This guy is bold, what is your thought on what he is saying though?

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by NickZac, Jan 11, 2011.

  1. NickZac macrumors 68000

    NickZac

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2010
    #1
    I'm not sure how to react; the man has balls to say this nationally.

    Friends, Critics Dispute Arizona Sheriff's Remarks on 'Political Rhetoric' in Wake of Rampage

    By Jana Winter
    Published January 11, 2011
    | FoxNews.com

    Sunday: Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik speaks at a news conference in Tucson, Ariz., a day after a shooting injured or killed 20 people, including a federal judge. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords survived the shooting and was in critical condition following brain surgery.

    AP

    Sunday: Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik speaks at a news conference in Tucson, Ariz., a day after a shooting injured or killed 20 people, including a federal judge. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords survived the shooting and was in critical condition following brain surgery.

    Just hours after Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, an Arizona Democrat, was shot in the head by a crazed gunman, Pima County Sheriff Clarence W. Dupnik — addressing the media for the first time — made headlines for saying that “vitriolic political rhetoric” heard on the radio and TV caused Jared Loughner to go on a bloody killing spree that left six dead and 14 wounded.

    "When the rhetoric about hatred, about mistrust of government, about paranoia of how government operates, and to try to inflame the public on a daily basis, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, it has impact on people especially who are unbalanced personalities," Dupnik said Saturday night.

    The sheriff, a Democrat who has served as the county's top cop for 31 years, angered many with the remarks — including some of his friends, who felt his editorializing had no part in a news conference, typically reserved for impersonal facts and details.

    Sheriff Larry Dever of Arizona's Cochise County, which borders Dupnik's, says he considers Dupnik a close friend and mentor but can't understand what drove his latest comments.

    But Dever added that he knows that Dupnik is very angry about the shootings and was close friends with the federal judge killed and with Giffords.

    "He’s offered me wise counsel over the years. He's not only a friend but someone I’ve looked up to," Dever told FoxNews.com. "But I cannot explain nor can I defend his comments on this."

    Rep. Trent Franks, R-Ariz., told Fox News: "I’m especially disappointed in the sheriff because we were looking to him for straight facts and he politicized this. I don’t want to be unkind but I was disappointed."

    "The sheriff is supposed to investigate, not pontificate," Brad Blakeman, former assistant to President George W. Bush told Fox News on Monday. "This guy should be fired."

    But this isn't the first time Dupnik has offered his brazen opinion on controversial topics, such as Arizona's controversial immigration law, the Tea Party and campaign finance.

    — He called Arizona's immigration law "racist," "disgusting" and "just a stupid law" in an interview with Tucson's KGUN9-TV on Apr. 27, 2010.

    In May 2010, Dupnik wrote in an opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal about SB1070 calling it unconstitutional: "I have argued from the moment that this bill was signed that it is unnecessary, that it is a travesty, and most significantly, that it is unconstitutional.”

    — On the Tea Party, according to the Arizona Star newspaper, he said at a local immigration forum in September: "I think it brings out the worst in America. Instead of sitting down and getting both parties to work together, they are part of a movement designed to stop Obama from accomplishing anything.”

    — On gun laws, at a press conference following the mass shooting: "Well, I think we're the Tombstone of the United States of America," he said, adding, "I have never been a proponent of letting everybody in this state carry weapons under any circumstances that they want, and that's almost where we are."

    — On Jan 9, 2010, Dupnik said of campaign finance reform to Fox News's Megyn Kelly: "When millions of dollars are filtered into this country to buy very vitriolic ads and they don't have to be identified to the people that are donating money to them, I think we need to take a look at it."

    Critics say the sheriff needs to be the protector of the people, not a source of instigation and divisiveness.

    Sheriff Paul Babeu of Pinal County, Ariz., told Fox News that Dupnik's comments only helped to fuel unsubstantiated rumors that were rampant in the hours after the shooting, including that the shooting suspect had served in Afghanistan and was a member of the Tea Party.

    “All of these have been debunked," Babeu said. "I wish that everybody would take a moment and try to calm this down and that's our job. It's not to insert our opinion but find out the facts and what's truly happened.”

    Dupnik himself later conceded on Fox News that his blaming vitriol was his opinion, not fact. And despite his critics he isn't backing down from his statements.

    "I think differences of opinion is what makes the world go round and round but it's irresponsible for us not a some point to address this kind of behavior and try to put a stop to it," Dupnik told Fox News' Kelly.

    But others say the sheriff should just stick to his job.

    “To ascribe political motives and then launch a political assault naming elected leaders in America and saying this is connected when there is no basis in fact does nothing to help at a time when people's hearts are broken and really trying to assess what happened here," Babeu said.

    "And you and all Americans look to law enforcement to find out the facts of truly what happened and not to give an opinion. But the sheriff is an elected sheriff."

    Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...itics-remarks-arizona-shooting/#ixzz1Ak3kCS9X
     
  2. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #3
    Agreed. I see nothing wrong with what he said at all.
     
