Politics
No Notifications
Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

Your Thoughts?

We will not negotiate the status of unlawful immigrants while Democrats hold our lawful citizens hostage over their reckless demands,” White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders said in a statement. “This is the behavior of obstructionist losers, not legislators. When Democrats start paying our armed forces and first responders we will reopen negotiations on immigration reform.”

So, when negotiating something, does each party in the negotiation not have a responsibility to negotiate over that which the other party finds important? Would it not seem that saying "We will not negotiate" on (insert subject) mean that you are being an obstructionist? If so, who then is to blame for failure of the negotiations - the one who wants to negotiate, or the one who does not want to negotiate?
frequentlyme
70-79, M
43 replies 58 views Jan 20, 2018
Share Link
Edited: 6 yrs ago
Top | Newest First | Oldest First
Northwest · M
Those who voted against the President's proposed budget, represent their districts. What Trump said in his tweet (and Huckabee seems to be repeating), is that he does not care about people.

The street will speak out this weekend, and up until an agreement is reached.
+ 3 · Reply · Translate · Jan 20, 2018
This comment is hidden. Show Comment
This comment is hidden. Show Comment
frequentlyme · 70-79, M
When having a discussion, I prefer to stick with facts... you know, those pesky truths that you seem to not want to deal with. "..guzzling Democrap Kool-Ade" is not a fact, it's an emotional statement based upon nothing.
+ 6 · Reply · Translate · Jan 20, 2018
WalksWith · 51-55, F
@frequentlyme Thank you!
+ 1 · Reply · Translate · Jan 20, 2018
Burnley123 · 41-45, M
I'm British and I see this as a big problem with your Constitution, that government shuts down automatically if funding agreements are not in place.

You can get away with it when you have a shared bipartisan culture among law makers but you are obviously a long way from that. I think things should just be automatically underwritten and debates on laws should be separate.
+ 1 · Reply · Translate · Jan 20, 2018
frequentlyme · 70-79, M
@Burnley123 I agree in part. Nothing but funding of ongoing debt and expenses should be debated, but it should be heavily debated. Everything else should be debated separately.
+ 1 · Reply · Translate · Jan 20, 2018
whowasthatmaskedman · 70-79, M
Political posturing all the way. Lets see. In the private sector , what do you do with an employee who refuses to do their job? Oh Yes.. You fire their asses and get someone else.
+ 0 · Reply · Translate · Jan 20, 2018
frequentlyme · 70-79, M
@whowasthatmaskedman Okay, but if we don't have politicians being politicians, what would we have? You suggestion would seem to suggest an autocratic system, not a democracy.
+ 0 · Reply · Translate · Jan 20, 2018
whowasthatmaskedman · 70-79, M
@frequentlymeHmmm.. I sometimes get hammered by Americans for my "anti American bias". But since you ask, how about the American system.? But lets tweak it a little. Take regulation and taxation and laws back to the fifties, when the country ran at a profit, and make voting compulsory for all, to insure participation and ban all political donations, but provide an allocation of money for each candidate to run a campaign on. Oh.. And toughen up regulation and enforcement to catch and jail those who cheat the system. Then America should be more or less what it always could have been. The American reality much closer to the American Dream.
+ 0 · Reply · Translate · Jan 20, 2018
frequentlyme · 70-79, M
@whowasthatmaskedman I don't totally disagree with you - in fact I mostly agree with what you said, except that taking things back to the 50's would negate the good changes made since then, and prevent future progress and evolution of the dream. The dream is for fairness, equality, freedom and the pursuit of happiness. Nothing uncommon, but the 50's didn't represent that dream anymore than today does, and for many, it represented it much less. Change isn't bad, change is a constant. However, I do think some things have gotten out of hand, and I squarely place the blame for most of it on the American voter, a voter who doesn't vote. We are, and have always been, our own worst enemy.
+ 1 · Reply · Translate · Jan 21, 2018 · Edited: 6 yrs ago
SW-User
The political party system should be controlled/removed from government.
+ 0 · Reply · Translate · Jan 20, 2018
frequentlyme · 70-79, M
@SW-User Difficult, in my opinion, to do. If you don't have political parties, then you would have chaos worse than it is. Consider everyone going on their own beliefs - you would have hundreds of representatives all wanting something different. We would get less done with that, than we do now.
+ 0 · Reply · Translate · Jan 20, 2018
SW-User
@frequentlyme Perhaps. Just a possible idea that may potentially end up being better or worse than the current situation.
+ 0 · Reply · Translate · Jan 20, 2018
frequentlyme · 70-79, M
@SW-User I do think it hard to imagine anything worse than the current situation - it's a mess, and a disgrace.
+ 1 · Reply · Translate · Jan 20, 2018
Zonuss · 41-45, M
You didnt write this when the Republicans were blocking Obama.
So this thread is a bunch of horse manure. ☺
+ 1 · Reply · Translate · Jan 20, 2018
frequentlyme · 70-79, M
@Zonuss Chew on what? That you jump to conclusions? Okay, I get it, you put your mouth in motion before you put your mind in gear. Where did I say or even imply that I'm against humanity, justice, for one party or another, or anything you stated as fact? I don't know you, but I must say your words paint you as single minded, and as or more divisive as those you point fingers at. Try fewer labels and use words that mean something, not, as you say, rhetoric.
+ 0 · Reply · Translate · Jan 20, 2018
Zonuss · 41-45, M
@frequentlyme If I have jumped to conclusions than I apologize.
I just wanted to see where you stood sir. ☺
+ 1 · Reply · Translate · Jan 20, 2018
frequentlyme · 70-79, M
@Zonuss I stand solidly on the side of what is right, decent, and supports what I believe to be our founding ethos, The Declaration of Independence, and in particular the passage: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." This, when I question anything, is what I think of.
+ 1 · Reply · Translate · Jan 20, 2018
JaggedLittlePill · 46-50, F
My thoughts are that they really think they are getting away with blatant lies and manipulation.
+ 1 · Reply · Translate · Jan 20, 2018
JaggedLittlePill · 46-50, F
Why are we negotiating a wall with medical care for kids and or the lives of people who have lived here most of their own? That is just insanity in the first place.
+ 0 · Reply · Translate · Jan 20, 2018 · Edited: 6 yrs ago
Mrsbetweenfatandfit · 26-30, F
hmm Well it would make sense to be discussing u.s citizens rights prior to the ones who are not legal. But that’s just an opinion
+ 1 · Reply · Translate · Jan 20, 2018
frequentlyme · 70-79, M
@Mrsbetweenfatandfit I do see what you are saying, and yes, it is a bit disheartening. For me though, I can see/imagine what would happen to those children if we summarily tossed them out of our country... not a pretty picture. I've lived in several, shall we call them, third world countries, under developed counties, and life there is hard, even brutal, and these children know nothing of their birthplace.
+ 1 · Reply · Translate · Jan 20, 2018
Mrsbetweenfatandfit · 26-30, F
@frequentlyme I totally get that. I really do this is not some quick easy choice type issue we face. We don’t want to hurt kids that did nothing wrong but we also don’t want to spit in the face of those working so hard to become a part of our country, or encourage this situation to continue years on. This is gonna take some serious problem solving and ideas from both sides to figure out the best solution not only for today but going forward.
+ 1 · Reply · Translate · Jan 20, 2018
frequentlyme · 70-79, M
We can certainly agree on that - there is no simple, long lasting solution.
+ 1 · Reply · Translate · Jan 20, 2018
This comment is hidden. Show Comment
 
Post Comment