About us Login Get email updates
Research
Print

NY Times rehashed Pres. Clinton haircut myth

February 09, 2007 5:45 pm ET
image

50 Comments

In a February 9 article, The New York Times reported on the uproar over House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's (D-CA) access to a military aircraft to fly nonstop between Washington, D.C., and her home district in California, noting the Republican effort to portray Pelosi "as a luxury-loving San Franciscan." The Times asserted that "the dispute illustrates that politicians are acutely aware that a jet-setting image can be dangerous," adding that "President Bill Clinton spent a long time living down the tale of his haircut on Air Force One as flights were delayed at Los Angeles International Airport, even though there is dispute over whether other planes were affected." In fact, there exists no "dispute over whether other planes were affected" -- the claim that Clinton's haircut delayed air traffic at LAX or elsewhere is flatly disproved by Federal Aviation Administration records, as reported more than 13* years ago.

As Media Matters for America has noted, the media have uncritically repeated baseless and disputed allegations from congressional Republicans regarding Pelosi and her access to military aircraft and have ignored their own role in perpetuating the GOP-fueled "controversy."

According to the February 9 Times article by congressional reporter Carl Hulse:

The attention to the dispute illustrates that politicians are acutely aware that a jet-setting image can be dangerous, particularly given the travails of modern travel for average Americans.

President Bill Clinton spent a long time living down the tale of his haircut on Air Force One as flights were delayed at Los Angeles International Airport, even though there is dispute over whether other planes were affected.

This claim, however, is completely false. According to a June 30, 1993, Newsday article headlined, "Bill's Coif: The Myth; Runway trim delayed no one":

The story was that planes were kept circling as President Bill Clinton had his hair clipped on Air Force One at Los Angeles airport last month.

The runway haircut by Beverly Hills stylist Cristophe became such a metaphor for perceived White House arrogance that the president himself felt compelled to apologize for the reported flight delays.

But the reports were wrong.

According to Federal Aviation Administration records obtained through the Freedom of Information Act, the May 18 haircut caused no significant delays of regularly scheduled passenger flights - no circling planes, no traffic jams on the runways.

Commuter airlines that fly routes reportedly affected by the president's haircut confirmed they have no record of delays that day.

The FAA records, generated by the regional Air Route Traffic Control Center, show that an unscheduled air taxi flight had the only delay attributed to the closure of two runways for an hour in anticipation of Air Force One's departure. The air taxi took off 17 minutes after leaving the gate -- two minutes late, by FAA accounting.

"If you understand the air traffic system, you'd find that statement [that planes were circling] ludicrous," said Fred O'Donnell, an FAA spokesman at the agency's Western-Pacific regional office, which responded to New York Newsday's May 21 request under the freedom of information law.

O'Donnell said that although two runways were closed, traffic was light that afternoon and arriving flights were simply diverted to the two other runways. "It did not cause any problems," he said.

However, an air-traffic controller union official said the runway closings did increase the workload in the control centers. "If you close two runways, you take away 50 percent of the capacity and increase the complexity by 100 percent," said Karl Grundmann, regional vice president for the union.

O'Donnell said the FAA records an arrival delay if controllers take any action to slow traffic approaching the airport, such as having the pilot circle the airport. A departure delay is recorded whenever it takes an aircraft more than 15 minutes to take off after having pushed off from the gate.

During the uproar over the haircut, an unidentified FAA spokesperson was quoted in wire service reports as saying that a flight from Yuma, Ariz., to Los Angeles was delayed 25 minutes, a flight arriving from Palmdale, Calif., was delayed 17 minutes and several other flights were delayed about 10 minutes. No airlines were identified, but these details were widely repeated by news media, including New York Newsday.

In fact, even Republican attacks on Pelosi as reported by the media -- the Times wrote that Republicans accused her "of putting on royal airs" -- echo Republican attacks on Clinton in 1993. In a May 21, 1993, article on the haircut, the Boston Globe reported that Republicans accused Clinton of having an "apparent regal attitude."

