Cecil County FOP Endorses Candidates ...

Cecil County FOP Endorses Candidates For Other Offices

There are 47 comments on the someonenoticed.wordpress.com story from Oct 1, 2010, titled Cecil County FOP Endorses Candidates For Other Offices. In it, someonenoticed.wordpress.com reports that:

The Cecil County Fraternal Order of Police, Lodge 2 proudly endorses: Chris Sutton for Sheriff E. J. Pipkin for Senate Nancy Jacobs for Senate Mike Smigiel for Delegate Ted Patterson for Delegate Carl Roberts for Commissioner Earl Piner for Commissioner Ellis Rollins for State's Attorney The Maryland State FOP, which represents 20,000 Maryland ...

Join the discussion below, or Read more at someonenoticed.wordpress.com.

First Prev
of 3
Next Last
I Do Believe

Wilmington, DE

#1 Oct 1, 2010
As self serving and disrespectful as the Cecil County FOP has been to the current administration of the Sheriff's office and commissioners...WHO CARES WHO THEY ENDORSE? I don't!

The Cecil County FOP has made it very clear that they are supporting the politicians that will promise them what they want. Binding arbitration, change of shifts, and whatever else they cry about will COST THE CECIL COUNTY TAXPAYERS A LOT OF MONEY!

I fail to see their professionalism and I surely am not impressed with their law enforcement abilities, so why would I care about who they support?

As taxpayers, you are responsible for investigating where your money will be spent and which politicians plan to spend it to their benefit.
Really

Rising Sun, MD

#2 Oct 1, 2010
I thought that as citizens we all vote for the BEST candidate to the job they are supposed to do? We pay for this salary, right?
I am sick and tired of all of this nonsense!
When will this county ever have some class and dignity? All we see and read is how this one did this and that one did that, I do not care!!! What I do care about is the future of the county! And who will do the best job. I could care less about your little group and whether or not they endorse a candidate or not??
So, who can be the best candidate? What candidate will represent doing a honest job?
From what I have seen the past year with all of this BS - NONE OF YOU deserve the job!!!!!!
Watching the Show

Brentwood, TN

#3 Oct 1, 2010
I would be very wary of ANY candidate that is endorsed by a special interest group (like the FOP).

Special interest groups are just that - interested in their own special interest. The FOP has clearly demonstrated what their "special interest" is - BINDING ARBITRATION.

Rather than asking why these candidates were endorsed - a better question might be what about the candidates that weren't?

Quite frankly, I'm more impressed with someone who has the courage to stand up to the bully tactics I've seen from some of the members of the FOP and say that they don't think binding arbitration is the best thing for ALL the citizens of Cecil County.

I agree with "Really" that I care a lot more about which candidates will be better leaders for Cecil County. Candidates that are willing to bow down to special interest groups clearly are not.
Damn Truth

Santa Clara, CA

#4 Oct 1, 2010
Barry Janney was the last two terms?
Local officer

Elkton, MD

#5 Oct 1, 2010
It is funny that Janney was supported the last two terms, yet now that someone you do not support was endorsed, the endorsement is stupid.

The FOP endorsement, whether you think it does or not, does have a tremendous effect on the community. Unlike many who post on these websites under anonymous conditions, many of the county citizens still respect the police and the job that they do. The FOP endorsement, especially for sheriff, is for the purpose of acknowledging who they feel the best candidate to be. If they supported Janney, none of you would be complaining.
Ballz to the Wallz

United States

#6 Oct 1, 2010
Who they feel? NOT EVERYONE! The majority voted for the liar who said he would give them binding arbitration! Come on, it's a scam and you know it's a scam! The FOP DOGGED SUTTON OUT THE LAST ELECTION SAYING HE WAS INCOMPETENT! Did he take a class in competency in the last 4 years? No. Did he tell them he would support binding arbitration? YES.

