More telling, I believe, is that the Washington Post chose to run the story at all. It tells me that the Post no longer views Edwards as a viable candidate. Thus written off, the Post may now air these kinds of stories, which they'll use later to insulate themselves from charges of treating Democrats with kid gloves.

Seriously, I really view this as the Post signaling the Edwards' candidacy is now "over."

For what Edwards is spending on fancy haircuts, he could get Floyd the Barber to travel in the Edwards ahn-tore-agh.

Nice work everybody, shifting the focus from that "there are poor people in America" nonsense. As if!

"This has to cost Edwards politically."

Yes it may well, with no small thanks due to journalistic efforts such as this, produced by the notoriously liberal-biased Washington Post (chuckle). Or, since the author of this piece wasn't on the MSNBC list of news people who gave to political campaigns, I guess it's safe to assume that he doesn't have any bias??

Craig S: I think it's safer to bet that this chap is a Hillary or an Obama partisan.