URI:
   DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       NeoConfederate States fo AMerica
  HTML https://ncsa.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: NationStates
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 2520--------------------------------------------------
       Re: 1st Presidential Debate live from Jackson,  West Phoenicia
       By: Heavenly Paradise Date: June 26, 2015, 10:39 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       "If a state knowingly as WMDs but will not register them, then I
       will send in the National Military to force them to register
       them or lose them. I will not allow our nation to live in fear
       of nations secretly harboring WMDs. The states have the right to
       keep and bear arms, but not to destroy the NCSA on a single
       whim.
       I again affirm that states should not be able to reject a bill
       passed by Congress. For example, by being a state, WP consents
       to be subject to all laws passed by Congress, as Congress is the
       supreme legislative body in the NCSA. This is not a matter of
       disrespecting a state's sovereignty,  but enforcing the rule of
       law that all states must adhere to. If a state should see a law
       as negative, they can again challenge it in the Supreme Court,
       or they can lobby their Congressional Representatives to pass
       legislation overturning the undesired law. The job of Congress
       is to make the national laws for the NCSA, and if we allow a
       single state to nullify a law, then that opens the door for all
       states to nullify laws, making the purpose of a national
       Congress moot.In a sense allowing nullification would also
       render the Constitution useless, because the Constitution
       established the Congress and gave it a special purpose that
       holds the fabric of our nation together. In order to have a
       unified and strong nation, we must make sure that we have the
       same laws and standards across the board, otherwise we will
       become more divided than they already are. The states are not so
       sovereign that they are their own nations, able to defy Richmond
       and make their own laws willy nilly. To prevent the corruption
       you mentioned among Supreme Court Justices from happening, I
       propose that we make the Justices elected by the populace, so
       that they have the interests of the People and not the President
       at heart. The Justices should also be replaced at the end of
       every two terms, so that lifelong power doesn't get to their
       heads.
       The Volunteer Prison Labor Act is an interesting law. It has
       been called slavery by parties in the past due to the amount of
       labor, but I disagree. It is not slavery because the prisoners
       are not forced to do it. I see it as beneficial because it helps
       the criminals pay their debt to society whilst improving
       infrastructure and stimulating economic growth. I see it as a
       viable alternative to my original plan and would say that it
       should be taken in due consideration for being the solution in
       all states nationwide.
       My view on political parties is that they are what has been
       dividing us for so long. We have for so long taken two or more
       sides and have not budged on our beliefs at all, causing
       political deadlock and bringing about more problems than were
       ever at the start. It has also caused monopolies which cause the
       voices of the minorities to be drowned out. You need only look
       at parties like the NeoConfederate Conservative Party and the
       Free State Alliance to find this out. There may be brief periods
       of equality between the parties, but it will never last. That
       being said, I do lean more politically conservative despite
       being an independent.
       Yes, you're right. The rich do provide more money to help the
       NCSA. I never stated that I supported taxing them higher. I said
       that we are all equals, so I will tax the rich at the same rate
       as the poor, but proportional to their income amounts. For
       example, if the income tax for a middle class person is 10% of
       their specific income, then a rich person will also be taxed 10%
       of their specific income. But those are just hypothetical rates,
       keep that in mind. That is the way that I see as equal. Everyone
       pays out the same rate, but only as much as is proportional to
       the amount of income that they make. A flat tax, if you will."
       #Post#: 2533--------------------------------------------------
       Re: 1st Presidential Debate live from Jackson,  West Phoenicia
       By: Sparta Date: June 27, 2015, 1:30 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       "If a state has WMDs and refuses to register them I will first
       gain a warrant from the Supreme Court to seize them. I will
       after gaining this ultimatum then give the offending state 24
       hours to register all of them or the WMDs will be seized and
       forcibly registered. In this way I would legally go about
       enforcing this law instead of forcing my way in and disregarding
       the states rights.
       1) I will help this party grow in government by being a role
       model and creating a good image of the Antebellum Party by being
       a great and efficient President. I would also, with the help of
       the Antebellum Party, hope to pass many bills through Congress
       that would show the nation as a whole that the Antebellum Party
       is efficient and ready to lead the NeoConfederate States to its
       glory once again. In this way the party will appeal more to the
       people of each state and we would gain more members. It also
       wouldn't be using my position in the wrong way because I'm doing
       everything to push the NCSA back to the top.
       2) Sparta has indeed gained the reputation of being a
       warmongerer. I believe in state's rights, and because of this I
       will let Sparta do what it pleases as long as it does not
       endanger the NCSA or any particular state. I will expect the
       state of Sparta to follow the regional laws and I will enforce
       them vigorously. Should a war break out, I will let it play out
       unless the defender requests government help against the
       aggressor. I would then immediately request permission from
       Congress to deploy the National Military and protect the
       defender. Even if that means crushing my home state I will do it
       if necessary to help the NCSA as a whole. We cannot tolerate
       needless aggression and I will act swiftly and stamp out the
       aggression. Is there anything else?"
