I agree! How can people loitering and damage the public buildings in Madison?

Each municipality has its own individually worded ordinance. Lloitering as described in the Milwaukee ordinance is different than the loitering ordinance as descibed in, say, Greenfield.

@Deb -

The issue here isn't with competing and differing ordinances, as the law enforcement officials involved are exactly the same in all specifically named circumstances - the MPD. So, we're obviously dealing with the same ordinances.

The issue is the unequal enforcement of that law premised upon a predisposed standard and pattern of discrimination by law enforcement.

Talk about double standards. You can call in "shots fired" and a cop might show up an hour later in Milwaukee, yet here there were 20 jackbooted cops locked in goosestep with the Barrett camp.
America has gone down the shitter.

I am surprised they did not strip search.

Craig: With the number of cars that pass under a freeway overpass bridge every 5 minutes most of the day -- and doubtless when sign-holders would bother to show up -- the potential victim count in the event of violence is much higher than for "shots fired" in most neighborhoods. Police have to assess each group: will they stay peacefully holding signs the whole time, or will they progress to a more violent demonstration? An angry, aggressive response to the initial police approach is a good hint. You can see on the video: this group responded angrily, aggressively. It's a bad symptom; what would hours of boredom done for such tempers? Watching all those cars go under them, would such angry people have lashed out at the drivers by dropping stones or bricks, as other bored and angry bridge-standers have done, causing multiple deaths and freeway crashes? That's one disaster police try to avert.

The other group, with an established peaceful, non-aggressive behavioral record, was just less of a worry. They didn't confront police so angrily. There were no warning signs of potential violence. Simply put, they didn't act like thugs.

Raven: I started laughing until I realized you were serious. There were more cops than sign holders, and there was no threat of violence. Not a single person took a crap on a squad. I doubt there was any worry one of them would drop their ass much less a brick.
It boils down to double standards, plain and simple. If it were the Barrett camp kicked off the bridge there would be a riot, and Jessy Jackoff would show up- THAT is the reason for the double standard.

@Raven-
Please removed your head from the sand you will suffocate

Speaking of Jesse Jackson I hear he had a whopping 6o people. 300 for the MSNBC clown and 900 for Clinton. Hmmmmmm yes u all claimed to have 1 million signatures, but only 600,000 votes during the primary? Hmmmmmm how many citizens for prosperity on Sat? Can you say 4000

Though I was told otherwise by a source I thought to be reliable, you are most likely correct, and I have removed that reference from the story pending confirmation. In the heat of the moment, my source likely was referring to the endorsement of Barrett by the Wisconsin Professional Police Association, the largest law enforcement union in the state, without specific reference to the MPD. I should have checked further. My apologies.

thats what you think. you have no idea who they will vote for behind the curtain.

Does Flynn qualify this event as a serious crime or misdemeanor? Could be a coding error? What does this mean to the crime statistics of Milwaukee?

Under Flynn's competent tutelage, I'm sure that this qualified as an act of domestic terrorism in his report.

MPA endorses Walker. They always have.

The MPA does not run the MPD. They never have.

If you're at all consistent, I'm sure you'll be trying to blame Walker for all of these things as well, just like you blamed your city's recent public debt rating downgrade on Walker, despite Moody's directly citing your massive public bond offering, while the City was already deeply leveraged, for the trolley that you just have to have, as being the culpable reason.

Mayor Barrett - you have proven that you can't even run a City smoothly, much less the entire State! Your 'leadership,' if that's what you call constantly pointing the finger and blaming others for your own problems, is nothing but a colossal joke!

My advice to the protestors - sue in federal court instead of the Mickey Mouse Milwaukee County Court House!

Ok, I expect you to throw your hat into the ring when Flynn's contract is up and/or when it's primary time for the office of Milwaukee mayor.

@Deb -

I don't live in Milwaukee, thankfully!

Sorry!

"The Recall group had a lawyer with them, that is why they were allowed to stay."

Now, I've heard some pretty stupid things from liberals here on the Patch ever since the recall crowd started this civil war, but honestly, this takes the cake by far!!!!

I guess it is only acceptable if you are an unshowered, foul mouthed, pot smoking, public defacating Liberal.
Well behaved demonstration is punished. Screaming Jesse Jackass types are allowed to protest anyway they see fit.

Craig, based on the video, are you quite clear on which group was "well behaved" vs "screaming"?

It was specifically the "well behaved" group that was left alone. The confrontational group got a predictably confrontational response from police. They could have avoided it by better behavior.

