CONNECTING THE DOTS, ETC.

SunTzu

Dude you need to get a life. You talk about how bad Mr. Taylor is running a campaign full of lies well Beseler is running a dirty campaign.  I do not believe for one second that Beseler is not behind all your ranting and raving. He sounds like another candidate I know who gets other people to do his dirty work for him so he can say that he had nothing to do with it.

Did these same unions not own Beseler four years ago but that was ok then. So now, he is mad because they do not want to play with him anymore.

Let me guess you must be one the magnificent seven or maybe yet you just might be Susan Armstrong herself.

My vote will be for Mr. Taylor because of Beseler’s smear campaign and because he is more qualified.

Dude-

Ssshhh! Don't TELL anyone that Beseler is running a dirty campaign! So far it is the best kept secret in Clay County! No anti-Taylor flyers, no defacing of Taylor signs, not even a negative word out of the Sheriff's mouth about him!

Oh, dear. I hope you didn't blow it for him! Oh, but wait. There is the folio article. Beseler must have fed all of that stuff to Susan Armstrong. I hope she (and folio) have good lawyers. Because they are going to get the pants sued off of them if that stuff isn't true!

I find it amusing that we have seen nothing but a dirty campaign for the past year from Taylor. Now that something has come out to expose the character of Mr. Taylor it is somehow Sheriff Beselers fault. I have not heard anything negative come out of Sheriff Beselers campaign.

I totally agree with you. I could not believe that Taylor denied not having anything to do with the anti-Beseler flyer. How can this man blame Beseler for the Folio and then say he had nothing to do with the anti-Beseler flyer. I think they both are playing a dirty campaign, but I have lived in Clay Co for over 40 years and have come to realize that if you don't play dirty, you usually don't win. Ask Lancaster about 4 years ago when he was trying the clean campaign stragedy.

I would feel alot better about Taylor if he would be man enough and admit that he new about the flyer, and stop trying to say he doesn't put family into politics and then slam a step-son for Beseler in the same paragraph. Can we find anyone more phony?

My support will stay with Beseler.

Taylor-       DON'T GO AWAY MAD, JUST GO AWAY!!!!!!!!

Some people who work in the SO are not part of the Sheriffs crew and fear for their jobs if they come out on here and blog about what the Sheriff has lied about.  I DO NOT WORK FOR THE SO.  I am very close to several people that work and they are very proudly supporting Mr. Taylor.  Heck when I was at the court house the other day taking care of somethings I noticed in the S.O. parking lot there were Mike Taylor bumper stickers, and window decals on several of the vehicles there.  Now thats sad. People have told me that morale at that place is just at the lowest level it has ever been.  I personally know about 20-25 people who have left not because they have been fired but because they could not stand to work for him anymore.

 Sheriff Beseler did not follow through on alot of campaign promises that he made during the last campaign I know you are going to ask me to list them for you but I will not list them all for fear of reorecussions on my friends but here is just one I know to some of you this may seem minor but to the deputies involved it rubbed them the wrong way.  He promised to sit down with each and every deputy to introduce himself and find out what their goals and visions were for the their career for the sheriffs office.  YEA that never happened instead he held meeting during their briefings or after work with their whole teams.  Another one is he said he would no longer move patrol deputies to the jail as a form of punishment yet he continues to do that.  I wonder if he knows what a morale killer that is for corrections officers its like slapping them in the face saying you are no better than a deputy who can not keep his nose out of trouble or who can not hack it on the road.  You are the scum of the S.O.  he may not be saying that to their faces but thats how they feel I have talked to numerous ones who feel that way. 

 Also he re-hired people that had been fired by Sheriff Lancaster for wrong doings and guess what they came back and were dirty again (selling drugs to your fellow officers is a big no no) oh yea and after all the media went away and it died down were offered their job once again good thing they didnt take it cause they already had a better job. 

I am sure you are part the magnificant seven but I know you will never admit it.  I don't think Mr. Taylor is taking your challenges because he does want to get into it with someone over an internet blog site.

This has absolutely no relavance to being a good sheriff but do you know at the Middleburg Parade from what I saw he sat in his cozy little golf cart the whole parade and did not shake a single hand or kiss a single baby.  If you want to be a good politician and win peoples hearts you have to shake their hand.  I have personally met Sheriff Beseler on several occassions and have never gotten more than a hello and a smile.  I have met Mr. Taylor 2 times and on the second he remembered my name and asked about my whole family.  I know Sheriff Beseler already has the job but I think he may be a little to confident he is going to keep it.

