Politics has become blood sport

What happened to friendly jousting?

Count me as one American who detests the notion of politics becoming a blood sport.

I long have considered it to be a form of aggressive competition. The competitors might be fierce opponents on the debate floor, but when the lights went out they would walk off the floor and share an adult beverage somewhere.

I remember a story that former U.S. Rep. Larry Combest of Lubbock once told me about his old boss, U.S. Sen. John Tower of Texas. Combest and Tower were staunch Republicans to be sure. Combest served on Tower’s staff prior to being elected to the House of Representatives in 1984.

Combest related a story about how Tower got into a ferocious Senate floor debate with liberal U.S. Sen. Hubert Humphrey of Minnesota. Both men argued their cases passionately, fiercely and with immense conviction that they were right and the other guy was wrong. Combest watched it happen from his perch in the gallery.

When the presiding officer gaveled the debate over, according to Combest, Tower and Humphrey walked to the middle of the Senate floor, shook hands, threw their arms around each other’s shoulder and walked way … laughing the whole time.

Do we hear of such a thing happening these days? Have our politicians become so dedicated to their side of the great divide that they no longer can see any redeeming value in the other side’s argument?

We hear reports instead these days about members of Congress expressing fear of working with their colleagues. The fear comes mostly from Democrats who suggest their Republican colleagues are threatening them with actual physical harm. What the hell kind of atmosphere is that? How in the world does a legislative body accomplish anything when the two sides are at each other’s throats?

Politics isn’t supposed to be a blood sport. Is it tough? Does it bruise egos? Of course it is and it does!

It does not need to fill itself with intense anger … or fear of those on the other side.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com