The Examiner: Election Tracker

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Mas isn't exactly fresh air. I'm surprised that so few people have commented on him being picked for yet another office that he's obviously not qualified for (the only office that he's actually qualified for being a blackboard monitor).

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Well... yeah.

But still its nice to see anyone besides the same 3 or 4 people in these jobs. If they screw up, they can be gotten rid of.

[Јas]

The Examiner

8 March 2008

MAS “obviously not qualified”
Outgoing SoEA, Al, has lamented the lack of attention the nomination of MAS117 has received since being nominated for the position of Attorney General. Al’s remarks make his feelings abundantly clear describing MAS as “obviously not qualified” for any office above that of hall monitor. Recent presidential hopeful, Polnut, was heartened to see apparently new people nominated but seemed to agree with Al’s core criticism.

MAS’s career hasn’t been without controversy. Having held jobs in every branch and just about every level of government, his periods in office have often been fleeting. Most recently his Governorship of the Northeast was the subject of scrutiny for what was deemed by many citizens as over-zealous use of his veto power. However, controversy has followed MAS’s career for a long time.

"a boneheaded, arrogant hack"
Indeed President Phil once led a campaign against MAS for reasons of incompetence, describing his nominee as “more concerned with having yet another title to his name instead of actually doing the job he might be called to do”, as well as a “a boneheaded, arrogant hack”.
 
----

President displays “leadership skills”
President Keystone Phil has defended his decision to disregard the 89.3% of the country, who believe that the President should have retained Lewis Trondheim as SoFA, as an example of “leadership skills”. The President proceeded to display these “skills” by describing the outgoing SoFA as an “extremely bitter little baby” and "throwing a fit”, before proceeding to make similar disparaging remarks against the general public who have questioned his decision. Indeed, the President went so far as to publicly mock a petition seeking to underline the strong feelings of many citizens on the issue.

----

Focus turns to Senate as SoFA Hearing begins
With the new STV elections on the horizon, whoever was nominated as SoFA could have expected more scrutiny than is the norm, to ensure that the new system is properly implemented. Over the past week, the public controversy associated with the President’s decision not to allow Lewis Trondheim to continue on in the role means the focus on the Senate hearing is liable to be that much greater.

Verily protests President’s hypocrisy
The confirmation hearing opened last night. Sen. Verily (NLC-NE), a close political ally of the nominee, Sen. Moderate – repeated to the Senate an impassioned criticism of the President’s behaviour and actions since his inauguration. Sen. Verily highlighted what could be seen as hypocritical behaviour on the part of the President:
“He had campaigned on a non-partisan approach to the running of government, and he has promptly evicted arguably the most capable SoFA we have ever had on essentially ideological grounds.”

He continued:
“it is clear that Phil…is unwilling to fulfill his promise of compromise and cross-ideological discourse.”

Despite his expressing complete confidence in Moderate’s ability, Verily has stated that he simply "will not roll over" for the President and that he feels he must abstain in the final vote in protest over the President’s actions.

Senators afleitch (NLC-D3) and Sam Spade (SSP-SE) have both expressed the view that the nomination should be judged on its own merits, independent of the furore surrounding the President’s actions.

----   

In Brief

Naso considering return to electoral politics
The Examiner has learned from a source close to White House Chief of Staff, Mike Naso, that Mr. Naso is considering a return to electoral politics in the next few weeks. The prospective District 2 Senate seat (should Sen. Moderate be confirmed as SoFA) may be a consideration.

Verily set for another term as PPT
With PPT nominations open once again, Verily (NLC-NE) has formally sought re-election. A number of senators have been quick to express their support including Mr. Moderate (NLC-D2); afleitch (NLC-D3) and meekermariner (PLP-ME). Following a confident and uncontroversial term in office, Verily is expected to be rewarded with another term.

Secretary of External Affairs Hearing
The SoEA confirmation hearing for nominee Masterjedi has opened for questions. The nomination has received less attention than either of the other cabinet positions. Masterjedi has promised to continue to work on the Foreign Policy Review and to deliver more speeches on foreign policy issues.

[Keystone Phil]

I applaud this paper for its fair coverage of events.

[Јas]

I applaud this paper for its fair coverage of events.

I am absolutely willing to correct any inaccuracies in any of my reports.

