The Public White House: Constitutional Convention at FINAL VOTE!

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

For everyone that's interested in a position, it would perhaps be easier if you simply PMed me (even if you've already expressed interest to one of us or said it publicly) with some basic questions and then I can just follow up on my own as I desire.

Tell me why you want the position.

Tell me specific thoughts you have for the position, as in, if you're applying for SoIA, tell me what you think of certain domestic policies, if you're applying for SoEA, tell my thoughts on certain foreign affairs events you have knowledge on, if AG, tell me your legal philosophy on regional vs federal rights, the enforcement of certain laws like impersonation, etc. Just give me a general rundown of your philosophies on things if that applies.

Tell me what you think you can do to make the position better, more active, or more noticed.

Add whatever you like. I'll follow up however I can.

And we're off!

I think this is a brilliant idea to make the potential appointees answer these questions up front. They will have to answer them publically to the Senate later and by doing this they will hopefully have answers ready to go.

For Moderator General: I would suggest Bacon King, Afleitch, or Inks.

A Moderator of the Atlas Fantasy Boards has to do it. So, only Gustaf or MasterJedi.

Yes, it has to be Jedi or Gustaf.

For GM... Barnes? NCYankee?

I have already communicated that I will not accept any cabinet position or appointment of any kind.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

If I may suggest something, Fritz done a trurly impressive work as RG and should be kept in this position

Thank you for the vote of confidence, friend! 

Regarding MG, I don't believe it has to be a Fantasy Elections moderator.  That was certainly not my intent when I created the position in the Senate (yes, this was my doing).  Perhaps a moderator will correct me if I'm wrong, but I think any moderator can perform the function of verifying posts by proxy.  Or can this only be done on the board that you moderate?

You have to get the IP address to do that and only a board moderator has access to them.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

So let me get this straight... You win with about 62% of the vote. You beat Afleitch. And now you're trying to start a constitutional convention.

Why does this sound familiar?

Party like its 2008!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Hey all.

I want it stated that I just went back and bookmarked all our campaign promises and some of our smaller campaign brainstorming. I will do my damnedest to make sure we take action on everything we can once we take office.

Oh so you actually plan to follow through on your campaign promises? Where did you get a bold and innovative idea. Everyone knows politicians are supposed to lie to get elected then do nothing or the complete opposite of what they promised.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I have grandiose expectations for this administration. Higher than any previously. You have set a high bar for yourselves...

The bar is even higher in my eyes.

On another note, I will have another announcement of Cabinet picks tomorrow. 6 days until the official start of this administration!

This reminds me of a joke George W. Bush made on the campaign plane in 2000.

"Please secure your high expectations safely in the overhead compartments, lest they fall and and hit someone, namely me."

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

People, can we have this discussion elsewhere?

I think it is more noticeable know.


I think these are great picks. I think Winston will be a great SoIA eventhough his ideas on collectivization and such are dead on arrival.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I see fairness, balance, and respectfulness weren't on the list of criteria when you were deciding who to appoint.

I chose those who I believed would be competent. I chose those who I knew would be active. I did not take ideology or personality into account because that has nothing to do with how I plan to run my administration. I think the number of Atlasian political parties represented in the Cabinet can attest to that.

If all people focus on is personality contests and false ideological lines in the sand, this game is doomed. We need reform and we need it now. My administration has no time for ego trips and left/right debates.

Mr President Spectator and Society; you have nominated a noted forum apologist for Maoism and the extreme left (and it's excesses) for the post of SoIA. Would you ever be willing in the future to nominate a Falangist or apologist of the extreme right for a similar role if they were proven to be competent?

As a matter of fact yes. I considered NCY for a Cabinet post, but he made clear that he would prefer to maintain the RPP presence in the Senate, rather than join my administration.

Honestly, my nominees should not be judged on their ideologies because that is not what they will be doing very much with. My administration will be all game reform, all legitimacy of the Executive, and all activity and competence. I don't plan on jumping into the fray on divisive ideological issues; you all can do those once I'm gone.

PS, I would not consider NYC to be 'far right' or remotely Falangist, so I'm not sure what you think I meant when I said would you nominate someone of the 'far right'; if it helps any better think of the other 'f' ideology (rather than Falangist)

Only a damned red coat would miss type those initials with them correct in the post YOU ARE QUOTING!!! 

