I’m beginning to repeat myself and for that I apologize.

I don’t intend to apologize for the repetitive topic. It involves this notion that the current state of political debate necessarily must devolve into a rhetorical flame-throwing contest.

Such fiery rhetoric comes from many of my progressive/liberal social media friends and acquaintances. Some of them have scolded me for seeking to reduce the temperature.

“This is war,” a few of them have told me. No. It is not.

I’ve had a brief bit of exposure to war. Believe me when I say this: This is nothing close to the real thing.

Yes, it is a form of combat. Democrats are angry with Republicans for fomenting anger. They suggest that anger can — and does — manifest itself in acts such as what we witnessed the past few days: the mailing of pipe bombs to officials who disagree with Donald Trump, the nation’s 45th president.

So, to counter that anger, they propose to ratchet it up. Among the top proponents of the in-your-face policy of political debate is Michael Avenatti, the lawyer who has made a name for himself representing Stormy Daniels, the adult film actress who alleges taking a one-time tumble with the future 45th president.

Avenatti is considering whether to run for president in 2020. Imagine my surprise. He says Democrats need a gut fighter to take the battle straight to the president and his fellow Republicans.

Where does it go from there? Only heaven knows.

I am sick of hearing the “war” references to this political debate. Too many politicians I respect — the late Sen. John McCain, the late Sen. Ted Kennedy, former Vice President Joe Biden, for example — have demonstrated how elected officials can argue and bicker over public policy without demonizing those on the other side.

Thus, I cannot accept the “this is war” mantra we hear from today’s active participants.