LIGHTHOUSE BLOG

Sheriff Dupnik Deflecting His Own Culpability

Sheriff Clarence Dupnik of Pima County Arizona has quickly become a liberal media darling due to his hasty jump to blame inflammatory political rhetoric from right-of-center groups for the massacre in Tuscon. 

Of course, in making his statements, he did exactly what he claims to be against - stirring up hatred and animosity toward people with whom he disagrees.  But the Sheriff's hypocrisy aside, I think there is more to this story.

If you listened to the Sheriff's claims, he states that vitriol and hatred has gotten out of hand, and that Arizona is ground zero for such hate.  Believing that as he did, when then did he not have a single deputy protecting Congresswoman Giffords at her well publicized event?  If the world is no longer as safe as it was in the 1800s, when he was growing up, why did he ignore the calls from a variety of Tuscon citizens warning his office that the killer was indeed dangerous?  In fact, he told those same worried citizens that his office was taking care of the issue.  Well apparently, and tragically, not.

The only plausible reason for blaming right-of-center groups before much information was known about the killer is that the Sheriff was trying to deflect responsibility for not doing his job in protecting his constituents, and for not taking action despite myriad warning in advance about the killer.  In any case, Sheriff Dupnik is not fit for duty, and should resign immediately so that justice can be administered honestly and fairly.  He has disgraced his office and the people of the state of Arizona.

Submit Alternative Bill Before Voting to Repeal Obamacare

The Republican led Congress is scheduled to vote next week to repeal Obamacare. This vote, in the absence of a Republican led Senate, and with Obama still in office, is mostly symbolic.  

I'm all for repealing Obamacare, but the symbolism of voting to repeal it without proposing any alternative is exercising poor judgement in my opinion.  There are some good features contained in the current law, and it is those features, even if they only amount to 2% of the current law, should be continued.  Not recognizing those features, and voting to simply eliminate them is not wise.

We need our leaders to vote on measures with substance, not just for symbolic reasons.  They need to re-think this vote.