Toward a Workable Hair Care System
Government economists, in conjunction with the Obama Administration, have now decided we must tackle the struggling hair care industry immediately, even if this requires full nationalization of assets, as it is “too big to fail.”
“Big hair” has long been the fashion icon and has been a basis for American pride, emulated around the world, thanks to the influence of Hollywood.
Who can forget the long locks on our Founders George Washington and Ben Franklin? What would they think about the state of salons in 2009?
And just why do you think they called those Brit political people the Whigs anyway?
With one out of two hair-establishments in one state of distress or another, President Barack Obama has shoved relief – some call it relaxing – to the top of his national agenda, even squeaking out over his great concern about racial equality in the bowling industry.
(Someday, Pennsylvanians must come to terms with this.)
Hairstyle activists are concerned about a loss if individuality under a nationalized system, as a one-size-fits-all approach may result in a perceived lack of diversity among clients. President Obama himself recently commented on Oprah: “All Americans must sacrifice some personal hygiene frills and style in our current hair care crisis.”
“Now is not the time to primp,” he continued.
Insiders know the president has been secretly “blaming Bush” for not dealing with all of this on his watch.
He goes on to further state that people with “fancy hair” are going to become a thing of the past, and that those people probably thought that they were better than anyone else anyway.
It has been uncovered that Democrat strategists wish to bring in low-cost hair dressers and stylists from across the border in order to keep costs down in the proposed federally-funded system, which no doubt will pay out less in salary.
Those in the GOP know that this is but a clever ruse to bolster the Democrat base, as there is an established link between salon workers and Republican antagonism.
However, even effeminate and openly gay stylists claim that there is but a “loose correlation” between their beliefs and the Democrat agenda.
Of course, those investing in hair care insurance have the most to lose. One proposal would set up a system of “bad-hair-banks” and consolidate the poor performers accordingly to facilitate an orderly bankruptcy proceeding.
They should have sold “short,” of course, but that’s 20-20 hindsight, as many shops just failed the administrations stress-tests.
Locally, WFMD’s Bob Miller, no stranger to hair-fashion himself with the classic “widows-peak” look, is just happy to have a new issue to rant about on his Morning News Express radio show.
The afternoon guy at the same station, am 930, is known to “not have a hair out of place” himself, but refused to comment on pending hair-change at the federal level. My suspicion is that the savvy Blaine Young is worried about offending current and potential advertising sponsors.
Perhaps Blaine’s sometimes side-kick on his self-named afternoon drive-time show could lend some insight, after all W. T. Mills is the barber extraordinaire! Alas, with clients stacked-up, he couldn’t get to the phone to make my pub-date.
The news director of the station, Dianah Gibson – secretly Bob’s work-wife – is all over the hair issue, as she was a past beauty queen. Always free with a quote, she said: “I like hair!”
In the meantime, until this hair-mess gets dressed up properly, consumers will have to fight it out at the retail level, with the reps from Paul Mitchell and Afro Sheen cosmetic products fisting it out in the parking lots.
None but the “follically challenged” will enter a salon alone under these tense circumstances with so much at stake! What would strategist James Carville do?
The nation calls out – but we have to do something!
To do otherwise would surely be shear madness.