When the conversation stops (or didn't start...)

I really will never understand why people are surprised when bad things occur because the conversation stops, or in some cases didn't start.

This can be seen everywhere, in politics, the work place or even at home. Here is the perfect example, Nancy Pelosi and some other folks went to the Middle East and met with a number of people from other countries to discuss many of the huge issues that face the world today, most of whom have a very different viewpoint from that of the US.

On their return, that group of politicians came under a lot of fire for even starting the conversation and are now being criticized for reputedly screwing the conversation up...but here a thing...no one else is having any conversation with these folks about any of the issues. So which is the bigger screw up?

I believe it would be much better for everyone if more conversations were happening, particularly if within those conversations, everyone was listening and really trying to understand. Then there might be less wars, less tension, fewer frustrated employees or fewer broken marriages etc.

Just a thought.

TC.

Technorati Tags: business, collaboration, life, Politics

Comments

[Jim Holden]

By law, only the President of the US has the authority to conduct foreign policy, no matter how inept he or his appointees may be. That's why the position of Secretary of State is a Cabinet member, beholding only to the President or the Executive Branch of the Government. Of course the Senate has the ability to "approve" the person who is nominated as Secretary of State, but has no further power, under the Constituion and subsequent laws, for Foreign Policy, Negotiation or anything other than "fact finding" trips to other countries. As to the comments about the male pronouns, I believe this law was written in the 1930's, well before the political correctness insanity of today.

[jrhDATE:April]

13, 2007 10:02 AM
The Logan Act: Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be,
who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly
commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any
foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to
influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any
officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies
with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States,
shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three
years, or both.

[Anonymous]

OK JRH, now you get to answer the following questions:Who has the "authority of the United States"? I would imagine elected members of congress would. Does it only cover males. i.e. "wherever he may be"What if you just meet with foreign governments and do not intend to influence the measure or conduct of said government?Who cares anyways, this only covers writting ltters and having sex with foreign governments?