On its own, the haircut wouldn't have been a big story. It's all about reinforcing previously held notions, in this that case, that Edwards was a vain prettyboy who wasn't nearly as in touch with the lower and middle classes as he claimed. Without that previously existing image, the story would have been an embarrassing scandal for a few days but one that would have eventually gone away. I'm not saying that makes it okay, just that it's more than a few reporters or campaign aides acting petty.

I'm shocked that Obama campaign or any Democratic campaign would engage in such pettiness and silliness.

I'm even more shocked a man who knew he had an extramarital affair that produced a child (and what extramarital affairs tend to mean for Democrats) would try to sleaze his way onto a national ticket;

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/ 11/plouffe-shocker-edwards-camp-offered- to-endorse-if-obama-would-pick-him-as-vp .php?ref=fpa

I'm not sure I trust any word that comes out of that man's mouth, even on policy. He could talk a big game, he was never going to get elected President anyway and he knew it.

Hang on, hang on.  The guy who ran the Osama bin Laden ad against Howard Dean in 2004 is the chief spokesman for the Obama White House, and yet you're SHOCKED to learn that the Obama campaign used some frivolous oppo research against a rival?  It's like you're nominating yourself for the Captain Renault Award for Naivete, or something.

The Edwards campaign, of course, was relentlessly about substance and issues.  Who here was enough of a primary junkie to remember the issue-dominated website that was www.plantsforhillary.com, for example?

Come on, this is politics and always will be.

After the Kerry debacle, I am actually heartened to see Democrats using attack politics.

Where those politics went to hide after inauguration, I don't know. But it's good to know they're there.

Is not that Obama (gasp) can play up negative stories about an opponent. It is that even a story which Politico could have gotten by looking at FEC records came from someone else. I honestly do not think the media creates even one in hundred stories, they just pass on press releases and leaks, which are informal press releases.

Well, it's not like the Obama campaign made him get the haircut.  Who was responsible for the 'I'm So Pretty' YouTube?  As someone up-thread noted this story played into a pre-existing narrative about Edwards or it wouldn't have been so damaging.  One of the things I always liked about Obama was that he was a political animal.

And you would have to admit that we dodged a bullet with Edwards.  I notice the Obama campaign didn't touch the Reille Hunter disaster then or now.  I think the haircut story was fair game, frankly.  And it didn't stop Edwards and Obama from tag-teaming Hillary from time-to-time when it suited them.

It is not Obama's fault that the media would pay so much attention to a worthless story. It is Edward's fault that that he risked another four years of republicanism since if he had won the nomination and his indiscretion had come to light in October 08 we would have been screwed.

You must have been pretty die-hard about Edwards, because I never thought the $400 haircut attack was a very effective campaign tactic.  I certainly don't think it derailed his campaign.  I think most Democrats watched him closely during the primaries, took his campaign seriously, decided he wasn't really Presidential material, and opted for Obama or Clinton instead.

That post on the cost of the Edwards haircuts derailed his candidacy.

Edwards' candidacy was failed from the start.  It was laughable from the outset, and all the way along.

I'm shocked that Obama campaign or any Democratic campaign would engage in such pettiness and silliness.  Perhaps I'm just bitter...

I hate to use this word, because it gets thrown around here so much, but this is a clear example of naivete.  

I was a huge Edwards supporter, disappointed when he dropped out (but suspicious) and terribly disgusted by the facts as they were later revealed. However, I wont condemn the man. He screwed up, did  some stupid things mostly to his wife. If she is still with him and perhaps forgiven him, who am I to hold a grudge. Only God can judge.....

Of the 3 candidates, he was on the only one discussing economic populism and the real problems we face with entrenched plutocrats in DC. So, of course, he had to go. He needed to keep it in his pants, but that's a separate issue from what he had to discuss substantively. It was too bad he was a dud.

It's very interesting to me that so many embrace this behavior by the Obama campaign.  What about change?  A new politics?  I think it's disgusting to disparage a primary opponent in this manner.  The intended purpose was to challenge Edwards' masculinity, to label him effete.  That is unconscionable in my mind.  

For those who approve of this behavior, I don't want to hear one howl of injustice when the same is tossed back at Obama.