I am also willing to entertain suggestions from the readership on any matters under editorial control.

If you feel a particular piece is unfair or inaccurate please do feel free to offer your own analysis, critique or response for editorial consideration. I would be very interested to any such complaint you may have.

[Keystone Phil]

I applaud this paper for its fair coverage of events.

I am absolutely willing to correct any inaccuracies in any of my reports.

I am also willing to entertain suggestions from the readership on any matters under editorial control.

If you feel a particular piece is unfair or inaccurate please do feel free to offer your own analysis, critique or response for editorial consideration. I would be very interested to any such complaint you may have.

Oh, no, no, no. Keep doing what you're doing. I really do believe this is a fine example of unbiased, not at all bitter journalism. Keep up the good work!

[Reaganfan]

Very good paper, Jas. Keep it up.

[Јas]

The Examiner

8 March 2008

Evening Edition

President: Qualifications are important; except when they’re not
Giving input into the Senate SoFA confirmation hearing, President Keystone Phil stated:
“When others were President, I support (sic) different people for Cabinet positions and may have voiced that opinion but when the President made his decision, it is time to put that aside and debate the qualifications of the nominee. Instead, we had an angry uproar. Instead I was being told I was dividing Atlasia, I was being told I was a hypocrite, etc. because I didn't go with the popular pick. Shameful.”

However, the President hasn’t always felt that qualifications are supposed to be the major consideration for debate at Senate confirmation hearings. Phil had no problem undermining the nomination of hughento for the position of SoEA for reasons of a personal spat outside of Atlasia.

After successfully derailing the nomination, Phil declared:
“He should not serve if he can't keep his nasty feelings private. Again, I have been provoked and he paid for it.”
It is unknown if the President still believes that public officials should not be serving in office if they “can’t keep their nasty feelings private”.

----

SoFA Furore: The Public Theatre
The petition set up in support of Lewis Trondheim has become a focal point for debate and discussion on the President’s actions and behaviour.

TCash Statement
There Southeastern Governor TCash issued a strong statement defending the rights of the people to express their disagreement and to petition the government on political affairs. TCash flatly rejected the criticism of SoEA nominee Masterjedi that the actions by the group are “pathetic”. Similarly, he expressed his disagreement with the President’s claim that the group constitute an “angry mob”.

The Governor underlined the importance of the position of SoFA describing it as “probably THE most important job in Atlasia” – and said that he hoped that consideration would be made to keeping Lewis Trondheim in the role.

Phil's response
In response, the President accused TCash of ignorance, “It's really disturbing how little people understand how this process works yet would boast about their intelligence concerning the law.” The President outlined the belief that the Senate has no right to take the situation regarding Lewis Trondheim into account in its deliberations.

Elder Statesmen Weigh-In
Outgoing SoEA and former President, Al has also joined the list of citizens to sign the petition supporting Lewis Trondheim for the position of SoFA. In doing so he expressed support for the rights of citizens to make their feelings known. Al’s stance comes despite the personal view that there is no chance of the President nominating Mr. Trondheim, and indeed his confidence that Mr. Moderate will make an able SoFA.

Since the controversy began statements in of support for the President have been rare, with the exception of his actual and proposed administration members. However, former President PBrunsel has now also weighed into the debate in support of his former Vice President, Keystone Phil. PBrunsel explained that he understood “the importance of getting the cabinet members who you want to work with, not ones the people demand on you”.

----

SoFA furore II: The Senate

President: Verily doesn’t understand “the balance of power”
President Keystone Phil has defended calling those objecting to his SoFA nomination as “childish” as merely “stating [his] reasonable objection” and correcting “ill conceived notions”. He proceeded to suggest that the outgoing PPT didn’t understand Atlasia’s “balance of power”.

Verily reiterated the reasoning behind his objections and accused the President of “turning this into a big fight.”

Moderate on Verily’s abstention
The nominee himself has responded to Sen. Verily’s statement of intent to abstain on principle, with an interesting phraseology. Sen. Moderate said “While I am disappointed that I will not have your vote for confirmation, I fully understand your reasons and bear no grudges.”

