There's a long tradition in America of not negotiating with terrorist, kidnappers, hijackers, extortionists, etc., or those used to be our purported mores anyway.
Does anyone else remember it that way?
Does anyone else remember it that way?
Well, republicans not only support the actions of domestic terrorists, but they have them within their ranks. They've hijacked governance through pure and total obstruction and sabotage. They've attempted to extort the public using the filibuster in an attempt to kill democracy.
We all know that Manchin has his own personal benefit and interests first in mind. He doesn't need to invoke the bogus notion of bipartisanship to hide behind just to block progress in order to achieve his personal agenda. The senate rules allow him to do that.
So, when he says that we must be "bipartisan" and we must negotiate with republicans, what's the difference between that and saying we must negotiate with and capitulate to terrorists?
Other than giving lip service to a long dead political process of compromise in which republicans have overtly sated they have no interest or intentions, what does he think we're supposed to believe he's trying to accomplish?
@threadreaderapp unroll...
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