Brings back memories, doesn't it Afleitch?

I see fairness, balance, and respectfulness weren't on the list of criteria when you were deciding who to appoint.

I chose those who I believed would be competent. I chose those who I knew would be active. I did not take ideology or personality into account because that has nothing to do with how I plan to run my administration. I think the number of Atlasian political parties represented in the Cabinet can attest to that.

If all people focus on is personality contests and false ideological lines in the sand, this game is doomed. We need reform and we need it now. My administration has no time for ego trips and left/right debates.

Mr President Spectator and Society; you have nominated a noted forum apologist for Maoism and the extreme left (and it's excesses) for the post of SoIA. Would you ever be willing in the future to nominate a Falangist or apologist of the extreme right for a similar role if they were proven to be competent?

As a matter of fact yes. I considered NCY for a Cabinet post, but he made clear that he would prefer to maintain the RPP presence in the Senate, rather than join my administration.

Honestly, my nominees should not be judged on their ideologies because that is not what they will be doing very much with. My administration will be all game reform, all legitimacy of the Executive, and all activity and competence. I don't plan on jumping into the fray on divisive ideological issues; you all can do those once I'm gone.

And you won't escape the Demon's wrath either.

I wonder what fried DAer tastes like? Or perhaps barbecue would be more fiting? Don't think fear of MB ascending will prevent me from extracting my vengence either. NO ONE IS SAFE!!!!

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I see fairness, balance, and respectfulness weren't on the list of criteria when you were deciding who to appoint.

I chose those who I believed would be competent. I chose those who I knew would be active. I did not take ideology or personality into account because that has nothing to do with how I plan to run my administration. I think the number of Atlasian political parties represented in the Cabinet can attest to that.

If all people focus on is personality contests and false ideological lines in the sand, this game is doomed. We need reform and we need it now. My administration has no time for ego trips and left/right debates.

Mr President Spectator and Society; you have nominated a noted forum apologist for Maoism and the extreme left (and it's excesses) for the post of SoIA. Would you ever be willing in the future to nominate a Falangist or apologist of the extreme right for a similar role if they were proven to be competent?

As a matter of fact yes. I considered NCY for a Cabinet post, but he made clear that he would prefer to maintain the RPP presence in the Senate, rather than join my administration.

Honestly, my nominees should not be judged on their ideologies because that is not what they will be doing very much with. My administration will be all game reform, all legitimacy of the Executive, and all activity and competence. I don't plan on jumping into the fray on divisive ideological issues; you all can do those once I'm gone.

PS, I would not consider NYC to be 'far right' or remotely Falangist, so I'm not sure what you think I meant when I said would you nominate someone of the 'far right'; if it helps any better think of the other 'f' ideology (rather than Falangist)

NCY has definitely had his moments. I distinctly remember one reelection rant announcement that drew a hefty bit of criticism.

Anyway, I mention NCY to show that I do look across the spectrum and base my picks based on competence, activity and trust. I should also note that while I may appoint people with strong personal ideologies, those won't be playing a role in my government.

     NC Yankee has been pretty right-wing at times, but not in a manner that could really be construed as fascist. To be honest, I do not really think there is anybody on the forum who is genuinely a fascist. In that case, an obvious defense is that there simply isn't a potential nominee that is as far to the right as Winston is to the left.

Its really a perverse desire on my part that makes such semi-fascist statements/rants come out. I can sense where the boundaries of reason are and I used to intentionally stay within them while I was maintaining North Carolina Yankee as separate entity but when that broke down last year, my true qualities came forth one of which is this sick infatuation for pushing beyond the boundaries of sanity in my comments.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I see fairness, balance, and respectfulness weren't on the list of criteria when you were deciding who to appoint.

I chose those who I believed would be competent. I chose those who I knew would be active. I did not take ideology or personality into account because that has nothing to do with how I plan to run my administration. I think the number of Atlasian political parties represented in the Cabinet can attest to that.

If all people focus on is personality contests and false ideological lines in the sand, this game is doomed. We need reform and we need it now. My administration has no time for ego trips and left/right debates.

