2012 SHERIFF ELECTION

At least Osborne has 23 years as a supervisor, even though I haven't found out where yet.

I do not believe you will be able to substantiate Osborn having 23 yrs of supervisory status. I will go on to say this, he is not a certified law enforcement officer! His wonton disreguard for the law is troublesome intself. I am appauled by his ethics and handlings of this most recent issue on 1-31-2012. Never mind all the rest!
Osborn sibling recent traffic ticket # 12001062TR steming out of lee county FHP.
1.) Citation: http://courts.co.charlotte.fl.us/Ben...Details/746520
2.) PublicResponse:http://i44.tinypic.com/mkgpqw.jpg Last names have been removed but the originals are with the proper law enforcement and media agencies.

Noteworthy is those who are openly in support of the Osborn Campaign are liking these unproffessional and factual comments. This behavior is beyond degrading and gives us all an inside for how he solves problems. I strongly urge all leo's to demand a public appology.

This is not a man worthy of leading a large public office let alone his own public affairs; advising his sibling that he could refer to the officer by every name in the book and he could'nt have done anything. What a testimony of character and if that officer does not drop that ticket, what Osborn, what then will happen? Cops do not get a bad rap for enforcing the laws, they get a bad rap for favortism and unprofessionalism. NO WADE!

[quote="notfair norbalancedI do not believe you will be able to substantiate Osborn having 23 yrs of supervisory status.[/quote]

I would urge you to read the first post in the tread, in which you will find the answer you seek.

Furthermore, thanks for your post. I can see his kid is a true A hole from your facebook post. I don't see any comments from dad directly. Not saying he wasn't involved, but not seeing proof that the was either.

Family and friends can loose an election for you...that's a fact. I see young Eric has no respect for LEO's. Your point is taken.

I am so pleased that you feel the need to bash the canidate that I have given my full support.

I wasn't bashing your candidate (proper spelling). I was simply providing facts and information about the candidates (again, proper spelling) and you got your panties in a wad. So let's call it what it is... you were/are bashing me! You are not very smart (sorry I know that hurts), so when presented with points that you cannot counter with intelligent comments, you call people names. Again, glad you aren't Sheriff.

Name calling? Really? The closest thing I can find to name calling is un-willing, un-worthy, un-educated and if the shoe fits (it appears that it did) wear it. Allow me to add one more. Un-truthful...Oh how is that possible? Believe it or not a half truth is a full lie... and you certainly told your fair share of those.

And thank you for correcting my spelling error(s). I do not use spell check. I do it by memory......Yes you caught me, I failed my damn spelling test also. But I have been practicing...candidate....candidates...I think I got it now. You should be as good in investigations as you are in spelling. If you were I would of never posted to begin with.

Your lies (I mean half truths) is what got me started to begin with. So do not flatter yourself this is not about bashing you. It is about getting all the information out not just what you felt like doing/sharing at the time. I could of called you lazy, but I stayed away from name calling. (At least I thought I did anyway)

I will remind you again this is not about me being Sheriff. You should be glad that I am not the Sheriff. You would probably be saying that I am mean. Most people that are happy that I am not the Sheriff are those resemble the above UN------Words.

And could you please tell me who told you that I wear panties...I thought that there was only one person that knew I did.

As Always My Name
Jim

Levity…You amused me. However, I posed several questions to you about your candidate which you haven’t answered. I welcome your responses in regards to Pope’s education and background that would convince me that he is qualified to be Sheriff.

