Since 1997, you’ve been coming to BarnesandNoble.com to discuss everything from Stephen King to writing to Harry Potter. You’ve made our site more than a place to discover your next book: you’ve made it a community. But like all things internet, BN.com is growing and changing. We've said goodbye to our community message boards—but that doesn’t mean we won’t still be a place for adventurous readers to connect and discover.

Now, you can explore the most exciting new titles (and remember the classics) at the Barnes & Noble Book Blog. Check out conversations with authors like Jeff VanderMeer and Gary Shteyngart at the B&N Review, and browse write-ups of the best in literary fiction. Come to our Facebook page to weigh in on what it means to be a book nerd. Browse digital deals on the NOOK blog, tweet about books with us,or self-publish your latest novella with NOOK Press. And for those of you looking for support for your NOOK, the NOOK Support Forums will still be here.

We will continue to provide you with books that make you turn pages well past midnight, discover new worlds, and reunite with old friends. And we hope that you’ll continue to tell us how you’re doing, what you’re reading, and what books mean to you.

Reply
Distinguished Bibliophile
keriflur
Posts: 6,637
Registered: ‎01-05-2010
0 Kudos

Tea in the Harbor

[ Edited ]

deesy58 wrote:

HumbleCorrespondent wrote:
deesy58 wrote: "This has become so true and prevalent that it has even affected the Congress, where members with differing views have almost stopped communicating with each other.Unfortunately, that appears to be exactly what their constituents want."

Unfortunately, it hasn't been since Bill Clinton was president that we have had much true 'across the aisle' compromise. This is not a comment about his policies or behaviour. He was a pragmatist who could compromise, and he did not demonize everyone who disagreed with him.

It isn't clear that the President plays much of a role in the failure of our elected members of Congress to work with each other.  If we completely ignore the person who is sitting in the White House, how do we explain why US Senators and Representatives are not able to even communicate with each other? 


I think naming the president just sets a timeframe.  As to the answer to your last question, I'm going to go with "Tea Party". 

 

I'd love to know what happened to a separation of church and state.  As I recall, that was one of the tenets this country was founded on.  We seem to have thrown it out the window.

 

If Congress excluded religious influence from their discussions I expect we'd see a lot more compromise.

 

And on another note, has anyone seen my copy of Naughty Nurses?  I much prefer reading it to talking politics.  :smileywink: