It baffles me. Seriously. The discussion we have over “negative” politics makes absolutely no sense. Yesterday I watched Andrea Mitchell repeatedly question campaign manager Rick Davis about why McCain is going negative and mischaracterizing Obama’s position. The interview devolved into a discussion of what “celebrity” means and whether it is “negative” to call Obama one. Then it devolved even further, into a “who started it” debate.

The ridiculousness was obvious in the final moments when Mitchell bemoaned the lack of substantive discussion about issues, to which Davis cleverly responded (paraphrased) “Well, I’d love to come back on the show Andrea and talk about issues next time.”

Every campaign cycle there are negative ads. Every campaign cycle, the media complains about them. And yet, at the same time, they can’t shut up about them. John McCain could run ONE HUNDRED ads about the issues and not get a single mention on Andrea Mitchell’s show. But ONE negative ad about Obama, and he’s on for a week. I am not saying the media is biased against McCain (though they are), but rather biased against substance. They’d rather spend all day complaining and bickering over who is negative, who is avoiding the issues. But still somehow have enough self-righteousness to shake their fingers at the campaigns, as if McCain and Obama are at fault.

If Andrea Mitchell, and the media as a whole, would stop reporting negative campaign news, negative campaigning would stop dead in its tracks. Until you are willing to do that, Andrea, please spare us the self-righteousness.