State of Play
As things stand, from public statements made, 2 Senators intended votes have been made known:
Aye: 1 afleitch
Abstain: 1 Verily

----

Southeastern News

Lt. Gubernatorial Run-Off Election
With voting returns gathering pace, there seems to be little doubt that Dave Hawk looks set to return to elected office as the Southeast’s next Lt. Governor. As of goin to print the returns have been as follows:

Dave Hawk: 7 (MATCHU[D]; Sam Spade; Dave Hawk; John Dibble; Josh22; TCash; Bacon King)
Willy Woz: 2 (Willy Woz; Southern Patriot)
Milk & Cookies:   0

Voting closes just before midnight tonight, Central Time, Sunday.

Abortion Law Debate
Southeast Magistrate, John Dibble decried Lt. Governor Willy Woz’s proposed abortion law as variously “impossible to enforce” and undermining the principle of “innocent until proven guilty”. The stern criticism follows on from Governor TCash’s expressions of concern.

The criticisms have resulted in Willy Woz submitting a revised draft which has removed the restrictions on Southeasterners from attaining abortions outside the region.

And finally…
Southeast Magistrate, John Dibble has submitted for consideration a new proposal for dealing with prisoners in his Free Range Prison Initiative. The initiative proposes the purchasing of 5000 square miles of land where violent criminals would be released to fend for themselves in a cost saving measure.

[Speed of Sound]

It is unknown if the President still believes that public officials should not be serving in office if they “can’t keep their nasty feelings private”.

No it isnt. Its quite known. If he still believed it, he would resign today.

[Keystone Phil]

LOL at bringing up the Hughento incident!

Of course qualifications are important but where did I ever say it's the only important factor?

Oh, and then there's the completely misleading comment about how I don't want the Senate to take into consideration "the situation with Lewis"...whatever that means.

Keep up the excellent work!

[Keystone Phil]

It is unknown if the President still believes that public officials should not be serving in office if they “can’t keep their nasty feelings private”.

No it isnt. Its quite known. If he still believed it, he would resign today.

Hugh and I had a very nasty feud awhile back. That's not the case anymore. It doesn't even remotely compare to the situation today. Nice try, though!

[Speed of Sound]

It is unknown if the President still believes that public officials should not be serving in office if they “can’t keep their nasty feelings private”.

No it isnt. Its quite known. If he still believed it, he would resign today.

Hugh and I had a very nasty feud awhile back. That's not the case anymore. It doesn't even remotely compare to the situation today. Nice try, though!

You still talk that way now, so dont even play that game. Nice try, though!

[Keystone Phil]

It is unknown if the President still believes that public officials should not be serving in office if they “can’t keep their nasty feelings private”.

No it isnt. Its quite known. If he still believed it, he would resign today.

Hugh and I had a very nasty feud awhile back. That's not the case anymore. It doesn't even remotely compare to the situation today. Nice try, though!

You still talk that way now, so dont even play that game. Nice try, though!

Still talk...how?

Oh, you mean giving people an attitude after they throw a fit? Oh, sure. I've done nothing divisive here. I made my nominations and did so in a respectful manner, even praising Lewis' work. I'm content with how I behaved. Others wanted to battle.

[Speed of Sound]

It is unknown if the President still believes that public officials should not be serving in office if they “can’t keep their nasty feelings private”.

No it isnt. Its quite known. If he still believed it, he would resign today.

Hugh and I had a very nasty feud awhile back. That's not the case anymore. It doesn't even remotely compare to the situation today. Nice try, though!

You still talk that way now, so dont even play that game. Nice try, though!

Still talk...how?

Oh, you mean giving people an attitude after they throw a fit? Oh, sure. I've done nothing divisive here. I made my nominations and did so in a respectful manner, even praising Lewis' work. I'm content with how I behaved. Others wanted to battle.

No, we dared to stand up to almighty president and you wanted nothing to do with it. You areinfamous for your hot temper, and it shows itself in this again.

[Јas]

LOL at bringing up the Hughento incident!

The hughento nomination is relevant and newsworthy because of your apparant changed beliefs regarding:
i) what should be considered in confirmation hearings; and,
ii) nastiness by public officials

Of course qualifications are important but where did I ever say it's the only important factor?

The article doesn't claim that you said qualifications are the only important factor. The piece says that you have argued that qualifications should be a major consideration. This inference can be drawn from a number of your recent statements including:

when the President made his decision, it is time to put that aside and debate the qualifications of the nominee.

