Posted on 01/09/2011 11:39:30 AM PST by Blood of Tyrants
Until Saturday's rampage against Rep. Gabrielle Giffords left her battling for her life and ended the lives of six others, Clarence Dupnik was not the most famous sheriff in Arizona.
But after a pull-no-punches news conference in which he linked the shooting in Tucson to a poisonous underlying political atmosphere, the Pima County sheriff may soon become known nationally as the anti-Joe Arpaio.
[snip]
A Democrat, Dupnik called the [Arizona immigration enforcement] law "a national embarrassment" and wrote in the Wall Street Journal that it was "unnecessary ... a travesty, and most significantly ... unconstitutional."
(Excerpt) Read more at aolnews.com ...
Not for nuthin, but someone born in late 1936 would have been 14 at the outbreak of the war. He would have been 17 at the time of the cease fire.
Not quite draft age.
He also would have turned 18 when there was a draft, which didn’t end until 1973. It always amazes me when I check up on the “tough guys’ who were quite willing in their youth to watch as other men left to train and serve. By the way, Sherrif Joe served and he’s basically in the same age group.
“Is the Sheriff a draft dodger?”
I doubt it. He would have been 17 when the Korea War ended, and he might not have been drafted during peacetime. He joined the police in 1958, so he would have been 22 at the time.
Dupnik has been sheriff forever. I respect him for his service,while disagreeing completely with his views. As a local bigwig, Dupnik knows all the local Political types so this was personal to him. This has been very emotional for all of Tucson and while his comments since the first press conference have been more extreme, Saturday’s comments came close to my own views. I heard him talk about not just the news media, but all media and cultural discourse we expose to our children and the mentally vulnerable.
There are plenty of families in my area who've had near constant military service with young men joining almost as a family tradition; not necessarily career men but guys who at least do something. There are plenty of families like that and they tend toward one political party. Then there are the others, who when you peel the onion you reveal a pattern of nonservice...there is always a reason not to join up in war or peace, regardless. The latter group tends to have plenty of examples from both parties...sad sacks all, and over several generations.
Not trying to argue here, but not everyone was drafted. And not everyone wants to volunteer to go to war. It doesnt make them less a man.
If someone stood for the draft, and their “number did not come up” are they in the same boat as someone that took off, got half a dozen deferments, or otherwise “avoided” the draft?
As an example, all of my uncles that served in WWII—every one of six of them saw combat. Some were recognized for heroism in one way or another. Every single one of them was dragged kicking and screaming into the army.
They are all good men. They just did not want to die in combat.
For five of them, that was accomplished.
You make an excellent case for the draft! My point was simply that so many of the actions of the tough guys and super patriots don’t correspond with their actions as young men. If Dave Keane, The Huckster, Mitch Daniels, Newt or Mitt don’t like when somebody points that out, it’s too bad.
Or Dick Cheney.
I assume this sheriff is elected,
so it’s not surprise he’s a lefty,
since the rep from the area is a dem.
I had to look this post up, because now, thanks to you, every time I hear “Dupnik,” all I can think of is this ridiculous Polish dance, lol.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.