Brian,

Your bias is shown in how you distort what he said by changing "stop ALWAYS" (emphasis mine) to "STOP (altogether)."

Hovde's point is that by ALWAYS covering stories about the poorest people, the press is missing the trainwreck we are all approaching when the ENTIRE economy goes into the dumps because we are no longer financing our debt at the present >2% rate and return to the <5.6% rate, among other things.

That is a valid complaint by Hovde, given the potential of even more people joining the ranks of the poor, not to mention that what will be considered "poor" relative to the general population will be even lower than what it is today.

How better to help the poor by creating and economy that demands their labor? You may disagree how that can be done, but I doubt you object to Hode's case that a robust economy has fewer poor people than a depressed one.

So why not talk about the risk we face as a nation? I'm certain Obama will discuss the topic, once he stops saying that the private sector economy is "doing just fine" and that we need to expand the public sector. Will you object when Obama wants to discuss the expansion of the general economy in order to help the American people? Of course you won't.

@Brian Carlson... On the loony left Tammy Baldwin, on the radical right Eric Hovde;two, yes two, likely un-electable candidates. Are you ready for a reincarnated Tommy Thompson?

That ad is the absolute bottom of the barrel. Nothing about it is good.

Right now we need more leaders that will not cooperate with the socialist takeover of America. I am sure that Eric will work very well with senators that agree with his vision. With any luck Harry Reid will be tossed from his chairmanship this time around and we can stop the leftist train in its tracks.

@brian -- Did you hear the rest of the message? When are we going to stop deficit spending, Brian? Huh? Come on, you are not being fair, you are just taking the last line out of context. I think the ad is great, and I look forward to hearing it each time it comes on.

@lolo peeg...What socialist takeover? Where is the evidence for making such a statement? This is a claim that's been made for the last 80 plus years. Typical right wing scare tactic rhetoric. Let's keep it real.

@William Maynard...Anecdotal evidence doesn't mean a thing.

William Maynard...Would you like to swap lives with them?

@William Maynard...Nope, retired.

What do you consider the 'public dole' William? Over 66 and collecting the benefits we paid for? Working in a government job like teaching, policing, firefighting, being our Governor? I'm none of those.

Tommy Thompson is actually a decent guy. I don't agree with everything he believes, but he made me tell myself, "How bad can it be?" when Scott Walker became our Governor.

Eric Hovde is another soulless empty suit like Scott Walker.

Governor Walker is the farthest thing from an empty suit. You may not agree with his policies, but you would have had to be in a ten year coma to think of him as an empty suit.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MlfE695MFHc

We disagree finally. I would never vote for Neumann. I worked for his campaign once. Once was enough. And I think there are a lot of conservatives who feel the same way. The only one I see with a chance of winning is Thompson.

@Jay Sykes...If the left were smart enough, which is highly questionable, they would cross over and vote in the primary for Fitzgerald. Baldwin would eat him alive. However, the rural vote will go for 'stick it to em' Tommy and push him over the top. So I guess I have to agree with you that it will be 'I can't get away from the bar' Senator Thompson.

Those on the left are still in shock that Walker didn't go down in flames. Smart or not, they're not going to risk voting for Fitzgerald at this point. I'm not so sure there's even going to be a lot of crossover. They may want to "make a statement" about Baldwin as did the Walker supporters in in the primary election running up to the recall.

Tommy wins cuz he's the good old boy and his challengers, basically, suck. He then commits political suicide in the election via YouTube. Regardless of the politics, the middle is going to vote for the candidate that comes off as more grounded and normal, rather than the one that's seen as foaming at the mouth.

'I can't get away from the bar'
Is it open season on making-up names and cheap shots? If it is, i'm gonna have a blast with Baldwin.

Oh yes, Hovde, another one that won't work with others to find a way to let the nation move on to heal and repair.
Sound's like a Tea Party.
Oh, and Tommy, he left Washington because: he 'didn't like it there'.
So, who would help us best?
Let's keep WI bipartisan and elect someone unlike Johnson - you know; the guy who bought his job using his own funds (back in the day hehe).

"when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody."
I'm still waiting, Barry.

Well said Lyle, however, try to speak to the masses.
Even I have to study the wording in order to 'get the message'.
I would have liked to have met your mother.
The Elites are losing their way and there will be a day of reckoning.

Outstanding... I may not always agree with you two gentlemen, but I love hearing you talk.

I always love the dichotomy of those on the educated left. They love to characterize these issues as a struggle between the common man and the faceless masters that drive them into the ground, yet the way they make their point hints towards more of the position of the educated elite.

For example, much of the hyperbole in the last couple posts, seems to be carefully concealed in a misty cloak of verbiage historically reserved and used by the upper crust and elite.

So what is the game we play here... are we appealing to the unwashed masses, by presenting ourselves as intellectually superior, thus elevating the value of our position? Is it intellectual demagoguing? Or are we simply unable to bring ourselves down to their level long enough to characterize our arguments in their terms?

But hey, since I am a part of those unwashed masses of the middle class, what would I know...

