ehBeth wrote:The guy I was considering for my birthday do
in NYC, charges $400(it'll go to $500 in September) for a cut, more for the colour etc. I decided against it, but he's busy enough that you need to book a month or so in advance.
So if this guy does a head an hour, in a 40 hour work week; he'll gross $800,000+ cutting hair? I don't doubt it, but to pretend that
that is anything but excessive, laughably so, to the average American is an exercise in denial.
So here we see people so hell-bent on not allowing the feminization of an already accused pretty-boy Democrat who was dumb enough to not only get a $400 haircut (like that would go unnoticed while campaigning for President)(despite all the breck hair nonsense of 4 years ago), then bill it to his campaign (insuring it would be noticed), and then astoundingly excuses it by saying he only paid the excessive amount because it was a friend (you know, because no one is weary of politicians who use their position to take excessively good care of their friends); that they'll pretend a $400 haircut isn't sufficient cause to use it as the base of a joke about excessive spending. No, NO, NO! It has "nothing" to do with excessive spending; it is "ALL" about feminizing a Democrat.
Why, Nimh once paid 1/10th that much for a haircut; that included a glass of wine no less; and that is somehow supposed to make one 10 times more expensive sound less ridiculous to the average Joe. NOT.
Ya'll really need to put aside your own biases. Yes, I think Edwards is a scumbag. If I thought he was Prince Charming; that wouldn't make his error any less foolish, or the ardent denial of same any less idiotic. This is akin to coming up with examples of others jumping in the lake if Edwards did.
