Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
>> HI EVERYONE.
WELCOME TO "INTERCHANGE."
I'M DAN JONES.
THANKS FOR JOINING US.
WE HAVE IMPORTANT THINGS TO TALK
ABOUT TODAY.
WE'LL TALK ABOUT FORMER
MILWAUKEE COUNTY EXECUTIVE TOM
AMENT, WHO DIED THE OTHER DAY.
WE'LL TALK ABOUT THE TWO
MILWAUKEE TEENAGERS WHO WERE
SHOT AND KILLED THIS WEEK WHILE
ALLEGEDLY BEATING UP A
MAINTENANCE MAN.
AND WE'LL TALK ABOUT THE STATE
LEGISLATURE DOING AWAY WITH
EARLY VOTING ON THE WEEKENDS.
LET ME INTRODUCE EVERYONE.
YOU KNOW JOEL MCNALLY, LONGTIME
NEWSPAPER COLUMNIST, WHO JUST
THE OTHER DAY RECEIVED A
LIFETIME ACHIEVEMENT AWARD FROM
THE ACLU OF WISCONSIN.
AVI LANK, WHO SPENT MANY YEARS
AS A VERY RESPECTED BUSINESS
REPORTER, AND NOW ACTS AS AN
OCCASIONAL ESSAYIST FOR UWM
PUBLIC RADIO.
AND DENISE CALLAWAY,
COMMUNICATIONS AND PUBLIC
RELATIONS PROFESSIONAL.
RICK HOROWITZ WILL BE ALONG WITH
COMMENTARY AT THE END OF THE
SHOW.
LET'S TALK FIRST ABOUT FORMER
MILWAUKEE COUNTY EXECUTIVE
AMENT.
LONGTIME POLITICIAN WHO RESIGNED
BACK IN 2002 AFTER THE COUNTY
PENSION SCANDAL, WHICH REVEALED
SOME VETERAN COUNTY EMPLOYEES
COULD RETIRE WITH PENSION
BONUSES OF HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS
OF DOLLARS, MANY OF WHICH HAVE
DONE JUST THAT.
HE CLAIMED IT WAS IGNORANCE
WHICH LED HE AND COUNTY
SUPERVISORS TO APPROVE THE
PACKAGE.
FOR BETTER OR WORSE, IT WILL
PROBABLY BE WHAT HE IS
REMEMBERED FOR.
IS THIS FAIR?
>> THAT HE'S REMEMBERED FOR
THAT, IT'S FAIR.
THAT HE WAS IGNORANT OF IT, I
WONDER ABOUT IT.
I DID A LOT OF -- I DIDN'T BREAK
THIS STORY, BUT I DID A LOT OF
REPORTING ON IT ONCE IT WAS OUT
THERE IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST,
AND I DON'T THINK THAT TOM AMENT
DID IT IN A KIND OF VENAL
MANNER.
I THINK HE PROBABLY HAD PEOPLE
AROUND HIM WHO SUGGESTED THIS
SHOULD BE DONE.
IT SOUNDED LIKE A GOOD IDEA.
YOU HAVE TO REMEMBER THAT BACK
THEN, THE COUNTY PENSION AND
MOST FUNDED PENSION PLANS HAD
VERY LARGE SURPLUSES IN THEM,
AND PEOPLE COULD THINK, YOU
KNOW, WE CAN BE MORE GENEROUS
THAN WE HAD THOUGHT TO BE, AND
YOU LIVE IN THE KIND OF BUBBLE
THAT AMENT AND A LOT OF PEOPLE
WHO RAINED STILL RUN THE -- RAN
AND STILL RUN THE COUNTY LIVE IN
WHICH IS THE BUBBLE OF THE
COURTHOUSE, PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT,
NOT NECESSARILY SEEING
EVERYTHING THAT IT'S GOING TO
LOOK LIKE ON THE OUTSIDE AND TOM
AMENT HAD THE PERSONALITY OF A
WET SPONGE.
HE WAS VERY MUCH ONE OF THESE
PEOPLE WHO, IF EDDIE SIDED TO,
HE -- IF HE HAD DECIDED TO, HE
COULD HAVE HID IN PLAIN SIGHT.
SO HE WAS ABLE IN A LOW KEY WAY
TOO GET THIS ENACTED.
I'M SURE HE KNEW WHAT WAS SAID
IF NOT IN EVERY LITTLE
PARTICULAR.
IF YOU GO BACK AN LOOK AT WHAT
THE UNION LEADERS SAY AT THE
TIME OF THE PENSION PLAN GOING
THROUGH, THEY WERE FLABBERGASTED
THAT THE COUNTY WAS PROPOSING
THIS TO THEY WILL.
THIS WAS NOT SOMETHING THE
UNIONS ASKED FOR, IT WAS
SOMETHING THAT WAS PROPOSED TO
THEM.
IT'S VERY HARD FOR ME TO BELIEVE
THAT HE DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT IT.
TO HIS CREDIT, HE NEVER DID
AVAIL HIMSELF OF MOST OF THE
BENEFITS HE COULD TAKE FROM IT.
LIKE I SAID, I DON'T THINK HE
WAS A VENAL MAN, I DON'T THINK
HE WAS A DISHONEST MAN, BUT I
THINK HE WAS A MAN WHO LIVED IN
A PLACE AND A TIME WHERE DOING
SOMETHING LIKE THIS DID NOT SEEM
PARTICULARLY THAT EXTRAORDINARY
TO HIM UNTIL PEOPLE WHO DID NOT
LIVE IN THE SAME PLACE AS HE DID
GOT A HOLD OF IT AND THEN
EVERYTHING, YOU KNOW, EVERYTHING
BROKE LOOSE, AND HE WILL BE
REMEMBERED FOR THE LASTING HARM
FISCALLY IT HAS DONE TO THIS
COMMUNITY.
