Civil Discourse and Politics--Oxymoron?

I find it very disheartening as I see Liberals being as vitriolic as Neo-Cons were and are. Oh, it seems to be a different brand of arrogance sometimes, but arrogance by any other name stinks the same. I am unabashedly liberal, but I feel it is extraordinarily important that I listen to the warnings of fiscal conservatives.

I don't want to see anyone slip through any cracks, anywhere. Clearly that isn't possible. What bothers me is that when conservatives — those who are not simply talking heads trying to sink the Democratic Party — speak their concerns about and disagreements with the current Administration's policies and actions of Congress, too often the response from the left is all sound and fury, signifying next to nothing.

At first, I felt, well, FINALLY we get to speak. I even wallowed a bit in Keith Oberman's and Rachel Maddow's shows. Then I felt bored. Then I felt angry because I didn't think they were a whole lot better than their counterparts on Fox. I went to Twitter to follow some folks from Morning Joe and once again realized that Liberals were blindly attacking a show that really DOES offer discourse on both sides.

I want to know what conservatives fear in the social agenda because I recognize we DO have a tendency to give away the store. I want to hear an honest discussion of the history of this country's use of torture in the last eight years. I am afraid that I assume there is and has been lying on both sides of the aisle, in the CIA, and in the Presidency. I am concerned about issues of law and what constitutes torture and who allowed what when.The conversation devolves, however, into whether or not someone was informed after the fact and who lied or didn't remember what when. We then lose the real conversation about our country and whether or not we were operating under our own rule of law and the international treaties we have signed! We have the Left in the knee-jerk response of defending our own, the Right doing the same. The Liberals cloak things in four-syllable words and sarcasm. Keith and Rachel are prime examples. Are they any less biased than their Fox counterparts?

Feh. We don't "talk" as neighbors, a point I touched on in an earlier post. Better to wait for a nice, juicy confrontation. Pat Buchanan mourns the days of some civility and bipartisan work in Congress. Whether or not I agree with his ideas, I agree with that sentiment. He does not get personal and he argues points, not personalities. He can laugh at himself AND his party.

How can we find a solution to the worsening health care situation if people refuse to listen as well as talk? How can we find a way out of the two wars we are in? Or find longterm economic solutions for our country? I think the Liberals need to rise to our own PR. We were excluded from the conversation for a long time, despite the cries about the "liberal media." Just because we finally have power, it doesn't justify behavior that sinks to the lowest common denominator.

Okay. This was a rant. I'm just ashamed of many professed Liberals, who talk about social justice, but who do not want to listen to proponents of another view. Not of my President, nor Joe--for all his foot in mouth faux pas tendencies--nor our Secretary of State. I think Administration officials are taking their cue From the President for civility. If only the congressional politicians and "regular people" could do likewise.

Politics in our country needs some serious listeners, not just serious talkers.