Also who in the world cares if Mr. Taylor is friends with Sheriff Lancaster I really don't think Scott is going to leave his cushy job in St. Augustine to come back and play here.  Who cares if they are using his barn for storage if his signs is there crime in that.  I voted for Mr. Beseler in the last election but now im starting to think Sheriff Lancaster wasnt so bad.....minus the credit card thing I know I know......But at least when he was in office people didnt come and work there for a few months and then decide to get the heck out of dodge.    I talked to a patrol deputy who assisted me on the side of the road one time who told me that all his life he wanted to be a police officer but his experience here and the lack of leadership ruined it for him.    Yes I did not know him from Adam and he may not have been able to hack it but his isnt the first story I have heard. 

Im just saying that everything in that place you call a job is not all apples and grapes and not everyone is as happy as you are and not everyone has the faith in your leader like you do.  The Sheriff is as dirty as them all but not all of us can sit down and open up like you can because as of right now you are on the right side of the desk and if we open up to what we know we could jeopardize our friends and families jobs.  BUT if Mr. Taylor gets elected I will tell you all I know DEAL......................

Proudmama wrote "I am sure you are part the magnificant seven but I know you will never admit it."

I have read this phrase a couple or more times now. Would you please tell me who are the "magificent seven" and what makes them so "magnificent"? I doubt anyone can measure up to the likes of Yul Brynner or Steve McQueen and the rest.

I have nobody pro or con in this issue so it's really a question of curiosity. Thank you. 

I think you should leave their names out of this. I know all seven of them and they are great law enforcement officers. Yes, most of them worked for Rick before he became Sheriff but that should not have any bearing on this election. They all do the jobs they are being paid to do. Do you honestly believe that if Taylor is elected he won't bring in his own people? You are a fool if you believe that. The only reason they are being attacked is because they worked with Rick before the election.

They consist of 7 people that the Sheriff brought in with him to lead his command staff.  I am not going to name them on here because someone brought up that its not the nicest thing to do.  But they are a few majors, and one that no one is really sure what his job is he just gets paid quite a bit of money for it......

One of the Sheriffs Campaign things was that he was not going to bring in people to lead the Sheriffs Office that it was full of leaders who were quite capable of their jobs.  But then again that was a broken promise because we come up with these 7.  Then there were the ones who were WAY more than capable and they were demoted but you know they are still their grinning and bearing it supporting their boss because that is what true leaders due..................I don't disagree that Mr. Taylor will bring on a few of his own picks BUT I surely HOPE he does not go in and demote deserving people to give his friends jobs.....That was just dead wrong

I think that is one of the problems that was discussed about the double dippers. The system that was put in place was to give higher paid employees a system (DROPs program) of retirement. That was to make room for up and coming younger qualified employees that could advance in the system too. We see it had the reverse effect when you get a legislator doing favors for friend. And a legal double dipping scheme started that has pushed other aside. You have to love those elected official they really know how to look after the taxpayers. Instead of a few friends. What the heck we just pay the bill.

I have a question for you. Beseler was a State employee when he decided to run for Sheriff. He had put in so many years that he was required to retire from that State job to be the Sheriff of Clay County. Why is it his fault for collecting a retirement (that he's entitled to) while currently working as our Sheriff? I don't get the argument. Are you saying that he should not get his retirement? Or that he should not have retired from his last job to become Sheriff? Just asking........

I think the legislator that laid this golden egg should be booted out of Tallahassee. I'm certain that will not happen because he has made many friends now. I bet his campaign contribution papers would reflect the many who want to keep this prized jewel in Tallahassee.

I think if it's a State job then they should get their pay and when they get out of the State System collect for all the years they have invested in the system. Regardless of the position. I don't think they should get both in a State System.

This is normal with any regime change.  Every president brings in his own cabinet.  Mr. Taylor will bring in his own command staff (if he wins), and I will not blame him.  The command staff is supporting the Sheriff.  You have to surround yourself with people that you trust and know.  All people brought on by the sheriff were capable and experienced.  Also, I remember a Sun Tzu blog that stated the sheriff refused to promise jobs before the election and a person was upset with him for that.  Sun Tzu cited the reason for not hiring that person even after the election was lack of experience.  I think this debunks any argument about bringing on friends (the person Sun Tzu was talking about was a wealthy supporter of Beseler's).  I don't know the capabilities of the people that were replaced, but I do know that they did not receive a pay decrease of any kind.  I forgot where I heard that, but I am sure it can be qualified with a public records request (if anyone cares to question me.)