  3. NickZac thread starter macrumors 68000

    NickZac

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2010
    #4
    He raises a good point. I am not sure if it was the correct timing but I think that at least some truth exists to what he said.
     
  4. Ugg macrumors 68000

    Ugg

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2003
    Location:
    Penryn
    #5
    What really stood out is how "shocked, stunned, surprised" all the people seemed during the fox interviews.

    I question how they can be such good friends with the Pima county sheriff when the guy has a pretty regular history of speaking his mind and denouncing the militaristic tactics of the teabaggers.

    In other words, this is all about fox steering the discussion, not reporting the news.
     
  5. Lyle macrumors 68000

    Lyle

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2003
    Location:
    Madison, Alabama
    #6
    Is there a published transcript of his remarks? Did he actually say that, or merely imply it?

    If he stated it as a fact that X caused Y, that's a problem. If it's just that he said something along the lines of, "... with all the rhetoric, it's no surprise, etc." then I certainly think he's free to express that opinion (unless there's just something I just don't know about his contract that prohibits that sort of thing.)
     
  6. fivepoint macrumors 65816

    fivepoint

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2007
    Location:
    IOWA
    #7
    Suggesting that the actions of a madman had ANYTHING to do with the Tea Party, Sarah Palin, or conservative commentators... BIASED IDIOT attempting to score political points.



    Who would have seen that coming?



    How utterly reasonable... expecting the Sheriff to give accurate FACTS actually associated with the CASE AT HAND instead of pure conjecture aimed at attacking and belittling a political party or worldview he disagrees with. Expecting a Sheriff to work on the case instead of turning it into a political firestorm.



    Indeed. Maybe not fired, but definitely voted out of office come the next election.



    I disagree with almost every single thing this man says. I think he's doing more damage than good. I'm sure others would feel the same about Joe Arpaio. I think it's ok in general for Sheriffs to share their views with the public, but his politicization of this shooting was over the line in my opinion. I don't think it's a fireable offense, but he should answer to the voters very soon.




    Exactly. All of his ******** comments were exactly that... ********. They were based on nothing but pure conjecture. Based on no facts whatsoever attached to the case. HE saw a congressman get shot and just automatically assumed it was politically based and that a republican sympathizer was to blame. Brilliant!


    He admits he's wrong, or that there's zero evidence to back up his claims, yet continues to attack. Again, brilliant. Anyone who defends this man's actions is seriously confused about 'right and wrong' in my opinion. Using a lone lunatic murderer as a political weapon is something everyone here who share's Mr. Dupnik's views should be ashamed of.
     
  7. Ugg macrumors 68000

    Ugg

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2003
    Location:
    Penryn
    #8
    I googled the part you highlighted and the only links are to conservative blogs/news sites.

    In other words, the right wing spin machine is taking “vitriolic political rhetoric” which are words that the Sheriff actually spoke and then twisting the rest of his statement to fit their own agenda.
     
  8. Ugg macrumors 68000

    Ugg

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2003
    Location:
    Penryn
    #9
    You're posts are so cute when you get all huffy-puffy and misquote and wrongly attribute. Like a bristling little chihuahua who thinks he's a pitbull.

    He didn't admit he was wrong, only that it was his opinion. Big difference dude.
     
  9. fivepoint macrumors 65816

    fivepoint

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2007
    Location:
    IOWA
    #10
    It's called reading comprehension, Ugg.

    Hence the rest of my sentence which said "or that there's zero evidence to back up his claims"

    Bottom line, he had no evidence... but continued on with pure conjecture and purely political bullcrap. Sad that you can't see the truth staring you right in the face.
     
  10. Ugg macrumors 68000

    Ugg

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2003
    Location:
    Penryn
    #11

    Yeah, of course. Why don't you simply be honest in your posts from the get go instead of being bombastic and condescending all the time. People might take you more seriously if you did.
     
  11. fivepoint macrumors 65816

    fivepoint

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2007
    Location:
    IOWA
    #12
    Why don't you be a bit more substantive and post something of consequence instead of reading my entire post, picking three words that you find to be out of place, blatantly ignore the rest of the cohesive sentence in order to fulfill your original wish of creating an ad hominem attack, and waste more of our time in the process?
     
  12. Rodimus Prime macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    #13
    I think there is a lot wrong with what he said and quite frankly should be fired.
    Hell a police offical should not be on party lines in my book and this guy is clearly talking party lines. He should be kick out of office for it and crossed a lot of boundaries. If he wants to speak out like that quite and no longer be a cop.
     
  13. renewed macrumors 68040

    renewed

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2009
    Location:
    Bemalte Blumen duften nicht.
    #14
    I think this guy was on point with what he said and I am proud of him. He told the truth without political motive. I wouldn't doubt it if some of his "friends" support him too but are too scared of getting voted out of office or losing funding from higher officials to speak the truth like this guy did.

    Again good for him.


    What do you think a cop is? A drone that writes tickets and shoots the baddies all day? They are a mentor as well. Many officers I know consider themselves to be protectors but also parents. Many get called out when parents can't handle their kids. Do they just arrest them? No they discuss the problem and the situation and mentor both the kids and the parents.

