Impeach Nym!!!!

[12th Doctor]

No, I don't acctualy support the idea of impeaching the president.  But this is what you guys are in affect doing by not giving him any chance to acctually do something.  All you are doing is bombarding him with critizism for this that and the other thing.  He has a rough job being the first president and if we don't show at least some semblence of support for him, it is going to make his job impossible to do.  Saying that he 'betrayed our trust is a total farse because these issues weren't addressed during the campaign(Looks over at Republicans in particular and Peter Bell).  I don't think that calling him a dictator is very constructive, or is going to strengthen the process any way shape or form.  So please, for the good of the forum, back off until the new addministration is up and running and equiped to address these concerns.

[TheWildCard]

Okay...

I'd like to make it clear I in no way ever called Nym90 a dictator the only thing I've ever done was try to figure out why he didn't want a supreme court(the new proposal is fine btw and you can see I support it).

[12th Doctor]

Maybe you, but there are certainly plenty of people who cannot- NO- will not shut-up about the matter and just continue to oppose any suggestion that is brought up, compromise or otherwise.

[7,052,770]

have to say the title of the post scared me

[12th Doctor]

have to say the title of the post scared me

It was intended to catch people's attention.  

[Nation]

Thank you, Supersoulty. Many thanks.

[Peter]

No, I don't acctualy support the idea of impeaching the president.  But this is what you guys are in affect doing by not giving him any chance to acctually do something.  All you are doing is bombarding him with critizism for this that and the other thing.  He has a rough job being the first president and if we don't show at least some semblence of support for him, it is going to make his job impossible to do.  Saying that he 'betrayed our trust is a total farse because these issues weren't addressed during the campaign(Looks over at Republicans in particular and Peter Bell).  I don't think that calling him a dictator is very constructive, or is going to strengthen the process any way shape or form.  So please, for the good of the forum, back off until the new addministration is up and running and equiped to address these concerns.

Supersoulty,

You are of course entitled to your opinion as to the administration, as am I. I should certainly hope that I need not go over the issue of whether it is permissible for citizens to question their leaders in a democratic society, because it surely is. I am more than happy to give the administration room to settle in and to find its footing before it starts addressing these concerns; However, the administration started addressing these concerns by making statements to us regarding the Convention, I felt them to be wrong, and I exercised my right to criticise. As yet, I am undecided as to the latest proposal, though it is certainly more agreeable than before. Generally the only way that any government in the world (let alone fantasy) will change bad policy is through public pressure, I simply applied this pressure - if you think I was screaming "impeach Nym", you are wrong, if I believe that, I will state it rather than dance around the issue.

[dunn]

No, I don't acctualy support the idea of impeaching the president.  But this is what you guys are in affect doing by not giving him any chance to acctually do something.  All you are doing is bombarding him with critizism for this that and the other thing.  He has a rough job being the first president and if we don't show at least some semblence of support for him, it is going to make his job impossible to do.  Saying that he 'betrayed our trust is a total farse because these issues weren't addressed during the campaign(Looks over at Republicans in particular and Peter Bell).  I don't think that calling him a dictator is very constructive, or is going to strengthen the process any way shape or form.  So please, for the good of the forum, back off until the new addministration is up and running and equiped to address these concerns.

Supersoulty,

You are of course entitled to your opinion as to the administration, as am I. I should certainly hope that I need not go over the issue of whether it is permissible for citizens to question their leaders in a democratic society, because it surely is. I am more than happy to give the administration room to settle in and to find its footing before it starts addressing these concerns; However, the administration started addressing these concerns by making statements to us regarding the Convention, I felt them to be wrong, and I exercised my right to criticise. As yet, I am undecided as to the latest proposal, though it is certainly more agreeable than before. Generally the only way that any government in the world (let alone fantasy) will change bad policy is through public pressure, I simply applied this pressure - if you think I was screaming "impeach Nym", you are wrong, if I believe that, I will state it rather than dance around the issue.

I fully agree with mr Bell. farthermore when did the president term started, what are the limits to his power, wuth no written constitution there will be tyrany or chaos. the president elect and his vp accepted thr idea of a convention but delaying the 5 persom committee they talked about. lets have the convention and will vote on all the issues

[12th Doctor]

No, I don't acctualy support the idea of impeaching the president.  But this is what you guys are in affect doing by not giving him any chance to acctually do something.  All you are doing is bombarding him with critizism for this that and the other thing.  He has a rough job being the first president and if we don't show at least some semblence of support for him, it is going to make his job impossible to do.  Saying that he 'betrayed our trust is a total farse because these issues weren't addressed during the campaign(Looks over at Republicans in particular and Peter Bell).  I don't think that calling him a dictator is very constructive, or is going to strengthen the process any way shape or form.  So please, for the good of the forum, back off until the new addministration is up and running and equiped to address these concerns.