Angela;

I'll go along with getting him out of office. He should go along with any idiot that voted yes on that deal.

I don't think it should be the way it is either. I just can't fault them or call them unethical for doing what is legal.

Mike Heemer

The way these pensions are funded is through agency contributions.  Each agency, such as the sheriff's office, contributes to an estimated amount based on the age, length of service, etc. of its employees (amounts are usually calculated by an actuary and then audited by a third party accounting firm during that agency's audit).  The only direct expense that that state usually incurs is the contribution in the current year, not the actual amount paid out to retirees.  These pension funds are invested and gain interest.  This means that the retirement check that these people receive isn't solely comprised of tax dollars.  It is tax dollars and revenues from the agency, as well as interest.  Also, there is a balance built up from profits of the fund that weren't used in previous years.  I can assure you that there is adequate funding in the pensions to cover it, and we (the taxpayers) are not footing the bill for every retiree.

You are right they did not take a cut in pay BUT they also were not entitled to a pay increase for 3 years so this year WHEN AND IF there is a pay increase it will be their first year since he has been in office to get one.....How fair is that....I don't know of any of them that did anything to deserve a demotion however they had to take it and smile because what more could they do most of them are so close to retirement they can taste it and couldnt jump on the bandwagon and go to another agency..................

What kind of demotions were they given? Detective to patrol? Loss of rank? Just curious.

mainly they were loss of rank.......but there were others given

Finder I see many who in the midnight hour stick stuff in there that benefits a few at the deteriment to the many. Most of them don't even read it when it goes pass them.

Of course I will still complain about them doing that kind of thing. Just like when they pass no property taxes for the Outer Beltway in the upcoming session. They benefit a few at the deteriment to the many. Then I will still complain that although it is legal. I still don't like having to fund those ideas with taxdollars.

I guess its my nature.

Believe it or not there were people in command staff positions under the former sheriff that had not business being in there. They were domoted by the current Sheriff because of their leadership abilities or lack thereof. Alot of the demotions made were the best thing for the agency. I would love to give names on that one but I will not. I know some of them have since left the agency and are active in the Taylor campaign. To answer your question Sam the position demoted were a couple of Majors to the rank of Captain and Captain to the rank of Lt. Those positiions are considered administrative / command staff appointed by the Sheriff.

Any new Sheriff will put people in positions that he trusts and if Mr. Taylor were to win the election (which I doubt)  he will do the same thing. I wonder how many people are double dipping in other county departments (school board, road dept. etc.).

Thanks for the info. Proudmama didn't really elaborate in her response. You know, they need to look at it for this point of view, at least they still had a job. Lots of people in the unemployment lines these days. Hopefully Beseler will stay our Sheriff. People are crazy if they believe Taylor wouldn't bring his own crew in.

 I believe there is double dipping in every department. People leave one job to take another and the majority of the time you have to retire from one to do the other.

 I agree a few of them may not have completly deserved their positions but I do know of a few who were doing a darn good job.   But its all politics and people who get their toes stepped on are better than me.  I could not work in a law enforcement agency because I can not hold my tongue well enough to put up with the BS that is involved. 

I agree with the whole if it aint broke don't fix it.  But I seriously think it is broke enough people just don't know about it or are not willing to speak up......

Dear Sun Tzu.

Did Sheriff Beseler lie? I know why some make the claim. It is on the FOP website.

According to the FOP, while running for office Beseler claimed to have no problem with the deputies forming a union, but after being elected blocked contract negotiations until CCSO and the FOP reached an impasse.

The Taylor campaign has been nothing but trash, but this trash has distracted us from asking real questions about Sheriff Beseler.

Whoever wears the Sheriff uniform is more than just a lawman, he is also a manager. Management has to establish a working relationship with the union for the good of all concerned. There are lots of workplaces that have unions, but very few in which there is an enduring and vicious labor dispute. The CCSO is the only place I know where the labor dispute has spilled over into the election.

