Twice in recent days on this program we've had some testy conversations. I wasn't here for one earlier in the week where some language was used that we normally do NOT use on the air or try not to. If you heard the first live feed at 9:00am you would have experienced it, but not in the later "feeds" that go out to stations that play the show later in the day.

Today, we had a bit of conflict between our guests reacting to the Obama health speech. Democratic strategist Steve Hildebrand, deputy campaign manager for the Obama campaign, has been in the news of late for arguing that Obama has NOT done enough to advance the issues he campaigned on, health care among them. Check it out.

We also had our regulars: Matthew Continetti of The Weekly Standard, Reihan Salam of The New America Foundation, and Pamela Gentry of BET to give us their take. But things got a bit heated — or frosty — when Hildrebrand addressed Continetti and Salaam directly to say that, in essence, conservative critics have not a leg to stand on when it comes to critiquing the President because they have bankrupted the country, gotten us into two wars and failed to do anything to address the problems they are now complaining about. Reihan and Continetti took exception, as you might guess.

I think all were quite civil and met my standards for civil discourse. But what about you? Did we stay in our lane or not?

This matters to me because we live in a time when people seem to think they can say anything to anybody about anything. For example, Rep. Joe Wilson shouted at the President during the speech last night (he "apologized" a few hours later):

And we believe that the only way to have a real democracy is to have civil conversations.

Let me know if I could have handled this one better, and if so how.