Friday, April 27, 2007

No Johnny, no.

Have a look at this picture:

You may say, I recognize that face. It looks familiar.
Have a look again.

Aah, the bell is ringing. It is John Edwards, the politician.

This is correct. It is John Edwards, the politician.
But look more closely.

What we see is a man who had a haircut that was costing $ 400.

It is true, John Edwards is also a politician.
A Democrat.
The Senator from North-Carolina and he has put himself in the race to try to become the next President of the United States.

But most revealing about John Edwards is that he decided to have a haircut costing $ 400.
That is pretty extravagant but OK, everybody can be as extreme as one likes as long as nobody else becomes a victim of it.
But what makes this haircut extra special is that John Edwards believed it was appropriate to pay the hairdresser with money from his campaign fund.
Money from people who donated to the campaign fund based on John Edwards’s political ideas and ambitions.

John Edwards has some good ideas for when he might become the new President of the United States.
Check out his website.
We could say: “Go, Johnnie, go!”
But the $ 400 haircut makes us say: “No, Johnnie, no!”
Go back home and take care of your wife.
Go back to North Carolina and take care of the people you are supposed to represent.

Why be so outspoken about John Edwards?

The US Census Bureau.
This United States Government office releases figures about the American population.
We must remember that these figures are official and objective.
According to the US Census Bureau’s latest figures, 36 million people in the United States live below the poverty line.
This includes 13 million children.

According to the Bread for the World Institute 3.5 percent of U.S. households experience hunger.
Some people in these households frequently skip meals or eat too little, sometimes going without food for a whole day.
These are a stunning 9.6 million people, including 3 million children, in one of the richest countries in the world.

To be a politician is to be a representative of the people.
To be a politician is to be in solidarity with all the people.
The rich and the poor.
As long as in John Edwards own country 3 million children are not getting enough food, as long as in John Edwards country 36 million people live below the poverty line, it is simply not appropriate to have extravagant $ 400 haircuts.
You can have a haircut for $ 20 and not tell the difference.
And be modest and in solidarity with 36 million people.
John Edwards should know this having been the former Director of the Center on Poverty, Work, and Opportunity at the University of North Carolina.

Ghandi, the Indian politician, would not take food one day a week just to make himself remember what a large part of the Indian population was going through.

A politician is not entitled to a privileged life.
But most choose to live in a reality of exclusivity once they have power distancing themselves of the people who elected them.
John Edwards demonstrated he is that kind of politician.

If a politician decides it is OK to use donated money for an election campaign to have a haircut costing $ 400, something fundamental is wrong in the thinking of that politician.
A politician should have the gut feeling that this is never OK.
Maybe in a banana republic, but not in a democratic country.
It shows that the morality of John Edwards is flawed.
If he thinks this was OK, imagine what will be OK when he becomes the new President.

When John Edwards was confronted with his extravagancy and dishonesty, he responded by saying: “That was a mistake, which we remedied”.
A typical answer of a politician.
It says nothing.
Except this: “I am trying to get away with this without harm to my reputation and ambitions for power”.
That it was a mistake to foot the extravagant bill with campaign money is not true.
It was a demonstration of an objectionable mentality and a flawed morality.
The true John Edwards revealed.
So he tries to downplay it.
A little mistake and let’s move on.
That’s why he suggests it can be remedied.
Not by him, but by “we”, whoever those "we" are.
Like a dirty spot on the table can be cleaned.
But the remedy of maybe re-paying the election fund $ 400 from his own pocket, doesn’t take away the fact that he makes dirty spots.

Most people who live in a balanced way will laugh if a hairdresser charges $ 400 for a haircut.
“Go take a walk, Mr. Figaro. You are a joker!”.
Nothing can justify such a price for a man’s haircut except pretentiousness.
Living in utter vanity and feelings of extreme self-importance makes one believe $ 400 is a justified price to cut the hair.
That is sick.
Something wrong in the head.
Such a person should never represent people but must see a psychiatrist.

