snoqueen wrote:And we were discussing the drinking and sexual behavior among city alders. What in the world Prosser has to do with this is beyond me.
Quoting from the article linked in the OP, to which I have referred at length in my comments (so you could reasonably infer I read it several times before discussing it):
An exception was Tim Bruer, who was one of the alders with Berg and Solomon at a pair of downtown taverns on the night of April 13, 2010, after a council meeting. He spoke at length to investigators about what he saw and says now that "it's ironic that many of the progressives on the council and in the community who are fast to be calling for state officials to resign for inappropriate behavior have not come forth and applied the same principles to Ald. Solomon," referring to calls for conservative state Supreme Court Justice David Prosser to step down...
I don't agree with Bruer. I don't think these two situations are parallel at all. I don't think accusations of sexual misbehavior in a private home with nobody else present are equivalent to a witnessed misbehavior in a public place. So what Prosser's got to do with it remains beyond me, even though it might make sense to Bruer. The purpose of my comments was not to argue with Tim Bruer, who is entitled to his own opinions.
What we were discussing, starting with the top of the thread, was excessive drinking, drunk driving, and sexual behavior among city alders.
If you think the issue should be turned into "jumping to conclusions about reports of assaults" then you need to say so. And while people jump to conclusions all the time, I don't think that's a major part of the Solomon/Berg discussion. Alders have been standing aside and waiting for results of an investigation, and I, for my own part, have said while I think the whole thing is an embarrassment (to many people not just Solomon) the driving thing is the worst part and along with the assistant DA, I can't see where there's a winnable case against Brian S. I have not, therefore, tried to build a big case that he's guilty or innocent. I attempted to open a discussion of whether the activities described in Steven Elbow's article amounted to criminality, and if so at what point. That's worthy of public discussion.
So if you try and stretch this thing and make a Prosser-Solomon equivalence, what's your reasoning? You whined because you think people jumped to conclusions about Prosser and now you're whining because people won't jump to conclusions about Solomon?