National Civility Institute: A Ridiculous Idea from a Bunch of Whiny Crybabies

Posted on by Jeremy Clymer (jclymer)
URL for sharing:

Have those boneheads at the University of Arizona been inhaling too much desert sand? Apparently unable to stomach a little bit of spirited debate in our public discourse, those bozos have decided to create the National Institute for Civil Discourse. Disgraced ex-Presidents George H.W. "Read My Lips: No Second Term" Bush and Bill "Failed in My Career as a Saxophonist" Clinton will serve as honorary co-chairmen of the institute, and have somehow deluded themselves into thinking that it will help "elevate the tone of dialogue in our country." Good luck, morons!

Listen, jerks: mean-spirited rhetoric is a part of our national heritage. Would the American Revolution have happened if our founding fathers had been all, "Hey, King of England, let's sit down and talk things over?" NO. It took hurting some feelings. And also killing some people. So whether you're a thin-skinned liberal complaining about tea partiers throwing around words like "Nazi" and "communist" like they're going out of style, or a boo-hoo-hooing neo-conservative who doesn't like being called crazy even though you are quite clearly a raving lunatic, GET OVER IT.

Wahhhh, I'm a loud, hateful blowhard but I start crying when people question my sanity.

What caused people to start thinking we needed civility in politics, anyway? Is it because one mentally unbalanced wacko went on a shooting spree and seemed to justify it to himself with some nonsensical political motives? Or is it because it really seemed he was just doing what certain people strongly implied he should be doing and it made people take a step back and realized maybe the fiery political rhetoric had gone a little too far? PREPOSTEROUS! That's quite clearly blood libel, and whoever said it should it should be taken outside and...

Oh. Could it be that we are all a little too quick to paint our political adversaries as wingnuts and wackjobs intent on destroying America for their own nefarious ends? Perhaps maybe the majority of people have the best of intentions and some are just woefully misguided in their view of how to make our country a better place. Perhaps we should study ways to reach a consensus between the left and the right so we can actually get things done in this country rather than just having an endless series of shouting matches and public posturing.

IF YOU BELIEVE ANY OF THAT, YOU ARE WORTHY OF MY SCORN AND CONTEMPT. Seriously. Compromise? Middle ground? Only ivy league eggheads would think those are good ideas. We need to continue to bicker and call each other names, because the louder we are, the more right we are. National Institute for Civil Discourse? More like National Institute for Removing Our Testicles and Putting Them in Storage Somewhere Because We're Not Going to Use Them Anymore. Incivility is here to stay, and you'd better get used to it.

What is the better way to solve our differences?

1448 views & 8 votes

Debate It! 1

I'm tired of the pointless mudslinging, but I like to see a politician that still gets passionate about the issues, so I'm torn. On a side note, Bush's reference to "a more perfect union" totally had me thinking about marriage counseling; I so hope this results in the distribution of foam bats on Capitol Hill.

Posted By Cobanerd,

Make a Comment

You must be signed in to add a comment. login | register
view profile
You are now following
You are no longer following
test message