From the February 9 Times story:

Republicans, accusing Ms. Pelosi of putting on royal airs, on Thursday stepped up their campaign to portray her as a luxury-loving San Franciscan because her cross-country travel could require a larger military jet than the one used since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks to ferry Speaker J. Dennis Hastert home to Illinois.

[...]

"I hardly think these amenities help with security, and I personally would describe them as inappropriate and unnecessary extravagances," said Representative Eric Cantor of Virginia, chief deputy Republican whip.

From the May 21, 1993, Globe story, headlined, "Presidential style; Air traffic waits for Beverly hills haircut":

But Republican critics seized the moment, blasting the populist president's apparent regal attitude.

"He ought to be more concerned about trimming the deficit than trimming his hair," scolded Rep. Dan Burton, Republican of Indiana, in remarks on the House floor yesterday.

And Ed Rollins, a veteran GOP strategist, called it "the ultimate arrogance."

*Correction: The original item said "more than 15 years ago." We regret the error.
Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by DorisRussell (February 09, 2007 6:34 pm ET)
         

      Media Matters is wrong

      In fact, there exists no "dispute over whether other planes were affected" -- the claim that Clinton's haircut delayed air traffic at LAX or elsewhere is flatly disproved by Federal Aviation Administration records, as reported more than 15 years ago.

      Sorry , 1993 was  not 15 years ago so that would not have been disproven by the FAA more than 15 years ago.

      Also, so what this is a joke and this country has bigger issues than this.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by therick (February 09, 2007 7:03 pm ET)
           

        True, so why did the NY Times bring it up?

        Report Abuse
        • Author by DorisRussell (February 09, 2007 8:43 pm ET)
             

          The NYT Brought it up because they are trying to create a mountain out of a molehill.

          My point is MMFA needs to be accurate with dates and times, over 15 years ago Bush SR was President.

          Report Abuse
          • Author by mefirst (February 09, 2007 8:48 pm ET)
               

            then why "so what"? isn't that what this site does? point our inaccurate stories?

            Report Abuse
            • Author by DorisRussell (February 09, 2007 8:53 pm ET)
                 

              MMFA was inaccurate in its opening statement that this was dismissed more than 15 years ago, shouldnt this site be correct in dates and times?

              Report Abuse
              • Author by mefirst (February 09, 2007 8:55 pm ET)
                   

                sure, correction noted. now explain the so what remark.

                Report Abuse
                • Author by DorisRussell (February 09, 2007 8:56 pm ET)
                     

                  not sure what you mean by "so what" remark, and you be more clear?

                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by mefirst (February 09, 2007 9:00 pm ET)
                       

                    "also, so what this is a joke and this country has bigger issues than this". that so what remark.

                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by DorisRussell (February 09, 2007 9:02 pm ET)
                         

                      the story is a joke, its GOP inflamed , I dont understand what you problem is with that statement? Are you defending the GOP and are you defending this silly story? Sure sounds like it.

                      Notice how mefirst plays games and attacks and twists things? I never bought mefirst's act. Keep spewing the GOP talking points. 

                      Report Abuse
                      • Author by mefirst (February 09, 2007 9:08 pm ET)
                           

                        "also mmfa, this is a silly story. why are we discussing it?" you, on the luntz thread. we are discussing it because it is a "gop talking point", which you are saying we should ignore. i'm not the one doing their work by suggesting we ignore it.

                        Report Abuse
                        • Author by DorisRussell (February 09, 2007 9:14 pm ET)
                             

                          if you dont see that this is a silly story, made up by GOP ers that you are really a GOPer. I guess you feel Rep Pelosi should not have security?

                          Why are you defending that loser Luntz? To me that means your a Republican who hates Pelosi. I hope I am wrong because you have in the past made some intelligent posts, but tonight they seem twisted and hateful toward Pelosi and they seem pro story.

                          Report Abuse
                          • Author by mefirst (February 09, 2007 9:16 pm ET)
                               

                            could you show me anywhere that i defended luntz?

