Home of The Brave: A 1960's Political RP

[Free Ward Marchers]

posting the last part anyway because you guys botched the format of your own debate.

I was the one solely in charge of the debate, I should have specified that there was not a response time, I take full responsibility for that, However I will not tolerate your rudeness, you have been very rude lately and it is uncalled for.

[Cybernetic Socialist Republics]

posting the last part anyway because you guys botched the format of your own debate.

I was the one solely in charge of the debate, I should have specified that there was not a response time, I take full responsibility for that, However I will not tolerate your rudeness, you have been very rude lately and it is uncalled for.

sorry, just incredibly frustrated I'm trying to meaningfully participate in this only to consistently get blocked by stubborn adherence to things that are factually wrong.

[Louisianan]

I was the one solely in charge of the debate, I should have specified that there was not a response time, I take full responsibility for that, However I will not tolerate your rudeness, you have been very rude lately and it is uncalled for.

sorry, just incredibly frustrated I'm trying to meaningfully participate in this only to consistently get blocked by stubborn adherence to things that are factually wrong.

You have been blocked by nothing so far but a filibuster that has ended.

[Cybernetic Socialist Republics]

sorry, just incredibly frustrated I'm trying to meaningfully participate in this only to consistently get blocked by stubborn adherence to things that are factually wrong.

You have been blocked by nothing so far but a filibuster that has ended.

true but It means I won't be able to pull that out later if need be.

[Louisianan]

You have been blocked by nothing so far but a filibuster that has ended.

true but It means I won't be able to pull that out later if need be.

Sure you can! The bill isn't dead! If debate ends, the bill simply goes back onto the docket, now I will say, depending on Dalmania (Boone's) vote your Act may die in a vote, simply because Boone is the Whip which means Dems have to vote the way he says or fear repercussions. You can always rewrite a bill, name it differently and try to pass it again. Not to mention, you are able to filibuster anything as well.

[Louisianan]

Who's on board?

---

Official Name: Milk and Butter Price Support Act

Nickname: Moo Moo Yummy Act

Overview: To establish a price support level for milk and butterfat.

Sponsor: Hubert Broussard (D-LA-3)
Co-Sponsors:

---

Section 1: Subsection (c) of sectioin 201 of the Agricultural Act of 1949 (7 U.S.C. 1446), as amended, is further amended by adding the following new sentence to be inserted immediately after the first sentence: "Notwithstanding the foregoing provisions, for the period beginning with the enactment of this sentence and ending March 31, 1961, the price of milk for manufacturing purposes and the price of butterfat shall be supported at not less than $3.22 per hundredweight and 59.6 cents per pound, respectively."

---

This bill is then honorably presented to the House of Representatives for consideration in order to fix prices for American Families to improve the United States Law and is backed by Hubert Broussard on January 28th, 1959.

[Cybernetic Socialist Republics]

Not Sofia, the Frasers don't support price floors or ceilings of any kind.

[Dalmannia]

true but It means I won't be able to pull that out later if need be.

Sure you can! The bill isn't dead! If debate ends, the bill simply goes back onto the docket, now I will say, depending on Dalmania (Boone's) vote your Act may die in a vote, simply because Boone is the Whip which means Dems have to vote the way he says or fear repercussions. You can always rewrite a bill, name it differently and try to pass it again. Not to mention, you are able to filibuster anything as well.

I say the best bet for the bill’s proponents is to put it back in the docket. Maybe some could negotiate with Boone, see if any amendments can be made. If concessions of any sort are made, who knows how he would vote. He certainly would be more lenient to any dissenters. Just remember, Boone isn’t above bribery, lobbying and any number of corrupt bargains...

[Cybernetic Socialist Republics]

Anyway, waiting for another round of polls before rolling out Tom Fraser's almost complete platform.

[Louisianan]

Sure you can! The bill isn't dead! If debate ends, the bill simply goes back onto the docket, now I will say, depending on Dalmania (Boone's) vote your Act may die in a vote, simply because Boone is the Whip which means Dems have to vote the way he says or fear repercussions. You can always rewrite a bill, name it differently and try to pass it again. Not to mention, you are able to filibuster anything as well.

