Oh Good! A Whole Institute Dedicated to Lecturing Conservatives on “Civility”

Don Feder, GrassTopsUSA.com

About a week ago, I had another lesson in liberal civility.

I was pulling into the parking lot of a burger-joint when an agitated young man drove up next to me. He rolled down his window, as I did. I thought I might have cut him off in traffic and prepared to apologize.

The first words out of his mouth were: “Are you a retard?” This is known as a rhetorical question. I was tempted to answer, “No, but I am still beating my wife.”

The graduate of The Charlie Sheen School of Refinement was incensed by one of my bumper stickers, “Global Warming: a dangerous man-made phenomenon caused by the mixture of recycled Marxist ideas and junk science.”

I told him I wasn’t going to have a conversation with someone who begins by asking if I’m “special.” We went into the restaurant. He was calm for a while, but as soon as he finished eating, he began loudly berating me again.

I was a “cretin.” I was too stupid to live in a superior state like Massachusetts and should move to Tennessee, where people are such mental defectives that they question the revealed truth of global warming. “Like Al Gore,” I innocently asked? That enraged him further. Finally, he delivered what he considered the coup de grace, telling other diners that I was a product of FOX News. Then he stormed out.

One of the cooks came out from behind the counter and asked if I wanted him to call the cops. I said no, my assailant was probably an Obama supporter who was off his medication. Massachusetts is lousy with such louts — not surprising, as we are the capital of thumb-sucking liberalism.

But, not to worry. The civility-mongers just opened the National Institute for Civil Discourse at the University of Arizona. By this time next year, we’ll all be going around bowing or curtseying to each other and saying: “Pray, pardon me” and “I beg to differ.” Soon, the entire country will resemble a Regency drawing room out of “Sense and Sensibility.”

According to the Institute’s website, it will be a “national, nonpartisan center for debate, research, education and policy generation regarding civic engagement and civility in public discourse consistent with First Amendment principles.”

In a Q&A describing its purpose, the Institute answered hypothetical questions about the Big C, including: “Are you blaming heated rhetoric for the Tucson shootings? Absolutely not. But the shootings created a space for people to focus on civility, and the Institute is building on that positive outcome of a tragic event.”

If the shooting of Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords and the murder of six others had “absolutely” nothing to do with civility, how exactly did it create a “space for people to focus” on same? Caution: Never expect consistency from the Left or ask liberals to define their terms (like “climate of hate”); it only confuses and agitates them

The only connection between the Tucson tragedy and civility is that a lot of people on the Left blamed the rampage on lack of civility among conservatives, without a scintilla of evidence to corroborate the claim.

Read more.

The Left Asks Civility of Hate-Filled, Murderous, Scumbag Conservatives

Don Feder, GrassTopsUSA.com

Last week, the Left was saying that conservatives from Sarah Palin to Rush Limbaugh and the Tea Parties had blood on their hands – that the Right created the climate of hatred that somehow caused/provoked/impelled/influenced a g-string-wearing, Communist Manifesto-touting psychopath (whose brains are “scrambled,” according to one of his professors) to shoot a Congresswoman in the head and murder a federal judge and five others.

This week, the Botticellis of bile are calling for civility and unity, asking everyone in politics (but especially conservatives, who, naturally, have the most to atone for) to dial down their rhetoric whilst a celestial choir hums Kumbaya in the background.

At a memorial service-cum-political rally (they even handed out t-shirts with the slogan “Together We Thrive”), President Butter-Wouldn’t-Melt-In-His-Mouth set the tone. “The truth is, none of us can know exactly what triggered this vicious attack,” the president soberly declared – after his minions had spent the preceding week telling us they knew exactly what triggered the attack: conservative talk radio, raucous town hall meetings, Arizona’s attempt to crack down on illegal immigration, and playing “Where’s Waldo” with Obama’s birth certificate.

“What we can not do is use this tragedy as one more occasion to turn on each other. That we cannot do,” proclaimed the president who’s spent the past two years savaging his opponents, telling Hispanics to “punish” their “enemies,” urging his supporters to bring guns to knife-fights, and sneering that Republicans “can come for the ride, but they gotta sit back” – presumably blindfolded and gagged.

In a classic example of the liberal disconnect from reality, in some cases the calls for civility and the smears went on simultaneously….

Read more.

Wagin’ War on Mad, Murderous Metaphors

The following article is a witty satire of those calling for greater “civility” following the shooting of Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords by a mentally deranged person. At FloydReports.com, we know civility means censorship, especially of conservative ideas, which is the liberals’ ultimate aim. Tom Purcell makes the same point with great humor in this satirical essay. –The Ed.

“Now that I’ve had a chance to think about it, I probably could have used a different metaphor.”

“This is going to be good. Please explain.”

“I’ve been coaching our high school’s basketball team for a long time. We don’t have the most talented kids, but we have the most heart. I’ve developed quite a knack for firing them up before big games.”

“Firing up?”

