You can purchase an autographed copy of Anything But Straight by sending a $35 check or money order to:
-------------------------
Wayne Besen
PO Box 25491
Brooklyn, NY 11202
To no fault of his own, John Edwards morphed into the "Breck Girl" in 2004 during his nearly successful drive to get the Democratic presidential nomination. The sliming of Edwards started when an anonymous Republican source telegraphed to The New York Times how the Party planned to attack the surging Senator from North Carolina. The GOP used deceit to label Edwards effete, hoping the veiled homophobia would lead to his defeat.
As John Kerry's struggling primary campaign headed south, his manager, Jim Jordan, stole a page from the GOP and started deriding Edwards as "the cute Beatle." (If only Jordan had the good sense to have called Bush the "dumb Beatle" Kerry might be President)
To exacerbate his image problem, a video recently began circulating on YouTube showing Edwards meticulously flipping his floppy hair to the tune of "I Feel Pretty." It has been viewed nearly 400,000 times - meaning he has the most famous mane since Fabio. So what did Edwards do...he hired a fancy Beverly Hills stylist to do his "do" to the tune of $400.
Not only did this solidify his Breck Girl reputation, it upended his important message that the growing gap between rich and poor is creating "two Americas." You know, the one America that goes to Super Cuts and the other that spends $400.
Personally, I don't have a problem with a self-made millionaire spending lavishly on grooming. After all, he earned his money and can spend it in any way he sees fit. No, this is more about enormously poor judgment that makes me question his fitness to be president. After all, it should not take a team of political consultants to tell him that a $50 limit on a hairdo might be a good idea until after the election.
Edwards' faux pas was reminiscent of John Kerry windsurfing at the very moment he was trying to convince Joe Six Pack that he wasn't an elitist.
If Edwards seemed out of touch, Sen. John McCain has lately seemed out of his mind. Last week, he butchered the Beach Boys hit Barbara Ann by crooning "Bomb, Bomb, Bomb Iran," but was recently oblivious to the bomb, bomb, bombs, detonating in Iraq while he made that silly walkabout in a hapless Baghdad market.
McCain ought to sell his 2000 campaign bus, the "Straight Talk Express" to Mitt Romney, who is desperate to court social conservatives. I can picture Romney traversing America, waving from the bus, chortling, "This is the Straight Talk Express, no gay talk here."
Romney has had his own problems, like his last minute membership in the NRA and pretending he is a real hunter. The truth is, the only thing of note he’s ever shot is the bull and his experience with "big game" is relegated to his efforts to trick the right wing into supporting his flip-flopping, Johnny-come-lately candidacy.
Meanwhile, Hillary Clinton showed she is amoral when she could not say whether homosexuality was immoral in response to anti-gay comments from Peter Pace, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. After checking the polls, consulting with consultants and sticking here finger in the wind, Hillary made amends with the gay community. Sometimes, Hillary looks so canned she could be part of an Andy Warhol painting. If she wants to beat Barack Obama, she's going to have to leave the talking points behind and start talking like her candidacy actually has a point.
In a way, I feel bad for the candidates. The campaigns are excruciatingly longer than they used to be and in the past twenty years there has been a proliferation of news channels. This means more interviews, which increases opportunities for gaffes. There was also a time when candidates campaigning in small towns could relax. If they messed up, the damage was locally contained. Now, with cell phone cameras and YouTube, if you screw up in an Iowa farm of hogs, you are instantaneously ripped to shreds on countless blogs. A candidate always has to be on or he or she will turn off voters.
The age of the political hero is over. There is no way a normal human being can withstand shadowing by multimedia for two years and not look downright human in the end. Perhaps, this is a positive development, as we may finally stop lionizing our leaders, only to be let down in the end.
Last week, I was within a hair of endorsing Edwards until he got the haircut. With primary voters looking eagerly towards Judgment Day at the polls, the candidates that may ultimately prevail are the ones who actually show a modicum of common sense and good judgment.
