What's wrong with Wisconsin politics?

We have a serious problem in Wisconsin. It's not about the tencency of politicians to ignore the people, or push their inane ideas on the people at taxpayer's expense, or the tendency of the people to let their triggers be tripped by the politicians.

It's about the failure of so-called political reporters to look beyond horse race stories to issues. OK, so Jim Doyle has a 40% approval rating, maybe, according to some polls whose motives and accuracy we really shouldn't trust. And, OK, this approval rating is twice as high as Dick Cheney's and on a par with George W. Bush's, but lower than almost everyone else in the universe, including the Ayatollah Khomeni and Osama bin Ladin.

So what?

I know political reporters aren't too secure, but they must be secure enough to go beyond this horse race stuff with some guy who works for the Republican Party, for crying out loud, and report something of substance instead of what he says about the 2006 campaign.

What the heck do they expect him to say? That W. is an incompetent and Hillary is not only smarter but better looking? Now there's a frightening thought.

Is it too much to ask for a little depth in political coverage? Have political beat reporters just awakened from hibernation and are still a little groggy and can we expect better in coming months?

Sports writers can do better than that any month of the year on any team in the NFL, NBA or DSL. And they're a lot more prone to interject some of their own understanding of the context, which political reporters must have some inkling of.

Maybe the media should just switch political reporters for sports reporters for the duraction of the 2006 campaign. Political junkies would be pleased at a new degree of color in political coverage, and to heck with the sports fans.