Does John Edwards deserve all the abuse? (video debate)

[quinnox]

Just watched this and thought I would throw it out there for people who might be interested.

It is a video debate between Peter Beinart and Jonah Goldberg on John Edwards and the flak he has been getting about his haircut and wealth.

This video was fairly long (much longer than most youtube videos for example) and not terribly entertaining. Still I felt there are some good points made.





http://www.nationalreview.com/video/?q=YWUwMjk5NWY3YmFkZmJjZjFjOTdlZDU2ZTlkZTgxMGI=

[LittleClarkie]

1. Personally, I reckon if he can afford a nice haircut

why not. Can't quite picture him heading for SuperCuts.

They pulled the same crap on Kerry. They really do need new material.

[karynnj]

8. There were differences, as well as similarities

The Kerry story, explained at length in the book by John Harris and Mark Halpern, was not true but a Drudge fantasy story - just as the Cameron (Fox News) story later in the campaign was. Kerry got a routine $75 haircut in DC. It was from a top stylist, but was simply a hair cut. A Republican operative finding that Kerry had gone to the stylist notified Drudge. The web story was total fiction with a price of (I think) $1000 for cutting, styling, coloring, highlighting etc with bogus quotes on how fussy Kerry was about his hair. The Kerry people immediately disputed the account and explained that it was just a haircut and it was $75 - which the stylist confirmed. The sad thing was that these two genuis political writers used this to postulate that Drudge is our Edward R. Murrow. They found what the Republicans and Drudge did praiseworthy! That sentiment will forever color my view of these two men, who are prominent pundits.

The Edwards story was true and came out because it was paid for with campaign dollars. The cost was so high because the stylist came to Edwards. Given the value of the candidate's time this likely is a valid expenditure for thecampaign. It was politically unwise though to charge it this way, especially as Edwards' theme is poverty.

The closest similarity is that they were attempts to attack each candidate's strengths. In Kerry's case, it was to make a war hero and athlete seem to be vain about his looks. This was likely because the RW's collective brain would have exploded if they accepted the truth - it is possible that an alpha male, with warrior and sports credentials, could be a Democrat, from Massachusetts no less. In Edwards' case, it was to make him look vain about his looks and as one of several expenditures used to question his committment to fighting poverty. (The far right took the former further with Ann Coulter's outrageous comments.)

[saracat]

2. Hmm. Interesting, especially Peters point that the haircut and House issues

are raised only to stifle debate on poverty issues by Conservatives.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

7. I agree

The implication is that a rich person cannot truly care about the poor (obviously a difficult concept for selfish right-wingers to grasp) and will be vilified if he or she speaks out on poverty. Well, since no one can run for president without being rich the objective here is to silence talk about the poor by any future presidential candidate. This also chills other top leaders such as those running for governor of Congress, since virtually everyone running for these offices is also wealthy, with the occasional exception. The right-wing is sending out warning flares to any progressive politician who even dares to consider talking about the poor.

[ce qui la baise1]

3. If you don't have anything good to say about

yourself, slander the other guy. It's a RW motto.
If Edwards haircut is all they have, they are
nobodies.

[LaPera]

4. Republican bullshit...How rich are the Bush's? FDR was extremely wealthy

as was Kennedy, Johnson and many Democrats, what's that got to do with anything? Just as there are and always have been rich republican politicians.

This is just more republican bullshit to get Edwards out of the race as soon as possible, tarnish him, repeat the non issues over & over.

And believe that they'll be a lot more of this republican shit directed at John Edwards week after week - The republicans want this charismatic, smart, skilled democrat tar & feathered and gone yesterday.

John Edwards is tough and a fighter for the people, and his excellent progressive platform speaks for itself!

http://johnedwards.com/

[quinnox]

5. Yes, Beinart talked about FDR

It is a good rebuttal I thought.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

6. *'s suits cost as much as $14,000

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

The figures come from a Chicago Sun-Times article. This is the newspaper that employs right-wing icon Robert Novak.

==A BUZZFLASH READER COMMENTARY

Here's some trivia for you I saw on the internet. While the press focuses on how much Sen. Kerry's haircuts cost, check out how much President Bush's suits cost. Certainly, if Kerry's haircuts are a story, doesn't this deserve a mention if it's true?

Highlights:

- "But Bush's past style lapses are forgivable because, since his inauguration he's been wearing some of the best tailored garments -- Oxxford suits."

- "This guiding principle ensures Oxxford continues to create top-notch garments for a price --$2,000 to $14,000 --that loyal customers are willing to pay."

- "Mr. Bush was so pleased with the fit of his tuxedo, suit, and topcoat and trousers that he immediately ordered six more garments." ==