This vote wasn't about the best man for the job. Sheriff Janney answered all of the questions with COMPLETE KNOWLEDGE and Chris Sutton muttled through with his mouth full of marbles in hopes that he wouldn't get called on to the carpet. Sheriff Janney walked away a winner from the debate...he just won't support binding arbitration so he doesn't win.

We all know Streight is an idiot, and he can walk around the office with his chest out, but he will end up at the bottom of the pile once the followers learn the truth!
Time to stop

Macomb, MI

#7 Oct 1, 2010
Who really cares who the FOP endorsed??? I know I don't . As vie said along they didn't endorse Sutton--- they endorsed binding arbitration. That's a big difference. Janney is still the man for the job. Do you really want someone like Sutton speaking in Annapolis? God help us... Cecil County would be the laughing stock. Embarrassing!
Watching the Show

Brentwood, TN

#8 Oct 1, 2010
Damn Truth wrote:
Barry Janney was the last two terms?
Readers of this blog will argue forever (or at least until Nov 2nd) on Janney’s leadership over the past 8 years…I see both positives and negatives.

I do think Janney was a fool for saying he supported binding arbitration without researching what it meant first. He is obviously paying the price now for not doing his homework.

What I was specifically referring to was the leadership qualities among the County Commissioner candidates. Sutton’s promises for binding arbitration are absolutely and completely meaningless without the support of the County Commissioners.

If we have concerns about the taxing impact of binding arbitration, we need to vote for the Commissioner candidates who don’t support it. I plan to do my homework…
Dances with Wolves

Elkton, MD

#9 Oct 1, 2010
When I see the FOP endorse Roberts and Piner, I know who not to vote for. I already had Robert's number before this endorsement, however seeing Piner's name on the list assures that I will not be voting for him either.

Many of you "get it". It's all about jockeying for political favors. The FOP is like a Union, looking for benefits, courtesy of the tax payers and approved by the County executives. It's all a set up.

All I want, as a citizen, is to be safe in my home and in this County. To see the priority of our law enforcement personnel be the protection and safety of all of us. To be honest here, I can't say much about Janney doing his duty, however, I see absolutely no indication that our safety is Sutton's priority either. It's not much of a choice between the two, however my vote will go to Janney because, as I learned from the Presidential election, things can get worse with "change".

And I hope to heck that Sutton never runs for sheriff again. These Janney-Sutton contests are pathetic. I hope DeWitt saved his signs for the next time.

Since: Jul 10

Everytown USA

#10 Oct 2, 2010
Thank you Dancey, your un-endorsement is an endorsement for me. If you don’t like someone, then I will investigate them. If you like someone, they are off my list.

Ignorantly you believe that someone would want or seeks an endorsement. WRONG. Organizations often endorse someone they know will win, even if that individual did not seek their endorsement.

Dancey, you are always against someone or something. I would like a positive review for a change. What is your learned expertise about Broomell the Smipkin-ite? Just because she hasn’t flown into a tantrum with face color matching hair color, doesn’t mean she isn’t capable of making Mikey proud of his protégé.

This may again, as with Tome in '06, be a time to vote for someone else just to keep her out.
transpo cop

United States

#11 Oct 2, 2010
Some of the readers here may not be aware of a long discussion on other threads on Topix about the endorsement practices of Adam Streight as President of Lodge 2, FOP. So let me bring you up to date, in light of this "recent" endorsement announcement.

Adam went to Del. Smigiel's fundraiser back in June and publicly announced that the FOP was endorsing Smigiel and this guy Patterson who is running against Delegate Rudolph. He also claimed the statewide FOP was endorsing all of them.

In fact, this was before the candidate filing deadline in July, before all candidates could be asked to respond to an issues questionaire, and before there was a membership vote. So now many months later he puts it in writing, at least as far as Lodge 2 goes. There is still nothing in writing I've seen about any other FOP Lodges endorsing his endorsements.

