I love seeing politics overlap with the culture at large, but Robin Givahn of the Washington Post has time and again tried to merge fashion critique with political analysis, and looked completely silly in the process. Her latest column "Dressing Down (In More Ways Than One)" is no exception.

She tries to put social and political significance on how dressed down so many of the Town Hall attendees are, as if people give thought to the political message they are giving by their dress.

Heck, if any thought was given to wardrobe, it was earlier criticism of protesters for being too well dressed that caused it. Pro-government advocates, mocked protesters by using the fact that some were in suits to claim that they weren't 'real' protesters, but industry plants. The "Brooks Brothers Brigade," was the what they were called. Now apparently they are crude angry people who can't dress well.

The other side of the equation is also over-thought. The idea of representatives saying "I'm the boss of you," by showing up in suits themselves is over the top. Many politicians do show up in more casual garb, others don't at public meetings. But a politician in a suit is not sending a message of dominance.

If I were Bob Woodward, I'd be asking the style section editors to stay out of political analysis, his turf. It reflects badly on the paper's more serious work.