The Office of JCL

[PJ]

We may disagree on many issues, but the civic union endorses you for Mideast assembly.

[PJ]

Tuscaloosa, Alabama

Thank you for such a robust welcome.

The issue I want to talk about is on the hearts and minds of many Atlasians of all political views. The current regional structure itself. Many in the political class and citizens are supportive of cutting the regions down from five to three. Their main concerns are well intentioned to promote greater activity. Are they not aware of the reforms Spamage and Maxwell are trying to promote within their regions to spur activity along with the IDS and my own Mideast and the ever solid Northeast once led by a friend in former governor Scott? While it will be a great way to shake things up I as a regionalist can't support this until I have more information on the pros and cons of going to three regions. Lets have a.careful and thoughtful debate rather than running towards a fad that could hurt the game we all love irreparably.

I agree with you but would go even further in that I vehemently oppose any attempts to reduce the number of Atlasian regions.

Since this is a crucial issue for me I proudly endorse you!

Just like you vehemently oppose religious freedom for Muslims and gay adoption. Go figure!

One has absolutely nothing to do with the other.

Also, this is for everyone. If you're going to argue, stop it with the fake smileys.

[PJ]

Tuscaloosa, Alabama

Thank you for such a robust welcome.

The issue I want to talk about is on the hearts and minds of many Atlasians of all political views. The current regional structure itself. Many in the political class and citizens are supportive of cutting the regions down from five to three. Their main concerns are well intentioned to promote greater activity. Are they not aware of the reforms Spamage and Maxwell are trying to promote within their regions to spur activity along with the IDS and my own Mideast and the ever solid Northeast once led by a friend in former governor Scott? While it will be a great way to shake things up I as a regionalist can't support this until I have more information on the pros and cons of going to three regions. Lets have a.careful and thoughtful debate rather than running towards a fad that could hurt the game we all love irreparably.

I agree with you but would go even further in that I vehemently oppose any attempts to reduce the number of Atlasian regions.

Since this is a crucial issue for me I proudly endorse you!

Just like you vehemently oppose religious freedom for Muslims and gay adoption. Go figure!

One has absolutely nothing to do with the other.

Also, this is for everyone. If you're going to argue, stop it with the fake smileys.

Calling out a politician on his retrograde positions has nothing to do with his retrograde position on game reform? I'm realize you and your party are as reactionary as they come PJ, but c'mon, there's obviously a link here between being a radical social conservative who wants to ban minarets and gay adoption and is opposed to changing the regional structure. Perhaps ZuWo is afraid of losing his power over the Mideast and that region's status as the nation's most reactionary?

Reactionary? Reactionary? REACTIONARY? SERIOUSLY? You simply know that's not true, TNF, FloridianOranges and I have a similar Matrix score to Bernie Sanders. I'm going to leave this arguement now, I wish you all well, I apologize if I offended anyone, and I hope no one kills anybody.

[PJ]

I have a question for fellow Federalists. If Max is well over quota for election why are you still first preferencing him and not helping Tmth and myself with first preferences. Do you want a majority in the senate? Then throw some first preferences our way.

Maybe there are Federalists who (shock! horror!) don't actually want you in the Senate.
Same principle exists on the other side, see for example

1. Sjoyce
2. Gass
3. Maxwell
4. Tmth
5. Xahar

Nix not voting for Napoleon....... I expect this kind of behavior from the left not the right. To think if they (meaning the federalist) were running and I wasn't I would give them my vote. I only expect the same in return. Isn't that how the party system works. I knew Nix wasn't going to preference me at all but for Federalists to preference Napoleon and SJoyce ahead of me when I would preference them ahead of any non federalist vote I make shows a double standard that will cripple any political movement.

What is that first sentence supposed to mean? Fortunately, a lot of the Federalists are less partisan than you. Let's take the most moderate member of the Federalist Party, which in my opinion is Sbane.  Not sure if they already voted, but based on ideology alone, does it make sense for a federalist with Sbane's matrix score to vote for someone they differ from 2 points economically and 3 points socially (Napoleon), or someone they differ from 6 points economically and 5 points socially? (You)

[PJ]

I have a question for fellow Federalists. If Max is well over quota for election why are you still first preferencing him and not helping Tmth and myself with first preferences. Do you want a majority in the senate? Then throw some first preferences our way.

Maybe there are Federalists who (shock! horror!) don't actually want you in the Senate.
Same principle exists on the other side, see for example

1. Sjoyce
2. Gass
3. Maxwell
4. Tmth
5. Xahar

Nix not voting for Napoleon....... I expect this kind of behavior from the left not the right. To think if they (meaning the federalist) were running and I wasn't I would give them my vote. I only expect the same in return. Isn't that how the party system works. I knew Nix wasn't going to preference me at all but for Federalists to preference Napoleon and SJoyce ahead of me when I would preference them ahead of any non federalist vote I make shows a double standard that will cripple any political movement.

