South Walton Fire District Races

**Lois Lane1** · 10-18-2008, 12:49 PM

I wanted to dispose of some correct information after reading the Walton Sun (the week of October 18, 2008).

Candidate for seat 3 Jack Abbit changed his party affiliation from Democrat to Republican a couple of weeks before running for office. A sudden change of belief's

? Also, Mr. Abbit is NOT seeking re-election for the board of fire commissioners. He was appointed to his current position almost three years ago. Thus, making this the first time he is running for the fire board.

Abbit states in his meet the candidates forum "I'm very concerned with being morally and ethically responsible to the community." Webster's definition is "dealing with, or capable of distinguishing between right and wrong".

I'm not sure he capable of doing this for the community.

The other candidate Dr. Scott Thurston stated "I don't practice dishonest politics". Maybe it's time to give him a chance.

**grumpyfish** · 10-19-2008, 06:44 AM

I have never been so disappointed and embarassed to be a part of a community that allows the local mullet wrapper to bash thier firefighters. I've spoken with a few of them and the general knowlede is that Jack Abbit(Scott Thurston's oponent) is in bed with the Walton SUN. I would suggest everyone who stands in support of our heros, please let your dissatisfaction be known with Gwen Break of the Walton SUN or Nate Kelly, her errand boy/spin doctor. He can be reached at 850-496-0111. Or if you're ok with the SUN printing steaming pony loaf and crapping on those who come running in your time of need, then simply do nothing.

**grumpyfish** · 10-19-2008, 11:02 AM

After further inspecting of the TP(sun), my suspicions are all but confirmed by the halftruths and purposely darkened picture of Scott Thurston. If Jack Abbit doesn't have the SUN in his back pocket, then he owes them bigtime. It also appears as if South Walton Fire District is throwing thier support behind Jack Abbit. I thought it was illegal for public governement to participate in politics. Actually I know it is a violation of The Hatch Act. You want to talk about stacking the board?! Also, if you noticed that the opinion column bashed Jack Abbit's oponent, Scott Thurston. I wonder if Jack is a member of the same community club she is?

**seagrovegirl** · 10-19-2008, 11:05 AM

As a member of the SWFD I know of no backing of any candidate. Can you give me some facts on where you got that info?

**seagrovegirl** · 10-19-2008, 11:37 AM

Originally Posted by grumpyfish

After further inspecting of the TP(sun), my suspicions are all but confirmed by the halftruths and purposely darkened picture of Scott Thurston. If Jack Abbit doesn't have the SUN in his back pocket, then he owes them bigtime. It also appears as if South Walton Fire District is throwing thier support behind Jack Abbit. I thought it was illegal for public governement to participate in politics. Actually I know it is a violation of The Hatch Act. You want to talk about stacking the board?! Also, if you noticed that the opinion column bashed Jack Abbit's oponent, Scott Thurston. I wonder if Jack is a member of the same community club she is?

How can you diss The Sun for half truths and then throw one out yourself???

I agree The Sun is lacking not only since the economic downturn. Unfortunately your comment about the Sun lost all credibility when you threw out a zinger of your own.

You seem to be intelligent and also seem to know a lot about what is going on, but I think you overdid yourself with this one.

**Lois Lane1** · 10-19-2008, 02:12 PM

If Seagrove girl you are a member of SWFD please due the public a favor. Ask why is a canidate using a SWFD apparatus in his (Jack Abbit) political advertisement? A vehicle that was purchased with tax payer money. It could appear that the SWFD is backing a certain canidate. I would hope this is not the case.

**seagrovegirl** · 10-19-2008, 02:34 PM

Originally Posted by Lois Lane1

If Seagrove girl you are a member of SWFD please due the public a favor. Ask why is a canidate using a SWFD apparatus in his (Jack Abbit) political advertisement? A vehicle that was purchased with tax payer money. It could appear that the SWFD is backing a certain canidate. I would hope this is not the case.

My thought on it was he is hoping to stress the point that he is the incumbant, but I can see where you are coming from. Anyone else have thoughts on this????

