One of the issues I'm really happy about is that recently, Secretary Clinton and I worked out an agreement on higher education, making public colleges and universities tuition free for every family in America earning less than 125,000 bucks. Didn't go as far as I wanted. But that's 83 percent of the population in this country.
Our will makes constantly a sort of agreement with the world, whereby, if the world will continually show some respect to the will, the will shall consent to be strenuous in its industry.
The basic agreement between human beings, indeed what makes them human and makes them social, is language.
The argument culture urges us to approach the world-and the people in it-in an adversarial frame of mind. It rests on the assumption that opposition is the best way to get anything done: Conflict and opposition are as necessary as cooperation and agreement, but the scale is off balance, with conflict and opposition over-weighted.
My mother's people, the people who captured my imagination when I was growing up, were of the Deep South - emotional, changeable, touched with charisma and given to histrionic flourishes. They were courageous under tension and unexpectedly tough beneath their wild eccentricities, for they had and unusually close working agreement with God. They also had an unusually high quota of bullshit.
Every dictator is a mystic, and every mystic is a potential dictator. A mystic craves obedience from men, not their agreement. He wants them to surrender their consciousness to his assertions, his edicts, his wishes, his whims - as his consciousness is surrendered to theirs. He wants to deal with men by means of faith and force - he finds no satisfaction in their consent if he must earn it by means of facts and reason.
Men. . . are not agreed about any one thing, not even that heaven is over our heads.
Anybody who comes together in a large group and they all believe the same thing, they're going to generate a certain amount of power. The Bible says one puts 1,000 in flight, and two 10,000, and so on and so forth. And so even if me and somebody else got into agreement about something, we would have more power than each of us by ourselves.
This is a unique deposit not just in terms of reserves, but also in terms of extraction techniques. Therefore there're grounds to talk about [applying] the Product Sharing Agreement.
Look at what I am proposing, and we [wih Bernie Sanders] have a vigorous agreement here. We both want to reign in the excesses of Wall Street. I also want to reign in the excesses of Johnson Controls that we bailed out when they were an autoparts company, and we saved the auto industry, and now they want to avoid paying taxes.
Of course, this person is to have the trust of the American people, then he or she would not only have the wish but also the supported political will to implement all these agreements.
Ultimately, my more significant agreement is with a virtue tradition that features Aristotle and Descartes.
At the very end, what is going to happen is that immigration will be reduced considerably. And how can we get to that stage? By agreements on sectors.
The Internet is not a thing, a place, a single technology, or a mode of governance. It is an agreement.
Army life don't agree with me.
Victor and vanquished never unite in substantial agreement.
The trade agreement has become a rather distinct feature of the American labor movement. . . . It is based on the idea that labor shall accept the capitalist system of production and make terms of peace with it.
I am formally accountable to the steering board of the PIC, and I meet with nine ambassadors from the PIC every week. I have to have the capitals' broad agreement with what I do.
An agreement cannot be the result of an imposition.