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

[Lumine]

Hey, I just wanted to wish you good luck on the race (for obvious reasons I can't endorse you), since you have an impressive and detailed platform. Still, I have some concerns or doubts about several of those proposals:

-Abortion: Just like a Person said, even during the week before? I'm sorry, but we're talking about outright murder here, not a simple choice.
-Life imprisonment ban: I support the abolition of the death penalty, but life imprisonment is necessary. Some criminals cannot be rehabilitated, and leaving them free just because they were imprisoned some years is sensless. What about the victims?
-16 years vote: I would also oppose this. People that are 18 years old have no idea about politics, and that's even more common in 16 year old kids. They would be too easy to manipulate.

[Lumine]

Hmmm... How the devil could I forgot that? I take my comment back!

[Lumine]

We disagree in almost anything, but it's refreshing to see a different take in Israel that (even if it is extreme) does not imply our full and unquestioned backing of an aggressive country. That said, Senator, I'd like to ask a few questions about your foreign policy:

1.- Why do you think soldiers should elect their officers? Don't you think there would be negative effects on discipline?

2.- I understand that NATO might be outdated in light of the end of the Cold War, but taking the recent tensions with Russia and other states, wouldn't it be wise to at least have an alternate kind of military alliance with our allies around the globe?

[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...

[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.

[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.

[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.

[Lumine]

Oh, my apologies, Senator, sometimes I can be really dense, and perhaps a little bit dumb when to comes to try and understand some statements made on the thread... But you have my most sincere thanks for such an emotional, friendly and moderate answer to my concerns, which I'm sure the voters will appreciate very much. Naturally I have a lot of extra things to say, but I'll save my comments for the debate, which I hope will help to disprove some of those grave accusations launched against our political parties and so many officeholders you have spoken so eloquently and nicely about.

Thus, I will refrain from further comments on this thread, given that the "retarded" posts of this hollow and useless moderate hero are evidently not appreciated nor wanted.

Have a good say, Senator!

[Lumine]

Senator, I have a small question, if you don't mind answering it. Could you give a more detailed explanation as you why you voted "Nay" to confirm GAworth and Superique as SoIA and SoEA? You never said anything negative about GAworth, and while you mentioned Superique's views on Israel as a negative point, you voted to confirm Sjoyce and Bacon King as SoEA, and they had views that were almost identical to Superique's views, Israel included.

[Lumine]

Senator, I have a small question, if you don't mind answering it. Could you give a more detailed explanation as you why you voted "Nay" to confirm GAworth and Superique as SoIA and SoEA? You never said anything negative about GAworth, and while you mentioned Superique's views on Israel as a negative point, you voted to confirm Sjoyce and Bacon King as SoEA, and they had views that were almost identical to Superique's views, Israel included.

When SJoyce and Bacon King were up for a vote I was also not pushing a bill to throw up sanctions against Israel. I am now, and I would like to support someone for SoEA that is completely with me on that objective. Superique is not, which is why I have voted against him.

As for GAworth, I voted 'Nay' because I did not want to deprive the Midwest of one of it's most effective regional leaders, and I find unanimity in nominations to be boring. I have no doubt that he will do a proper job as SoIA.

I still have my private doubts about Superique, but I agree with GAworth, he'll do great in Nyman, but it's a real loss for our Region. Thanks for the answers!

[Lumine]

lol

My opponent has announced his "team" today, which unsurprisingly consists of a bunch of right-wingers. Weird how the "Progressive Union" has a member which openly calls for the privatization of Social Security and supports compulsory pregnancy, isn't it? Doesn't sound like much of a "progressive" party to me.

Having read Lumine's platform, I got out the same interpretation as TNF. What's wrong with that?

In my frank opinion, it's wrong in the sense that TNF takes conclusions to an extreme. Are there more right wingers than left wingers? The team is split in half with Superique and Brewer from the left and DC and Cris from the right. I have recieved additional help from other people in the right, sure, but what is wrong with that? The fact that I consider myself from the center/center right is not a surprise, but my views on the environment (and previously in game reform) were not necessarily popular with the right, so that doesn't make me a member of the far right.

I will concede to TNF that my views on Social Security are more to the right than the rest of the party, but then again, most members of my party have more leftist views than me on several issues. The Senator himself holds views that moderate Laborites sometimes consider too leftist, so while I don't want to engage in a game of tu quoque, I don't think that criticism is fair. And the compulsory pregnancy line is just hyperbolic nonsense. While I have serious moral concerns about abortion (we're talking about a life here), I am not calling for a ban on abortions, nor am I trying to lead a war against women. I'm looking for reasonable ways to reduce abortions and to reach a balance which enables abortion when necessary (rape, incest, danger to the mother's life, the first weeks of pregnancy perhaps), but this is precisely the kind of issue in which extreme positions don't work.

[Lumine]

Senator, I think it's time for us to finally have a debate on the issues. I sincerely apologize for the long wait, but I still can't find a moderator who both of us could consider impartial. Do you have any proposals for a moderator?

[Lumine]

Senator, I think it's time for us to finally have a debate on the issues. I sincerely apologize for the long wait, but I still can't find a moderator who both of us could consider impartial. Do you have any proposals for a moderator?

Perhaps a panel of moderators would be best? One Federalist, one Progressive, one Laborite, and one Democratic-Republican?

That would be perfect indeed, and it would certainly secure a very engaging debate! I would like to suggest Tyrion as the Laborite moderator, and Scott or Siren as the Progressive moderator. I'm not sure about the Federalist and the Democratic-Republican, though.

[Lumine]

Cris could be a good Federalist moderator.

I would love to see him moderate, but he is part of my campaign team after all...

Senator, I think it's time for us to finally have a debate on the issues. I sincerely apologize for the long wait, but I still can't find a moderator who both of us could consider impartial. Do you have any proposals for a moderator?

Perhaps a panel of moderators would be best? One Federalist, one Progressive, one Laborite, and one Democratic-Republican?

That would be perfect indeed, and it would certainly secure a very engaging debate! I would like to suggest Tyrion as the Laborite moderator, and Scott or Siren as the Progressive moderator. I'm not sure about the Federalist and the Democratic-Republican, though.

I'm down!

Great!

[Lumine]

Well, Senator, in the end I decided to contact Shua, Tyrion, Riley and DemPGH as the moderators, and they all accepted. I feel that they would provide a good balance between right and left (Shua/Riley - Tyrion/DemPGH), and they seemed the best choices to me. If you agree with them, all we have left is a concrete date (tomorrow, Thursday?) and set how many questions per moderator so they can make the necessary arrangements.

[Lumine]

Great to hear, I will open a thread for moderators to discuss the potential questions and date.

[Lumine]

Senator, I'm warning you in the kindest possible terms, do not instigate violence with your militia.

[Lumine]

I quote:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I find it hard to consider that self-defense, not to mention your blatant disregard of the law enforcement and the judicial system of the Republic.

I should point out that the Most Serene Republic of the Midwest does not allow for militias in its Constitution like the Mideast does, and your statement can be considered as going against items 1, 3, 4 and 5 of the Checklist of Approved Social Tasking in the Midwest Constitution. It's also important to remember that in the Atlasian Constitution the Senate is the one with the powers to call and create militias, the regions only having the power to appoint officers and lead training.

Furthermore, I personally believe the idea of putting conditions to the regional executive to relinquish control of a militia is ludicrous and it sets a horrible precedent, (not to mention the fact that it undermines the regional goverment), so I would encourage the Senator to submit the NTB to Governor Gass and end this problem.

[Lumine]

Governor, any chance I could request being portrayed as a bloodthirsty tyrant in said textbooks?