The Sheriff and all the deputies work for us. The management style of the Sheriff and the welfare of the deputies is the concern of the voters. Yes, fighting crime is the most important issue, and I cannot fault CCSO on this, but the Sheriff must also manage.

Did the Sheriff start the fight, or was it the FOP? Does the FOP have the right to be angry? They must be very angry for them to have backed Taylor, a man who from the start had ticking time bombs on his and his family’s record.

There are questions that need to be answered. I asked them here http://myclaysun.com/node/4115

hoping that someone might give me answers to some of these questions, but no one stepped forward.

Don’t think that I am a friend of Taylor, as I made clear here http://myclaysun.com/node/4130

Neither think that I am a friend of the unions, as I made clear here http://myclaysun.com/node/4005

The voters need to know what’s going on inside of CCSO. Few want Beseler replaced by Taylor, but maybe he needs to be replaced by someone else.

Are there no issues that need to be resolved? Are you just closing ranks not so much in support of Beseler, but in rejection of Taylor? I want to know the truth?

I await your reply, but be warned, warrior...

I did not come for a fight, but I am a man of war. I took the name Kulpah in jest, but know that I am not now joking. Approach me with humility, lest you be consumed when my anger surges forth without warning. If it comes to war, then I will be Felix no longer, my battle flag reads Macabeus Invictus. Meet me in peace, or rest in pieces.

All joking aside, there have been an awfull lot of accusations from both the Beseler and Taylor camps.  If even half of these things turn out to be true, shouldn't there be a whole lot of people going to jail, or at least in court being sued?

That's one reason why I'm voting for the other guy.  You know who I'm talking about. 

He is the only candidate for Sheriff that NOT ONE SINGLE PERSON HAS ACCUSED OF ANY MISCONDUCT WHATSOEVER.

His handcard says his web address is agnjustice@yahoo.com.  I'm sure he would like to hear from supporters, and I'm sure he could use more volunteers.

While I have made it very clear that I believe we have an excellent sheriff in Beseler, you are correct that Gary Newman is a good, honorable man.  I do not say "give me Beseler or give me death", I say "give me Beseler or Newman, or give me death."

Let's get down with this and I'll do the public records request to get to the bottom of the matter. I can try to answer your questions but I think a lot of your questions could be simply answered by the Sheriff himself.  Have you tried calling him?

This is the bottom line that I will tell you is Sheriff Beseler is an honorable man and has not lied, contrary to other's beliefs. Making a statement in error is simply that, a mistake. However, saying something, knowing it's not true, is a lie. Along those lines, giving information out to the public that is only partially true is misleading and can be construed as a lie.

Example. The card you received in the mail(along with the anti Beseler card)  regarding the other candidate's claim 250 law enforcement professionals leaving the agency in the last three years. With that statement, a layman would look at the figure and say to them self, "Man there must be a problem at the Sheriff's Office if that many "law enforcement professionals left" While the statement is partially true the number is not all DEPUTIES. Only an average of 19 DEPUTIES left per year.  That is a law attrition number. I think my point is made regarding half truths.One thing is for certain, when Sheriff Beseler makes a statement he can back it up (public records). My challenge to anyone, prove what he said ( text, audio, video) where he made a statement and he was lying. Remember my definition of a lie it hold to you too. I have yet to see one testament, proven where Beseler lied. Show me where I'm wrong and I start making my humble pie.

 Newman is a good man. There is only one candidate who has experience in being the Sheriff and that person is the Sheriff. The proof is in the pudding. Yes I support Beseler.Here are some of my reasons. Gave money back to BCC but Deputies have all new cars and equipment in those car. Gave deputies raises in spite of the Union impasse (agreed upon by the Union). Gave a training unit and coordinated training for the deputies to keep current with FDLE requirements. If you didn’t know If you lapse in mandatory training you lose your certificate. The list goes on and on. I

f you want to know I'll go on and on.I'll start looking at your posts more carefully and reply only on things I think I'm qualified to answer. I do have friends and family there who can help me out with information.  

Sheriff Beseler told the members in the 2006 year end review that "We are one step away frombeing recognized as a "well work place environment" which will qualify the department for discounts on employee health insurance premiums and a savings to the employees and taxpayers". Then he comes out and tell them we just have to get the rest of the county employees to do the same and we will see the savings.

I guess he told a little white lie or he just did not know what he was talking about.

Sun Tuz, after reading most of your blogs I think you may be suicidal or was at one time.

