Getting serious about civil discourse

[saveliberty]

Your suggesting message boards not be allowed? *shocked look*

 

[MaggieMae]

Your suggesting message boards not be allowed? *shocked look*

Comprehension not your strong point?

"Meaningful one-on-one political disagreement is not the same as flaming opposing views on message boards or through blogs."

You might try reading the whole article. It's really not that long.

 

[Avatar4321]

LOL, can you imagine being lectured on civility by a serial adulterer President who was impeached for lying and obstruction of justice.

how could anyone keep a straight face?

And I guess the protesters in Wisconsin or the 14 Democrat Fleebaggers didn't get the message they WERE suppose to be and do things, civilly.

Yeah, I guess you'd rather hear lectures on morality from Newt Gingrich, like he did at the Christian Coalition Conference last night. At least Clinton only had one wife.

oh... so the fact that he only had one wife excuses him cheating on her constantly?

 

[whitehall]

Getting serious? Are you serious? Can't you spot a BS example of political propaganda? Arizona has enough problems without funding an institute for civil discourse or maybe the US taxpayers are footing the bill. Maybe the first issue they should tackle is the fact that every prominent conservative speaker has been the victim of assault on a college campus at one time or another.

 

[Avatar4321]

I agree, but why isn't that happening? Who, what is to blame? This article sets it out quite clearly, covering all bases.

It's happenning for a number of reasons:

1) People are turning away from God
2) People are devaluing life, and likewise the level of respect they have for their fellow man's life.
3) People refuse to exercise virtue in their life and instead turn to lowest common denominator.

As for who to blame: Everyone in political discourse. We all have a responsibility be civil with one another. And I'd especially like the people lecturing all of us about it to get off their behinds and start practicing what they preach.

 

[Anachronism]

Politics is the bastard child of Love and War; so why would anyone ever expect that civility might have anything to do with it? Politics combines some of the most base concepts of humanity... philosophy, ego, charisma, leadership, and teamwork .....into a Win or Lose, Us vs. Them, All or Nothing game where the winner walks away with the loser's proverbial girlfriend (the power to Rule). It's like the movie "Highlander" without the swords and explosions (most of the time).

To even suggest that civility and politeness are even what we SHOULD be looking for is laughable to me. The idea that it's POSSIBLE is an absolute knee-slapper. To achieve that, you would have to somehow remove most of the differences of opinion between the respective parties involved, and in that case we would not really have any choices left at all.

 

[MaggieMae]

LOL, can you imagine being lectured on civility by a serial adulterer President who was impeached for lying and obstruction of justice.

how could anyone keep a straight face?

And I guess the protesters in Wisconsin or the 14 Democrat Fleebaggers didn't get the message they WERE suppose to be and do things, civilly.

Yeah, I guess you'd rather hear lectures on morality from Newt Gingrich, like he did at the Christian Coalition Conference last night. At least Clinton only had one wife.

oh... so the fact that he only had one wife excuses him cheating on her constantly?

Not what I said. Pay attention.

 

[MaggieMae]

Getting serious? Are you serious? Can't you spot a BS example of political propaganda? Arizona has enough problems without funding an institute for civil discourse or maybe the US taxpayers are footing the bill. Maybe the first issue they should tackle is the fact that every prominent conservative speaker has been the victim of assault on a college campus at one time or another.

I guess you couldn't be bothered even reading the excerpt to the article in the OP. The funding will come exclusively from private donations.

And please link your allegation about "every" prominent conservative speaker being assaulted. As I recall, only Ann Coulter was the subject of any attempted "assault" by someone throwing a pie at her. People like Bill Kristol, who was hardly "assaulted," should have known more than to face a crowd of students who were for the most part anti-war.

 

[MaggieMae]

Politics is the bastard child of Love and War; so why would anyone ever expect that civility might have anything to do with it? Politics combines some of the most base concepts of humanity... philosophy, ego, charisma, leadership, and teamwork .....into a Win or Lose, Us vs. Them, All or Nothing game where the winner walks away with the loser's proverbial girlfriend (the power to Rule). It's like the movie "Highlander" without the swords and explosions (most of the time).

To even suggest that civility and politeness are even what we SHOULD be looking for is laughable to me. The idea that it's POSSIBLE is an absolute knee-slapper. To achieve that, you would have to somehow remove most of the differences of opinion between the respective parties involved, and in that case we would not really have any choices left at all.

You obviously know little about the history of political compromise. Ronald Reagan and Tip O'Neill had ideological differences, but they rarely set examples for the public by screaming at each other. Clinton and Gingrich used to discuss their differences far outside the Washington glare. How do you think both Reagan and Clinton managed to become popular presidents? BY LISTENING TO AND CONSIDERING OTHER OPINIONS AND OPTIONS!

When the public sees vitriol on stage by elected officials, they copy the same attitudes, depending on their political favorites. Since the controversial Bush v. Gore election, there has been a deep and ugly divide, with the result being pure hatred of the other party. That is absolutely STUPID, because it creates an our-way-or-the-highway mindset for whichever party holds the power, and creates even more anger by the public. So laugh away, if you're so inclined. But if everyone felt as you do, be prepared for more gridlock and none of our problems solved.