**grumpyfish** · 10-20-2008, 07:51 AM

That point can be stressed and implied by the word "RE-ELECT." Jack Abbit is the incumbant, so he should know better! And you will have to explain to me how I'm speeking out of school. The Hatch Act was developed to prevent public taxpayers dollars from being spent on political campaigns. IT'S THE LAW! You will have to point out the half-truth I've floated out there. And don't even try to let the SUN off the hook by blaming their bias on the economy. It costs just as much to print the truth than it does to print a lie. I'm sorry if I seem a bit crass, I usually agree with you, but it seems that at every turn, the rules seem to have been waived for Jack Abbit, and have gone unchecked by the Supervisor of Elections, Bobby Beasley. It's like Kazek & Thurston vs. Wright, Abbit, the Walton SUN, and The Supervisor of Elections. What does Walton County have to do to get a fair election? But who cares, right? It's just a Fire Commissioner Race.

**seagrovegirl** · 10-20-2008, 10:06 AM

Please answer the question. How did SWFD back Abbit? Ok... re-elect is the wrong wording, but it has nothing to do with SWFD, we are not involved in his campaign. I agree with you on the Sun, I wasn't defending them. Show me the Hatch Act where you think Abbit violated it and maybe I can do something about it, if that is the case.

I still don't see where SWFD appears to be backing Abbit.

**grumpyfish** · 10-20-2008, 01:09 PM

Originally Posted by seagrovegirl

Please answer the question. How did SWFD back Abbit? Ok... re-elect is the wrong wording, but it has nothing to do with SWFD, we are not involved in his campaign. I agree with you on the Sun, I wasn't defending them. Show me the Hatch Act where you think Abbit violated it and maybe I can do something about it, if that is the case.

I still don't see where SWFD appears to be backing Abbit.

I never said SWFD did "back" Abbit. I said it appears as if they have. Count how many times South Walton Fire District is named in his political ad. Look at his political disclaimer. South Walton Fire District should definately not be listed on his disclaimer. I'm not accusing you, I'm saying if Abbit is a commissioner, and he has embarked upon a political campaign, then he should have educated himself. There may be nothing that can be done about this now, but this should be something you as SWFD should be aware of. It could affect the credibilty of the board. I see how much flack you take for the millage rate, you don't need anything else making your lives that much more difficult just because Jack Abbit wants to use his position in the way he has. From what I understand he didn't even campaign the first time, he was appointed(Good old boy club). See how that appears? If perception is reality, then SWFD needs to reel Abbit in. He made it your business by posting that ad. Bad judgement on his part.

**seagrovegirl** · 10-20-2008, 02:14 PM

Division of Elections-Department of State Booklet for candidates;

Campaign Advertising: What information must be included on a political disclaimer?
Political advertisement paid by the candidate:
"Political advertisement paid for and approved by (name of candidate) (party affiliation) ( office sought)

For more disclaimer examples see http://election.dos.state.fl.us/pdf/adHandout.pdf

**grumpyfish** · 10-20-2008, 03:55 PM

Thank you for the info. I want you to know that I'm sorry if I seemed like I was gunning for you. I was not. I just dislike it when politicians use underhanded tactics. I hold nothing against SWFD of which you're a part of. It is a fine organization. I just want to keep it that way and I know you do too.

**Bob Wells** · 10-22-2008, 04:13 PM

Vote Thurston and Kazek
The other candidates have started slinging mud.
Jack got your email, you should try less spin and be more straight forward.

**DuneLaker** · 10-22-2008, 10:21 PM

I'll be voting for Wright and Abbit. They are the most qualified and are proven board members who are for the common citizens of South Walton. I found it quite disturbing a few weeks ago when certain individuals were voicing untrue remarks about these two fine men.

**Bob Wells** · 10-23-2008, 06:10 AM

Curious what were the untrue remarks.

**DuneLaker** · 10-23-2008, 07:27 AM

Be careful what you ask for. I have been generous in not saying more specifically who said it. Furthermore, it is often better not to repeat untrue statements.