It is Sun TZU.

In case you care, which you probably don't.

I welcome the opportunity to exchange information, ideas, and views with you. I do not perceive a battle between us, as you said, you come in peace. I am not going to give you an opinion of whether it is the FOP or Sheriff Beseler. I will present you with the facts and you can form your own opinion. Never hesitate to ask me a serious question but please do not be mired down in the swine droppings. I want to give you accurate information and I do not have everything I need to respond to you right now. I am just posting this so you will not think I blew you off. I will answer you as quickly as possible.I have watched your postings and I can see you are a man of sincerity that is seeking truth. I pledge to give you nothing but the truth, as I know it. If it is an opinion, I will tell you it is an opinion. One thing I will tell you, watch for substance in what others write. Many people here will just throw stuff against the wall to see if it will stick. Pay them no mind. Some will only have anger and slander. Pay them no mind. Even though my words are often very passionate, they have substance and no one has refuted them. It is easy to say Beseler lied but show me where Beseler lied. I have said Mike Taylor has been untruthful and I have shown the evidence. While you are waiting, formulate specific questions and post them. I will answer.I look forward to corresponding with you.Sun Tzu

Thanks for the info, but I don't think you could convict a DUI case before a Judge.

Did the Sheriff start the fight, or was it the FOP?

Calling it a fight is not appropriate. The parties are at a serve disagreement. The major article is binding arbitration. He has stated many times in public why he disagrees with the article in the contract. The bottom line is the FOP and the SO declared impasse. Who did it first is not material because they are at impasse regardless.  

The next step was the special magistrate and the magistrate ruled in favor of the Sheriff (binding arbitration) because there was no evidence produced in the hearing to warrant going to binding arbitration. The ruling was based upon the county has a career service appear process (municode.com to see the CC ORD on Career Service) that has been utilized minimally. And in one case the employee was reinstated. All of the other cases the board in the appeal with the Sheriff's discipline.  FOP rejected the magistrates recommendations and negations failed again. They couldn't agree. There are other articles that were disagreed upon but surely they could have been worked out. Do a public records request to see the special magistrates ruling, after all it cost $9000, $4500 on the shoulder of the tax payer.   

Need more I’ll try to elaborate. Call the FOP president. After all it fair to hear both side. Fair and Balanced     Does the FOP have the right to be angry?

That is opinion and being angry is individualized in every person and not an organization

Your obviously a county employee. What is a white lie? Your statement is flawed.

The BCC give the SO their Health benifits. They are the ones who negotied with BCBS not the Sheriff. The ewmplyee only pays $150 per month for family coverage. Tha's pretty good by my standards. JSO pays $350 per month for family coverage. I dont think you want to walk that line becasue the public is not going to agree with you.  They probably pay much more than a county employee.

The exampole you gave is the Sheriff's part in trying to reduce cast to you. But if the County as a whole doesn't pitch in them his statement to improve the cost to you is now a mistake but not by his doing.

Sorry for typos    

In your post above I would like to make an observation.

Your statement:Gave money back to BCC but Deputies have all new cars and equipment in those car.

Let's examine that statement. On Nov 8 2005 in the BCC minutes it states.

Rick Beseler, Clay County Sheriff, Re: 2004/2005 Budgeted Unspent Reversion

Sheriff Beseler spoke about his efforts to reduce spending during the past year and presented the Board with a reversion check in the amount of $1,009,190.22.

Well he gave us back 1 million alright. But what about the new cars.

On Dec 15, 2005 the very next month he office appeared before them asking for money to buy vehicles.

Referred discussion on Sheriff’s Office vehicles to the full Board.

Well if he needed the money to buy vehicles then why did he give it back. My opinion it looks good to the taxpayers. Why did he send someone over there to ask for it back the next month? My opinion none of the taxpayers would remember him coming back and asking for it back. But the giving 1 million back looks good on tv. IMHO

Well I guess that's how you give 1 million back and everybody has a new car. I like those politician tricks. They remind me of the street vendor and the shell game.

Were having a discussion and your calling me a name? Don't stoop to your fellow bloggers. Your above that.  Come on let's be real and discuss real topics. BTW I have beaten the most feared DUI attorney, have you?

Beseler gave the money back and came back for it. It doesn't matter who's budget it was. It is the budget for the Sheriff's Office not the Sheriff.