@Brian Carlson...As you so aptly state it, "evokes his poor immigrant ancestors", I did spend some time researching his family and it is clear; he is the product of wealth and influence. He is one who has not had to struggle, hence he doesn't quite understand the plight of the poor and disadvantaged. To his credit, he and his brother Steven have created the Hovde Foundation and are focused on the fight against MS and Hovde House project focused on children at risk around the globe. However, his credentials as a real estate magnet, hedge fund manager, financial analyst and investment banker doesn't appear to have prepared him for the political complexity of serving in the US Senate. In my opinion, he is even more out of touch with everyone else's experience who occupy the middle and lower working classes than Ron Johnson.

@Terry...I'm happy you find some pleasure in exchanges that others write. However, why is there a tone of anti-intellectualism in your comment? I hardly think that you are part of the unwashed masses, as you state.

Lol... Lyle.

Just a bit of hyperbole of my own, if you would indulge me...

Are we talking about Herb Kohl here? Maybe us taxpayers can build an arena for Hovde?

@Terry
Congratulations on remaining middle class!
That used to be a station in life to overcome.

Thank you Mrs. R.

I believe its all about choices, and in my opinion, that is where all this talk of class warfare falls short. I paid my own way through my education. My parents helped as much as their limited means would allow, but the lions share was my own hard work.

I have had opportunities in my life to rise above my station and join the 1%, but that was not the direction my interests led me. Until and if we reach the point in this country where those that through hard work and desire are no longer able to generate those opportunities to rise if that is what they desire, I will continue to view this "us versus them" approach to be nothing more than political posturing.

lol...

You infer that suburban whites stereotype others, while you are stereotyping them. Had I come on this forum and made some similar blanket statement about some social economic or racial group beloved by the left, you would be the first one castigating me for doing so, and you would be correct,.

If it helps you better understand or defend your position by thinking of the world in such simplistic terms, far be it from me to dissuade you. I could return the favor, but that would be disingenuous as I am not as willing to think of the world in such simple terms.

@Terry...You may not think of the world in such simplistic terms, of course the world is not simplistic, but I am afraid there are far to many people do think in that manner and base most of their opinions on stereotypes.

As any political scientist, economist or sociologist can attest, American society is classified from top to bottom. Although we would like to think of ourselves as classless, that just isn't the case. As such, Dirk's characterization has relevance and I don't know how one talks about subgroups/subclasses without referring to a generalization. We encounter this linguistic trap every time we refer to minority groups and individuals. I for one would welcome a different way of talking about various groups without the stereotyping language that goes along with it.

Talk about reverse racism. So now I'm supposed to categorize myself into one of these groups because I'm white? Is there supposed to be something wrong with being white?

Terry - You are hard to figure out. What kind of talk do you want from the left? Educated, uneducated, effete, down to earth, entertaining, serious, nuanced, matter-of-fact? You protesteth too much.

Mau - No, there is nothing wrong with being white, what is wrong is being right (-wing, that is),
Why do you vote against your own self interests? Why do you yearn for a right to work state, when you have union ties? What will happen to wages and pensions if the big money boys continue to buy elections? Why do you help rich people get richer, including billionaires Are you subsidizing them, when they pay little or no taxes, and you pay yours? Think about it. Are you being taken as a fool?

@Dirk, sounds like you are describing the left. How can you fool yourself to think that there are no rich powerful people on your side manipulating you. Plus you are blind to the fact that the unions are headed up by fat cats who give a crap about you. All they think about is their pocket books and power. They are no different than the bankers or any other greedy people.

No sir, no attempt to insult you was intended. I was just reveling in the delicious irony of arguing for the 99% in the context and syntax historically reserved for the elites.

It... amused me.

I will say this, however, I have no problem, simply based upon reading your posts (which I do enjoy), that you are or were part of the "education elite". I believe that it would be somewhat disingenuous to claim otherwise.

Every group has subgroups. We mark ourselves as part of them in certain ways, such as how we carry ourselves or present ourselves. Within those same subgroups it works the same. How we present ourselves, especially in the presence of those outside the subgroups, can be indicative of our place in the respective subgroup to those paying attention.

I know many folk in the "educated" subgroup, some of who post on this site. The way you present yourself speaks for itself as to were you likely fall within that particular subgroup.

Simple human psychology.

@Brian... What do you want the candidates to say? OR
How specific do you want them to be in their 30 second TV commercials or 15 second radio spots? (said with a sardonic lilt in the voice)

@Jay Sykes...What I miss is the long and thought out position papers and statements that candidates used to put out. I have been all over looking for position statements from Hovde and I have been thwarted in my effort. He is, so far, running on being an outsider focused on fiscal conservatism, but I can't find anything on other issues. In fact his fiscal conservative positions are sketchy at best.

When you don't have position papers to go on, then you are left guessing as to where they really stand on issues other than the 30 second sound bites.

There is some truth to that Lyle...

So much of the political discussion today is crafted to fit the "sound bite", and less about the substance of what they actually intend to do. Combine that with the current atmosphere of the politics of hate, you have to work exceptionally hard to discover what a candidates positions actually are.

And yes, this does apply to both sides of the road.

Do any of the current lot of Senate candidates have a library of 'current' position papers available?

Frankly, since the about the time of the demise of Glass-Steagall, I've felt that Congress is 'all reactive' and 'no proactive'. To sum it up with my favorite political flip-flop jargon: 'I was for it...before I was against it.'