JustUsBoys.com gay porn forum

logo

remove these banner ads by becoming a JUB Supporter.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 51 to 100 of 113
  1. #51
    Bammer's Papa
    Kulindahr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    on the foggy, damp, redneck Oregon coast
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    101,396
    Blog Entries
    78

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Senate invokes "nuclear option"

    Quote Originally Posted by rareboy View Post
    I have no idea why anyone would defend the use of rules that are not spelled out in the constitution of the country. Just because something has supposedly 'worked' for 225 years does not mean that it works today.

    I know for a fact that at one time a filibuster meant more than just recording it on the vote and then everyone going home for the weekend or the summer.

    From the outside it looks like it is high time that some major rule changes were made that do allow a democratically elected president and senate to exercise the authority the voters gave them and to start to get people thinking about how things can get done instead of how the legislative branch can prevent anything from getting done.
    The whole point was to prevent the minority from just being trampled. The filibuster is in the spirit of the Constitution, which is why it was invented, but it turned out too easy to abuse.

    Still, it shouldn't have been thrown out, just reformed, to 11/20 required for cloture -- 55 votes.

    "Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

    --Jonathan Rauch, Salon Magazine, March 13, 2000

    *the number is now forty

  2. #52

    Re: Senate invokes "nuclear option"

    Quote Originally Posted by palbert View Post
    Of daisies and nuclear options:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dDTBnsqxZ3k
    Yep, it's how LBJ won the 64 election. Now we know that LBJ was the warmonger and Goldwater was the man of peace.

  3. #53
    Do I dare to eat a peach?
    palbert's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Coastal Downeast Maine
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    10,114

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Senate invokes "nuclear option"

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Springer View Post
    Yep, it's how LBJ won the 64 election. Now we know that LBJ was the warmonger and Goldwater was the man of peace.
    Only because he lost. Remember the "Eastern Seaboard" quote - had Goldwater his way you'd be living on the east coast.

    Another notable ad of the Johnson Campaign, "Eastern Seaboard", took aim at Goldwater's statement: "Sometimes I think this country would be better off if we could just saw off the eastern seaboard and let it float out to sea."

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daisy_(advertisement)

  4. #54
    Virginia Is for Lovers Alnitak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Maryland
    Orientation
    Gay
    Posts
    4,936
    Blog Entries
    2

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Senate invokes "nuclear option"

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Springer View Post
    Yep, it's how LBJ won the 64 election. Now we know that LBJ was the warmonger and Goldwater was the man of peace.
    Who said if all men were angels we would need no government?

  5. #55
    Do I dare to eat a peach?
    palbert's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Coastal Downeast Maine
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    10,114

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Senate invokes "nuclear option"

    Quote Originally Posted by Alnitak View Post
    Who said if all men were angels we would need no government?
    James Madison, Federalist 51.

    Did I win?

  6. #56

    Re: Senate invokes "nuclear option"

    Quote Originally Posted by Alnitak View Post
    Who said if all men were angels we would need no government?
    Joe Biden?

  7. #57
    Bammer's Papa
    Kulindahr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    on the foggy, damp, redneck Oregon coast
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    101,396
    Blog Entries
    78

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Senate invokes "nuclear option"

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Springer View Post
    Yep, it's how LBJ won the 64 election. Now we know that LBJ was the warmonger and Goldwater was the man of peace.
    And LBJ justified the hypocritical and dirty ad because he knew if Goldwater got elected there would be no chance of any kind of civil rights legislation.

    "Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

    --Jonathan Rauch, Salon Magazine, March 13, 2000

    *the number is now forty

  8. #58
    JUB Addict Ninja108's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Partnered
    Posts
    62,088

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Senate invokes "nuclear option"

    Republicans kept playing with fire and finally got burned.
    As for the threat of far right candidates getting nominated,look at who got through in the 05 deal.
    You can't make a threat on something you've already done.

  9. #59

    Re: Senate invokes "nuclear option"

    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    And LBJ justified the hypocritical and dirty ad because he knew if Goldwater got elected there would be no chance of any kind of civil rights legislation.
    Without the republicans there would never be a Civil Rights Act in the 60's.

    LBJ may have gotten the civil right bill through Congress ... but no black family in American has his photo hanging on their walls beside MLK -- the photo is JFK not LBJ.

  10. #60
    Bammer's Papa
    Kulindahr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    on the foggy, damp, redneck Oregon coast
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    101,396
    Blog Entries
    78

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Senate invokes "nuclear option"

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Springer View Post
    Without the republicans there would never be a Civil Rights Act in the 60's.

    LBJ may have gotten the civil right bill through Congress ... but no black family in American has his photo hanging on their walls beside MLK -- the photo is JFK not LBJ.
    But Goldwater opposed the version LBJ wanted, because he said it infringed on states' rights.

    "Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

    --Jonathan Rauch, Salon Magazine, March 13, 2000

    *the number is now forty

  11. #61
    Impish and Mercurial Rolyo85's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Boystown, Chicago
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    8,679

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Senate invokes "nuclear option"

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Springer View Post
    Without the republicans there would never be a Civil Rights Act in the 60's.