What is that first sentence supposed to mean? Fortunately, a lot of the Federalists are less partisan than you. Let's take the most moderate member of the Federalist Party, which in my opinion is Sbane.  Not sure if they already voted, but based on ideology alone, does it make sense for a federalist with Sbane's matrix score to vote for someone they differ from 2 points economically and 3 points socially (Napoleon), or someone they differ from 6 points economically and 5 points socially? (You)

Him and Scott I expected. I'm talking about Vosem and Torie.

Your position on gay marriage would probably explain Torie's vote.

[PJ]

I have a question for fellow Federalists. If Max is well over quota for election why are you still first preferencing him and not helping Tmth and myself with first preferences. Do you want a majority in the senate? Then throw some first preferences our way.

Maybe there are Federalists who (shock! horror!) don't actually want you in the Senate.
Same principle exists on the other side, see for example

1. Sjoyce
2. Gass
3. Maxwell
4. Tmth
5. Xahar

Nix not voting for Napoleon....... I expect this kind of behavior from the left not the right. To think if they (meaning the federalist) were running and I wasn't I would give them my vote. I only expect the same in return. Isn't that how the party system works. I knew Nix wasn't going to preference me at all but for Federalists to preference Napoleon and SJoyce ahead of me when I would preference them ahead of any non federalist vote I make shows a double standard that will cripple any political movement.

What is that first sentence supposed to mean? Fortunately, a lot of the Federalists are less partisan than you. Let's take the most moderate member of the Federalist Party, which in my opinion is Sbane.  Not sure if they already voted, but based on ideology alone, does it make sense for a federalist with Sbane's matrix score to vote for someone they differ from 2 points economically and 3 points socially (Napoleon), or someone they differ from 6 points economically and 5 points socially? (You)

Him and Scott I expected. I'm talking about Vosem and Torie.

Your position on gay marriage would probably explain Torie's vote.

Yet I would back him if he were running in this race.

There are RL politicians who I wouldn't vote for even if they endorsed me. (If I was a RL politician.)

I'm not saying I wouldn't vote for you if you endorsed me, not sure what I would do in that situation, but I can't imagine your getting your endorsement in the first place.

[PJ]

Sorry if anyone was offended by my comments.

[PJ]

Indianapolis, IN

I'd like to express my thoughts on this drive to call for a convention to overall the Atlasian Constitution. I can understand why some want to do so. Some believe the game is becoming stagnant and want to change legislative processes. This will not be getting my support. One of the proposed changes would end the regional system we have. There is a very good reason for the idea of seperation of powers and duel federalism. The federal government has no business dictating matters of family to the regions. The powers of the national government need to be clear, specific and limited.

Regarding the matter of unions I have examined a certain system used in Canada (discussion in Spamage for President thread) called the Rand Formula. Given my economic views I cannot in good conscience support any move towards. While I firmly believe unions have a right to be an advocate for individual workers going before management, I also believe that the individual has the right not to join said union and the rights and responsibilities that come with it. I believe union and non union labor can work together amicably and peacefully in the same shop. So why should one be forced to join a union as part of being hired to say an auto or steel factory? They shouldn't be. That's why I believe in right to work. It promotes a fair job playing field. Union exclusivity doesn't.

I and many others don't support the elimination of regional governments. Yet I support the new constitutional convention. The current constitution has flaws. I'm sure everyone, including yourself, know of something in the constitution they would like to change.

[PJ]

JCL, do you oppose adoptions by single parents?

I was raised by a single parent. My mother from 3-11 and my dad after that. While I think any situation besides the two parent married heterosexual couple is less than ideal,  if the circumstances were right a single could. There's this young lady who became a missionary in Africa. I believe she adopted some 14 or so African kids. The story is talked about in the book Kisses from Katie. .

So you have no problems with single parents, but gay parents are unacceptable because a child does better with a mother and a father?

[PJ]

JCL, do you oppose adoptions by single parents?

I was raised by a single parent. My mother from 3-11 and my dad after that. While I think any situation besides the two parent married heterosexual couple is less than ideal,  if the circumstances were right a single could. There's this young lady who became a missionary in Africa. I believe she adopted some 14 or so African kids. The story is talked about in the book Kisses from Katie. .

So you have no problems with single parents, but gay parents are unacceptable because a child does better with a mother and a father?

If your union can't produce new life, you don't get to adopt. I gave you one instance where a single could do it. The circumstances of my life from 3-adulthood of how I was raised wouldn't be close to the ideal situation but it is miles ahead of a gay couple could ever offer.

1. If this is your belief, then women who can't have children shouldn't be allowed to adopt.
2. Back it up with more than disproven research.