Why has discourse in this country become so divisive and nasty?

Because the Democrats have allowed their party to be taken over by liberal extremists and that has caused them to lose complete control of all three branches of government for the first time in a half century. When you lose power after having it for that long you tend to complain a bit. Not to say that Republicans have been innocent in the stupidity but it's mainly liberal Democrats who cause all the fuss.

I guarantee that if Democrats would kick Michael Moore, Al Franken, and the like from positions of authority they would absolutely be able to regain control of the House, at least. But they won't, Democrat leaders LOVE to suck-up to liberal extremists just as much as Republicans love to suck-up to religious extremists.

NOTE TO "Moirae" ... I'd LOVE to debate you point for point on abortion. Feel free to email me if you're interested.

Discourse in this country has always been divisive and this is to be expected as we are a very diverse culture. I trace the nastiness in our discourse to a number of factors one of which sticks out. This occurred in 1984 in the House of Representatives when Newt Gingrich questioned the patriotism of a number of democrats before an empty hall late at night. House speaker O'Neill made the point during a full house debate that it was the lowest thing he had witnessed in 32 years of service. Gingrich had achieved his goal and the days of public nastiness by the republicans began. Gingrich explained this as a way to get the media's attention because they love confrontation and through confrontation you can educate (catapult the propaganda to) the public. Newt went on to outline the ways in which republicans can bastardize the word liberal and to spin issues in their favor by framing an issue in republican terms. Tactics which they have not abandoned even though they have abandoned the architect.

Now, we arrive at the present and it seems as if people are upset that democrats, liberals and progressives are fighting back. This is textbook framing and spinning by the masters of propaganda and if it wasn't so blatantly ludicrous it would be sad because the ones complaining are the ones who started the tactic and I might add the ones who are not debating the issues but the ones who are the loudest in calling names and ridiculing the other side as "liberals" instead of defending their positions. I will add that I don't believe we have even seen the tip of this iceberg as most of the fight right now is by the ever increasing liberal blogosphere. When it reaches the national discourse then you will truly see "nastiness" because there are a lot of people who are pissed off about the direction the republicans have taken this country in the last six years.

"I guarantee that if Democrats would kick Michael Moore, Al Franken, and the like from positions of authority they would absolutely be able to regain control of the House, at least." What authority, exactly, do these two men hold? Michael Moore is a liar and terrible film maker. Al Franken is an intelligent, witty talk show host. Neither one of them hold authority over the Democratic party.

For the question, it's basically just this site. People hide behind their avatars or silly pictures and view themselves as untouchable. Most wouldn't say the nasty things they type face to face, I don't believe.

Hawks and Doves have never gotten along, and they don't get along today. Both groups have thier party though, the democrats serve the doves, and the republicans serve the hawks, by and large, even though sometimes members of both groups have been intensely dissatisfied by their, ahem, 'representation'.

Fraud and corruption are frequent topics of public debate,

taxation is also a topic, and people will argue til the cows come home on these things. War's a topic, immigration's a topic,

criticism and dissent are all a part of it. What's amazing to me though is that the GOP gained the majority control and then basically wasted their advantage in a lot of ways. Mark that one down to fraud and incompetence...

Dem are backed to the wall. They have no ammo to bring to a political debate so the fall back on time-worn innuendo and lies.

Well, this just kind of ticks us decent folk off.

Like this gal that wants to debate abortion. That's already been decided by the Supreme Court. The Hispanic Caucus of the Democratic Party wants to pardon millions of criminals, but that's ignored. Get my drift?

THANK YOU! I am sooooo sick of 1 party or the other, screw parties, fight for America!

I personally think Bush and his agenda of making it if you don't agree with what I'm doing, you're a traitor or a terrorist started it all. Then it just got picked up and ran with. Now I understand mud slinging, but what needs to be Understood that in our history, we are expected to stand and fight against what we disagree with. George Washington did it and based a Nation upon it. I'm not Bush bashing here either, I truly feel he's done some great things or come up with good concepts. But coming up with and implementing are very different.

We need to stop this party crap and work together for the good of America.

My issue is the systematic destruction of America by the Republicans who are obsessed with assaulting the United States Constitution's Bill of Rights.

They think they are entitled to all the wealth because somehow they are entitled and they don't care about anything but their pocketbook.

They also love to Blame the victim, the poor, who pays for "Free Enterprise" which is a misnomer!

Of course it's got to be the Republican's fault! I was waiting for that. It can't be the truthful, gracious, ready-to-discuss liberals of all kinds who refuse to discuss anything that doesn't start with "You're right!" At least you were able to hide your bias better than most of the liberals I've come in contact with here. Until you lose the accusations hidden under your so-called openness, nothing can be discussed.

Liberalism is an ideology, philosophy, and political tradition that holds liberty as the primary political value.[1] Broadly speaking, liberalism seeks a society characterized by freedom of thought for individuals, limitations on power, especially of government and religion, the rule of law, the free exchange of ideas, a market economy that supports relatively free private enterprise, and a transparent system of government in which the rights of minorities are guaranteed. In modern society, liberals favour a liberal democracy with open and fair elections, where all citizens have equal rights by law and an equal opportunity to succeed[2]. Liberalism rejected many foundational assumptions which dominated most earlier theories of government, such as the Divine Right of Kings, hereditary status, and established religion. Fundamental human rights that all liberals support include the right to life, liberty, and property. In many countries, "modern" liberalism differs from classical liberalism by asserting that government provision of some minimal level of material well-being takes priority over freedom from taxation. Liberalism has its roots in the Western Enlightenment, but the term now encompasses a diversity of political thought, with adherents spanning a large part of the political spectrum, from left to right. In the context of economics, the term "liberalism" refers to economic liberalism, which is associated with the political ideology of liberalism itself.

Yes,some moncrhromatic republican has excasserbated the rage.

Also, a combination of internet titilation and a higher standard of living has gone to peoples heads.

the religous right has also realized that if wveryone else can say what they will,they can to.So all of the junk under the surface has surfaced.

Give it about 20 years to cool off.