    LBJ may have gotten the civil right bill through Congress ... but no black family in American has his photo hanging on their walls beside MLK -- the photo is JFK not LBJ.
    Yeah, too bad the GOP of today is a sad mockery of what it was in the 60s, isn't it?
    That we are capable only of being what we are, remains our unforgivable sin.
    - Gene Wolfe

  12. #62
    Bammer's Papa
    Kulindahr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    on the foggy, damp, redneck Oregon coast
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    101,396
    Blog Entries
    78

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Senate invokes "nuclear option"

    Quote Originally Posted by Rolyo85 View Post
    Yeah, too bad the GOP of today is a sad mockery of what it was in the 60s, isn't it?
    There's been very little "grand" about the Grand Old Party since then, though there have been a few bright spots.

    "Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

    --Jonathan Rauch, Salon Magazine, March 13, 2000

    *the number is now forty

  13. #63
    JUB Addict T-Rexx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    4,624

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Senate invokes "nuclear option"

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Springer View Post
    225 years up in smoke.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Springer View Post
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...fight/?hpid=z1

    "The Senate is on the verge of striking down nearly 225 years of precedent by ending the long-standing filibuster rules for most presidential nominations, a remarkable change in procedure that has been the subject of a years-long fight between Democrats and Republicans."

    The filibuster is a fundamentally anti-democratic institution which does not deserve the respect it has weirdly been accorded in the US Senate. It is a bizarre tradition which celebrates tyranny. The only reason it has been even somewhat tolerable, all these years, is that it has (traditionally) so rarely been invoked.

    Just because something is old does not mean it is good.

    The filibuster needs to die. Completely, utterly, and irretrievably. It is a failure of the American system that needs to be corrected.

  14. #64
    Bammer's Papa
    Kulindahr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    on the foggy, damp, redneck Oregon coast
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    101,396
    Blog Entries
    78

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Senate invokes "nuclear option"

    Quote Originally Posted by T-Rexx View Post
    The filibuster is a fundamentally anti-democratic institution which does not deserve the respect it has weirdly been accorded in the US Senate. It is a bizarre tradition which celebrates tyranny. The only reason it has been even somewhat tolerable, all these years, is that it has (traditionally) so rarely been invoked.

    Just because something is old does not mean it is good.

    The filibuster needs to die. Completely, utterly, and irretrievably. It is a failure of the American system that needs to be corrected.
    The filibuster was designed to limit democracy, in accord with the fears of that system expressed by the Founding Fathers. Its purpose was to limit the tyranny of the majority, and thus help keep the country on an even course instead of lurching back and forth every time a different party got control. Imagine this country if one party could ram through everything it wanted if it was in control -- imagine in the Tea Party folks somehow got control.

    That's why there should be some form of the filibuster. But changing it for appointments is long overdue, because it empowers the very thing it was meant to prevent: single-party tyranny.

    "Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

    --Jonathan Rauch, Salon Magazine, March 13, 2000

    *the number is now forty

  15. #65
    JUB Addict T-Rexx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    4,624

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Senate invokes "nuclear option"

    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    The filibuster was designed to limit democracy, in accord with the fears of that system expressed by the Founding Fathers. Its purpose was to limit the tyranny of the majority, and thus help keep the country on an even course instead of lurching back and forth every time a different party got control.
    The filibuster was not invented by the "founding fathers" (or anyone else, for that matter) as some sort of brake on democracy.

    The first filibuster did not occur until 1837. It was quite an accident of Senate rules, not a shining example of brilliant and insightful governmental design.

    The filibuster is a stain on American democracy. It needs badly to die.

  16. #66
    Rambunctiously Pugnacious JayHawk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    River Quay - KC
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    24,227

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Senate invokes "nuclear option"

    Kuli, it does mean that in a situation where sane and rational adults are willing to give some and take some to get partially what they desire. Unfortunately the mass media and social media effect means that mass brainwash is not only easy but almost guaranteed. It is sick because in any other time I would be 100% behind the idea of a solid check on group think but when you look at the statistical relationship of how many things have been obstructed just for the mere act of obstruction, ten you realize abuse when you see it. It turns my stomach. I WANT TWO PARTIES with viable different messages fighting over the best path because it has worn well for this nation. I don't know if it is simple racism or mass delusion with the loss of total power as a party but the republican party is breaking this nation. I wish they would have passed it with a expiration to return to filibuster rules. In that way the idea could return with the threat of simple majority should the party not in power seek to disrupt the entire nation for their own petty goals.
    Everyone can be great, because everyone can serve.
    ~ Martin Luther King, Jr.


  17. #67
    Bammer's Papa
    Kulindahr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    on the foggy, damp, redneck Oregon coast
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    101,396
    Blog Entries
    78

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Senate invokes "nuclear option"

    Quote Originally Posted by T-Rexx View Post
    The filibuster was not invented by the "founding fathers" (or anyone else, for that matter) as some sort of brake on democracy.

    The first filibuster did not occur until 1837. It was quite an accident of Senate rules, not a shining example of brilliant and insightful governmental design.

    The filibuster is a stain on American democracy. It needs badly to die.
    You read about as well as Springer, sometimes....