>> DENISE, HE STEPPED DOWN, A
LOT OF THE COUNTY SUPERVISORS
WHO VOTED FOR IT WERE RECALLED.
YOU AND I HAVE BOTH BEEN TO MANY
COUNTY BOARD MEETINGS, CITY
COUNCIL MEETINGS, WHERE PEOPLE
ARE VOTING ON THINGS THEY KNOW
ABSOLUTELY NOTHING ABOUT.
DO YOU THINK ONE OF THE REASONS
THAT PENSION PACKAGE PASSED WAS
BECAUSE PEOPLE JUST APPROVED IT
AND REALLY DIDN'T FLOW WHAT IT
WAS ALL ABOUT?
>> IT CERTAINLY WAS VERY
COMPLEX.
ONE PERSON WHO I THINK TIME HAS
CERTAINLY TOLD KNEW IT AND HAD
CONCERNS ABOUT IT WAS FORMER
COUNTY SUPERVISOR LYNNE DEBRUIN.
SHE WAS THE ONLY COUNTY
SUPERVISOR WHO VOTED AGAINST THE
NEW PENSION PLAN, THE BOONDOGGLE
AS WE WOULD THINK OF IT BEING
NOW, SO I THINK IT'S A VERY,
VERY COMPLEX -- IT WAS A VERY
COMPLEX PROCESS, VERY COMPLEX
PROGRAM THAT THEY PUT IN FRONT
OF THEM THAT QUITE FRANKLY, SOME
OF THE COUNTY'S OWN FINANCIAL
PEOPLE HAD DIFFICULT
UNDERSTANDING.
I THINK THE LESSON OUT OF THAT
IS IF YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND IT,
AS COUNTY SUPERVISORS, YOU DON'T
VOTE ON IT UNTIL YOU DO.
BUT I DO THINK THAT ONE OF THE
THINGS THAT IS REALLY KIND OF
INTERESTING, I DON'T DISAGREE
WITH AVI, BUT I THINK ONE THING
ABOUT TOM AMENT IS THAT HE
EXPECTED GREAT LOYALTY FROM THE
PEOPLE AROUND HIM, THAT HE WAS
ALSO VERY LOYAL AND VERY
TRUSTING TO THOSE FOLKS WHO HE
ALSO KEPT VERY CLOSE TO HIM.
AND I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS
THAT HAPPENED, AND CAN OFTEN
HAPPEN WITH VETERAN POLITICIANS
IS YOU DON'T ALWAYS PAY ENOUGH
ATTENTION TO WHAT'S GOING ON
AROUND YOU, THAT TRUST SOMETIMES
IS NOT NECESSARILY MISPLACED,
BUT THERE ISN'T THE RIGHT AMOUNT
OF SKEPTICISM AROUND SOMETIMES
WHAT AIDES ARE PROPOSING.
I THINK THAT'S PART OF WHAT HE
GOT CAUGHT IN TO.
I THINK HE MAY HAVE HAD SOME
QUESTIONS.
I DON'T KNOW THAT HE FULLY
UNDERSTOOD IT HIMSELF.
>> I WOULD AGREE THAT HE
PROBABLY DIDN'T FULLY UNDERSTAND
IT HIMSELF AND I WOULD AGREE
THAT HE WOULD HAVE TRUSTED
PEOPLE WHO WOULD HAVE PROPOSED
IT TO HIM, BUT I WILL TELL YOU
THE REASON I THINK THAT THERE
WERE PEOPLE THERE WHO KNEW VERY
VERY WELL WHAT WAS GOING ON --
>> THERE'S NO DOUBT ABOUT THAT.
>> THE REASON FOR THAT IS THE
THING THAT FINALLY DID SEND
SOMEONE TO JAIL, WAS THAT NO ACT
-- ACTUARIAL REPORT WAS MADE
OF THIS.
IT NEVER EVEN OCCURRED TO ME
THAT -- WAS A POSSIBILITY THAT
IT DIDN'T EXIST.
I DIDN'T ASK TO SEE IT AND I
PROBABLY SHOULD HAVE, BUT I
SUSPECT THE REASON IT WASN'T
DONE WAS THAT IF IT HAD BEEN,
THERE MIGHT HAVE BEEN MORE LYNNE
DEBRUINS AROUND THAT DIDN'T WANT
THAT TO HAPPEN.
IT'S HARD FOR ME TO BELIEVE THAT
AMENT WAS UNAWARE OF THAT KIND
OF POLITICS AT THAT KIND OF
LEVEL TO GET IT THROUGH.
>> THERE'S BEEN SO MUCH SPECK
LAYING THAT HE WAS SET UP --
SPECULATION THAT HE WAS SET UP?
>> I DON'T THINK HE WAS SET UP,
BUT I HAVE TO DISAGREE A LITTLE
BIT WITH THE CONVERSATION.
I THINK AVI MAKES A GREAT POINT
THAT PENSIONS, HUGE SURPLUSES,
THERE WAS A BIG ECONOMIC BOOM
GOING ON, AND TWO THINGS WERE
INVOLVED.
ONE WAS THAT THIS WAS A WAY TO
REWARD THE UNIONS OUT OF THE
SURPLUS IN THE PENSION FUND,
RATHER THAN RAISING PROPERTY
TAXES.
