Wouldn’t it be funny if some government bureaucrat forced Air America to air Conservative points of view and they started actually making money?

Speaking of a lack of couth, Brazoria Texas has just proposed legislation to criminalize the “n” word. Written into the statute are exemptions for those who utter the “uncouth” verbiage but whose recipient is not offended. In essence, the crime is totally subjective in its determination and will require the offended person to make the determination.

Naturally, this will be complicated when a person greets another with this salutation but a bystander overhears and is offended. As I stood in line for one hour at the post office today, I truly had to marvel at the notion that my tax dollars will be siphoned off into a merry go round of litigation over the offended (you can only imagine where this will go) instead of building roads, hospitals, and providing police and fireman.

And, people actually think that they can litigate the world into tolerance.

I heard you ain’t got no couth.

This guy loved genitalia and never missed an opportunity to attach heavy duty four letter words in his findings as he drooled and lisped his way across a canvas.

I asked him if was possible to enjoy the art without seeing all the “hidden meaning” and if it was possible to deliver the lecture without resorting to sandbox potty language.

Being the only conservative in the seminar, I was quickly apprised of the fact that I was the last living specimen of Victorian repression.

I think that liberals have adopted abusive and crude language as a substitute for the Marquess of Queensbury Rules. (There is a German adage which roughly translated is: They try to pee with the tall dogs.)

Yep, I agree.

And it is nice to be able to disagree without having the discussion break down into a saloon brawl, as is the case elsewhere on the net. I’m not the most “couth” person on the planet (as my very patient wife can testify) but I do find rational discussion fulfilling.

So….. what kind of coffee?

Coupled with the delightful pieces that LaShawn writes, it is a part of my day that I look forward to, like a good cup of coffee and even better conversation.

Even the liberal sites that allow a conservative to post are so vile and rife with ad hominems that most conservatives who are actually seeking something which resembles a conversation, simply give up.

A very liberal professor told me quite sadly one day that the same dynamic occurs in college and he feels helpless to stem the tide. He said that conservative students come to his class very open, eager to learn and make friends, but are treated with such vitriol for their opinions that they clam up really quickly and shrink inside of themselves. He said that it would take enormous courage for most of them to handle the backlash if they merely admitted that they were pro-life, much less rejecting socialism or global warming. Then he looked at me sadly and said that he used to think of those who shared many of his viewpoints as tolerant and he wonders what happened.

Thomas is right about one thing. There are some people who absolutely cannot handle hearing opinions (or facts) that don’t reflect their own preconceived notions. His only mistake comes in assuming that this is even possible for a conservative. It would take an incredible amount of effort to isolate yourself from any type of ‘liberal’ dogma -media, mass communication, academia, etc. – all are dominated

I’ve also noticed that one must search far a wide to find a ‘liberal’ site that allows conservatives to comment..quite a few of them ban anyone not spouting the party line. I’d challenge anyone to attempt it on DailyKos, Huffington, etc.

For some time I have been an active participant on “liberal” websites and have been baffled by the constant accusation that conservatives are incredibly mean-spirited and vile. In the light of the obscenity, vitriol, and routine vicious ad hominem responses, that are endemic in the discourse of the left, I have been seeking an answer for the extraordinary dissonance.

This morning, a frequent “leftie” poster wrote the following response to a statement concerning Hillary: “[I will] be reasonable until Democrats, liberals, others I agree with, or I am attacked by those with whom I diagree, I will measure my words carefully. But, once attacked, I will respond in kind.When you start deleting the attacks by bad and evil conservatives, then I will moderate my tone as well.”

Here is the statement that so incensed her and “made her feel attacked.”

“May God help us, and the entire free world, if this person [Hillary] gets elected.This is a bad person, not fit to serve as president; and backed by evil interests that are not friendly to either America or freedom.”

Wilma responds;”I look forward to watching you delete my post while allowing thr [sic] rabid right free reign to attack Democrats and liberals. “As a 50 year old housewife, I’ve been attacked for being a Democrat by people like Byron, Relic, Bildo, Puken, Merton, Rove, Bush, and Cheney for half of my life.”

Rove, Bush, and Cheney???????

Well, the point is that she is not that unusual and it hit me that she can no longer distinguish between a personal attack and a difference of opinion. It’s really rather extraordinary.

Tragically, her thinking has become so collectivized that she can no longer tell the difference between a negative comment about a political figure and an attack upon her person.

It’s almost as if they have merged into one.

Most of her posts are punctuated with “Everyone knows it” or “the polls say” or “the rest of the world is on my side” or “two thirds of Americans” or “the people have spoken and rejected your ideas”

She can no longer allow her ideas to stand on their own and frantically grasps for proof that her opinion is bolstered by numbers for it is only then when she can stand firm. After all, if one’s truth is no better than another’s, then it is probably better to have more folks truth buttressing one’s own.

At the end of the day, this is the last person on the planet that I want to give the power to make rules about how I live my life.

I also see a problem with folks who use Tivo to pre-record their viewing choices. Why, they could record a political commentary program and fast forward through the viewpoints they didn’t want to hear. I guess we will have to outlaw Tivo. After all, it is the only way we can be “fair”.

Honestly, I just can’t believe that there are people who want to give the government even more power than it already has.

I wonder if the folks who support bringing back the Fairness Doctrine would still support it if Air America’s ratings were sky high and Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Bill O’Reilly, etc. were having trouble finding an audience.

Welcome to the party.

Perhaps you will have the time to read posts 1 through 178, beginning with #1 and progressing sequentially.

The answer to your question lies therein: frequently.