Civil discourse


#1

As January 8 becomes more distant in the past, I would like to offer my thoughts on the topic raised by the events that day in Tucson: Civil political discourse.

As we now know, there is plenty of reason to believe that the motivation for the shooter was related to mental illness and that the motivation was unlikely to have been related to political rhetoric. Premature and unfounded reports may have suggested otherwise at first, but now that has primarily changed, although certainly there are places where political opponents of the conservative movement persist in a version of events that suits their politics rather than which fits with reality.

But the idea was posed that political discourse needs to become more civil. Conservatives have taken this as a veiled insult directed at them, as it may well have been intended. That aside, there is nothing wrong with a call for civil political discourse. There is, however, something wrong in calling for civil political discourse and acting to supress civil political discourse.

Political discourse becomes uncivilized for a reason. Politics today is a product of a large population of Americans with a disagreement with the direction set for the country by the Democratic Party, and that state of being is compounded by the fact that the Democratic Party has failed to give that disagreement an appopriate level of disrespect.

Instead of discussing the relative merits of differing visions for the way forward in America, the Tea Party’s calls for limitted government, the political ideas of the movement have been disregarded and instead the movement has been called names and accused of acts on a systematic basis which have been unrelated or even staged by opponents.

If Democrats are truly interested in civil discourse, then it is time to remember they have a part to play in that as well.


#2

For any civil discourse to occur the Left would have to first, admit that they use all the same tactics that they accuse the Right of using. Not going to happen. Second they would have to admit that we’re not all ignorant rednecks that couldn’t participate in any exchange of ideas. Not going to happen.


#3

If Democrats are truly interested in civil discourse, then it is time to remember they have a part to play in that as well.

Dem Congressman: ObamaCare Repeal **Will Kill People **

Breitbart.tv » Dem Congressman: ObamaCare Repeal Will Kill People

Yeah, I’m not seeing the dems being civil. :hippy: Just more B-S.

.


#4

we’ve been thru this too many times to be able to believe the left’s call for civility or bi-partisanship or whatever else they call for and they never mean.

you’d have to be stupid to keep falling for this…republicans. i’m talking to you.


#5

Somebody needs to explain this to the Rinos in the NE… Snow, Brown, Collins and their ilk.


#6

There are 2 parts to civil discourse. You can’t have civil discourse without discourse, and the point bears emphasis in particular to moderate Republicans who would say that the right should temper their speech that without discourse, we are only performing a disservice. Truly responding to a call for civil discourse is always the right thing to do, and if it is unilateral then the side that remains uncivil or disengaged becomes obvious for what it is. The 2010 mid-terms proved this out.


#7

I disagree. It is possible to take the high road. When there is no uncivil discourse to run on the news constantly, then the perpetrators (whoever they may be) will stick out like a thumb.

If you can’t get a point across without “bringing a gun to a knife fight” or “Using second amendment solutions to your political problems”, then you aren’t being civil.

I would think that good Christians would naturally be on the high road here. Maybe the people using this language aren’t good Christians.


#8

The only time the liberals want civil discourse, is when it is beneficial to them. Otherwise, our “solution to health care is to die quickly”. Otherwise, the Tea Party are racists. Otherwise, we are “rednecks clinging to our guns and religion”. Otherwise, we are the “Party of NO”.
Obama wants to resort to “hand to hand combat”, in Washington, when he refers to Pubbies. Now, he wants civil discourse. Disingenuous.


#9

The only time the ANYONE wants civil discourse, is when it is beneficial to them.


#10

I think it is much more important to have the truth. I say to speak your mind, and who cares who likes it.


#11

Then why would anyone believe a person who claims that civil discourse is beneficial to all?


#12

ANYONE was meant to represent political parties.

Simple morality should lead a person to be civil.

Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.


#13

And that is how I took it. The Dems keep claiming that civil discourse can only lead to what is beneficial to ALL. And all too many Pubs are dumb enough to buy it.

Simple morality should lead a person to be civil.

Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.

Tell me about it.


#14

The lefty news outlets don’t need any uncivil discourse to begin with. How long did it take them to accuse us, Sarah Palin and the Tea Party of shooting Gifford. After the truth was ignored for days they rebutted by saying that “the next one will be”. They don’t care one whit if they stick out like a sore thumb. We sit on the high road and get attacked. We sink to their level, we get attacked. We explain our side of an issue, we get attacked.

Obama said the “Bring a knife to a gun fight” line most recently. He said it’s going to be “open war fair” on the hill. Anyone care about that? Two “nice young gentlemen” are standing outside of a polling place with batons shouting at voters. We point that out and are called racists. Anybody out there care about the crime committed in the first place, no! Just that we dared to point it out.

Civil discourse to the left is everyone agreeing with everything they say and do.


#15

yes. The dems are calling for civil discourse. CAUSE THEY LOST!

Weasel Zippers » Blog Archive » Dem Congressman Compares GOP ObamaCare Claims to Nazi Propaganda Minister Joseph Goebbels, Lies About Jews That Led to Holocaust

last nite. on the floor of the house. Maybe we should get more particulars on when and where and by whom this civil discourse is to begin.


#16

I agree with you 100%.

From where I sit, I see the exact same thing coming from the right.


#17

the difference being is that the right is for the right things. But besides that point, the right does not have the support and propagandizing muscle that education, business, science, entertainment and the media have. This is a bad bad Axis of Evil.

Additionally, I was just thinking…civil. The japanese and the chinese are considered two very very civil Civilizations. And they are the cruelest people on the face of the earth.


#18

MANY nations would say the same about us.

I always thought that one of the many things that makes our country exceptional is that we lead the world. We don’t look at other countries to seek permission for our lack of civility. We don’t follow others failed examples.


#19

Agreed 100%


#20

I don’t know where your sitting but I haven’t heard much about Obama, Reid, Pelosi or any on the left being blamed for the shooting. I don’t see FOX News brining out “experts” calling for Civil Disobedience. Rush, Hannity, Beck and the rest are all saying that violence only hurts us and helps the Left.

Give me one example of the Right calling for violence. I’m talking mainstream. Yes there are nut jobs on both side, but only the Left plays them every chance they get. MSNBC, CNN, NBC, ABC, CBS have all had members of the peace loving Left warning of the violence coming because of the Right. Of course the connections they have to draw would give even Glenn Beck a headache. Give me the main stream example you say we do also. Even if you do find one, I’ll find 10 from Piven, Van Jones, Wright, Shabazz and half the ladies from the view. All I have listed don’t seem to want any “civil discourse” but boy can they point fingers. How many times can that idiot Sheriff be interviewed saying “it’s the Right’s fault”.

I didn’t think it was physically possible, but your sure proving you can sit with your head up your…