AND THIS TAX CUT POLITICS YOU
KNOW, WHICH, YOU KNOW, SCOTT
WALKER, THE GOVERNOR OF THIS
STATE HAS MADE HIS NUMBER ONE,
YOU KNOW, JOB OF GOVERNMENT IS
TO CUT POLITICS, -- IS TO CUT
TAXES, NOT TO DO ANYTHING DECENT
FOR ANYBODY, BUT THE OTHER THING
WAS THE TOTAL FAILURE OF THE
"THE MILWAUKEE JOURNAL
SENTINEL."
THIS STORY WAS NOT BROKE BY THE
DAILY NEWSPAPER, IT WAS BROKEN
BY A MAGAZINE WRITER BRUCE
MURPHY, WHO DID IT FIRST ON A
WEB SITE AND THEN DID IT FOR
"MILWAUKEE MAGAZINE" AND THEN,
YOU KNOW, THE "JOURNAL SENTINEL"
MADE IT A BIG CRUSADE AFTER THEY
HAD TOTALLY MISSED THE STORY.
IF YOU DON'T REPORT ON WHAT THE
COUNTY BOARD IS DOING, THEY CAN
PASS ALL KINDS OF THINGS.
AND THEY DID.
BUT THE OTHER THING -- A COUPLE
MORE THINGS I DO WANT TO SAY
THOUGH IS THAT AVI TALKED ABOUT
TOM AMENT'S LOW KEY PERSONALITY,
WHICH IS ABSOLUTELY TRUE, BUT
THAT LOW KEY PERSONALITY ALSO
MANAGED TO DO SOME VERY GOOD
THINGS.
HE MANAGED TO PASS SOME THINGS
THAT COULD HAVE BEEN
CONTROVERSIAL, BUT BECAUSE OF
THE WAY HE DID IT, AND THE KIND
OF PERSON HE WAS, IT DIDN'T STIR
A LOT OF CONTROVERSY, AND ONE OF
THEM WAS A PROJECT THAT MY WIFE
WAS INVOLVED IN, WHICH WAS AN
ALTERNATIVE TO INCARCERATION,
THAT PEOPLE WHO WERE CONVICTED
OF CRIMES, RATHER THAN GOING TO
JAIL OR PRISON, THAT YOU KNOW,
COULD RUIN THEIR LIVES AND MAKE
THEM UNEMPLOYABLE THE REST OF
THEIR LIVES, INSTEAD WERE
REFERRED TO WHAT WAS CALL THE
DAY REPORTING CENTER, WHICH TOM
AMENT PUT INTO THE BUDGET, AT
$100,000 ORIGINALLY, AND IT'S
KNOW GROWN TO A -- NOW GROWN
INTO A MILLION DOLLAR PROJECT
THAT PEOPLE WHO GO TO OR ARE
SENT TO THE DAY REPORTING
CENTER, GET DRUG TREATMENT, JOB
SKILLS, THEY, YOU KNOW, IN FACT,
CAN GET AN EDUCATION, FINISH
THEIR EDUCATION, AND 80% OF THE
PEOPLE WHO COME THROUGH THAT
PROGRAM DO NOT RECOMMIT CRIMES
OVER THE NEXT THREE YEARS.
IN SOME OF THE -- NOW, THAT
WOULD HAVE BEEN A CONTROVERSIAL
PROGRAM THAT RIGHT WING RADIO
WOULD HAVE GONE CRAZY OVER,
EXCEPT THAT THEY DIDN'T EVEN
NOTICE WHEN IT PASSED, BECAUSE
OF TOM AMENT.
SO HE DID A LOT OF -- HE DID A
LOT OF GOOD THINGS IN THAT WAY
TOO, BUT THE OTHER THING IS, I
COVERED THE COUNTY BOARD, I DO
NOT REMEMBER THE COUNTY BOARD
EVER PASSING ANYTHING CONNECTED
TO PENSIONS THAT THEY DIDN'T
KNOW EXACTLY HOW --
>> I ABSOLUTELY AGREE WITH THAT,
AND I DON'T HAVE THE PROOF OF
THIS IN THIS CASE, BUT I AGREE
WITH THAT OBSERVATION, AND NOT
JUST THE COUNTY BOARD.
I COVERED THE COMMON COUNCIL AT
THE SAME TIME.
>> WE BOTH DID.
>> YES.
CORRECT.
>> AND IF THERE WAS SOMETHING
THAT PERSONALLY AFFECTED A
MEMBER, THEY GENERALLY KNEW
ABOUT IT TO THE NICKEL.
>> BUT YOU KNOW, THE THING IS,
WE SPENT ALL THIS TIME TALKING
ABOUT THIS ONE PIECE OF HIS
30-YEARLONG YEAR, AND I THINK
THE THING THAT MAYBE ADDITIONAL
TIME THAT PASSES WILL BE A
LITTLE KINDER TO HIS MEMORY,
THERE ARE SOME THINGS IN
MILWAUKEE THAT WOULDN'T BE HERE
IF IT WOULDN'T BE FOR TOM AMENT.
YOU MENTIONED ONE OF THEM.
HE WAS CRITICAL IN THE MILLER
PARK CONSTRUCTION PIECE.
HE WAS CRITICAL IN TERMS OF WHAT
HAPPENED AROUND THE BRADLEY
CENTER.
BEING WHERE IT IS.
SO I THINK THAT -- BUT OF
COURSE, THAT'S ANOTHER STORY NOW
WITH WHAT SOME PEOPLE THINK IS
TOO OLD OF A BUILDING, BUT HE IS
THE ONE --
>> THAT OLD WRECK.
