I looked at the above-linked site, and I can’t find the July 8th column anywhere. I didn’t pick up the newspaper that day, so I am sure it was in it, but I wonder what’s so embarrassing about it that it no longer is fit for public distribution.
If I read Herb’s two remaining “regulars” take on it (and they ain’t so regular anymore from the looks of it), Mulshine must have made a snide remark about a Bridgewater municipal case that Ventantonio heard.
I would bet you almost any amount of dough, that someone had been cited for a fineable offense (“cruelty to animals” or something similarly titled), pled guilty to it, and the judge levied the fine.
Mulshine probably twisted this into: AND the judge levied the FINE!!!!, as though Jim V. had done something wrong.
However, as any well-versed American citizen knows, a legislature MAKES the law, and the judge INTERPRETS the law. This is called “separation of powers”.
So if the judge is faced with a statute or ordinance that says, “the penalty for X is $500”, the judge doesn’t get a lot of discretion to say, “naw, let’s not bother with that law today”.
You expect there to be a consistent and fair application of the laws, as passed by the legislature!
Mulshine should stick to his rants about the dangers of S.U.V’s, and not try to do the local Republican Party any favors trying to “up the negatives” of the G.O.P. candidate’s opponent. The (fairly) regular readers may not take too kindly to that sort of insertion.