I say the best bet for the bill’s proponents is to put it back in the docket. Maybe some could negotiate with Boone, see if any amendments can be made. If concessions of any sort are made, who knows how he would vote. He certainly would be more lenient to any dissenters. Just remember, Boone isn’t above bribery, lobbying and any number of corrupt bargains...

Broussard has offered 'special interest' money, feel free to get back to him about that....

[Louisianan]

The official debate poll is up!

[Louisianan]

Who's on board?

(Image)

---

Official Name: Milk and Butter Price Support Act

Nickname: Moo Moo Yummy Act

Overview: To establish a price support level for milk and butterfat.

Sponsor: Hubert Broussard (D-LA-3)
Co-Sponsors:

---

Section 1: Subsection (c) of sectioin 201 of the Agricultural Act of 1949 (7 U.S.C. 1446), as amended, is further amended by adding the following new sentence to be inserted immediately after the first sentence: "Notwithstanding the foregoing provisions, for the period beginning with the enactment of this sentence and ending March 31, 1961, the price of milk for manufacturing purposes and the price of butterfat shall be supported at not less than $3.22 per hundredweight and 59.6 cents per pound, respectively."

---

This bill is then honorably presented to the House of Representatives for consideration in order to fix prices for American Families to improve the United States Law and is backed by Hubert Broussard on January 28th, 1959.

Still looking for Co-Sponsors to the Moo Moo Yummy Act!!!!

[Newne Carriebean7]

Fuck it, Sharp likes the title, so he'll back Broussard's bill in the Senate.

[Cybernetic Socialist Republics]

Honestly I think having people explain what they thought of the debate rather than just having the poll would be more interesting.

[Free Ward Marchers]

Honestly I think having people explain what they thought of the debate rather than just having the poll would be more interesting.

well in real life, the press would definitely write about the debate, so we decided to make the poll too gauge what people thought of it, and then make a story of it. People can react to it if they wish (I'm actually surprised they haven't already).

[Hopal]

The endorsement of Brown Jr. is now official.

[Cybernetic Socialist Republics]

Honestly I think having people explain what they thought of the debate rather than just having the poll would be more interesting.

well in real life, the press would definitely write about the debate, so we decided to make the poll too gauge what people thought of it, and then make a story of it. People can react to it if they wish (I'm actually surprised they haven't already).

to be completely frank, I think you can make a pretty strong argument for not getting rid of the poll tax by using the "informed voter" argument and saying that it's satisfactory for some states to refuse certain people the right to vote because they are not informed and therefore can't be good citizens. Same way you can explain away tests and devices.


What I don't get is how anyone here thinks that essentially denying the existence of article 6 of the constitution, the supremacy clause, is a "good argument" and yet that was the foundation of broussard's position.

this by the way is why I was upset about not getting the post my final response, because the entire debate was built around making that point in the end. Instead it just ended suddenly and the poll was thrown up before I got the chance to make that point

[Louisianan]

well in real life, the press would definitely write about the debate, so we decided to make the poll too gauge what people thought of it, and then make a story of it. People can react to it if they wish (I'm actually surprised they haven't already).

to be completely frank, I think you can make a pretty strong argument for not getting rid of the poll tax by using the "informed voter" argument and saying that it's satisfactory for some states to refuse certain people the right to vote because they are not informed and therefore can't be good citizens. Same way you can explain away tests and devices.


What I don't get is how anyone here thinks that essentially denying the existence of article 6 of the constitution, the supremacy clause, is a "good argument" and yet that was the foundation of broussard's position.

Dude, nobody here thinks that. Have you ever heard of double speak? Making something sound better than it actually is? Thats what Broussard does, in the Phyletic Perception Act, for instance, Phyletic Perception sounds better than Racial Discrimination. If one can dress something up and make it sound good, then that's how uninformed people will perceive it unless they are given facts. You're taking things way too personally, Broussard is Broussard and I am Me, Sofia is Sofia and you are you, nothing IC has anything to do with you personally, that's merely how RPs work.

