Boyd Matheson: Curing our contempt

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • OregonGirl Kaysville, UT
    May 18, 2017 4:04 p.m.

    "practice warm-heartedness. This is not to say that the answer to what ails our nation, our communities or personal relationships is a big old group hug "

    I agree wholeheartedly - while being civil won't help fix everything it will make it so we CAN work towards fixing things. Let's first build a decent shelter so we can have the necessary conversations. Otherwise, the storm could destroy our nation.

    I helped to organize a Constitution Rally just a week ago where we gave an example of how people from differing viewpoints can agree that the Constitution gives us all a voice, and government a great framework. Let's be civil and figure things out together.

  • JoeCapitalist2 Orem, UT
    May 18, 2017 9:41 a.m.

    Daedalus, Stephen: "Democrats do not control the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives, and are not the party that nominated the unfit man is now precariously and temporarily perched atop the Executive Branch."

    Right now that is the case, but in 2009 it was different. The Democrats were firmly in control of both houses of Congress and had just elected a far-left president from their party. They did NOTHING to try and stem that power shift farther to the left. In fact, they accelerated it, by pushing every far-left agenda item Obama put forward. There is a reason why the voters have thrown many of them out of office on election day.

    The same may happen to the GOP in future elections if they follow the Dems example.

    Tyler D: "Now finally after decades of “playing by the rules” (and attitude almost totally absent on the Right) Democrats are beginning to wade into swamp..."

    Give me a break. Democrats have never 'played by the rules' unless they made the rules to suit themselves. They are neck deep in the swamp and have been forever. Try taking a look in that mirror yourself.

  • cavetroll SANDY, UT
    May 18, 2017 9:22 a.m.

    @ 2 Bits

    " I wonder what my liberal friends who attack people (especially Republicans in general) with such contempt and bad stereotypes, feel about what he said about contempt.
    I know my Democrat friends and Liberal Friends and Progressive friends are just as "good" as I am. But I don't get the same feeling back from them. They seem to feel superior, and full of contempt for people who don't agree with them (politically)."

    There are more than a few Conservatives on here who also attack people with stereotypes and hatred. Calling a person a "snowflake" is just one example. Some of the liberal leaning people also don't get the feeling of being "good." There are many examples from both sides of the political discussion where they demean the other side. All parties need to step back and take a long look in the mirror.

  • Daedalus, Stephen ARVADA, CO
    May 17, 2017 12:27 p.m.

    @JoeCapitalist: "...And yet not a word about Democrats and liberals taking back their party and power"

    Correct.

    Do you want to make a guess as to why that is?

    Not a trick question.

    Democrats do not control the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives, and are not the party that nominated the unfit man is now precariously and temporarily perched atop the Executive Branch.

    200 "radical leftists" who yell and scream at a Chaffetz town hall meeting to hold Trump accountable will not get his attention like 20 phone calls from lifelong salt-of-earth conservative Republicans who donated and volunteered for each of his campaigns.

    Chaffetz -- and every other GOP politician elected to the safest seats -- can be sure that for every loyal supporter who takes the time to call his office with that message, there are at least 10 more who share their views. Those polite inquiries are the dead-canaries in the coal-mines where Trump's enablers have been toiling.

    Those conservative Republicans still exist. Perhaps some Democrats would prefer to wait for the 2018 mid-terms to flip the Senate or House, but Americans really need something sooner than that.

  • Tyler D Prescott, AZ
    May 17, 2017 9:10 a.m.

    @NoNamesAccepted – “You've asked the wrong question and made the wrong assertion.”

    Let me explain why my question was precisely the right one.

    Since the Reagan Revolution, Democrats have by and large engaged in civil discourse (a few nitwits on college campuses notwithstanding) even as emboldened Republicans have ramped up their vitriol and naked power grabs (e.g., impeach Clinton, obstruct Obama, steal a Supreme Court seat, etc.).

    You may not agree with the editorial columns in the NY Times but they are simply part of the marketplace of ideas.

    Now finally after decades of “playing by the rules” (and attitude almost totally absent on the Right) Democrats are beginning to wade into swamp, no doubt driven by the election of arguably the most immature, morally flawed and unfit person ever to be elected to high office.

    So now for the Right to decry our contempt and make calls for civility strikes me as an abusive husband, after decades of beating his wife, pleading for domestic tranquility the day after she finally decides to hit back.

    You want to change our toxic politics? Start by looking in the mirror.

