Next on Hardball...Chris plays Hardball with Chris...

Strangely, I am already tired of the media reporting that the media is giving John McCain a free ride while the Democratic party continues to choose it's candidate. I shouldn't be tired of this. I should agree that McCain is being left alone, and getting only good press - even when he gives an economic speech that is essentially asinine.

But you know what the problem with this story is? It's being reported by the media. While true that the media (or press) is the primary conduit for, you know, reporting - their continued insistence on covering themselves does the country a profound injustice. I really don't want to be informed about which media conglomerate is leaving John McCain alone more, or the manor in which one pundit masquerading as reporter reports more positive Clinton stories than Obama stories, or vice versa. I'd like news please.

You know for like a couple of weeks the American media was dealing with what the candidates were saying about public and foreign policy. It was like 2 1/2 weeks in March. But since the "horse race" took over in the Democratic party, and "capitulation race" came to the staggering result everyone thought it would 2 years ago - there has been no news. None. Just a lot of piss and vinegar. Worse on the Democratic side.

So I don't blame the protracted fight on the Democratic side on the media, but I do blame the McCain pass on them. Why? Well, vanity for one. The Media just doesn't seem to get enough of reporting on itself - which is really stupid, because if politics is show business for ugly people; then journalism is politics for ugly people - and that is some serious ugly. However; I feel that the pass that McCain has been getting is really more rooted in the media feeling bad that they pronounced his candidacy dead in January, and now he's the GOP nominee, yeah, whoops.

The truth is really McCain is getting no more special treatment than any GOP candidate since 1980. The media has overcompensated for there own "liberal bias" since then, but unfairly scrutinizing the democratic candidate, holding them to a higher standard than their GOP counterpart. This may be a good thing for the Democrat party, but the country has really suffered - go back and just look at some of the BS the "media" let Gov. George W. Bush get away with, but hammered VP. Gore. Hey the reporting of the release of the hostages in Iran circa 1980 anyone? Dukakis in a tank..ok probably his fault...but Willie Horton?

And just one more time: Who the hell covers an economic speech in the mist of an economic crisis and doesn't mention that the speaker offers no, not one, solution. Asinine.

ABILIFY

That sounds like a presidential malapropism. The kind of thing the president says to describe his Iraqi adventure, "We're over there, uh, try'n to, uh..hee, hee...abilify the Iraqi people."

Sadly, Abilify is not just a "misstatement," but a drug being marketed with the aggressiveness of the Viagra, Cialus, and Lavetra tenacity of the past few years. I believe that I have written about this before - but I am becoming more and more concerned (ok, obsessed) with it.

Who thought it was a good idea to advertise prescription drugs on television? Probably a stupid question - Marketing companies. And pharmaceutical companies, and the FCC, and the republican party, and the democratic party, and every television network - cause who gets the money from the ads, right?

But shouldn't we question the legitimacy of a drug that has more side affects and a greater risk of death than smoking? I'm not unsympathetic to people with serious mental problems (John McCain aside) but should someone with bipolar disorder really be getting treatment suggestions from television commercials? Thats right, Abilify is for the treatment of bipolar disorder, and features a woman in her late 30's to mid 40's taking a tentative walk through a scenic mountain side, alone. To the ads credit, she does meet up with a similarly aged friend (of the same sex) at the end of her journey, they have a small verbal exchange, and continue the trek into the wilderness. This my friends is Abilifin'.

These Big Pharma commercials are totally irresponsible. They claim that the tag line "ask your doctor about..." make them responsible, but like the "I approve this message..." line in campaign commercials, they do very little. Not only that, but the list of side effects, who shouldn't take it, who should take it, when you should take it, and how many different ways these "medicines" will KILL YOU, is absurd.

Once upon a time, the networks and liquor companies agree not to produce or air liquor commercials. we have seen this agreement evaporate in the Randian 21st Century economic environment. Such is the avenue that has been created for ads for prescription drugs. So while cigarettes will never be advertised on television again, marijuana remains illegal, and the biggest advertisers for the Super Bowl are beer companies; the countries greatest moral dilemmas are same sex marriage and lapel pins?

Moral values are an important part of a functioning society. I believe that they are inherent to our survival. But they are not a one way street. It is not a question of what is legal, but what is right. Ok, I'm really messed up now, because I'm pretty sure Gov. George W. Bush said that exact thing during his 2000 campaign. So what, a stopped clock is also right twice a day (unless it's a military clock, then only once.) Just because a drug is legal, doesn't make it good. And there is real moral deficiency when it comes to anything that can generate money in this country. This is why I refer to this century as Randian, though one could also qualify it as "Gekkoist." Ayn Rand and the fictional Gordon Gekko both claim that "greed is good," But I would submit that the past 20 to 30 years have proved just the opposite. When we stop seeing each other as people, and only as consumers or potential profits; we lose our humanity.

Picks for Obama vs. McCain

ET SNL & WTF

So I read this Entertainment Weekly article on Saturday Night Live. It's the same article they write every 4 years: SNL is best and more powerful than it should be in an election year. No doubt, the more powerful part, but I'm not sure it's at it's best. Seems to me SNl does it's best when it is commenting on the Greater America, not just lampooning the political arena. I mean, Bass'O'Matic '76? Come on, now that was some funny shit.

But my really issue with the article is when they confront Lorne Michaels with the charge that the show is bias toward Hillary Clinton. He denies such charges. Frankly, since Tina Fey hosted the first post-strike show, I would have to say Lorne is full of shit. The show as of late has been remarkable biased toward Hillary. **I'm gonna only say this once, I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH FRED ARMISEN PLAYING OBAMA** In fact I think it's a brilliant casting choice, and he is doing a great job - though I think he should incorporate Barack's "look" preface more...At any rate, the show is totally backing Clinton. And why not, it's based in New York, everyone who works on the show is one of the Senators constituents. They can be bias toward her, that is fine with me. Just don't lie about it.

Really, they shouldn't have to deny it. Unless they recognize that the vast majority of their audience is in the Obama demographic. Hmmmm...wait a minute...I bet they do realize that...at least Lorne Michaels does.

The overall lesson here: I should not read Entertainment Weekly so closely.

Cigarettes and Disapointment

Yet another reason that Ohio and Texas should be expelled from the country. Along with Florida. Can't say I'm surprised by Clinton's wins in Ohio and Texas, but if she thinks she can win those states come fall, she is just a s deluded as the right wing says she is.

I find it disheartening that one of the chairs of her campaign (Sen. Barbara Ann Mikulski (D-MD) know from experience that a prolonged primary will lead to a cash short campaign come the fall. How do I know this, I heard her say it in a campaign speech in 2006 on behalf of Ben Cardin. Oh there was another speaker at that rally too, Sen. Barack Obama? Ever heard of him?

The Clinton campaign is now embarking on what may become the clearest example of Democrats sabotaging themselves. There is a case to be made at this point that she has a "me or nobody" mentality. Sure she has won the big states, states that Dennis Kusinich could win if he was the Democratic nominee. But to stand in the way of such an inspirational figure, and offer nothing but benign wonkery - tell us it's better for us - use republican tactics - and put us all at risk of 4 more years of Bush/McCain buffoonery and crazy-land-neo-world-destructionism, is just irresponsible.

On the other hand, she can't win. Might as well try and get more people to watch the convention. Although, it didn't work for the last episode of the West Wings 6th season. But it should have.