Local Office of IDS Emperor Scott - Salisbury, NC (Back in Business)

[Mad Deadly Worldwide Communist Gangster Computer God]

Napoleon, I already explained, I think, pretty articulately why I think the justices should be impeached.  Supreme Court justices currently have the most trivial role out of all of us, and I think the very least they can do is acknowledge their positions publicly by participating in cases when the occasion arises.  I'm aware that Ebowed said the case was being discussed privately, but unfortunately, that's not helpful to the rest of us.  If the Senate doesn't impeach, it would be giving the OK to a recurring problem in this game.

I assure you, I do not support the removal of the justices for personal reasons.  I've been long against that kind of politics.  And in fact, I rather like opebo, but I don't approve of his inactivity as Supreme Court Justice.  As the President said, there are legitimate criticisms to be addressed here.  My stance is not in the context of some personal crusade, and I don't want to be brought into one, either.

And it's no problem, Marokai.

In what other Court cases were discussions among the Justices made public? You're literally saying that we should impeach the Justices because a long standing precedent of private deliberations "isn't very helpful". That's a gross misuse of the impeachment procedure.

Meanwhile, the Senate's work is delayed and we are voting on committees that should have been dealt with two weeks ago and not a peep out of anyone. That office, too, is criticized for its perceived triviality and yet its most important task was muffed completely. Is that worthy of impeachment?

And I ask what this recurring problem in the game is. The Supreme Court, in its current composition, has been swift in reaching decisions where time was of the essence. Do you have any examples otherwise that show this is recurring?

No, it isn't.  I don't have a problem with justices discussing the terms of the case privately, provided that they make the effort to carry out the deliberations in public, as well.  And you know, I don't have a problem with someone being late on something, provided that they have a reasonable excuse.  Quite honestly, I'm completely surprised to see you calling people out for inactivity less than six months after your unfortunate experience as president.  If you want to see what the problem is, open your eyes.  I'm not just talking about the Supreme Court when it comes to the inactivity problem.  We've all seen it.

[Mad Deadly Worldwide Communist Gangster Computer God]

I'm willing to reconsider Ebowed's impeachment and take him at his word, but I'm going to need a strong reason to do so and evidence of change.

[Napoleon]

Napoleon, I already explained, I think, pretty articulately why I think the justices should be impeached.  Supreme Court justices currently have the most trivial role out of all of us, and I think the very least they can do is acknowledge their positions publicly by participating in cases when the occasion arises.  I'm aware that Ebowed said the case was being discussed privately, but unfortunately, that's not helpful to the rest of us.  If the Senate doesn't impeach, it would be giving the OK to a recurring problem in this game.

I assure you, I do not support the removal of the justices for personal reasons.  I've been long against that kind of politics.  And in fact, I rather like opebo, but I don't approve of his inactivity as Supreme Court Justice.  As the President said, there are legitimate criticisms to be addressed here.  My stance is not in the context of some personal crusade, and I don't want to be brought into one, either.

And it's no problem, Marokai.

In what other Court cases were discussions among the Justices made public? You're literally saying that we should impeach the Justices because a long standing precedent of private deliberations "isn't very helpful". That's a gross misuse of the impeachment procedure.

Meanwhile, the Senate's work is delayed and we are voting on committees that should have been dealt with two weeks ago and not a peep out of anyone. That office, too, is criticized for its perceived triviality and yet its most important task was muffed completely. Is that worthy of impeachment?

And I ask what this recurring problem in the game is. The Supreme Court, in its current composition, has been swift in reaching decisions where time was of the essence. Do you have any examples otherwise that show this is recurring?

No, it isn't.  I don't have a problem with justices discussing the terms of the case privately, provided that they make the effort to carry out the deliberations in public, as well.  And you know, I don't have a problem with someone being late on something, provided that they have a reasonable excuse.  Quite honestly, I'm completely surprised to see you calling people out for inactivity less than six months after your unfortunate experience as president.  If you want to see what the problem is, open your eyes.  I'm not just talking about the Supreme Court when it comes to the inactivity problem.  We've all seen it.

Im not calling anyone out for inactivity here. I am trying to make a legitimate inquiry about a puzzling double standard. The leading proponents of this impeachment attempt are known to have personally disliked the Justices for longer than you and I have been here. The same ones are ignoring the more impactful inactivity of their own buddy.

I agree that inactivity is a problem, but impeachment is a solution worse than inactivity. Is no one willing to consider the broader implications of one President and one Senate appointing an entire Court? Under what justification is impeachment the first answer? As far as I am aware, neither you, Ben or Marokai made any inquiries or suggestions to the Justices that they publish their thoughts or reach a hasty decision.