    BTW, the US was never meant to be a democracy, because democracy leans toward mob rule. It was meant to be a Republic, with democracy on a limited basis, to protect liberty.

    "Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

    --Jonathan Rauch, Salon Magazine, March 13, 2000

    *the number is now forty

  18. #68
    Bammer's Papa
    Kulindahr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    on the foggy, damp, redneck Oregon coast
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    101,396
    Blog Entries
    78

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Senate invokes "nuclear option"

    Quote Originally Posted by JayHawk View Post
    Kuli, it does mean that in a situation where sane and rational adults are willing to give some and take some to get partially what they desire. Unfortunately the mass media and social media effect means that mass brainwash is not only easy but almost guaranteed. It is sick because in any other time I would be 100% behind the idea of a solid check on group think but when you look at the statistical relationship of how many things have been obstructed just for the mere act of obstruction, ten you realize abuse when you see it. It turns my stomach. I WANT TWO PARTIES with viable different messages fighting over the best path because it has worn well for this nation. I don't know if it is simple racism or mass delusion with the loss of total power as a party but the republican party is breaking this nation. I wish they would have passed it with a expiration to return to filibuster rules. In that way the idea could return with the threat of simple majority should the party not in power seek to disrupt the entire nation for their own petty goals.
    The filibuster and cloture system can only work when we have sane and rational adults in charge.

    As for two parties, some of the Founding Fathers saw the danger in partisanship, though they expected it to be region against region. The only solution to partisan deadlock is more parties -- and that means we need to change the system.

    Good idea on a sunset clause for the filibuster rule change!

    "Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

    --Jonathan Rauch, Salon Magazine, March 13, 2000

    *the number is now forty

  19. #69
    Rambunctiously Pugnacious JayHawk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    River Quay - KC
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    24,227

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Senate invokes "nuclear option"

    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    You read about as well as Springer, sometimes....

    BTW, the US was never meant to be a democracy, because democracy leans toward mob rule. It was meant to be a Republic, with democracy on a limited basis, to protect liberty.
    We are indeed a republican and should have appointed Senators doing the work for the elected representatives of each state. The reps then bringing the point of view of the common man by district. The lines are incredibly blurred these days with everyone thinking everything belongs to a straight down the line popular vote. If that were the case we would still discriminate against blacks, women and homosexuals....
    Everyone can be great, because everyone can serve.
    ~ Martin Luther King, Jr.


  20. #70
    Bammer's Papa
    Kulindahr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    on the foggy, damp, redneck Oregon coast
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    101,396
    Blog Entries
    78

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Senate invokes "nuclear option"

    Quote Originally Posted by JayHawk View Post
    We are indeed a republican and should have appointed Senators doing the work for the elected representatives of each state. The reps then bringing the point of view of the common man by district. The lines are incredibly blurred these days with everyone thinking everything belongs to a straight down the line popular vote. If that were the case we would still discriminate against blacks, women and homosexuals....
    It's well established that when an elected body chooses from its members someone to represent it at a higher level, the result tends toward better quality than when such representatives are elected by the same people who elected that body. That's what the Senate should be.

    "Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

    --Jonathan Rauch, Salon Magazine, March 13, 2000

    *the number is now forty

  21. #71
    Rambunctiously Pugnacious JayHawk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    River Quay - KC
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    24,227

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Senate invokes "nuclear option"

    Quote Originally Posted by JayHawk View Post
    We are indeed a republican and should have appointed Senators doing the work for the elected representatives of each state. The reps then bringing the point of view of the common man by district. The lines are incredibly blurred these days with everyone thinking everything belongs to a straight down the line popular vote. If that were the case we would still discriminate against blacks, women and homosexuals....
    aaaaaaack that should say Republic NOT republican..... No more extra iced water for me tonight.... or vodka.
    Everyone can be great, because everyone can serve.
    ~ Martin Luther King, Jr.


  22. #72
    JUB Addict T-Rexx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    4,624

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Senate invokes "nuclear option"

    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    You read about as well as Springer, sometimes....
    I read what you wrote:

    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    The filibuster was designed to limit democracy, in accord with the fears of that system expressed by the Founding Fathers. Its purpose was to limit the tyranny of the majority, and thus help keep the country on an even course instead of lurching back and forth every time a different party got control.
    The filibuster was not designed to limit democracy. It was never "designed" to do anything. It is an accident of Senate rules and a mistake. It has nothing to do with any fears the founding fathers may have had about anything. It did not appear until long after they were all dead.

    The filibuster utterly destroys the system of checks and balances created by the founding fathers, since it allows a single person to bring that entire process to its knees. It is just my opinion, but I rather suspect the founding fathers would have been appalled by the filibuster. "Checks and balances" is intended to force discussion and encourage compromise. The filibuster stops discussion and discourages compromise. It is very anti-democratic, and anithetical to the founding principles of this republic.


    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    Imagine this country if one party could ram through everything it wanted if it was in control -- imagine in the Tea Party folks somehow got control.
    That is precisely how democracy works.

    The USA is a system of "checks and balances" between branches of government. If the people elect one party to control of every branch of government, then presumably it is because the people want that party to carry out its perceived agenda.

