Office of Chairman TNF: Red Army takes NM, UT, ID, AZ

[Lumine]

While my opponent talks, I act. Today that is none more apparent in the passage of yet another progressive labor law, the Employer Non-Interference Act of 2013, which makes it easier for workers to organize unions. I ask the people of the Midwest and of Atlasia if they are willing to reject a Senator who proposes detailed and substantive legislative action in favor of non-controversial, "me too" legislation. If your answer is yes, vote for my opponent. He has never and will never introduce anything that might cause "partisanship" or "disunity" in the Senate.

But if you want a Senator who will fight for you and yours, if you want a Senator who doesn't give a f**k about preserving some kind of imaginary "bipartisan consensus" in order to make friends in an Internet game, then cast your vote for me. I will not be a "me too" Senator, like my opponent will if the Midwest makes the mistake of electing him to the Senate. I have not been a "me too" Senator and I will never be a "me too" Senator. A vote for TNF is a vote for activity and principle. A vote for Lumine is a vote for wishy-washy centrism and me-tooism.

What's it going to be, comrades?

Senator, I resent those comments. I acknowledge that you have the edge in detailed legislation so far, but that does not mean that your record is more effective. Controversial legislation is not necessarily a problem by itself, but it is a problem when you are not willing to work with the rest of the Senate (and by that I mean Federalists, which, like it or not, are necessary to actually pass those bills). As Senator Tmthforu pointed out, you are only making actual interventions in your own bills, not on the rest of the Senate. I may not send a lot of detailed legislation, but that is not my duty as Governor, My duty is to represent people, and to pander to one side while neglecting the rest of the citizens would mean that I'm being undutiful. I sponsored Constitutional Reform, Speed Limits, an attempt to relinquish our claim on New Mexico, and my agenda for this month calls for Civic Education, Environmental Awareness, Nuclear Energy, a High Speed Rail and hopefully Wiki Reform.

I haven't released my full agenda for the Senate so far, but rest assured, I will do so soon and I will fight for it in the Debate, during the Campaign, and in the Senate. The difference among us? I'm willing to play nice and actually get the bills passed with actual consensus among the parties, which is actually what should be done. Neither Federalists nor Laborites have enough votes to freely pass what they want on they own, and that doesn't give anybody the right to create further gridlock and poison the political environment without actually contributing to debate.

EDIT: Made a slight mistake...

[Хahar 🤔]

Controversial legislation is a problem by itself

Why? If everyone has to agree with your legislation before you even propose it, what's the point of having a deliberative body?

[Lumine]

Controversial legislation is a problem by itself

Why? If everyone has to agree with your legislation before you even propose it, what's the point of having a deliberative body?

Sorry, my bad, it was supposed to read: "Controversial legislation is not necessarily a problem by itself, but it is a problem when you are not willing to work with the rest of the Senate". But the point remains that some bills are just way too controversial to be considered serious. Just look at the widespread reaction to the Labor bill to change the names of several airports or the TNF Rational Education Act, or the backlash at the abortion bills in the Mideast. Is not only the (sometimes) bills that go too far, but many times has TNF rejected any possible compromise, thus destroying any chance of those bills to actually pass the Senate. Besides, most of the time the defense of his legislation is based on personal attacks, thus making the whole thing even more pointless.

[President Tyrion]

Controversial legislation is a problem by itself

Why? If everyone has to agree with your legislation before you even propose it, what's the point of having a deliberative body?

Sorry, my bad, it was supposed to read: "Controversial legislation is not necessarily a problem by itself, but it is a problem when you are not willing to work with the rest of the Senate". But the point remains that some bills are just way too controversial to be considered serious. Just look at the widespread reaction to the Labor bill to change the names of several airports or the TNF Rational Education Act, or the backlash at the abortion bills in the Mideast. Is not only the (sometimes) bills that go too far, but many times has TNF rejected any possible compromise, thus destroying any chance of those bills to actually pass the Senate. Besides, most of the time the defense of his legislation is based on personal attacks, thus making the whole thing even more pointless.

I apologize, but that's just inaccurate. If nothing else, TNF is perfectly willing to compromise on his legislation, and almost never objects to watering down his own legislation, which I personally have been known to do from time to time.

[PJ]

Controversial legislation is a problem by itself

Why? If everyone has to agree with your legislation before you even propose it, what's the point of having a deliberative body?

