I agree with you strictly on the politicians part and the corporate media who should know better.

But there was a reason for the First Amendment. It was there so that you could bitch without fear of being arrested by the government.

One of my favorite letters, if I could find it, I remember reading Jefferson's response to Adams on the issue of mudslinging. Adams at the time was horrified by the treatment of politicians and suggested the media "respect" them. Jefferson in his letter basically reminded Adams for the entire reason for the Revolution. They were prior to the revolution, subject to the tribalism of the King in all aspects of their lives.

In a very literal sense to me the Declaration of Independence was a polite "fuck you" to the King. It was as offensive as a glove slap and challenge to a dual.

I hate Beyond's economic views, and I know he hates mine. I think if someone wants to say "fuck Obama" or "fuck Romney" they should not be arrested for it.

HAVING SAID THAT, I do think though, this division is corporate feed and politics feed. The people with the power care more about dividing us to maintain power, than they do about caring.

I am not a fan of PC and I don't think we should become thought police to maintain civility. But the division is money feed. So this is how I like to counter this crap.

Back in 2000 when Bush one the left cried that they were robbed. I can pontificate till the cows come home how a recount wouldn't have changed it, but they should have allowed it anyway. Still not my point though, I am getting to it.

There is a psychology of the loser. When your party or club is out of power, you have more of a feeling of things are going to change for the worse or forever. I certainly felt that the Bush years were horrible. Now that Obama is president the Republicans are feeling what I felt.

Now here is where the founders come in. If anyone on any side of an issue thinks "the end is near" , then why do we have separate powers? Why do we have oversight? And why do we have checks and balances? Because times change and powers shift over long periods. As much as I thought the Bush years sucked, they ended, because of the Constitutional ban on absolute power.

So the issue isn't blasphemy or ridicule. The issue is context and who and where it is being done. Those with power are NOT doing a good job "letting the reader decide". But when people have the noble goal of civility, it cannot be done by force of law. Beyond likes to bitch about me and I like to bitch about him. And I don't want his rights taken away and I am sure he doesn't want mine taken away.

There was a day when Republicans and Democrats disagreed and it was not a gang. There was a time when Reporters were not pundits offering opinions, like Walter Cronkite. And I agree that we need to get back there.

But I don't want either side ever to get to the point of Adams in thinking that being offended should not happen to people in power. Otherwise any political party, or individual politician or celebrity or religious person could pool money to silence dissent, and no one wants that.

 You talk about how we "lost" our ability to be rational and not have venomous polarization. I suggest that we have never had the ability. A quick survey of political cartoons, editorials and newspaper reporting will show that bitter partisan divides, outright dishonesty and us vs. them win at all costs mentality has frequently been a part of our political culture. Indeed, the only thing that seems to be new is the idea that we should "all just get along" or bring a "new tone" to DC, ideas that are solely promoted by the party in power and for some reason politicians are worried about being seen as attacking their opponent personally, even though most data suggests that personal attacks are effective at winning campaigns. 

The presidential campaign between Jefferson and Adams was extremely hyperbolic and negative, especially when compared to most campaigns today. The president of Yale said if Jefferson won the election

http://www.lehrmaninstitute.org/history/1800.html

Sounds a lot like Michael Savage to me...

Throughout history our politics has been similar, especially when we approach times when our country is making crucial long term decisions. Right now is such a time and healthcare is one of those decisions. Is it over the top? Sure, the country probably isn't going to end in our lifetimes whichever way we ultimately go. The anarchists, federalists and capitalists that bemoaned the success of the progressive movement in the early 1900's as the end of the country were wrong in the sense that 100 years later we are still here and still arguing very much same general principles. However, on the other hand they were right in that our country would be very different today if the federal government didn't set up the large bureaucracy, the social safety net and federalize many responsibilities previously left to the states.

The Supreme Court decision was another of those moments that will have a huge effect on our lives and our system of government. Obamacare isn't going to be repealed, the political support to do so simply doesn't exist and in another 4-8 years it will become so entrenched that repealing it would run into the same problems as attempting to repeal social security. For better or worse, our country has chosen a direction and we are more or less stuck with it. Maybe a few reforms will pass in the future, but little more. 

I try not to be hyperbolic but sometimes fail, I can generally avoid the "us vs. them" mentality because as a libertarian, my side never wins- it is much easier to criticize when your dog isn't in the fight and therefore can never do anything wrong. However, when I was in the republican party the us vs them mentality did affect me, just like any other game winning in politics is fun and there really isn't much better than being at an election night party when the results come out in your favor. Politics is messy, dishonest, brutal street brawling and it always will be. The "high" road is a myth pushed by politicians in a position where they don't have to fight yet.