Sticks And Stones May Break My Bones, But Words Can Make Me Bonkers

There is no evidence that Jared Loughner’s rampage in Tucson was influenced by vitriolic rhetoric. There is also no proof that it wasn’t. In light of the fact that it has happened at least three times in the recent past, and as David Brock (CEO of Media Matters For America) pointed out, by persons who admitted that they were heavily influenced by conservative vitriolic rhetoric, I don't think that it is much of a stretch to believe that rhetoric and imagery might have played some small part in this tragedy.

In light of the fact that Loughner’s anti-government sentiments closely mirror those of some in the Tea party movement, it is difficult to believe that he wasn’t motivated, at least in part, by the stories we have all seen about Tea partiers bringing weapons, or threatening to bring them, to political rallies. It is very easy to find images of signs carried by these folks depicting or threatening violence if they don’t get their way through more peaceful means. Search "we came unarmed this time".

The constant barrage of messages on talk radio and conservative television shows painting non-conservatives, and in some cases non-conservative enough conservatives, as anti-American, nazi, Marxist, and any number of other pejorative designed to elicit hatred of a group, cannot help but to fan the flames of divisiveness.

If anyone had actually even implied that these folks needed to join Mr. Loughner in whatever sentence he receives from this horrible incident, then one could understand their outrage. No one sane has seriously suggested that. It has only been suggested that there is the possibility that the vitriol did, in fact, play a role, and that it needs to be toned down.

Rather than accepting that as a good idea, some right-wing talking heads instead immediately launched attacks at the sheriff who first said it (without naming any names, I might add, so it is interesting that the bit dog barked) and went on the defensive, claiming to have been hurt themselves. This in itself should have shown the American people (especially those with children) that those protesting harbored at least a little self-perceived guilt.

Given that there would be absolutely zero repercussions to the talkers who may have influenced this guy, even if the FBI found a letter outlining exactly how he had been influenced, I am astonished at the response. Rather than admitting that words can, indeed, have influence, the conservative talkers, almost to a man, asserted in one breath that no, words can not have any influence, so even if this guy listened to nothing but Fox and conservative talk radio, they cannot be held responsible. Then, in almost the next breath, they have all proclaimed how much harm the speculation that they might have some culpability has done.

I don't think that it has been too much to ask that the vitriol be reined in, but apparently there are those who do not agree with me. Especially those on the right have, since Saturday, ramped up their vitriol, one person even suggesting that the only way to make the hatred stop is for the left to give in completely to the right. If, he suggested, the right gets everything they want, exactly how they want it, then and only then can the calls for revolution, the vile name-calling, the painting of non-conservative American citizens as enemies of the state, be expected to be stopped.

Increase the Rhetoric

"…because I think it’s the vitriolic rhetoric that we hear day in and day out from people in the radio business and some people in the tv business and what we see on tv and how our youngsters are being raised…" Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik, Saturday, January 8, 2011
　
This statement, on the heels of a massacre in Tucson, Arizona Saturday morning, sparked off a wildfire that has swept across the nation. Without having blamed any person or entity in particular, Sheriff Dupnik seems to have riled the neocon talking heads on radio and television as if they were a fire ant bed and he ran over it with his lawn mower.

It seems to me that, since the sheriff didn’t point a finger at anyone, the fact that the conservative media immediately recognized themselves in his statement says something.

Almost before the words were out of his mouth, conservative pundits nationwide took umbrage, claiming that he had made a verbal attack on them. Like a child caught in a wrong, they cried out "but they do it too", almost as one. "They" being the liberals.
　
It is moot whether the vitriol comes from both sides or not. It is also moot, actually, whether or not the political vitriol spewed on a daily basis had anything to do with Jared Loughner’s madness.

What is important is that there is a very large contingent of radio and television personalities who paint "the other side" as un-American and to be reviled. Whether or not this kind of speech had anything to do with this tragic even or not doesn’t really matter. What matters is, can we accept that it might, and do as the good sheriff suggested? In other words, can we tone it down? Should we tone it down?

Apparently the answer, at least from some on the conservative side, is a resounding no.
　
　
http://biggovernment.com/jperren/2011/01/10/how-to-eliminate-inflammatory-right-wing-rhetoric-2/
　
In other words, what this guy is saying is that, until we have a one-party system like Nazi Germany did, there will be no abatement of the hateful rhetoric. As long as Democrats and progressives insist on ensuring that everyone has a slice of the American pie regardless of their ideology, skin pigment, or religion, until Republicans get everything they want, exactly as they want it, nothing is going to change.

And make no mistake, this guy isn't the only one refusing to back down the rhetoric. The radio and television pundits have actually stepped up their vitriol, almost across the board, since Saturday.

Nice.

77 Million Dollars in Federal Government Waste

Conservative pundits and politicians have long called for the repeal of the federal minimum wage, claiming that it increases unemployment and hampers business.

Considering that a lot of them seem to think that $7.25 (the current federally mandated minimum wage) is plenty for the American people that they supposedly work for, I think that dropping their salaries down to twice the minimum wage would be the right thing for them to do.

I say twice, because they do have to maintain a residence not only in their home district, but in DC as well. Since they seem to consider that $7.25 should be enough for working Americans to maintain one household, then it shouldn’t be much of a stretch to assume that they should be able to maintain two on twice minimum wage.

Since they seem to be completely out of touch with the public, this would also serve the purpose of putting our legislature in a position of actually understanding where the average American stands.
Then bring in campaign finance reform in the form of public funding only for campaigns, kick lobbyists out of DC, and maybe we can get something done in this country.

Oh, and I think that, given the tendency for these politicians to not show up for work, we should probably install a time clock in both chambers.

Rank and file members of both the House of Representatives and the Senate make $174,000 yearly, or $83.65 an hour, assuming 52 weeks of 40 hours a week worked.

Party leaders in both the House and the Senate make a salary about 1.11 times that of the rank and file, $193,400 yearly, or $92.98 hourly, again assuming 52 weeks worked 40 hours per week.

The Speaker of the House makes 1.28 times the rank and file $223,500 yearly, or $107.45 per hour. Also assuming the 52 weeks worked 40 hours per week.

Since we all know that they don't work anywhere near that, the hourly rate would be a lot higher in reality. For the sake of simplicity, we will leave out all of the benefits and perks they receive simply for being legislators.

There are 535 members in the House and the Senate. Our expenditures for legislation are:

$92,220,000 yearly for the rank and file combined.
$773,600 yearly for the four party leaders.
$223,500 yearly for the Speaker of the House.
$93,217,100 is the total for the combined yearly salaries for all of our federal legislators.

If we bring them down to the reality that they seem to believe that the rest of us should be able to live in, and use the same multipliers from the base for the leaders, then we have the following:

$30,160 yearly for rank and file members, based on minimum wage times two.
$33,478 yearly for party leaders in both chambers, based on rank and file pay times 1.11.
$38,605 yearly for the Speaker of the House, based on rank and file pay times 1.28.

This works out, when combined, to:

$15,984,800 yearly for the combined rank and file
$133,392 for the four party leaders
$38,605 for the Speaker
$16,156,797 would be the total cost to taxpayers for the combined yearly salaries for all of our federal legislators, for a savings of $77,060,303.

This is truly only a drop in the bucket as far as federal expenditures go, but this, to me, is as good a place to start saving as any.
　
AMMENDMENT (01/09/2011) I should add that, as our representatives in Washington, D.C. are expected to make frequent trips to their home districts, We the People should be expected to foot the bill for one (1) round-trip coach class airfare per month for them.