of the country are ripping with it?

Whether or not in is we, who have a number of "well thought out," reasoned responses, or the other "huddled masses" who are clacking about it, every body knows who Dowd is and how much Edwards' haircut cost.

Hell, I quit getting haircuts when they hit ten bucks and I do it myself. After half a lifetime of good looking, combed and trained hair, I now buzz it off to the scalp and then let it grow to three quarters of an inch and do it again.

At the best of times. recently, the only way we could even manage to get a thinking man in the presidency, he had to be a snake charmer and. in many ways, almost a republican.

So, sadly, I think, in terms of relevance, she mas more of it than we do.

When they start ripping him on actual issues then I'll worry.

But they won't becaue then they'd have to talk about issues. And facts. This is about as deep as they go.

It doesn't change my opinion of Edwards.

variety, don't vote on issues: they vote on perceptions.

She may have wielded a mighty sharp tongue here, but she's correct on her "perception" meter.

Edwards should know that. Of course, $400 haircuts SHOULDN'T matter to voters but they do, and it is stupid to ignore that fact.

Regardless, Obama, Richardson and Edwards are my top picks right now.

than misguided idiots. We assume the media and its clueless contributors are all part of a concerted plot to destroy the thinking, caring fraction of the American public. (Well I have anyway.)
Could it possibly the ordinary American brain really is a vacuous lazy-thinking, self-absorbed nincompoop, who really does care about a baby in the Bahamas who is filthy rich and doesn't even know it, yet?

I can understand that the National Enquirer might well be the largest selling publication in the country, given its pernicious ubiquity, since it really does follow that most of the voting public cares little that the top cop has been proven to be a lying, murdering little creep and a thoughtless, low brow thug--or does that fact just serve to confirm the general suspicion that cops are like that?

Even with the obvious discomfort and and anger over Gonzo's performance, thursday, I heard not a single comment about perjury or obstruction--are these words only to be used by prosecutors and not by senators?

PBS has gone down the republicker rabbit hole and are we the only ones to notice? Are even we fighting for ALL MANKIND as we seem to think, or are we really only reflecting what we see in store for ourselves and our narrow band of close family?

I thought I automatically knew the answers to these questions and thousands more, but now I'm not even sure I can even figure out what questions really need answering, let alone whether or not those are simply the convenient, easy ones.

with pitchforks, chicken feathers and a hot bucket of tar says a lot about us as a country. The politics of an expensive haircut may be the only way a lot of dumbed-down, inattentive voters manage to size up a candidate, sadly. We get what we ask for from the media. MoDo is just taking the easy route that we demand. We sure as hell don't want to read about the details of policies, Senate voting records, etc.

I generally like Dowd's columns. I think she was trying to use the Edwards' haircut as a starting point on how the voters reacts to the public perception of candidates. And also how much the candidates spend on "consultants", which also relates to image.
Unfortunately, she got lost along the way and ended up just bashing Edwards.
This is a non story. The media does not want to admit it's a non story. But they proudly bring in RW pundits everyday to tell us that Gonzogate is a non story. Your liberal media at work.

haircuts and Hillary gets $1500 haircuts. I don't see you ragging on them for that.

I wonder what Obama's manicures cost him? (his hair is cut extremely close so his haircuts probably come cheap for a presidential candidate)

good-looking guy who would look just as good with a $15 haircut at the barber shop. Why does he feel the need to spend so much? Why is it so damn important to him?

A 400 dollar haircut? Whether it was paid from campaign money or his own pocket, that will be viewed as excessive by most people

I do not believe that the majority of the voters give a rat's ass about this haircut. It is media hype, and as that, it is achieving its goal by giving rise to the kind of discussion that is going on about it.
Dowd just played right into the stupid game.

You think the majority of voters give a rat's ass about this haircut, I respectively disagree. You and I may not, but with a public that is consumed by American Idol and Britney Spears, I think you are over-estimating them

Look at what they did to Kerry when they swift boated him, and they were lying about his war record and they still got away with it

after seeing what Pres Shit-for-Brains has done for/to them.

Voting for the "guy you can sit down and have beer with" gets you nothing.