27 Comments:
I read this article via Rex Wockner, and I have to say that I'm deeply disappointed. Is there ANYTHING going on in your life that isn't a few molecules deep? The Republicans issue their shallow, crappy attack-plans, and you, some guy who has a blog and a soapbox to reach the public, vomit them forth like a good little lackey. You covered every single, petty, low-IQ bullet point, and added NOTHING new to the discussion. This whole thing sounds like some bitchy little queen having a spazz-attack in the local gay rags. Our country is being overtaken by amoral thugs, and you're being a pissy queen. Try this: Act your age, do some IN-DEPTH analysis, share a grownup series of opinions that weren't pre-manufactured for you, and quit wasting valuable space!
posted by Papa Tony, at
4/26/2007 1:59 AM
I'm not enamored by any of the three democratic candidates, none of whom believe in full equality for LGBT voters, maybe its not politically expedient for them to really come out and tell us what they really believe in as far as we're concerned, but lets not forget that Clinton had to be prodded to take a stand on Gen. Pace's abominable commentary, that gays are immoral. Edwards at least publicly disagreed with Pace's statement, but he still does not support full equality. Voting for any of them just to get rid of Bush is one thing, but does anyone really believe that once a democrat takes the White House that we're going to get anywhere? I don't think so. Its going to be more of the same!
"Last week, I was within a hair of endorsing Edwards until he got the haircut."
So it worked. You've bought into the stupidity and Edwards goes down. You ought to be proud of yourself. Gay people really do care more about their hair - even other people's hair - than they do about real issues. Thanks Wayne
posted by Anonymous, at
4/26/2007 9:34 AM
I agree with you Wayne that the Edwards' team showed poor political judgment with the haircut fiasco. However, I also see Robert's point that Edwards has vocalized more support for LGBTQ rights than either Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama.
In the end, we should not be so quick to jump on the negativity bandwagon. Tonight we will see how the candidates do during the first debate.
Substance, articulating the issues and the ability to make a good impression in this type of atmosphere will be more telling of an Edwards' candidacy than his supposed obsession with his hair.
posted by Anonymous, at
4/26/2007 11:37 AM
So we must all sit and still consider who to vote for in the 2008 elections. The worse of numerous evils. I agree that it will be "more of the same" regardless of who gets in at this point. However, the "hair thing" and Edwards is pretty petty. I know a lot of individuals (men - straight and gay) who would never trust their hair to "supercuts" or any such bargain shop. It doesn't mean there is anything wrong with someone who goes to Supercuts, but also means that there is nothing wrong with someone who goes to a salon.
I think Edwards needs to focus on the future generations and what they want. These politicians talk about the future generations and doing what it best for them. That is bullshit! The future generations are less homophobic and much more peace minded then the generations of these old farts who are in office. Edwards own daughter told him that he needs to get with the program relating to gay marriage and stated that all of :that" would change when her generation moved into office. How telling! Did he listen ? Apparently not! That was the voice of the generation that "they" are protecting and he didn't even listen .. it was his own family member.
I was married in Toronto last year to my wonderful partner. What a difference in cultures! They do have their issues as well with people who do not agree with their legislations on marriage and gay adoption, but at least the government of Canada has balls big enough to say, we understand your disagreement, but your bibles must stay in your churches and OUT of public policy.
We just traveled to Spain and what a great community they have and are also free to marry. The scary part is that Spain and other European countries have SO many more years of history and experience than the U.S. has ... let's hope we can begin to learn from other countries and stop experimenting and recreating the wheel like we are when it comes to allowing religious zealots to run the country. These peoples ancestors fled this type of religious oppression and founded the U.S., but now it is a different story and not a problem now that they are the oppressors.
Oh well, sometimes you just don't want to get out of bed. We are considering moving to Canada in the next 3 to 5 years .. and I know some will take issue and say we should stay and fight for the cause, but .. we are 43 years of age and want to have hapiness in our lives before we get too old to enjoy it! Let's hope something happens in 3-5 years in the U.S. that will make it worth our while. It would be nice to trabel abroad and not be embarrassed to call ourselves Americans.
posted by Anonymous, at
4/26/2007 11:47 AM
Personally, I care much more about Edwards' platform and his ideas than I do about his hair. The $400 haircut "scandal" is nothing more than Edwards' opponents trying to find anything they can to denigrate him. So he paid $400 for his stylist to come to him to do his hair. I seriously couldn't care less. If we allow such trivial things to decide who our candidate will be, then the idea of true democracy is nothing more than a legend of ancient times.