You still can never make a point

Lancaster wrote that buget. good try. That was then this is now. Looks like the man saved some bucks. Bless your heart

Well if he came back after it how did we save anything? Taking in to account it is taxpayers money. Its not Beseler's of Lancaster's money but my money. It's not the Sheriff but the Sheriff's Office budget. Hello you hear me in there good buddy.

Where do you think he got all those new cars? I hope you are not saying we have some slush fund hidden some where.

Look to how the Orange Park Station was paid for and you'll find your answers. Those all are CI funds. Good try again. Your are truly uninformed. You still dont know anything good buddy. Do you ever wonder why your posts go ignored. read you your own and you'll figure it out. At least BM agrees with you, that's a start. Opps forgot my own rule. I'm done with you.

I was going to address each one of the points you made. Oh well.

The specific issue I was interested in was the light duty policy.  The way I read the FOP side it sounds like a really bad policy, I was just trying to get info from people who actually deal with CCSO policies to see how it really works.  My basic, first look impression is that maye some of the FOP  demands during contract negotiation weren't that extreme, and if the "division" within CCSO is as bad as I have heard.

I didn't say that the Sheriff lied, I was giving my impression of why some would say it.  The way I see it, even if Beseler did say that "he had no problem with the employees forming a union," and then later did change his mind, that is not neccesarily lying.  Situations can change, and you find out that thing you said, or even promised, does not apply to existing situation.

I don't want to get bogged down in the "Beseler lied" thing.  Everybody on the Sheriff's side keeps talking about proof, video, written, whatever, that he actually made this statement.  That is off topic, the statement, if made, is just an expression of a policy.  When running for office he must have talked to the FOP, and at some point someone have asked him about his view of a union, does anyone have proof that back then he was opposed to a union?

What I really want is a clear view of the situation.

The general way I have perceived the situation is that of an election in which there is an incumbant Sheriff, management, and a union picked lackey.  While the dispute between management and union might just be arbitration, this state exists because they could not reach an agreement.   Into the mix goes every other union with any connection to Clay or law enforcement.  In the middle of it all we get a "vote against incompetance flyer."  You look at the whole and I see a fight, I think that most of the participants consider it to be a fight, and I don't believe you can separate these issues and say that one is just arbitration.

I will cut to the chase; are the FOP demands so ridiculous, is the Sheriff trying to work with the union or is he unreasonably untractable, and are policies such as the "light duty" policy causing low morale?

Thank you for your kind words.  I admire your style, and in particular like the way you used "sluttish" in a previous blog.  That is linguistic innovation.

I know absolutely nothing about the FOP, so your description of events, the connecting of dots, goes far beyond me.

I have noticed a tendency for people to mock things that they consider as conspiracy theories.  I am the opposite, in that I automatically look for hidden motives.  It is funny to me; people talk about the "old boys" in Clay, what do they consider the "old boys" to be except a conspiracy?

I guess that your detractors don't believe that the FOP, a national, state, and local organization, with ties to law enforcement, has no influence and does not seek to increase it's influence.  They need to look at some other unions, and at all politics in general.  Everyone is trying to gobble up as much power as they possibly can.  Getting really, really local, the people in my homeowners association have let their tiny bit of power go to their heads.  Conspiracy is how politics work, and if you don't see it then you don't see the workings.

I heard the press was at the victims rally in Fleming Island. I have not seen any coverage in the news or the paper. What happened?

I think that a lot of the FOP members thought Beseler would not mind the union and used that to get some of their support. After he got elected, the FL Sheriffs assoc had a lot more influence than that little FOP Lodge and was part of his decision.

The Fl Sheriff's Association is a not-for-profit 501(c)3 corporation. It is made up of the 67 Sheriffs of Florida, about 3,500 business leaders and 130,000 citizens throughout the state.

The majority of their members are not even employed in law enforcement. It is one of the largest state law enforcement associations (a nice name for a union) in the nation.

The FOP hasn't got anything on these guys.

And what new Sheriff is going to buck that system?

That's exactly right! That's why I laugh when they talk about the FOP and their endorsement. You better get a union to look after the men and women who are in law enforcement. Real law enforcement the guys with the boots on the ground.

Thank You,thats what my handle stands for. In another BLOG I have asked Braveheart if he would have accepted the FOP endorsement and plan on asking Beseler the same. There is a lot of critcism of the endorsement but I'd bet none of them would turn it down.