>> HE'S THE ONE THAT REALLY
DEVOTED THE 30 YEARS OF HIS LIFE
TO THE CITIZENS OF MILWAUKEE
COUNTY.
HE DIDN'T WANT TO BE ANYTHING
ELSE.
HE DID NOT SEE BEING COUNTY
EXECUTIVE.
>> AND THAT COULD GO BACK TO
WHAT I SAID AT THE BEGINNING,
THAT'S PART OF THE SORT OF THE
TRAGEDY OF ALL OF THIS, BECAUSE
HE WAS IN A -- HE WAS IN A
BUBBLE.
>> AND IF IT WERE NOT FOR THE
ECONOMIC CRASH THAT CAME ALONG
BECAUSE OF THE NATIONAL ECONOMY,
UNDER REPUBLICAN PRESIDENT WE
KNOW WELL, YOU KNOW, THOSE
SURPLUSES AND PENSION FUNDS, YOU
KNOW, IT MAY HAVE CONTINUED AND
IT MAY NOT HAVE BEEN THE HUGE
FINANCIAL DRAG ON THE COUNTY
THAT IT IS NOW.
>> I AGREE THAT IT WOULDN'T HAVE
BEEN AS BIG A DRAG, BUT IT
PROBABLY WOULD NOT HAVE DONE
MUCH TO CHANGE THE PUBLIC
OUTRAGE THAT CAME WITH THEY SAW
THAT PUBLIC EMPLOYEES WERE
TAKING SIX AND EVEN IN RARE
CASES, SEVEN-FIGURE PAYOUTS FROM
THIS FUND.
>> NEXT TOPIC.
TWO TEENAGERS WERE SHOT AND
KILLED THE OTHER DAY BY A
MAINTENANCE MAN IN MILWAUKEE.
THEY ALLEGEDLY WERE INVOLVED IN
A FIGHT WITH THE GUY, BEATING
HIM UP, WHEN HE PULLED A GUN AND
SHOT THEM.
AT FIRST IT SOUNDS LIKE
SELF-DEFENSE, BUT THE
MAINTENANCE MAN IS BEING HELD IN
JAIL WHILE THEY LOOK AT THE
POSSIBILITY OF HOMICIDE CHARGES.
THEY HAVEN'T DECIDED IF THEY'RE
GOING TO CHARGE HIM WITH
ANYTHING.
IF IT WAS SELF-DEFENSE, DOESN'T
THIS GUY HAVE THE RIGHT TO KILL
HIS ATTACKERS?
AND WILL THIS TURN INTO ONE BIG
POLITICAL MESS BECAUSE OF THE
DIFFERING VIEWS AS TO WHETHER OR
NOT PEOPLE SHOULD CARRY GUNS?
HE HAD A CONCEALED CARRY PERMIT
AND HAD A GUN, DID HE PROTECT
HIMSELF AND USE THE PERMIT FOR
WHAT IT WAS INTENDED?
>> WELL, THE THING IS, THERE
WAS, YOU KNOW, POSSIBLY LETHAL
VIOLENCE ON BOTH SIDES.
YOU KNOW, THE KIDS WITH THE
BASEBALL BAT AND HIM WITH A
DEADLY WEAPON.
AND THE REPORTING ON THIS HAS
BEEN SO CONFUSING.
NO ONE REALLY KNOWS WHAT
HAPPENED IN THAT BUILDING.
WITH THAT GROUP OF PEOPLE, AND I
CERTAINLY THINK IT'S APPROPRIATE
FOR THE POLICE AND THE DISTRICT
ATTORNEY'S OFFICE TO BE
INVESTIGATING A DEADLY CRIME.
AND A DEADLY INCIDENT AND IT
COULD HAVE, YOU KNOW, COULD HAVE
BEEN DEADLY ON EITHER SIDE.
SO OF COURSE, THERE'S AN
INVESTIGATION.
YOU KNOW, WHAT DRIVES ME A
LITTLE BIT CRAZY IS THAT BEFORE
ANYBODY EVEN KNOWS WHAT HAS GONE
ON, IT BECOMES A GUN ISSUE.
ON ONE SIDE AND THE OTHER.
PRO GUN AND ANTI-GUN AND PRO
CONCEALED CARRY AND
ANTI-CONCEALED CARRY.
THE FEWER DEADLY WEAPONS AND THE
FEWER DEADLY CONFRONTATIONS
BETWEEN CITIZENS IN OUR
COMMUNITY THE BETTER AND
CERTAINLY, IT NEEDS TO BE
INVESTIGATED BY LAW ENFORCEMENT,
BUT IT SEEMS LIKE THE PRESS IS
LIKE ALREADY DECIDED THAT THIS
IS GOING TO BE, YOU KNOW, THE
GUY WHO KILLED THE KIDS IS A
HERO, AND THE KIDS THEMSELVES
WERE JUST ***, AND WE DON'T
EVEN KNOW WHAT THIS FIGHT WAS
ABOUT, SO I'M JUST A LITTLE
CONCERNED ABOUT THE WHOLE RUSH
THAT THIS GUY CERTAINLY HAD A
RIGHT TO PROTECT HIMSELF.
WELL, I THINK WE ALL FEEL WE
HAVE A RIGHT TO PROTECT
OURSELVES IF OUR LIVES ARE
THREATENED, BUT WE DON'T EVEN
KNOW WHY THIS INDIVIDUAL'S LIFE
WAS THREATENED.
>> IF HE'S NOT CHARGED WITH A
KYLE AND IT IS RULED BY THE D.A.