    That is what this is. He sees an issue that caused people to get killed in his county and he is stating how to fix it. He is mentoring the community. He is telling them how to avoid this issue, how to save lives next time. He is being a hell of a Sheriff, cop, person and man.
     
  14. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #15
    On the basis that this is a sincere opinion from across the aisle, I applaud you.
     
  15. Ugg macrumors 68000

    Ugg

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2003
    Location:
    Penryn
    #16
    Under those rules, the right's god-like sheriff, arpaio in Phoenix, should have been run out of town a long time ago.
     
  16. Rodimus Prime macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    #17
    guess what I would of repeated the same thing if it had come up and I saw the thread.

    I do not think police should be tied to any political party and if they start talking politices over the new media like this guy then they should be fired plane and simple...

    Really I hate having words put in my mouth. It becoming way to common place on this boards if you are not with us then you are automatically against us and support the other side. There is no middle ground.
     
  17. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #18
    He crossed no boundaries whatsoever. He's entitled to his opinion on how to prevent crimes. THAT'S HIS JOB.

    But I guess you just think he hates the right or something. :rolleyes:
     
  18. Rodimus Prime macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    #19
    read my next post.
    I saw a lot of polical rhetoric in what he said. It was democrat rhetoric in the GOP attack and surprise surprise the guy is a democrat

    Publicly speaking political rhetoric no matter what party should not be tolerated of a cop. Big time if it is a new conferences
     
  19. renewed macrumors 68040

    renewed

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2009
    Location:
    Bemalte Blumen duften nicht.
    #20
    I urge you to read my response to you above. Thanks.
     
  20. Rodimus Prime macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    #21
    I read it. while i agree with a lot of it. This guy was not doing this. He was speaking rhectoric and democrat talking points at a press confesses. Very bad form and in my book goes against what cops should do.
    He should be fired for it. I would say the same thing if some GOP cop came out and start doing talking points for his side. This is just my stance on cops. They should not be taking policitcal sides as this guy is doing.
     
  21. Liquorpuki macrumors 68020

    Liquorpuki

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2009
    Location:
    City of Angels
    #22
    To me it sounded like he was condemning the media as a whole. I don't see the partisanship in his comment.
     
  22. renewed macrumors 68040

    renewed

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2009
    Location:
    Bemalte Blumen duften nicht.
    #23
    Have you heard radio shows about politics? Television shows? It is what he said it is. I can imagine someone who listens to it constantly and it is not of sane mind to commit such an act. It isn't a movie or cartoon either. It is real life politics and it is saddening. It comes from both sides too. Rep. yelling at the Dems. Dems. yelling at the Rep.

    His opinion was that this is what caused the sickening event that day and he told the public. He gave his assertion on how to prevent it from happening again and what led to it. This is what a cop does.

    What I bolded is part of the issue he was addressing. What is democratic rhetoric? The truth? Because that is what this guy was talking about that day, the truth.
     
  23. Desertrat macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2003
    Location:
    Terlingua, Texas
    #24
    The sheriff is doing no differently than the earlier post babbling about the non-existent militaristic tactics of the Tea Party--which was in no way involved in the tragedy in any way, shape or fashion.

    He was doing his best to divert attention from the complaints against the shooter for the criminal threats about which his office had done nothing. Drag in irrelevant politico-babble to cover his office's lack of attention to a reported problem.

    It's no different from all the other childish hysteria, trying make this candidate for a rubber room into some sort of political symbol. The hypocrisy in this whole deal is disgusting, whether the dragging in of the "Palin bullseyes" which were no different from the Democrat map in the same style, or the yawp about new laws concerning political speech.

    Look at all the posts here, ever since the shooting: Nattering away about right-wing extremism and talk shows--but everything his acquaintances have said indicates the doofus is far more to the left than any other sort of politics.

    The bottom line in all this is our system in dealing with nut-cases and potential nut-cases. I have no answer, myself, nor does anybody else seem to. This is no more than a reprise of the VaTech shooting--which also involved a nut-case whose weirdness was already known.

    But for the people involved, this affair would have drawn no more attention than a ghetto or barrio Saturday night shoot-out. Me, I have more pity for the nine-year-old girl and her parents...
     
  24. Ugg macrumors 68000

    Ugg

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2003
    Location:
    Penryn
    #25
    'Rat, I'm disappointed that you are judging this guy based on the statements of some of Jared's "friends" and ignoring the main theme in all his messages, that of anti-government. There's no possible way that leftists are anti-government as you so love to remind us.

    Is it possible that his stance towards the govt. was evolving? Very possible, he was only 22. Maybe even it was some twisted hybrid that only exists in his mind, but do us all a favor and use your age to temper this argument, not fan the flames.


    In regards to nut cases being allowed to purchase guns at will, gosh, don't you think that maybe we should start to look at why we allow that? Or is that simply the price we have to pay for the poorly worded and continually re-interpreted 2nd Amendment?
     

Share This Page