Office of Northeast Member of Assembly Senator Libertas!

[Purple State]

Thank you for all of your support.

Unfortunately, as I said, it is an uphill battle against a Senate dominated by reactionary voices.

In addition, the incoming president and vice president, already obstructionist before even taking office, have made it clear that they are mere tools of big business and the military-industrial complex. I fear this is going to be a dark time to be an Atlasian, unless you're the CEO of WalMart or Boeing.

I forgot how you could take support and misconstrue it with lies and insincerity.

Rather than acting like an incessantly spiteful boor, why not attempt reasonable debate on legitimate issues for a change? It may make your uphill battles less steep, rather than more.

[Purple State]

Thank you for all of your support.

Unfortunately, as I said, it is an uphill battle against a Senate dominated by reactionary voices.

In addition, the incoming president and vice president, already obstructionist before even taking office, have made it clear that they are mere tools of big business and the military-industrial complex. I fear this is going to be a dark time to be an Atlasian, unless you're the CEO of WalMart or Boeing.

I forgot how you could take support and misconstrue it with lies and insincerity.

Rather than acting like an incessantly spiteful boor, why not attempt reasonable debate on legitimate issues for a change? It may make your uphill battles less steep, rather than more.

Being deliberately disingenuous now, Mr. President-elect? You know very well that is not the bill I am referring to.


You already fired the first shots of obstructionism when you falsely claimed my proposal to give the Atlasian people the right to decide whether to commit to a war of aggression would be "dangerous for our armed forces" and a "dangerous impediment to legal actions by the Atlasian military".

If you believe that I (or anyone else) am obstructing something, say what it is. Speaking in generalities will, of course, leave room for disingenuous retorts.

You are taking things a little too personally here. I voice opposition to one of your proposals and suddenly I am obstructionist? I was simply pointing out that I also support some of your efforts (in fact, I have voiced support for two of your proposals already).

I think you will find it much easier to pass the less controversial things if you work with, not against, your fellow senators and my incoming administration on the more controversial things. But simply going guns-a-blazin' over one disagreement will prove counterproductive, I assure you.

[Purple State]

Thank you for all of your support.

Unfortunately, as I said, it is an uphill battle against a Senate dominated by reactionary voices.

In addition, the incoming president and vice president, already obstructionist before even taking office, have made it clear that they are mere tools of big business and the military-industrial complex. I fear this is going to be a dark time to be an Atlasian, unless you're the CEO of WalMart or Boeing.

I forgot how you could take support and misconstrue it with lies and insincerity.

Rather than acting like an incessantly spiteful boor, why not attempt reasonable debate on legitimate issues for a change? It may make your uphill battles less steep, rather than more.

Being deliberately disingenuous now, Mr. President-elect? You know very well that is not the bill I am referring to.


You already fired the first shots of obstructionism when you falsely claimed my proposal to give the Atlasian people the right to decide whether to commit to a war of aggression would be "dangerous for our armed forces" and a "dangerous impediment to legal actions by the Atlasian military".

If you believe that I (or anyone else) am obstructing something, say what it is. Speaking in generalities will, of course, leave room for disingenuous retorts.

You are taking things a little too personally here. I voice opposition to one of your proposals and suddenly I am obstructionist? I was simply pointing out that I also support some of your efforts (in fact, I have voiced support for two of your proposals already).

Before you've even taken office, your administration has been fighting against 75% of my proposed legislation. Your vice president in particular has been responsible for creating an environment of negativity on the Senate floor.

So yes, it sure seems like obstructionism rooted in a personal vendetta against me.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Is that a threat?

Let's not get carried away in hyperbole. I support the Intra Regional Mobility Amendment and the Fusion Ballot Reform Act and have stated as much. Your Break the Chains Act is good, but could use some modifying on technical points and the debate in that thread with Marokai is a healthy one to have. And I oppose the Ludlow Amendment. That is my administration's official position. So I oppose 25%, not 75%, of your current proposals and I'm willing to work to find a compromise to the Ludlow Amendment.

You are picking fights for no reason and taking a "with me 100% of the time or against me 100% of the time." I'm not threatening you; I'm giving you the cold, hard truth. If you actively seek to alienate people, go right ahead, but that will inevitably hurt your agenda.

[Purple State]

That's all well and good, but if it passes I'm the one with the pen. The buck stops with me and when I voice an opinion that becomes the opinion of my administration, whether I say it first or last.