US Federal Government Shutdown

[Montmorency]

A terrorist takes hostages, and in exchange for their release demands free passage out of the country on the grounds that both he and the state want him out of there: to actually "compromise" on these grounds would of course be a total abdication of responsibility, and for the executive making such a decision cause for impeachment.

But in reality no terrorist would ever make such demands, in part because it makes no sense to go to the trouble of carrying out the terrorism only to use it to plead, 'Hey let's just forget about all of this business'.

And in reality no terrorist would be so obscenely trollish to commit terrorism and then say something along the lines of, 'So we want to destroy your country and society, and you want to neutralize the threat my organization presents to your country and society; let's do the "reasonable" thing and settle on what we both want for now.'

"What's the difference between Tea Partiers and terrorists? You can actually negotiate with terrorists some of the time."

Obviously, piece-meal funding is a terrible idea both practically and politically.