Tom Fulks’ opinions are right out of the Democratic Party’s playbook
I cannot disagree more strongly with the far-left position Tribune columnist Tom Fulks has taken on three of our elected officials — District Attorney Dan Dow, Sheriff Ian Parkinson and Assemblyman Jordan Cunningham.
I am in no way suggesting Fulks does not have a right to an opinion. Every person does.
But keep in mind, these are just his opinions.
.Fulks has made repeated personal attacks on Dan Dow, who is a person of great religious faith.
In his columns, Fulks implies that because of the DA’s faith, people must discount anything he says about the Tianna Arata and other defendants facing charges in connection with Black Lives Matter protests.
Fulks apparently feels the DA cannot be a Christian and fairly and honestly do the job he swore to do — a position that is simply ridiculous.
Let’s not forget the facts of this case. When protesters blocked Highway 101 in both directions for over an hour, they committed a crime. Pedestrians can’t even walk on a freeway without being removed by police.
Anyone watching Arata’s video on YouTube can see that she was the instigator of this unlawful activity. She must learn her actions have consequences.
Once the DA determined prosecution was warranted, his sworn duty was to take the case through the court system. That is what should have happened.
But due to unsubstantiated charges of political bias, SLO Superior Court Judge Matthew Guerrero — who was appointed by former Democratic Gov. Jerry Brown — disqualified the entire San Luis Obispo District Attorney’s Office.
The case might be prosecuted by the left-leaning State Attorney Generals’ Office or simply dropped. If not prosecuted, then justice is not served. It also sends a message that Black Lives Matter protesters can commit crimes with impunity.
Regarding Sheriff Ian Parkinson not going after COVID-19 violation, he is not alone. Sheriffs throughout much of California and other states took the same position. Lockdown restrictions are not laws, but executive orders that did not have the review and approval of legally elected state officials or the public.
Under Gov. Gavin Newsom’s latest order, law enforcement officers could arrest a person who buys a hot dog from a restaurant and eats it at an outside table owned by the restaurant. But that same person would be spared if he sat in his car with the windows open three feet from the table and ate the same hot dog. That’s absurd.
Fulks also hypocritically attacked Assemblyman Jordan Cunningham for traveling to Hawaii, yet said nothing about Gov. Newsom’s attendance at an exclusive birthday party at a Napa Valley restaurant where no one wore face masks or maintained a six-foot social distance.
Assemblyman Cunningham is trying to rein in the governor’s out-of-control use of authority that should be in the hands of the state Senate and Assembly by introducing AB 108. The bill would limit the governor’s authority under the California Emergency Services Act (CESA) to unilaterally change laws or regulations only up to 60 days after the emergency was declared.
Since the outbreak of COVID-19 nearly a year ago, the governor had ample time to receive support and approval for his plans. He chose not to do so, but instead to issue executive orders.
His frequent changes in policies ruined thousands of small mom-and-pop businesses such as barber shops, hair salons, bars and restaurants. They can’t afford to open, then close, then partially reopen, then shut down again several times over the course of nearly a year. California lockdowns have happened without any evidence that barber shops or hair salons or restaurants are hot beds of coronavirus.
It’s the governor’s unilateral actions that are destroying California’s economy — not Assemblyman Jordan Cunningham, District Attorney Dan Dow or Sheriff Ian Parkinson.
Tribune columnist Joseph Rouleau is a retired supervisory special agent with the U.S. Treasury Department and a retired U.S. Naval Reserve captain. Contact him in care of letters@thetribunenews.com.