BTW, some of their supporters' comments here are really good examples of things <b>not</b> to say to police in face-to-face encounters: "jackbooted cops locked in goosestep," etc.

@Raven-Have you taken your medication today? I think you have forgotten to take and you know what happens when you miss a dose!!!!

iagree with you 100%.

For what.... talking?

Wow - you guys are really unhinged! Even the decent liberals have acknowledged that this was fundamentally wrong in all regards.

So, EveKendall and linda w, what's your excuse?

It's possible that group felt they'd get more mileage out of a complainable confrontation with police than out of a quiet night standing up holding signs on a bridge. And, simply, angry people enjoy angry shouting.

@Raven -

"... a quiet night standing up holding signs on a bridge."

Umm... that's exactly what they were doing before the police came along. Did you even read the article in its entirety or do you have reading comprehension issues?

@Eve -

So, now private lawyers dictate to police as to how to do their jobs? Well then, that's a new one for me!

What country do you live in exactly? There aren't by chance pictures of Idi Amin or Manuel Noriega hanging above your fireplace mantle, are there?

And I believe it's been definitely proven here on Patch time and again that it was in fact the recallers that started this civil war, not Walker, and tomorrow's election results will prove that to the rest of our nation, which happens to be the United States of America by-the-way!

Eve, what school do you teach at?

@McMulligan -

If Eve is a public school teacher, then Walker has a lot more house cleaning to do after tomorrow!

Huh. Go figure. Your demeanor screams public school teacher.

@Eve -

You may want to stick with construction and leave commenting on the law to those that actually know the law!

Wow Craig, you're taking this blog and yourself way to seriously.

Satori: You are right. I am PO'd that we can penalize someone who actually does something about our problems. Yet we reward politicians who kick the can down the road and do nothing to avert a financial crisis (ie: National Debt, SSI, etc)
We are heading down a path that is nearing the state of non recoverable. The wait and deal with it later strategy has made things worse. When is it time to fix the mess?
My fear is: As a State we could be leading the way to real reforms on a National level. This election is a hint of what could be, or could not be to the rest of the Nation. If we do not reaffirm Scott Walker, we are telling the entire Country that we prefer to not act on issues that are crucial to our long term survival. So, it is not just about bankrupting the State, next will be the US Government.

Are you really that daft Random,? No, a lawyer is not required to be with a group, she just happened to be there. You have no evidence that these police officers were removing them because they were Walker supporters. I'm betting they weren't the SAME officers that allowed the other group to stay. Your argument is weak and hard to prove.

@Eve -

"You have no evidence that these police officers were removing them because they were Walker supporters."

Umm... did you even bother reading the article? That's exactly the conclusion made.

"I'm betting they weren't the SAME officers that allowed the other group to stay."

What does that have to do with anything? It's called failure to properly train the officers, and doesn't matter if it's the same group or not. Get a clue!

As I said before, stick to pushing a broom and cleaning toilets and leave commenting on the law to those that actually know the law.

@Greg -

I'm going to beat you to it this time :-)

Once again proof that Barrett and the Dems are targeting the low information, non-thinking voter!

Hoffa, why do you so often resort to name calling?

@Satori -

Where do I engage in name calling, exactly?

Well, if you realize that I'm the voice of reason, then how is it that you can't see that you're unhinged about this situation, as I believe I was clear with my above comment!

Wow - how enlightening! That totally changed my entire perspective on this issue, election, and life in general!

Thank you for opening my eyes $$andSense - you must be a g-d!

Okay, thanks.

Crack is whack.

Hoffa, if you worked for a living and paid taxes, you may have a say in this. But you like to brag about all your money, not being married, all your cars at mom and dad's farm and maybe have 30 something years of experience of life with no committement to anything but your selfish lifestyle. So what? And the Jack Nicholson photo and cigar makes one think of nothing more than a union thug. Yet you condemn unions. Who is the conondrum here?

$$&senceless: How can you condemn someone who lives within their means and doesn't spend more than they have? Don't you think our Government should be fiscally responsible? Oh nevermind- you don't.
Bet you have a case of the green monster because someone isn't up to their eyeballs in debt?
I cannot understand how people can honestly want their Government to continue the spending spree and put us underwater beyond hope.
Seriously, how can people be that stupid?