  • JoeCapitalist2 Orem, UT
    May 17, 2017 8:27 a.m.

    Daedalus, Stephen: "Simply put, America really needs Republicans and conservatives to take back your party and power, asap."

    And yet not a word about Democrats and liberals taking back their party and power from the radical leftists that have gained control over it. Just stick your head in the sand and pretend that only the GOP has gone astray.

    Both parties need to keep the radical elements from their side from gaining too much influence. So let's stop pretending that only the party we personally oppose is to blame.

  • Daedalus, Stephen ARVADA, CO
    May 16, 2017 6:58 p.m.

    Trump is the antithesis of all that the Republican party and conservatives espoused a mere 30 years ago.

    But Trump did not simply just happen.

    Trump is the final block placed by the amoral political opportunists who have spent years cynically pushing, pulling and reshuffling conservative, moral, and religious principles and ideas like blocks in a reckless and rowdy game of Jenga, hooting and hollering as the tower starts to fall.

    My contempt for the 2017-era Republican party and 'conservatives' is not aimed at the individual rank-and-file, but rather the misleading ideas used to secure and retain those individuals' self-affiliation to an empty shell of an ideology.

    Perhaps surprisingly, I do not hold Trump in contempt as a person. As a close relative to someone who exhibits similar symptoms of destructive grandiosity, I have learned the hard way to recognize the humanity within such a disordered mind, even while acknowledging the real harm she caused to people I cared about. These are sad, lonely souls, deserving of pity and compassion, but from a safe distance.

    Simply put, America really needs Republicans and conservatives to take back your party and power, asap.

  • NoNamesAccepted St. George, UT
    May 16, 2017 5:28 p.m.

    @Tyler D: "Even if we grant that mainstream media “leans left” ... why did we not get .... guys who would make Joseph Goebbels proud?

    "This is what I find so troubling about today’s Right – whatever they decry from the other side they give us its evil twin to the Nth degree."

    You've asked the wrong question and made the wrong assertion.

    The proper question (for both sides) is this: Do you want to become what you despise in others?

    The proper assertion is that both sides ramp things up.

    News media leans left. So the right got talk radio.

    Talk radio is a shouting fest. But it is mostly confined to those who choose to listen. I rarely choose to listen. The public result of talk radio is mostly people voting for more conservative candidates.

    The left responds with outlandish and boorish behavior at town hall meetings that prevents congressmen from having reasonable discourse with their constituents.

    Where does this end?

    Both sides can always point to something the other side did to justify their own bad behavior.

    Which side will rein in their conduct? Who will stop the contempt and accept that deep political disagreement doesn't make the other guy evil?

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    May 16, 2017 2:38 p.m.

    @wasatchcascade,
    #1. It doesn't matter what color the last President was. They all deserve to not be treated with contempt (yes, even Trump and Bush).

    I disagreed with Obama and was disappointed he didn't accomplish many of the things he promised in his campaigns, but I always said he was a good man. Never had contempt for him as a person.

    Does the left have contempt for Trump? Did they have contempt for Bush over his decisions (Iraq, etc)?

    I'm sure there were some radicals who grew contempt for Obama and other Presidents. That's why I say we all need to learn the lesson in this letter.

    Can you acknowledge that your side needs to work on this? I've said I do. And Republicans obviously do.

    Blaming how you act today on how you think somebody else acted before.. solves nothing.

    Republicans can blame their contempt for Obama on your contempt for Bush. And that has been blamed on Republicans contempt for Clinton. That logic just guarantees the contempt goes on. We have to break the cycle or each election it will get worse (with partisans blaming their contempt on what happened to last President).

    BTW... Media treated Obama with less contempt than Trump and Bush IMO.

  • Twin Lights Louisville, KY
    May 16, 2017 2:32 p.m.

    I agree wholeheartedly with the need for civility. I hope we practice it now. I also hope we practiced it over the past 8 years. If not, perhaps we should review our actions and resolve to do better.

  • Irony Guy Bountiful, Utah
    May 16, 2017 2:27 p.m.

    All four of our congresspeople just voted to eliminate essential health benefits for all Americans.

    It is very difficult indeed to feel warm-hearted toward such cold-hearted individuals.

    On behalf of all Americans who suffer from diabetes, cancer, heart disease, cystic fibrosis, autism, and other "uninsurable" conditions, may I be forgiven for expressing a certain "contempt" for our heartless Congress?

