No Phoniness Zone

Although this is such old news, Eugene Kane deems it to be worthy of a column.

There's no denying that the debate between attorney general Republican candidates JB Van Hollen and Paul Bucher on 620 WTMJ last Thursday was an embarrassment.

However, as out of control as it was, it's over. The candidates addressed the matter and have moved on. Simply put, it ceased being an issue last week.

But that doesn't stop Kane from rehashing it. He's clearly exploiting to the incident.

Kane writes:

Finally, there comes a breath of fresh air in politics this election season.

All it took was two simple words: "You suck."

Admittedly that's a pretty colorful, down-to-earth response during a political debate. It's also pretty juvenile, but no more so than a lot of the other stuff politicians say about each other during an election year.

If one wants to look for "pretty colorful, down-to-earth" talk, one need look no further than Michael Jackson McGee, Jr. I consider "If you drive by my house, I'm going to kill your ass," pretty colorful.

The apple, of course, doesn't fall far from the tree. Michael McGee the elder is just as colorful.

I believe Kane, too, has had his share of "pretty juvenile" remarks. He's often resorted to making childish swipes at Milwaukee talk radio hosts ("local blowhards").

As an earthy kind of guy, I appreciate cutting through the baloney to say what you think. It's a lot better than the usual double-talk we're going to hear between now and November.

So, is this supposed be Kane's tribute to the "you suck" brand of campaigning?

The Republican candidates for attorney general met during a radio debate last week, and things got heated when J.B. Van Hollen was frustrated by constant interruptions by Waukesha County D.A. Paul Bucher.

"Will you ever listen," Van Hollen reportedly told Bucher during a commercial break. "That's why you suck, Paul, because you only listen to people who agree with you."

Nobody in the radio audience heard the comment, but in his best "classroom snitch" mode, Bucher made a point to bring it up when the broadcast resumed.

I think this a cheap move by Kane. I have to believe there's something personal going on here.

Apologies were extended and refused. The debate resumed without further incident, and the race for the Republican nomination will likely not be affected by the comment on Bucher's suck-ability.

Kane is really having fun, isn't he?

...Some voters will likely not be swayed by the rhetoric in the Republican race for attorney general as much as by the candidates' stand on various issues. Both men seem determined to bring the death penalty to Wisconsin and will use the current furor over illegal immigration as a scare-tactic to get elected.

(I think both of those stances "suck," by the way).

Oh, that Eugene Kane... What a colorful guy!

I would hope that such a silly incident on the radio wouldn't have an impact on the race.

If Wisconsin voters want to get tough on crime and take steps to uphold immigration laws, they should know that Peg Lautenschlager and Kathleen Falk aren't up to the job. That's what really matters, not a heated exchange between candidates.

It's better to focus on issues than personalities in any election, but I have no problem with name-calling in politics as opposed to phony civility between opponents who can barely stand each other.

For example, in the gubernatorial race it's clear Mark Green wants to call Gov. Jim Doyle a "crook" and that Doyle would like to call Green "an extreme wacko."

But they don't; they leave that to their supporters.

To a certain extent, much of public social interaction is somewhat "phony."

For example, if I were introduced to Eugene Kane, I would say something like, "It's nice to meet you," rather than "I think you can be a real jerk."

Maintaining a degree of civility makes for a much more pleasant existence for everyone. If being polite is being phony, then I think phoniness has its merits.

By the way, I do think it's important to note that Doyle is a "crook" and Green is not an "extreme wacko."

...It's always intriguing to watch two people going for the same political office who act supremely annoyed with the other for having the unmitigated gall to compete for the spot.

It's almost like two suitors vying for the same lover, except in this case, it's usually the voters who get . . . well, you know.

Being competitive doesn't demand playing dirty.

Kane outdid himself with that analogy about the suitors. He managed to be both colorful and juvenile.

Campaign rhetoric can get awfully personal, particularly the closer you get to election day.

That's when politicians understand all the empty promises and proposals won't determine who wins as much as which candidate strikes voters as a real living, breathing person instead of a cardboard cut-out

Is that why people elected Michael McGee, Jr.? Because he's so very living and breathing?

In circumstances like that, saying, "You suck," might not be as thoughtful as saying, "Your policies won't work."

But it sure does make more of an impression.

I see this column as awfully personal. I don't think it's really about the race for attorney general or politics or civility.

I think Kane wrote it to get back at Paul Bucher's wife Jessica McBride for posts she made on her blog, exposing Kane to be a hypocrite for refusing to step up and mentor an at-risk youth.

In short, Kane sucks. Pretty colorful?