Actually the questions asked of Martinez sound a whole lot like those planeted questions for Hillary. For your edification, Edwards' so called "protectionist policies" will end outsourcing, the favorite Republican tool to inflate stock portfolios at the expense of all Americans whom they hope will then have to join the military so they have more lives to sacrifice on illegal endless wars.

Please if you are going to try and offer such BS about Republicans know what you are writting about.

Has anyone noticed that a draft-dodger trumps a decorated Vietnam Veteran for president? Has anyone noticed that the only monogamous Republican candidate for 2008 is Mormon? Has anyone noticed that a family-values evangelical has embraced a thrice-married philanderer for president? All of those subtle distinctions have been obscured by the fog emanating from our possibly intelligent but definitely simple-minded president. Somehow, ordinarily intelligent Americans, are buying nonsense when qualified leadership is being offered. Obama, Clinton, Edwards are competent, thoughtful, capable-of-complex-thought leaders. Why would anyone choose a Bushie-me-to candidate?

From the article:

"What about Abraham Lincoln? Greatest all-time White House tenant, square as could be."

Greatest?? Over 600,000 American's dead on their own soil and you call him the GREATEST? No use in reading the rest of the column after that as your perspective is obviously skewed beyond repair.

This is uncanny - just linked from Andrew Cohen's Bench Conference where he praised Sandra Day O'Connor's grace upon learning hubby's in love with another woman. If Mr. Martinez can't comprehend the difference between fidelity and infidelity, keeping a marriage together and breaking one up, tossing aside a spouse and standing by one, leaving a child behind and staying for a child's sake, he ought not to be allowed out of his house, much less online writing for WaPo. Please, WaPo? We need an editor here.

More facile witty crapola.

Issues, and how the candidates will deal with them. That's what I want to read in a newspaper.

It's easy to be a smart ass. It's tough to write without an ego and a bit of wisdom.

Andres: time to grow !!!

-- stan

I agree with the posters who question why this is even published.

Also, I would like Ms. Howell to know that in the future I will immediately discontinue reading any article containing the word 'mantra.' Unless its about meditation.

This Andres Martinez is like the loud drunken obnoxious a-hole at a party who makes rude personal remarks about the other guests and then when called on it claims "that was just a joke".

The Post wants to keep up focus of American politics on haircuts and cleavage rather than on the economy, Iraq or the Constitution. So it starts this stupid column and then when challenged on it says its just 'humor'

I agree with Helena. I don't think Hillary has had a messy personal life. Here husband cheated on her. How is that her fault?

As far as $400 haircuts. Think of it this way. Someone earned $400 to pay his rent and buy food. Edwards has a 10 million dollar house. Think of how many people worked and earned money building that house. Maybe they would have been unemployed if he hadn't hired them.

He has money. What's he supposed to do with it? Give it away? Sit on it?

Wow, what an a-hole!

Wow. Can the Post's coverage get any more vapid? Please get rid of this nonsense.

A presidential candidate should be someone who gets the voters excited about having the exceptionally qualified candidate
lead the nation into a better place than it is now.The ideal is not a candidate that does not have the moral fiber to dismiss a husband who has asked to be released from a bad marriage (Bill asked Hillary for a divorce before becoming president...she balked)and then gone on to do the unthinkable. The character question is why did she stay in this perverse marriage? It is not that Bill had not had numerous affairs and drunken bouts with women outside the marriage in Arkansas. No amount of posing as a happy family in public now can blind the public to that. As for the republican smear machine, one cannot blame Bill's LIES to the American people about his immoral behavior on that. The only "smear" visible was on the infamous blue dress. Bill did that all by himself.There are countless moral American women who have left unfaithful husbands, and Hillary's behavior sickens them. Giuliani is checkered-there are questions about his choice of partners and judgments, but he did say that while he might have screwed up on some things, his dedication to the job could not be questioned. In a toss up between Hillary and Giuliani, he would be favored. He has not put forth a boondoggle of a healthcare plan doomed for failure and cost the American taxpayers the millions and millions spent on her half-baked idea. No, I do not want someone like that making economic and foreign policy decisions.Let her do what she is good at: raising one child stigmatized by a mother so ambitious that she looks the other way and a father who wished he were with someone else.Romney is the right candidate. He shows good judgment, moral fiber, right accomplishments, and all the good stuff that we look for in a candidate. About the only thing that we would want to know is, what kind of job permits for foreigners is he favoring (we do not want half of India- and extended family entourages- here as engineers and convenience store workers) and whether he plans to flood Washington with mormons.The other candidates are also ran(s)...Obama ought to just start his nonprofit and work with the poor.Edwards can spend his enormous wealth having as many expensive haircuts as he wants-he earned the money to pay for them and that's OK.

