A Third Magazine Cover For The Candidate The Press Loves...

Well, we can't turn Barack Obama into Corbin Bleu and we can't make Hillary Clinton into Vanessa Hudgens, but really, do we need another glossy magazine article about John Edwards? The magazine business says... a-yup.

Rolling Stone has a major profile of Sen. Edwards this month, and the editors saw fit to place the article teaser right next to a beefcake photo of Zac Efron, who stars in Disney's High School Musical franchise. Apparently, Mr. Efron is the tween it boy of the moment.

That makes three the number of magazines that have run major profiles of John Edwards. Men's Vogue got Annie Leibovitz to photograph Edwards and the author rhapsodized about his charms and rugged populism.

Perhaps uncomfortably, given Elizabeth Edwards's recent remarks about her husband's race, Esquire wonders whether a white guy can still be elected president.

Now comes Rolling Stone. These are MSM pubs, really.

Perhaps Hillary Clinton can hold up a picture of the Rolling Stone at the next debate and say that she wouldn't dare let a magazine call her a "liberal" on the cover. And come to think of it. Zac Efron does look a little like a young Johnny E.

Comments

I think John is better looking than the new heart throb, but I am biased.

Posted by Rosie | August 10, 2007 1:47 PM

Hillary will always have her "business luvs hillary" cover on Fortune to think about.

Posted by Outside the Beltway | August 10, 2007 2:22 PM

Men's Vogue, Esquire, and Rolling Stone? These are hardly typical MSM organizations. Call me when Time and Newsweek do covers.

Posted by Dave | August 10, 2007 3:02 PM

Marc, where is you coverage of Romney saying his 5 boys working for his campaign is same as serving in Iraq? Isn't it outrageous to equate serving in the military with helping out in a political campaign?

Also, where is your coverage of Rudy's latest attempt to exploit the memory of 9/11 for political gain? Speaking to reporters in Cincinnati about workers at WTC site, Giuliani said: "I was at ground zero as often, if not more, than most of the workers. ... I was there working with them. I was exposed to exactly the same things they were exposed to. So in that sense, I'm one of them.". Rudy has an underlying contempt for the folks who sacrificed their health and lives during the clean-up process.

So Marc, why are you so fascinated by John Edward's looks, Obama's foreign policy that MSM does not like? But at the same time you totally ignore any negative stories about GOP candidates. Its amazing that you are covering GOP straw poll in Iowa buy conveniently omit these important stories?? Do you have any answers??

Posted by behonest | August 10, 2007 3:37 PM

Yes Marc, why are you trying to silence John Edwards? This man has a long and impressive history of selfless, unrewarded devotion to public service, of great accomplishment in the Senate, and of taking unpopular positions in the face of public opinion when the truth needed to be told, and yet all anyone can ever focus on are his looks and hair. You and the rest of the Establishment may try to keep him down, but his voice will not be silenced!

Posted by Truth 2 Power | August 10, 2007 4:32 PM

given a choice, i'd rather someone who is in Rolling Stone than fortune.
guess who the corporate candidate is???

Posted by vwcat | August 10, 2007 6:57 PM

Still trying to walk back from that one, Ambinder? Obviously when the bloggers complain about the MSM they mean the MSM News media.

Posted by AJ | August 11, 2007 12:48 AM

Indeed yes, Rolling Stone has no corporate ties whatsoever. Good call. And let's all raise a fist against silencing people by talking about them!

Posted by Jamie | August 11, 2007 1:16 AM

All you John Edwards lovers out there need to know just one thing: John E. is a FAKE, PHONY, and a POSEUR who puts up a nice facade. He is another of those "Do as I say, not as I do" kind of guys that wants to unite the 'downtrodden'. I am surprised he doesn't hand out business cards with numbers for his law office on them so that he could maybe pick up some new business while trolling for votes. He wouldn't deign to piss on you if you were on fire unless there was money in it. Now, as for the nimrod (T2P) who remarked on his stellar Senate record; What the hell have you been smokin'? I am from NC and most people here figure he was just taking up space while in office. A quick look at his voting tally shows that he was rarely at work from 2003 on. Out of 57 recorded votes he wasn't even there for 31 of them. To call him useless would be too kind. The reason he didn't run for the Senate again is that he would have lost his ass and his job.

Posted by JF | August 11, 2007 5:13 AM

behonest: we all view things through our own personal lens. What I got out of the same article was that as adults, the 5 sons were allowed to make their own choice about service in an 'All Volunteer' military. He should not have added how they are helping in their way to elect their father because that statement could easily be turned into the kind of offensive remark you point out. I volunteered and served two tours in Vietnam ('65-'68) and am a disabled verteran (that combat disability has much improved over the years - thank's be to God). If Romney's son's help Gov. Romney get elected then I believe they have done a great service for their country because he end that war without creating a disaster there or by asking our troops to cut and run. But neither I nor Romney equate that honorable 'service' with the personal sacrifices made by combat veterans. I think you need to cut him some slack. So, let's be honest.

Posted by VSteven | August 11, 2007 2:58 PM