I do believe that this haircut stuff is also a "swiftboating" tactic.
The Repukes may feel they have the most to fear from an Edwards candidacy, and are doing their best to make sure there isn't one.

is better than what they offer, especially on Iraq.

and you are right they will use it as a swiftboating tactic, which is why John Edwards, or any candidate should be careful because they have all eyes on them.

Yes, I do believe this will blow over, but it should be a warning to all the Democratic candidates what they are up against

Romney, look quite "GQ" themselves, but because they don't have the "Breck-Girl" rep, no one will think to make a deal of it.

candidate.

His record isn't that impressive, and he sounds like a phony and a flip-flopping dipshit. But, the bar for the top job in this country has been set very, very low, so it may not matter.

to the degree that they will infer that Edwards is out of touch with the middle class person

An example is the troop funding bill sent to bush with a deadline to be out of Iraq. The bill itself was fine, but the pork that was attached to that bill allowed the opposition to potentially divert attention away its substance.

Why allow them to use it as an argument?

Same thing I would ask of John Edwards, you know all eyes are on you, why present yourself as excessive?

and compared to the tons of pork that has been attached to spending bills for the last 6 years, while the Repukes were in power, this is just drop of bacon grease. Bush NEVER had a comment about all that pork!!!
Again it is a matter of the media not really doing their job to write the truth. They are still just repeating whatever Prez SHIT-FOR-BRAINS says, and giving it validation that it does not deserve. The press is still acting as if it must be true if Pres SFB says so.

The same is true for the idea that the troops are on the edge of losing all their funding if a bill without restrictions is not passed. What a crock! SFB is the one who will veto it!!!
And how come he is threatening to send more troops and he extends the deployments if there is not enough money to support those that are there already?

I have lots of questions and the media is not giving me answers. They are discussing the cost of haircuts!!!

We shouldn't give them the avenue to talk about the cost of haircuts in the first place.

I WOULD like to know who the source of this information was regarding the haircut.

I believe they are terrfied of Edwards as a candidate and will do whatever necessary to undermine his chances.
How far from all that Howard Dean "scream" crapola is this?

You can't hand her grist for the ridicule mill on a silver platter, which is what Edwards did in this case.

Claiming two $400 haircuts in the space of 17 days as a campaign expense will dog Edwards for a long time to come.

Fuck Maureen Dowd. She's a piece of shit media whore. I've seen her in interviews like on Real Time - she is a fucking idiot.

She really should stick to the written word, and stay away from the spoken word.

scrutiny of Republican public figures, wouldn't it?

Ronald Reagan's extensive use of "patriotic" backdrops for photo-ops -- the Statue-of-Liberty shot in particular. That was ALL image. God knows he didn't have a brain in his head, but he looked impressive in front of all those landscape buzz-icons.

And more currently, Mitt Romney. He seems to have nice hair and fine clothes. Is Mitt Romney a metrosexual? Does he even have genitalia?

I think MoDo is talented in many ways, but I agree with TahitiNut and others in this thread that there's a disconnect with MoDo and some males.

you love her,you hate her,but at least you notice her....

Anyone know?

I am not doubting the veracity, only the motives of the source.

He released it in his FEC report down to the make-up job at The Pink Sapphire.

this thread die, for Edwards' sake, LOL!

Ranger husband that Edwards went to a spa called the Pink Sapphire and get his reaction.

I won't drip it sarcasm, I promise. I just want to see how he reacts.

And, as a test subject, my husband's not that great because he IS a Democrat - but he's still a macho white male.

Hang on.

He rolled his eyes and pulled an "Imus" by saying something not-so-nice about homosexual tendencies (and he's all for gay rights - but it's hard to break years-old habits of using certain terms, even though the ones he uses aren't nearly as bad as some do).

This is to what Dowd was explaining. It's a very real issue we need to look at when selecting a nominee.

Oh - and, for the record, my husband's an Al Gore fan. He never even heard of the "earth tones" bruhaha.

I am sure Edwards did not tell Barbara Walters how much the haircut cost while he was guesting on her weekly show.
How did this get to be the big piece of rw fodder that it has become?
Who first PRINTED it or repeated it on thier radio show?

I sure as hell did not read about it in The Nation!!!

