Posted on Friday, 3rd April 2009 by Patrick Dorwin
It’s Friday, that means it’s time for another Weekend Open Line, a place for you, our readers, to post the interesting stories and information that we have missed. This has become an important post every week.
I want to start this week off with a huge shout-out to my guys Bruce, Glenn & Roland, as well as all of our loyal readers that keep coming back to make this blog be part of your day. I realize that things have been a bit slower paced the past few months as I have been fighting through some health problems, some of which I have bored you with, others I have not, but even though it has sucked to be me the past few months, this blog has remained a consistent part of the day for several hundred people, and I appreciate that and hope to get back to a more regular posting soon.
With that said, this one is for you, so have at it!
Posted in Home | Comments (47) |
47 Responses to “TGIF weekend open line”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
April 3rd, 2009 at 5:20 am
Hang in there Patrick. Like the guy said, “The meek shall inherit the earth, but we’ll be able to take it back.” 2010
April 3rd, 2009 at 6:57 am
Feel better Patrick!! And I would also like to say thanks to the guys for continuing to post. Gotta have my Badger Blogger with my morning coffee!
April 3rd, 2009 at 10:05 am
Patrick, you have readers such as I who you have never met. I check your blog most days as you and the contributors have news the MSM don’t see fit to print. News like MPD hijinks, MMSD dumps and the comedy club called MPS. Thanks!
April 3rd, 2009 at 10:36 am
Look for people out and about tomorrow in Washington County collecting signatures to have the West Bend Library board take a vote on 5 issues pertaining to sexual explicit materials that are geared towards minors 6th through 8th grade.
Washington County has a SHARE program so if these books are in West Bend they are also accessible to those acroos Washington County.
1. Reclassification of Youth-Targeted Pornographic Books
2. Visual identification of explicit material
3. Restrict Access to Library-produced Sexual Content Online
4. Balanced Literature on Controversial Issues
5. Children’s Internet Protection
April 3rd, 2009 at 11:09 am
Hang in there, Patrick!
Here’s an image of a downtown trolley from a postcard I recently acquired.
April 3rd, 2009 at 11:17 am
I realize not every post is a hit. We try to mix it up a bit, to keep things fresh.
If we focused only on political dysfunction, failed/failing policy and general hypocrisy, things would get pretty dry around here.
“tbones,” when you refer to those “dumps,” some of our newer readers might not know what you’re talking about.
Last summer, we caught a DNR employee dumping a raw, composite slurry of antibacterial chemicals and goose feces into an open MMSD storm drain.
Since it was never reported by the J/S, obviously, it never happened.
April 3rd, 2009 at 11:40 am
B-blogger gentlemen, have you heard the news of John Chisolm’s recent hiring. I hear he hired a newly retired ex-MPD Special Investigations detective. I don’t always agree with John and his decisions as D.A., but he is a class class guy. Looks like good guys don’t always finish last.
April 3rd, 2009 at 1:01 pm
Gus, I heard about it a couple weeks ago at a gathering of warriors I attended. Tom Barrett has no appreciation for talent and ability, but it sure is obvious that John Chisholm does. Mike Sandvick will make a very positive contribution to the D.A.’s Office just as he did with the Milwaukee Police Department, and he’ll be working for someone who supports him.
April 3rd, 2009 at 1:09 pm
Glenn last month I ran into Mike downtown and had a couple of Guinness or is that Guinnai with him.
I asked him if he was working and he told me with a smile that he was “retired”. I knew something was up. On Tuesday I had a chat with John Chisholm and somehow Mike came up. Mike is older than he looks, but he isn’t the “retiring kind”.
It’s a perfect fit. Mike is everywhere. He’s like THE SHADOW, and he knows how to get things done. I’ve seen him work when he wasn’t working.
John can use a good investigator and Mike is nobodies toadie. Glenn I don’t know if you saw my post, but Bob Donovan told me to say “hi” to you.
April 3rd, 2009 at 2:50 pm
10-4 Gus. I saw it.
April 3rd, 2009 at 9:21 pm
Interesting bit of judicial activism nearby where Iowa’s supreme courts has struck down that state’s ban on gay marriage. I’m surprised Radish hasn’t commented.
And surprised nobody has commented on the MPD sergeant nailed for OWI, considering he was far more than “one toke over the line.”
April 4th, 2009 at 7:19 am
They were both wrong.
April 4th, 2009 at 7:26 am
Let me add to that. One will be punitively disciplined and one won’t be. Can you guess which one will receive punitive disipline?
April 4th, 2009 at 8:55 am
“Let me add to that. One will be punitively disciplined and one won’t be. Can you guess which one will receive punitive disipline?”
