"A Clear Choice on Crime": Vote Green

One of the editorials in today's Milwaukee Journal Sentinel is impossible to swallow.

"A Clear Choice on Crime" begins with a note from the Editor:

This is one in a series of editorials analyzing the gubernatorial candidates' positions on specific issues. We will end the series with an editorial recommending one of the candidates.

What could be more ridiculous than that???

I wonder which person the editorial board will endorse at the end of their series analyzing the gubernatorial candidates' positions.

Gee, the suspense is killing me.

What a joke!

The editorial begins:

Political foes like to outdo each other when it comes to being tough on crime. Democratic Gov. Jim Doyle earned his credentials as a hard-nosed, lock-the-bad-guys-up attorney general - a posture he maintains. His Republican challenger, U.S. Rep. Mark Green, has showed his toughness by proposing and backing laws stiffening criminal penalties.

But the state's top executive must be more than just tough. He must be smart. Our review of the record suggests that Doyle is both tougher and smarter than Green on crime and that in one critical area, Green is too soft. We base this on his views on guns.

Another surprise -- The editorial board blames crime on guns.

I didn't see that coming. Right.

Green faults Doyle for Wisconsin's rising rate of violent crime, particularly in Milwaukee. According to FBI data, the state rate fell by 2% in 2003 from the previous year and by 5% in 2004 and then rose sharply, by 15%, in 2005. The corresponding Milwaukee rate fluctuated more dramatically, falling by 7% and 12% and then soaring by 31% - worrisome, indeed. Though it wasn't as steep as here, an uptick took place throughout the nation in 2005 - suggesting the causes may transcend state borders.

Those figures are shocking. They really are.

I am certain that if a Republican governor had been at the helm while there was such a dramatic rise in the crime rate, there is no way that the JS editorial board would excuse it as being caused by something that transcends state borders.

Clearly, Doyle has failed, and failed miserably, especially in matters of controlling crime.

He has been a disaster.

A 31% increase in crime in Milwaukee isn't "worrisome." Not being able to find one's car keys is worrisome. This 31% jump is worthy of full blown panic.

It's disgraceful that the libs on the JS editorial board are willing to gloss over such an inexcusable performance by Doyle.

INEXCUSABLE.

Although crime-fighting is primarily a local job, governors play a role. To his credit, Doyle has met this responsibility. After a recent spike in violent crime in Milwaukee, for instance, he helped funnel $750,000 to the city for police overtime, with the backing of the Legislature's Joint Finance Committee.

Doyle throwing a little money at the problem after he was shamed for being MIA during Milwaukee's bloody Memorial Day Weekend was not a solution. It was no where near an appropriate response to the bloodshed.

The wanton violence in Milwaukee received national attention. Mark Green challenged Doyle to respond. Doyle had no choice but to do something to defuse the situation as quickly as possible what with the election on the horizon. So, he sent a few bucks.

Unfortunately, Doyle's response to the crime problem was woefully inadequate. If it had been truly effective, the violence would be ebbing. It's not.

If Doyle had done his job, Joe Munz's life might have been spared.

Perhaps Betty Jones and two of her sons, Christopher B. Durant and Dexter P. Durant, wouldn't have been the victims of a triple homicide.

Those four murders took place in the span of less than 24 hours in mid-October. They highlighted what a mess remains in the city and the terrible price of failing to address it.

The Journal Sentinel chronicles these daily murders and beatings in Milwaukee, but its editorial board is satisfied with Doyle's efforts to address the anarchy.

For the JS to suggest that Doyle has crime under control is insane. Truly.

...In his first budget, Doyle took a bite out of revenue sharing, hurting efforts by cities to hire cops. But facing a huge deficit, he had little choice. Green might find himself in a similar bind.

This is so stupid!

Doyle had no choice but to cut funds that cities needed to hire cops?

And the board thinks that Green would have done the exact same thing?

That sounds so childish. "Green would have done it, too."

The board argues that Green would have made the same budget choices as Doyle. That's a leap that the board cannot make. The board's assumption that a Gov. Green would have virtually ignored the violence in Milwaukee Doyle-style is completely unfair.

I also don't buy that Doyle was forced to make budget cuts that hurt cities' ability to have adequate law enforcement. He could have found the funds to assist in keeping the state's people secure.

Is the basic safety of Wisconsinites a priority for Doyle or not?

Apparently, satisfying his big donors and catering to the demands of WEAC and other Doyle pet groups is more important to him.

On one important issue - guns - Doyle is head and shoulders above Green. Through his veto power, Doyle kept Wisconsin from adopting a misguided concealed-carry law. There are already too many guns out there, and there are some places they should never be, concealed or not. Green, in contrast, backs a concealed-carry law.

And here it is -- The Journal Sentinel's favorite scapegoat: GUNS.

The board refuses to acknowledge that concealed-carry laws have been shown to REDUCE crime in some of the 48 states that have them in place.

In effect, based on the numbers, Doyle's veto of concealed-carry actually has been an obstacle in crime prevention.

So, how does Doyle's obstruction put him head and shoulders above Green?

It doesn't. Doyle's policy is adding to the problem.

The editorial concludes with this:

Wisconsin is safer with Doyle at the helm.

That's false.

Not only is it false, it's a lie. The board is intentionally deceiving its readers by distorting Doyle's record on crime.

The editorial's conclusion is not grounded in reality.

When it comes to being tough on crime, Doyle has shown himself to be utterly incompetent. He has failed the people of Wisconsin.

There is definitely a crystal clear choice on crime.

Doyle is an appeaser. He tolerates crime.

Green won't.

If you're a Wisconsinite and you aren't satisfied with the soaring violent crime rates in the state, a vote for Doyle would be a horrible mistake.

Ditto for Kathleen Falk.