Is it even possible to quantify the irony and hypocrisy of Moeller and Laird on their latest effort?

For John Laird to write about "civil discourse" is not unlike Josef Goebbels writing about democracy: for both, it's a subject they've heard of... but really know practically nothing about.

For Jim Moeller to weigh in is not unlike Stalin complaining about the Nazis.

ANYTHING Laird writes about on the subject as he judges others is, of course, the height of hypocritical buffoonery. For LAIRD to claim OTHERS engage in "La la la ... I can't hear you" after his years of leftist spew wherein he rarely misses the opportunity to ignore, blow off, ridicule and insult those wise enough to trash his positions is the epitome of being a hypocrite.  In short, Laird has precisely zero room to talk... but like most hypocrites, he doesn't care.

When Moeller hits the keyboard and tries to spin the efforts to ignore the constituency while simultaneously decrying the "lack of civility" given his decade plus history of attacking, insulting, belittling and berating tends to show the sickness that infects most of those on the left: the sickness of arrogant self-delusion.

I don't always agree with them (Moeller babbles) or their beliefs and to disagree is not "refusing to listen" or "arrogance" or "knowing best" or "campaign contributions" or a "personal agenda". It's an honest opinion based on what I see are some pretty solid facts/reasons - if you'd like to hear them. Some don't and are the subject of Mr. Laird's opinion piece today. Others are courteous and listen politely and walk away muttering under their breath and then still there are those that ask other questions and are curious and want to know more why I think this way or that way - and I want to know more from them so we both learn from that exchange.

This from a man LEGENDARY for his attacks and arrogance towards those he disagrees with?

Hypocrisy gained a new name today: the dual label of Laird... and Moeller.