When in the past did the Court discuss things like this publicly? Never. So why would we impeach them because of that? Send them a nice, or even a not-so-nice, PM and move on. Politicizing the Court is never a good idea, and openly advocating for an entire Court to be replaced at once is far worst Senator than inactivity.

[Mad Deadly Worldwide Communist Gangster Computer God]

Napoleon, I already explained, I think, pretty articulately why I think the justices should be impeached.  Supreme Court justices currently have the most trivial role out of all of us, and I think the very least they can do is acknowledge their positions publicly by participating in cases when the occasion arises.  I'm aware that Ebowed said the case was being discussed privately, but unfortunately, that's not helpful to the rest of us.  If the Senate doesn't impeach, it would be giving the OK to a recurring problem in this game.

I assure you, I do not support the removal of the justices for personal reasons.  I've been long against that kind of politics.  And in fact, I rather like opebo, but I don't approve of his inactivity as Supreme Court Justice.  As the President said, there are legitimate criticisms to be addressed here.  My stance is not in the context of some personal crusade, and I don't want to be brought into one, either.

And it's no problem, Marokai.

In what other Court cases were discussions among the Justices made public? You're literally saying that we should impeach the Justices because a long standing precedent of private deliberations "isn't very helpful". That's a gross misuse of the impeachment procedure.

Meanwhile, the Senate's work is delayed and we are voting on committees that should have been dealt with two weeks ago and not a peep out of anyone. That office, too, is criticized for its perceived triviality and yet its most important task was muffed completely. Is that worthy of impeachment?

And I ask what this recurring problem in the game is. The Supreme Court, in its current composition, has been swift in reaching decisions where time was of the essence. Do you have any examples otherwise that show this is recurring?

No, it isn't.  I don't have a problem with justices discussing the terms of the case privately, provided that they make the effort to carry out the deliberations in public, as well.  And you know, I don't have a problem with someone being late on something, provided that they have a reasonable excuse.  Quite honestly, I'm completely surprised to see you calling people out for inactivity less than six months after your unfortunate experience as president.  If you want to see what the problem is, open your eyes.  I'm not just talking about the Supreme Court when it comes to the inactivity problem.  We've all seen it.

Im not calling anyone out for inactivity here. I am trying to make a legitimate inquiry about a puzzling double standard. The leading proponents of this impeachment attempt are known to have personally disliked the Justices for longer than you and I have been here. The same ones are ignoring the more impactful inactivity of their own buddy.

I agree that inactivity is a problem, but impeachment is a solution worse than inactivity. Is no one willing to consider the broader implications of one President and one Senate appointing an entire Court? Under what justification is impeachment the first answer? As far as I am aware, neither you, Ben or Marokai made any inquiries or suggestions to the Justices that they publish their thoughts or reach a hasty decision.

When in the past did the Court discuss things like this publicly? Never. So why would we impeach them because of that? Send them a nice, or even a not-so-nice, PM and move on. Politicizing the Court is never a good idea, and openly advocating for an entire Court to be replaced at once is far worst Senator than inactivity.

I can't speak for Marokai, but I don't believe he and others want to pursue impeachment for personal reasons.

I'm willing to accept a compromise and support a law that would give the President the power to only appoint one justice, but that doesn't justify keeping the current ones.

I don't think we should have to PM justices to ask them to do their jobs.

[Napoleon]

Their job has never been to post all their thoughts publicly before reaching a decision, which they still haven't reached. Again, when they have needed to make a ruling they have been timely. If you want them to do their job differently from how its been done, ever before, then you should tell them before you try and kick them out of office. I don't think that's unreasonable but hey.

If its not for personal reasons, why aren't any other inactives being targeted for impeachment? I already mentioned the fact that we are two weeks late setting up Senate committees. I don't hear a word from anyone about that. I understand the Court is composed of people that may be considered low hanging fruit in the dystopian Atlasia of today but that doesn't mean they should be the first target of impeachment, all things considered. Do you think the failure to start the Senate on time is an impeachable offense?

And I think the idea that we ought to impeach the Honorable Justices goes a step further and calls into question their character. Opebo maybe a narcissist (Haha) but anyone who knows Bgwah and Ebowed knows they care deeply about this game and have done more for it than anyone calling for their impeachment. They would certainly resign if they weren't interested in doing the duties required of them.

[Mad Deadly Worldwide Communist Gangster Computer God]

If other articles of impeachment are brought up, I, of course, will consider them.  In fact, go ahead.  Draft some of those articles, and then we all can have a fair conversation about them.  Please, by all means, do so.  But it should go without saying that the job of elected officials is to work in the public square.  That is the only way we can be assured people are doing their jobs.  The job of a senator is to consider the evidence in front of them and reach a verdict, not meddle in petty affairs.  I don't even know why I'm being pressed on something I was never involved with.  As far as I know, this is between you, Marokai, and the judges in question.

