Leave it to the wife to remind me that, from time to time, I need reminding.

                “You know, dear,” she said sweetly, “just because people differ with your politics does not necessarily mean they are all lemmings being led to the cliff by a wily politician. They may well be thinking individuals like yourself who, having thought about what is being said, agree with it, even if you don’t.”

                Then came the coup de grace: “Sometimes you liberals come across as know-it-alls looking down your noses at anyone who disagrees with you.”

                Ouch! And to think, I’ve lived with this closet counter-revolutionary for over 43 years and never once imagined she could ever think of me as nothing more than just another progressive blowhard.

                I tried to come up with an appropriately rapier-like bit of repartee to skewer her heretical observation, but (as is usually the case when she offers an opinion) the more I thought about it, darn it (not exactly the expletive that came to mind), she could be right!

                Let’s be honest, she is right.

                “Oh heck,” (again, not exactly the expletive that came to mind), I do sometimes operate on the premise that I’m right and you’re just too obstinate to accept the unassailable truth I am laying out for you. Breaking out in a cold sweat, it occurred to me that this makes me nothing more, and no better, than a mirror image of those I occasionally take to task. Okay, okay, I often take to task.

                So, in a sincere attempt to restore order and balance in the universe, let me say to the Trump-ites, the Cruz-ites, the Rubio-ites, the Carson-ites, the Christie-ites, and all the other “-ites” out there, you are not necessarily lemmings being led to a cliff by a wily politician. You may well be thinking individuals who, having carefully considered what is being said by your candidate of choice, have come the conclusion that they are right, and you are perfectly entitled to agree with them.

                There, I’ve said it.

                However, there are limits to all this sweetness and light.

                Be you progressive, liberal, conservative, evangelical, libertarian, know-nothing, or whatever, I think we can agree our differences should be based on fact, and not fiction.

                Fact: There are roughly 11 million undocumented aliens currently in the country illegally.

                Fiction: They are all – or even many — murderers and rapists.

                Facts can be used to support, or undermine, wildly different positions. That’s fair. Position 1: All 11 million need to be sent back to their country of origin and apply for legal admission to the United States. Position2: Realistically, 11 million is too many to deport, so what is needed is a legal path to citizenship for those who are here, and heightened border security for those who are not.

                You can have a debate on that.

                “They are all (or even many) murderers and rapists” adds nothing but a distraction that gets in the way of rational discussion.

                Our “facts” must be supported by evidence. To say “the earth is flat” or “the moon is made of green cheese” 15 times in one speech does not make the earth flat, nor the moon a cheese ball, no matter how much we want to believe it.

                Until shown otherwise, our default assessment of the candidates should be that each, in his or her own way, wants to do well by the United States, not harm it. Despite such good intent, to debate about whether their proposals actually help or harm is fair game.

                Argue facts with passion, but treat each other with compassion. The operative assumption, the birther brouhaha aside, is that we are all Americans. As evidenced by the nasty breakup of the Trump/Cruz bromance, name calling is counter-productive. It makes everyone look foolish, and cheapens the process of selecting the next leader of the free world.

                Those of us who have developed partisan points of view should remember that we have an obligation to our fellow citizens who have not. They should be treated with respect, because it is they who will decide the outcome of this election. It is unacceptable to flim-flam those you respect. Ditto for your candidate. If they do, perhaps you should reexamine your loyalties.

                If all of this sounds a bit “preachy,” I suppose it is. It is as hard for a liberal to go non-judgmental cold turkey as it would be for Rush Limbaugh to say something non-judgmental about Hillary, Bernie, or Martin. I think, however, that the stakes are worth the effort.  After all, we are charting our national course for the next several years. After the bands stop playing, the fireworks go dim, and the pundits scurry back to their respective think tanks, we will have to live with the result of this year’s campaigning. Let’s hope that result is based somewhat on substance, and not entirely on circus.

                For the record, I am still trying to come up with a zinger response to the wife, but the odds of doing so are not looking good. I haven’t won a battle of wits with her since before Jimmy Carter was president.

                Oh well, keep on truckin’.