SELF-DEFENSE, THEN A LOT OF
PEOPLE ARE GOING TO SAY THAT'S
EXACTLY WHAT CONCEALED CARRY IS
FOR.
>> THEY MAY SAY THAT.
I GUESS A LOT OF HOW YOU FEEL
ABOUT THIS IN THE END IS GOING
TO BOIL DOWN TO HOW YOU FEEL
ABOUT THE D.A.'S JUDGMENT AND
HOW MUCH YOU'RE WILLING TO TRUST
THAT OFFICE.
YOU KNOW, IT SEEMS TO ME, AND I
AGREE WITH JOEL, WE HAVE LIMITED
DIRECT KNOWLEDGE ABOUT WHAT
HAPPENED HERE.
BUT IT SEEMS TO ME THAT SO FAR
IT'S BEING HANDLED IN A RATHER
PROPER AND MATURE AND MEASURED
MANNER.
YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT LIKE WHAT
HAPPENED IN FLORIDA WITH TRAYVON
MARTIN WHERE THEY DRUG TESTED
THE VICTIM AND DIDN'T DRUG TEST
THE GUY WHO SHOT HIM.
YOU KNOW, HERE IT'S PEOPLE IT
SEEMS TO ME APPROPRIATELY WERE
TAKEN INTO CUSTODY, THE SYSTEM
IS WORKING THE WAY IT IS SET UP
TO WORK.
I SUSPECT THAT THE D.A., I WOULD
HOPE THAT THE D.A. WILL LOOK AT
THE FACTS, MAKE A DISSIPATIONATE
JUDGMENT AND TAKE WHATEVER
CONSEQUENCES FROM THE PUBLIC
THAT THERE ARE AND I HOPE THE
PUBLIC WILL, UNLESS IT'S GIVEN
REASON OTHERWISE TO BE UPSET,
DECIDE THAT THE D.A. IS ACTING
IN GOOD FAITH.
I AGREE WITH JOEL.
I WISH THERE WERE FEWER GUNS
AROUND.
BUT YOU KNOW, IT REALLY DOESN'T
MATTER WHAT I WISH LEGALLY.
LEGALLY APPARENTLY THE GUY WAS
ARMED PROPERLY, SO YOU'VE GOT TO
TAKE THAT INTO ACCOUNT AS THE
D.A. REVIEWS THIS AND AT THIS
POINT, I MEAN, ASK ME AGAIN WITH
IT ALL COMES OUT, I DON'T KNOW,
BUT AT THIS POINT, IT SEEMS TO
ME THINGS ARE PROGRESSING THE
WAY THEY PROBABLY SHOULD.
>> IS ANYBODY GOING TO BE
SURPRISED DO YOU THINK, DENISE?
>> YOU KNOW, I GUESS MY SURPRISE
IS HOW WE NOW THINK THAT
CONCEALED CARRY MEANS THAT THE
ONLY OPTION YOU HAVE IF YOU FEEL
THE NEED TO DEFEND YOURSELF IS
TO KILL THE PEOPLE.
>> NO, NO.
WE DON'T KNOW THAT.
>> WE DO KNOW THAT BECAUSE WE
HAVE TWO PEOPLE WHO ARE DEAD
NOW, SO WE DO KNOW THAT THIS --
THE DEADLY FORCE WAS USED IN
THIS CASE, AND I THINK A LOGICAL
QUESTION TO ASK IS, AT WHAT
POINT IN TIME DO WE SAY THE
CONCEALED CARRY MEANS YOU HAVE
THE -- THE AUTOMATIC RIGHT TO GO
TO DEADLY FORCE?
IMMEDIATELY THERE.
WHAT YOU ARE ABLE TO DO IS TO
DEFEND YOURSELF.
YOU DO NOT ALWAYS HAVE TO KILL
THE INDIVIDUAL WHO IS ATTACKING
YOU IN ORDER TO DEFEND YOURSELF.
I MEAN, I THINK, I CAN HEAR
PEOPLE NOW, WELL, IF YOU'RE IN
THAT SITUATION, YOU'RE IN A
HURRY, YOU KNOW, EVERYTHING IS
HAPPENING FAST, YOU'RE GOING TO
DO YOU KNOW, WHATEVER YOU FEEL
LIKE YOU NEED TO DO, WHICH IS
PART OF THE REASON THAT WE NEED
TO BE SO CAREFUL, AND CAUTIOUS
ABOUT TRAINING PEOPLE WHO ARE
CARRYING GUNS, LEGALLY WITH
CONCEALED CARRY PERMITS.
THIS GOES BACK TO THE WHOLE IDEA
OF THE IDEA THAT TRAINING IS OK
IF YOU CAN DO IT ON LINE.
YOU TAKE A TWO-HOUR COURSE AND
YOU FULFILL THE REQUIREMENTS FOR
CONCEALED CARRY.
THE PROBLEM BEHIND THIS IS IS
THAT WE JUST SEEM TO ASSUME IN
THIS COMMUNITY NOW, THAT IF
YOU'RE DEFENDING YOURSELF AND
YOU HAVE A PERMIT AND IT'S
LEGAL, IT'S OK IF YOU JUST GO
RIGHT TO DEADLY FORCE AND I
DON'T THINK THAT WAS THE CASE.
THIS IS A 17-YEAR-OLD GIRL.
A 17-YEAR-OLD GIRL.
A 19-YEAR-OLD YOUNG MAN.
WHAT THEY WERE DOING, IF IN FACT
THIS IS CORRECT, BEATING THIS
MAN WITH A BASEBALL BAT, WAS
ABHORRENT, AND THEY SHOULD HAVE
BEEN PUNISHED AND HE SHOULD HAVE
DEFENDED HIMSELF.
