The end of civil discourse.

I've long thought that the Republican method of argument was to call names rather than offer a reasoned response of any kind. Rep. Wilson, now celebrated as a hero by the right for screaming out at our President, calling him a name, a liar, was either making a desperate attempt to call attention to himself, or having a temper tantrum. As always, the President was gracious.

I wish there had been more coverage of the tea-party convention last Saturday. I watched in vain for a shot from the air of teeming thousands covering the national mall (the million man march came to mind). The crowd was called alternately "thousands" and "tens of thousands." So how many were there? Apparently not that many. I was distressed by what they looked like. They were old. They were fat. (Older and fatter than me even). When interviewed they seemed confused. They didn't even have talking points. Maybe that was the liberal media trying to make them look bad. They were name callers.

If someone says something you disagree with, don't bother to explain your position, simply call them a name. Any name will do. A Nazi. A Communist. (Does any conservative know that those ideologies are extreme examples of right and left? Is there anyway to represent both at the same time?) An Indonesian Welfare Thug? Say that one is a discussion ender.

The conservatives could not elect a President. They cannot organize a march on Washington. Is there any reasonable person that can put together an argument against any initiative by the Democratic Party. I'd love to see ideas, discourse, and argument replace, ranting, posters, and tantrums.

I feel that the current political situation can be summed up as the party of ideas versus the party of temper tantrums. (It is almost the debate of reason against emotion). I pray that reason wins.