Taking Things Too Far
•
by Saya Innsbruck
Really? Impeaching a president voted in by the Canadian Voters is going to be impeached because a number of congressmen hates Samuel de Champlain? Not only does the relation between Chucky Norris minimal, impeachment should only be reserved for presidents that have completely abused their power or performed acts that have outright betrayed the trust of the nation. Apparently, for some, if the executive doesn't work the way you want, they are traitors as well.
It's your opinion to believe the man is a traitor, or the Union Nationale sucks, or whatever, but to use game mechanics as a means to overthrow a democratically elected president of Canada is a gross abuse of power. It spits in the face of what we hold dear, and is every bit as treacherous as Champlain's actions during WWIII. We can always retake our land, or rebuild our economy. However, to destroy the spirit of democracy is to attack the very system we have in place. It's more valuable than our high diamond/titanium. Most do not even know of Samuel de Champlain, nor care about him.
Of course, some of the congressmen that have voted yes certainly have the interest of the nation in mind, as they have complete believe that Samuel de Champlain is a traitor and the executive has abused their power in this case. This to me, however, is akin to real life US ratifying the Patriot Act because of 9/11. A complete curb of democracy in exchange for "security".
I have voted NO in the impeachment vote. I hope my fellow congressman does it as well, and solve this in diplomacy rather than a negative flame fest that is happening at the moment.
EDIT:
Apparently the transfer of the company to the Canadian Health Service is also a point arguing for Chucky Norris' impeachment. Myself and the MoH/Congressman James Wiens have access to the organization as well - and we are members of the legislative as well. Dozens can testify that James Wiens, the current Minister of Health, is of good character. Further, if Chucky Norris moved the company for greed - would he not moved it into his own organizations? And would he not empty Revenue Canada? Bascially put, this matter is only a transfer of government assets from one government ministry to another government ministry. No CAD/gold moved into the hands of private individuals.
While putting gift companies in government usage may hurt businesses, that is another argument and is not relevant to this current issue.
Facebook
Twitter
Discord
Comments
I have also voted no. While I disagree with the way Samuel de Champlain's case was handled behind closed doors I don't believe it warrants impeachment.
I may have disagreed with Chucky's handling of a situation ultimately of limited importance, I definitely do not think that casting him out of office is a reasonable course of action.
well, to be fair - the CP DID intentionally influence the judiciary, which violates separation of branches of gov't. That is not a wise thing to permit habits to form about.
Law is about precedence, some things you cannot let unpunished go even once.
Apparently tho, our constitution does not make it illegal for a CP to interfere in the judicial process and effect outcomes.
We have good and just laws, don't we?
Way to uphold unjust laws CSD!
please do tell what your idea of completely abusing his power would be?
if the CSD has no ability to stand up to poor leadership and security risks, then it is no surprise that we have fallen from a party that one regularly won 13-16 congressional seats each election.
Geez Petz, that was before I was eborn...
How do you not influence another branch of government in a game that has only a dozen or so active voting congressmen, and the same number of active executives? We know every other active government member in game. Furthermore, EVERY president before Chucky Norris had broke a law here and there, and it's funny how some congressmen (not necessary only from the CPF, and not everyone from the CPF) only brought it up now.
Besides, I am certain that a good number of the congressmen knew nothing about the president's "interference" with the judicial process. Why have it not brought before the congress floor, and instead utilize the gaming loopholes to further some individuals' goals?
It's incredibly ironic how the congressmen in favour of impreachment is breaking a law in order to impeach a president, and is now using "we must prevent precedence" as a defence. Hypocrite.
"please do tell what your idea of completely abusing his power would be?"
Retreating regions from Phoenix, moving public funds into personal accounts, declaring war without prior approval, and the likes. Not because of a minor connection of a questionable individual.
@petz: The CSD needs no leadership in political decision because we respect everyone's choices. Nosyt is a fabulous leader at organizing elections and party initiatives though! ~hyuu~
It's the reason why I am arguing with you now. We are more a group of like-minded independents than a traditional party. Personally, I don't care whether someone comes from the CEP or the UN as long as they contribute to eCanada, really.
Saya I agree with the concept all of individuals working for eCanada. however, this term, chucky has supported cutting hundreds of jobs by shutting down the grain industry and worked behind the scenes (rather than in an open transparent format) to allow someone who fought against us to run for a political office in our government.
I spent many terms in congress working with all parties and although many disagreements have taken place, no one has ever conducted themselves in such a negative way towards ecanada. It has been only a few months since all of ecanada worked together to free ourselves from occupation, yet now chucky has worked towards forgiving those that fought against us. In real life, german soldiers and officers from WWII are still sought after and sent to trial for their actions over a half century ago. Yet here in our little eworld, we seem to forget so quickly.
eCanada needs a PM that understands their role and responsibility to our nation in all aspects. Whether or not this impeachment succeeds, the point is that more than one party is unhappy with his actions. If there had been a discussion/debate prior to this, would the same people voiting no necessarily keep their vote the same way. Chucky has stated he won't seek re-election. Perhaps these events can be a warning to future PMs not to overstep their authority.
Never give up, hope that you will get a better result in the future.
Look forward to your success.
By encouraging the pardon of SdC, was Chucky acting in the best interest of the whole country or in the best interest of one culture?
"By encouraging the pardon of SdC, was Chucky acting in the best interest of the whole country or in the best interest of one culture?"
Nah, just the best interest of the party which voted for him. After all, it's awfully hard to scratch your own back.