John Edwards. It's called oppo research that did not have to happen. Hillary's facials are in there too. It is the campaign's responsibility not to shoot themselves in the foot - the very thing sloppy staffers did. Any news organization that read the report put it out there - with John Edwards' permission. Blaming the media for this doesn't wash or blow dry. That's what makes it devastating - its self-inflicted.

why, because this haircut is getting MORE coverage than the war in Iraq. The gonzolez testimoney was covered very little on the major television networks. The Supreme Court decision prohibiting an D&E, ("partial birth abortion"), was filtered from the general public, not mentioning how rare the procedure is, and that it is performed to SAVE THE LIFE OF THE MOTHER

No, the media has plenty of blame for pushing britney spears, and american idol, as major news stories when the country is going broke

John Edwards. The price of the hairdo is not an issue - dude had a credit card in his wallet - next time use it. He is responsible for this distraction - it would have been something else for the lame brain msm. the MSM likes bright shiny objects with pictures/images that translate easily. Who handed them this galaxy of laughs - the campaign staff. The corporate media, as always, did the lowest common denominator, but not with out the Edwards campain giftwrapping it for them.

If you know that is what they do - why feed the monkeys?

Incidently, a 400 dollar haircut is excessive

something that this nation is guilty of. I thought it was an excellent point. It's as idiotic as the entire obsession with appearances, clothing and trivia - but that's why is a prize possession to go after by the shit diggers.
I read that Murdoch was trying to sink Hillary in 2000 with publishing bad pictures of her in his rag. He was very disappointed that this failed - maybe that's why he decided to join her later?
Anyway, any political race should be aware of the importance of appearances - some much more than others.

It is still SWIFTBOATING the candidate they are afraid of.
Any big articles about the grooming costs of the Repuke candidates?

Has nothing to do with anybody being afraid of an Edwards campaign. His hoped for improved image as a strong leader next to spa services stories just write themselves. Two America Man next to a $400 tab for an improved hair day. Huge house next to poor people in NOLA. It is a narrative that is being built that he is helping along by giving them comic fodder so that they do not have just one recent example, but many. That is the problem -he is not controlling his own campaign narrative. The GOP is munching popcorn. The lazy media, AP, Reuters, NYT, LAT, CNN, MSNBC did not even break a sweat, the Edwards campaign gave 'em a freebie. Who's afraid of the guy that gives great treats at his own expense?

I cannot believe that there are no comparable "facts" about the Repuke candidates. Don't see them bouncing all over the media.
I would like to see the listings for ALL the candidates made public.(Of course one can assume that some might not be perfectly accurate.)

Honestly, McCain spent more on image junk. Hillary has $1500 makeovers. None of the candidates, except one lone ranger, said their platform was built on economic fairness. The political process is not made for those who don't get their hair mussed - it's flat out mud wrestling. Many small donors gave the money they could ill afford and seeing it spent on $400 hair shenanigans and powder puffs, doesn't play well for a guy who says he is for them. His staff should make sure nothing hurts his image, instead they helped show some hypocritical behavior that is now in the public domain because he put it there. Chalk this one up as a painful learning experience for a guy that definitely knows better. Everybody already knows the media is not fair, doesn't play fair, and has no fairness doctrine.

http://www.fec.gov/disclosure.shtml It is required by law that they be electronically filed for public viewing. This year it was for April 15, 2007 for the first quarter.

NOT.

Someone went in there and picked up that factoid and intentionally made a big stink over it. Something tells me it was not a reporter from The Nation.

I just can't take her seriously. She's more of a gossip collumnist than a political analyst or editorialist.

Any politician is fodder for her stiletto heels, to mix a metaphor. I love MoDo. I am a supporter of Edwards, but I love her because she reserves her sharpest harpoon for Hillary.

I have to admit these things are completely fair game. It's not dirty politics in any way. And if Edwards can't even counter this kind of politics, Lord knows what he'll allow to go unchallenged in November 08. Lord knows what other kind of attack he'll not be able to anticipate and counter before it happens. (A good example of anticipation is Obama's book and his mention of his own drug use.) Ideally, you have to counter an issue before it can even become an issue. There's not even any self-deprecating humor, at least that I've heard, to even try to counter the $400 haircuts.