I JUST DON'T BELIEVE THAT YOU
HAD TO KILL THEM BOTH TO BE ABLE
TO DO IT AND I THINK THAT -- IS
ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE HAVE
TO TAKE A LOOK AT WHEN WE TALK
ABOUT CONCEALED CARRY.
I WOULD LOVE TO SEE THIS
LEGISLATURE GO BACK AND GET RID
OF CONCEALED CARRY.
THAT'S NOT GOING TO HAPPEN, BUT
I WOULD LOVE TO SEE THEM GO BACK
AND SAY YOU KNOW WHAT, IF WE'RE
GOING TO SAY THAT PEOPLE IN THIS
STATE HAVE THE RIGHT TO CARRY
WEAPONS THAT CAN KILL PEOPLE,
THEN WE NEED TO HAVE BETTER
TRAINING TO MAKE SURE THE PEOPLE
UNDERSTAND THAT IS NOT THE ONLY
OPTION THAT YOU HAVE.
>> THERE ALWAYS HAS BEEN, OR
THERE USED TO BE, A CHARGE
EXCESSIVE USE OF SELF-DEFENSE,
OR EXCESSIVE USE OF FORCE IN
SELF DEFENSE, AND IF YOU HAVE A
GUN, I DON'T THINK YOU CAN DO
ANYTHING BUT KILL THE PERSON.
>> PEOPLE GET SHOT EVERY DAY IN
THIS COMMUNITY WHO DO NOT DIE.
I MEAN, COME ON.
>> I DON'T KNOW THAT -- IS
RIGHT, AND DENISE, I'M NOT SURE
I CAN GO AS FAR AS YOU SAYING IT
IS ASSUMED IF YOU HAVE A
CONCEALED CARRY WEAPON, THE ONLY
THING YOU CAN DO IS KILL
SOMEBODY.
>> I THINK WE LOOK AT CONCEALED
CARRY CASES IN THIS COMMUNITY,
THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT IS
HAPPENING.
>> WHAT ELSE WOULD YOU DO?
>> MINE THE WHOLE IDEA -- I
MEAN, THE WHOLE IDEA BEHIND THE
CONCEALED CARRY IS TO PROTECT
YOURSELF.
I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT IN EVERY
SINGLE CASE WHERE SOMEONE FEELS
THREATENED, THAT THE ONLY OPTION
IS LETHAL.
I DON'T BELIEVE THAT.
IF THAT'S THE CASE, WHEN WE TAKE
A LOOK AT POLICE IN THIS
COMMUNITY, WHO ARE WELL TRAINED
ON HOW TO EVALUATE SITUATIONS,
AND USE WEAPONS, POLICE EVERY
TIME THEY COME INTO A DANGEROUS
SITUATION WHERE THEY FEEL
THREATENED DON'T PULL OUT THEIR
GUNS AND SHOOT AND KILL PEOPLE.
>> HOPEFULLY WHAT WILL COME OUT
OF THIS IS A TEACHING MOMENT,
AMONG OTHER THINGS.
>> TWO FATALITIES AS PART OF A
TEACHING MOMENT?
>> BUT AS THE D.A. GOES THROUGH
THIS AND DECIDES WHAT IS THE
APPROPRIATE LEGAL RESPONSE HERE,
IF HE -- IF FOR SOME REASON
DECIDES CHARGES CAN'T COME OUT,
THEN YOUR ANALYSIS, DENISE, IS
PROBABLY CORRECT AND THE
LEGISLATURE SHOULD TAKE ANOTHER
LOOK AT IT.
IF HE DECIDES IT WAS
INAPPROPRIATELY STRONG RESPONSE,
THEN MAYBE THE KIND OF ATTITUDE
YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT MIGHT GET
MODIFIED IN THIS COMMUNITY AND I
DON'T MEAN TO MINIMIZE THE DEATH
OF TWO PEOPLE, BUT THAT COULD BE
AN ANCILLARY, YOU KNOW, THAT
COULD BE SOMETHING GOOD THAT
MIGHT COME OUT OF IT, IF IT
LEADS TO A REASONED DEBATE ON
THAT ISSUE.
>> ALL RIGHT.
NEXT TOPIC.
WISCONSIN LAWMAKERS VOTED THE
OTHER DAY TO DO AWAY WITH
WEEKEND EARLY VOTING.
THEY SAID SMALL TOWNS JUST DON'T
HAVE THE MONEY OR MANPOWER TO
CONDUCT EARLY VOTING MONDAY
THROUGH FRIDAY AND THEN ON THE
WEEKENDS TOO.
IMMEDIATELY, DEMOCRATS
COMPLAINED THAT THIS WAS A
RACIST MOVE TO LIMIT WEEKEND
VOTING BY DEMOCRATS AND
MINORITIES IN MILWAUKEE AND
MADISON, WHICH HAS PROVEN TO BE
POPULAR.
DO YOU AGREE WITH THEM.
>> I HATE THE FACT THAT THIS
STORY HAS TURNED INTO A HE
SAID-SHE SAID STORY, WHEN
EVERYBODY KNOWS WHAT'S GOING ON.
IT'S NOT JUST IN THIS STATE, IT
IS ALL ACROSS THIS COUNTRY.