@$$andNonSense -

There's no cigar present in Hoffa's photo! In fact, the real James Riddle Hoffa didn't smoke, didn't drink, and didn't fool around with women, just like this Hoffa! He was a very virtuous man! The picture is a still of the McClellan Hearings scene from DeVito's 'Hoffa' (1992), a grossly underrated film!

James Riddle Hoffa would be saddened by what the unions have turned into. He was an extremely conservative man and didn't believe in public sector unionization. And he also hated the Kennedy's just like this Hoffa!

Do your homework!

And for the record, Hoffa does work for a living and pays plenty of taxes, thank you very much!

Proof once again that Barrett and the Dems are targeting the low information, non-thinking voter!

Craig

You and my detractors don't have a clue. I have no debt. I have a wife and two kids. I deplore gov't spending. This has all been made clear before on many of my postings. Learn to take notes or copy my postings on your computer. My handle is based on Ben Franklins philosophy of common sense and not spending on useless crap. I work with inefficient, useless or obstructionist state agencies everyday (DOT and DNR are my favorites). Walker made the bad choice of taking a bribe to give cops a pass on one of your beloved tools, ACT 10. ACT 10 did nothing, NOTHING to get rid of the inefficiency of state gov’t. All he did was take out his ire on personnel, not the GD system where is where the money is at.

@$$andSence: I have no interest in keeping tabs on anyone's personal information, but I congratulate you on your fiscal decency with your personal finances. How is it that you do not think the same decency should be applied when it comes to Government? Should the State just continue to spend more than is sustainable like Doyle did? At what point is it time to start fixing financial problems in this Country? Should we wait for SS checks to bounce before addressing that issue? Should we allow the Nation's debt to continue to a point of no return?
Voting for Barrett is akin to kicking the can down the road once again. We have to stop the madness....
If not now- when?

$$: No reply?
Cat got your tongue?

Speaking of rocks, is it your, you are or you're? Since you are in construction, measure twice, cut once.

Tommy Barrett is Rock Solid for Gwen Moore.

@Eve -

Yeah, you keep telling yourself that!

Apparently, they're allowing computer usage with internet access in the padded rooms again!

@Ima -

I believe that Eve was referring to the kind of 'rocks' that one smokes, ala Tyrone Biggums, which she obviously finds useful!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-6xENiFq0B4

???

Honestly, how many incoherent people are they are going to allow on the Patch tonight?

Thankfully the mentally incompetent aren't allowed to legally vote!

@MsKendall:
Hint: if you use the reply button, the comment goes in the appropriate location. Knowing your attitude toward men, Barrett deserves your vote. He hasn't got any bits.

Craig, you have no idea how I feel about men by the few comments I've made, but I'll tell you what I think of CONSERVATIVE men, if you ask real nice like...FYI...there isn't always a reply button under all the comments, and frankly who cares what order they come in? It makes it so much more fun, doesn't it?

@Eve -

In the words of a great man:

"That lunatic in heaven played a really bad joke on us. He took that place in women where pleasure and desire and the reproductive system and everything else that makes them female lives, and he buried it deep inside, out of sight, nicely tucked away. But look at us, our dick and our balls are out there flapping in the breeze."

So, what's your point exactly, if you even have one?

LOL @ Hoffa!
Young man, you go to the Principal's office this minute!

Some of us swing, some of us jiggle, but those who attach them with a belt, makes Eve giggle.

Eve, would you care to actually provide an EXAMPLE of the OPINIONS expressed in my nasty itty bitty little rag of a Patch? I have a caps lock, too, and I know how to use it... it's just that I generally don't use it.

@Eve -

Mr. Price is a very reputable and professional journalist, of the very highest integrity, and a damn fine writer to boot.

I guess what they say about Pabst Blue Ribbon and what it does to a person is true!

Some rocks are more useful.

Thank you, Mr. Arnot, for bringing us back to the subject.

@David -

Very nicely said. You are a true gentleman and a great representative of the pro-Walker majority in this great state of ours!

This is not a violation of basic constitutional rights. The right to free speech is not contested, but where the free speech is taking place. If the protesters were blocking the bridge and they are asked to move, this is entirely appropriate. A neighbor most likely contacted the police. If the neighbor did not contact the police if pro-recall supporters acted in the same way, that tells a story, too.

In a situation such as this, a commonsense "gutcheck" is valuable.

@Bren -

The 1st Amendment protection of free speech is indeed limited to time, place, and manner restrictions. However, if these people were being unduly prohibited from engaging in speech where they had a right to do so, then this would in fact constitute an unlawful depravation of the exercise of such right. Remember the Skokie, IL case against the neo-Nazis? Pretty similar to what we have here from a constitutional law perspective.