    There is no honor in preventing the will of the people from being realized. It is not a good thing that anyone in the Senate can prevent the entire government from functioning. It is an embarrassing flaw in our system.

    The filibuster needs to die.


    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    BTW, the US was never meant to be a democracy, because democracy leans toward mob rule. It was meant to be a Republic, with democracy on a limited basis, to protect liberty.

    Democracy

    Democracy De*moc"ra*cy (d[-e]*m[o^]k"r[.a]*s[y^]), n.; pl.
    Democracies (d[-e]*m[o^]k"r[.a]*s[i^]z). [F. d['e]mocratie,
    fr. Gr. dhmokrati`a; dh^mos the people + kratei^n to be
    strong, to rule, kra`tos strength.]

    1. Government by the people; a form of government in which
    the supreme power is retained and directly exercised by
    the people.
    [1913 Webster]

    2. Government by popular representation; a form of government
    in which the supreme power is retained by the people, but
    is indirectly exercised through a system of representation
    and delegated authority periodically renewed
    ; a
    constitutional representative government; a republic.
    [1913 Webster]
    Last edited by T-Rexx; November 23rd, 2013 at 05:57 AM.

  23. #73

    Re: Senate invokes "nuclear option"

    Quote Originally Posted by JayHawk View Post
    aaaaaaack that should say Republic NOT republican..... No more extra iced water for me tonight.... or vodka.
    Wow! Kulindahr didn't correct you. You're special JH.

  24. #74
    Rambunctiously Pugnacious JayHawk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    River Quay - KC
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    24,227

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Senate invokes "nuclear option"

    Quote Originally Posted by T-Rexx View Post
    I read what you wrote:



    The filibuster was not designed to limit democracy. It was never "designed" to do anything. It is an accident of Senate rules and a mistake. It has nothing to do with any fears the founding fathers may have had about anything. It did not appear until long after they were all dead.

    The filibuster utterly destroys the system of checks and balances created by the founding fathers, since it allows a single person to bring that entire process to its knees. It is just my opinion, but I rather suspect the founding fathers would have been appalled by the filibuster. "Checks and balances" is intended to force discussion and encourage compromise. The filibuster stops discussion and discourages compromise. It is very anti-democratic, and anithetical to the founding principles of this republic.




    That is precisely how democracy works.

    The USA is a system of "checks and balances" between branches of government. If the people elect one party to control of every branch of government, then presumably it is because the people want that party to carry out its perceived agenda.

    There is no honor in preventing the will of the people from being realized. It is not a good thing that anyone in the Senate can prevent the entire government from functioning. It is an embarrassing flaw in our system.

    The filibuster needs to die.





    Democracy

    Democracy De*moc"ra*cy (d[-e]*m[o^]k"r[.a]*s[y^]), n.; pl.
    Democracies (d[-e]*m[o^]k"r[.a]*s[i^]z). [F. d['e]mocratie,
    fr. Gr. dhmokrati`a; dh^mos the people + kratei^n to be
    strong, to rule, kra`tos strength.]

    1. Government by the people; a form of government in which
    the supreme power is retained and directly exercised by
    the people.
    [1913 Webster]

    2. Government by popular representation; a form of government
    in which the supreme power is retained by the people, but
    is indirectly exercised through a system of representation
    and delegated authority periodically renewed
    ; a
    constitutional representative government; a republic.
    [1913 Webster]
    Yes a republic is a type of Democracy but to suggest a practice in place and KNOWN for over a hundred years is an oopsie? Really dude? While it has been there since the beginning, it has only been practiced for 100 years when the parties were trying to usurp recalcitrant conservatives that are afraid of change. The thing has not really changed either they just changed the threshold. Remember your ardent support in ten years when republicans are doing all kinds of obscene appointments and doing it because they have fifty one and could care less.
    Everyone can be great, because everyone can serve.
    ~ Martin Luther King, Jr.


  25. #75
    JUB Addict T-Rexx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    4,624

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Senate invokes "nuclear option"

    Quote Originally Posted by JayHawk View Post
    Yes a republic is a type of Democracy but to suggest a practice in place and KNOWN for over a hundred years is an oopsie? Really dude?
    The fact that the filibuster is a mistake is a matter of historical record.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filibus..._States_Senate


    The only reason the filibuster is revered by the Senate is the implication of power that it provides to arrogant legislators. "If I can single-handedly bring down the entire US government, I must be one hell of an important person! Lots of women will want to have sex with me!"

    The fact that this is an old mistake does not reduce its stupidity.
    Last edited by T-Rexx; November 23rd, 2013 at 08:58 AM.

  26. #76
    Rambunctiously Pugnacious JayHawk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    River Quay - KC
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    24,227

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Senate invokes "nuclear option"

    See but you entirely miss the point. As often occurs. Perhaps it was a mistake to exist but the fact that it has stayed a mistake in place and in use is NOT a MISTAKE. To think so is ignorant. The fact is it was kept and SHOULD be kept to keep in check the power of the majority. Mindless mass rule is ignorant and leads to destruction. Imagine the outcome if McCarthy felt free to simply trample the representation of 24.5 states..... that is a helluva lot more than one freaking person.