Can YOU guess which one could have killed my loved ones and DESERVES punitive discipline? Who in the hell drives around not only intoxicated but over three time the legal limit? He should be criminally charged!
April 4th, 2009 at 9:04 am
Radish didn’t want to pollute Patrick’s blog with her rantings, which are mostly about the ignorance and hatred being spewed by celebrants of the ruling’s “victory over ignorance and hatred.”
People need mirrors.
April 4th, 2009 at 10:07 am
Anon said “Can YOU guess which one could have killed my loved ones and DESERVES punitive discipline? Who in the hell drives around not only intoxicated but over three time the legal limit? He should be criminally charged!”
Who is Darnell Cole for $1000.00 Alex?
April 4th, 2009 at 10:08 am
How about we just lop his head off Anon? Maybe take his house and put his wife and kids on the street too.
April 4th, 2009 at 10:19 am
Glenn I believe “lopping off his head” is only an option if MPD takes Stimulus money from “His Trajesty the Boy King”.
April 4th, 2009 at 10:38 am
And only if he’s a conservative gus.
I understand Anon’s passion on this suject of OWI, and there are certainly enough examples of why someone should be passionate about this problem. I just want to emphasize that nowhere on this thread have I or anybody else suggested that this guy should not be charged nor has anyone made any excuse for his actions. My point in responding to BHB’s comment was to point out how a group of liberal activist judges in Iowa can “make” law without any repercussions, and this guy will certainly (and deservedly) be punished for his actions. Now if that’s not good enough, then I doubt there’s anything I can say to address an obsession.
April 4th, 2009 at 11:14 am
“Who is Darnell Cole for $1000.00 Alex?”
I know who Darnell Cole is but who is Alex, Gus? Am I suppose to know what you are talking about?
April 4th, 2009 at 11:50 am
“How about we just lop his head off Anon? Maybe take his house and put his wife and kids on the street too.”
Glenn…speaking of lopping heads off…this guy could have easily lopped an innocent person’s head off had he crashed into them…and if his wife and kids were to end up on the street it would be due to HIS actions…not mine or anyone else who thinks we need tougher OWI laws. I am sure those who were KILLED by drunk/drugged drivers would have jumped at the chance of LIVING on the streets instead of being DEAD.
“Now if that’s not good enough, then I doubt there’s anything I can say to address an obsession.”
What could you possibly mean by “obsession”?
April 4th, 2009 at 12:04 pm
Anon, Darnell Cole could have killed your family.
Where is your outrage Anon?
You’re not very bright are you?
He didn’t lop off anyones head Anon. Did he?
Settle down Anon, everything is going to be alright. The Cop will be punished, he’ll lose his job and your family will be forever safe from Head Lopping.
April 4th, 2009 at 12:23 pm
Gus…go back and read Glenn’s comment to me and try to comprehend what he said. It’s not about the drunk driver being a cop with me. Glenn KNOWS that….
The reason for my first comment was because there is no comparison between the topic of gay rights and what is happening in Iowa and drunk drivers. The MPD Sergeant is not the only person in this world to face punitive discipline for drunk driving and to suggest he is being signaled out because he is a cop is incorrect.
April 4th, 2009 at 1:39 pm
Anon, I don’t want to be mean or rude to you, but trust me, Glenn and I are on the same page. I’m sure Glenn will affirm that.
I’ve got 2 law enforcement officers as brothers. Both have been in extremely dangerous and high profile situations in their careers. Both have faced the possibility of imminent death as they were literally protecting and serving. Both would be shit-canned if they drove drunk. Both would be news stories if the drove drunk.
The Sgt. in this story has sacrificed a lot for our community. He has protected US and served US.
I don’t think we should be overly harsh on a first time drunk driver, but he should be punished.
I will not forget the sacrifices he made for you and for me.
April 4th, 2009 at 2:42 pm
As far as Iowa, I have trouble seeing “gay marriage” as a rights issue. I’m curious what the reaction will be when the first “gay divorces” hit the courts. In either cases, judges should not make law - that’s reserved for legislative bodies. People will talk about the judges. Right or wrong, that’s the worst punishment they’ll suffer for their actions.
Regardless of past service, this sergeant was WAY over the line. He deserves whatever he gets.
April 4th, 2009 at 7:06 pm
I agree BHB, and that was my original point.
April 4th, 2009 at 7:22 pm
Bhb,the officer deserves the same punishment that you or I would get. We have one set of laws not 2.
April 4th, 2009 at 8:48 pm
Gus -
I agree, so far as the courts are concerned. I’m not sure how I feel about his continued employment at MPD. I’m sure there’s a union contract and an Employee Assistance program that apply to one extent or another.
