Live from Waukesha: DEBATE THIS!

(Note: Read about the October 6 Doyle-Green debate here.)

Jim Doyle and Mark Green faced off tonight in the first of their debates sponsored by We the People/Wisconsin.

Mike Jacobs of Today's TMJ 4 and Frederica Freyberg of Public Television co-moderated the forum.

A panel of citizens assembled from all over the state asked the questions.

Tonight's Subject: Taxes and the Economy

But before substance, let's talk about appearance.

The candidates were dressed like twins -- dark suits, blue shirts, and red ties. The main differences: Doyle's U.S. flag lapel pin was twice, maybe three times as big as Green's pin. And of course, Green is younger, much thinner, and has hair.

At first I thought Green looked nervous, but he loosened up quickly.

To me, Doyle looked like a crook, but I admit that I'm biased.

Jacobs was very charged up. A nice guy, he was especially nice and very energetic, like he had just downed a six-pack of Red Bull.

Freyburg was competent and professional, except when she told Doyle what a good job he did after his first response. To be fair, I think she was referring to him staying within the time limit, but it still sounded weird.

The candidates went back and forth on taxes and the economy.

Listening to Doyle, you'd think that Wisconsin was a paradise for career opportunities. Only fifteen minutes into the debate, he brought up stem cell research. (I was wondering how long it would take before Doyle would spit that out.)

Green was realistic. He cited the need for change, to create a climate that encourages business.

Green was filled with facts that countered Doyle's rose-colored picture.

At one point, when Green was speaking, the camera panned to the audience, showing a member nodding in agreement with Green.

Doyle touting his property tax freeze made me ill.

Doyle said that Green's taxes went down $300 last year. (Mine went up dramatically.)

Green said it's a strange feeling to think of Doyle's people going through his tax returns. (I can relate to that, due to my identity being compromised via an Internet privacy policy violation. Creepy.)

Green went on to say that if you feel your taxes aren't high enough, then he is not your candidate.

"If you think the tax burden isn't too high, I'm not your guy," said Green.

Doyle defended himself by saying he did what he had to do to protect education. He skirted the tax issue by sucking up to WEAC.

Doyle said we've gained manufacturing jobs in Wisconsin.

Green's rebuttal was that we have not gained well-paying jobs.

He said we need a government that moves at the speed of business, not at the speed of bureaucracy.

Green said we don't have a people problem in the state. We have a leadership problem.

Doyle said that oh yes we have seen job growth, accusing Green of making up facts and, in effect, lying.

Green wasn't flustered. Although Doyle kept talking about all the tax cuts he's made, Green retorted with, "There's not one tax cut that Gov. Doyle proposed."

Doyle started talking about how he increased high speed Internet access in the state. Sure, I believe its availability has increased but what did Doyle do to achieve that?

What was the government's role? There was none. That's private business. Good old-fashioned capitalism and competition drove the market to make broadband more readily available and at a reasonable price, NOT DOYLE.

Doyle was taking credit for something that he didn't accomplish. It was reminiscent of Gore claiming credit for being the force behind the invention of the Internet.

Green said that Doyle keeps casting stones at Washington, but he added, "Doyle has adopted some of Washington's worst habits -- failing in math." That was a good line.

He went on to clarify some of the numbers that Doyle was twisting and exploiting and misrepresenting.

Doyle made the idiotic accusation that Green was responsible for the budget problems in Washington, while he has managed a balanced budget in Wisconsin. Right.

Even if one is to accept Doyle's balanced budget premise, his charge is still so lame! Green is one of over 430+ Congressmen. The state of the federal budget cannot be tossed in Green's lap.

Doyle insisted that he's anti-tax. Huh?

Then, came the closing statements.

Doyle told a story about being on the floor of a GM plant. Farmers and autoworkers were there cheering over ethanol. Uh, sure.

Green used his time to speak from the heart about Wisconsin. He wanted to thank the people of the state. He said running for governor has allowed him to fall in love with the state all over again. That was nice.

He vowed to provide the leadership to make Wisconsin great again.

Overall, Doyle managed to keep smiling, but I think he was ticked off. Green seemed to get under his skin.

Green, on the other hand, answered the questions at hand and connected very well with the audience, always maintaining his composure.

This first debate was important, especially for Green. It was Green's introduction to some Wisconsinites. To many, he's an unknown.

For those in the viewing audience unfamiliar with Green, I think he made a good first impression.

In that sense, I think Green gained more from the debate than Doyle.

Also, Doyle was in the position of having to present himself as an anti-tax Dem, while juggling the demands of his special interests that rely on tax increases.

Green had the luxury of portraying himself as someone who will reduce the tax burden on Wisconsinites.

Would I have given some different responses to Doyle? Was I thinking that Green should have said this or that? Of course.

But it all came down to this question:

Do you want higher taxes?

As a result, Green won this debate.