REPUBLICANS HAVE MADE IT A
POLICY TO REDUCE VOTING,
PARTICULARLY IN CITY -- URBAN
POPULATIONS, PARTICULARLY AMONG
BLACK VOTERS, PARTICULARLY AMONG
ELDERLY VOTERS, PARTICULARLY
AMONG STUDENT VOTERS, WHEN THEY
FIRST CAME UP WITH THE I.D. LAW
IN THIS STATE, THE NO-STUDENT
I.D. IN THE STATE OF WISCONSIN
COUNTED AS A LEGITIMATE I.D.
AND EVERYBODY KNOWS WHAT'S GOING
ON.
YOU EITHER BELIEVE IN DEMOCRACY,
OR YOU DON'T.
YOU EITHER BELIEVE IN ELECTIONS
OR YOU DON'T.
YOU EITHER BELIEVE IN VOTING OR
YOU DON'T.
AND IT USED TO BE A DRIVE IN
EVERY COMMUNITY IN THIS COUNTRY,
GET OUT THE VOTE.
GET OUT THE VOTE.
THE IMPORTANT THING IS THAT MORE
PEOPLE VOTE.
YOU DON'T WANT, YOU KNOW, LOW
TURNOUTS.
YOU WANT IN FACT THE HIGHEST
POSSIBLE TURNOUT YOU CAN GET
BECAUSE THAT'S THE MOST
DEMOCRATIC TURNOUT.
AND I DON'T MEAN DEMOCRATIC
PARTY.
I MEAN DEMOCRACY.
I MEAN WE BELIEVE IN DEMOCRACY.
AND I KEEP SAYING OVER AN OVER,
I EXPECT BETTER OF REPUBLICANS.
I ACTUALLY BELIEVE THAT NOT
EVERY REPUBLICAN IS DISHONEST,
AND IS A LIAR AND IS GOING TO GO
OUT IN PUBLIC AND CLAIM THAT,
YOU KNOW, WE'RE REALLY WORRIED
ABOUT VOTER FRAUD OR WE'RE
REALLY WORRIED ABOUT SMALL TOWNS
THAT MIGHT NOT WANT TO COME UP
WITH THE MONEY TO REGISTER
PEOPLE.
IT IS SIMPLY TO REDUCE VOTING.
THAT IS THEIR PLAN, THAT IS
THEIR CLEAR, YOU KNOW,
NATIONWIDE INTENT, AND THAT
MEANS THEY DON'T BELIEVE IN
DEMOCRACY.
AND I GREW UP IN AN EXTREMELY
REPUBLICAN COMMUNITY, IN AN
EXTREMELY REPUBLICAN STATE, AND
I REMEMBER REPUBLICANS BELIEVING
IN DEMOCRACY, BELIEVING IN
VOTING, BELIEVING IN GETTING OUT
THE VOTE, BELIEVING IN IN
CREASING VOTER TURNOUT, NOT
REDUCING IT.
AND THEY'RE GOING IN THE
OPPOSITE DIRECTION FOR A CLEAR
PARTISAN REASON AND THAT MEANS
THEY DON'T BELIEVE IN DEMOCRACY.
>> LET ME BE CYNICAL.
YOU CAN'T GO PAY YOUR PROPERTY
TAX BILL SEVEN DAYS A WEEK.
YOU HAVE TO GO MONDAY THROUGH
FRIDAY.
>> ACTUALLY YOU CAN.
YOU CAN GO TO THE BANK AND PAY
YOUR PROPERTY TAXES.
WE DO MAKE IT EASIER FOR THE
GOVERNMENT TO COLLECT TAXES FOR
US.
CLEARLY WHEN IT COMES TO THE
OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO BE ABLE TO
EXPRESS OURSELVES IN THE PURIST
FORM OF DEMOCRACY THAT WE HAVE,
THAT'S NOT OK.
THIS IS TOTALLY ABOUT
SUPPRESSING THE VOTE IN URBAN
AREAS, AND AGAIN, I'M JUST
AMAZED AT THIS REPUBLICAN
LEGISLATURE, THIS IS A
REPUBLICAN PARTY THAT ALWAYS
TALKS ABOUT LOCAL CONTROL, BUT
NOW THERE'S AN ASTERISK THERE,
UNLESS IT'S SOMETHING WE DON'T
LIKE AND THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT HAS
HAPPENED IN THIS CASE.
I VOTE EARLY.
I DO.
I GO ON SATURDAY OR SOMETIMES
I'VE EVEN GONE ON SUNDAY AND YOU
SEE BUS LOADS OF LITTLE OLD
LADIES AND GENTLEMEN COMING FROM
CHURCH AND THEY'RE ALL GOING TO
VOTE TOGETHER.
WHAT COULD BE MORE AMERICAN THAN
EXPRESSING OUR RIGHT TO VOTE AND
APPARENTLY IT'S TOO AMERICAN.
>> FIVE DAYS ISN'T GOOD ENOUGH?
>> IF THE IDEA, IF THE IDEA IS
TO EVEN THE PLAYING FIELD
AMONGST THE SMALLER COMMUNITIES
AND THE BIGGER COMMUNITIES IN
THIS STATE, THEN THE LEGISLATURE
SHOULD ALLOW THE CITY OF
MILWAUKEE AND LARGER CITIES TO
SET UP MULTIPLE PLACES WHERE YOU
CAN GO TO VOTE.
THE LAW SAYS YOU CAN ONLY HAVE
ONE IN A MUNICIPALITY, WHICH
MEANS THAT FOR THE 600,000
PEOPLE IN MILWAUKEE, AND THE
15,000 PEOPLE IN WHITEFISH BAY,
THERE'S ONE PLACE.
WELL, YOU KNOW, IF YOU WANT TO
SAY YOU CAN ONLY DO THAT WITH
WORKING PEOPLE ARE WORKING, AT
LEAST LET THEM SAY, YOU'VE GOT
TO HAVE ONE PLACE PER 20,000
PEOPLE.