April 4th, 2009 at 10:34 pm
A tip for bloggers:
From the Volokh Conspiracy, 4/4/09
http://volokh.com/
“Guide to Libel Law: The folks over at Public Citizen have just released what looks like a very useful guide to avoiding libel/defamation liability (and libel/defamation litigation) for “bloggers and non-profit organizations.” It’s a good idea, and nicely executed. Public Citizen, though unabashedly of the “left,” has done some terrific work over the last decade in an area that is also dear to the heart of many on the “right,” namely protecting the rights of individuals on the Net to speak freely (and, if they so choose, anonymously). And whereas 25 years ago 99% of the population could go about a lifetime’s worth of business without ever thinking about the laws of libel and defamation, that is no longer true, thanks to the Net — another Internet-enabled change in the scale of the relevant legal domain.”
http://www.citizen.org/litigation/briefs/IntFreeSpch/articles.cfm?ID=18475
April 5th, 2009 at 7:08 am
the officer deserves the same punishment that you or I would get. We have one set of laws not 2.
Ditto
April 5th, 2009 at 8:15 am
BHB, I don’t recall anyone in recent times getting terminated from MPD for a first time OWI unless perhaps there were additional factors involved. In my opinion, any such discipline would be extreme and indicative of disparate punishment. I understand that law enforcement is held to a higher standard and have no problem with that concept so long as it stays within reason. My best recollection of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) is that termination on the basis of alcoholism is not an acceptable punishment unless the alcoholism prevents one from performing his or her duties in the workplace. If my recollection is correct, and there have been no modifications to the ADA, then any Police Department has to carefully weigh its options when considering what discipline is appropriate. Most reasonable people acknowledge PTSD in combat veterans and accept reasonable dispositions when that is a factor in an incident. It can be a sometime overused and even invalid excuse, but unless we have more background on the individual involved, we cannot rule it out nor can we demand termination when that is not the norm. That said, unless there is more to this incident that has gone unreported by the media, he will undoubtedly be charged by a prosecuting attorney for this offense and all the facts presented thus far indicate a Department Rule violation of being “unfit for duty” which will surely result in some kind of disciplinary action by the Department. Thus, the “higher standard” kicks in.
April 5th, 2009 at 10:03 am
I think we all understand the law needs to be applied evenly and I have never heard of a case involving a LEO where the law was not applied evenly.
An employer can decide what kind of discipline an individual will receive based on his/her actions…just like in the Darnell Cole case.
What happens to him at work and what happens to him in court are two separate issues.
I am sure this MPD Sergeant will claim he has an alcohol problem in order to save his job using (or abusing) the ADA.
April 5th, 2009 at 10:50 am
Giggle
April 5th, 2009 at 11:52 am
If I received drunk driving citation, I would not lose my job. I don’t understand why people like Anon want to apply a different standard to the MPD Sergeant that was busted for DWI. Again, I would not lose my job and I would not be mentioned on the news either.
Obviously the MPD should be concerned since the officer was severly intoxicated. I would hope there is some intervention to look into the possible problems this sergeant is having with dealing with the stress that goes along with his job. It sounds like he is now on administrative duty so hopefully the dept is addressing the situation.
To suggest that he should lose his job is ridiculous and applies a completely different standard than what is applied to most people in the same situation. I do know of some people who would immediately lose their job if they received a DWI while driving a company vehicle. I don’t think the sergeant was driving a squard car or was on duty at the time.
Forgive my rant on this subject but I’m really tired of the world expecting police officers to be able to handle all the crap the world wants to hand them and then at the same time expect them to handle it all perfectly. I don’t know how they continue to work so hard in the face of the garbage and total lack of appreciation they receive but thank God they do.
How about a little understanding and offer of help instead of the usual attack.
April 5th, 2009 at 2:57 pm
I don’t recall anybody attacking the officer in question. I don’t know what should be done about continued employment. I’d be far more sympathetic if the b.a.c had been lower. Bear in mind that we’re talking about a sworn officer who daily goes armed in our midst. No matter how much I suport the police, I cannot in good conscience argue that he should be held to a lower standard than an MATC president.
April 5th, 2009 at 7:41 pm
I don’t agree with the firing of the MATC president either. I had the same thoughts about a different standard when that news came out. I did hear that there was possibly something in his contract to support his firing. Still I don’t agree.
Overall it just seems that different standards are applied to some people.
Like it or not, first offense drunk driving is not a criminal offense. If the law is changed to a criminal offense then we’re talking a different scenerio. Obviously, conviction of a crime would be reason for dismissal for a police officer. I’m just arguing that for a first time drunk driving offense, they should be treated the same as you and I. The argument about him being a sworn office who is armed is irrelevant since he was not on duty.
