Mitt's Dog = John's Hair

Really, they're not exactly equal, though one might mistake Mr. Edward's "do" for a shrubbery, or a small furry animal.

I thought I ought to come to his bi-partisan defense and say that just as there can be no credence in attacking Mitt Romney for his choice of transit for his dog, one shouldn't disqualify John Edwards from the Presidency because he buys haircuts for $400. While one can, case-by-case, pick apart the wisdom or even the justifiability of certain large-dollar purchases, I think that this is hardly clean cut (forgive me.)

It's part of the rather ridiculous notion that people have that wealth necessitates contempt for the poor, or that true, honest and good rich people should not actually use their money, or use it only for things like donations.

I do think that one can attack John Edwards for spending $400 on a haircut that looks like poo. Mitt Romney's equally decried $200 cuts are somewhat better.

The worst anybody can say is that these guys are getting ripped off.

(one can disqualify John Edwards from the Presidency, howerver, on the basis of him being a Red.)