John Edwards likes his hair to be pretty

Why do so many "progressives" call even videgraphic evidence of vacuousness a "smear"? This video is not an opinion and it is not a distorted view of the facts. It is shows how one presidential candidate spends much of his time. It shows us at least one of the things that he cares most about.

What is interesting here is not just the amount of time spent primping, because surely many of us spend just as much time on our hair. But, it's the evident all-absorbing fastidiousness of the perfect hair that concerns many people.

"Only after we change that which seemed essential do we realize how natural the "new normal" really is and how inevitable it always was."

www.francislholland.blogspot.com
francislholland@yahoo.com

I have no doubt whatsoever that they spend just as much time and hairspray on Hillary when she goes on television. I think this is more of a statement on our culture than on any particular candidate.

Power of story. It's the Culture Stupid. Probably why Liza felt moved to post it here?

This hair-raising clip (yeah, okay, lame) made me think of the other Clinton actually -- remember "Bill's Coif" nearly 15 years ago?

The story was that planes were kept circling as President Bill Clinton had his hair clipped on Air Force One at Los Angeles airport last month.
The runway haircut by Beverly Hills stylist Cristophe became such a metaphor for perceived White House arrogance that the president himself felt compelled to apologize for the reported flight delays.

But the reports were wrong.

According to Federal Aviation Administration records obtained through the Freedom of Information Act, the May 18 haircut caused no significant delays of regularly scheduled passenger flights - no circling planes, no traffic jams on the runways.

"If you understand the air traffic system, you'd find that statement [that planes were circling] ludicrous," said . . .an FAA spokesman. . .

Well. If you understand the layered power of story, what you'd find ludicrous is the belief that factual dispute is the real story. Heck, the wrangling over interpreting facts for partisan purposes is a whole story all by itself, not dependent on the individuals or even which generation is involved in any particular version!

These basic recurring stories are timeless, and the way we throw them back and forth as if they were new and the details so critical each time -- taken altogether, that IS culture! Or Culture Wars. Emelda Marcos and her shoes, John Kerry windsurfing in costume, Bush the First at the grocery store, Marie Antoinette and her cake . . . the way we combine the elements in each new iteration and how successfully it takes hold in the culture are the variables that make retellings feel new and real. But each time the stories tells us more about ourselves and our culture than the public figures they feature.