What angered many other law enforcement officers in other FOP Lodges, like myself, is that Adam has claimed to speak for all FOP members and Lodges, when in fact he does not. He can endorse whichever candidate he wants personally, and if a formal vote is taken by his own membership to agree with him, so be it.

But shooting his mouth off on endorsements, before he has formal authority to convey it, is just so much garbage. That Patterson guy had the nerve to put the honored FOP badge on his website months ago without any proven vote of endorsement.

If I were a candidate, I would decline an endorsement from Lodge 2, knowing the baggage and garbage that goes with it.
CC Voter

Baltimore, MD

#12 Oct 3, 2010
There have been many interesting comments lately. I agree that the vote of FOP Lodge 2 concerning its "endorsement" for Sheriff is nothing more than a vote for collective bargaining with binding arbitration. We can go on and on with why Sheriff Janney changed his mind. It is no secret that he became frustrated with the FOP President and supporters of the President, their change of document language, their absolute rude behavior in Annapolis (even against the Cecil County Administrator, and their total lack of respect toward him and many County leaders. The economy is not in good shape. Most of the County government workers have no clue about this fact. They aren't getting it that between the new health care laws and the economical downturn, the County could be in serious financial trouble. You would think they would pick up a newspaper and read it on their repeated work breaks on FmLA. I appreciate Sheriff Janney taking the tax payers into consideration. He is looking at the big picture and hopefully the citizens of Cecil County will get this fact. I hope the voters will not elect an uneducated Cecil County government "Corporal" as Sheriff of our County. We are going to have enough problems in the next few years to come. We do not need Sutton--there is no time for training or teaching him how to speak clearly (that could take four years alone) I could almost say a change would be good IF IF IF an educated professional had won the primary but I tell you all it is just not Chris Sutton.
Teddy R

Finksburg, MD

#13 Oct 3, 2010
Cecilian wrote:
Thank you Dancey, your un-endorsement is an endorsement for me. If you don’t like someone, then I will investigate them. If you like someone, they are off my list.
Ignorantly you believe that someone would want or seeks an endorsement. WRONG. Organizations often endorse someone they know will win, even if that individual did not seek their endorsement.
Dancey, you are always against someone or something. I would like a positive review for a change. What is your learned expertise about Broomell the Smipkin-ite? Just because she hasn’t flown into a tantrum with face color matching hair color, doesn’t mean she isn’t capable of making Mikey proud of his protégé.
This may again, as with Tome in '06, be a time to vote for someone else just to keep her out.
Broomell is not a Smipkin and has not been for some time. You did not see her featured on the "Fiscal Team" flyer. I believe she will be an independent voice that will look out for the taxpayers. Let's hope she get's fired up red-hot at budget time and controls spending, we all know that King Carl will spend like there is no tomorrow. I say if you want higher taxes vote for King Carl.
Confused

Elkton, MD

#14 Oct 3, 2010
CC Voter wrote:
There have been many interesting comments lately. I agree that the vote of FOP Lodge 2 concerning its "endorsement" for Sheriff is nothing more than a vote for collective bargaining with binding arbitration. We can go on and on with why Sheriff Janney changed his mind. It is no secret that he became frustrated with the FOP President and supporters of the President, their change of document language, their absolute rude behavior in Annapolis (even against the Cecil County Administrator, and their total lack of respect toward him and many County leaders. The economy is not in good shape. Most of the County government workers have no clue about this fact. They aren't getting it that between the new health care laws and the economical downturn, the County could be in serious financial trouble. You would think they would pick up a newspaper and read it on their repeated work breaks on FmLA. I appreciate Sheriff Janney taking the tax payers into consideration. He is looking at the big picture and hopefully the citizens of Cecil County will get this fact. I hope the voters will not elect an uneducated Cecil County government "Corporal" as Sheriff of our County. We are going to have enough problems in the next few years to come. We do not need Sutton--there is no time for training or teaching him how to speak clearly (that could take four years alone) I could almost say a change would be good IF IF IF an educated professional had won the primary but I tell you all it is just not Chris Sutton.
You speak of an educated professional, which Janney is not either. Playing baseball doesn't count as earning a college degree...
Confused