**Interested Girl** · 10-23-2008, 07:31 PM

So as the soon to be Republican State Committeewoman you are publicly stating that you do not agree with the endorsements voted on by the Executive committee. Did you attend that meeting that was reported earlier.

We should expect a unified story from our leadership. What you do in the voting booth is your business, but what you say here reflects upon you leadership ability.

Lord help us.

**Lois Lane1** · 10-23-2008, 08:54 PM

Originally Posted by Interested Girl

So as the soon to be Republican State Committeewoman you are publicly stating that you do not agree with the endorsements voted on by the Executive committee. Did you attend that meeting that was reported earlier.

We should expect a unified story from our leadership. What you do in the voting booth is your business, but what you say here reflects upon you leadership ability.

Lord help us.

I would love to hear the untrue remarks. Check with the supervisor of elections for candidates party affiliation. Mr. Wright is a good candidate. On the other hand, Mr Abbit was a democrat who recently changed to republican to try and get their endorsement. As a lifelong republican I would hope our leadership has better judgement than to vote for such a candidate. I would hope the Executive committee of our party does not hold the same views.

**The Watcher** · 10-24-2008, 01:14 AM

For what it is worth, the Watcher likes Thurston in this race. As I understand it, those who respond to the actual 911 Calls for Fire and Help (aka the fire department) like Thurston too.

1 + 1 = 2 No brainer.

w

**seagrovegirl** · 10-24-2008, 07:44 AM

Originally Posted by Interested Girl

So as the soon to be Republican State Committeewoman you are publicly stating that you do not agree with the endorsements voted on by the Executive committee. Did you attend that meeting that was reported earlier.

We should expect a unified story from our leadership. What you do in the voting booth is your business, but what you say here reflects upon you leadership ability.

Lord help us.

You obviously have a twisted perception of group endorsements. My perception is that I am thankful that elected officials have the right to think for themselves, this is a democracy, you know.

Endorsements are determined by a group, then voted on. Not everyone in the group gets the endorsement of the candidate they prefer. There is no law or anything unethical about Dunelaker making choices she is comfortable with. It would scare me if she voted to follow the herd.

**Interested Girl** · 10-24-2008, 08:30 AM

I gave her the absolute right to vote her conviction when entering the ballot box. Who a person votes for is that person right.

A person that is an official of the party signs a loyalty oath to the party and those that he or she represents. He or she has a responsibility to those to carefully restrict their own personl viewpoint in a public venue.

Would it bother you if she stated in public that she was going to vote for Obama for president while serving as a Republican party official.

If that is her position on this election then she should resign if she feels so strongly about her position on the candidate that she must speak against an official action of the party.

She has violated her oath of office.

She should resign.

**seagrovegirl** · 10-24-2008, 08:38 AM

IG, lighten up, Dunelaker stated her choice in a non partisen race......

**Bob Wells** · 10-24-2008, 09:09 AM

Dunelaker,
I realize it is easier to say there in an untruth out there, and by not being willing to say what that untruth is leaves your credibility in question. Maybe there would be an answer to your perception of the alleged untruth.

**seagrovegirl** · 10-24-2008, 09:19 AM

Originally Posted by Interested Girl

I gave her the absolute right to vote her conviction when entering the ballot box. Who a person votes for is that person right.

A person that is an official of the party signs a loyalty oath to the party and those that he or she represents. He or she has a responsibility to those to carefully restrict their own personl viewpoint in a public venue.

Would it bother you if she stated in public that she was going to vote for Obama for president while serving as a Republican party official.

If that is her position on this election then she should resign if she feels so strongly about her position on the candidate that she must speak against an official action of the party.

She has violated her oath of office.

She should resign.

It wouldn't bother me, but I can see that it would bother you.

**Interested Girl** · 10-24-2008, 09:44 AM

She has publicly endorsed a candidate in direct opposition to the endorsements given to candidates in official vote of the Executive committee.

