Can some smart person research this for me??

Please - and find out if it's true or not?
It came in an email from a friend who posted to our slick-willy mail list.
He says he has no idea and can't find any backing for it...........
Neither can I. If false, we'll kill it here! Lies make us look BAD.
IF true, it needs to go viral.
PLEASE don't spread it unless you can CONFIRM without doubt that it's true!
------------------------------------------------------------
Well I cannot confirm nor reute this via Snopes.com, so we'll just
have to watch from now on and see what we see!

This is from the MTA (Maryland Trooper Assoc. Newsletter)

I have read all of the emails from not only some of the MTOA board members,
but from other Law Enforcement & Military personnel about Barack Obama's
rudeness and what seems to be disgust for basically anyone in uniform. Well,
it's my turn to add to the list of emailers and here it is:

So members of the Calhoun County Sheriff's Department, Michigan State
Police, (me included) and other local agencies inside Calhoun County are
working with Secret Service in the security of Mr. Obama. Mr. Obama's bus
arrives in Battle Creek and pulls into the stadium area. Before Mr. Obama
exits the bus, he has the Secret Service get off and tell all Law
Enforcement personnel in uniform that they now have to stand behind the bus
so Mr. Obama is not seen with anyone in a Law Enforcement uniform before he
gets off or while in the public view. So, everyone from Michigan State
Police, Sheriff's Deptments and other agencies look at each other for a
brief second, go and stand behind the bus out of sight so Mr. Obama does not
have to see, or been seen with, what to him is 'undesirables' since he
refuses to been seen or even acknowledge Military or Law Enforcement
personnel in uniform. And he wants to be our commander-in-chief!

At a time of war and terrorism in our world, this presidental candidate who
is being protected by various branches of the military & law enforcement at
the tax payers expense, refuses to acknowledge, be seen with, have in his
photographed background, any type of Military or Law Enforcement in uniform.

But this is not in the headlines or in the news or on TV. The TV news
doesn't show us marching around behind the bus. In the future, look and see
if you can see a single soldier or police officer in uniform when you see
Obama. Why? I wonder what the story or media frenzy would be if it was
Muslims, blacks, whites, Jews, or any other race, gender, religon, and/or
occupation, that Mr. Obama refused to be seen with or have around him.

Why would I make this up? Everyone in Law Enforcement knows we have
traditionally had more funding under Democrats.

Just food for thought leading up to November 4th.

Jason Kern
Michigan Tactical Officer's Association
Michigan State Police

Executive Board Member

Someone raised a question if I'm a "rat" or a "troll" - I'm independent who WAS leaning towards McCain/Palin, however after this week's attempt to discredit Obama instead of trying to beat their opponent with arguments (like economy), I asked myself is this really the person I want to have for a president. If there was ever I time to do this, it was right after the primaries or even during the primaries. You can't argue someone's points, lose and then go after his credibility. Why did you argue in the first place? What McCain/Palin did this week has just backfired. Instead of reassuring us how will they lead this country out of crises, they just scared off thousands of voters who were still undecided, but leaning towards republicans. In other words, they became radical to point out how radical their opponent is. They gambled and now they are paying for it (last night's debate 54% Obama, 30% McCain)

I know I'm going to get burned for this (probably banned) - maybe Obama is not qualified to be a president, but this week attempt to discredit Obama makes McCain/Palin even less qualified.

Baz...........you are a TROLL and you were never for McCain/Palin
You simply can't take the truth about your hero. You drank the kool-aid and are willing to let this subversive socialist/marxist take over our wonderful country.
My uncles gave their blood in WWII and my husband and friends in Vietnam ...and not so it could be taken over by a Marxist while idiot Americans stuck their heads in the *** sand! I have no respect for you or your type. Use the two eyes God gave you and wake up and smell the coffee before it is too late!!!

baz wrote:Someone raised a question if I'm a "rat" or a "troll" - I'm independent who WAS leaning towards McCain/Palin, however after this week's attempt to discredit Obama instead of trying to beat their opponent with arguments (like economy), I asked myself is this really the person I want to have for a president. If there was ever I time to do this, it was right after the primaries or even during the primaries. You can't argue someone's points, lose and then go after his credibility. Why did you argue in the first place? What McCain/Palin did this week has just backfired. Instead of reassuring us how will they lead this country out of crises, they just scared off thousands of voters who were still undecided, but leaning towards republicans. In other words, they became radical to point out how radical their opponent is. They gambled and now they are paying for it (last night's debate 54% Obama, 30% McCain)

I know I'm going to get burned for this (probably banned) - maybe Obama is not qualified to be a president, but this week attempt to discredit Obama makes McCain/Palin even less qualified.

If Obama's connection to Ayers, Odinga, New Party, ACORN, Wright and Pflegler doesn't bother you enough to vote for the Marxist/Socialist (and there is evidence that he is connected with them), but McCain and Palin bringing those FACTS to the forefront bothers you so that you will not vote for them . . . you have drunk the Kool-Aid and there is nothing we can do to help you. God help you!