Elkton, MD

#15 Oct 3, 2010
Dances with Wolves wrote:
When I see the FOP endorse Roberts and Piner, I know who not to vote for. I already had Robert's number before this endorsement, however seeing Piner's name on the list assures that I will not be voting for him either.
Many of you "get it". It's all about jockeying for political favors. The FOP is like a Union, looking for benefits, courtesy of the tax payers and approved by the County executives. It's all a set up.
All I want, as a citizen, is to be safe in my home and in this County. To see the priority of our law enforcement personnel be the protection and safety of all of us. To be honest here, I can't say much about Janney doing his duty, however, I see absolutely no indication that our safety is Sutton's priority either. It's not much of a choice between the two, however my vote will go to Janney because, as I learned from the Presidential election, things can get worse with "change".
And I hope to heck that Sutton never runs for sheriff again. These Janney-Sutton contests are pathetic. I hope DeWitt saved his signs for the next time.
Just because Dewitt's daddy was a good sheriff, doesn't mean he would be good as well. Dewitt has never passed a promotional exam, yet you would trust him to run the entire sheriff's office. Very comical.

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#16 Oct 3, 2010
Confused wrote:
<quoted text>
Just because Dewitt's daddy was a good sheriff, doesn't mean he would be good as well. Dewitt has never passed a promotional exam, yet you would trust him to run the entire sheriff's office. Very comical.
What is comical is thinking that Sutton could ever be Sheriff !
Ballz to the Wallz

Schuylkill Haven, PA

#17 Oct 3, 2010
CC Voter wrote:
There have been many interesting comments lately. I agree that the vote of FOP Lodge 2 concerning its "endorsement" for Sheriff is nothing more than a vote for collective bargaining with binding arbitration. We can go on and on with why Sheriff Janney changed his mind. It is no secret that he became frustrated with the FOP President and supporters of the President, their change of document language, their absolute rude behavior in Annapolis (even against the Cecil County Administrator, and their total lack of respect toward him and many County leaders. The economy is not in good shape. Most of the County government workers have no clue about this fact. They aren't getting it that between the new health care laws and the economical downturn, the County could be in serious financial trouble. You would think they would pick up a newspaper and read it on their repeated work breaks on FmLA. I appreciate Sheriff Janney taking the tax payers into consideration. He is looking at the big picture and hopefully the citizens of Cecil County will get this fact. I hope the voters will not elect an uneducated Cecil County government "Corporal" as Sheriff of our County. We are going to have enough problems in the next few years to come. We do not need Sutton--there is no time for training or teaching him how to speak clearly (that could take four years alone) I could almost say a change would be good IF IF IF an educated professional had won the primary but I tell you all it is just not Chris Sutton.
AGREE,AGREE,AGREE! You said it all! Wake up Cecil County!
Dances with Wolves

Abingdon, MD

#18 Oct 4, 2010
Confused wrote:
<quoted text>
Just because Dewitt's daddy was a good sheriff, doesn't mean he would be good as well. Dewitt has never passed a promotional exam, yet you would trust him to run the entire sheriff's office. Very comical.
Yes I would. I find it equally hysterical that you would "assume" that Sutton could be trusted to run the entire sheriff's office. What exactly has HE done that would qualify him to run the entire the entire sheriff's office? What programs and efforts has Sutton done in his current capacity to convince you or anyone else that he would be the better candidate over Janney? Seriously. Can you answer that?

On a broader scale, I'm disappointed with the political repeats, the same people running against each other again, which gives us, the voters, no real choices. Just a rehash of former contests. Do we let Sutton win, just to give him a chance, even though most of us already can predict the results? How about the Governors contest? Keep the same idiot in or elect the former idiot? How about Kratovil and Harris? These contests are extremely disappointing as what we really need in office is new blood with fresh ideas, not a candidate who has a score to settle in proving he could win.

