Announcement

Collapse

Forum Rules - You must read(Updated!)

DISCLAIMER

You agree to NOT use this site or its affiliated sites, services you may have access to as a result of being a member here (subscriber or otherwise), to post items (images, textual material, etc.) that are pornographic in nature, illegal in the United States and/or the country you reside in, support or encourage illegal activities (e.g., terrorism), advertise for your own personal profit, or send unsolicited messages (i.e. SPAM) to members or non-members.

AND

You agree that if any clause or component of this document is found to not be legally binding in a court of law of proper jurisdiction then the remainder of this document shall remain fully binding and in full force.

AND

You agree to NOT hold Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. (makers of the forum software), uspoliticsonline.com, sites affiliated with uspoliticsonline.com, its administrators, its moderators, others associated with its operation, and its owners liable for any and all of the following (in whole or in part):
Personal insults/attacks by other members.
The content posted by other members, whether directed at you personally or a label/classification you associate with. This includes remarks you consider to be libelous or slanderous in any way.
Any financial or time loss due to your participation here or as a result of something you read at this site, including posts/PMs by other members and feature(s)/software available at the domain uspoliticsonline.com.
The dissemination of any personal information about you as a result of either your negligence (e.g. staying logged into a computer that others have access to) or willingness to post such information on a public and or private forum, private message or chat box. This includes using your real name or other details that could allow other members and/or the general public to determine your true identity. You are prohibited from using your real name on these forums, either as your username or in posts / PMs you write.

FORUM RULES, IN ADDITION TO THE DISCLAIMER

1. These rules apply to all sections of USPOL, including public and private forums, blogs, and visitor messages.

2. You cannot attack and/or personally insult someone. You cannot bait other forum members; this includes referring to posters by derogatory terms. Please, remain courteous and respectful to all forum members at all times. You agree to take responsibility for reporting such posts when you come across them. Please, use the ignore feature if need be. Any member who intentionally and continually posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response, or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion, may be regarded as a troll by staff, and have their account suspended or banned.

3. You cannot harass (sexually or otherwise) other members. This includes malicious, slanderous, or defamatory comments. If you are not sure if something you write is inappropriate or not then don't say it. Err on the side of caution.

4. Copying and Pasting Articles, and Starting New Threads. You cannot simply cut and paste in posts or when starting threads. You MUST provide the identifying information (source, author, date, and URL). You must also offer some original thoughts along with the cut and paste. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts from the article. Excerpts really shouldnt be more then a paragraph or two. Furthermore, if you use images or other copyrighted material in your posts or signature you must have permission of the copyright holder unless you know for a fact that the image is in the public domain. In addition:
a. It must include the identifying information; e.g., where available, the author, the publication, the date, the URL.
b. The member must offer some context, including: How did you hear of this article? What is your opinion? Why is it important to you? Why should it be important to forum readers? The more context you provide, the more you assist others in gauging the excerpted information's significance.
c. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts, not the whole thing or even the majority of the whole thing to encourage people to read the entire article.

A violation of any of the above will result in the deletion or closing of the post or thread and could earn you a warning or suspension. If you have any questions concering any of the above please PM a moderator and we will be happy to clarify.

5. You cannot post the same thing in multiple forums. You must not open similar threads about the same or a similar topic. You cannot spam the board or send unsolicited messages to members via PM, email or any other means.

6. Do not post off-topic. You cannot derail a thread with off topic posts.

7. You cannot shout in posts. This includes posting in all CAPS, bold, lIkE tHiS, and extra large font. Posts should also be one color, although you may use an additional color for highlighting ideas you wish to address.

8. You may not alter quotes in a way that misrepresents what was originally said.

9. Multiple accounts are not allowed. If you are found to have more than one account all accounts will be permanently terminated.

10. You cannot have a user name, avatar, signature, or post images that are deliberately offensive. That includes the display of overly explicit or graphic images that may not be suitable for minors.

11. Signatures can not have more than three lines of text, with a font size no larger than "4", and no more than two font colors. Images in signatures cannot be any larger than 800 pixels wide x 200 pixels tall. Animated images are not allowed.

12. You are prohibited from taking any action to disturb the use of the services by others, distribute material that contains viruses, spyware or any other malicious code or harmful programs. This includes interfering with the working of the network, attempts to gain unauthorized access to a service or other computer systems that are part of the site or any other site, by use of the available services.