Solely based upon the article and included videos, the MPD appears to have violated the group's 1st Amendment rights, in addition to their due process rights and right to equal protection under the law.

Mr. Hoffa, it appears this was an impromptu (not pre-reported to authorities) gathering on a footbridge. The police are required to respond to public safety complaints and determine validity/course of action. Other posters have pointed out that belligerence escalates and contributes to the decision of what happens next. As you know I've watched hours of Occupy live feed and observed what can only be described as police brutality, administered under the guise of minor city ordinance violations (Oakland, New York City). (Knocking individuals off of bikes, striking videographers with batons, pepper spraying bystanders, etc.).

We may not appreciate police presence when it is inconvenient to us, but it is never prudent to display belligerence or confrontational behavior as the woman on this video has done. The police would have been completely justified in escalating this confrontation to obstruction of justice, loitering, disturbing the peace, etc.

As I said, commonsense "gutcheck." Ask the officers where you may stand, better still, call in before you march/occupy to determine what's possible.

@Bren -

I understand your point, and it is a valid one.

But the FACT that pro-Barrett people were engaging in exactly the same activity without the police shutting them down is prima facie evidence that something more is going on here. As far as I'm aware, last year's bridge protest in Milwaukee was not permit approved, nor were any of the recallers so-called light brigades over the last year and a half. And again, they were allowed to exercise their 1st Amendment rights freely on public bridges within the jurisdiction of the MPD. But the moment a pro-Walker group mirrors that activity, the police show up and shut it down - come on - even you have to admit that this smells!

From watching Occupy, you must realize that people have emotions and can get heated, especially when they perceive that their rights are being violated. While the woman in the video does get loud, at no time does she come off as being anything other than upset and certainly does not display any signs of becoming physically violent. So please, drop that crap.

They just wanted to know what law it was that they were supposedly violating and how their activity differed from that of the pro-Barrett people. This info would be usefully in determining where they could legally engage in such activity, would it not? And the MPD cited them an ordinance that pertains only to bridges over waterways.

How would you feel and react under such circumstances?

e

Izzy dear, I do not have an alter on Facebook, you ma'am are a liar.

That was a hoot, and not divisive at all!

Wow, I've been wrong this entire time. Walker's college love child had me questioning my allegiances, but this comment has definitely proven to me that it's definitely those evil Republicans and their supporters that are dividing this state!

Once again proof that..... say it with me boys and girls…. Barrett and the Dems are targeting the low-information, non-thinking voter!!!

Just to be clear: You would support Walker if he included cops in ACT 10?
My taxes went down for the first time in 22 years, but I would love for them to go lower still. Give Walker more time to fix the rest of the messes created by the limpwristed dolts before him.
It is a good start so far, why oust the one man who has actually done something meaningfull? Unless you like the snowball effect.

$$ -

See the new and improved Wisconsin license plate that I uploaded to the pics above, just for you!

I'd love to stay and continue the fun, but I have to get in a hyperbaric chamber to keep my bits from falling off. No laptops allowed in there.
I'm guessing not a single person changed their view of who they will vote for.

@Izabella -

In all fairness, there are several decent liberals here on the Patch that would gladly stand with you against this atrocity! Unfortunately, none of them were here tonight, and instead this story has appeared to bring out the nut jobs of their contingency.

Just like V-E and V-J days, tomorrow will go down and be remembered as a historic victory for freedom over oppression!

Believe in Wisconsin and keep her moving FORWARD - VOTE WALKER, KLEEFISCH, and WANGGAARD on Tuesday, June 5th!!!!

@Robert Merlin -

If that's the case, then the MPD should enforce that law equally! Such is the issue raised by this situation.

@Dark Star -

You just don't learn, do you?

1) You're linking to a lefty liberal blog, not Politifact.

2) How can one call something FACT, when it's based upon a completely subjective standard such as "most dishonest?"

But you're right - liberals calling others dishonest would indeed constitute the pot calling the kettle black, so thanks for pointing that out. This just might be the most honest statement that you've made here on Patch!

You may claim he is dishonest and that can be disputed, but when I say he is our Governor, that is fact.

Who's to say that a lawyer is going to be anymore calm than upset non-lawyer citizens?

And again, having a lawyer present shouldn't change at all how the police do their job, as private lawyers don't dictate police procedure, protocol, and judgments. But if that's the new standard in the MPD, then maybe I need to start exerting more influence over the police in that City when I visit!