I don't understand the comment that Obama's longer time in public office versus Clinton's is a silly argument to make. He did some wonderful things in the Illinois legislature, while Hillary accomplished very little all those years as first lady except to make a mess of health care reform. Hillary is just leaning on Bill's experience for her experience. That doesn't make a strong president. Obama's experience is more extensive and most important, it is his.

Well, there was that little pecadillo of Lincoln's - he was so fond of a certain young man that he was known to share his bed with him in the White House. No doubt it was just that 19th century intense friendship thing.

what the hell is this? and why is the Post associated with whatever the hell it is? i'd consider geting rid of it ASAP, before this gets any worse...

There is a difference between making mistakes and fundamental character defects.In the case of Bush and Giuliani,they are definitely belong to the latter case. They are reckless,impulsive,ignorant,bulling,stubborn,weak,and opportunistic. Once you put these type of person in high position, they will abuse the powet and make a mess out of every thing they touch. The Bush administration is good example. Watch out for Giuiani as the president, he would to the same thing if not worse. Can the country afford that to take the chance.

Who gave this idiot a column?

If I wanted to read this biased crap, I'd go to a campaign website.

Who is Andres Martinez and why is he given this platform to write this ridiculous, uninformed crap? Inquiring minds want to know.

Lincoln had some serious problems, including suffering from what was probably clinical depression after he was rejected as a suitor as well as a wife who was probably mentally ill herself. He definitely had a messy personal life, though in a different way from Bill Clinton, JFK, etc.
By the way I'd like to include Lincoln's description of his depression. As a former sufferer from this disease I've never seen it described better:
"I am now the most miserable man living. If what I feel were equally distributed to the whole human family, there would not be one cheerful face on the earth."

'given your candidate's protectionist policies, plenty more mundane things will start costing $400 if he wins, so 400 bucks for a haircut won't seem like such a big deal.'

you are truly a moron. what a waste of bandwidth. not funny, not anything, pure juvenalia.

PLLLEEEASE!! Richard Nixon led an exemplary life!. What planet have you been living on?

Let's review: Hillary has held her marriage together and raised a model daughter to adulthood. Why on Earth should she be lumped together with Giuliani, who has made a complete hash of his personal life?

Lincoln had a pretty wild personal life what with his wife being insane, and losing his son in the middle of the Civil War... also struggled with depression for much of his life.
Probably the mot square of the presidents was "Silent Cal."

The way the candidates lead their personal lives gives us a hint as to how they will lead their public lives. The old argument for Presidents maintaining expemplary personal behaviour was that they could be blackmailed and thus compromised in their public conduct as much as it was based on moral values.,

What's this all about anyway? Is it that now that the shoe is on the other foot, (those ha ha ha, beyond hypocritical, so-called "values voters" the Republicans, and their reprehensible candidates have been revealed to be murderous, immoral hypocrites, the Post is going to start a campaign to overlook personal perverted conduct and let bygones be bygones thus giving Rudy and the rest of the right-wing rapscallions a pass?

An eye for an eye I say, the Clintons were persecuted and impeached by the Republican Smear Machine and the media, Gore and Kerry were persecuted by the same, (Hi Chris, Tim, CNN, need I bother to mention the tacky Republican FoxNews outlet?)

So. now that it's the Republicans' turn you want to change the rules to protect them? NO! they shouldn't be given a pass and yes, they should be justly shredded into tiny little political bits. NO pass for the Republicans.

If Mitt Romney as president were to treat his subjects like he did his defenseless dog, it would be nothing but a continuation of the craven conduct of the George Bush regime.

