Politics means never having to say you're sorry.

Yesterday's post was written to be non-partisan. I hope I succeeded. Today, not so non-partisan.

Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik criticized vitriolic political rhetoric during a press conference about the assassination attempt on Rep. Gabrielle Giffords. He in turn was criticized by Sen. Jon Kyl and vitriolic right wing bloggers for having the temerity to suggest that perhaps the tone of  political conversation might have contributed to the attack. Some have even called Sheriff Dupnik's comments an attack on the 1st Amendment.

Have you ever walked into a room full of children to find family heirloom in pieces on the floor and ask "What happened?" The 1st one that says "I didn't do it" is the culprit. Perhaps if the Sheriff's criticism didn't hit the target, the response wouldn't be as vociferous? More importantly, in Brandenberg v. Ohio the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously found that speech likely to incite imminent lawless action is not protected by the 1st Amendment.  I believe an attempt to kill a U.S. Representative qualifies as imminent lawless action. Also, Sheriff Dupnik never suggested abridging anyone's 1st Amendment rights. He merely suggested exercising restraint in rhetoric,a nuance obviously lost to right wing hate mongers. Finally, Sheriff Dupnik did not ascribe the counterproductive caustic rhetoric to either (any) political philosophy. The offense taken by the right wing blogosphere proclaims "the lady doth protest too much, methink."

Instead I suggest the offended angry right go learn the lesson of Sue Lowden.  Ms. Lowden was the front runner for Nevada Republican nomination to challenge Harry Reid for Senate. Polls showed Lowden way ahead of Reid in a general election. (Un)fortunately Ms. Lowden, while attempting to criticize Pres. Obama's health care reform initiative, made a remark about bartering chickens for health care. When asked about her non-21st century approach to affordable health care, Lowden chose to reiterate rather than retract the statement. Both Harry Reid and Sharron Engle capitalized on this gaffe. Engle won the Republican nomination and Harry Reid won the Senate race. A simple "I chose my words poorly" and Sue Lowden would likely be Senator Lowden and the Republicans might control the Senate. That's the power of "I'm sorry."

The responsibility for the high volume discord pervasive in today's political climate does not rest solely with any party. Still if one (either) party is unwilling to consider they're portion of the mess jointly created, the mess can't be cleaned, not even for the memory of a nine year old girl.

Merry Christmas, Senator Kyl

Senator Jon Kyl, The 99ers have no money to buy food for Christmas. "Let them eat figgy pudding", replies Senator Kyl.

Why are they holding my check hostage?

Like many unemployed Americans, I have not received any unemployment benefits since mid-June. Unlike 4 million+ unemployed I still have benefits. Until extensions are funded, no one is discussing adding weeks. Additional weeks are crucial for the recipients and the economy. This breaks my heart for the 99ers. They are running out of options or worse. It scares me because I will be joining them soon. It angers me because it is bad economics and bad social policy. I still look for work everyday, but jobs aren't there. Like many I am frustrated that 41 senators can do this much damage. Why are they holding my check hostage?

The Senate Republicans are using a filibuster to keep the vote on funding from taking place. Their claim is fear of increasing the national debt. I always felt this is a convenient excuse andSen. Jon Kyl admits as much. Most pundits attribute this to pure partisan politics, but it goes beyond that. These quotes are a 30+ year snapshot of Republican opinion regarding the unemployed. It reflects a concerted effort to keep wages from increasing and keep employees in fear of losing their jobs. Think about it: Unemployment benefits aren't getting out and officials representing over 40% of the country call us lazy, hobos, substance abusers and worse, with impunity. Are you really going to fight for $10 a week? Be too busy to come in for a half day on Saturday, compensated or not? Call in sick when you are sick?

I don't think the Republicans stand in the lobby and talk about ways to suppress wages. It is just who they are. Government safety nets are socialism; repeal or privatize Social Security and Medicare; "The business of America is business". They are merely being true to character but things happen and you must reevaluate your priorities. No matter what drives your behavior you are still responsible for the consequences. Why didn't even one Republican Senator, Representative or Governor say "No matter what we believe, people are going without food and shelter. Philosophy can wait." ? They all bear that responsibility.

Am I being too harsh? Not harsh enough? Too simplistic for a complex issue? What do you think?

My apologies to Conservatives fighting for unemployment extensions. I whack the Dems. next time.