Mr President Spectator and Society; you have nominated a noted forum apologist for Maoism and the extreme left (and it's excesses) for the post of SoIA. Would you ever be willing in the future to nominate a Falangist or apologist of the extreme right for a similar role if they were proven to be competent?

As a matter of fact yes. I considered NCY for a Cabinet post, but he made clear that he would prefer to maintain the RPP presence in the Senate, rather than join my administration.

Honestly, my nominees should not be judged on their ideologies because that is not what they will be doing very much with. My administration will be all game reform, all legitimacy of the Executive, and all activity and competence. I don't plan on jumping into the fray on divisive ideological issues; you all can do those once I'm gone.

PS, I would not consider NYC to be 'far right' or remotely Falangist, so I'm not sure what you think I meant when I said would you nominate someone of the 'far right'; if it helps any better think of the other 'f' ideology (rather than Falangist)

NCY has definitely had his moments. I distinctly remember one reelection rant announcement that drew a hefty bit of criticism.

Anyway, I mention NCY to show that I do look across the spectrum and base my picks based on competence, activity and trust. I should also note that while I may appoint people with strong personal ideologies, those won't be playing a role in my government.

     NC Yankee has been pretty right-wing at times, but not in a manner that could really be construed as fascist. To be honest, I do not really think there is anybody on the forum who is genuinely a fascist. In that case, an obvious defense is that there simply isn't a potential nominee that is as far to the right as Winston is to the left.

Its really a perverse desire on my part that makes such semi-fascist statements/rants come out. I can sense where the boundaries of reason are and I used to intentionally stay within them while I was maintaining North Carolina Yankee as separate entity but when that broke down last year, my true qualities came forth one of which is this sick infatuation for pushing beyond the boundaries of sanity in my comments.

     Everybody possesses within themselves the capacity for insanity. Part of living & functioning in society is steering clear of that area of the psyche, but being a perfectly normal, upstanding person is not that interesting. Personally, I am much too "civilized".

Its not even trying to but failing to avoid that area of the psyche, I could deal with that. However its when I am both in that area of the psyche and getting some kind of sick satisfaction or pleasure out of being there, that's truly disconcerting.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Can we not spam this thread

They have bad sight appearently.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Question

Am I making the game too boring for everyone?

Seriously, I have been pretty baffled by the general sense of apathy in the game at the moment. Granted game reform isn't the sexiest of causes to champion for four straight months, but my sense was that people had some energy behind improving the game. Was I mistaken? Was the will of the people more about electing a "fixer" to cleanup the game while everyone tuned out?

So hit me with your best shot. How can I make this game more interesting for everyone, right here, right now? Because heck, I'm out of ideas on how to engage you more actively than I have been.

Yea you pretty much suck.

Just kidding.

Well actually you do and its entirely out of your control. The statement I bolded pretty much somes it up. If people are tuned out while expecting someone to be the "fixer" then the battle is lost. There will be no success in "Game Reform" unless the reform has the practicial effect of tuning people into the game. If it doesn't have that effect, it's all just wishful thinking and reform for reform sake. That was your Obama style "miscalculation". The Consitutional Convention is a prime example that you still have a hard time grasping this. The Con-Con has not by any means grabbed peoples interest and I see nothing that writing a new Consitution that will stir it. You have the progress within the convention to point to as a success, but ask yourself, "Success towards what"? If you or anyone else can point to a single benefit towards an established goal then opposing the Con-Con would be suicidal. The reason you can't is a testament as to why it really doesn't matter anymore and why no one really cares that Andrew/Duke is critical of.

A outside observer can make the case that the Con-Con has become nothing but an attraction for the superactive and no one has any interest in its actions beyond that group. As such any expectations of its effects are seriously just wishfull thinking.

Substance is important, but your failure was in not realizing the practicality side of it. I realize failure may be a tough word for this context and by no means am I saying that someone else could do better or will do better. The problem you had was that you set yourself up for failure in this regard. Getting back to practicality for a minute. You could take Marokai Blue, a policy wonk with a distastefull personality and have him burry us in facts and figures and policies to repond to them and a sledge hammer to wash it all done. But it wouldn't generate activity. The only activity generated would be the mob of Atlasian Tea Partiers looking to Tar and Feather him for it. And that would be the very thing that MB would squash as much as possible. 