                            Report Abuse
                            • Author by DorisRussell (February 09, 2007 9:17 pm ET)
                                 

                              could you show me where I defended this story?

                              Report Abuse
                              • Author by mefirst (February 09, 2007 9:48 pm ET)
                                   

                                i made no such comment. you, however, did say i was defending luntz. show me and everyone else where i did that.

                                Report Abuse
                                • Author by DorisRussell (February 10, 2007 7:35 am ET)
                                     

                                  show me and everyone where I said I defended this story? You lie and everyone caught it. It seemed to me you just wanted to start a fight and change the subject instead of having an educated discussion on this topic.

                                  Report Abuse
                                  • Author by mefirst (February 10, 2007 7:57 am ET)
                                       

                                    really, you just wanted to have a discussion? that's why i quoted you from both this story and the luntz story saying we should not be discussing either one because they're "silly" and a "joke".

                                    Report Abuse
                                    • Author by DorisRussell (February 10, 2007 8:36 am ET)
                                         

                                      why have you continued to defend this story ?

                                      Report Abuse
                                      • Author by mefirst (February 10, 2007 9:19 am ET)
                                           

                                        you can continue to deflect all you want. you said that i "lie". you claimed at 914pm that i was "defending that loser luntz" and that my posts "seem twisted and hateful toward pelosi". i made no statements that said or even came close to implying that, and you cannot produce them. it's clear who's the liar.

                                        Report Abuse
                                        • Author by DorisRussell (February 10, 2007 9:29 am ET)
                                             

                                          you refuse to answer the question as to why you dont feel the Pelosi story is silly? You wont denounce the story as silly. Its not a lie. Keep playing games, its saturday no one will care.

                                          Report Abuse
                                          • Author by mefirst (February 10, 2007 9:41 am ET)
                                               

                                            tick..tick..tick. that's your time and credibility on this site, ticking away.

                                            Report Abuse
                                            • Author by DorisRussell (February 10, 2007 9:42 am ET)
                                                 

                                              my credibility and views have been established and are well known. You wont answer the question, that is your right. You want to defend the GOP lies that is your right.

                                              Report Abuse
                                              • Author by mefirst (February 10, 2007 9:46 am ET)
                                                   

                                                i said we should be discussing the stories. you said we shouldn't bother because they're silly and a joke. do you deny saying that?

                                                Report Abuse
                                              • Author by Brabantio (February 10, 2007 9:49 am ET)
                                                   

                                                Doris, you are losing credibility.  Mefirst is not defending GOP talking points. 

                                                You...are...confused.  I'm not trying to be mean, it's just obviously true.  You have no idea what you're talking about.

                                                Take some deep breaths and re-read and get a hold of yourself, please.

                                                Report Abuse
                                                • Author by mefirst (February 10, 2007 9:54 am ET)
                                                     

                                                  brab, i've said about doris from the beginning that she's just on here to disrupt. pretend she agrees and then make all these posts about how this story or that shouldn't be on here or even discussed. i could wrong, but i don't think so.

                                                  Report Abuse
                                                  • Author by DorisRussell (February 10, 2007 10:13 am ET)
                                                       

                                                    as I stated yesterday mefirst,  you have the right to think what you want. I just find it stange that you keep attacking me about the Luntz story, a man i find disgusting , and you wont answer the question that I asked. Is the Pelosi story silly? Its a simple question. Instead you keep making accusations against me. You really sound like a GOPer

                                                    Report Abuse
                                                    • Author by mefirst (February 10, 2007 10:19 am ET)
                                                         

                                                      people can read this exchange and the one on the luntz thread between us, and make up their minds.

                                                      Report Abuse
                                                      • Author by DorisRussell (February 10, 2007 10:22 am ET)
                                                           

                                                        Yes they can, I think most will not care and see this as a childish discussion.

                                                        Report Abuse
                                                        • Author by mefirst (February 12, 2007 6:52 am ET)
                                                             

                                                          i know. and just like your pal tommy, you're on here with the first post and calling this a "joke" and we should be discussing bigger issues. sound familiar?