  • The True Open Minded Mormon Draper, UT
    May 16, 2017 2:21 p.m.

    Dear Tyler: If you think Rush and Newt are to blame for the atmosphere of today, you've spent too much time on Whiskey Row. Take a nice long drive up Senator's Highway, at least up to Groom Creek, and let the breeze help you with your thought process on this one.

    I get it, the Left wants to blame Rush for telling the truth about them but as the Wikileaks posts proved, the DNC has always been corrupt and a lying machine to denigrate anyone and anything that gets in the way.

    ps, none of you who complain about Rush, Fox News etc even listen/watch them.
    pss, I don't either!

  • JoeCapitalist2 Orem, UT
    May 16, 2017 2:07 p.m.

    Impartial7: "I remember when that contempt started. It was when Rush Limbaugh ..."

    No. It did not start there. It didn't start with Obama, Bush, Clinton, or Reagan either. Civil discord and rhetoric has been around since before the start of our republic. You can pretend all you want that 'the other side started it' but until both sides decide to tone it down, it will only get worse.

    In the last election, I voted for the candidate that I considered the 'less of two evils'. Lots of other people decided that Hillary was somehow more acceptable. While I disagree with their vote, I respect their right to cast it. Looking at Trump, I can understand why many people don't like him even if I can't understand the hyperbolic hatred many have towards him. I don't think that the only possible reason someone could have voted for Hillary is because they must be racist, sexist, evil, and/or stupid either.

    It would be nice if more people on the left would think the same thing about me and my vote.

  • Tyler D Prescott, AZ
    May 16, 2017 1:59 p.m.

    @NoNamesAccepted – “But prior to talk radio, cable TV, and the Internet, what voice did conservative views have? The big networks have leaned leftward since at least the days of Walter Cronkite.”

    Even if we grant that mainstream media “leans left” (which is very different than claiming the media is Leftist) why did we not get new media that just “leans right” rather than guys who would make Joseph Goebbels proud?

    This is what I find so troubling about today’s Right – whatever they decry from the other side they give us its evil twin to the Nth degree.

    Media is slightly biased? Here, have 24/7 propaganda?

    Democrats remove filibuster on lower court nominees? Let’s destroy the entire process and as an added bonus, steal a Supreme Court seat.

    Hillary Clinton is a liar? Let’s elect the most prolific liar in the history of the Republic.

    Where are the Republicans who, when they identify a vice among their opponents, turn to the corresponding virtue as an antidote instead of embracing that same vice and giving it a steroid injection?

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    May 16, 2017 1:41 p.m.

    RE: "Ideas and the expression of those ideas can and should be treated with contempt, when those ideas deserve it"...
    ---
    Treat the idea with contempt (if you must) but not the person. That's something you do frequently. Treat the person with the idea with contempt. That's wrong.

    It's also wrong to extrapolate and apply your contempt to whole groups by association (ie Republicans, Conservatives, Religious people, etc).

    When you start grouping people, and treating them all with contempt (as we have seen in some bitterly contentious comments about people who voted for Trump)... you are on the wrong track.

    Treat the idea with contempt if you must, but not the person. And don't apply your contempt to whole groups, assuming they fit your stereotypes for their "Type" and assuming you know what they think or feel (because you have a convenient stereotype for them).

    People are not bad. Some ideas are bad.

    Keep your contempt to the idea.. Not the people. Is my suggestion.

    Do you deny some people have contempt for people because they voted for Chaffetz, or Trump? I know for a fact it happens. They have contempt for the person. Because they voted wrong.

    That's the point.

  • wasatchcascade ,
    May 16, 2017 1:16 p.m.

    Boyd, at it again, from his Sutherland stronghold, preaching the religion of conservatism but bathing it in the balm of cooperation as an antidote to contempt? America had a black president for 8 years, and while many could contest is ideology and views, his personal manner and his family were deemed respectful - and yet the right, with great gusto offered non-stop contempt toward the man. And now we have a POTUS who has in his pocket at times a crassness, vulgarity, impulsiveness and unspeakable lapse of judgment. But we, the citizenry are to keep our quiet, show restraint all the while contempt is a trigger for the other side (another past president). Respect, acceptance, flexibility, adaptability and attempt at understanding are laudatory mindsets I imagine, and a sense of "control" when we are upset. But tossing out contempt in the current national and state climate - well, one would have to fire the state Republican chair and how many other politicos, from the Governor to Senator Hatch and on down. Oh yes, tethering conservatism to theology and then quiet & a pause; until the side starts up their engines, and the volcanos roar?

