DUNCE: NYT columnist irritated at 'inconsequential' news shaping presidential race

It wasn't until the "war on women" was turned back on the Democrats because of Hilary Rosen's comments about Ann Romney and until it was rediscovered that President Barack Obama used to eat dogs that liberals noticed the all the "inconsequential" things that keep popping up in this election.

Good timing.

From a column by the New York Times' Charles Blow:

We are already lost in the weeds of the inconsequential. ...

This is what we’re discussing — a manufactured mommy war and a rhetorical warmonger .

And while we’re distracted, recent polling suggests that the race is tightening.

This all makes me want to grab every American by the shoulder and say, “Focus, people!”

This will be a long election fought with hundreds of millions of dollars over relatively few voters in the middle. There is unlikely to be a knockout punch or a trump-card issue. There will be many ups and downs, faux pas and faux issues. But we shouldn’t lose sight of what really matters — what this and every presidential election is really about.

DUNCE.

The ladies on "The View" also dismissed the role dogs are playing in this election on Tuesday. Where were these people two months ago when it was Republicans who were engaging in a "war on women" and it was Mitt Romney who was being made fun of for putting his dog on his car roof?

Until now those were real news stories.

[New York Times]