    So sure if you wanna just see the world in black and white, then the practice is a mistake. If you actually live in a world with color and with the influence of men then you must admit there are a million different ways to see things. This permanent 'nuclear' option will bite you personally in the ass in the next decade. Guaranteed. When a single man or typically two people from the same state have the right to hold up a piece of legislation it does make sense in the broad view of forcing so many states to do something they are unwilling to do. The exponential use because of a negro in office or because of progressives in office or whatever reason the whacktivist tell themselves at night, THAT is the only reason it should be curtailed but not extinguished.
    Everyone can be great, because everyone can serve.
    ~ Martin Luther King, Jr.


  27. #77
    JUB Addict T-Rexx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    4,624

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Senate invokes "nuclear option"

    Quote Originally Posted by JayHawk View Post
    See but you entirely miss the point. As often occurs. Perhaps it was a mistake to exist but the fact that it has stayed a mistake in place and in use is NOT a MISTAKE. To think so is ignorant.
    Nonsense.

    There are two reasons it has stayed in place: Senatorial arrogance and the fact that it has traditionally so rarely been invoked.

    That latter fact is significant. Until recently, the filibuster was rarely used because senators understood how dysfunctional and dangerous it is. It was never a good idea. It has always been dangerous and problematic.

    And now, you insist that it must be continued simply because, as mistakes go, this one has been around a long time. And you call me "ignorant" for pointing out how stupid that is.
    Last edited by T-Rexx; November 23rd, 2013 at 09:34 AM.

  28. #78
    Impish and Mercurial Rolyo85's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Boystown, Chicago
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    8,679

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Senate invokes "nuclear option"

    I am definitely with T-Rexx on this one. The filibuster has always seemed like a total legislative abortion to me. And he is also right that such a thing can only exist if EVERYONE has serious respect for the political process. Which is not the case, currently, nor is likely to be within the next decade.
    That we are capable only of being what we are, remains our unforgivable sin.
    - Gene Wolfe

  29. #79
    The Boy Next Door LuvFindsAndyHardy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Boston
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Posts
    4,073

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Senate invokes "nuclear option"

    Quote Originally Posted by Rolyo85 View Post
    The filibuster has always seemed like a total legislative abortion to me.
    I can't agree with you on this one, Rolyo. The filibuster was created to combat both a perceived and a very real threat of tyranny by the majority and we should always want to protect ourselves from tyranny. We are now facing, however, the unintended consequence of a tyranny by the minority (which our ADULT forefathers could never have even imagined) and so, the filibuster being a non-organic (for lack of a better term) tool it is ripe for reform. It was created to combat partisan tyranny (a good thing) and I have no problem with changing its rules to also combat partisan tyranny (also a good thing.)

  30. #80
    Bammer's Papa
    Kulindahr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    on the foggy, damp, redneck Oregon coast
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    101,396
    Blog Entries
    78

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Senate invokes "nuclear option"

    Quote Originally Posted by JayHawk View Post
    See but you entirely miss the point. As often occurs. Perhaps it was a mistake to exist but the fact that it has stayed a mistake in place and in use is NOT a MISTAKE. To think so is ignorant. The fact is it was kept and SHOULD be kept to keep in check the power of the majority. Mindless mass rule is ignorant and leads to destruction. Imagine the outcome if McCarthy felt free to simply trample the representation of 24.5 states..... that is a helluva lot more than one freaking person.

    So sure if you wanna just see the world in black and white, then the practice is a mistake. If you actually live in a world with color and with the influence of men then you must admit there are a million different ways to see things. This permanent 'nuclear' option will bite you personally in the ass in the next decade. Guaranteed. When a single man or typically two people from the same state have the right to hold up a piece of legislation it does make sense in the broad view of forcing so many states to do something they are unwilling to do. The exponential use because of a negro in office or because of progressives in office or whatever reason the whacktivist tell themselves at night, THAT is the only reason it should be curtailed but not extinguished.
    Well said. But that having been said... we need some reforms:

    1. If you're going to filibuster, you have to actually do so, staying on the floor and talking at least sixteen hours.
    2. Each Senator may filibuster only once per year.
    3. The cloture threshold should be dropped to 11/20, i.e. 55 votes.

    Those would take the thing from being like a playground fight to one requiring thought and strategy, since no one could just filibuster every last thing he objected to.

    I'm tempted to add a provision that a filibuster could be broken by a majority vote of the Senator's own party, just to keep the freaks in line.

    "Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

    --Jonathan Rauch, Salon Magazine, March 13, 2000

    *the number is now forty

  31. #81
    Bammer's Papa
    Kulindahr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    on the foggy, damp, redneck Oregon coast
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    101,396
    Blog Entries
    78

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Senate invokes "nuclear option"

    Quote Originally Posted by T-Rexx View Post
    The filibuster was not designed to limit democracy. It was never "designed" to do anything. It is an accident of Senate rules and a mistake. It has nothing to do with any fears the founding fathers may have had about anything. It did not appear until long after they were all dead.
    An "accident"? According to the early congress-critters, it's inherent to the nature of the Senate -- it was intended. What was unnatural was the ability of the body to shut off a speaker -- i.e., cloture.