       #Post#: 2535--------------------------------------------------
       Re: 1st Presidential Debate live from Jackson,  West Phoenicia
       By: Heavenly Paradise Date: June 27, 2015, 1:42 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Mr. Kennady, the only problem with getting a warrant from the
       Supreme Court is that it is just a piece of paper. A state could
       simply deny you entrance by use of force. Not only that, but
       when a state defies a national law, it is paramount to rebellion
       or insurrection, and that is where the lines blur between
       sovereignty and defiance. The National Military is the efficient
       way to enforce the law, and it is not illegal to use it. When a
       state is in rebellion, it practically forfeits its membership as
       a legitimate state, and therefore has no sovereignty. "
       #Post#: 2536--------------------------------------------------
       Re: 1st Presidential Debate live from Jackson,  West Phoenicia
       By: Sparta Date: June 27, 2015, 1:52 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       "That piece of paper carries the force of the entire NCSA upon
       it. That in itself should be enough to the offending state to
       back down. If the state doesn't back down after the warrant is
       issued then the might of the National Military shall fall upon
       that state. In this way we wouldn't offend a state's rights, and
       would go about it in the legal way. We also wouldn't know if the
       state does defiantly have WMDs. They may say they do as a way to
       deter state's to attack them. So if your plan of action went
       through you would be barging in on the state's land without a
       legal reason. You'd be breaking the nation's laws. In my way we
       have a legal reason to enter the state. Even if it is just a
       piece of paper we have a legal reason and wouldn't break the
       law. Explain to me why you reason it is better to break the
       nation's law and barge in without legal reason?" Kennady says.
       #Post#: 2537--------------------------------------------------
       Re: 1st Presidential Debate live from Jackson,  West Phoenicia
       By: Heavenly Paradise Date: June 27, 2015, 1:54 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       "Actually, Mr. Kennady, I believe you are right. After due
       consideration of the Constitution, a warrant would actually be
       needed to take the weapons. I am not trying to violate state
       sovereignty as you have so often mentioned, but for all my
       knowledge I am not perfect."
       #Post#: 2538--------------------------------------------------
       Re: 1st Presidential Debate live from Jackson,  West Phoenicia
       By: Heavenly Paradise Date: June 27, 2015, 1:59 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       "But let me also add that when talking about warrants, the
       Constitution refers to the people, and not to the states. So the
       lines of getting a warrant are quite blurred. It may or may not
       be legal. So I actually may not be breaking the law with my
       plan. I am not so out to get the states as you think, Spartan."
       #Post#: 2539--------------------------------------------------
       Re: 1st Presidential Debate live from Jackson,  West Phoenicia
       By: Sparta Date: June 27, 2015, 2:06 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       "Please use my name. We are here to debate not to call names Mr.
       Gray. Now, the Constitution does refer to the people but this
       also carries over to the people in charge of each state. These
       weapon's are owned by the people of the state so we would need a
       warrant to seize them. At least if we would like to do this
       legally. Now, I would like to ask you Mr. Gray. What will you do
       if a nuclear war breaks out between states?" Kennady says.
       #Post#: 2541--------------------------------------------------
       Re: 1st Presidential Debate live from Jackson,  West Phoenicia
       By: Heavenly Paradise Date: June 27, 2015, 2:15 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       "I was not the one who started this bashing, Mr. Kennady. You
       attacked me and my policies before everything began, saying that
       I am against state's rights and all. Then again, you may need a
       warrant, or you may not. I would leave that up to the Supreme
       Court to decide, due to the fact that the People and the States
       are often addressed differently in the Constitution. You say
       that this is the only way to do things legally, yet the
       Constitution is not clear. Especially since when referring to
       people the Constitution may just be talking about your average
       Joe. You see, when we get to talking about things like the
       leaders of states, the leaders do not actually own these
       weapons. It is not their personal property, but the property of
       the military of that state and of the collective government of
       that state, rather than the people as individuals. If a nuclear
       war ever broke out, I would step in, as the Constitution says to
       protect the states from Domestic Violence and invasion."
       #Post#: 2542--------------------------------------------------
       Re: 1st Presidential Debate live from Jackson,  West Phoenicia
       By: Sparta Date: June 27, 2015, 2:18 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       "This is a debate. It is my duty to question your policies. Is
       this all?" He asks.
       OOC: We gotta wrap this up soon cause Gondor an I have to head
       to Bamivo
       #Post#: 2543--------------------------------------------------
       Re: 1st Presidential Debate live from Jackson,  West Phoenicia
       By: Heavenly Paradise Date: June 27, 2015, 2:21 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       "To question? Yes. To say that I am against something that I am
       not without actually asking my opinion on state's rights as a
       separate issue entirely? No. But I do apologize for my temper,
       as it sometimes gets the better of me. I respect you, Mr.
       Kennady and look forward to our next debate. But I am done with
       this first one if you are, good sir."
       *****************************************************
   DIR Next Page