James, If a lawyer *can't* stay calm, and *doesn't* know how to negotiate with police, he (or she) ought to to turn in his/her Bar membership and sue his/her law school for a refund of tuition, because these are exactly the sorts of things lawyers should know. Representing people in high-stakes, high-tension situations (court, billion-dollar contract negotiations) is what they're trained to do.

Raven, you watch too much TV.

@Raven -

Do you have a JD? Are you a bar licensed attorney?

In fact, Hoffa holds a JD, an LLM, and is a bar licensed attorney. And guess what, lawyers are humans with emotions, just like ordinary citizens. Now, most lawyers would remain calm in such a situation, but not all. In reality, most lawyers would also not engage in dictating to the police how to do their job, as they have no legal authority to do so. And if the police are violating someone's rights, the lawyer would definitely allow it to occur, as opposed to trying to stop them, as they'd be more interested in the subsequent civil suit against the police department and the media attention that such a lawsuit would generate.

So please, keep it real!

Greg: In fact, I rarely watch TV.

James: I wrote that the lawyer would "do the talking with police" (but "know not to make it a dominance face-off"); and "know how to negotiate with police". In echoing this back, you rendered it as "dictat[ing] police procedure, protocol, and judgments" and "dictating to the police how to do their job". Did getting your JD and LLM not result in your learning the difference between negotiating and dictating?

It's not int he best interest of the media and may be illegal to post pictures of minors in legal issues. They never show the defendant in underage court cases, same may apply here.

Patch was not present at the scene of this incident. As stated in the story, the accompanying video was taken by one of the participants, and the father of the boy tried but failed to record the detention of his son.

"Protesters who blocked traffic Thursday and invited arrest declared victory and marched off after Police Chief Edward Flynn said that officers wouldn't help them fulfill their "martyrdom fantasies" and that they could stay "and freeze their butts off."
Occupy Milwaukee 11/11, North Ave. Bridge
This action blocked traffic and cause major safety concerns, but the MPD chose to handle it different. WHY?

The police were asked for and given a chance to comment for this story so that we could have their side of the event, but they refrained from issuing a statement. As Barrett and his police department have declared "we have nothing to hide," then why not tell their side of this situation to the media?

Answer: Barrett LIED!

@Patriot -

Actually, this entire Chapter applies solely to bridges over waterways, and even then, only bridges in certain areas throughout the city, as is distinguished in the first few sections.

Hence, the cited ordinance did not even factually apply to the situation of a bridge over a roadway.

Is MPD serious??? Their officers can't even distinguish the difference between water and a roadway??? This is a classic case of failure to properly train! I hope they sue!!!

Barrett and Flynn have some explaining to do and apologies to make

@Hoffa-Thankyou for looking researching that a little more than I!! I just quickly looked up the ordinance that the officers issued and thought it was quite disturbing that they did not even know the particulars of that ordinance!! Then I was out the door. Again Thank You. Im just amazed at how polarized we have become in the last year and a half. Amazing!!!
Gov Walker all the way!!! Finally a politician with NADS

Isn't this just a bit overstated? Apparently these folks didn't check beforehand whether or not this was an appropriate place to protest, someone contacted the police (noise? blocking the bridge?) or they were spotted from below. Instead of being cooperative they became belligerent. It's never a good idea to do something controversial without knowing your rights and options.

@Bren-Isn't it a bit scary to be hassled by law enforcement when they dont even know the ordinance they are saying your violating? Then when they quote and or provide an ordinance it is the wrong one

@Bren-Nice spin there!! A foot bridge over the freeway. Point being is they have evy right to be there period!! They were told they were breaking a city ordinance and in fact they were not. The ordinance given to them was 118-62 dealing with draw bridges. Bren go crawl into your hole because Gov Walker is going to blow him out of the water.
I was #674 at 840 this morning

Spin master Bren, hardcore leftie to the bone

Bren offers some good advice here, but it doesn't change the FACT that what the officers did in this situation was WRONG and ILLEGAL.

A comparison of this to Occupy is like comparing apples to oranges. And if you defend the police for not arresting people in Occupy or even the Capitol occupation of February 2011 for similar ordinance violations, simply because of the mass of people present, then all you're doing is advocating that the masses should be allowed to disregard the law simple because of the size of their activist group. That is not a principle of American values, and quite frankly, I find such an assertion to be utterly disgusting!

