These are two words I would think every person over the age of three would know the definition of. So why do politicians have such a problem with answering a question with one of these responses. Most of the time it’s made really easy to narrow down the ability to use these two responses. When someone starts a question with “Yes or no, . . .” you should be able to actually use them in your answer.
I have to categorize any person in power, political or corporate, as being a sleazy, slimy, evading, self serving ass when they refuse to answer simple yes or no questions. They get 5 stars when they do this crap under oath.
Within the day of the murders in Parkland, students were already demanding action. They were already calling out their leaders and the NRA. They already were calling bullshit on politicians who were trying to direct the discussion to mental health. They want change. That change is gun control. That change is getting the NRA’s money out of politics. That change is simple. Do you believe there should be reasonable gun control? This has been the question of the circuit and really is a simple ‘yes’ or ‘no’ response. You can explain your answer after you have provided the actual answer.
It has been said by more than one person, that any elected official that has taken donations from the NRA has blood on their hands. Anyone who allowed the law to lapse making it easier for the mentally ill to attain weapons. Anyone who has not taken action to ban bump stocks. It really covers about every politician. The concept was posed to Representative Curbelo of Florida’s 26th, when asked on This Week, “Yes or no, does Marco Rubio have blood on his hands”. The question was posed to him three times. He never answered. He did exactly what these kids are calling politicians out on. Providing a canned answer that doesn’t commit to anything, blames the other side, or blames everything on, in this case, mental illness.
Hearings on the hill should demand those being questioned to answer yes or no questions. If they are not willing to, the only other option should be the 5th. Reporters need to hold their interviews to the same standard. Answer the question, then you can explain. If you can’t answer the first question, you don’t get to vomit your opinion.
Yes, politics is about compromise, but how can you compromise with anyone when they can’t even take a position in public? No, we won’t put up with this shit.