Don’t look now, but the Washington Post is on the hair beat again. Washington Post’s fashion writer Robin Givhan had this 500-word piece in yesterday’s A Section about a certain former governor’s perfect locks.
Romney has been accused of having anchorman hair — the kind of glossy perfection that lies neat and immobile atop the heads of men such as NBC’s Brian Williams and movie land’s Ron Burgundy. The comparison is not meant as a compliment.
The historical record includes photos of Romney surrounded by those of lesser locks walking into the wind. Everyone else’s face is lashed by their hair; Romney’s hair remains as tidy as a Ken doll’s. When he ran with the Olympic torch in 2006, his hair remained frozen in place. Before the airing of his sweat-soaked-hair ad, the last time Romney’s silken strands moved appeared to have been Oct. 10, 1994, at a Columbus Day parade in Worcester, Mass., when a mighty wind nudged them ever . . . so . . . slightly.
And on and on it went. Givhan, who has also been overly-fascinated with Hillary Clinton’s pantsuits and cleavage, not only scrutinized the quality and appearance of Mitt Romney’s hair, she parlayed this overwrought analysis into a political examination, explaining what voters will think (and expect) from a candidate’s coiffure.
Worse, the WaPo followed it up with yet another reference to — you guessed it — John Edwards’ hair.