Supersoulty,

You are of course entitled to your opinion as to the administration, as am I. I should certainly hope that I need not go over the issue of whether it is permissible for citizens to question their leaders in a democratic society, because it surely is. I am more than happy to give the administration room to settle in and to find its footing before it starts addressing these concerns; However, the administration started addressing these concerns by making statements to us regarding the Convention, I felt them to be wrong, and I exercised my right to criticise. As yet, I am undecided as to the latest proposal, though it is certainly more agreeable than before. Generally the only way that any government in the world (let alone fantasy) will change bad policy is through public pressure, I simply applied this pressure - if you think I was screaming "impeach Nym", you are wrong, if I believe that, I will state it rather than dance around the issue.

I fully agree with mr Bell. farthermore when did the president term started, what are the limits to his power, wuth no written constitution there will be tyrany or chaos. the president elect and his vp accepted thr idea of a convention but delaying the 5 persom committee they talked about. lets have the convention and will vote on all the issues

Nym is not a tyrant.  He is just trying to start things up.  He hasn't even selected his whole cabinet yet and you guys are jumping all over him.

I agree that people have the right to say what they will, but you should excercize some prudence and responsibility.  With liberty comes responsibility and our responsibility at this time is to have order so that we can allow our leaders to be able to work-out current concerns without public oppinion breathing down their necks.  Civil imput is the order of the day here, not far-flung, far-out statements.

[12th Doctor]

What far flung statements have been said, supersoulty?

Saying that Nym 'betrayed the voters trust'.  Saying that this government will 'decend into tyranny'.  Amoung many other.

[Peter]

Saying that Nym 'betrayed the voters trust'.  Saying that this government will 'decend into tyranny'.  Amoung any other.

I am guilty of a variant of the former. I would like to take the chance now to set the record straight: I consider it to be a betrayl of the voters to deny them adequate democratic safeguards (I never once used the word trust in the context described).

Second of all, nobody has ever used the words "descend into tyranny", and if you refer to a statement I made, as I believe you do, then you will find my exact words were "... effectively endorsing mob justice and/or tyranny ...", I never once called Nym a tyrant, I never once suggested that Nym's proposals would cause us to descend into tyranny, just that the possibility was there due to a lack of proper democratic safeguards. It is quite possible to accept a situation that is far from ideal yet not be guilty of its potential failings (e.g. Ulyssess Grant presided over one of the most corrupt administrations in history, yet was not guilty of any corruption himself).

[12th Doctor]

Saying that Nym 'betrayed the voters trust'.  Saying that this government will 'decend into tyranny'.  Amoung any other.

I am guilty of a variant of the former. I would like to take the chance now to set the record straight: I consider it to be a betrayl of the voters to deny them adequate democratic safeguards (I never once used the word trust in the context described).

Second of all, nobody has ever used the words "descend into tyranny", and if you refer to a statement I made, as I believe you do, then you will find my exact words were "... effectively endorsing mob justice and/or tyranny ...", I never once called Nym a tyrant, I never once suggested that Nym's proposals would cause us to descend into tyranny, just that the possibility was there due to a lack of proper democratic safeguards. It is quite possible to accept a situation that is far from ideal yet not be guilty of its potential failings (e.g. Ulyssess Grant presided over one of the most corrupt administrations in history, yet was not guilty of any corruption himself).

I bet your probably one of those people who thinks that Iraq is a failure because we don't have a stabalized government there yet.

[12th Doctor]

This was ment to be a parody of Iraq, but it think that it works fine fo this instance  


http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/002/610rshcr.asp

[Peter]

I bet your probably one of those people who thinks that Iraq is a failure because we don't have a stabalized government there yet.

I don't consider it a failure, I recognise that the coalition is doing the best it can under far from ideal circumstances; I do however object (similar to here) to the manner in which the coalition has been unable to lay down a firm timetable that everybody can try to keep to. I also admire the fact that the coalition is trying to bring Iraqis into the drafting process rather than writing it for them.

[Gustaf]

What's this all about???

[Gustaf]

What's this all about???

Did you not read it all?

Lol, yes, but the whole thing didn't make that much sense to me...seems like much ado for nothing to me.