Poll this! Investigate that!

Among the many troubling aspects of this election have been the over-the-top negative ads and the news analyses that transform polling results into reality.

If these ads are so effective, why isn’t Coors running negative ads about Bud? Or Cherrios slamming Wheaties?

Maybe corporations know that tearing down the competition only turns off consumers. Do I really need to drink beer? Especially since they started the beer-belly wars?

And given a choice between “The Breakfast of Steroid-Using ‘Chumpions’” and “the Little Round Nothings,” I’ll opt for eggs.

The corporations obviously see this as destructive of the marketplace. So why don’t the geniuses running the political campaigns see negative ads as destructive of democrary?

Then there are the pundits who pontificate on the results of elections that haven’t been held. If they can do that, why don’t they tell us about what’s going to happen after the election of 2012? Why weren’t they telling us about the “rise” of the Tea Party on election eve in 2008?

I suppose that last one is an honest question. The folks who brought us this recession (and are profiting mightily from it) must have known that the lumpen would be pissed. An obvious strategy was to capture the anger and put it to work to keep shifting the money to the rich.

Tell me again: what does extending tax breaks for the wealthy have to do with cutting the deficit?

And remind me: why should insurance companies NOT be required to cover folks with pre-existing conditions?

The media need to stop spending money on talking heads and hire (or rehire) investigative reporters.

The sleuths might start with this timely query: Just who is really financing the Tea Party? And why? And how about the sequel: what do they have up their sleeves for 2012? Whatever it is, you can bet it is in the works NOW!

Rip City asks, "Recession? What Recession?"

Which one doesn’t fit?

a) Housing prices are falling. Bye-bye equity.

b) Car dealers can’t give away inventory.

c) The unemployment rate is soaring.

d) The Blazers are raising their ticket prices 6.7 percent

The correct answer is d) ... I guess.

It’s all a matter of supply and demand, sports reporter Jason Quick of The Oregonian tells us today.

The supply part I get. The supply of seats in the Rose Garden is fixed. The Blazer franchise finally has managed to hire law-abiding, yet competitive players. The place is selling out — at current prices.

It’s the demand part I can’t figure.

Blazer fans apparently don’t turn the pages from the sports section to the business section. Or open their 401 (k) statements.

If they did, they would join the rest of us in thinking about how to hack away at discretionary spending. You’d think Blazer tickets would be right up there at the top of the cut list — along with a spur-of-the-moment trip to Paris, a new car and a five-course dinner in the Pearl.

You’d think. But you’d be wrong.

When it comes to sports fans, we are in the world of fanaticism and fantasy. What do reason and a bank statement have to do with the thrill of victory on hardwood or turf?

The economy can be tanking, but as long at the Blazers are on a Rip City tear, Blazer owner Paul Allen can jack up his prices — the real world economy be damned.

For the ’09-’10 season, that means that the best seats in the house will go for $140 a pop, up from $130. The whole season will cost a cool $6,160.

It’s anybody’s guess what Paul will be asking for beer and parking.

If there is any consolation, it’s that the nose-bleed, blue collar sections won’t cost more next year. For the pleasure of watching ant-sized millionaires race around on a court the size of a playing card, you still will pay $9.