We are also reading hearsay evidence about what else occurred. It's unclear from the video precisely what type of bridge they are standing on. It may be that the officer who provided the ordinance was also unclear about the type of bridge, etc. Again, I have seen Occupiers arrested for similar/lesser behaviors (unlawful congregation) than exhibited on this video. My questions are 1) how the police came to be at the scene and 2) why so many officers are present.

I believe in free speech and the right of assembly. But as I wrote above, the rights of others must also be respected. It's interesting how some people are outraged about this incident while expressing none at the new state law requiring parties of four or more to acquire a permit before entering our own State Capitol (unless you are a family or a coven of lobbyists).

@Bren-Again why are you not able to submit to the facts. The ordinance quoted by the officer dealt with a bridge over water!!! A draw bridge Bren!! It was clear that the bridge in question was not over water. This goes hand in hand with the fellow marine that was arrested

Bren, Admit it. Doulbe Standard. I don't even want to hear your fanasty-land spin on the governors great victory last night after a year of hearing how the people will speak with their vote. Thank god it was never even close. Victory was evident within the first hour of reporting results. This is what DEMOCRACY looks like again.

Vicki should leave the reporting of rumors to the Lefties.

That office is messed up enough without any extra help from a "mole". You can put this one in the bin with the Scott Walker love child.

Vicki should relax. Just have the Clerk's office look for one of these (actually, it does seem to match many individuals who reside in Shorewood):

Moles (Scalepus spp.) are not rodents, but relatives of the insectivores (insect eaters) such as shrews and hedgehogs. In their search for food, moles burrow in lawns, meadows, stream banks and open woodlots, creating elaborate underground tunnels. They feed mainly on earthworms and insect larvae (grubs). Only rarely seen above ground, moles are 4 to 9 inches long, including the tail, with long dark gray or brown fur. Eyes are tiny, like a pinhead, and the tail and feet are usually pink. They have no visible ears. There are seven species of moles in the United States, and some species may be protected by law.

http://milwaukee.crittercontrol.com/services/waukesha/molecontrol.html

[i]"there is RUMOR that there is a mole in the Waukesha County Clerk's office put there to disrupt the vote tally and cause confusion so Waukesha's vote is questioned."[/i]

That would be Kathy Nickolaus.

@Raven -

You're a day late and a dollar short on that one - Kathy is sitting out this election.

Sorry, but you're going to have to come up with a new boogeyman to cry about tomorrow after Walker demolishes Barrett!

Bad advice.

Obey the police, and then sue the pants off the department later. Let Barrett explain to his taxpayers why his officers aren't trained sufficiently.

" Moore said. "This state is a firewall against losing all of our rights, and we had better treat it that way."

You can't make this kind of stuff up.

They would not be charged with a crime. The arrests (just a day before the election) would have been Statewide if not National news. Barrett would be hounded yesterday and today having to explain why his police department was arresting opposition sign holders. Instead of a few hundred thousand drivers seeing these signs, millions would have heard the story of unjust arrests.

The cited ordinance pertained solely to bridges over waterways.

Are you telling us that the police couldn't clearly see that the bridge in the factual situation presented was over a roadway, and not a waterway?

I guess all of those officers should be fired for stupidity then, right? After all, if they can't even tell the difference between a roadway and waterway, well… that just scares the hell out of me allowing them to keep a badge!

@Mike-Well you seem to be super intelligent!! Was not aware that wages and benefits were affected for Police or Fire!! Regardless buddy as a private sector tax payer the one who pays all u public entitlement seeking low lifes wages its about time I have a say!! While my health care costs increase every year you feel entitled to just bargain for more wages to offset the bad economy iwhile again my health care goes up as well as everyday cost of living. Hmmmm seems very one sided there buddy!! CLOWN

They have no obligation to show lenience towards people bent on discrediting their worth to society by supporting wage cuts, retirement benefit cuts, etc.

***************************

They do, however, have an obligation to enforce the law even handedly, regardless of whether or not they view those they come in contact with as supporting them politically. If you're suggesting otherwise, you don't get it. If you're suggesting otherwise and you're a public employee, you're part of the problem.

@Mike Walsh: Imagine if you'd been some solitary non-police-officer target of their wrath -- say, a middle-aged schoolteacher -- caught off on a side road somewhere. A confrontation like that could be rather scary, especially after all the death threats that were made after the recall petitions were created.

Seeing as how Milwaukee can not differentiate between a lake and a toilet, I kinda expect them to be confused with the bridge issue.