Lack of respect.....Are you for real. You began this thread with a lack of respect and certainly injected humor when you felt it was warranted. You told me not to tell you what Popes education was and referred to him as being a bagger at publix. Questions like that do not deserve an answer. I treated it as humor and ridicule which we now could class with your special use of vocabulary words (levity). Plus the fact that I do not even know whom I am talking to. You hide behind this fictious name claiming to be Fair and Balanced which has been far from the truth. Then when someone posts something you become sarcastic. Oh and by the way I have mastered sarcasim if you have not already noticed, and will duel with the best of you. So to be honest you became my playmate in a very childish game that was worth while for my boredom that comes with retirement. However, if you would like to become more serious you would certainly have to do a 180% for me. Use the name your momma gave you and ask questions without providing the answers or being sarcastic. Plus, even if you have to play make believe, act like you really give a damn about Law Enforcement, CCSO, and who may be your next boss. I state this believing that you may be part of the Sheriff's Office. I would of said assume but I do not want to call you any names. I am who I have been and hide behind nothing. There are no secrets about me now or then. I say what I mean, mean what I say and that has obviously made me mean. I own my integrity and owe no one anything. Which is more than most can say. So where do we go from hear....Check Mate...New game? I will certainly answer anything about Pope when asked for good reason and by a serious party. Other than that it has come time for me to concentrate on more serious matters. Like our new Sheriff Ed Pope.

As Always My Name
Jim

[Mod 610]

As this thread started out it was the use of links as reference material which is correct in the TOU. You can mention candidates and their reported qualifications but stop there as people are passionate about their candidates and will defend them, then attack the opposition on why they think are not qualified. This is nothing new and goes back to the Roman period in time. (They use to kill people just to take over their spot. :shock: )

This is not a campaign debate site on who has more awards, who could not pass what, who has leadership experience, etc, etc, etc. This is not an attack site of a former candidate site. This is not even an attack site as it is a TOU violation. What this site is is a Law Enforcement site people. If you want a Charlotte County Sheriff's Office candidate debate site then start one yourselves. Stop it here.

Do I see a hint of censorship? I thought that the position of the Sheriff was Law Enforcement. So you have decided that you don't like the subject so it is time to stop. How did you get this position of MOD 610? Your censorship is also a violation of freedom of speech. I have read the rules of use and censorship is not one of your responsibilities unless it is in violation of the rules. And then I would have to ask what rules are we going to follow. The rules state uses your own name unless an a Anonymous Message is warranted. I did not know that the position of the Moderator was censorship. I have read the forum rules on several occasions and believe you are over extending your authority. I have copied the rules that I have referenced below. Enough said. :!:

Jim

This is not a SLAM site and the Forums should be used constructively. Messages (anonymous or not) accusing anyone (including political candidates) of wrong doing (and/or criminal accusations) without substantial proof or reference are subject to deletion. Use your REAL name unless the need for an Anonymous Message is warranted. Messages not requiring Anonymous status, but being abused, are subject to deletion by System Moderators. Anonymous Messages are not granted the same right to exist that properly identified Messages are. Failure to comply can result in Message deletion and/or access blockage. :?:

[Mod 610]

Do I see a hint of censorship? I thought that the position of the Sheriff was Law Enforcement. So you have decided that you don't like the subject so it is time to stop. How did you get this position of MOD 610? Your censorship is also a violation of freedom of speech. I have read the rules of use and censorship is not one of your responsibilities unless it is in violation of the rules. And then I would have to ask what rules are we going to follow. The rules state uses your own name unless an a Anonymous Message is warranted. I did not know that the position of the Moderator was censorship. I have read the forum rules on several occasions and believe you are over extending your authority. I have copied the rules that I have referenced below. Enough said. :!:

Jim

This is not a SLAM site and the Forums should be used constructively. Messages (anonymous or not) accusing anyone (including political candidates) of wrong doing (and/or criminal accusations) without substantial proof or reference are subject to deletion. Use your REAL name unless the need for an Anonymous Message is warranted. Messages not requiring Anonymous status, but being abused, are subject to deletion by System Moderators. Anonymous Messages are not granted the same right to exist that properly identified Messages are. Failure to comply can result in Message deletion and/or access blockage. :?:

EP your campaign manager is at it again. Folks aren't going to vote for you if you bring excess baggage into your command.