What I was referring to as attack is the comments posted by Anon. Yes, I hope he does claim to have a problem with alcohol and receives the help he most likely needs. There are reasons why police officers suffer higher rates of alcoholism, divorce, suicide, etc. But people like Anon are quick to judge that it would be an abuse to claim a problem with alcohol.
April 5th, 2009 at 8:32 pm
Trudy - you say being a sworn officer who is armed is not relevant. I cannot agree. It is not only his conduct the evening he was cited that is called into question, but also his judgement. That judgement, or lack thereof, is with him 24/7/365.
If he needs help, I hope he gets it, and deals with whatever problems he may face successfully. In the interim, I feel I have legitimate cause for concern.
April 5th, 2009 at 9:41 pm
Bhb, I agree. (I usually agree as you are intelligent).
But, the Cop did not offend under Color of his Badge. To punitively adjudicate the Cop because of his job would be wrong. One set of laws. The Police Dept. in question should further sanction him, as they deem fit and necessary. Being drunk and making a bad decision to drive IS NOT related to your “on the job” decision making process to any degree in my opinion. At least not if it was a SINGLE infraction. But I could be convinced otherwise. Where I diverge is where Law Enforcement, like FANNIE MAE and FREDDIE MAC are coerced to hire “less than qualified” Officers, yet they hold a good man to such a standard upon a mistake or singular incident. Again I believe I could be persuaded otherwise. The fact that the Officer did NOT kill someone is but the Grace of God. That is true of ALL of US who have been guilty yet not caught or punished for this offense. I’m biased, but I am also intellectually honest. I know that I have driven under the influence when I should not have. I know that at least one of my two Cop brothers have too.
We are all sinners. Most of us have escaped legal responsibility for things we’ve done outside of the law.
Barry Obama has admitted as much.
April 6th, 2009 at 6:44 am
Trudy…what I said was “using (OR abusing) the ADA”. Only he knows which one it will be. But…I will tell you this…I have seen both happen so it’s not an “attack” to suggest the ADA does get abused.
There are different standards for different professions. I don’t see anything wrong with the different standards. Some jobs have moral clauses and some don’t…and those who decide to take the oath to uphold the laws know exactly what is expected of them and need to live accordingly…or face discipline. It’s the nature of the beast.
April 6th, 2009 at 7:45 am
Well stated Gus:
There are people that judge and envy others. They do not realize that by acting this way they will find themselves judged more harshly.
Somewhat like the people that vote to tax their neighbors. They will find themselves taxed.
Why not concentrate on what you are doing, how you can help, how you can get paid, instead of concentrating on others.
Anon is in great denial. Take a good look at yourself.
April 6th, 2009 at 8:17 am
John Smith…when someone is driving drunk on the public streets it becomes EVERYONE’S business, and I can’t think of anyone who would be envious or jealous of a person who can’t control himself long enough to not put everyone else’s life in danger.
And…where do you get off trying to make it personal and about me? Really…John…what do YOU know about me? Are you really that weak you have to take cheap shots at me? Pfft.
April 6th, 2009 at 9:01 am
Anon, why don’t you get off your high horse and quit judging everyone else. Its not personal, its reality. Pointing the finger at every one else is not going to fix your problems. Only you can fix your problems.
If you really look at yourself, you will find that you don’t deserve anything and are not qualified to judge others. You are in denial, self negligence.
We are all public officals, what we do or do not do directly affects the community we live in. I think it is a greater offense to the community to not participate, not to make sure your kids to school with lunch in hand. To judge and evaluate others not yourself. Those kids that don’t attend school, will more likely commit greater offenses, create greater problems, probably drug driving.
Yes, drunk driving is a crime and there are things in place. Are you more likely to be killed by a drunk driver or you doctor or someone speeding or someone not paying attention. You have been influenced by the media to concentrate on what they say you deserve. Wake up.
April 6th, 2009 at 12:06 pm
Man. I feel like I am in the twilight zone.
April 6th, 2009 at 12:28 pm
Agreed.
April 6th, 2009 at 12:47 pm
No…John. I’m pretty sure you ARE in the twilight zone. I just feel like it when I read your comments.
April 6th, 2009 at 12:50 pm
Paging Roland Melnick. Roland Melnick, please report to customer service.
April 6th, 2009 at 1:36 pm
The twilight zone where because you think your a good person and you can accuse others of pretending to have an alcohol addiction to save their jobs. Where you have never personally put other lives in danger? Where everyone else should be hung high at everyone else’s expense except good person Anon. Sounds like denial to me?