[Louisianan]

well in real life, the press would definitely write about the debate, so we decided to make the poll too gauge what people thought of it, and then make a story of it. People can react to it if they wish (I'm actually surprised they haven't already).

to be completely frank, I think you can make a pretty strong argument for not getting rid of the poll tax by using the "informed voter" argument and saying that it's satisfactory for some states to refuse certain people the right to vote because they are not informed and therefore can't be good citizens. Same way you can explain away tests and devices.


What I don't get is how anyone here thinks that essentially denying the existence of article 6 of the constitution, the supremacy clause, is a "good argument" and yet that was the foundation of broussard's position.

this by the way is why I was upset about not getting the post my final response, because the entire debate was built around making that point in the end. Instead it just ended suddenly and the poll was thrown up before I got the chance to make that point

If you have any issues with any of the OP decisions, TG one of us, don't make a bunch of drama in the OOC.

[Cybernetic Socialist Republics]

to be completely frank, I think you can make a pretty strong argument for not getting rid of the poll tax by using the "informed voter" argument and saying that it's satisfactory for some states to refuse certain people the right to vote because they are not informed and therefore can't be good citizens. Same way you can explain away tests and devices.


What I don't get is how anyone here thinks that essentially denying the existence of article 6 of the constitution, the supremacy clause, is a "good argument" and yet that was the foundation of broussard's position.

Dude, nobody here thinks that. Have you ever heard of double speak? Making something sound better than it actually is? Thats what Broussard does, in the Phyletic
Perception Act, for instance, Phyletic Perception sounds better than Racial Discrimination. If one can dress something up and make it sound good, then that's how uninformed people will perceive it unless they are given facts.

Broussard didn't make anything look good, he just straight up acted like the supremacy clause didn't exist.

what Broussard did was basically like saying that sky was the color of broccoli, while everyone could look up and see that the sky was not in fact the color of broccoli, and then turning around and saying "well it was compelling because instead of saying it was green he said it was the color of broccoli."

[Free Ward Marchers]

Dude, nobody here thinks that. Have you ever heard of double speak? Making something sound better than it actually is? Thats what Broussard does, in the Phyletic
Perception Act, for instance, Phyletic Perception sounds better than Racial Discrimination. If one can dress something up and make it sound good, then that's how uninformed people will perceive it unless they are given facts.

Broussard didn't make anything look good, he just straight up acted like the supremacy clause didn't exist.

what Broussard did was basically like saying that sky was the color of broccoli, while everyone could look up and see that the sky was not in fact the color of broccoli, and then turning around and saying "well it was compelling because instead of saying it was green he said it was the color of broccoli."

the people voted for who they thought won, it's not Louisianan's fault you don't like how it went. So could you please stop clogging my OOC man

[Louisianan]

Dude, nobody here thinks that. Have you ever heard of double speak? Making something sound better than it actually is? Thats what Broussard does, in the Phyletic
Perception Act, for instance, Phyletic Perception sounds better than Racial Discrimination. If one can dress something up and make it sound good, then that's how uninformed people will perceive it unless they are given facts.

Broussard didn't make anything look good, he just straight up acted like the supremacy clause didn't exist.

what Broussard did was basically like saying that sky was the color of broccoli, while everyone could look up and see that the sky was not in fact the color of broccoli, and then turning around and saying "well it was compelling because instead of saying it was green he said it was the color of broccoli."

Calm down for just a moment, and realize one thing, you are stating your opinion, not fact. Don't get confused, your opinion is your opinion, not fact, and not everyone has to live by your opinions because they are entitled to their own. You are taking things too personally. Don't feel like an IC attack on your character is an OOC attack on you. You are currently attacking me simply due to an IC event that, if I may add, was not moderated by myself.

[Louisianan]

The endorsement of Brown Jr. is now official.

Would Douglas like to sign onto the Moo Moo Yummy Act?

[Hopal]

The endorsement of Brown Jr. is now official.

Would Douglas like to sign onto the Moo Moo Yummy Act?

He hasn't made his mind on the Moo Moo Yummy Act, it isn't really something his constituents would think or care about. But he'll have look over it. I like the name though.

[Deblar]

The endorsement of Brown Jr. is now official.