Sorry, my bad, it was supposed to read: "Controversial legislation is not necessarily a problem by itself, but it is a problem when you are not willing to work with the rest of the Senate". But the point remains that some bills are just way too controversial to be considered serious. Just look at the widespread reaction to the Labor bill to change the names of several airports or the TNF Rational Education Act, or the backlash at the abortion bills in the Mideast. Is not only the (sometimes) bills that go too far, but many times has TNF rejected any possible compromise, thus destroying any chance of those bills to actually pass the Senate. Besides, most of the time the defense of his legislation is based on personal attacks, thus making the whole thing even more pointless.

I apologize, but that's just inaccurate. If nothing else, TNF is perfectly willing to compromise on his legislation, and almost never objects to watering down his own legislation, which I personally have been known to do from time to time.

He compromises only when he knows the bill will fail, while simultaneously calling the opponents of the bill fascists, and contributes very little to discussion of bills other than his own.

[Lumine]

Controversial legislation is a problem by itself

Why? If everyone has to agree with your legislation before you even propose it, what's the point of having a deliberative body?

Sorry, my bad, it was supposed to read: "Controversial legislation is not necessarily a problem by itself, but it is a problem when you are not willing to work with the rest of the Senate". But the point remains that some bills are just way too controversial to be considered serious. Just look at the widespread reaction to the Labor bill to change the names of several airports or the TNF Rational Education Act, or the backlash at the abortion bills in the Mideast. Is not only the (sometimes) bills that go too far, but many times has TNF rejected any possible compromise, thus destroying any chance of those bills to actually pass the Senate. Besides, most of the time the defense of his legislation is based on personal attacks, thus making the whole thing even more pointless.

I apologize, but that's just inaccurate. If nothing else, TNF is perfectly willing to compromise on his legislation, and almost never objects to watering down his own legislation, which I personally have been known to do from time to time.

He compromises only when he knows the bill will fail, while simultaneously calling the opponents of the bill fascists, and contributes very little to discussion of bills other than his own.

Well, I did see an attempt at compromise in the Rational Education Act, but said attempt was also filled with the usual comment of Federalist support for child abuse. The Hospital Act had no proposed amendments,  the "You can't fire me, I quit" was discussed in detail, but changes came from the other side. On the other hand, he has compromised in bills like the first Actual End to Imperialism, only to introduce a second version that is not only controversial, but that goes even further than the first one, including parts that were rejected by most of the Senate.

[tmthforu94]

Controversial legislation is a problem by itself

Why? If everyone has to agree with your legislation before you even propose it, what's the point of having a deliberative body?

Sorry, my bad, it was supposed to read: "Controversial legislation is not necessarily a problem by itself, but it is a problem when you are not willing to work with the rest of the Senate". But the point remains that some bills are just way too controversial to be considered serious. Just look at the widespread reaction to the Labor bill to change the names of several airports or the TNF Rational Education Act, or the backlash at the abortion bills in the Mideast. Is not only the (sometimes) bills that go too far, but many times has TNF rejected any possible compromise, thus destroying any chance of those bills to actually pass the Senate. Besides, most of the time the defense of his legislation is based on personal attacks, thus making the whole thing even more pointless.

I apologize, but that's just inaccurate. If nothing else, TNF is perfectly willing to compromise on his legislation, and almost never objects to watering down his own legislation, which I personally have been known to do from time to time.

Sorry Tyrion, but that's simply not true.

[President Tyrion]

Let's look at the facts by looking at the most recent completed cycles (Passed, Vetoed, Tabled) of TNF legislation. The reason we're only looking at TNF legislation is because we are currently examining the claim that TNF clings to controversial legislation without furthering compromise. I'll take the last 6 TNF bills, and we'll see what the story is. I did NOT cherry pick; I just took the last 6 closed bills by TNF. 

• Collective Bargaining Modernization Act - First, I offered an amendment to water down the bill, and TNF, after some discussion, accepted it as friendly. He offered an amendment of his own, which was also processed. I then offered another amendment because I was still not comfortable with it. TNF accepted 2 of the 3 changes as friendly, and asked for a vote on the 3rd. Then, TNF voted FOR the bill to get it to the President's desk, where it was vetoed. He responded to all of my concerns, and, while he didn't agree, he eventually supported the final product. Status: Compromise
• State Name Recognition Act of 2013 - This bill was relatively uncontroversial to begin with, and TNF did accept both of tmth's amendments as friendly. Status: Compromise, but so obviously uncontroversial as to be insignificant
• Freedom of Law and Association Act - This was another relatively uncontroversial bill, and passed unamended. Status: So obviously uncontroversial as to be insignificant
• Co-determination Act of 2013 - Here's an interesting one. The bill went immediately to final vote as there wasn't much debate. TNF indicated a desire to compromise, but our dear President Duke rejected it.
  

