On 9/6/05 9:51 PM, "Barbara Lickness" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Promising to add 71 police officers when you took away 150 over a 4 year
> period does not lend itself to proof that Public Safety has been the mayors
> highest priority since becoming mayor. To me R.T.' is the one attempting to
> score political points  by promising to add more officers within weeks of the
> election because the crime issue is an Achilles heel for him. Too little too
> late!

Except that's not true and you know it.

You know full well that there are not 150 fewer cops than than when Rybak's
administration began. That 150 cops refers to how many have been lost since
1997, which was when SSB's second term was just starting and a full four
years before Rybak was elected mayor.

And it only takes simple math to figure out that if the 71 cops being hired
brings us to 41 more than when Rybak's term started, then obviously, there's
no way 150 cops were lost over that period unless you're using the kind of
seriously fuzzy math that got the city into it's financial distress in the
first place.

So why do you continue to repeat this falsehood from the McLaughlin
campaign? 

If things are as bad as you say in the inner-city neighborhoods, why do you
have to spread lies to make your point?

Mark Snyder
Windom Park

REMINDERS:
1. Be civil! Please read the NEW RULES at http://www.e-democracy.org/rules. If 
you think a member is in violation, contact the list manager at [EMAIL 
PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list.

2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait.

For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html
For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract
________________________________

Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn 
E-Democracy
Post messages to: mailto:[email protected]
Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls

Reply via email to