Haven't said much about the Milwaukee police-pay brouhaha; it's really not my business. Don't live in Milwaukee and the impact on my State taxes is de minimis at most.
But Jessica did a public service and found the other side of the story. It's worth reading.
The cynic might conclude that the JournalSentinel is finding another way to attack the Republicans...
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
I've read "the other side of the story," and am not the least bit convinced that there is still justification for the existing law. The first point, frankly, is just laughable. Justification by Comparitive Example (i.e., "why shouldn't we still get paid, those other guys are"?) is always the first argument of those with little solid ground to stand on. So Doyle's old lacky is still getting paid, too. Well, here's a thought, instead of using that as an excuse to continue paying deservedly-fired cops, how about working on legislation to stop paying the lacky as well? As for the commission/legal appeal distinction...so what? Either way, cops who were fired for legitimate reason are still dragging the process out to cash a paycheck while they sit on their asses. Republicans can claim righteous defensability all they want in supporting the Milwaukee cops, but I'm not buying it. It's still a simple case of voting as your campaign contributions dictate.
You ARE aware of the history of police department firings, no?
Your post would not admit to that.
Accusations are not the same as convictions. The Chief is NOT the final authority in the Department.
And there are a lot of bad people working in LOTS of places--but private industry is simply not comparable to civil service.
Post a Comment