  I am open to entertaining a redraft if the President would consider it, rather than vetoing the bill. At any rate, if the bill is vetoed, I will continue to place it in the queue until it becomes law.
  

  I can't imagine anything I can do to make this something I could support.
  

  I am not going to defend TNF continually placing it in the queue, because that is not an action with which I agree, but the issue here is compromise, and TNF certainly offered it. This offer was rejected by the President, which is his prerogative. The option, however, was there. Status: Compromise
  
• Referendum on the Use of Military Force Amendment - This had a very interesting vote breakdown, because tmth very consistently likes to defer power to the people on amendments, which I appreciate, and I agreed with him, along with TNF and Gass. Essentially, people made up their minds and voted, and there was essentially no debate. There was no opportunity for compromise, although the bill was controversial. Status: Neutral
• Amendment to The Productivity Equalization and Worker Employment Act of 2011 - This one is an obvious one. There was not much debate, and the bill went to Duke unamended. Duke sent back a redraft. After much deliberation, TNF agreed to the watered down version. Note that TNF was perfectly willing to negotiate a redraft. Again, he compromised on controversial legislation. Status: Compromise

So, it appears we had 4 pieces of controversial legislation out of the 6, 3 with an opportunity for compromise, and TNF stepped up on all 3.

3/3 is pretty solid. This is a lot of work for me to compile which is why I stopped, but it's really, really clear what the trend is.

There are lots of things I absolutely cannot defend about TNF's record. This is not one of those things.

[TNF]

A suggestion for my opponent: this would be a great theme song for you campaign. I've taken the liberty of altering the lyrics for Atlasia for you:

I cried when they banned Simfan
Tears ran down my spine
I cried when Maxwell deregistered
As though I'd lost a father of mine

But opebo got what was coming
He got what he asked for this time
So love me, love me
Love me, I'm LumineVonReunthal

I go to abortion rights rallies
And I put down old T.N.F.
I love PJ and Flo and Scott Sunday
I hope every fourteen year old boy becomes a star

But don't talk about regional consolidation
That's going a little bit too far
So love me, love me
Love me, I'm LumineVonReunthal

I cheered when Superique was chosen
My faith in the system restored
And I'm glad the Mustafinists were thrown out
Of the Atlas Fantasy Government board

I love Laborites and Federalists
As long as they don't move next door
So love me, love me
Love me, I'm LumineVonReunthal

The people of old Nyman
Should all hang their heads in shame
I can't understand how their minds work
What's the matter don't they read The Record Courier?

But if you ask me to send my children to school
I hope the cops take down your name
So love me, love me
Love me, I'm LumineVonReunthal

Yes, I read Atlas Fantasy Elections
I've learned to take every view
You know, I've memorized the OSRP
I feel like I'm almost a Senator!

But when it comes to things like Israel
There's no one more white and blue
So love me, love me
Love me, I'm LumineVonReunthal

I vote for the Progressive Union
They want the game to be strong
I attend all the party meetings
They sure keep up me up till dawn

And I'll send all the PMs you ask for
But don't ask me to do my job
So love me, love me
Love me, I'm LumineVonReunthal

Sure once I was young and impulsive
I wore every conceivable pin
Even went to the Liberal Party meetings
Learned all about Napoleon

Ah, but I've grown older and wiser
And that's why I'm running to win
So love me, love me
Love me, I'm LumineVonReunthal

[Sec. of State Superique]

What's the matter with me?

[tmthforu94]

Senator TNF,

How many more liberals do you think need to register in the Midwest before your re-election campaign is assured victory?

[Talleyrand]

Senator TNF,

How many more liberals do you think need to register in the Midwest before your re-election campaign is assured victory?

I'm confused. So you are now opposed to people of different political persuasions than yours registering in the Midwest?

[tmthforu94]

Senator TNF,

How many more liberals do you think need to register in the Midwest before your re-election campaign is assured victory?

I'm confused. So you are now opposed to people of different political persuasions than yours registering in the Midwest?

That's not what I said at all - quit twisting my words.

Also, it would be nice if the Senator would spend a little more time actually debating legislation and a little less time coming up with silly lyrics that attacks his opponents.