I don't do rivalries with people here anymore.  This thread wasn't intended to be about someone's childish grudge and I will not let it go in that direction.

[Napoleon]

If other articles of impeachment are brought up, I, of course, will consider them.  In fact, go ahead.  Draft some of those articles, and then we all can have a fair conversation about them.  Please, by all means, do so.  But it should go without saying that the job of elected officials is to work in the public square.  That is the only way we can be assured people are doing their jobs.  The job of a senator is to consider the evidence in front of them and reach a verdict, not meddle in petty affairs.  I don't even know why I'm being pressed on something I was never involved with.  As far as I know, this is between you, Marokai, and the judges in question.

I don't do rivalries with people here anymore.  This thread wasn't intended to be about someone's childish grudge and I will not let it go in that direction.

I don't support impeaching anyone currently in office. But how are you going to suggest you aren't involved in this when, as a candidate, you announced your support for impeaching the entire Supreme Court? You're possibly right that we should know whether the justices are doing their jobs- in this instance I take them at their word- but this is how things have always been done on the Court. Why not look for alternative solutions? As it stands, you will be impeaching these Justices and throwing new ones into the same system.

Anyway, I don't think you have the grudge against the Justices, which is why I was shocked as I said earlier to read your initial statement. Unless you were referring to me having a grudge which simply isn't the case. I don't think my questions have been unreasonable though. I just had an interest in the thought process involved in reaching that decision because in my opinion impeachment is an extreme step.

[Mad Deadly Worldwide Communist Gangster Computer God]

It is the alleged drama I'm not involved with.

I would only confirm judges if they promise to do their jobs.

[Mad Deadly Worldwide Communist Gangster Computer God]

Now that we can get back to the real issues...

I have been invited to speak for the Nix/DemPGH campaign on education policy.  While we may not agree on all of each other's ideas, I look forward to engaging in constructive dialogue about this issue ASAP.

[Mad Deadly Worldwide Communist Gangster Computer God]

Ridgefield, New Jersey

I'm happy to be here in Ridgefield for the second townhall meeting of the campaign.  I'm eager to take all your questions, whether they relate to the work I've done as Governor or what I will do as your senator.

[Mad Deadly Worldwide Communist Gangster Computer God]

PRESS RELEASE

Today I had the pleasure of speaking at a campaign event for Senator Nix and AG DemPGH in New York.  You may view the speech here.

As been stated, education is one of the vital issues I am focusing this campaign on, as I did my last one, and it will be an issue I will begin to pursue during my first day in office.

[Mad Deadly Worldwide Communist Gangster Computer God]

PRESS RELEASE

I will be at the AFL-CIO in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania later today to speak about campaign finance reform.

[Mad Deadly Worldwide Communist Gangster Computer God]

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Good afternoon, and thank you to the AFL-CIO for letting me speak here today.

Today I am here to talk about campaign finance policy, which is an issue that the good people here have been fighting for for years, and it is an issue that I hold dear.

Our nation is fortunate not to have a Supreme Court that constantly caters to corporate interests, like we've seen in the United States, where a vital law that balances the influence of wealthy donors in elections was struck down three years ago.  This decision, in my view, was a travesty of democracy, as it undid years of bipartisan progress on making its democratic process fair to everyone.

But our national policy on this issue, I'm sad to say, is not much better.  Upon searching the wiki, I have found no official policy on campaign finance.  We can not afford to let our government's silence on this issue continue.

As your senator, I will pursue legislation that will correct this.  I will author legislation that values the tenets of the DISCLOSE Act, which  bans Atlasian corporations with 20 percent or more foreign ownership from influencing election outcomes through the use of campaign contributions, and prevents recipients of federal bailouts from making political contributions.  This bill will also give the general public access to information regarding corporate and interest group campaign expenditures through our websites and require disclosure of membership organization with more than 500,000 memebers that made political ads.

Critics argue that such legislation will be a threat to privacy rights, and while I understand these objections, I contend that personal privacy must be balanced with the integrity of our electoral process.  We must acknowledge this fundamental truth: money influences politics, and it would be an injustice on our part to let campaign donations go without regulation or oversight.

Thank you.

[Mad Deadly Worldwide Communist Gangster Computer God]

I would like to inform everyone that a vacancy still exists in the Northeast Assembly.  Therefore, if anyone is interested in serving, please say so ASAP.  I want to call a special election soon, but given our current activity crisis, I don't foresee one happening any time soon.

[sentinel]

If you want you can appoint me, but I am still running for Governor as well.

[Mad Deadly Worldwide Communist Gangster Computer God]

If you want you can appoint me, but I am still running for Governor as well.

Thank you.  You may swear in now.

