The February 2012 Presidential Debate

[Hatman 🍁]

Health Care will be one of my administration's top priorities.

I would abolish private health care altogether, except for cosmetic surgeries. The reason being, no one deserves better, quicker health care than someone else based on how much money they have. Priority will be based on how much some one needs health care. I would also make prescription medicine free, and ambulance rides free.

How would I pay for it? Well, it is a fact that socialized health care systems are actually cheaper than completely private systems. Doing away with costly lawsuits means savings. Also, a Washburn administration's focus on altering society will mean people will have less need to get medical care.

People would be encouraged to live healthier lifestyles, with subsidies on healthy foods, and fat taxes. Also, we would gradually phase out the legality of trading tobacco, which would cut down on health costs. We will also make sports funding a high priority that will encourage fitness levels amongst the populace.

And most importantly, a Washburn administration would drastically alter the environment, making the air we breathe and the water we drink much more safer to consume. All these changes will result in a cutting down of hospital visits.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Here's another audience question for the candidates, on the topic of the military's role and strategy -

how will the candidates ensure our national interests are met overseas while avoiding as many troop casualties as possible

?

[ZuWo]

Here's another audience question for the candidates, on the topic of the military's role and strategy -

how will the candidates ensure our national interests are met overseas while avoiding as many troop casualties as possible

?

I and my running mate Jbrase have come to the conclusion that our nation should not get entangled in new wars. The wars we fought in the past placed a huge burden on our people in general, our troops in particular and on our budget. Our troops should ideally only be used for purposes of national defence. However, this does not mean that our country should turn a blind eye on severe global conflicts and become an isolated place. We need an effective diplomatic corps and use our economic power to intervene in conflicts wherever it is necessary. Additionally, we need to intensify military and economic cooperation with our allies - countries such as Canada, Australia, most European nations or Israel. At the moment, two of the biggest challenges we are facing are the ongoing slaughtering of the Syrian population by its own government as well as Iran's nuclear ambitions. In cases like these, a military intervention should only be our last resort. Indeed, what we need to do first is exploit all diplomatic means to secure peace and stability.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

Here's another audience question for the candidates, on the topic of the military's role and strategy -

how will the candidates ensure our national interests are met overseas while avoiding as many troop casualties as possible

?

What a question! And a very special happy Valentine's Day to clarence and shua!

As Co-Presidents, the Andrews believe in treating our troops with the utmost love and respect. They are off fighting wars for us to have the freedom to love freely. We must return the love. Our policy is this: we must give our troops the most love and greatest care we can while they are meddling overseas. If they are stationed in other countries, we will send them care packages. If they are fighting, we will send them better uniforms and guns.

That brings me to my final point. We mustn't be quick to start wars, but we must be quick to win them. In our administration, we will first attempt to love our enemies as our friends, using diplomacy, care packages and handshakes to win over their hearts. If that doesn't work, we will love them with our sanctions. If that fails, we will show them all our love through the butts of our guns and the explosions of our bombs. But we don't wish this on anyone, so we hope our first style of good old loving will stick with our enemies. Remember, Jesus said to love thy enemy, and because we has His endorsement, we will do the same. But remember, Jesus isn't afraid to fight for what is His if necessary, so we will not be afraid to fight when we need to!

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

I've responded to Clarence's question in my own campaign thread, but I'll repeat it here.

I agree with my opponent when he says that one of the best way to avoid the loss of life through warfare, is not to engage in conflict when avoidable and to use our diplomatic clout to bring about a resolution that is of benefit to as many as possible.

However, as we know, sometimes conflict is not our choice and we need to be prepared to defend ourselves and our values should they be threatened and where a peaceful resolution is not an option.

In my previous comments, I stressed we must focus on making sure that on one front our military strength is not undermined and is able to respond to threats and with enough power to act as a disincentive. We can handle this concern and the concerns of those who worry about the size of our military Budget by approaching our military capacity as a demonstration of brains and brawn.

Yes, we need a powerful military but we need one that's smarter and embraces advances in technology and intelligence gathering. This is how we can reduce casualties, drones, highly-skilled but small strike forces engaging in tactical strikes - not a bloated behemoth lurching across the land.

Obviously, we want to acknowledge how important it is to avoid conflicts, they are expensive often morally questionable, and are devastating to all sides involved. However, we cannot sit by and pretend that all conflicts we might find ourselves involved in would be brought about by us. We need to take the focus off having the biggest military and directing our resources on having the smartest military. A military that can engage and respond quickly and efficiently is a way to end wars sooner and cost less, both in money and most importantly of all, in lives.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Atlasia has been investing in alternative energy sources, and is working to reduce carbon emissions through a Carbon Tax and other regulations.  Are we on the right track in terms of dealing with climate change?   Are there environmental issues that you believe we need to pay more attention to? 