[TNF]

Senator TNF,

How many more liberals do you think need to register in the Midwest before your re-election campaign is assured victory?

I demand an apology, Senator. How dare you tarnish my reputation as the avatar of the Atlasian far-left by sullying me as a "liberal"?

[tmthforu94]

Senator TNF,

How many more liberals do you think need to register in the Midwest before your re-election campaign is assured victory?

I demand an apology, Senator. How dare you tarnish my reputation as the avatar of the Atlasian far-left by sullying me as a "liberal"?

I never said you were a liberal - you're clearly a socialist. Please don't put words in my mouth.

[Talleyrand]

Senator TNF,

How many more liberals do you think need to register in the Midwest before your re-election campaign is assured victory?

I'm confused. So you are now opposed to people of different political persuasions than yours registering in the Midwest?

That's not what I said at all - quit twisting my words.

Also, it would be nice if the Senator would spend a little more time actually debating legislation and a little less time coming up with silly lyrics that attacks his opponents.

No one is twisting your words, so there's no need to play victim here. Your passive-aggressive shtick is just getting a bit too hackneyed.

I'm also confused as to why you're attacking TNF's activity record of all things. Whether or not you like the rhetoric he uses, he has consistently been among the two or three most active, if not the most active, Senator since he was elected in June of last year. He's certainly more active than you or I.

[Flake]

TNF, why are you the voice of liberty?

[tmthforu94]

Senator TNF,

How many more liberals do you think need to register in the Midwest before your re-election campaign is assured victory?

I'm confused. So you are now opposed to people of different political persuasions than yours registering in the Midwest?

That's not what I said at all - quit twisting my words.

Also, it would be nice if the Senator would spend a little more time actually debating legislation and a little less time coming up with silly lyrics that attacks his opponents.

No one is twisting your words, so there's no need to play victim here. Your passive-aggressive shtick is just getting a bit too hackneyed.

I'm also confused as to why you're attacking TNF's activity record of all things. Whether or not you like the rhetoric he uses, he has consistently been among the two or three most active, if not the most active, Senator since he was elected in June of last year. He's certainly more active than you or I.

Passive-aggressive? I've been fairly vocal and upfront about my complaints with TNF for quite a while now, and considering he is my regional senator, I think I have every right to.

If you only determine an active senator as one who introduces a bunch of legislation and then defends it by attacking the right, then yes, TNF is the most active senator. But as I've brought up before, he rarely contributes to legislation that isn't his own, and I have a problem when my Senator barely comments on half of the legislation in the Senate, and I know others feel the same. I have already brought forth facts that back that up, and I will continue to do so until TNF actually does something about it. He is far from being the most active Senator - a laughable claim. I may not introduce as much legislation as he does, but I think I certainly contribute more to the actual debate of legislation, as do several other Senators.

I'm not just bringing up these criticisms because I want TNF to lose next month - I'm bringing them up because I think they're valid concerns that I'd hope my regional senator will address. While he hasn't commented on this yet, hopefully it is something he will be more conscious of and will improve on, because if he's elected next month, I'd rather not have four more months of this.

[GAworth]

The Paper does not appreciate being used in a political attack piece. We are neutral on endorsements. We have interviewed yourself and accepted editorials from our regions Governor. We are open to all who wish to opine, no matter there party.

[PJ]

You would rather write a song about your opponent then answer simple questions?

[TNF]

You would rather write a song about your opponent then answer simple questions?

Not sure what simple question I'm avoiding answering here that isn't an inane or ridiculous set up by you or the "Progressive" Union.

The Paper does not appreciate being used in a political attack piece. We are neutral on endorsements. We have interviewed yourself and accepted editorials from our regions Governor. We are open to all who wish to opine, no matter there party.

It wasn't an attack on you, GAworth. I enjoy your paper as much as anyone else, but I figured it fit the best for the context of the song because it's our leading Midwest paper and Lumine is (unfortunately) our Governor. I meant no offense and thank you for interviewing me.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

Endorsed, of course.

[TNF]

Endorsed, of course.

Thank you for your support, comrade. It is much appreciated.

[Lumine]

You would rather write a song about your opponent then answer simple questions?

Not sure what simple question I'm avoiding answering here that isn't an inane or ridiculous set up by you or the "Progressive" Union.

