Firefighters? Anyone?

[graytonbeachguy]

By the way...

Your reference to September 11th and the officer who gave his life today in service of the citizens of Okaloosa County is a cheap exploitation of two very tragic events.

Shame on you!

 

[Alan Osborne]

Bottom line is this, We still don't know what criteria was used for the endorsement!

My response was sincere, If you believe it or not is up to you.

 

[rapunzel]

Thank you for your interest in this important subject.

As for the signs; We are actively seeking more efficient (and more beautiful) means of participating in candidate support. Ideas are welcome.

South Walton Professional Firefighters Assoc.

Here's an idea: Post the reasoning behind your support. Issue a press release with you reasons for support of certain candidates. I don't have any problem with the firefighters endorsing candidates, my problem is the lack of a stated reason. Your group has a website, and it would be easy to post a statement about the candidates you have decided to support, and give examples of the voting records that lead you to believe they'd act in a way that would benefit firefighters.

I think it's fabulous that firefighters care enough to devote time and money to endorsing candidates in a local election. I would just give the endorsements more weight if I could understand the reasoning behind the support.

 

[Johnny Post]

Bottom line is this, We still don't know what criteria was used for the endorsement!

Very good point. An endorsement that is not based on a candidate forum, i.e. Emerald Coast Association of Realtors, or some other criteria the public can examine is always questionable.

Also, anyone involved with South Walton Fire District out there? If so, was this an issue that SWFD was involved with?

On a somewhat related note, I keep hearing that some candidates are being approached by (or possibly approaching) SWFD to strike a deal for support for the district, in exchange for supporting that candidate. This is rather concerning, as it certainly stinks of the good ole boy politics so many on here complain about.

 

[brother bombero]

Alan Osborne, I've been sitting back and trying to take of this in. To reference your last post, I think the criteria used for their endorsement is stated clearly in the really long post above by SoWalProFire. And I'm with graytonbeachguy on this one. You have a reputation of being a controlling, close-minded hot head. This is Walton County Government, not the US Military. Your rank has no bearing here. Stand down from red alert. I am so sick and tired of people losing ground or basis in their argument, then breaking the "emergency glass" and using the "9-11" card to give their argument some credibility. That card is way over played, and frankly I find it disrespectful. If you want to show honor to those who died, how about a little respect. Do they still teach that in the military? I would think that as a political candidate, you would do your best to make friends and rally support, not make enemies and burn bridges. Did you ever think that your reputation had preceded you, and that is why they aren't responding?

 

[rapunzel]

Osbourne, sounds like you wanted to dictate the terms on which you would speak to a vitally important constituency in this county. I have observed you at County Commission meetings and find this to be par for the course. You demand to have the questions framed in a method that will justify your answer. If the questioner refuses to comply, you simply attack the questioner. As everyone knows, these ad hominem attacks are one of the basic fallacies of logic.

That's a pretty nasty line of attack, and I'm not sure that I agree that strongly advocating for fair/neutral wording, or requesting to be provided relevant factual materials to evaluate a problem is a cop out. I think it indicates a good bit of intellect and an understanding of how to avoid being manipulated by special interests.

I would love to see the questions the Firefighters' union sent out, so we could see for ourselves the criteria upon which the firefighters based their decision.

 

[BeachSiO2]

This is a very intriguing discussion. I think Punzy has hit the nail on the head with this one. It is great that groups are learning more about the candidates. I just think they could be even more persuasive (read powerful) by showing how they came to their conclusions, what questions were asked, what the responses were, etc.

I wonder if one of the questions were in relation to the current federal legislation that has been introduced in Congress in regards to collective bargaining? I would be very interested in some of the answers to that one.

 

[rapunzel]

Alan Osborne, I've been sitting back and trying to take of this in. To reference your last post, I think the criteria used for their endorsement is stated clearly in the really long post above by SoWalProFire. And I'm with graytonbeachguy on this one. You have a reputation of being a controlling, close-minded hot head. This is Walton County Government, not the US Military. Your rank has no bearing here. Stand down from red alert. I am so sick and tired of people losing ground or basis in their argument, then breaking the "emergency glass" and using the "9-11" card to give their argument some credibility. That card is way over played, and frankly I find it disrespectful. If you want to show honor to those who died, how about a little respect. Do they still teach that in the military? I would think that as a political candidate, you would do your best to make friends and rally support, not make enemies and burn bridges. Did you ever think that your reputation had preceded you, and that is why they aren't responding?

Why is this getting so heated? What are the rest of us missing?

As you can see from my signature line, I have decided to support Mr. Osborne. When I first asked the question about the criteria, I was merely leaning Osborne. When I saw that the firefighters had endorsed Mr. Braunstein, I was a bit surprised and wanted to know more about why they'd chosen to support him. In my mind, firefighters carry a lot of weight and I wanted to reevaluate Mr. Braunstein before I made a final decision.

Instead of a positive review of Mr. Braunstein's candidacy, or a new awareness of issues I had not yet considered (all these empty and abandoned houses in SoWal seem like a dangerous hazard, does one candidate have a plan to deal with them?), this thread has degenerated into an attack on Mr. Osbourne. That's terribly unfortunate if our goal is an informed voter.

We all know Mr. Osborne doesn't 'play ball' (it's why many of us do support him) -- but in a field of five candidates, attacking one person does nothing to help your chosen candidate.

 

[scooterbug44]

Osborne wanted to answer your questions and offered to do so in multiple public forums so all could attend - he just had some clarifications due to the phrasing that didn't seem to come from Joe Q. Firefighter.

Then he mentions how much he supports you and how he has personally been involved in emergency responses ............and all of a sudden he was under attack. My "something else is going on " radar sure pinged on that one!

 

[SoWalProfire]

Bottom line is this, We still don't know what criteria was used for the endorsement!

Mr. Osborne, Every candidate who responded to our questionnaire by answering the questions on it and submitting their responses to our organization, was invited to our regular monthly meeting in June. During this meeting the members of our organization asked their own candid questions of each of the candidates. After all the candidates had their turn in the hot seat (so to speak), the membership held a vote. This is how we determined which candidates to support.

Each of these candidates received the same questionnaire you received. Each of these candidates did their own research and answered the questions to the best of their ability. This is how we have always done it. It would not be fair to provide "questionnaire aid" to any individual candidate. If the candidate does not answer the questions as written, then the candidate does not get invited to the meeting of the membership. We have never changed our process to bend to the will of any individual candidate.

Much like the constituency of Walton County District 5, we believe that our elected officials are in office to serve our needs, not vise-versa. Our agenda is a simple one, support the campaign of those who will support us. When a candidate suggests to us that he or she knows better what questions we should be asking and how those questions should be worded, it seems a lot like the tail trying to wag the dog.

My personal hope is that if you are elected, you will let your constituency determine what actions you take as a commissioner and not vise-versa.

You suggest that our process is not fair. I suggest this to you: It was not us who did not give you a fair chance for our support. It was you who denied yourself this opportunity.

A lawyer did not write our questionnaire. It was written by firefighters, who are more intelligent than some people give them credit for.