engaging someone politely and professionally is usually more likely to change their mind about something

A few things about this:

(1) I always find it odd when people come and lecture me about incivility given that I avoid almost completely the conventions which civility-shrews complain of most -- cursing, or refusing to refer to people by their formal names and titles (using nicknames or insults instead), or using slang, etc. And while (like everyone else in this regard) I'm not perfect, I try always to focus on the argument made and not personal attributes (physical appearance, details about private lives, etc.).

Nonetheless, the civility-monitors periodically complain about my "tone." What they're really complaining about is that they don't like their views to be aggressively criticized. They feel hurt when that happens, so they equate that in their mind with a personal attack. They want their views to be honored and respected, even when -- in my view -- their views don't deserve honor and respect.

(2) One of the vital points, in my view, is that there is not "two sides to every issue." The U.S. had no cause to attack Iraq. Torture is wrong. Bush officials committed felonies by eavesdropping on Americans without warrants. Period.

Anyone who thinks that "civility" means extending respect to repugnant and plainly false arguments doesn't know that the term means. If that's what "civility" means, I think there's too much of it, not too little of it.

(3) I know it's conventional wisdom, but I actually dispute the notion that the best way to persuade people is by speaking gently to them and winning them over with kind and incremental advocacy.

There are all different ways to persuade people. That is one way. But it's not the only way. Passionate, unyielding and emphatic advocacy -- backed up by sound logical reasoning and amply documented claims -- also works, as any trial lawyer will tell you.

People often resist hearing views that are different than theirs but if you make the case in a way that forces them to know they're wrong, even if they don't want to think that, it's often as effective -- and sometimes more effective -- than a gentler form of faux-open-minded advocacy.

(4) Tommy would benefit from reviewing the vital -- and oft-overlooked -- distinction between incivility and indecency:

http://www.sadlyno.com/archives/2710.html

My favorite:

Torture is something they do... those dark-skinned, uncivilized African tribesmen.

-- elijahs

Gonzales and Mukasey indulge in such breathtaking hypocrisy because they can. Possible antidote: Greenwald. Best wishes for 2009, Glenn! Also to all you libertarians, librarians and liberians out there: happy new year!

While Sysprog and so many other commenters do a great job on UT, there is no one who has so relentlessly and magnificently dedicated himself to one issue- TORTURE. His actions on and off UT are motivated solely by his wonderful humanity and dedication to the rule of law. He continually amazes me with his vast knowledge and sound arguments. No one has taught and motivated me like ondelette. I hope you create such an award Jebbie and others who agree with me vote for the commenter who truly deserves MVC- ondelette.

The level of denial displayed by Gonzalez deserves a new entry in the manual of psychiatric disorders.

Readers may recall that the Daily Show sent a correspondent up to Wasilla shortly after Palin's selection, to take the pulse of the real Americans there. Relevant in the present context is the fellow in the bar who explained to the interviwer that the real victims of 9/11 attacks were average guys [Joes?] like himself. He conceded under questioning that people actually died in New York, but didn't recant his position that the serious consequences were to people outside the area, like himself.

This level of self-absorption, whether by a former AG or a fellow in a bar who presumably voted for George Bush as a prospective libation companion, deserves a bit more analysis by credentialed medical types, in my humble opinion.

What he said.

There is a direct link between the Iran-Contra We Are Above The Law psyche and the current administration.

His name is Elliot Abrams. A founding member of the Project for a New American Century, Abrams was in the thick of I/C and is currently Deputy National Security Advisor.

He was convicted of crimes for his I/C activities but was pardoned by President H.W. Bush.

If anyone is interested, I've linked the Wiki site covering him. His history is enough to make a sane person puke.

I second RMP's nomination of ondelette. Vote early, vote often, dead or alive. Help preserve our democracy.

In addition to the others already mentioned, I nominate "pow pow" for factual density and elucidation, and "Little Brother" for literary quality.

Is this an end-of-the-year thing?

I think it a very BAD idea to to single out a contributor for popular acclaim.

That having been said, I must insist on a tie between sysprog and ondelette. Honorable mention for pow wow. And what's a WOG, anyway?

Sorry for the O/T Glenn.

@Glenn, BTW, would you consider doing a follow-up on loose ends generated throughout '08? Like, whatever happened w/ that nitwit Col. Boyle? (was that his name?), and did you ever get any any response from the Senators the other day (see, I've forgotten the topic already)? and what's happening w/ Accountability NOW/ and the like...?

And no, thanks, I don't need a sandwich.

To avoid cluttering up this Palace of Elegant, Polite, and Thoughtful Discourse with important stuff, nominations for the oh, so Prestigious Wog Awards will be counted only if they are made via the email link at the Wog.

Thank you for your cooperation.

link @ sig

"I always find it odd when people come and lecture me about incivility"

If you interpreted that as a lecture, then my apologies. It was an observation, nothing more. I think I also added a comment in there that indicated that its to each his own.

In any case, its your blog, you can talk to people however you like. I get about 9 visitors a month to my blog, so you'd be a fool to follow my advice. As anyone can see, if you're going to talk about Palestine to me, you're not likely to get very genteel discourse. I doubt I ever change anyone's mind, but that's just the way it comes out.