Mayor Soglin, take on Mo Cheeks and defend Mike Koval!

The sophisticated, Putin-endorsed political detection system here at the Manor is picking up emanations that well meaning citizens would like to step in where the Madison Common Council won’t by starting a voluntary legal defense fund for Police Chief Mike Koval.

We consulted our chancellor of the exchequer and her verdict is “Not one red cent.”

Witch Trial

Madison Common Council debates Koval reimbursement

Like it or not, Mike Koval works for the City of Madison. Its city council is in the grips of the Great White Guilt. In the spirit of Obama, police are the enemy for “over-policing” crime-ridden areas of town, for defending themselves against drug-crazed attackers, for not allowing the perpetrators of crime (looking at you, Jenelle Laird) to decide whether they want to be arrested or not.

 

Professional agitators are thanked for shouting Racism in a crowded council chamber but neighborhood watch citizens who dare approach the alders are given the third degree.

Meanwhile up the hill at the State Capitol, legislation is advancing that would end catch and release of young toughs like the repeat offenders who killed a City of Milwaukee building inspector (in broad daylight! While on the job!) in order to hijack his automobile. (Assembly Bill 88 and AB 89.) More here.

Madison had a chance to make a small difference by electing Steve Fitzsimmons and Dave Handowski in the southwest side. Voters on April 4 chose otherwise.

The police union endorsed both challengers but its campaign contribution was well short of the maximum allowed by law. Given that it endorsed only two other candidates and that those candidates had no opposition one can surmise that the police union’s campaign treasury was in no danger of depletion. Over 500 men and women work for the department. Did any of them write a personal check to the campaigns? We are not aware of a single one.

So as ye reap

Eventually, the council will have to vote on paying Koval’s $22,000 legal bill to defend himself against the absurd charges lodged with the Police and Fire Commission. It only takes six alders to deny his claim.

The fact is, the PFC issued a mixed message. That was on purpose. It takes the PFC off the hook and puts the council in the cross hairs.

Haven’t spoken with the man recently but friends tell me Mike Koval is greatly disheartened by the Council’s non-action. If so, he is reading it the same way as I am. As the Policy Werkes said months ago, this Council will not approve the chief’s reimbursement. Koval can bring suit, but that would put him in hock another $20,000. It would be a tough case to win. If the Council has a vote — and they do — they have discretion.

The man could quit. Madison doesn’t deserve him. The better course of action would be to stay and keep pounding that desk.

Mike Koval would make one helluva powerful candidate for mayor two years hence. One that The Emerald City deserves. Mo Cheeks can harvest the anti-cop vote; Paul Soglin can try to walk the tightrope but he loses to a candidate who would be The First Black Mayor in Madison History. Never under-estimate the liberal-progressive-socialist need for warm fuzzies.

Koval can rescue liberalism from its headlong descent into madness and return it to something that JFK would have recognized. I’ll write that campaign check myself.

Advertisements

About David Blaska

Madison WI
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

12 Responses to Mayor Soglin, take on Mo Cheeks and defend Mike Koval!

  1. Eric Z says:

    Now you’re complaining that a Union didnt spend enough on a candidate? C’mon now Dave. If it was MTI contributing to a candidate you’d be howling about it.

    Like

    • David Blaska says:

      Nope, not complaining. Just stating as fact. You get what you pay for. Or don’t pay for. MTI is willing to spend. Madison Police, not so much. Just ask Chief Koval as he tries to get recompensed for defending a frivolous complaint.

      Like

  2. You are right on to suggest that the Chief run for mayor. He already kicks butt replying and responding to the citizens of Madison, something neither mayor or Cheeks do well if at all!!! And speaking to AB 88 and AB 89, be glad you don’t live in Milwaukee! However, that may be Madison’s future if we don’t turn this ship around and soon. By the looks of all the homes for sale in Madison, change may already be afoot.

    Like

  3. Marcus says:

    Why on God’s Green Earth would the Chief want to run this awful city. He’s much smarter than that.

    Like

  4. Balboa says:

    I hear about the “white flight” from cities all the time by liberals and progressives. We moved out of Madison 5 years ago, best thing we ever did. Now when I hear how insane they are with regards to policy and programs. I just laugh because the City of Madison likes to create it’s own problems by overthinking issues to the nth degree. Next on the list when kids are done with school to get the heck out of Dane County.

    Like

  5. Dan B. says:

    Might it be that the city if Madison is expressing via the ballot box just how embarrassed it is that the police here shoot unarmed citizens and seem to be uninterested in participating in an examination of the practices that led to such horrific incidents? Does the MPD even do a good job? Madison is generally considered a safe city, but the cops have done a lot of killing of people who weren’t shooting at them recently. What does the cold case file look like? Isn’t the top of State, feet from the Capitol, still an open-air drug market? If Koval is at all interested in being mayor, then he is not fit to be chief. As for the Blaska vote of confidence, you might want to play that a little closer to the vest. Ask Fitzsimmons how much your support helped him in the election.

    Like

    • David Blaska says:

      When a 190-pound man in the full strength of young manhood and a head full of drugs wrestles you in a narrow staircase, you are not going to risk that crazed fellow taking your service weapon and using it on the police officer and on innocent passersby. Not so coincidentally, Tony T. Jr. had been assaulting complete strangers at random. He was so out of control that his three buds, men in their 20s, could not control him. They called the police. This was an experienced drug abuser who took a double dose. Suicide by cop?

      This incident was examined by an independent agency and the officer was exonerated. All he did was defend his life.

      “Cops have done a lot of killing of people who weren’t shooting at them?” Gawd, you’re an awful mess, Dan B. No, the crazy home invader who chased out the residents waving a saber wasn’t shooting. The man who had just knifed to death another human being and now came at the cop wasn’t shooting, either. Or the time a few months ago when the police were lured to Raymond Road for the purpose of being shot at. They arrested the guy, unharmed.

      You do NOT attack a police officer.

      Like

      • Dan B. says:

        While you argue that it was reasonable, necessary even, for those people to be killed, I disagree. You leave out the name Paul Heenan. He did not attack a cop in a narrow hallway. All that was necessary to killing him was a step or two backwards. Instead, he was shot and killed by Steve Heimsness, an angry cop who had a record of violence and overreaction. Heimsness was fired, but not for ending an unarmed person’s life on a city sidewalk in front of his friends. That killing caused many to wonder whether calling a cop when things go bump in the night is the right thing to do. Because when you embrace guns, guns are the solution to a lot of problems. Killing someone ends one person’s life and likely ruins another’s. Seems like cops should embrace researching changes to practices that might reduce those instances. But Dave insists we hold the line. That seems to be a minority opinion in this town.

        Like

      • Patricko says:

        And isn’t it curious that of the two instances of police related deaths, it was Tony Robinson and not Paul Heenan, that got a huge settlement from the city? I wonder what differential could possibly account for that outcome?

        Like

  6. Batman says:

    The common denominator of serious and sometimes deadly confrontations with police is resisting arrest and defying commands. It is unwise to do so regardless of how unfair and unwarranted it may be or seem to be at the time. One can deal with the situation later with the help of a lawyer instead of a hospital or morgue.

    A citizen does not have to be armed to be a lethal threat to a police officer. The police have a job where every encounter with a citizen can be lethal. That must have a profound psychological impact upon the police.
    This youtube video is one example of what can happen with an unarmed citizen.

    Like

  7. David Blaska says:

    We should also point out that Paul Heenan attacked the police officer after invading a home in the wee hours of the morning and starting a fight with the homeowner. Heenan was three times the legal drunk limit but it’s everyone else’s fault he died.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s