Kurt Vonnegut is one of the most important American authors and thinkers of the 20th century.
He recently passed away.
In his memoirs, called “From A Man Without a Country: A Memoir of Life in George W Bush's America.”, he calls politicians like John Edwards “PP’s”.
“PP’s” stand for psychopathic personalities.
The medical term for smart, personable people who have no
John Edwards has indicated he is a PP and it is good we know this at this early stage of the election campaign.
PP’s like Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld have been demonstrating how disastrous and devastating they were and still are.

Chuck Berry sang:

“Go go
Go Johnny go”

But we sing:

“No no
No Johnny no”


The memoirs of Kurt Vonnegut called “From A Man Without a Country: A Memoir of Life in George W Bush's America.” can be found by clicking on:

The website of John Edwards can be found by clicking on:

The website of the United States Census Bureau can be found by clicking on:

The report on hunger in the United States of the Bread for the World Intsitute can be found by clicking on:


Jo said...

While you make many good points, Michel, I must make a correction. John Edwards is not the Governor of North Carolina.

Robert Hill said...

The American politcal machine is so corrupt that it must be dismantled and rebuilt.

Anonymous said...

Very well said.

Anonymous said...

All good points but it is very hard to find a politician that is not a rather blatant hypocrite. One of the leading hypocrites is Al Gore. Here's a quote from:,,2022934,00.html

Last year the Gore household consumed 221,000 kilowatt-hours (kWh) of electricity - more than 20 times the national annual average.

His household consumption of energy rose between 2005 and 2006, the bills showed, from 16,200 kWh a month to 18,400 kWh last year. In addition, he spent on average $1,080 (£550) a month on natural gas. Combined, his electricity and gas bills reached almost $30,000.

The group released the information on Monday night under the title "Al Gore's personal energy use is his own inconvenient truth". Its president, Drew Johnson, told the Guardian that he had no objection to someone spending $30,000 on energy to light and heat a multimillion dollar house. "I only have a problem with that person telling us what light-bulbs to buy and that we should get a new low-energy refrigerator. That's hypocrisy, and I'm proud to have exposed it," he said.

Anonymous said...

In order to get my head around the magnitude of Al Gore’s energy consumption I did a little arithmetic. At 18,400 Kwh/mo. Al is consuming an average of 25.2 Kw continuously 24/7. This is roughly 219 amps @ 115 volts continuously 24/7.

The article says he is consuming 20 times the average home. My wife and I live in a 2,400 sq. ft. home in southern CA. For 2006 we used 5,615 KWh. California has a very temperate climate but Al is using over 39 times as much energy as I am in his home and his home is in a fairly temperate climate also.

At least John Edwards isn’t writing books and going around the country telling me how much to pay for a haircut!!!

Anonymous said...

I'll refrain from any obvious comments about a non-American citizen criticizing our process or candidates...

What is scary is that the one candidate on that stage last night that probably has the most integrity is Dennis K. Eeeew.


Anonymous said...

I agree with you that John Edwards is "morally flawed" as demonstrated by his attempt to use taxpayers' contributions to his campaign for a personal extravagance. I do not agree that "rich people" have an obligation to share their wealth with others. (I believe that's called socialism.) However, it would be nice to see a rich politician offering to share his own wealth with the poor rather than the government's (i.e. the taxpayers') money.

Robert Hill said...

I laugh at the occasional Red-neck blind patriotic remark about Michel not being an american citizen and how dare he criticize our political process. Since when does one have to be American to have an opinion of america? This country is so blind, as long as they have thier reality telivision shows they can care less about anything else. The majority of americans haven't got a clue about how much Debt China holds of ours, or couldn't tell you how many hundred people died in Iraq today as long as all of thier accustomed comforts are still in place. I thank Michel for having an opinion on america, and I find it interesting, a view from outside, it's sometimes hard to see yourself through other peoples eyes, Robert Hill

SPOA said...

But he's so cute.