I recognize that the long campaign season has proven challenging for political writers looking for new angles on the same old story, but this post by Andrés Martinez on the Washington Post's blog Stumped is just plain silly. Granted, the basis for the post, a question submitted by a teacher wondering who Holden Caulfield would vote for in the 2008 presidential elections, is a little bizarre. But Martinez only makes matters worse by choosing to write his response as Holden Caulfield:
I do sort of like Ron Paul. I have to admit it, he seems swell. I caught a little of the Republican debate and you should have seen him up there, old Ron Paul grumpily carrying on about the Constitution, the Fed, the war and freedom. All the other phonies were up there like football players bragging about how tough they would be if given the ball, but Paul was having a whole different conversation on his own, about real stuff. And he was sore as hell about it, like the crazed uncle no one wants to be stuck next to at Thanksgiving dinner. He killed me, if you want to know the truth. I mean, I don't know what the hell he's talking about when he gets all intellectual about the gold standard, but it knocked me out that he was talking about standards.
Considering the motley crew that is Ron Paul supporters, I suppose Caulfield's disaffected youth shtick might fit right in. But Martinez overlooks some key issues. First of all, Caulfield is 17, meaning he wouldn't be doing any voting at all. Secondly, and forgive me for stating the obvious, Caulfield is a fictional character. Political endorsements carry a lot less relevance when the endorser is not real.
Let's hear it, TalkBackers. Which fictional character endorsements are you anticipating? Sleeping Beauty for Thompson? Anne of Green Gables for Kucinich?
--Melanie Mason