We've all heard the question, "what happens when an irresistible force meets an immovable object?"
Supposedly this condition was first pondered in the 3rd Century BC in a book called "Han Feizi", a collection of essays by the Chinese philosopher, Han Fei.
Some enterprising guy back then tried to sell a sword that he claimed could penetrate any shield, while at the same time he was pedaling a shield that he said nothing could penetrate.
The customer was a bit confused and asked the seller what would happen if his all-piercing sword were to strike his impenetrable shield.
The sales guy stood there confounded, unable to answer the question. Presumable he lost the sale.
The answer to the question is, of course, "nothing".
This philosophical paradox seems to apply to the current 117th Congress, only the survival of our Democracy depends on ditching both the sword and shield and getting to work.
Comments