Flip Molinar
Talossan since 1-1-2008
Proud Talossan
Posts: 1,592
|
Post by Flip Molinar on Nov 13, 2009 23:50:30 GMT -6
I meant it should be a non-political office and I will gladly help to make that a reality, but until it is indeed a non-political office, your criticism of S:r Preston, especially in the context of this conversation, is both unfair and unfounded.
|
|
|
|
Post by Breneir Itravilatx on Nov 13, 2009 23:54:56 GMT -6
Well that is quite an amoral stance there, Flip. Until it is what is should be...the holder of the office shouldn't be expected to act as he should already act?
|
|
Flip Molinar
Talossan since 1-1-2008
Proud Talossan
Posts: 1,592
|
Post by Flip Molinar on Nov 13, 2009 23:59:57 GMT -6
You cannot enforce an opinion as though it were a law, which is precisely what you are doing now, and will continue to do, until such time that the head of the Chancery becomes legally-bound to non-partisanship.
|
|
|
|
Post by Breneir Itravilatx on Nov 14, 2009 0:13:20 GMT -6
Flip, we enforce opinions all the time...it is called tradition. The good Captain made a tradition of being non-partisan in the past and I am not only saying that he ended that with "defending the Administration" but that we should quickly codify this tradition so that the SOS cannot on occasion decide to defend the Administration that gave him the position in the first place.
|
|
Flip Molinar
Talossan since 1-1-2008
Proud Talossan
Posts: 1,592
|
Post by Flip Molinar on Nov 14, 2009 0:20:29 GMT -6
Granted, all I am arguing is thatwe cannot criticize the SOS for doing just what the current one did, until the codification of which you speak occurs.
|
|
|
|
Post by Breneir Itravilatx on Nov 14, 2009 0:21:45 GMT -6
We can, we should and I did. Why aren't you again?
|
|
Flip Molinar
Talossan since 1-1-2008
Proud Talossan
Posts: 1,592
|
Post by Flip Molinar on Nov 14, 2009 0:38:51 GMT -6
Because, though I disagree with him on this particular issue [that of governmental activity] I accept it as one made by an MC in an attempt to defend the policies of the political party to which he belongs. Whether or not he should be allowed to hold the office of both the SOS and that of an MC at the same time, is another issue altogether... an issue upon which you and I most determinately agree.
|
|
Flip Molinar
Talossan since 1-1-2008
Proud Talossan
Posts: 1,592
|
Post by Flip Molinar on Nov 14, 2009 0:44:01 GMT -6
|
|
Flip Molinar
Talossan since 1-1-2008
Proud Talossan
Posts: 1,592
|
Post by Flip Molinar on Nov 14, 2009 0:46:33 GMT -6
November 2009 Terpelaziun...
|
|
|
|
Post by Sir Alexandreu Davinescu on Nov 14, 2009 19:52:36 GMT -6
Your changes in the rules may well have some merit, Tzaracomprada. Unfortunately, you accompanied them with an implication that the Secretary of State abused his power. Inasmuch as I can see, all he did was express an opinion about a political matter... and it had absolutely nothing to do with his job.
Because I think your behavior was unbecoming to a gentleman and a member of the Ziu, I will be voting against every Progressive Party bill now and in the future until either the PP or you apologize to a public servant who has behaved in an irreproachably correct manner from the start of his time in office. Every bill sponsored or co-sponsored by the Progressive Party will be anathema in my eyes until such a time as this party makes amends for this slander. If a member of the PP wishes to do so on Tzaracomprada's behalf, that will of course be immediately accepted.
|
|
|
|
Post by Breneir Itravilatx on Nov 14, 2009 19:57:05 GMT -6
As far as I am concerned no apology will be forthcoming. And I will be campaigning to ensure that you are held responsible for using your office as Senator for partisan retribution at the costs of the good citizens of M-M.
|
|
Brad Holmes
Cunstaval to Maritiimi-Maxhestic
Atatürkey, and flying by the seat of my RUMP
Posts: 1,014
Talossan Since: 3-16-2006
|
Post by Brad Holmes on Nov 14, 2009 20:40:53 GMT -6
As I have said, up until the moment, that the Chancery strode into the position of "defending the Administration" he had been doing a good job. I, in all honesty, believe that the good Captain actually agrees with me that it is not the Secretary of State's role to defend Administrative policies but to serve the people. He has done the latter very well but he should never do the former. If he feels that he must defend the honor of the Seneschal, the Distain or the Administration as whole...then resign and simply be a RUMP MC...but don't allow even the possible hint of partisan favor on the part of the Chancery...which is precisely what his "defense" allows. While it is not yet a "de jure" issue, it is admitted by the good Captain himself that he believes that the Chancery should be non-partisan which is why he said earlier that he "tries". I now seek to make it a requirement of the Chancery that it be non-partisan as a matter of law not just of choice, attempt, or tradition. And on that matter of perspective, I shall not be moved. I don't presume to put words into the good Captain's mouth, but perhaps he is responding to unjust accusations, as he as leaped to the defense of non-RUMPers in similar circumstances of possibly unjust accusations. Good luck with your Amendment though. I'll sure work hard to defeat it! As far as I am concerned no apology will be forthcoming. And I will be campaigning to ensure that you are held responsible for using your office as Senator for partisan retribution at the costs of the good citizens of M-M. This, of course, assumes that the "partisan retribution" is contrary to the people of M-M's best interests and not simply sound practice of defeating poor legislation? ============================================= Is the rampant lack of proper spelling and grammar within this thread simply an accident or some joke I have yet to pick up on? |
|
|
|
Post by Sir Alexandreu Davinescu on Nov 14, 2009 20:45:28 GMT -6
As far as I am concerned no apology will be forthcoming. And I will be campaigning to ensure that you are held responsible for using your office as Senator for partisan retribution at the costs of the good citizens of M-M. It's partisan only inasmuch as I am holding your party responsible for your slander. You may of course take what actions you think reasonable, Tzaracomprada. But I suspect you will find very few people willing to join you in accusing the Secretary of State of corruption of his office. |
|
|
|
Post by Breneir Itravilatx on Nov 14, 2009 20:52:42 GMT -6
I suspect that people will join me in ensuring that another Secretary of State does not wade into partisan politics as has happened. I also suspect that people will join me in preventing you from using the honor and privilege of the office of Senator for political retribution.
For someone who claims that I am not a gentleman...you are currently pledging to commit "un-gentlemanly" acts.
|
|
|
|
Post by Breneir Itravilatx on Nov 14, 2009 21:02:11 GMT -6
Good luck with your Amendment though. I'll sure work hard to defeat it! Thank you Senator Holmes for jumping off that cliff and sinking down into the abyssmal depths that are my expectations of you. I would not expect you to vote rationally because that is not in your history. I just wish you would surprise me. Just once. How boring.  Cheers. |
|