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Question

Am I making the game too boring for everyone?

Seriously, I have been pretty baffled by the general sense of apathy in the game at the moment. Granted game reform isn't the sexiest of causes to champion for four straight months, but my sense was that people had some energy behind improving the game. Was I mistaken? Was the will of the people more about electing a "fixer" to cleanup the game while everyone tuned out?

So hit me with your best shot. How can I make this game more interesting for everyone, right here, right now? Because heck, I'm out of ideas on how to engage you more actively than I have been.

Yea you pretty much suck.

Just kidding.

Well actually you do and its entirely out of your control. The statement I bolded pretty much somes it up. If people are tuned out while expecting someone to be the "fixer" then the battle is lost. There will be no success in "Game Reform" unless the reform has the practicial effect of tuning people into the game. If it doesn't have that effect, it's all just wishful thinking and reform for reform sake. That was your Obama style "miscalculation". The Consitutional Convention is a prime example that you still have a hard time grasping this. The Con-Con has not by any means grabbed peoples interest and I see nothing that writing a new Consitution that will stir it. You have the progress within the convention to point to as a success, but ask yourself, "Success towards what"? If you or anyone else can point to a single benefit towards an established goal then opposing the Con-Con would be suicidal. The reason you can't is a testament as to why it really doesn't matter anymore and why no one really cares that Andrew/Duke is critical of.

A outside observer can make the case that the Con-Con has become nothing but an attraction for the superactive and no one has any interest in its actions beyond that group. As such any expectations of its effects are seriously just wishfull thinking.

Substance is important, but your failure was in not realizing the practicality side of it. I realize failure may be a tough word for this context and by no means am I saying that someone else could do better or will do better. The problem you had was that you set yourself up for failure in this regard. Getting back to practicality for a minute. You could take Marokai Blue, a policy wonk with a distastefull personality and have him burry us in facts and figures and policies to repond to them and a sledge hammer to wash it all done. But it wouldn't generate activity. The only activity generated would be the mob of Atlasian Tea Partiers looking to Tar and Feather him for it. And that would be the very thing that MB would squash as much as possible.  

You raise interesting points that I largely agree with, though I think the Convention (and there are still some aces there) is proof that even the active elite aren't tuning in. A debate I intentionally setup with a clause mandating regional legislatures was not much of a debate at all.

I do acknowledge that my initiatives failed to gin up any interest in the game over the past few months. Wiki reform and the Convention don't exactly engage people the way they used to. But I am interested to hear if you have any ideas on what I could have done to make things go the other way. Could I have (and could I still) engaged people without simply playing to the partisan divide?

In other words, is there a middle ground between what I've done and your example with a hardcore agenda from Marokai, that could have brought people into discussions without creating an acerbic and angry atmosphere?

The question may no longer be important for me, but it could have profound effects for the next administration.

Off course there would be middle ground. The politics of the day would set the goal posts of what is mainstream and what isn't. What matters is that there is a level of partisanship and competition. A level of political jockeying.

Hardcore debate isn't the problem. Politics is meant to be intense. Even in the European Countries where the parties are far more centrist, there is still a heavy amount of intense and even personal intensity. You problem was not being too centrist as opposed to being too liberal. That was just an example. Your problem was you pushed some policy changes but those were relatively quiet and took a back seat too the "Game Reform". The adjenda can be from anywhere on the ideological spectrum. Though the more centrist it is, the less debate and less intensity there will be. Game Reform is important and even critical but it can't be the primary or sole focus of an administration. Otherwise you are left with a "Where is the beef?" problem. "Beef" as in what will make changes to current policy that are very political in their debate (in some cases very ideological).

There is another problem with activity and that is, if you're not either in party heirarchy or running\performing in elected office... There's really very little for the average Atlasian to do unless they want to do a newspaper\commentary...

Unless I'm missing something, there is just not a lot to do if you aren't in an office.

True, which was why I spent most of my time in Atlasia helping build up regional legislatures. It seems as though even those have died down though over the past few months.

The entire game had slowed to a crawl since well before Marokai and I had announced our candidacy to run back in April. The whole premise under which I approached him was, I believe, "I'm bored, let's run for president/vice president." So while I will take the blame for not adequately engaging people in the last few months, I don't think of my administration as the root of the problem. This was an obvious problem well before I even decided to run.