Really, Senator? Federalists, Laborites and Democratic Republicans have asked the same questions, and you either ignore them or refuse to answer. For a man who has the nerve of saying that I'm a moderate hero with no beliefs, I find extremely cynical of you that you refuse to answer any questions about Former Senator Xahar and your opinion of the recent Cultural Marxist bills. I don't care if you want to go Joe McCarthy on the Progressive Union and pretend that we engage in frivolous conspiracies, but you should at least answer the legitimate concerns of your very own constituents. You are the Midwest Senator, and the least you could do is answer questions from the people you should be representing.

Therefore, and since I am (unfortunately) your constituent and I am supposed to be represented by you (thus entitled to make questions), I am going to ask you all the questions you have ignored so far:

1.- Why are you the voice of Liberty?
2.- What is your problem with Superique? (And for that matter, with our party)
3.- Why do you only contribute to your own bills instead of debating all bills on the Senate?
4.- What is your take on the Enemy Of The People Bill and the Mideast Centres for Progressive Cultural Enlightenment and Re-Education Bill?
5.- How do you explain defending Xahar while condemning Napoleon?

Honestly, Senator, is you want to be the Moderate Hero on this race and decline to answer so don't alienate you constituency at least be open about it so we can stop playing this senseless game of cat and mouse.

[TNF]

You would rather write a song about your opponent then answer simple questions?

Not sure what simple question I'm avoiding answering here that isn't an inane or ridiculous set up by you or the "Progressive" Union.

Really, Senator? Federalists, Laborites and Democratic Republicans have asked the same questions, and you either ignore them or refuse to answer. For a man who has the nerve of saying that I'm a moderate hero with no beliefs, I find extremely cynical of you that you refuse to answer any questions about Former Senator Xahar and your opinion of the recent Cultural Marxist bills. I don't care if you want to go Joe McCarthy on the Progressive Union and pretend that we engage in frivolous conspiracies, but you should at least answer the legitimate concerns of your very own constituents. You are the Midwest Senator, and the least you could do is answer questions from the people you should be representing.

Therefore, and since I am (unfortunately) your constituent and I am supposed to be represented by you (thus entitled to make questions), I am going to ask you all the questions you have ignored so far:

1.- Why are you the voice of Liberty?
2.- What is your problem with Superique? (And for that matter, with our party)
3.- Why do you only contribute to your own bills instead of debating all bills on the Senate?
4.- What is your take on the Enemy Of The People Bill and the Mideast Centres for Progressive Cultural Enlightenment and Re-Education Bill?
5.- How do you explain defending Xahar while condemning Napoleon?

Honestly, Senator, is you want to be the Moderate Hero on this race and decline to answer so don't alienate you constituency at least be open about it so we can stop playing this senseless game of cat and mouse.

Jesus Christ you're dense. If you (or your teenage support caucus known as the 'Progressive Union') had bothered to even read this thread or anything I'd posted, a lot of those questions would already be answered, in some form or another.

1. I made a whole goddamn post about it a few pages back.
2. When did I say I had a problem with Superique? You guys need to learn how to take satire, stat. I put him in the song lyrics because he was your running-mate last go around when you decided to run for President. I do not support him being nominated for SoEA on account of his support for continued military aid to a literal autocracy in the Middle East currently engaged in ethnic cleansing. The Progressive Union is a laughable 'political party' which has achieved nothing of value, stands for nothing, and has not even one Senate seat all the while operating a 'Shadow Cabinet' to criticize the administration. It is a ridiculous and laughable exercise in softcockery, where right-wingers like yourself co-mingle with supposed liberals like PJ (I'M PRO-CHOICE BUT COME ON). I do not wish for the support of or wish to work with your party. It is a pox upon the body politic, and I encourage all other parties to oppose it in any fashion.
3. This is a nonsensical charge as has been explained by my allies in this thread. I have spearheaded important amendments to all kinds of legislation, whether or not the PU derp brigade or Tmth-DC Al Fine muh reactionary caucus wishes to acknowledge that.
4. I am not answering that question because it is irrelevant. I am not a member of the Mideast Assembly. I will not have to vote on it. IBDD is a troll not worth addressing or giving even an iota of my time to answer.
5. I have answered this question before. The fact that you and your ilk do not like my answer does not change the fact that I answered this question a very long time ago.

It is rich that you are calling me of all people a moderate hero when you are literally running on nothing more than 'derp bipartianship' and 'muh moderation'.

I am going to win this race and rub each and every one of your faces in it. And I don't give a damn about bipartisanship, moderation, or all of those dumb buzzwords you think will win you an election. If you don't stand for something, you'll fall for anything, which is certainly evidenced by the flurry of posts in this thread on the part of you and your supporters.