The worst thing that could happen to this nation would be for another Republican to be elected president. If that happene, we will never learn the depts of depravity that this regime has sunk to and boy, does that worry Georgie. Another Republcian president would be a disaster beyond our wildest imaginations.

Some like to say Clinton was distracted when Republicans were going after him. However, he did strategically bomb Iraq not long before he left office and WMD's were never found by Bush. Of course when he did this Republicans claimed he only did it to take attention off their investigations. Goodness, after all the Republican investigations (when they could have been doing the peoples business) all they could come up with was to attack his personal life because Republican politicians, after all are the party of the highest family, moral values? When Clinton was president other countries were our allies, which means we had more countries willing to stand with us, which equates to more security. We had a truly thriving economy. Wages were far from stagnant as they have been for the past 5 years under total Republican control. One Clinton was good for our country and because I believe behind every good man is a good or better woman; I say we need another Clinton for president to clean up the mess Republicans have created with their best judgment.

Lincoln was not a square. He was subtle, sly and garrulous and was often the profound jester.

The haircut thing was a joke! I'm for Edwards and I laughed. Obama is giving me a feeling like I should give the guy a second look. I'm not a Hillary hater, she's mighty and competent, and the best qualified, but the corporateness of her and the Bush Clinton Bush Clinton thing really offends me.
Sir/Ma'am, don't let the 400$ haircut figure in. Two thirds of the candidates have had 400$ haircuts. I agree its retarded, but in the celebrity world...it happens. Kucinich could get an excellent, shorter, more modern haircut from me for 35$. I take that back; I'll do it for nothing, as I really like the guy.

I cry foul at the John Edwards comments, and I'm not even a supporter of his. Honestly, though, why is his pricey haircut such a topic of derision? Let's see the expense accounts of other candidates, their clothing, shoes, vacation spots. Also, if the poor are waiting for a poor guy or gal to champion their cause they're gonna be waiting forever.

Q. As I survey the candidates, how much weight should I give to a messy personal life (Hillary, Rudy) versus an exemplary one (Barack, Mitt)?

I don't see anything in Hillary's personal life that would exclude her from being president--she's been married only once and herself has never committed a public marital indiscretion. I do see a great deal in her professional life--i.e., that she's dishonest, pathologically ambitious, she shares Dick Cheney's geopolitical goals, and she's channeling Karl Rove to run her campaign.

As for Rudy, his public and private lives are so entwined they are difficult to separate--he's shown such very public poor judgement in both. Also, there are his not very well concealed ties to organized crime. You really need to look at the totality of the candidate when you make your decision.

As far as Obama's inexperince he has been right about two things.

We should not treat Pakistan "Musharaf" as if they were the UK.

He was scolded for that and he was 100% right.

Secondly he stated he would talk to the Iranians.

If Americans understood anything about Iran they would know they do not have the capability to make you wear a Burka.

They have the GNP of a state like Indiana.

In other words White America needs to stop being scared of everything they do not understand.

How bad could Saddam be since we sold him the weapons he killed the Kurds with.

After 9/11 he was the second worst person in the world next to Regans favorite freedom fighter Bin Laden.

Republicans created these monsters just like Musharaf.

A messy personal life does have an affect on candidates. Bill Clinton was used as an example. Not only did he betray his wife, he betrayed the poor with his welfare reform and betrayed Gay-Americans when he came to office on a rainbow of Gay pride and then gave us Don't Ask, Don't Tell but to top it off-The Defense of Marriage Act. Betrayal in his life is a pattern that a month in the country just doesn't fix.

Trust is a major issue, especially when voting for a presidential candidate. Considering Hillary's refusal to respond specifically to questions about how to fix Social Security, about illegal immigrants and how to end the war in Iraq, it appears betrayal might be on the offering for those who vote for her and want these issues resolved. It appears that betrayal for the Clintons may be contagious.

I agree that protectionism will raise the price of many things, but haircuts would seem to be naturally immune to foreign competition. It's one of the few services you usually have to get not just domestically, but locally.

Somebody tell me this: Is this column supposed to be funny? Or what? I think it's what...

***************************************************************

This new feature adds absolutely nothing to the Post's
credibility in its political coverage. Mrs Howell is
watching -- best can this column before she notices!

***************************************************************