13. Discussion of moderation actions in public and/or private forums is not permitted. Moderation actions include warnings, suspensions and the editing or deletion of posts. If a member has a concern about a moderation action, he or she is invited to address it with the board staff via Private Message. This rule exists to protect the privacy of all posters with regards to disciplinary action. The moderator team will never publicly discuss the warnings/suspensions of any posters, and we ask that you return the favor, whether about yourself or another poster. Posting about moderation actions in the public forums constitutes a violation. You are free to discuss a moderation action via Private Message with the moderator involved, but you may not harass or abuse the moderators (as already specified in the forum rules). In practical terms, this means that once a moderator tells you his or her decision is final, no further PMs about that moderation action are permitted. If you have a concern about a moderation action, you are free to appeal to a Forum Administrator via Private Message. You may only discuss moderator activities or discussion of moderation with staff member if you chose to private message and are not under any circumstances allowed to use the PM function to forward or promote moderator discussion in regards to specific forum action, amongst other regular members. Administrators do reserve the right to read said PMs and may do so ; if that results in discovery of messaging between posters of such moderator discussion then it will lead to the same violation being received for discussing said moderator actions on the forum. If you receive a message to the effect of having been given moderator information, please report it to a member of staff. Engaging back in that discussion with the original violator will earn you just as stiff a sanction.

14. Do not ignore moderators or administrators. Do not repost something a moderator or administrator has deleted. You cannot have moderators or administrators on your ignore list.

15. Only post in English. Short passages in foreign languages may be acceptable if its use seems helpful for the ongoing discussion and when there is no indication of a potential violation of the forum rules. Always provide a translation into English in such cases. In case of doubt, the incident will be regarded as a violation, no matter of the actual meaning of the foreign language text.

16. The use of words/comments etc. written by other posters, without approval of the poster in your personal signature is not allowed nor are references, by name, to other posters allowed.

17. Please pay attention to announcements by Forum staff that will be found in the "Welcome! / News & Announcements" forum from time to time.

18. Use of "liar", "lies", "lying", etc. Accusing someone of being a "liar" or similar accusations towards other posters will generally be regarded as implying an insult and therewith as a violation of the forum rules. "I question the validity of your statement because...", "That's not the truth" or "you are wrong about that" are sufficient for any decent discussion if you want to disagree with somebody's assertions.

19. Thread opening restriction for new members. In order to control SPAM, new members must have moderator approval to start their own threads.

20. Thread titles must relate to the discussion within. Do not make misleading titles, or titles such as "Guess what..." or "You'll never believe this...". Members need to be able to identify the general gist of the thread via the title. Profanity in thread titles is not permitted.

21. Forum members are instructed to use forum tools and abilities for their intended purposes and no other. If members identify a forum glitch or weakness of any kind that allows you to see or do something you know you shouldn't, please report it. Being aware of any unintended access to the Forum and failing to take appropriate steps to notify staff of said access issues, will create a presumption of seeking to take advantage of the issue, will result in either account suspension, or banishment.

22. Any link to a site that contains graphic content, must contain a warning describing what a person might reasonably expect to view if they click on said link. No graphic pictures are to be posted on the Forum.

23. Threats or advocations of violence toward a public figure, or member of the Forum, will not be tolerated. Conversation about revolution or the like is not prohibited by this rule; directly calling for violence is, eg It's time to kill every <redacted> that voted for the bill, is not permitted.

24. Accounts with no posts will be deleted after 30 days. Inactive accounts with low post histories may be deleted after one year.

25. Private forums are something offered to members that decide to contribute directly to this site via donations. These donations help immensely in keeping this site up and running. Private forums are designed to allow the contributing member discuss whatever he/she wants to and to have the power to direct that discussion in whatever way he/she chose. They were not designed nor are they intended for simply talking trash about members that don't have access to the forum. While the targeted members cannot see the forum or the comments, it creates a negative atmosphere that really isn't necessary. If you want to totally rip apart ideas, ideologies, political parties, etc. that is fine. We simply ask that you don't use the private forums as a means to attack other members that aren't privy to such comments. It is difficult enough to have a political discussion forum because the discussion of politics is inherently heated as people are so passionate about their beliefs...the ones that take the time to come to such a site in the first place at least. The idea of private forums is so people of similar political persuasions can discuss whatever they want without fear of being attacked. Nonetheless, we hope that a certain level of maturity would foster itself within such an arena and not simply lend itself to a bashing forum.