Thom, I'm with you when it comes to considering a move to Canada. I've been a gay activist since the late 60s and when I look around and see how other countries are racing ahead of us on equality issues, I'm not that hopeful about our own society, whether there's a republican or a democrat in the White House. Who would have thought Spain of all countries would have legalized gay marriage? Even our closest ally, the UK has legalized some mirror image of marriage in the form of Civil Partnerships that entail all of the rights and privileges of marriage without the name, applicable across the UK. If they can do that, so can we, its a start at least. What is so disheartening is that married couples in the state of Massachusetts still do not enjoy any of the 1138+ federal rights and privileges that their heterosexual counterparts take for granted. Of interest is that in Spain and the UK, there is state religion, truly amazing and governments of both countries were able to pass legislation without any problem. What is more amazing is that Tony Blair stated that passing legislation giving more equality to the LGBT community has made society a lot better. I doubt if we'll ever hear our leaders saying anything comparable, and we purport to be the most progressive society on this planet. In truth, we're not and never will be when it comes to social issues. Meanwhile, we languish under this current regime, our unalienable rights being denied us based on religious bigotry and hatred of our community. I don't see much change happening if and when a Democrat takes the White House in 2008 either. Our civil rights and promotion thereof are not politically expedient for any of them and none are prepared to stick their necks out and go that extra mile even after they've been elected. Most politicians prefer the term Civil Unions for our community. Well if that's what they're going to give us, then let them offer it at the federal level so that we can at least benefit from the rights and privileges that our counterparts are accorded when they legally marry. Gov. Spitzer's plans to draft marriage legislation for the Lesbian and Gay community in our state is laudable, but we all know its not going to pass the legislature, sadly. More of the same unfortunately.
Tony, the first commenter: Whoa, "pissy queen", "bitchy little queen","good little lackey"...So which is it? Napoleon complex? Not hugged enough as a child? Over-caffeinated? I have a hard time believing you're actually serious. Are you having some weird attack of the well-known and overplayed hipster irony?
posted by Anonymous, at
4/26/2007 4:59 PM
the point, bitchez, is the lack of Edwards's judgement in getting the $400 haircut in his America and conveniently forgetting about the $20 haircut in my America, not the haircut itself. It seriously undermines his by-any-standards admirable "Two Americas" platform. Someone who grew up in a shack or whatever then rose to fortune then fame ought not to forget their origins when dealing with the little people. A $400 haircut is as out-of-touch as Bush 41's bewilderment over a barcode scanner at a supermarket.
Frankly I'm tired of being ruled by rich people.
posted by 42, at
4/26/2007 10:09 PM
I would like to know if Edwards knew he was being filmed--and if he did, how could he not know that it would be used against against him? My other point, is that this country is still too sexist and racist to elect a woman or a man of color. It's sad to say, but if the Dems want the oval office back, they'd better run a white man again. If anyone can snatch defeat from the jaws of victory, it's the feckless Democrats. And to the last poster--unfortunately the masses have always been ruled by the rich; and that taint gonna change anytime soon.
posted by Anonymous, at
4/27/2007 8:02 AM
I think you silly queers are just upset because you are all a bunch of hairdressers and you are afaid that people are going to revolt and make you lower your stupid high prices.
When real men used to cut hair in barber shops, the price was normal. Then, the queers took over the shops, painted the walls and raised the prices. Now, things have gotten so bad, that you have recruited straight men to get $400 hiarcuts.
This is the real gay agenda. Thanks guys!
posted by Anonymous, at
4/27/2007 10:42 AM
Anonymous, whoever you are, maybe you need to come out and accept who you are! What are you doing here on a gay website anyway? Pruriently interested perhaps? Its clear you have some serious issues going on in your life and you need to get over them and get a life. Quit the morally superior attitude just because you consider yourself straight! You're anything but superior and oh so insecure! Jealous or upset?
Oh, that's right - if someone criticises gays then they must be gay themselves. Oh, brother!