    Quote Originally Posted by T-Rexx View Post
    The filibuster utterly destroys the system of checks and balances created by the founding fathers, since it allows a single person to bring that entire process to its knees. It is just my opinion, but I rather suspect the founding fathers would have been appalled by the filibuster. "Checks and balances" is intended to force discussion and encourage compromise. The filibuster stops discussion and discourages compromise. It is very anti-democratic, and anithetical to the founding principles of this republic.
    The filibuster is itself a check on the system -- it prevents the minority from running roughshod over the majority. It encourages compromise... at least when there are sane adults in the Senate.

    Quote Originally Posted by T-Rexx View Post
    That is precisely how democracy works.

    The USA is a system of "checks and balances" between branches of government. If the people elect one party to control of every branch of government, then presumably it is because the people want that party to carry out its perceived agenda.

    There is no honor in preventing the will of the people from being realized. It is not a good thing that anyone in the Senate can prevent the entire government from functioning. It is an embarrassing flaw in our system.
    Preserving liberty is far more important than the will of the people.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Springer View Post
    Wow! Kulindahr didn't correct you. You're special JH.
    I was laughing too hard.

    "Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

    --Jonathan Rauch, Salon Magazine, March 13, 2000

    *the number is now forty

  32. #82
    JUB Addict Ninja108's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Partnered
    Posts
    62,088

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Senate invokes "nuclear option"

    HEre's the thing,in the past when the filibuster was used,it was because of serious concerns with a judge qualifications or viewpoints.
    That's not the case anymore. The last three judges to be blocked were very qualified,and even the likes of Ted Cruz admitted that.
    They're blocking them for the sole reason they don't want Obama to be able to appoint anyone,that's not what the filibuster was meant for.

  33. #83
    JUB Addict T-Rexx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    4,624

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Senate invokes "nuclear option"

    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    An "accident"? According to the early congress-critters, it's inherent to the nature of the Senate -- it was intended. What was unnatural was the ability of the body to shut off a speaker -- i.e., cloture.
    No one ever sat down and designed the filibuster to do anything. It is an accident of Senate rules.

    It is not a tool of democracy. It is a tool to prevent democracy from happening.


    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    The filibuster is itself a check on the system -- it prevents the minority from running roughshod over the majority.
    On the contrary. It allows the minority to prevent the will of the people from happening.

    It is the very definition of the minority running roughshod over the majority.


    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    It encourages compromise... at least when there are sane adults in the Senate.
    The filibuster does not "encourage compromise." It isn't even invoked until a vote is pending on a bill. The point of the filibuster is to stop a vote on legislation that has already been debated, and is about to be passed. The filibustering party senses it is about to lose, and needs to stop the democratic process from proceeding.

    The point of the filibuster is to stop democracy from happening.



    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    Preserving liberty is far more important than the will of the people.
    How is stopping democracy from happening "liberty?"

    Historically, when has the filibuster ever preserved liberty? What events may we point to as evidence of its greatness?

    Oh yeah, it helped to delay the civil rights movement for 40 years. It helped prevent the USA from joining the League of Nations (and arguably contributed to the onset of WWII). It prevented Lincoln from raising an army to fight the south for the first few months after Fort Sumter (forcing him to suspend Habeus Corpus). It has stopped president Obama from carrying out his constitutional mandate to make appointments.

    The filibuster is wonderful - if you hate democracy.

  34. #84
    Rambunctiously Pugnacious JayHawk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    River Quay - KC
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    24,227

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Senate invokes "nuclear option"

    Yeah nobody ever sat down and did anything to constrain or empower the filibuster.... that is why it is such a talked about topic. lol because no one has ever altered or thought out how to use it.
    Everyone can be great, because everyone can serve.
    ~ Martin Luther King, Jr.


  35. #85
    Do I dare to eat a peach?
    palbert's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Coastal Downeast Maine
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    10,114

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Senate invokes "nuclear option"

    This is very much a question of whose ox is getting gored. On the whole, however, I think T-Rexx is in the right and that Kulindahr - as so often - is letting loaded words (e.g., "liberty") get in the way of clear thought, and letting a procedural gimmick subvert the Constitution which defines that liberty.

  36. #86
    Do I dare to eat a peach?
    palbert's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Coastal Downeast Maine
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    10,114

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Senate invokes "nuclear option"

    The filibuster question appears not to have moved things along in the Senate. Now the Defense bill is being held up by one Senator, Inhofe of Oklahoma.

    The most high-profile consequence of legislative failure can already be seen. The current impasse threatens months of work done by Democratic senators to address the problem of sexual assault in the military. A vote on two amendments was originally expected to take place on Wednesday but was ultimately derailed when Oklahoma Sen. Jim Inhofe blocked it and demanded the Senate consider a list of amendments, some of them related to issues like Iran sanctions, that would have slowed progress on the bill even further. Inhofe repeated this demand on Thursday, saying he would not support moving the bill forward without that assurance.

    http://www.msnbc.com/melissa-harris-...ry-sex-assault

  37. #87
    JUB Addict T-Rexx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    4,624

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Senate invokes "nuclear option"

    Quote Originally Posted by palbert View Post
    The filibuster question appears not to have moved things along in the Senate. Now the Defense bill is being held up by one Senator, Inhofe of Oklahoma.
    The filibuster change invoked by the Senate two days ago only effects executive and non-SCOTUS judicial appointments.

