BBC BLOGS - Justin Webb's America
« Previous | Main | Next »

Presidential hair

Justin Webb | 18:24 UK time, Friday, 21 December 2007

Further to those thoughts about Mitt Romney, I have an insight, I think, into why Congressman Tom Tancredo, the anti-illegal-immigration Republican, has dropped out of the race and endorsed the faltering Romney campaign.

Mr Tancredo gets a haircutYears ago, chatting to the congressman (who is a charming and warm man, one-to-one), he told me he would probably stand in 2008 but that, as he put it, "The job will go to someone with better hair!"

Well, his actions are consistent with that belief...

Mitt Romney's hair is among his most presidential attributes, surely?

Comments   Post your comment

  • 1.
  • At 07:10 PM on 21 Dec 2007,
  • Justin wrote:

I thought John Edwards was the hair candidate - at least that's what Fox are trying to make out anyway.


  • 2.
  • At 07:34 PM on 21 Dec 2007,
  • Foster wrote:

Romney's hair contributes to his image as a used-car salesman.

I think I subconsciously size up a man based on the time he spends on his hair each morning, and that doesn't help Mitt.

But I come from a state whose governor is Rick Perry, a man whose only positive attributes are his hair and his height. So maybe it is important?

  • 3.
  • At 09:31 PM on 21 Dec 2007,
  • Andrea wrote:

Edwards became identified with "hair" after a YouTube video circulated showing him combing and fussing with his hair for several minutes. It was not a flattering video. If you had seen it, you, too, would have concluded that this is a man who spends a lot of time on his hair.

Silly to blame Fox for Edwards' behavior.

  • 4.
  • At 09:32 PM on 21 Dec 2007,
  • Henry Gekonde wrote:

Illegal immigrants help feed this nation of overeaters, pave its roads and build its overpriced houses. Until Tancredo and other Americans come to terms with that sobbering reality, this country will never solve the problem of illegal immigration.

Makes it easy for me. I wont be President, I have a buzz cut. It gets hot in Southern Arizona in the summer LOL!

  • 6.
  • At 12:16 AM on 22 Dec 2007,
  • John Kecsmar wrote:

I think it is a valid point. Image and media "acceptance" does tend to revolve around clean-cut and looking faces, i.e. those with a good head of hair and well groomed.
Same in UK politics...just look at IDS or W.Hague. Hague is an excellent debater, but was ridiculed in the press for being bald.
Questions about is America ready for a woman president, hmmm..it sound be, is anyone ready for a leader that has no hair!
Funny one that...since most MDs and CEOs have little or no hair.

But Edwards has "good" hair -- Romney has a head full, but it's outdated!

  • 8.
  • At 02:22 AM on 22 Dec 2007,
  • Rachel wrote:

I can't help but laugh at all of this - but, wouldn't Hilary be the "hair" candidate?

It's lovely to know a candidate's hair affects how a person votes.

Tom Tancredo is this generation's Paul Revere... "The Mexicans are Coming!, The Mexicans are Coming!"

He has awakened the country to the threat of uncontrolled immigration (see France, England and the rest of Europe).

Now that the alarm has been sounded, he can take a well deserved rest, while the rest of us take up his cause.

Thank You, Tom!

  • 10.
  • At 08:53 AM on 23 Dec 2007,
  • AnonymousCalifornian wrote:

This actually has to do with your ignorant article here">http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/from_our_own_correspondent/7154551.stm>here, supposedly about evangelicals.

a). What makes you believe that Mr. Phelps and co. are evangelicals? Or is that just a term you use for any Christian-themed 'wacko'?

b). Mainstream Protestant denominations in the United States are already similar to their European counterparts. In other words, no longer Christian and basically NGO social programs.

c). What is exactly so absurd about people being Creationists? Bluntly put, technically you can't even be sure the world existed before you were born, much less billions of years ago. A bit extreme, but the point is that at some point you have to accept what other people who you believe to be more knowledgeable than yourself say about dating systems and the age of life and the universe.

If you don't know squat about what you're reporting (as is obvious by your characterization of Creationists and evangelicals--and American society in general) and you are a journalist/correspondent for a major, international news network which people globally rely upon for information on topics they know little about, then you shouldn't report on those topics at all.

You are not living up to your duties, sir.

  • 11.
  • At 02:56 PM on 23 Dec 2007,
  • grampagravy wrote:

It has been my experience that the more time one spends on their outside, the less others are likely to find on the inside.