WA state ...I like your answer but please lets not be distracted. You all might not have had a tough primary process ...the dems did. And since I was supporting HRC ...I was pretty much familiar with what was going on during the primaries. These kind of write - ups are very common. and they used to crop up especially when HRC started using the wright issue and mentioned ayers at a debate. This happend post March and you all can look back and see for yourself how the results turned out. The media did a great disservice by greatly avoiding the matter and being a dem primary there was always a limit to which you can try to fight for your cause with media bias. I am sure you all will relate personally now. Its a repeat but this time we cannot be soft and hit hard. Character trumps all virtues. But again I have learnt to be tolerant to varying view points..everyone has a right to express his/her concern. You won't be surprised ..I have actually interacted with folks who believe Rev wright made sense! and not to mention ...they are all supporting BO with some even working for his campaign. Hence we should respectfully agree to disagree and move on with the final goal in mind. JM/SP in the WH. No time for useless bickerings. United we stand divided we fall!

WA State Voter wrote:If Obama's connection to Ayers, Odinga, New Party, ACORN, Wright and Pflegler doesn't bother you...

A BIG emphasis on "IF" - when your sources are more credible than some right winged websites like obamacriminal.com, I'll look into it. Right now it's all speculating and playing the fear card.

In the mean time, I will watch the debate and try to make my decision off of their arguments, not some allegations. I'm not crazy about Obama (don't give me that cool-aid cliche crap). I think he is good guy but too green to take such a important position. I was leaning towards McCain, but I started to dislike him after going so desperately after Obama's credibility. If he hired some dogs to do his dirty job, I wouldn't change my mind, but what he and palin are trying to do this week should be beneath a presidential candidate.

Baz ...I don't understand what you mean by IF in case of Ayers, ACCORN, Wright, Pfleger...the relationships have all been established , its the extent which needs to be informed to the public by ther MSM. Regarding the New party , I agree its still fresh waters. Regarding Rev Wright...Just ask yourself ...can you have a pastor for 20 years and still not realise about his virulent teachings and if you still continue in the church ( for all means you have the right to ) why should you disavow him when it becomes public knowledge and you are running for the Presidency. why should you publicly disinvite him to your convocation and hold sermons privately with him at your basement.

FYI...www.obamacrimes.com started by Philip J Berg was the Deputy AG of PA and a vocal Bush - Hater. But I can agree till there is a decision by the judge this case is hoot. Although these docs should be public knowledge for a person running for the top office....shouldn't take a case where in a 'motion to delay/dismiss' was filed necessary.

If your last statement was meant in good spirit about the debate I will take you at your word. You will find me at this forum and we can discuss the positions on issues to help you make a decision.

Bill..Sorry currently was looking at the veracity of the Corsi statements from today but will see if I can find any info regarding what you have put up.

independant_visionary wrote: Regarding Rev Wright...Just ask yourself ...can you have a pastor for 20 years and still not realise about his virulent teachings and if you still continue in the church ( for all means you have the right to ) why should you disavow him when it becomes public knowledge and you are running for the Presidency. why should you publicly disinvite him to your convocation and hold sermons privately with him at your basement.

First off, I'm not here to advocate Obama, but this whole Rev Wright thing is blown out proportion. I think every Christian should use his/hers own head when it comes to religion and not just blindly follow what they hear from their pastors. I'm a baptist and I attend the same church with senator Mccain (North Phoenix Baptist), but I disagree with a lot of stuff that pastor Dan Yeary says from time to time. People like to describe Rev Wright as some "spiritual leader" who influences how Obama should think or act. Same goes for Bill Ayers. I find it really hard to believe that Obama would come this far with his campaign and still agree/believe/act within the radical views of his pastor or Bill Ayers. If there was any truth to that, it would have already been shown in some form of his campaign, but right now it's just speculating. I don't know...it's just too big of a conspiracy to me to be true. I think there's more valid arguments to 9/11 conspiracy than this one.

But back to ARGUMENTS - I think Obama doesn't have enough political experience, McCain is somewhat solid but too old for my taste, Bidden is a typical, business as usual Washington politician, and Sarah Palin has not spend one day in congress (and that interview with "gotch-ya" journalist definitively didn't help her cause). So bottom line, NONE of them are eligible for their respective positions, esp. not at this time when we really need someone who can get us out of this hole.

Baz..Of course BO cannot act radical ...do you think if he did he would even be here one step away from the presidency. Now on an individual basis I believe if he wanted, he can/could have easily dispute/d these arguments...I mean how difficult can it be unless you have something to hide. ...these being legitimate questions if not for me or you but for many others..CAN be easily cleared by BO ..and taken of the table.

Now as for me The simple reasons for not supporting him are 1. No track record 2. Superfluous specifics 3. Personal experience being on his campaign late 2007.

I do agree with most of your points about each of the candidates ... JM is 3x my age hence it is at times difficult for me to relate to him and he is never being known to communicate effectively to our generation but he knows his stuff. he has had various experiences which can be effectively applied. I believ I can trust him ...may not agree with all his policies but the worlds not perfect. Sarah is personable and very realistic and Joe seems like a nice person but VP's did not influence my decision although it did strengthen my vote for JM. I like the man / woman combination + experience + execuberance in the right order.