Right on. Gays are not to be taken to task for their silliness. Get over the haircut!
posted by Anonymous, at
4/27/2007 11:15 AM
It's not the criticism of gays, it's the fact that you're spending time on this website: fee fi fo fellow--i smell curious yellow!!!
posted by Anonymous, at
4/27/2007 1:51 PM
Anonymous, saying you're "exgay" is admitting that you're really gay. "Exgays" haven't changed same sex attractions into opposite sex attractions, they've just repressed themselves and have only changed what they call themselves, not their orientation.
posted by Priya Lynn, at
4/28/2007 12:32 AM
I wonder if there are any ex-heterosexuals! Can NARTH provide any evidence to support the notion that one can also convert an heterosexual to homosexuality?
Anonymous, if you claim to be ex-gay, then why does it bother you that much to come to a gay website in the first place? If you were that secure about your newly found heterosexuality, why waste your energy here. Shouldn't you be in church or group therapy wherever you go to help your fellow ex-gays adjust to their new orientation? What do you think about when you're having sex with women, assuming you can perform that well?We here are fully adjusted and happy I might add. Have a good life assuming you have one!
The only 'myth' is that "ex-gays" exist. Our position comes from the sciences of psychiatry and psychology. Yours comes from wishful thinking and religious quackery. And spare us the bullshit that you're here to support our rights--we dont need it! You're here because you havent left your old (gay) world behind---and you never will!! B. Queer
posted by Anonymous, at
4/28/2007 9:44 AM
B. Queer, with you on that. What is so transparent is that NARTH et al have never had any of their research if you could call it that, let alone methods published in any of the scientific literature, not one, yet they make these ridiculous claims of conversion by praying away the gay orientation with the help of aversion therapy. Its laughable!. Definitely quack therapy and many of them have been discredited because of it. Has anyone ever tried to pray away the heterosexual?
I'm not one to tell people who to vote for, but I just watched a debate with D-Chris Dodd and R-Sam Brownback on social issues such as same sex unions, I just have to say after listing to Brownback, if he becomes president, I'm moving to Canada, it's true some Democrats may seem disapointing in helping the glbt community but we can't afford to get someone on thier moral highhorse like Brownback in office.
posted by Anonymous, at
4/28/2007 9:55 PM
Who is this sad freak show who keeps inserting ex-gay into every post? This is about Edwards and the presidential race.
Why would a person bring ex-gay into it, unless they were so consumed with trying to change that that is the only thought they are able to think. Gee, talk about a pathetic brainwashed sap.
Nice work Wayne! BTW, have you seen extremist Guy Adams' new website www.ValuesUSA.net -- apparently it's some new coalition made up of many of the anti-gay "pro-family" groups in the country. There's some pretty hateful stuff there. What do you think? Rick. "LeftWingWarrior" Chicago
posted by LeftWingWarrior, at
4/29/2007 1:45 PM
Wayne, thanks for deleting the creep. Can we say L-O-S-E-R???
Jill, the reason why Anonymous persists in bringing "ex-gay" into every comment is that its quite obvious he's still gay. Why would anyone like that bother coming to a gay website in the first place? He's outnumbered anyway. We're often accused of shoving our sexuality down heterosexual throats as if it were an agenda, something they like to use against us, but in reality it is they, the socalled ex-gays with the agenda. They know deep down its not working and they're mostly all delusional and in denial about a lof of things.
Anonymous, whoever you are, male/female/bi/transgender, you are so wrong. This IS a gay website by default. If it weren't owned and run by a gay man, then you would be correct. As for your contention that this site is full of "exaggerated or hysterial things about ex-gays", that is a ludicrous statement. You and your fellow socalled ex-gays' conversion has been debunked by the American Medical and Psychiatric Association since there is no scientific proof or evidence in the establishment literature to document yours and your organizations' claims. If you have the proof, why can't you or they provide it with sound scientific evidence in the form of a structured scientific study and setting over a long period of time? Prove that you can convert an heterosexual to homosexual via the same prayer and aversion therapy, then you might have some credibility. The truth of the matter is, you can't.
What a joke for suckers who just don't have what it takes as human beings to be their true and natural selves. They are the Uncle Toms of the modern age.
posted by Anonymous, at
4/30/2007 1:53 PM