  • 12.
  • At 10:31 AM on 24 Dec 2007,
  • Rodrigo Calvo wrote:

Dear AnonymousCalifornian,

Technically, you can't even be sure that the world exists now. Maybe the Tweedledumists are right and you, me, and everything about us is just part of the Red King's Dream. Admittedly, I would rather prefer that a movement as dumb as Creationism was just a figment of an old monarch's imagination, but, unfortunately, good, old-fashioned evidence points otherwise, and I'll rather put stock on that that on an old work of fiction.

  • 13.
  • At 12:44 PM on 24 Dec 2007,
  • Andrew wrote:

Has the United States ever elected a bald president?

  • 14.
  • At 01:47 PM on 24 Dec 2007,
  • RS wrote:

I worry more about what's under the hair!

  • 15.
  • At 06:21 PM on 24 Dec 2007,
  • Janice wrote:

Hmmm.... in the case of some candidates, it's a relief that they're hair today, gone tomorrow.

It's a pity for all that Tom Tancredo has retired from the Presidential race. He is a great patriot, and it is good to know that America still produces men like him, who are totally dedicated to preserving our unique nation.

Now only one true friend of American sovereignty remains -- Rep Duncan Hunter. The rest are various flavors of globalist, who believe that the nation must be diminished in order for business to be convenienced.

At least Tom managed to put the issue of borders and immigration enforcement on the table, even though elites of both parties would prefer that the current anarchy remain in place, although for very different reasons.

  • 17.
  • At 07:05 PM on 10 Jan 2008,
  • Teresa Kirk wrote:

Kerry- Obama?


I've got two news articles pasted for anyone that missed it.
I don't think Barack looks real impressed with this development from the picture they used in the articles. Do you think Barack is wondering what Kerry wants with his backing of Obama when he wins the election of delegates for the Presidency. My face would reflect the same if I had someone like Kerry decide to get buddy-buddy with me too. Sorry couldn't help adding that last bit.
But the Kerry Clinton ticket didn't impress me than and they still don't, no matter how they want to change their memory's of history, it just wont wash with me. I have a long memory on how they have run as the Democratic Party. And their visions have not reflected well for the Democratic voter. I want someone in this party to have as much insight and vision as Barack Obama. With Obama honesty. He does not say I will fix it. He says it will take hard work and tanacity for all to fix. Not someone out boost their resume while their looking for a limelight to bask in.
Trying to blame one party for the lost middle income earner is futile. I was considered a middle income wage earner in the 1970's, 80's and 90's. Now I'm part of the two income brackets that's left in our society. After the 80's and 90's increase in wages and cost of living faze out. Then the start of temp work agency's that company hiring made popular because they couldn't sustain the wage increases and new employees coming in with the currant benefits and wage levels in the mid 90's. Profits didn't match the greed of wages. We all fell in that hole together. Cost of living did not reflect well on anyone party or economic cycle.
That is the guilt we all need to share, because by the mid 90's, the youth coming into the work force at that time was about the same as a indentured servant that started this country and it's infrastructure. They were being hired through work force agencies. (like that fraise, work force) The discrepancies in the economy should have taken a more serious look then.
Instead the quick fix, of creating work agencies were invented, which took care of the current wage earners. But by allowing company's to reduce wages and benefits on the new hires their was repercussions that have continued to be ignored. Cost of living has continued to go up. But cost of living wage increase, has never been fazed back in.
So now We are left with an imbalance in the 21 century. And that is being cut down to two levels in society. The Upper Level and the Lower Level. So are there any economist that want to touch this one with a quick fix proposal? I'm left in the lower level income bracket, so I would like one. But something that took thirty years to mess up, might take more than a quick fix without causing heavy tax hikes and the continued fear of Recession.
Recession has been a very real on going possibility since the mid 1990's. And we all know how well that works. Compromise by everyone would probably have a better chance to work.
But who can we trust to lead the negotiations, for both sides?
Our experienced Leaders in these fields have ignored it with federal intervention that have been the quick fixes, but with no substance.
We call this jerry rigging were I come from. But we plan down time to fix the problem, when it will not cause a bottleneck effect. Hmmm, could we teach our leaders a new language and a way to address problem solving, ya think?


Subject: BBC NEWS | Americas | White House battle goes US-wide



http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7180738.stm

Subject: 2004 Dem nominee Kerry endorsing Obama - Yahoo! News



http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080110/ap_po/obama_kerry;_ylt=Aoi65CZpDyE7CvYDEf_9Imqs0NUE

This post is closed to new comments.

BBC iD

Sign in

BBC navigation

BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.