She should resign -plain and simple.

**seagrovegirl** · 10-24-2008, 09:47 AM

I disagree....carry on.........

**Andy A** · 10-24-2008, 11:00 AM

Originally Posted by Interested Girl

She has publicly endorsed a candidate in direct opposition to the endorsements given to candidates in official vote of the Executive committee.

She should resign -plain and simple.

Really?? Since when does an endorsement from a committee hold an individual on that committee to an absolute support of the endorsement? IG, you have a very warped perception of how our party system works, IMO.
I have served on many boards and just because I didn't agree with the majortity's opinion is no reason to resign. Nor should she resign if she should personally come out in support of Obama. Many on both sides of this campaign, in leadership positions, have come out in support of the opposing candidate. Watch Fox News to see Hillary supporters who were part of the campaign who have come out in support of McCain.
Just

**Andy A** · 10-24-2008, 11:02 AM

Just because we serve on ANY committee of a particular party should not mean we march in lock step with that party. I certainly understand what you are saying, IG, but I think you are dead wrong on this issue.

**Interested Girl** · 10-24-2008, 11:10 AM

Nothing warped about it.

Howard Dean is the DNC Chairman u imagine him as the sitting chair announcing that he was supporing John McCain. Resign he would be free to endorse anyone he chosees. While a leader he must publicly support their endorsed candidates.

I for one feel that she has violated her oath of office and has destroyed her ability to speak for my party.

Can she vote for whomever she chooses, yes she most certainly can.

She should resign.

**Andy A** · 10-24-2008, 12:55 PM

You have one more person disagreeing with you. Me. I cannot equate a local party group the the RNC or DNC. There is a big difference and not only that, the race you're talking about is, or should be non partisan anyway. Maybe you should reevaluate your position on this matter. It is one of the reasons so many moderates and independents do not any longer find the Republican Party to be in their best interest.

**Interested Girl** · 10-24-2008, 02:24 PM

Andy

The major parties are both organized along the same lines.

Naional
State
County

Each has an organzation that concerns itself with electing candidates. The County's first responsibility is to support and elect candidates that are members of their own party within their geographic boundaries. Their second responsibility is to Candidates in state offices and third those candidates in national offices.

They do that by attracting voters to their party and then encouraging the to vote for those tjhat subscribe to a platform.

The only differnce in the DNC/RNC and the Local party is where there first priority lies. Without a single clear message candidates are destined to defeat and that means that they can not address those things they believe in and stand for.

Members of any party not serving in a leadership role and are free to publicly campaign for any candidate and therefore vote for any candidate they choose. When she stepped into that role her personal viewpoint becomes secondary to the party viewpoint, and she know it.

Mrs. Rees is not just a registered Republican, she is in fact one of the three "Howard Deans" in Walton County. Each party has a local chairan and a state committeman and a state committeewoman. They are the public face of our parties.

I expect a unified message from those three people. They sign oaths concerning those issues. She has violated her oath.

What you seem to espouse is the "Every Man for Himself Party" and that party will never get anyone elected.

Guess we will just disagree beyond that.

**Andy A** · 10-24-2008, 02:46 PM

IG, believe it or not, I understand the party system. I just don't see the need for it being carried to the point you are indicating. So, we will just have to disagree. Probably its one reason I am not envolved in "party politics". As I said previously, I think it is one reason both parties, but particularly the Republican Party, is losing the support and respect of the electorate as a whole.

**Interested Girl** · 10-24-2008, 03:00 PM

I enjoyed the exchange of viewpoints. Thanks

**Bob Wells** · 10-24-2008, 03:32 PM

Dunelaker, check out the new thread. The Truth About Jack. I had the opportunity to see the email NC mentioned although it was not sent to me, maybe you could post it and answer about how taxpayer monies were possibly used for the failed attempt to change the SWFD charter, unless Mr. Ramey did pro bono work for the district.

I would still like to know the falsehood/ lies/ untruths that were placed out there a while back.