[Hatman 🍁]

Here's another audience question for the candidates, on the topic of the military's role and strategy -

how will the candidates ensure our national interests are met overseas while avoiding as many troop casualties as possible

?

A Washburn administration would probably avoid foreign conflicts. Not because we are anti-war, but more for the fact that we wouldn't be able to afford it due to our many ambitious proposals. We would like to see money poured into insurgent coffers to topple dictatorial regimes. For example, we would support the Syrian uprising by supplying money and weapons. We wouldn't send troops however.

Atlasia has been investing in alternative energy sources, and is working to reduce carbon emissions through a Carbon Tax and other regulations.  Are we on the right track in terms of dealing with climate change?   Are there environmental issues that you believe we need to pay more attention to? 

We are not doing enough. These proposals are minor and don't really do much in helping climate change. They are mostly just to appease the left of centre base. No, only a Washburnist administration would be fully committed to reducing, carbon emissions to negligible levels. We have an 8 year plan that would retrofit all homes with solar panels so each home would be self sufficient. Our 8 year plan would also eliminate the gas powered automobile by replacing the industry with cars that run on renewable sources. These two ambitious goals will cut down on most of the carbon emissions here in Atlasia. Of course, to really combat climate change, we need all countries on board. However, Atlas does have the highest carbon emissions in the world, so we need to cut down the most. Plus, if we are able set in place our plan, other nations would follow our lead, knowing how feasible it actually can be.

[ZuWo]

Atlasia has been investing in alternative energy sources, and is working to reduce carbon emissions through a Carbon Tax and other regulations.  Are we on the right track in terms of dealing with climate change?   Are there environmental issues that you believe we need to pay more attention to? 

It is my conviction that we have to treat the environment with care, respect, dignity and humility. Therefore, our general goal as a society should be to reduce harmful emissions of any kind and to use natural resources wisely.

Yet, here's where I differ from most of my opponents. While I believe that the government should indeed set basic rules for the protection of our environment, I doubt the usefulness of far-reaching measures such as a carbon tax or massive state investments in alternative energy sources. I say let the free markets act; if there is a need for alternative energy sources they will eventually catch on. The only kind of policy I may consider as President is tax incentives for the use of alternative energy sources, but I do not support extreme government intrusion in the energy market.

Let me be clear: There is an ongoing public and scientific debate regarding the extent and causes of "climate change", which makes me question the purpose of most policies that have been proposed, and I do believe our nation faces problems that are way more severe than "climate change".

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

This is another issue in which there is a clear difference between the candidates, especially between ZuWo and myself.

I want to make this clear, I believe climate change is real, it is here now and our activities are involved.

However, the market mechanisms available to disincentivise carbon-intensive behaviour are just one element of a broader issue of environmental sustainability. For the record I believe that we should be making sure that our polluters are forced to pay for what their profit-making enterprises generate.

I don't believe that was can always protect industry at all cost, there must be consequences to their actions. We also need to ensure that industry is provided avenues to continue to innovate. For all of their crying poor, high-level polluters have put more money into research and development than any government or conglomeration of universities have done.

They know that low-carbon is the future, but as long as we make it easy to pollute and don't place a level of responsibility on our polluters, they won't reform their practices. So I will defend the carbon tax.

So let me make this clear, while I believe that we should be open to new scientific evidence should it emerge as to the basis of what we can see is going on around us. For now, I will listen to the experts, who can present evidence which is both qualitative as well as quantitative, as opposed to conspiracy theorists who are often funded by those who want to make this issue disappear. Even Margaret Thatcher, a patron saint of the free-market right believed that acting to respond to climate change was a good insurance policy and opens up new opportunities.

We need to manage water quality and ensure that we advocate for reforms to our agricultural policies to ensure that crops are grown where it is responsible to have it grown. We need to respond to the cold-hard realities of climate change, that is so we can adapt against that change we cannot prevent. We need to protect our coastal infrastructure against erosion and the risk from increases storm-surges.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

Friends, I don't usually mention the past, because the past is the past, it's over and done with, and we shouldn't dwell on it. However, in my past life as a Senator, I did a lot for mother nature, to have and to hold her, to protect the smallest of creatures and ensure we had clear air and clean water.

As a senator, I established the green fund for small businesses, gave low interest loans and tax breaks to those companies that invested in green tech, and also tried to implement a cap and trade system which the senate rejected rudely. It's okay though.

Friends, we must protect our trees for our children to play on, our dogs to climb, and our birds to sit. I know we are on the right track because I, in my past life, put us on that track. As co-president, I promise to you all now we will remain on that road and continue to see more trees bloom and more birds chirp when those April showers bring May flowers. We represent the environmentalist in this race, and we proud wear that rainbow coat of love!