 

[California Girl]

Your suggesting message boards not be allowed? *shocked look*

Comprehension not your strong point?

"Meaningful one-on-one political disagreement is not the same as flaming opposing views on message boards or through blogs."

You might try reading the whole article. It's really not that long.

Ascertaining facts is a skill that SL has yet to master. He's prone to hyperbolic overreaction.

 

[Anachronism]

You obviously know little about the history of political compromise. Ronald Reagan and Tip O'Neill had ideological differences, but they rarely set examples for the public by screaming at each other. Clinton and Gingrich used to discuss their differences far outside the Washington glare. How do you think both Reagan and Clinton managed to become popular presidents? BY LISTENING TO AND CONSIDERING OTHER OPINIONS AND OPTIONS!.

What I know about the history of political compromise is that the whole idea that there IS a history of political compromise in this country disgusts and nauseates me more than you can probably imagine.

I learned at an early age that popularity and majority opinions have nothing to do with RIGHT and WRONG; which are the only two political concepts that I have any interest in. Yes, I'm actually a believer in PRINCIPLES and WALKING the TALK rather than spewing a wave of platitudes that you don't believe in and will never even attempt to live up to. That's why I believe the last true CONSERVATIVE in Washington DC was President Andrew Jackson.

When the public sees vitriol on stage by elected officials, they copy the same attitudes, depending on their political favorites. Since the controversial Bush v. Gore election, there has been a deep and ugly divide, with the result being pure hatred of the other party. That is absolutely STUPID, because it creates an our-way-or-the-highway mindset for whichever party holds the power, and creates even more anger by the public. So laugh away, if you're so inclined. But if everyone felt as you do, be prepared for more gridlock and none of our problems solved.

I have no problem with Gridlock and if I need the Government to solve my problems I don't deserve to have them solved in the first place. My-way-or-the-Highway is the way I live my life, Maggie.

 

[MaggieMae]

You obviously know little about the history of political compromise. Ronald Reagan and Tip O'Neill had ideological differences, but they rarely set examples for the public by screaming at each other. Clinton and Gingrich used to discuss their differences far outside the Washington glare. How do you think both Reagan and Clinton managed to become popular presidents? BY LISTENING TO AND CONSIDERING OTHER OPINIONS AND OPTIONS!.

What I know about the history of political compromise is that the whole idea that there IS a history of political compromise in this country disgusts and nauseates me more than you can probably imagine.

I learned at an early age that popularity and majority opinions have nothing to do with RIGHT and WRONG; which are the only two political concepts that I have any interest in. Yes, I'm actually a believer in PRINCIPLES and WALKING the TALK rather than spewing a wave of platitudes that you don't believe in and will never even attempt to live up to. That's why I believe the last true CONSERVATIVE in Washington DC was President Andrew Jackson.

When the public sees vitriol on stage by elected officials, they copy the same attitudes, depending on their political favorites. Since the controversial Bush v. Gore election, there has been a deep and ugly divide, with the result being pure hatred of the other party. That is absolutely STUPID, because it creates an our-way-or-the-highway mindset for whichever party holds the power, and creates even more anger by the public. So laugh away, if you're so inclined. But if everyone felt as you do, be prepared for more gridlock and none of our problems solved.

I have no problem with Gridlock and if I need the Government to solve my problems I don't deserve to have them solved in the first place. My-way-or-the-Highway is the way I live my life, Maggie.

Then you truly have my sympathies.

 

[Anachronism]

Then you truly have my sympathies.

Your sympathies for WHAT, Maggie?

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Getting serious? Are you serious? Can't you spot a BS example of political propaganda? Arizona has enough problems without funding an institute for civil discourse or maybe the US taxpayers are footing the bill. Maybe the first issue they should tackle is the fact that every prominent conservative speaker has been the victim of assault on a college campus at one time or another.

I guess you couldn't be bothered even reading the excerpt to the article in the OP. The funding will come exclusively from private donations.

And please link your allegation about "every" prominent conservative speaker being assaulted. As I recall, only Ann Coulter was the subject of any attempted "assault" by someone throwing a pie at her. People like Bill Kristol, who was hardly "assaulted," should have known more than to face a crowd of students who were for the most part anti-war.

"known more"? He should have known he have been assaulted by angry liberals?

Hmm.

 

[MaggieMae]

Getting serious? Are you serious? Can't you spot a BS example of political propaganda? Arizona has enough problems without funding an institute for civil discourse or maybe the US taxpayers are footing the bill. Maybe the first issue they should tackle is the fact that every prominent conservative speaker has been the victim of assault on a college campus at one time or another.

I guess you couldn't be bothered even reading the excerpt to the article in the OP. The funding will come exclusively from private donations.

And please link your allegation about "every" prominent conservative speaker being assaulted. As I recall, only Ann Coulter was the subject of any attempted "assault" by someone throwing a pie at her. People like Bill Kristol, who was hardly "assaulted," should have known more than to face a crowd of students who were for the most part anti-war.

"known more"? He should have known he have been assaulted by angry liberals?

Hmm.

Bill Kristol was the neocon's neocon, having penned The Project for a New American Century and the strongest advocate for invading Iraq. So he should have not expected student protests?