As you know by now, Richland County Sheriff Leon Lott has hired former City of Columbia Police Chief Randy Scott as an investigator in his department. Lott gave Scott his first job in law enforcement here in the Midlands some years ago and says he feels somewhat responsible for the incident that Scott says led to him suffering from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder.
I have absolutely no doubt that Scott suffers from PTSD, I expect many of our police and emergency personnel suffer from it. I do still have questions about the timing of the announcement. After city management said Scott could be facing disciplinary action he abruptly took a leave of abscence. When he resigned from the job last month he divulged that during that time he saw a counselor and was given the diagnosis.
Lawsuits, threats of lawsuits, threat of discipline for still unknown reasons, residents of the city deserve some answers from those in charge. And then there is the $52,000 question.
Under law that has since changed, Scott and others were allowed to "retire", wait 15 days and then be rehired in the same job at the same salary. That loophole that allowed Scott and others to start collecting full retirement benefits while working closed on January 2nd of this year.
In Scott's case he wasn't actually eligible for this "perk".
He hadn't accrued enough time in the system, not until the then City Manager okayed the use of city money to purchase $52,000 in credits from the state retirement system to allow the Chief to double dip.
I have no issue with Lott's hiring of Scott. Lott is a stand-up guy trying to do the right thing and Scott is a good law enforcement officer who brings a lot to the table. He just to needs to put a few things back on the table, 52,000 of them to be exact.
Chances are you didn't see the one and only scheduled debate between Mark Sanford and Elizabeth Colbert Busch last night. Chances are most of the mainstream media didn't see it either, but that hasn't stopped them from spinning it for the Democrat.
Don't get me wrong, the former governor has been his own worst enemy. He doesn't need biased reporting to bring him down, he has done a terrific job of that all by himself thank you.
Still it infuriates me to see headlines like "Colbert Busch debate zinger keeps focus on Sanford" and "Elizabeth Colbert Busch boldly calls out former South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford for his cheating scandal in the candidates' first debate".
Did these "reporters" SEE the debate? Sure Colbert Busch meekly mentioned Sanford's fling as an afterthought to a statement on spending, but to hear the media tell the story she was the aggressor and the clear winner of the debate.
Nothing could be farther from the truth.
Colbert Busch came across as nervous, unsure and not very well informed - a point she once even conceeded. As one Citadel political science prof said, after this debate the election comes down to nothing other than being a referendum on Sanford.
But don't let any of that get in the way of a good story. Let's face it, sex sells. If it weren't for that angle there really wouldn't have been anything to report from last night.
As you watch our pal Chris Matthews below, remember that the right is always being accused of being callous, mean-spirited and uncaring and unsympathetic. Go ahead and scroll to about the 1:45 mark and watch Matthew's Syria solution and hear how "all we ever do is kill Arabs"!
As is often the case when news is breaking, we get a lot of information in a hurry, some of it not entirely true.
We also get a lot of conspiracy theories and we are getting some of those already. I find them interesting but don't usually believe most of them. I am honestly not sure what I do and do not believe about this story yet.
I do have a few questions.
It appears as though these two are Islamist extremists. Who else is involved? Why no claim of responsibility? And why knock off the 7-11? Stay with me here.
At 5:20 on the afternoon the photos of these two are plastered over every screen in the country, heck the world for that matter. What would you do? Go out five hours later and try to knock off a convenience store? Really??
Next up you carjack a vehicle, drive around for about a half hour and then left the car's owner go. Seems plausible that this guy might have already seen the photos of you and you just let him go? Not to mention that you've just days ago killed three people and injured many more. Having a hard time trying to figure that out.
Then we hear that these two have been in the country for some time. The older brother for a decade or more. The younger a star student and pre-med student. If you plan to pull off a terror attack, why do it in your own town where lots of folks have seen your face. Detonate a couple of IED's, kill and maim a bunch of folks then just head to the house?
Maybe over time some of these will be explained. Meantime just call be dubious of some of the reported "facts".