Two talking heads sit down to dinner, one on the left and one on the right, to talk about politics and other issues.
"My views are more just than yours," says the left. "I believe in respecting individual rights, choices and liberties."
"I beg to differ," says the right. "My views are based on morality and practicality. They clearly supersede yours because they provide the safest and most effective society."
Thus, the debate begins rather civilly, with both talking heads doing what they do best - twisting the truth with spinster precision.
Each believes that he is the ultimate spokesman for his respective side. Never wrong. Not a chance.
Because of the ratings opportunities, all the major media networks televise the dinner event. Viewers want to see the two opposing sides collide, the producers think. Drama.
Cameras surround the dinner table, with lights in the eyes of the two pundits. They both have sweat on their foreheads; they both stick to their political guns.
"I don't understand how you can talk about protecting individual rights when you allow illegal aliens to enter this country, having no right to do so," says the right.
"I don't understand how you think that our immigration policies don't encourage immigrants to cross over," says the left. "It's the system, not the people, that need to be fixed."
Then left head says something else. "Besides, what gives you the right to tell someone they can't come into the country?"
"My American citizenship and the fact that I pay taxes and contribute to society lets me say whatever I damn well please about people who have no right to live in this country," says the right head.
"Who gave you the right to come here in the first place?" asks the left.
The tension in the room builds with each talking head's comments. Civil discussion turns ugly, as neither talking head convinces the other of moving any ground on his positions. They resort to name-calling.
"God gave me that right," says the right head. "But I guess a heathen wouldn't know much about that.
"No, but an arrogant bigot would," said the left head. "Maybe if you had ever experienced first hand what it's like to be poor, you would have more sympathy for less fortunate people."
"Maybe if less fortunate people worked a little bit harder, they could end up living well off, and do so legally as well," said the right.
"How can you punish someone for never having an equal opportunity?" asks the left.
"How can you allow America to be taken over by Mexican workers?" retorts the right.
Eventually, each talking head keeps spinning his wheels, arguing back and forth with the other, but never making progress toward a real-world solution.
"If you and everyone like you don't appreciate the moral foundations this country was built on, then you can move," says the right.
"The foundations of this country rely on tolerance, acceptance and freedom," says the left. "Equality for all. That's why America is the greatest country."
"America is the greatest country because we make it the greatest country," says the right. "We protect our way of life, even in the face of the world's most threatening dangers."
"You're wrong!" they both bellow.
The dinner ends, with the debate having achieved relatively nothing. The two men leave without shaking hands.
Oddly enough, at what was supposed to be a dinner, neither talking head ever touched his food. It lies in the middle of the table.
But sadly, neither talking head ever came close to touching it.
Ty Thompson is a journalism senior. Any resemblance to real-life talking heads is purely coincidental. Email: tyler.w.thompson@asu.edu.