Private Forums are governed by all of the above Forum rules. In addition:
  • Private forums that essentially become abandoned homes will be subject to deletion, donation or reorganization. Just like elsewhere in life, clubs sometimes lose their vitality and purpose for a myriad of reasons. If it becomes clear that a private forum has clearly lost its vitality and nobody is going to really use it anymore, owners are advised to consider whether to reuse the forum for something new and productive rather than let them linger or notify the Administration that the forum should be rearranged for other purposes, closed, merged with other compatible private forums, donated to others for new purposes, etc. Do not be concerned that your forum must be a membership and post count race with others to avoid falling under this policy; the question is whether your forum has actual vitality instead of being 'brain dead.'
  • Additionally, private forums may only be owned by subscribed members in the Platinum or Diamond categories.
  • Should the owner of a private forum be banned, quit USPOL or otherwise abandon the forum the PF will be transferred to another owner or closed.
  • Propriety of private forums. Administration staff will determine the desirability of a proposed private forum and enact any conditions upon it to ensure its purpose is productive.
  • Any and all instances of sharing accounts by allowing someone else to log in under their own account so they can see into private forums for which they are otherwise not permitted to access, will be deemed violation of the double account rule and all caught doing so will be permanently banned.
  • Relaying private forum posts and information to other posters who are not members of the particular private forum for any negative or destructive purpose (eg mean-spirited gossip, fueling interpersonal disputes, etc), is not permitted, and will constitute a violation of the Forum rules.
  • For purposes of monitoring USPOL Terms of Service Administrative staff (not Moderators) will have access to Private Forums.
  • All Private Forums must have at least one active Administrator as a member for purposes of handling issues which cannot be addressed through moderation permissions.
  • Discussion of moderation activities is prohibited on the open site and is likewise prohibited in Private Forums.

26. The administrators and moderators reserve the right to edit and/or delete a post,and/or close a thread, and/or delete a thread at any time if of the opinion that the post is too obscene, inappropriate, or the discussion has run its course.

27. 'Back seat moderating' is not allowed. If you take issue with another poster's contribution to the forum, you're welcome to report any posts you think are out of line, but you should not bring it up publicly within the forum.

28. Images in posts (whether embedded or hot linked) must be reasonable in size. 800x800 should be considered a good rule of thumb. Excessively large images make it difficult for users on mobile devices to load pages. If necessary please simply link to very large images using the URL tags. In addition, the following images are not permitted (including, but not limited to pages with images or videos containing):
  • Strategically covered nudity
  • Sheer or see-through clothing
  • Lewd or provocative poses
  • Close-ups of breasts, buttocks, or crotches

29. Any solicitation or communication involving sports betting / gambling / online casinos / bookies and or internet based card or slot machine systems or sites will lead to all said content being physically removed from the site and server, and will lead to any and or all parties involved being permanently removed and banned from the site to the farthest extent possible. This includes any links to any form of bookmaker, casino, any type of game or match or event where money transfers on the outcome or link of any sort to wire act violations and or anything in violation of either the Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act, Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006, or the Federal wire Act. This applies not only to the open forum but all and or any chat rooms, articles, private messages and or private forums. All content that violates this rule will be deleted, without notice.

CONSEQUENCES

Failure to comply with any of the forum rules may result in your posts being edited or deleted and/or your account being temporarily or permanently banned from the forums. U.S. Politics Online uses a warning system that generates an automated Private Message to members when they are in violation of Forum rules. The decision to issue a warning is left to the discretion of the moderator or administrator handling the violation. If a member does not agree with an action taken by a moderator, they can appeal to an administrator after seeking clarification from the moderator who issued the warning/infraction and appealing to them in the first instance. Members MAY NOT harass a moderator or administrator by sending excessive PMs when they are discussing an appeal.

Violations are assigned a point value. Points are valid for 30 days. When a members earns 10 points, their account will be automatically suspended: five (5) days for a first suspension; ten (10) days for a second suspension; and twenty (20) days for a third suspension. If a member incurs an additional 10 points after having served three periods of suspension, then they will be permanently banned from the Forum.

Point values are as follows:
Zero (0) points Warning
Two (2) points - Minor infraction / Non post infraction (minor) / Off topic posts / spamming
Four (4) points - Academic dishonesty / Baiting / Discussing moderator or administrator actions / Implying an insult / Minor insults / Moderate infraction / Non-post infraction (moderate) / Thread dumping
Six (6) points - Direct insult at another member / major infraction / Non-post infraction (major)
Ten (10) points - Act of criminality, or advocating thereof

The administrators and moderators also bear the right to issue warnings, temporarily suspend or ban posters for continued trolling or other serious misconduct (eg. professional spamming) even if the poster has not yet reached the maximum warning points or suspensions level. Other options if the above consequences do not seem adequate include placing the member in a moderation queue, which means all posts will have to be approved before they are posted to the board.