  • Lagomorph Salt Lake City, UT
    May 16, 2017 12:43 p.m.

    One imagines that Mr. Matheson recently visited his attic, found that cardboard box with the embossed faux leather finish, undid the brass clasp to open the hinged lid, and withdrew a 7-inch vinyl disk that he then took to his den and placed on the vintage turntable at a brisk 45 rpm. From the speakers came the aspirational voices of Jim and Cathy Post of Friend & Lover singing “Reach Out of the Darkness.” It would indeed be so groovy now if we could sit down with people we did not care for, like longshoremen, perhaps, and talk about things that were on our mind and find that they were friends of ours. And yet “Reach Out of the Darkness” is generally derided by the sophisticated left as naÏve nostalgia. Meanwhile, the right, which eschewed hippiedom and hewed to church camp, has somehow, oddly, picked “Kumbayah” to be the metaphor of choice for the kind of cooperative civility they disdain. "Kumbayah" is now a putdown. Maybe a mutually agreeable middle ground can be found in the Youngbloods and “Get Together”?

    Can we try to love one another? Right now would be good.

  • HSTucker Holladay, UT
    May 16, 2017 12:43 p.m.

    Thank you, Mr. Matheson. Sadly, civility has become a conservative value, no longer revered by popular culture. You're preaching to the choir.

    With luck, those who value civility will prioritize that virtue above "resistance" to those who disagree.

  • jeanie orem, UT
    May 16, 2017 11:51 a.m.

    "This is a thinly veiled attempt at inoculating 'conservative' ideas and those who promulgate them from criticism."

    No, it's not.

    "Ideas and the expression of those ideas can and should be treated with contempt, when those ideas deserve it."

    Who gets to decide what ideas deserve it? Who has the authority for the final say? Not you or me.

    "...they should be ready for that idea to be challenged, even ridiculed..."

    Why ridiculed? Why not just challenged?

    As the article pointed out, it takes very little effort to ridicule and a lot more thought and self-discipline to present your own counter arguments.

    No minds are changed through second grade behavior, but people can be persuaded with clear arguments.

  • NoNamesAccepted St. George, UT
    May 16, 2017 11:43 a.m.

    Once again, too many of the comments prove the thesis of the article. Nothing in this article should be at all disagreeable to anyone regardless of political ideology. But because the author works for a generally right-leaning think tank (though not grassroots conservative on issues like enforcing immigration), certain voices not only dismiss the words, but attack them.

    Some who don't attack the thesis entirely, attempt to dismiss it as not being valid because it wasn't written while Obama was president. Many, as much as justify their own contempt toward others. The thesis of the article is proved as liberal posters demonstrate contempt for the author and all conservative viewpoints. A couple of conservative posters return the contempt for their liberal neighbors.

    It is fine to disagree. The problem is viewing another human being as less than because of that disagreement.

    Would it be too much to ask that we view conservatives as hard working decent people rather than as greedy? And that we view liberals as decent, caring people who want a just, peaceful world, rather than as lazy, couvetous, parasites?

  • NoNamesAccepted St. George, UT
    May 16, 2017 11:35 a.m.

    It is easy for the left to point to talk radio as some milepost change in society. I don't care for the tone myself.

    But prior to talk radio, cable TV, and the Internet, what voice did conservative views have? The big networks have leaned leftward since at least the days of Walter Cronkite. NPR always has.

    Some leftists will justify terrorism against Israel from Palestine because of the difference in power, but fail to consider that for a couple of decades--from the sexual revolution in the 60s through the 80s--conservatives in America had no media voice while the left controlled pop culture and media. No, that does not justify even incivility, and certainly not violence. But it does lead to pent up frustration.

    I suspect that too many on the left (and the right), however, are upset not with how the right (or left) expresses itself but more fundamentally are very unhappy that such differing views continue to exist at all.

    Trump is no more offensive in personal conduct than was JFK, LBJ, Nixon, or Bill Clinton; just more honest about it. But his election stalled the march toward endless liberalism. It reminded the left that the right still exists.

  • Daedalus, Stephen ARVADA, CO
    May 16, 2017 11:16 a.m.

    This is a thinly veiled attempt at inoculating 'conservative' ideas and those who promulgate them from criticism.

    Remember the trope 'hate the sin, love the sinner'?