I see no problem with DeWitt, and it's not because of his father. I see a person who has no hidden agenda and who, if elected, would give it his best shot and do what he thought was best. If he failed, he could be ousted at the next election. If he did well, he could be re-elected for another term. Either way, he would deserve a chance. New blood.

We shall see who laughs after the election, when things don't change because we the people will be represented by the same old hacks and expect different results. Personally, I won't find it particularly funny since I won't be expecting any positive changes to assist with building our economy or making things better for the rest of us, but I will have a moment of pleasure telling those that actually supported these hack that "I told you so".

So feel free to support Sutton, Roberts and Piner. If they win, their records speak for themselves and the results of their administration are predictable and obvious. You could not possible expect that things will get better for the taxpaying citizens under their care.
Dances with Wolves

Abingdon, MD

#19 Oct 4, 2010
Cecilian wrote:
Thank you Dancey, your un-endorsement is an endorsement for me. If you don’t like someone, then I will investigate them. If you like someone, they are off my list.
Ignorantly you believe that someone would want or seeks an endorsement. WRONG. Organizations often endorse someone they know will win, even if that individual did not seek their endorsement.
Dancey, you are always against someone or something. I would like a positive review for a change. What is your learned expertise about Broomell the Smipkin-ite? Just because she hasn’t flown into a tantrum with face color matching hair color, doesn’t mean she isn’t capable of making Mikey proud of his protégé.
This may again, as with Tome in '06, be a time to vote for someone else just to keep her out.
The tone of your request regarding my endorsement (assuming I have one) of Broomell and "Smipkin" suggests that you are not really interested in my answer, so I will save us both time and blog space by not providing you with one.

I never suggested that Sutton sought the FOP endorsement. What I did suggest is that there is a deal in place which, if Sutton wins, certain financial gain and benefits will be given to the members of the FOP in exchange for their vote. Isn't that much obvious to you? Is it not reasonable to you that if Sutton wins the FOP "wins"?

I have nothing against law enforcement and highly respect those that serve. But my point of view comes from being a resident, a citizen, a person who expects to feel safe and secure in our community. What has Sutton done, in his current capacity, to assure the safety of the citizens, or is he just another desk jokey with dreams of getting rid of the boss? Seriously. How would additional benefits to our local law enforcement personnel assure that we, the citizens, have better police protection? If you answer that one, the follow up question would be why that extra protection by the same personnel isn't being done now?

Yes, you are right. I do sound like I am against alot of things...lol But just maybe it is my way of seeking an informative "argument" which you have yet to provide. Not one Sutton supporter has produced one solid bit of information that proves that Sutton is the better candidate. Not one Sutton supporter has produced one single accomplishment that would make an average citizen like myself look forward to a Sutton administration. Instead, what we have here instead is the "shoot the messenger" syndrome, which you have provided.

As for Roberts, his record with the School Administration speaks for itself. Ignore the established facts at your peril. I will be more than happy to offer an "I told you so" when he stays true to his record and our taxes get wasted again for nonsense.
Alice W

Glen Arm, MD

#20 Oct 4, 2010
Teddy R...Comm. Mullin was a Smipkin until he was thrown uner a bus for a (slight) tax increase vote. He is now on the "Fiscal Team". Broomell was a Smipkin until Smigiel fired her when she ran for commissioner last time. Her signs are now in the front yard of Mega Smipkin Ted Patterson. Connect the dots.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 3
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Bob Ehrlich Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Are Democrats Turning Against the DREAM Act? (Aug '11) Aug '11 Proudnativist 15
News District 36: Pipkin vs. Mumford (Oct '10) Oct '10 Cecil Educator 3
News Legislators ponder medical marijuana law (Oct '10) Oct '10 Mennem 1
News 36th Delegate GOP Primary: Hershey Wins Final V... (Sep '10) Sep '10 A Lincoln 10
More from around the web