                                                          Report Abuse
                                                • Author by DorisRussell (February 10, 2007 10:11 am ET)
                                                     

                                                  Bra- That again is your right to believe that. I believe the Pelosi story is silly, its obviously a GOP talking point, how is that being confused? mefirst somehow refuses to even answer the question, its a silly story made up by the GOP, I dont understand what the issue is.

                                                  Report Abuse
                                                  • Author by Brabantio (February 10, 2007 10:32 am ET)
                                                       

                                                    And nowhere has mefirst defended the story.  You seem to get caught up in these false either-or mindsets, and don't explain yourself very well at all.  Make an effort to make yourself understood, and stop making so many assumptions, and you'll get along much better here.

                                                    Report Abuse
                                              • Author by Easy to refute wingnuts (February 10, 2007 4:01 pm ET)
                                                   

                                                "my credibility and views have been established and are well known."

                                                -----

                                                Yes, they have, Doris. Just not in the way you think they have, You deflect every question and post in a trollish manner.

                                                You said this story was a joke. Mefirst said this is a GOP talking point that has been rejuvenated over and over again. MMFA first stated 15 years ago, then posted a correction.

                                                The story of Clinton's haircut impeding air traffic is, in fact, a joke. The fact that the So-Called Unbiased Media (SCUM) still reports it as having a modicum of truth is not jfunny in the slightest.

                                                Report Abuse
                                                • Author by CaseySpring (February 10, 2007 5:02 pm ET)
                                                     

                                                  You are right about everything, but someone who is obviously pro Clinton, pro Pelosi is not a troll. You owe Doris an apology.

                                                  Report Abuse
                                                  • Author by DorisRussell (February 11, 2007 1:43 pm ET)
                                                       

                                                    Casey, thankyou however no one needs to aplologize to me. I am not a troll, and i despise that word as I have stated in earlier posts.  My support of Speaker Pelosi and the way the right wing and the media used that story to pursue a right wing agenda are the issues.

                                                    Also MMFA - Thank you for correcting the story with the correct dates ;-).

                                                    Report Abuse
                                                • Author by conleytgwinn (February 10, 2007 8:12 pm ET)
                                                     

                                                  Let's hear it for "SCUM"!       "So-Called Unbiased Media" Indeed!

                                                  Easy: 

                                                  I haven't seen that acronym before, so, henceforth, you, I credit - and I will probably use it a lot!

                                                  Report Abuse
      • Author by mefirst (February 09, 2007 7:17 pm ET)
           

        notice how doris sounds just like a certain someone who is constantly posting on here? what's the point? why is this here?  i  never bought her act from the beginning.

        Report Abuse
        • Author by DorisRussell (February 09, 2007 8:43 pm ET)
             

          Mefirst- You are allowed your opinion of me, that what makes this site great. 

          Report Abuse
      • Author by oscar the grouch (February 09, 2007 7:41 pm ET)
           

        Doris, MMFA is correct. No planes were delayed at arrival or departure by President Clinton's haircut over 15 years ago. It would have been impossible for that to have happened.  So their facts are correct in the way they were posted.

        Report Abuse
        • Author by DorisRussell (February 09, 2007 8:41 pm ET)
             

          Oscar the point is its not 15 years ago, 15 years ago was 1992.  Also this story is a made up story by the MSM. 

          Report Abuse
          • Author by oscar the grouch (February 09, 2007 11:05 pm ET)
               

            AH, perhaps, but the way it is posted by MMFA, it is true. No planes were delayed by President Clinton's haircut 15 years ago.  So MMFA can continue their "spotless" record of never being incorrect (even if the posted facts are not based in reality). ;)

            Report Abuse
    • Author by leatherhelmet (February 09, 2007 9:11 pm ET)
         

      There is no way to tell what is the truth.  Today, someone would have posted the actual FAA records. In those days, we had to rely on some reporter's interpretation.