[Mad Deadly Worldwide Communist Gangster Computer God]

For future reference, I am posting the current ballot.  The election is in just under four weeks, which may sound long, but will be here before we know it.  If you are considering a run for Assembly or for Governor, please declare ASAP.

NORTHEAST JUNE ELECTION

As Governor, I hereby declare this polling place open.

This is the Northeast regional polling booth for the June 21st-23rd election.  In this polling place, Northeast citizens are electing a Governor, five Representatives, and voting on two constitutional amendments.

Votes for offices in this region are cast using PR-STV.  Voters who wish to preference more than one candidate should allocate a first preference for a candidate by marking a [1] in the space provided by that candidate's name, and proceeding to number as many preferences as they desire by marking a [2], [3], etc for as many candidates as they so desire.

A vote will be counted so long as the voter that casts it is eligible to vote in this election and casts  a formal ballot. A vote is formal so long as it contains numbered preferences with no duplicate numbers. A ballot containing Roman Numerals is not considered informal. A ballot in which candidates have been ranked a,b,c, etc is not considered informal so long as no letter has been repeated, and so long as a single candidate has been ranked a, for as long as the letters are consecutive with no duplicate letters. A ballot is formal if the CJO can determine the intent of the voter without interviewing that voter.

Per past practice, write-in votes are only counted for a candidate if he or she publicly declares a willingness to receive write-in votes for a particular office in the [name of election] before the polls close in the Candidate Declaration Thread or writes in his or her own name on the ballot for that particular office.

Votes for "NOTA" or "None of the Above" for any office are formal regardless of the preference assigned to it. Should a voter preference "NOTA" as well as other candidates, only his vote for "NOTA" will be counted.

This booth shall remain open until June 23rd at 11:59:59 PM EST.  Editing your ballot at any point after posting will result in disqualification of your vote.

Official Ballot

Governor
[ ] Goldwater (Federalist Party - Delaware)
[ ] SirNick (Liberal Party - New York)
[ ] Write-in:____________

Assembly
[ ] 豚FLY (Light Party - Maine)
[ ] bore (Labor Party - Rhode Island)
[ ] Snowball (Labor Party - New York)
[ ] Goldwater (Federalist Party - New York)
[ ] Write-in:____________

Amendment 1. Constitution Ratification Amendment

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[ ] Yes
[ ] No
[ ] Abstain

Amendment 2. Amendment to Northeast Constitution Article 2 Section 10

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[ ] Yes
[ ] No
[ ] Abstain

[sentinel]

I'm New York, bud.

[Mad Deadly Worldwide Communist Gangster Computer God]

I'm New York, bud.

Oops.

I knew it was New something.

[sentinel]

I'm New York, bud.

Oops.

I knew it was New something.

Wouldn't mind New Amsterdam haha

[Mad Deadly Worldwide Communist Gangster Computer God]

I will formally endorse one of the candidates running for Northeast Governor tonight.

[Mad Deadly Worldwide Communist Gangster Computer God]

Also, I will be abstaining from the Northeast regional debate next week.  Voters can learn more about my positions here.

On a side-note, I welcome former Representative Poirot to a clean and competitive race.

[Mad Deadly Worldwide Communist Gangster Computer God]

As always, it is good to see another competitive election for the Northeast Region shaping up.  Polls have indicated that this will be an especially tight race, and one of two very qualified Northeast statesmen will be our next governor in just a few weeks.

Both candidates have reputations for being pragmatic and loyal to the Northeast, and that kind of attitude is just what the Northeast needs to keep going.  Tonight, it is my honor to formally endorse Representative Sirnick for Northeast Governor.  While we do not always see eye-to-eye, he has contributed numerous ideas for improving our region, and I trust him to continue the openness and honesty that the Northeast governor is expected to uphold.

I join Senator Nix and others as we pick Nick for Governor of this great region!

[Mad Deadly Worldwide Communist Gangster Computer God]

Also, we are still three people short on having a full slate of Assembly candidates.

Please, for the love of God, don't make this a repeat.

[sentinel]

As always, it is good to see another competitive election for the Northeast Region shaping up.  Polls have indicated that this will be an especially tight race, and one of two very qualified Northeast statesmen will be our next governor in just a few weeks.

Both candidates have reputations for being pragmatic and loyal to the Northeast, and that kind of attitude is just what the Northeast needs to keep going.  Tonight, it is my honor to formally endorse Representative Sirnick for Northeast Governor.  While we do not always see eye-to-eye, he has contributed numerous ideas for improving our region, and I trust him to continue the openness and honesty that the Northeast governor is expected to uphold.

I join Senator Nix and others as we pick Nick for Governor of this great region!

I'd like to thank Governor Scott for his support. I'm looking forward to seeing the "Senator" title next to Scott's name as well!