Cory Booker has been a vegetarian since his days at Stanford. He claims to have no real vices, save books. In 2009, Booker was the subject of some controversy when he jokingly fought with Conan O’Brien on “The Tonight Show.”

In 2010, he volunteered via Twitter to help a 65-year-old man shovel snow from his driveway, and in April he suffered second degree burns and smoke inhalation while saving a woman from a burning house.

Booker is also the mayor of Newark, New Jersey, and has been the main talking point for pundits over the last few days. On Sunday, Booker appeared on MSNBC’s “Meet the Press,” where he described the Obama campaign’s attacks on Mitt Romney’s time at Bain Capital as “nauseating.”

This type of attack wouldn’t have normally garnered much attention, if any at all. However, Booker also happens to be a lifetime Democrat.

In the blink of an eye, Booker’s comments became the talking point for every pundit and media outlet.

FOX’s headlines most likely read something like this; “Booker trashes Obama- Is he correct, mostly-correct or completely correct?”

NBC’s; “Booker’s comments- who forced him to criticize the President, and why?”

It’s been four days, and I can already say I’m sick of hearing Booker’s name. Not because I agree or disagree with his comments on the Obama campaign, but because it really shouldn’t matter. As of the “Booker controversy,” politics seems to have reached a new low in the blame game, and that can only mean one thing; it really must be campaign season.

With the 2012 presidential election essentially underway for a whole three weeks now, it was only a matter of time until the whole process imploded on itself. The controversy over Booker only represents what we all knew was coming this year-deflection from the issues.

It was all inevitable, and I knew that. Yet I still find something innately horrid about this whole “controversy.” It is reflective of how ridiculous and partisan our political process has become.

Apparently, today’s politician cannot even hint that he disagrees with his party’s candidate. Suddenly, to Republicans, Booker represented four years of resentment and hatred towards the Obama administration. Booker was transformed into a figurehead for Democratic anger. This was expected.

What was not expected, however, was the liberal aggression towards Booker. Democrats across Washington swiftly began separating themselves from a man who, prior to Sunday, was an up-and-coming star in their party.

Once upon a time, a minor disagreement between two politicians wouldn’t have even been newsworthy. However, in the 24-hour news cycle that consumes today’s politics, every issue is controversial.

This approach is muddying politics.

Booker was simply providing his own opinion on a dominant issue, and instead of examining why he made such remarks, the media chose to portray the incident as a sort of civil war among Democrats.

November 6 can’t come quick enough. I pray that this election isn’t another hotbed for aggressive personality attacks or vague speculations. Sadly, I know this prayer will not be answered.

Until then, I’ll adopt Booker’s stance on the whole issue- “enough is enough.”

John Downen is a junior journalism major.

He can be reached at 581-7942

or [email protected]