The American Spectator

Reader Mail

Mood Swingin'

3.7.08 @ 12:01AM

(Page 2 of 3)

OK, Quin. Mr. Cox, it is. He certainly has a list of solid credentials. You offer sound reasoning. And, he's likable. But, haven't we been here before? I can't help but recall for the record, all of our 'successful' predictions so far, beginning with the Republican 'victory' in November, '06. Lisa Fabrizio's case for Fred. Mitt's endorsement by NRO. And hey, even Rudy. And, who did we end up with? John McCain, the conservatives' bane, that's who! The typical Republican Party bosses 'it's my turn' candidate, who has suddenly become the timely equivalent to Esther, who if unable to save the Republican Party, will surely save the nation. So, OK, we've all sucked it up, put one foot in front of the other and marched on, reticent, but determined, if only from a distance, to keep standing athwart history, and yelling STOP! at the top of our lungs, even as we mourn the passing of the elegant author of those immortal words, who's shoes I know I'm certainly unworthy to tie. Who knows, maybe, this time we're due, or maybe, I just need to change my brand of Scotch, and I don't even drink, but I may start if this keeps up. Then, again, it could be I just need a dose of that hope mojo going around. I know this, we'd better be thinking outside the box on this one. If Chris Cox meets THAT criteria, then I'm in, here's my penny ante. Thank God the Dems are in riffsville, at least for now.

But hey, what's up with the suit Cox is wearing in the photo TAS published? Doesn't look like out of the box thinking to me, unless it's an old trunk. If that's an indicator of his potential effectiveness in the VEEP debates, I'd say he needs a little advice during his ramp up. Hmm, what's Naomi Wolf doing these days?

OK, rant's over.
-- Mike Showalter
Austin, Texas

Why not actually do something groundbreaking? If, as it now appears, Mr. Obama is the Democrat nominee, Mr. McCain may need some help in the Deep South, which in the Democrat primaries voted largely along racial grounds.

While I cannot quibble with any of the choices vetted by Mr. Hillyer, and assuming for some reason that the erudite and attractive Governor of Alaska is not desirable, I would urge some discussion of Zell Miller.

A maverick Democrat, yes, too old probably, but no doubt a straight talking, American patriot. A nice counterpoint to Mr. McCain, and still very popular in the crucial southern states.
-- Jay Molyneaux
Denver, North Carolina

DEATH TO THE SALESMEN
Re: Doug Bandow's Patently Absurd:

Fascinating!

In his defense of pharmaceutical companies, Bandow omits any reference to one of the highest expenses of drug companies -- commissions to salespersons. I have known sales persons for
pharmaceutical companies, and they are high earners indeed.

He also glosses over, by defending it, the other, even higher, high expense -- advertising -- claiming that it's necessary in order to increase sales, but he includes advertising to "people" or "patients." Is it not enough to inform physicians of the details about a new drug, or remind physicians of the proven benefits of older drugs -- still effective, but not as glitzy or profit-making? Do they have to use scare tactics on ordinary folks, and invent new "diseases" and "conditions," and give new names to old complaints [especially the alphabetic names, don't you love 'em?].

Does anyone outside the profession know how much "advertising" money is already spent to get physicians to prescribe their products? Free samples to give away, do-dads for the office with the name of the new drug in brightly-colored bold italics, and more?

He also does not include the drugs that are created, advertised ad nauseam, and sold for vanity "conditions" like E.D.

He does admit that advertising is meant to increase demand, but I would ask "demand for what?" A drug the patient's doctor already knows about, but prefers to prescribe something else -- most likely an older drug, one still effective, but that produces less profit for the manufacturer?

Bandow did tug at my heartstrings for a moment when he described the sad plight of drug companies who spend tons of money in R&D, until I remembered that they're R'ing and D'ing drugs that duplicate others that are already on the market [but earning less profit, or none because this company doesn't have a comparable, or has one which has gone into pharmaceutical public domain ("generics"), and drugs for vanity purposes, and other drugs with new exotic names for conditions that can be treated at less expense.

I have seen television commercials that push a new drug without ever even saying what condition it is intended to treat [not a joke -- you have, too], yet inviting the prospective patient to "ask your doctor if you need new Pseudopharmica." I can just imagine her reaction to my asking my physician if I need "new Pseudopharmica."

Letter to the Editor

topics:
Foreign Policy, Health Care, John McCain, Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Television, Iraq, NATO, Alaska, Unions