    All of the other filibuster rules, unfortunately, remain in place.

  38. #88
    Slut
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Partnered
    Posts
    269

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Senate invokes "nuclear option"

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Springer View Post
    When the next President, a republican, takes office the republican senate will only need 50 votes to approve all Supreme Court nominees.

    Let's go back to the good old days when all it took was some cash in a Senator's pocket, a hooker, and some booze to change votes.
    Your imagination/fantasy continues to amaze me...

  39. #89
    Do I dare to eat a peach?
    palbert's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Coastal Downeast Maine
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    10,114

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Senate invokes "nuclear option"

    Quote Originally Posted by MisterB View Post
    Your imagination/fantasy continues to amaze me...
    Please see Jack Springer's post, from an other thread:

    http://www.politico.com/magazine/sto...ker-99530.html (Bobby Baker recollections)

    He's more right than wrong.

  40. #90
    Slut
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Partnered
    Posts
    269

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Senate invokes "nuclear option"

    Quote Originally Posted by palbert View Post
    Please see Jack Springer's post, from an other thread:

    http://www.politico.com/magazine/sto...ker-99530.html (Bobby Baker recollections)

    He's more right than wrong.
    Not sure I'm following you. Are we talking about the same thing here?

  41. #91
    JUB Addict T-Rexx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    4,624

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Senate invokes "nuclear option"

    Quote Originally Posted by JayHawk View Post
    Yeah nobody ever sat down and did anything to constrain or empower the filibuster.... that is why it is such a talked about topic. lol because no one has ever altered or thought out how to use it.
    People argued the benefits of slavery in America for 244 years before it was finally decided to be bad and worthy of eliminating.

    That doesn't mean that, for 244 years, slavery was good for America.

    Since you are so enamored with the filibuster, perhaps you could give us a few examples of the wonderful things it has accomplished over the nearly two centuries it has been in use. Since it has been so beloved for so long (and endlessly debated as you point out), surely it has a long, long list of accomplishments.
    Last edited by T-Rexx; November 24th, 2013 at 11:58 AM.

  42. #92
    Do I dare to eat a peach?
    palbert's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Coastal Downeast Maine
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    10,114

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Senate invokes "nuclear option"

    Quote Originally Posted by MisterB View Post
    Not sure I'm following you. Are we talking about the same thing here?
    To the extent you quoted JS on legislative drunks, hookers, cash and suasion, yes.

  43. #93
    Slut
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Partnered
    Posts
    269

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Senate invokes "nuclear option"

    Quote Originally Posted by palbert View Post
    To the extent you quoted JS on legislative drunks, hookers, cash and suasion, yes.
    Ah, I see the confusion. When I quoted, I bolded the part I was responding to. I was not referencing Mr. Baker's ruminations. I read it. Not surprised, as a retired Fed, I was privy to alot of similar antics, although on a much smaller scale.

  44. #94

    Re: Senate invokes "nuclear option"

    Quote Originally Posted by MisterB View Post
    Ah, I see the confusion. When I quoted, I bolded the part I was responding to. I was not referencing Mr. Baker's ruminations. I read it. Not surprised, as a retired Fed, I was privy to alot of similar antics, although on a much smaller scale.
    So you should have know what I was talking about without even reading the article ... you DID read the article didn't you?

    Maybe an apology is in order?

  45. #95
    Rambunctiously Pugnacious JayHawk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    River Quay - KC
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    24,227

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Senate invokes "nuclear option"

    Quote Originally Posted by T-Rexx View Post
    People argued the benefits of slavery in America for 244 years before it was finally decided to be bad and worthy of eliminating.

    That doesn't mean that, for 244 years, slavery was good for America.

    Since you are so enamored with the filibuster, perhaps you could give us a few examples of the wonderful things it has accomplished over the nearly two centuries it has been in use. Since it has been so beloved for so long (and endlessly debated as you point out), surely it has a long, long list of accomplishments.
    Well isnt that a cutsie patootsie emotional argument you've created???

    I will ignore the ignorance and respond to the valid question. The first time it was used was to defeat to imposition of a national bank via restoring the charter of the Second National Bank. Very easy historical argument can be made that with a large national bank it would have been much more difficult to have the great depression. Mostly because the solution was to create a giant national bank entity. But that isn't direct so I am sure you will make some excuse up for that not being a good idea.

    I am sure you cannot demonstrate the lack of value anymore than I can detail the value. And it a parliamentary procedure has NOTHING to do with a specific tear jerker human rights issue you want to flop out. It does have to do with the minority having a voice and ability to alter legislation. It has been abused recently and this adjustment is necessary.

