Wednesday, September 01, 2010

Ballard: Shameful Opponents Are Using Tragedy For Political Purposes

As far as Mayor Greg Ballard is concerned, those calling for the firing of Public Safety Director Frank Straub and/or IMPD Chief Paul Ciesielski for their failure to address the Bisard investigation head on when it occurred rather than plotting and strategizing how to improve Straub's public image are simply using the tragedy for political purposes. That's what Ballard told Fox59 News today during an interview. Those calls for Straub's and/or Ciesielski's removal reached a fever pitch after Fox59 News exclusively reported this past weekend that Assistant Chief Darryl Pierce spoke to Ciesielski no fewer than 8 times from the crash scene before he and Deputy Chief Hicks were summoned to return to the department to discuss Straub's public image problems and an afternoon press conference Ciesielski scheduled as a show of support for Straub. Both Hicks and Pierce were required to stand with Chief Ciesielski at the afternoon press conference, although both men declined to speak out in support of Straub.

Straub and Ciesielski later announced the demotion of both men, in addition to Commander John Conley, for failing to communicate to him and Straub the seriousness of Bisard's crash and failing to take charge of the accident scene. When asked if his top two public safety guys would still be in place at the conclusion of the Bisard investigation, Ballard declined to comment, but he indicated the two men had his full support in carrying out the reforms he says he hired them to implement. Ballard said he will accept responsibility for what becomes of the investigation. The buck stops with him he told Fox59 News.

It seems a bit hypocritical for Ballard to accuse others of playing politics with the tragedy when his administration has been prolific in its use of staged press events to bolster him and his administration politically. He ran on the platform of Public Safety Is Job One, insisted on being given control of the police department and got his wish. Before the Bisard crash, Ballard and his paid mouth pieces repeatedly told us crime had decreased after he took the reins of IMPD, notwithstanding significant public sentiment to the contrary. IMPD under his rein has also been beset by numerous incidents of police officers running afoul of the law. It seems only fair that the opposition be given fair time to vent their views, even if it's not what Ballard wants to hear. If their pronouncements are political, then so are his.


Had Enough Indy? said...

I'd place my bets that Ballard is trying to get Straub & Ciesielski to resign - so that he doesn't have to fire them and seem to be bending to the wishes of the 'other' party.

Paul K. Ogden said...

HEI, you actally think Ballard is that clever? You're giving him far too much credit. Think simple. He sees everything from a very simple mindset.

Indy4U2C said...

Our mayor should not have brought in Frank Straub, a New York Liberal, with an oversized ego. A good job interview could have prevented the mayor's 'issues'.

I grew up in this city and have never known such highly visibile problems with the Public Safety Director's position. Never in history has it been in the media like this. It is supposed to be a low-key position...and always has been.

Frank Straub, a New York Liberal, wants to pretend to be police chief and has really done a lot of damage to the city, police department, and our great mayor.

Had Enough Indy? said...

Indy4U2C - I think police officers have been the ones to do the damage to "the city, police department, and our great mayor". I only quote you, and am not implying any agreement with your choice of adjectives.

Cato said...


This culture of corruption and brutality that is deeply sown in IMPD did not come from Straub.

IMPD is a bitter, angry, savage group of thugs who lie and attack to protect their own and who view themselves as an occupying army.

This unaccountable overlord mentality was created a long time ago, encouraged by such as Cottey, Newman, Goldsmith, Brizzi.

The pro-police component of the Republican Party strips our freedoms far more energetically and effectively than does the most bizarre laws and regulations from the enviro-Left.

Indy4U2C said...

Cato, you got me laughing!

Did you get those comments from The Communist Mannifesto? Your comments are not only laughable, but sound like true propaganda.

Obviously, you don't live in the same city I grew up and continue to live in.

Cato said...

See? This is why the Republican Party is currently quite unattractive.

Those who want a docile, servient government are called Communists by today's Right. The Right makes a mess out of the language, calling those who advocate limited government "collectivists." They haven't the first clue about the terms and concepts they employ.

Please tell me how the Republicans are anything but the dumb peoples' party.

The Right has completely lost the plot. Their version of Right is a rehash of the hard-Left nationalistic obedient socialism from early 20th Century Europe.

Statists like Indy4 are a huge turn-off to those who advocate limited government, and one has to ask: just what is a Republican, these days?

Sean Shepard said...

Ack! Cato and Indy4U2C.

I think Cato's point that, in American today, the police have become militarized enforcers for the state not "peace officers" or protectors of individual rights. Let's face it, men with loaded weapons ready to be drawn shouldn't be detaining people for not wearing their seat belt. People should see the police as their friend and ally not as a group to be avoided.

I often wonder how much inner city crime could be reduced if not for the drug laws. Somebody with a bag of weed (a plant that grows naturally) in their house is much less likely to call the cops for anything even though they are doing no harm nor violating anyone else's rights.

Indy4U2C is probably in fair territory jumping at what on the surface seems like hyperbolic statements about IMPD. But, watch enough YouTube videos of grandmothers, speeders with their families in the car and children getting Tazed by police. Watch people get arrested for merely verbally challenging an officer for why he was detaining and illegally searching someone (cases almost always dropped after the questioner is intimidated with an overnight in jail). Examine the Republican Party's complete failure and abandonment of restoring personal freedom and natural rights to citizens and, well, you then clearly see the authoritarian tyranny in the room. It is not exclusively the domain of the left.

Perhaps what Cato meant to imply is not so much the "pro police" (I'm "pro police" after all and think their job should be easier and less dangerous) but perhaps "pro nanny state"?

Most Republicans don't really believe the government does much of anything very well but they always give it a complete pass when it comes to police and the military. But, as I have wondered out loud lately, were are the police and government agents that will protect us and our rights from ... the police and government agents?