Matthew 10:16
Member # 003
- Thread starter
- #21
My preferred drink is water spiked with pixie dust. 
You are right in a sense. The process is adversarial by its nature. Same as my profession. However, my point is the process as it is presently being carried out is not in the best interest of our country & citizenry. And I would also argue that those that engage in the present style of rhetoric also do a disservice to not only themselves, but also to their party as well. Granted there are going to be those that relish & enjoy that kind of behavior, but I believe that there are a substantial number of silent observers who shake their heads in shame & disapproving amazement. I wonder what the rest of the world thinks of our present style of political discourse. Where will it all end. Are we headed for armed confrontations to settle our differences like the Sunnis & Shiites or the protestants & catholics?
Even though the process is adversarial by its nature, I believe that it does not have to be carried out in the present atmosphere of combative political discourse. See my previous comments herein before posted. We can be adversarial/oppositional without being hateful, ridiculing, insulting, vitriolic, caustic, inflammatory, incendiary, derisive, divisive, rude, discourteous, insensitive, ugly, mean spirited, vehement, blusterous, agitating, obstinate, obstreperous, vengeful or retaliatory.
You are right in a sense. The process is adversarial by its nature. Same as my profession. However, my point is the process as it is presently being carried out is not in the best interest of our country & citizenry. And I would also argue that those that engage in the present style of rhetoric also do a disservice to not only themselves, but also to their party as well. Granted there are going to be those that relish & enjoy that kind of behavior, but I believe that there are a substantial number of silent observers who shake their heads in shame & disapproving amazement. I wonder what the rest of the world thinks of our present style of political discourse. Where will it all end. Are we headed for armed confrontations to settle our differences like the Sunnis & Shiites or the protestants & catholics?
Even though the process is adversarial by its nature, I believe that it does not have to be carried out in the present atmosphere of combative political discourse. See my previous comments herein before posted. We can be adversarial/oppositional without being hateful, ridiculing, insulting, vitriolic, caustic, inflammatory, incendiary, derisive, divisive, rude, discourteous, insensitive, ugly, mean spirited, vehement, blusterous, agitating, obstinate, obstreperous, vengeful or retaliatory.