    No doubt, the filibuster has been overused in recent years, snarling Senate action on even the most routine matters. But such abuse is evidence of a deeper problem -- the increasing polarization of politics -- and not its cause.

    In terms of fairness, the filibuster demarcates the difference between the Senate and the House. In the House, a dictatorial majority can prevent the opposition from playing any meaningful role -- even from offering amendments. The existence of the filibuster in the Senate ensures that, at least in one chamber, the minority gets its chance to try to change the end product.



    Read more: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/art...#ixzz2lcLx7OvY
    Follow us: @RCP_Articles on Twitter
    BUT I am sure you have a few more epitaphs to sling out so have at it.

    I wonder, since it wasn't purposefully created, why they had to vote to remove the procedure for ending debate before it was created.... the fact that it was named later doesnt mean it was created by purpose.

    In 1789, the first U.S. Senate adopted rules allowing the Senate to move the previous question which meant ending debate and proceeding to a vote. Vice President Aaron Burr argued in 1806 that the motion regarding the previous question was redundant, had only been exercised once in the preceding four years, and should be eliminated.[2] In that same year, the Senate agreed, recodifying its rules, and thus the potential for a filibuster sprang into being.[2] Because the Senate created no alternative mechanism for terminating debate, the filibuster became an option for delay and blocking of floor votes.
    They purposely removed the method of ending debate, which the lack there of is the reason filibuster exists and the term cloture was later defined to bring the matter to an end. SO ask yourself did men at one point choose to remove the procedural sequence of ending debate? If men did that then no matter of calling it a mistake by current proponents or opponents makes that so.


    Hey next you could compare it to internment. That would be a good one.
    Everyone can be great, because everyone can serve.
    ~ Martin Luther King, Jr.


  46. #96
    JUB Addict evanrick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Seattle
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    4,491
    Blog Entries
    16

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Senate invokes "nuclear option"

    Quote Originally Posted by palbert View Post
    James Madison, Federalist 51.

    Did I win?
    federalists are scum. that sounds like something a federalist would say.
    http://forum.justusboys.com/forum/signaturepics/sigpic30903_2.gif

  47. #97
    JUB Addict evanrick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Seattle
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    4,491
    Blog Entries
    16

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Senate invokes "nuclear option"

    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    There's been very little "grand" about the Grand Old Party since then, though there have been a few bright spots.
    thats not a spot its a giant grease stain on Chris Christies 10XL dress shirt.


    and the filibuster is as stupid and useless as the electoral college.
    Last edited by evanrick; November 24th, 2013 at 08:15 PM.
    http://forum.justusboys.com/forum/signaturepics/sigpic30903_2.gif

  48. #98
    Impish and Mercurial Rolyo85's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Boystown, Chicago
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    8,679

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Senate invokes "nuclear option"

    Mocking his comparisons really brings you nowhere. The essence of his argument remains unchallenged in this topic - that the filibuster is anti-democracy, anti-compromise and has historically not really brought any good to the country.
    That we are capable only of being what we are, remains our unforgivable sin.
    - Gene Wolfe

  49. #99
    Rambunctiously Pugnacious JayHawk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    River Quay - KC
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    24,227

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Senate invokes "nuclear option"

    It has innumerable altered bills so both sides are more equally represented. So yeah if narrow majorities are where you wanna go then it is awesome. That is hard to measure, so I do understand the inability to recognize it. Imagine the irreparable damage done to this country had the republican controlled Senate not been checked during the Bush years.

    Still it is an argument that cannot be won at anytime by either side. Odd that it is such a anti democracy horrible thing but they simply relieved it very modestly so appointments can be effected. Something tells me the people who have been on both sides of that filibuster power understand the needed nature.

    Oh wait I have a great historical comparison. The Nazi party got everything it wanted with no opposition. That is probably a good model. (oh no is that like comparing the filibuster to slavery...ooops)
    Everyone can be great, because everyone can serve.
    ~ Martin Luther King, Jr.


  50. #100

    Re: Senate invokes "nuclear option"

    Quote Originally Posted by Rolyo85 View Post
    Mocking his comparisons really brings you nowhere. The essence of his argument remains unchallenged in this topic - that the filibuster is anti-democracy, anti-compromise and has historically not really brought any good to the country.
    We have a republic .. not a democracy. If we had a democracy we'd be voting all the time, our forefathers developed a republic where we have a representative government. Those representatives serve at the voter's will for a specific amount of time.

    For example if we had a true democracy Obamacare would be dead today because most people are against it. With a true democracy the USA would probably be over before 1800.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | About JustUsBoys.com | Site Map | RSS | Webmasters | Advertise | Link to JUB | Report A Bug on this Page

Visit our sister sites: Broke Straight Boys | CollegeDudes.com | CollegeBoyPhysicals.com | RocketTube
All models appearing on JustUsBoys.com were over 18 at the time of photography. The records for sexually explicit images required by U.S. 2257 are kept by the
individual producers of the images. The location of the records is available by clicking the Custodian of Records link at the bottom of each gallery page.
© 2012 JustUsBoys.com. The JustUsBoys.com name and logo are registered trademarks. Labeled with ICRA and RTA. Member of ASACP and The Free Speech Coalition.