Washington Post Editorial Board looks weak (politically correct?)

Washington Post

Last night my OFF THE RECORD (scroll back to watch the video posted here) called for a revision of the Civil Service firing process (step it up) and for the firing of the Secret Service Officers who did the most disgraceful job of so called protecting our President (not to mention representing the United States overseas in such a deplorable manner.) How could anyone disagree? Firing should be the word used in discussing it. Firing is blunt, to the point and appropriate. The Secret Service agents were drunk, one passed out in the hall of the hotel!

Well…enter the Washington Post Editorial Board….it penned an Editorial today about the Secret Service. The Editorial Board did not specifically call for firing. Instead the Board wrote this mousey worded “we assume tougher discipline to follow.” (see below) Why not step up and call for what should be done – firings – instead of the mousey “assume tougher discipline to follow?” And when is this “tougher discipline to follow?” After the taxpayers have paid a year of administrative leave, a/k/a paid vacation?

Why not call for fast track firings, a revision in the union civil service rules? This is not a close call – drunk on the job? and taxpayers then pay for administrative leave that will linger, linger and linger? ? A strong editorial makes demands for REAL changes, that work. Instead this editorial semi pats the Secret Service on the back for prior changes (“…the agency has taken steps…” after the Secret Service prostitution scandal in Colombia.) Baloney! Those so called steps were obviously silly or we would not be going through this again.

The editorial looks weak and like they don’t want to offend anyone. It says at one point that “apparently” the rule against drinking was violated ‘by the passed out agent.” Apparently? What was he passed out from that they needed the word “apparently?” They don’t trust their own reporting?

If you care, really care, you have some fire in your belly, a willingness to say it straight, not this politically correct language.
You help…and weak mousy editorials don’t help.

“…To drum home that message, yet again, the Secret Service sent three agents home from the Netherlands and placed them on administrative leave; we assume tougher discipline is to follow. Yes, the agency has taken steps since Cartagena to prevent misconduct. Obviously, it’s going to have to do more….” [part of Washington Post editorial]

go to the Washington Post and read the entire editorial — maybe when you read the whole thing, you will not agree with me. Return here and tell me why I am wrong.