Have hearings based on Mr. Moderate's qualifications for the office. That's what this ought to be about. It isn't about who I should have appointed.

Oh, and then there's the completely misleading comment about how I don't want the Senate to take into consideration "the situation with Lewis"...whatever that means.

You've repeatedly said that the focus of the Senate hearing should be on the nominee, not your decision regarding Lewis. See the following...

If my nominee is unqualified, fire away. Until then, do your job and be concerned with the person before you, not Lewis.

I nominated an extremely qualified person for that position. If you can find flaws, fire away. Go. Do it. Focus on him. Don't be a rubberstamp. Show me what your problems with my nominee. That's what this process is about.

The situation here is that you want [/i]me[/i] to rubberstamp the popular opinion because Lewis has his fan base that can't seem to understand that Lewis is not a life appointment. This is exactly what I came to change here.

when the President made his decision, it is time to put that aside and debate the qualifications of the nominee.

If you wish to clarify some of these matters, then you could answer the following questions:
1. What are legitimate considerations for the Senate in confirmation hearings?
2. Do you believe public officials who publicly display "nastiness" should remain in office?

[Keystone Phil]

No, we dared to stand up to almighty president and you wanted nothing to do with it. You areinfamous for your hot temper, and it shows itself in this again.

Again, you tried to force your personal preference on me and I'm not budging. I don't understand what you're "standing up" for. Fighting against a qualified nominee? What a bunch of freedom fighters!

You probably just wanted to annoy me so you can be the child that you are and say, "Haha! Look! You have a temper!" Typical.

The hughento nomination is relevant and newsworthy because of your apparant changed beliefs regarding:
i) what should be considered in confirmation hearings; and,
ii) nastiness by public officials

Correct and that was concerning the nominee at the time, not someone I wanted to be nominated. Thanks.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[/quote]

Uh, right. Do the job and question, criticize, etc. the nominee before the Senate. Not asking for a rubberstamp.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Qualifications and conduct in Atlasia, not who ought to have been nominated.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

If they have a personal vendetta against someone, they shouldn't be promoted to higher office. Now I know you want to say I have some "nasty" attitude directed towards people here but here's the difference: I didn't insist on taking this route. Again, I made my decision and stated it respectfully so I really don't need to hear from a bunch of bitter people about how I'm the one with a temper.


I think the real problem here is that Jas and SoS are extremely bitter people. They want to point to my alleged temper problems but the issue at hand is that these two can't get over a decision I made that they personally hate. I also think Jas can't get over his electoral defeat in the previous election. Remember, one of my two opponents (or possibly both) wanted me shut out of the debate before the election because I was a "non factor." Remember that? Ever since that defeat, Jas has obsessed over filling his paper with stories (which might - just might - be a little one sided) concerning my administration. Such a pity he can't move on.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

This is exactly what fantasyland was like back in the Good Old Days. A campaign promise fulfilled days after taking office!

[Keystone Phil]

This is exactly what fantasyland was like back in the Good Old Days. A campaign promise fulfilled days after taking office!

[Speed of Sound]

You probably just wanted to annoy me so you can be the child that you are and say, "Haha! Look! You have a temper!" Typical.

No, here you are, in your defense of yourself, doing the crime. Painting your dissenters as nothing more than constant and infamous whining 'children'. I dont see how anyone even takes you seriously with all the hypocrisy in your words, sir.

[Keystone Phil]

You probably just wanted to annoy me so you can be the child that you are and say, "Haha! Look! You have a temper!" Typical.

No, here you are, in your defense of yourself, doing the crime. Painting your dissenters as nothing more than constant and infamous whining 'children'. I dont see how anyone even takes you seriously with all the hypocrisy in your words, sir.

How else am I supposed to characterize your silly behavior? You want to bait me and when I defend myself, you get to point to an "infamous temper?" Laughable.

[Speed of Sound]

You probably just wanted to annoy me so you can be the child that you are and say, "Haha! Look! You have a temper!" Typical.

No, here you are, in your defense of yourself, doing the crime. Painting your dissenters as nothing more than constant and infamous whining 'children'. I dont see how anyone even takes you seriously with all the hypocrisy in your words, sir.

How else am I supposed to characterize your silly behavior? You want to bait me and when I defend myself, you get to point to an "infamous temper?" Laughable.

