Month: October 2008

Could you imagine a US Presidential campaign where one side said of another that by winning their opponent “were radicals who would murder their opponents, burn churches, and destroy the country”? How about a loser in a Presidential election that calls his opponent, “Judas of the West”? Maybe a political operative that would forge a letter to a foreign government and said government’s response would destroy a President? Or, most famously, a handful of men try to spy on their opponents and get caught destroying the man they supported?

Sadly, a lack of civility in American political discourse has been the norm in our history and not just a recent addition in our troubled times. Though sometimes it just doesn’t seem that way. In Reconcilable Differences, Ronald Brownstein writes:

From the final years of Bill Clinton’s presidency through Bush’s two bruising terms, American politics has been polarized as sharply as at any point in the past century. Party-line voting in Congress hasn’t been so prevalent since the days of William McKinley and Theodore Roose­velt. In the history of modern polling, Republican and Democratic voters have never held such disparate views of a president’s job performance as they do of Bush’s.

But as the 2008 Presidential Campaign comes to a close, we are once again examining how we got to this place and, more importantly, how we get out of it. Over the past few days, I hope one has seen on Delaware Liberal (we’re having internal debates as well) an examination of our political discourse.

But what is civilitiy? And what is meant by political civility?