    The same applies here.

    Ideas and the expression of those ideas can and should be treated with contempt, when those ideas deserve it.

    Does the individual expressing those ideas deserve to treated with contempt?

    No, not if he or she is expressing a personal opinion for no other reason than giving voice to what they sincerely believe. But they should be ready for that idea to be challenged, even ridiculed, in the free-wheeling marketplace of ideas, without seeking shelter in playing the victim.

    But paid pundits, think-tank executives, and elected officials can and should be personally regarded with contempt if they propagate contemptible ideas on behalf of their benefactors, in full knowledge of the purpose and effect of those words, ideas, and policies.

    So...sorry Mr. Matheson, you are not off the hook. Nice try though.

  • Tyler D Prescott, AZ
    May 16, 2017 10:50 a.m.

    @The True Open Minded Mormon – “There is zero self-reflection by any of the Liberal/Democrat/Progressive individuals who post on these pages.”

    I agree… nice article.

    Though your comment above brought to mind the Parable of the Mote and the Beam.

    Certainly there’s blame to go around, but Impartial7 is right in suggesting that the poisoning of our politics went to a whole new level with talk radio and politicians like Newt Gingrich (who now seen as not aggressive enough by today’s alt-right).

    That said, the Left has their own demons… smug condescension being chief among them.

  • Vanceone Provo, UT
    May 16, 2017 10:51 a.m.

    Note the leftists all singing from the same book : "It's really the right that is the hateful speech promotors! They disagreed with Obama, which was racist and sexist to not agree with our president! It's unpatriotic, except when we do it! Bushitler!"

    The left is now claiming that they have the right to censor speech, because it's "Hate speech". Every single leftist in this thread who is saying the right started it under Obama also claims that the government should silence "hate speech." And what is hate speech? Why, whatever they, the left, says is hate speech. Calling all Christians "Homophobic bigots who should be forcibly silenced/squelched" is not hate speech, of course. Saying "I disagree with Obama" is irrefutable evidence you are a racist and have forfeited all your rights as a US Citizen.

    While it may be true that there is some overwrought language on the right, it pales to the left's current position: "You are guilty of wrong-thought and wrong-speech and therefore we shall beat you until you change your mind!"

  • The True Open Minded Mormon Draper, UT
    May 16, 2017 10:24 a.m.

    Impartial7 is the perfect example of what Boyd is referencing. There is zero self-reflection by any of the Liberal/Democrat/Progressive individuals who post on these pages.

    Attack...attack...attack

    Nice post Boyd.

  • Fred44 Salt Lake City, Utah
    May 16, 2017 10:21 a.m.

    2 Bits,

    Don't you think this would have been a little more credible if the editorial had been written back in October when Donald Trump was insulting everyone he disagreed with or 5-6 years ago when republicans led by Limbaugh, Hannity and the gang were trashing President Obama and Hillary Clinton? Timing is everything, and for the far right Sutherland Institute to now see this as a problem after their guy got into the White House by trashing everyone is a bit disingenuous don't you think?

  • Vanceone Provo, UT
    May 16, 2017 10:09 a.m.

    And yet, Impartial7, you are 100% comfortable calling people "Bigots" and "haters" and "Racists" and "sexists" and "theocrats" full of "hate speech" whenever they disagree with you. And your entire party is currently promoting "Your speech is violence, and our violence is merely speech." The left thinks it is okay to maim and murder people because they don't like what some people say.

    Witness the leftist who just poisoned the founder of JihadWatch in Iceland (to cheers and praise from your side, naturally). The riots at Berkeley and many other places. The left's response? crickets, or else praise and "Of course hate speech shouldn't be tolerated! Naturally, we on the left define what is hate speech...."

    Don't pretend that the left is some paragon of virtue under assault by those evil "reichwingers" the left is so fond of. It's rather the opposite: people on the right are actually under assault--physical harm-- from you and your side. And you claim that it is the right who is intolerant?

  • Prometheus Platypus Orem, UT
    May 16, 2017 10:06 a.m.

    We have a President who is a huge part of the new illiteracy along with those who get their information from radio and TV.

    This, then, is the new illiteracy, the illiteracy of those who can read but don't. [...] This new illiteracy is more pernicious than the old, because unlike the old illiteracy it does not debar its victims from power and influence, although like the old illiteracy it disqualifies them for it. Those long-dead men and women who learned to read so that they might read the Bible and John Bunyan would tell us that pride is the greatest of all sins, the father of sin. And the victims of the new illiteracy are proud of it. If you don't believe me, talk to them and see with what pride they trumpet their utter ignorance of any book you care to name.
    Gene Wolfe

  • There You Go Again St George, UT
    May 16, 2017 10:03 a.m.

