tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8078379512095504946.post6878047751466573496..comments2024-03-26T06:17:49.527-07:00Comments on Had Enough Therapy?: The Civility TrapStuart Schneidermanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12784043736879991769noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8078379512095504946.post-11539671011121430092010-12-04T07:46:45.892-08:002010-12-04T07:46:45.892-08:00Is it just me or has anyone else noticed that thos...Is it just me or has anyone else noticed that those who want civility are the ones least likely to have given it. This seems to hold true for respect, manners, courtesy et al.<br />These demands for, fill in the blank, almost always come from those who have abused others and are now being pummeled themselves by the very same tactics they used. One cannot state that, "I don't have to compromise because I won." and then expect that when conditions change that those one ignored now have to compromise.<br />No one should expect to get more than they give no matter the position currently held.Dennisnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8078379512095504946.post-85323103611640423992010-12-03T15:10:29.405-08:002010-12-03T15:10:29.405-08:00"Barbara Bush has a right to her opinion. And..."Barbara Bush has a right to her opinion. And she has a right to express it in piquant prose. But doesn’t Sarah Palin have a right to respond? If she chooses to respond, does that allow Joe Scarborough to fling rhetorical dirt at her, all the while thinking that he is a master of civility?"<br /><br />Well, it seems Karl Rove seems to think Palin didn't have the right to respond to Mrs. Bush.<br /><br />http://hotair.com/archives/2010/12/03/karl-rove-to-palin-and-huckabee-stop-whining-about-the-bushes-already/<br /><br />Funny coming from Rove considering that he admits he failed GWB (and the country IMO) when he let lies stand concerning his boss. <br /><br />And now he thinks Sarah should eat it w/o complaint. <br /><br />Great piece, Stuart! I always enjoy reading your blog!Marshnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8078379512095504946.post-65180048654615109462010-12-03T13:43:09.318-08:002010-12-03T13:43:09.318-08:00A couple of things come to mind. First, by calldi...A couple of things come to mind. First, by callding themselves the No Label group (party) they are essentially neutering themselves. They are either not willing or are scared of identifying themselves with any thing. Now, maybe this is the objective. From a non-association, they can attack at will, all the while claiming not be, "neutral." Or, as you write, civil. I also expect this so be seen by most people as a veneer to further the liberal PR machine. Since they are also essentailly nothing though, caused by their own wanted definition, I suspect they will amount to little but more noise.wooftynoreply@blogger.com