Our community is divided over a recall election, and if that isn't proof that we're cracking at the foundation, look just a little bit further: Even the Boy Scouts are fighting.

No, it's not good. But it's happening, and at this juncture we'd be wise to proceed in the most non-destructive manner possible. In light of the powerful message delivered recently by constitutional scholar Dr. David Gray Adler, maybe we can confront our differences, well, differently.

As a mobster philosopher might once have said, "When you breakka bread witha somebody, you don'ta wanna breakka their face."

Dr. Adler, of course, says it better. He regaled his audience with anecdotes about political foes in Congress who would draw figurative blood from each other during debate and then dine together that night or even have their families vacation together in the summer.

He spoke of the great leaders of another time, people like Daniel Webster in the early and mid-1800s, whose speeches were so eloquent, so moving, so thought-provoking - yet respectful to individuals on the other side of their ideas. And rarely were these inspirational figures leashed to extensive notes or, worse, the need to read their speeches. Now, Dr. Adler noted, our statesmen have sometimes devolved into reading vicious one-liners from notecards.

Lacking many - or any - Daniel Websters, we still can make progress.

Is it possible that our community could follow the lead of the Coeur d'Alene noon Rotary Club? Among its many well informed and ultra-active citizens, you might find Rep. Kathy Sims, a recall advocate and enemy of urban renewal, sharing space and laughs with recall target Deanna Goodlander and urban renewal director Tony Berns. This is not to say that their families are planning vacations together, but in the Rotary environment, at least, they've found they can all pull in the same direction.

Maybe the foes facing off on opposite cliffs of our political divides can, for the sake of their constituents, agree to break bread and work toward ensuring those differences are not personal. Private meetings where they can look each other in the eye and find things they agree on, things that perhaps they can build on, would minimize acrimony and maximize potential.

Who knows? Maybe they would find their similarities outweigh their differences.