Part of me wants to say that the back-to-back-to-back controversies of Ogis, Hamilton and then McCarthyist anti-sockism so poisoned the environment in the game that people simply became fed up and tuned out. That era in Atlasia was as full of hate as the era of DWTL, except that the regionalism fights were a single, drawn out controversy rooted in an ideological debate, as opposed to the more recent era, which was rooted in personal bickering.

Would anyone argue that this analysis is off base?

No, in fact, it's spot on. I, myself have gotten sick of the awful sludge of Atlasia more than once and still come back for more. A bit like a masochist, I suppose. I used to serve in the NE Assembly before I had to leave... Where the hell did it go?!... I haven't even found the bloody thing since coming back as having a single post. It got so personally reprehensible to me that I just decided I wouldn't come back and yet, here I am again...

I'm close to proposing a radical solution to this problem that could even cause some backlash... There's only one group that seems to be really enjoying themselves and that's the Populares... Basically Atlasia's Tea Party... That is a sad state of affairs indeed. Nothing against most of them, because they're active, but let's be honest, a lot of the feelings of rancor come from the prickly personalities that everyone seem to have picked up. It gets so hateful and so damn personal that I think some forget that they aren't really in a public office. They like to try and hurt people or lash out at people... There may be nothing that can change that...

But that is the point. Intensity is the life blood of politics. The problem with intensity is that we have a bunch of children (more based on emotional development then age) who take things too far. They don't know where to set the boundaries or they have to win at all costs whether its for the good of either the issue they are dealing with or game play. I frankly have immersed totally game play and issues to the point where I make many decisions based off what will be the most interesting. If I achieve everything I want, I can't get it because I already have it. You don't baked the cake that is already made. So pushing for a utopianistic society that is adhereing to ones ideology 100% is political suicide once you have it and detrimental to the game.

I actually agree with several points made by Yankee.  The work you have done in game reform does little to actually encourage activity.

Teddy points out that we have become a stagnant community with nothing left to debate.  To some degree, that is true.

That is why, as President, I will work for recruitment of new Atlasians, of all political persuasions, as the primary goal of my administration.  We need new blood injected into the game to keep things interesting.  Also the primary excitement in this game is the elections, and greater numbers of voters makes for more exciting elections.

I dream of a day when 200+ votes cast in elections becomes the norm.

I still agree with you, just like I did last July. The trouble was in working to bring that about (well I actually did the least in terms of quanity of recruits in that period) I managed to recruit our friend from BAkersfield. You don't know who you are getting. And at times when sending those recruitment PMs I feel like a combination of a snake oil salesmen and a telemarketer. Most sane people wouldn't join this place if they knew what they were getting into.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

As a community, we've turned Atlasia into a country we are all comfortable with.

The reason things get personal is that there is no more ideology left to debate.

Half the problem is fear. Fear that if they push what they want, Atlasians left leaning electorate will forever destroy their future in Atlasia. When is the last time we had a Pro-Life President? Keystone Phil. Now without getting into all the things that made his administration not so good, why did he win while no other such conservative can get close?

Whatever the case there are many Conservatives who aren't comfortable with current policies but feal trapped. So I would have to disagree with your assessment there about everyone being comfortable where it is. Marokai is not comfortable, he wants to go more leftward, he has told me in the past. Yet he went negative and crossed the line the most.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

The problem is large numbers of Atlasian voters are American including yourself the last time I checked (Just making sure you didn't relocated to North Korea or anything). And many of them, especially on the right are entirely uncomfortable with European style politics and prefer a more solid Right wing then exists on the Continent. It may not be what you want or what anyone wants but in the words of Walter Cronkite, "Thats the way it is". As such we need a hybrid of both and we will struggle atll a comfortable mixture is arrived at. Unless you can control people's hearts and minds you can't control people's politics, Marokai. Yet one more reason people aren't interested, especially on the right, which I mentioned earlier. You don't want activity Marokai. Thats the problem. You have ideology to create and evoke it from people but then you respond to aggressively that it discourages debate.