No, I have expressed a dissenting opinion, along with many other very respected Atlasians. This isnt silly behaviour, this is a serious discussion Atlasia is having, whether youre angry we're having it or not. Sorry, Phil, say what you want about me, you won't bludgeon me into silence. Ive got nothing to lose.

[Хahar 🤔]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Qualifications and conduct in Atlasia, not who ought to have been nominated.

Emphasis added.

[Keystone Phil]

You probably just wanted to annoy me so you can be the child that you are and say, "Haha! Look! You have a temper!" Typical.

No, here you are, in your defense of yourself, doing the crime. Painting your dissenters as nothing more than constant and infamous whining 'children'. I dont see how anyone even takes you seriously with all the hypocrisy in your words, sir.

How else am I supposed to characterize your silly behavior? You want to bait me and when I defend myself, you get to point to an "infamous temper?" Laughable.

No, I have expressed a dissenting opinion, along with many other very respected Atlasians. This isnt silly behaviour, this is a serious discussion Atlasia is having, whether youre angry we're having it or not. Sorry, Phil, say what you want about me, you won't bludgeon me into silence. Ive got nothing to lose.

And, continuing my roll as "Broken Record in Chief," I'll say again that I don't have a problem with the disagreement with my decision. I have a problem with the unnecessary anger with my decision and my desire to stand by my extremely qualified nominee over someone who expects a life appointment.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Qualifications and conduct in Atlasia, not who ought to have been nominated.

Emphasis added.

Hughento and I had our problems here, too. I suggest laying off the arrogance when you don't fully understand the situation.

[Speed of Sound]

You probably just wanted to annoy me so you can be the child that you are and say, "Haha! Look! You have a temper!" Typical.

No, here you are, in your defense of yourself, doing the crime. Painting your dissenters as nothing more than constant and infamous whining 'children'. I dont see how anyone even takes you seriously with all the hypocrisy in your words, sir.

How else am I supposed to characterize your silly behavior? You want to bait me and when I defend myself, you get to point to an "infamous temper?" Laughable.

No, I have expressed a dissenting opinion, along with many other very respected Atlasians. This isnt silly behaviour, this is a serious discussion Atlasia is having, whether youre angry we're having it or not. Sorry, Phil, say what you want about me, you won't bludgeon me into silence. Ive got nothing to lose.

And, continuing my roll as "Broken Record in Chief," I'll say again that I don't have a problem with the disagreement with my decision. I have a problem with the unnecessary anger with my decision and my desire to stand by my extremely qualified nominee over someone who expects a life appointment.

But if we disagree with it strongly, wouldnt we naturally be angry? That seems to be a logical response to a serious breach in personal beliefs. Besides, it seems the only angry person here is you.

[Keystone Phil]

You probably just wanted to annoy me so you can be the child that you are and say, "Haha! Look! You have a temper!" Typical.

No, here you are, in your defense of yourself, doing the crime. Painting your dissenters as nothing more than constant and infamous whining 'children'. I dont see how anyone even takes you seriously with all the hypocrisy in your words, sir.

How else am I supposed to characterize your silly behavior? You want to bait me and when I defend myself, you get to point to an "infamous temper?" Laughable.

No, I have expressed a dissenting opinion, along with many other very respected Atlasians. This isnt silly behaviour, this is a serious discussion Atlasia is having, whether youre angry we're having it or not. Sorry, Phil, say what you want about me, you won't bludgeon me into silence. Ive got nothing to lose.

And, continuing my roll as "Broken Record in Chief," I'll say again that I don't have a problem with the disagreement with my decision. I have a problem with the unnecessary anger with my decision and my desire to stand by my extremely qualified nominee over someone who expects a life appointment.

But if we disagree with it strongly, wouldnt we naturally be angry? That seems to be a logical response to a serious breach in personal beliefs. Besides, it seems the only angry person here is you.

Uh, I see no reason to get angry over this. I've tried to make this clear before - This is a game.

Anyway, the childish behavior continues. Apparently, I'm the only person who "seems" angry even though you and a few others continue to beat your chests, telling me how you won't stand down to my authoritarian behavior, won't be silenced by the tyrant, etc.

Anyway, Mr. Moderate will make a great SoFA. I'm glad I nominated him and that his entire confirmation process ran smoothly.