    This op-ed would be believable if it had come during the 8 years President Obama was the POTUS.

    The person who was elected to be the POTUS made a cottage industry of questioning President Obama's birth certificate.

    Mrs. Obama was referred to as an Ape in Heels.

    Not a word about toning down comments while President Obama was in office.

    Now we read/hear a call to tone down our dialogue?

  • Boyd in Provo , 00
    May 16, 2017 9:25 a.m.

    This is a very timely and well written article of what we are facing as a people in today's world. I agree with "jeanie from orem" that we may strongly disagree but we still see value in each other.

    We have all gone through the worst presidential election cycle in years but I believe it is time for all of us to take a deep breath and start acting civil to one another again. We have done it in the past and we can do it again.

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    May 16, 2017 9:07 a.m.

    I actually agree with everything he said. I wonder what my liberal friends who attack people (especially Republicans in general) with such contempt and bad stereotypes, feel about what he said about contempt.

    I know my Democrat friends and Liberal Friends and Progressive friends are just as "good" as I am. But I don't get the same feeling back from them. They seem to feel superior, and full of contempt for people who don't agree with them (politically).

    We could all learn from what he said in his letter. Everybody.

  • marxist Salt Lake City, UT
    May 16, 2017 9:08 a.m.

    "In our modern media world, it is much easier to have contempt for those who disagree with us than it is to engage in meaningful dialogue. "

    True enough. But to have "meaningful dialogue" requires people know something. They have to bring knowledge, theory and concepts to the debate. Often we lack these so we just attach ourselves to a belief which feeds our egos, and shout it.

    Some attribute things mistakenly to me because of my handle "marxist." I so label myself for one reason only, and that is to get Marx's rich and huge volume of theory into mainstream economics. But my effort is handicapped because most people in our community literally don't know who Marx was.

    This makes "meaningful dialogue" almost impossible in these areas important to me.

  • jeanie orem, UT
    May 16, 2017 8:51 a.m.

    Truly, all political parties are guilty of this contempt. Pointing fingers solves nothing because for every accusation there is a counter one - keeping us all angry and feeling victimized.

    "When they go low, we go high" applies to all or we continue to be part of the problem regardless of our political beliefs.

    It has to be that we can disagree, even strongly, without contempt or we are lost.

  • Abeille West Haven, UT
    May 16, 2017 8:18 a.m.

    I know that's how you feel, Impartial7. Others see it differently. But all that isn't the question. The question is, what are you going to do about it now? You have a choice - continue to be angry and find reasons and excuses why demeaning another is okay, or take a chance and talk with others who don't share your opinion. A quote attributed to Aristotle says, "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." Being aware of the thoughts of others can allow us to make better policy, better laws, and results in treating everyone better - as equals. Without this, we're back to treating the opposition poorly and making excuses why that's okay.

  • stevo123 Driggs, ID
    May 16, 2017 7:59 a.m.

    Mr.Matheson, The American Enterprise Institute and the Sutherland Institute do not have me and my family's interest in mind. Do not mistake opposition for uncivil behavior.

  • Hutterite American Fork, UT
    May 16, 2017 7:52 a.m.

    It is not contemptuous, however, to discuss when we find someone working on our behalf displays behaviour that is incompetent, immature or even dangerous or treasonous.
    Those are qualities we see in them, and perhaps they must be dealt with.

  • Impartial7 DRAPER, UT
    May 16, 2017 6:53 a.m.

    "“More than we have an anger problem in American politics, we have a contempt problem in American politics.”

    I remember when that contempt started. It was when Rush Limbaugh gained national attention for his contemptuous radio program. Followed by Hannity, O'Reilly, Beck, etc. Democrats tried decorum in response but got shouted down at every tur. The Sutherland institute isn't exactly a model of civility, either.

  • jeanie orem, UT
    May 16, 2017 6:53 a.m.

    This is a great article!

    "If I feel that my opponent is utterly worthless, it is easier for me to make ranting personal attacks rather than reasoned arguments."

    What a difference we would all feel in this country if our foundational belief were that while we may strongly disagree, we still see value in each other.

    I'm going to make a better effort.