“We were about to play our archenemy in our biggest game of the year — but our kids wouldn’t get the lead out. They should have been warming up, but instead sat around, shooting the breeze.”

“That’s no good.”

“I understood why, though. They were still shellshocked over the loss we suffered a few days before. That game was murder.”

“Shellshocked! Murder!”

“Well, they figured I was going to console them, but I came at them with both barrels blazing. I told them point-blank that they were at fault for the loss. They were not prepared and went off –“

“Half-cocked?”

“That’s right. I called out my guard for having an itchy trigger finger — he’d rather shoot than pass and he couldn’t hit the broad side of a barn with a bazooka.”

“Oh, my goodness”….

Read more.

Obama’s Phony Civility Truce is like Muslim Hudna

Kevin “Coach” Collins, CoachIsRight.com

In the months since the Republicans resounding victories at the polls the language of politics has changed.  The Democrats are not talking so tough anymore.

Gone are the days when a snarky Barack Obama’s tone toward the defeated Republicans dripped with, “We won. You Lost” during negotiations over his wasteful “economic stimulus” bill.

At that point (January 2009) Doug Schoen, a Democrat strategist, explained Obama’s position with, “Ideally he wants bipartisanship. If that doesn’t work, [it becomes] ‘We won, you lost. You’re discredited. We’re not.’ That’s kind of his fallback position.”

What a difference an election makes.

Just over three weeks after their crushing defeats on Election Day because of Obama’s policies he was singing a different tune. He wanted to sit down and talk with the victorious Republicans. He struck a friendly tone saying ,“[It] isn’t about Democrats or Republicans. It’s not about left or right. It’s about us. It’s about what we know this country is capable of.” That “truce” didn’t last long.

After a lame duck session of Congress in which Obama racked up a number of important victories ABC News commented, “He set the tone — and potentially set a trap — for the next legislative session. By alluding to “unfinished business,” he implied that Republicans should keep cooperating with him — and they may well listen, since “the party that looks like they’re holding things up for political gain is the party that will suffer at the polls.” ABC may have quite inadvertently stumbled onto the truth, but it wouldn’t understand it even if they read this piece.

It’s a HUDNA.

Read more.

Obama: Civility for Thee but Not for Me

Floyd and Mary Beth Brown, Impeach Obama Campaign

Our Lecturer-in-Chief demands we do as he says, not as he does. During his University of Michigan commencement address, Barack Obama assumed the professorial role and began lecturing Americans on how to behave: “Now, the second way to keep our democracy healthy is to maintain a basic level of civility in our public debate. … But we can’t expect to solve our problems if all we do is tear each other down. You can disagree with a certain policy without demonizing the person who espouses it.”

While the idea of a civil debate is certainly appealing, Barack Obama has done more to damage civility in public discourse than any presidency in 40 years. Obama is the first president since Richard Nixon to personally launch verbal assaults on his enemies. His administration is willing to attack anyone who dares to stand up against them. They employ the shockingly un-presidential strategy of going after their critics by name. Robert Gibbs, the president’s acid tongue spokesman, attacked CNBC reporter Rick Santelli after less than a month in office.

Obama then joins Gibbs by personally lashing out at critics. Obama is even willing to go after his allies that don’t fall in line. “Don’t think we’re not keeping score, brother,” Obama famously told Rep. Peter DeFazio, a Democrat from Oregon.

Obama has issued scores of scathing personal attacks. He attacked Mitch McConnell as being in bed with Wall Street. He claimed John Boehner was a healthcare Chicken Little. He said Sarah Palin is “not exactly an expert on nuclear issues,” and called Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh a “troublesome” twosome spreading “vitriol.”

Obama’s comedy also has a political bite to it. Rather than employing the strategy of most recent presidents of engaging in self-deprecating humor, Obama makes fun of others. He tells jokes mocking Sarah Palin, Scott Brown, John Boehner, Charlie Crist and Mitt Romney.

Landon Parvin, an author and speechwriter for Democrats and Republicans, and a joke writer for three Republican presidents (Reagan and both Bushes) says, "With these dinners you want the audience to like you more when you sit down than when you stood up. … Something in [Obama's] humor didn’t do that.”

Even Nancy Pelosi has told Obama to cool his critiques of Washington, D.C. Pelosi and other Democrats in the House are concerned that he is throwing them under the bus to save his own reputation. Obama is more concerned about preserving his own image and re-election prospects than he is about supporting his party in 2010.

Even Obama’s most reliable allies, the formerly dominant mainstream media, are beginning to take notice. Josh Gerstein and Patrick Gavin of Politico report: “Reporters say the White House is thin-skinned, controlling, eager to go over their heads and stingy with even basic information.” When the friendly press takes notice, there must really be a big problem.

It’s easy for the president to lecture about the lack of civility in politics, but when his administration is one of the most vicious voices in modern history those lectures are hypocritical. If Obama really wants to raise the public discourse he ought to start the cleaning in his own White House.