I believe Edwards is a great and forward thinking man, I believe he is right on almost all issues, but the guy's got to understand his own weaknesses and I don't think he does.

(snip)

President George W. Bush steps into the spotlight looking like a man fresh off the pages of GQ magazine. His black cashmere overcoat delicately drapes his shoulders, the blue stripe tie radiates against his white shirt and the suit perfectly fits his fit form. What a contrast after seeing Bush's hokey business and Western attire on the campaign trail. The 10-gallon hats and cowboy boots caused many fashion watchers to shake in their boots. But Bush's past style lapses are forgivable because, since his inauguration he's been wearing some of the best tailored garments -- Oxxford suits.

The Chicago-based Oxxford Clothes is the gentlemen's club for the well-dressed. In the summer issue of Forbes' FYI magazine, Oxxford was appointed the best suit to own in the list of "50 of America's Best." The article touted the fact that the suits are still made by hand entirely in Chicago and that pattern pieces are individually cut from one piece of fabric.

(snip)

Shortly after the election, Harold Wiesenthal of Harold's in Houston, Texas called his friend, former President George Bush, to request the honor of dressing our next President. Because of the Bush family's respect for Harold, and appreciation for our fine American-made products, we immediately received a positive response.

On January 4th , 2001, a small team from Harold's and Oxxford Clothes flew to Austin for the first fitting. Attending from Oxxford was President and CEO, Crittenden Rawlings with Head Designer, Rocco Giovannangelo. The team then flew to Austin for the first fitting. They gathered at President Elect George W. Bush's ranch in Crawford, Texas for a second fitting last Saturday. Mr. Bush was so pleased with the fit of his tuxedo, suit, and topcoat and trousers that he immediately ordered six more garments.

http://www.buzzflash.com/contributors/2002/12/06_Suits.html

That is what makes this such an obvious Swiftboat tactic: pick one petty, irrelevant to the big picture, fact and see how much you can get the media and the public to get upset over it.
Still a big crock of crapola.

Maureen must prefer the really bad haircuts typical
of many GOP.

OR the bad hairpieces.

with the combovers (Rudy, McCain). Romney has bulletproof hair. Huckabee is balding, but looks OK. Brownback had a full, thick head of hair, but he's weird-looking. I can't say the GOPers have bad haircuts this time around, unfortunately.

it costs, since it is that much more diffiuclt to make you look "photogenic".

a guy who is bald on top but the "fringe" hair is too long and/or poofy--it must be more of a feat of engineering to get that to look good.

you that would leave a mark and darned if it didn't...

Jesus Mo--give it a break! He's NOT Joe Shmoe. He's gotta look like a media star.

It's a very real concern - and one I hear from the white male Bubbas in my area. Does Dowd have a sharp tongue? Sure. I think she's rather "snippy," myself.

My husband, a transplanted "Yankee" from Boston, even says this about Edwards: that he's too "pretty" to get many white male swing voters in the South and mid-West.

I don't find the column so unfair as it is a very real portrait of the "Heartland" voters. If you want to affix blame, assign it to the backgrounds and upbringing of white male voters in the "red" areas of the country. Why do you think Rove goes out of his way to portray the very effete Bush as a "cowboy," even though Bush wouldn't know a lasso from a necktie.

This is why I'm consistently saying on this board that I don't think any of our "front-runners" can win - that none of them appeal to the very group of people we need in order to win the election: white, male swing voters in the South and mid-West.

People like her are part of the problem. About half her opeds are about superficial garbage related to people's appearance.

She has gone this route with Kerry, Gore etc. Apparently no one can win, because I think her problem with Kerry/Gore was they didn't "look good enough" :eyes:.
Gore's hair and earth tone suits were ripped up too.

They should hire an adult to write that column...

in the polls. She considers it her mission in life to trash anyone and everyone.
It really just shows she's an insecure media whore out to do the bidding of her corporate pimp(s).

It is a lot of empty sarcastic blather. I like sarcastic blather as much as anyone, but this has nothing behind it, it's just bashing for the sake of it. One does have to wonder when Edwards got on the media shitlist, was it when he raised all that money?