>> WHY CURTAIL IT AT ALL?
>> ALL I'M TRYING TO DO IS TAKE
THEM AT THEIR WORD.
EVEN IT OUT AND THEY'RE NOT.
>> EVERY OTHER CIVILIZED COUNTRY
AROUND THE WORLD, GOVERNMENTS
ARE TRYING TO FIGURE OUR HOW YOU
INCLUDE MORE PEOPLE IN THE
DEMOCRATIC PROCESS.
WHAT DOES THAT SAY ABOUT US?
>> IT SAYS THAT NATIONALLY THE
REPUBLICANS ARE VERY AFRAID THAT
THEY'RE LOSING THE MAJORITY AND
I AGREE WITH JOEL, ALL THEY CAN
DO IS TRY AND SUPPRESS THE OTHER
SIDE.
>> WHAT HASN'T CHANGED SINCE THE
AFFORDABLE CARE ACT WENT INTO
EFFECT LAST OCTOBER IS ALL THE
CONTROVERSY.
WHAT HAS CHANGED IS THAT THERE'S
A KEY DEADLINE COMING UP IN JUST
A COUPLE OF WEEKS.
IT'S GOT THE PRESIDENT TAKING
SOME UNUSUAL STEPS, AND IT'S GOT
HIS OPPONENTS UNUSUALLY
OUTRAGED.
HERE'S RICK HOROWITZ TO EXPLAIN.
RICK?
>> I'M THINKING IT'S TIME FOR
PRESIDENT OBAMA TO GIVE UP ON
OBAMACARE.
OR AT LEAST HE HAS TO GIVE UP ON
OBAMACARE.
HE NEEDS TO CALL IT REPUBLICAN
CARE.
MAYBE THEN WE WOULDN'T HAVE ONE
OF THE COUNTRY'S TWO MAJOR
POLITICAL PARTIES ACTUALLY
ROOTING AGAINST MILLIONS OF
AMERICANS FINALLY GETTING HEALTH
INSURANCE.
THAT OLD LINE ABOUT HOW MUCH YOU
CAN ACCOMPLISH IF YOU DON'T CARE
WHO GETS THE CREDIT FOR IT?
IT COULD BE TIME TO PUT IT TO
THE TEST.
ESPECIALLY SINCE, AND EVERYONE
KNOWS THIS, THE MAJOR PARTS OF
THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT STARTED
OUT AS REPUBLICAN IDEAS,
CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICAN IDEAS,
FREE MARKET, PRIVATE INSURERS.
YOU KNOW, RIGHT OUT OF THE
CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, HERITAGE
FOUNDATION PLAYBOOK.
UNTIL OBAMA SUPPORTED THOSE
IDEAS.
SUDDENLY IT'S SOCIALISM.
SURE.
SO MAYBE IF THE PRESIDENT AGREED
TO STOP CALLING IT OBAMACARE
ONCE THIS BIG MARCH 31st
ENROLLMENT DEADLINE IS PAST.
AND MAYBE IF HE CALLED UP ALL
THE PRESIDENTIAL SCHOLARS AND
OFFERED NOT TO TAKE ANY CREDIT
FOR IT WHEN THEY WRITE THE
HISTORY BOOKS.
MAYBE THEN THE REPUBLICANS WOULD
BE HAPPY INSTEAD OF ANGRY WHEN
FOUR, FIVE, MAYBE EVEN SIX
MILLION PEOPLE NO LONGER HAVE TO
WORRY THAT ONE INJURY, ONE
ILLNESS, COULD BANKRUPT THEM.
RIGHT NOW THOUGH?
THE REPUBLICANS ARE VERY ANGRY.
THEY'RE ANGRY THIS WEEK BECAUSE
THE PRESIDENT WENT ON AN ON-LINE
COMEDY SHOW, "BETWEEN TWO
FERNS," WITH ZACH GALIFIANAKIS,
TO PITCH THE NEW HEALTH CARE LAW
TO THE KIND OF PEOPLE WHO WATCH
ZACH GALIFIANAKIS AND ON-LINE
COMEDY SHOWS.
YOUNG PEOPLE.
TO REMIND THEM THAT EVEN HEALTHY
young folks can get sick or
injured, to invite them to check
out healthcare.gov, to learn
about the benefits, about the
help they can get paying
premiums, and mostly, to make
sure they don't forget that
March 31st SIGNUP DEADLINE.
YOU'D HAVE THOUGHT OBAMA THREW
UP INTO SOME PRIME MINISTER'S
LAP OR SOMETHING.
MEANWHILE, IN JUST ONE WEEK, THE
VIDEO HAS ALREADY GOTTEN
MILLIONS OF VIEWS, AND WAS THE
NUMBER ONE DRIVER OF TRACK TO
THE HEALTHCARE.GOV WEB SITE.
NOT BAD!
YOU KNOW, WHEN I NEED A QUICK
PICK-ME-UP?
I LIKE TO THINK ABOUT BILL
O'REILLY AND THE REST OF THE FOX
NEWS HOUNDS COMPLAINING ABOUT
SOMEONE'S LACK OF DIGNITY.
HONESTLY?
THEY'RE NOT WORRIED THAT IT
MIGHT BE UNDIGNIFIED.
THEY'RE WORRIED THAT IT MIGHT BE
EFFECTIVE.
>> THANKS, RICK.
AND THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR
WATCHING.
STAY WARM AND ENJOY THE REST OF
YOUR WEEKEND.