      The partial facts are Clinton did get a haircut from Christophe, no one knows what the haircut cost and we don't know for sure what planes were held up since no one published the records in their totality. Here was the NY Times version:

      "A person familiar with the airport's operation on the day of the visit said that the plane was parked in a secure 'non-movement area' and remained on the ground for 56 minutes, from 4:52 p.m. until 5:48 p.m., while Mr. Clinton got styled.

       

      "This resulted in at least two flights being held up longer than 15 minutes, the threshold requiring an accounting to aviation authorities. Both delays -- one 17 minutes, the other 25 -- were on commuter flights with fewer than 30 passengers. Other, larger craft were delayed too, for less than 15 minutes, because all traffic had to be diverted to the two runways that remained open."

      Report Abuse
      • Author by DorisRussell (February 09, 2007 9:22 pm ET)
           

        dont you think this is really ridiculous? The NYT brings up this bogus story about Bill Clinton, yet the current President has been commander in chief when over 3100 Americans have been killed in his illegal war.  Please tell me what is wrong with America that we spend time talking about the sill Pelosi story, and Anna Nicole Smith and this? Are we doomed?

        Report Abuse
      • Author by HuntingtonBeachLefty (February 10, 2007 1:12 am ET)
           

        A person familiar with the airport's operation

        Ah, thanks, I've always trusted that guy, and understood his need to remain anonymous. Imagine the repercussionsif his delayed plane observations were publicly credited to him.

        Report Abuse
        • Author by laplacian (February 12, 2007 1:19 pm ET)
             

          Excellent point!  We've heard a lot of debate recently about anonymous sourcing.  The chief pro-anonymous source argument has been Watergate. The notion that the alleged haircut story rose to a millionth of one percent of the significance of Watergate is laughable, yet there were some who wanted to dub it "Haircutgate", as I recall.  The refusal of the guy even to go on record about the airport traffic (or the refusal of the reporter even to bother asking him to) should have been a cue to drop the whole story and move on.

          Report Abuse
      • Author by solon (February 10, 2007 1:30 pm ET)
           

        What I read at the time was the tower said no flights except the press plane that travels with Air Force 1 was delayed. Lets suppose your first statement were true. That we cant know for sure now. Then the accusation SHOULD NOT BE MADE.  The burden of proof is on the accuser and it obviously has not been met. This is another undead talking point, no matter how often or completely it is debunked it just keeps coming back because the rightwing likes it and couldnt care less whether or not it is true.

        Report Abuse
    • Author by CaseySpring (February 10, 2007 5:05 pm ET)
         

      My 2 cents

      This type of reporting will continue. The MSM will buy into the Republican talk about Pelosi and Senator Clinton. They will bring up things that happened 13 plus years ago.  I am suprised they dont bring up Dukakis.

      MMFA - Great job on the correction.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by laplacian (February 12, 2007 1:07 pm ET)
         

      My opinions:1. The Pelosi story is silly and irrelevant, regardless of the "facts".2. The Clinton haircut story was equally silly at the time it either did or did not occur, and is monstrously silly being brought up today.  (Shame on you, NYT!) 3. MMFA's arithmetic regarding the time of its occurrence, or lack thereof, was faulty.  So, flog them. Or, thank them for the correction.4. Dorisrussell should not get so exercised and accusatory in general, but especially when such utter trivia is being "discussed".  Or is this  parody?

       

      Report Abuse
    • Author by fantagor (February 12, 2007 1:12 pm ET)
         

      I find it amusing that most the posts on this thread centered on an OBVIOUS typo (15 vs. 13 years ago). Everyone who knows this story, and do mean story, knows it circulated during Clinton's first term as President, what else, since the allegation was that AIRFORCE 1, the President's jet, caused the delays.

      I think Poppa Bush would have been rather miffed if the governor of Arkansas borrowed his ride.

      Report Abuse

my.MediaMatters.org

Login  Sign Up

Push Back

Phone calls, emails and letters from the public do make a difference. Remember that to be effective you must be polite, and professional. Express your specific concerns regarding that particular news report or commentary, and indicate what you would like the media outlet to do differently in the future.