I always enjoy reading about food, but I am saddened to see that the N.Y. Times' Maureen Dowd and others seem to think that food metaphors are a valid substitute for genuine issue analysis.
In Sunday's NYT, Dowd wrote:
Despite Obama’s wooing, some women aren’t warming. As Carol Marin wrote in The Chicago Sun-Times, The Lanky One is like an Alice Waters organic chicken — “sleek, elegant, beautifully prepared. Too cool” — when what many working-class women are craving is mac and cheese.
So what the hell does this actually mean? This might make for clever-sounding prose, but I'm not sure that comparing the candidates to meal entrees helps voters make sense of the issues.