What actually happens and what people perceive are two very different things. Last time I checked politics is all about perception. Unless you can controll perceptions, then what people perceive and what really happens will never be congruent. Activity is controlled and determined by what people perceive, what they perceive their future and the amount of interest to be.

And lastly defeating bad bills is not the same as actually being able to push for and pass good conservative legislation without being treated as some kind of dangerous villain. Of course in your mind there is nothing acceptable or even remotely worthwhile in terms of conservative legislation. Thats perfectly fine that you beleive that, but crusading against people for thinking otherwise is not healthy for this game, Marokai.


The reason your worthless "Stop giving tax breaks to outsourcing companies" failed is because its an entirely bs arguement created by for and off politicians to run populist campaigns. Its election year pandering, not good policy. There is no such thing as a "tax break for sending jobs overseas". And you will never avoid having a tax break that has the "unintentional effect" of causing some outsourcing. You can't create a bill that will achieve what you want without costing us jobs in other sectors or hurting us in some other way. Its always been that way too. At the very least the Atlasian Senate couldn't come up with a way to shape or word it that would solve that flaw with that legislation.

I thought you said you were comfortable, not you are complaining about stuff not passing, which is it?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I'd also like to point out that, if there's been no serious right-wing legislation, it's because people don't introduce anything. Libertas is no centrist or left-winger, and the two proposals from him that come to mind is an anti-war constitutional Amendment (that I voted for in the referendum), and a bill that taxes big business chains.

And honestly, if you'll excuse me just being blatantly obnoxious and partisan for this one: the right-wing has been defeated in the contest of ideas and debate over and over again. Look at the healthcare thread. If I remember correctly, we fought for nearly or just about 20 pages. That's why we won that bill. We didn't win because everyone was just some sort of social democrat in disguise, we won because we put forth powerful debate backed out by a multitude of sourced arguments. Purple State made it deficit neutral, we argued back and forth over it's effectiveness. It's worked just fine.

The simple fact of the matter is, the only motivation for your opposition is ideological, not factual. Yankee once tried to mount opposition to a small estate tax raise (which I believe was proposed by Afleitch) and I merely pointed out that it hits only a fraction of a percentage point of small enterprises. During the argument on taxes, we didn't win by sitting still, we won those tax rates in the Fiscal Responsibility Act because we stood up to the burden of proof on us and carefully balanced and demonstrated it's fairness and impact. (People can make up to 33k only being taxed at 14%, and the first 8k of income isn't taxes at all!) We won the stimulus because of the constant indepth arguments over it's effectiveness and direction. Yankee and I spent pages having a wonky back and forth!

I see nothing from the right that is that equivalent. Nothing at all. We won the smoking ban, why did we win that smoking ban with a veto-proof majority? Because tough arguments were brought forward by myself and Afleitch that won people over with our demonstrated fact.

As long as the root of your position is simple ideology, you will inherently be less successful.

That is a given, I beleive I made a very compelling arguement in that direction that complete 100% ideological success should be avoided in the game for the sake of self preservation of the game itself.

And beyond that there are many reasons. We can go on and on about problems with how Libertas and the Populares operate and ways in which they could be far more effective from a political strategy and a game play perspective. The problem is that so much criticism has been made (because a certain group ignored my warnings ) That now any criticism of the Populares, even constructive criticism sends chills up the spine of the Populares in a way the word "Crusade" does in the Muslim world. And frankly enough has been said of how the Populares have damaged the game play and such forth that to keep discussing it would be to beat a dead horse. Even so, I belevie I mentioned Libertas and some of his counterproductivity this afternoon in this thread.

I think more attention should be focused and the counterproductivity and "failing with good intentions" people. I think this thread has been very productive in this regard in that it provided the opportunity to say "THis is why PS couldn't turn it around", "This is why some partisanship is necessary" "This is why Game Reform is not end within itself" without having someone yell at your for criticizing a Consitutional Convention or a certain someone hoping "Your new masters treat you well" (You will never escape long term punishment for this ).


Maybe I should just read another Pat Buchanan book and use a phrase from it to rile up, oh damn Al is gone. That plan is out.   

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You know, I am beginning to reconsider the Legislative Reboot idea.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You see that is the problem with the reboot though. You would have to separate and only start over with some bills and then the mere act of deciding which ones would be a nightmare.