**grumpyfish** · 10-24-2008, 10:00 PM

Originally Posted by DuneLaker

I'll be voting for Wright and Abbit. They are the most qualified and are proven board members who are for the common citizens of South Walton. I found it quite disturbing a few weeks ago when certain individuals were voicing untrue remarks about these two fine men.

By the way, how is the weather in the warm coccles of your colon? Are you serious?! Obviously, they both have their arm "up there" making you their puppet.

**grumpyfish** · 10-24-2008, 10:02 PM

Originally Posted by DuneLaker

Be careful what you ask for. I have been generous in not saying more specifically who said it. Furthermore, it is often better not to repeat untrue statements.

Yeah, usually when you have accusations, and have been called out, you present proof, not lay down that BS line...I don't play checkers, but I'm pretty sure it's your move.

**DuneLaker** · 10-25-2008, 05:25 PM

Jack Abbit and Ed Wright are both registered Republicans of which I am quite free to support.

**Lois Lane1** · 10-25-2008, 09:07 PM

Did you not read the post "The truth about Jack". Maybe you like your politicians dishonest and unethical. Myself, I like politicians who don't practice dishonest politics. Vote for a candidate that doesn't change parties a couple of months before the election to win votes.

VOTE THURSTON

**Bob Wells** · 10-27-2008, 02:24 PM

I would like to encourage you to vote, if not early, at least on November 4. Although I am supporting Thurston and Kazek, I just hope you vote.

**scooterbug44** · 10-27-2008, 02:34 PM

Just so I am not missing anything here - Dunelaker is being attacked for being a bad Republican leader because she said she is voting for 2 Republicans in non-partisan races?

Refusing to repeat untrue allegations and give them more life isn't exactly a bad thing either!

**Bob Wells** · 10-27-2008, 02:44 PM

By not repeating what is supposedly untrue does not allow for those voters the opportunity to judge. If the allegation could be proved true or untrue then it can be a positive for someone. By saying there is an untrue allegation raises questions without proof. As far a Dunelaker being attacked, and the comments by grumpyfish are concerned, they were over the top and crude. Grumpyfish should be admonished to remain somewhat civil even in the heat of politics.

**grumpyfish** · 10-28-2008, 06:47 PM

Originally Posted by scooterbug44

Just so I am not missing anything here - Dunelaker is being attacked for being a bad Republican leader because she said she is voting for 2 Republicans in non-partisan races?

Refusing to repeat untrue allegations and give them more life isn't exactly a bad thing either!

If you're going to quote someone, it helps if you do not "paraphrase." And yes, refusing to provide proof for one's allegations simply removes crediability.

And thank you FF2. Alow some advice from me. remove the log from your eye before concerning with the speck in mine.

**Bob Wells** · 10-28-2008, 07:00 PM

Maybe playing sock puppets should stop.

**brother bombero** · 10-30-2008, 08:20 AM

**Bob Wells** · 11-02-2008, 02:45 PM

Vote Kasek and Thurston, I will be out at Good News UMC supporting my candidates, stop by and say Hi.
Bob

**Bob Wells** · 11-03-2008, 06:22 PM

Get out and vote. Stop by and a say hi. Your firefighters are supporting Kazek and Thurston, they will be responsive to you the taxpayer/ voters.

**Aggie** · 11-04-2008, 11:03 PM

Originally Posted by grumpyfish

You may find this interesting. I've already met Jack Abbit and Ed Wright. However, I spoke with Scott Thurston and Jon Kazek (Abbit & Wright's opponents) and they have quite a bit in info on "cutting the fat," even "more" than the two in office have. I guess they have done their homework. Both have seemingly great ideas to maintain financial responsibility on the Fire Commission. Thurston said he had a plan to establish accountiblity on the board with regards to attendance. I don't know if that was "political rethoric" or not, but what would they to gain by "bs-ing" anyone? It's not like Fire Commissioners get paid a ton of money. From what I hear, it's almost a volunteer job. They seemed pretty sharp though.

The voters voted return Jack Abbit and Ed Wright to office.