PRIVACY POLICY

All information obtained by the end user via the registration process is for internal purposes only and will not be sold to or shared with any third parties. However, if the end user participates in illegal activities and a court of proper jurisdiction orders U.S. Politics Online to release certain information about said user then we will act according to the law. Furthermore, no information will be released on threat of a lawsuit, attempted or actual intimidation, or due to any other reason except as notated in the first sentence of this paragraph. Nonetheless, keep in mind that the information we do have is very limited and generally only consists of the IP address a member uses.

SUBSCRIPTIONS

U.S. Politics Online offers several subscription plans to help cover the operational costs of the site. As a thank you for your donation, you will receive special added benefits meant to enhance your U.S. Politics Online experience. Plans vary in price, starting at only $0.05/day, and benefits vary with the price. Benefits include ability to go straight to new posts, to search the forum, larger avatar, private forums, invisible mode, photo gallery, email, web hosting, and no advertisement banners. Please, click here for more details.
See more
See less

Could you hold off on that speech ...?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Could you hold off on that speech ...?

    Nancy has another great idea !!! Such inspiration !!

    She asks the president to hold off on his state of the union speech until "after the shutdown."

    Great strategy Nancy. I would have suggested keeping your big mouth shut, but ... waste of time..

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pelosi to Trump: Reschedule State of the Union Speech if Shutdown Continues

    House Speaker Nancy Pelosi asked President Donald Trump on Wednesday to reschedule his annual State of the Union speech before Congress because of the partial U.S. government shutdown.

    "Sadly, given the security concerns and unless government re-opens this week, I suggest that we work together to determine another suitable date after government has re-opened for this address or for you to consider delivering your State of the Union address in writing to the Congress on January 29th,"


    https://www.newsmax.com/politics/pel.../16/id/898449/


    Pelosi says the partial shutdown is raising concerns about security preparations for the speech. The California Democrat notes that the Secret Service and Department of Homeland Security have been without funding for almost four weeks.

    The annual speech is perhaps the president's biggest opportunity to present his agenda directly to the public.

    Pelosi writes that "given the security concerns and unless government reopens this week, I suggest that we work together to determine another suitable date after the government has re-opened."


    https://www.khq.com/news/pelosi-asks...dfd3ccc0f.html

  • #2
    As a conciliatory gesture, maybe Nan will refrain from delivering her democraps response.

    ?


    • #3
      The president tells Nancy to stay home ..

      -------------------------------------------------------------------------------

      Trump Tells Pelosi Her Overseas Trip Postponed Amid Shutdown

      In a letter to Pelosi on Thursday, Trump said that due to the shutdown a trip to Egypt, Brussels and Afghanistan would be delayed, declaring: "In light of the 800,000 great American workers not receiving pay, I'm sure you would agree that postponing this public relations event is totally appropriate."

      https://www.newsmax.com/headline/tru.../17/id/898677/

      ?


      • #4
        JUST coming in here to post this. ABC News online has a copy of the letter, as captured from Sarah Sanders tweet:

        7C7A68A7-A171-48B8-A44C-29B7CE512C13.jpeg

        you just KNOW that had to sting. I can hear Pelosi meltdown from here...

        ?


        • #5
          Originally posted by DavidSF View Post
          JUST coming in here to post this. ABC News online has a copy of the letter, as captured from Sarah Sanders tweet:

          7C7A68A7-A171-48B8-A44C-29B7CE512C13.jpeg

          you just KNOW that had to sting. I can hear Pelosi meltdown from here...
          LOL If Donnie was smart he'd leave Nancy alone because she is a lot smarter and tougher than he is.

          ?


          • #6
            Originally posted by redrover View Post

            LOL If Donnie was smart he'd leave Nancy alone because she is a lot smarter and tougher than he is.
            Ok cool. Go outside and play now, and stay OUT of the street !

            ?


            • #7
              The president isn't going to take nancies advice and "hold off" on delivering his state of the union speech.

              We have a problem.

              Nancy and her imbecile friend chuck can pretend we don't only for so long.

              It's not going to work any more. this can't last....

              Because we're too busy and foolish arguing about decent immigration policy and a wall, we'll continue having masses of people coming to invade America ?

              As we sit on our thumbs and argue with one another, we're being invaded.

              We have forgotten the harsh realities of the world ?

              As happens with successful, comfortable nations and peoples. They get lazy and dumb.. then they lose all.

              Does a nation with people this lazy & dumb deserve to be overtaken and overthrown ?

              It's what we're witnessing. History has other examples of similar downfalls.

              Enjoy the show, sorry if it hurts later, but -shrugs- what did we do to stop it ?

              Sorry, nevermind this is just a "manufactured crisis." - said fools.

              This isn't being ignored...

              -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

              MEXICO CITY Another migrant caravan is forming in Honduras, with plans to set out next week on a journey that will once again test the immigration policies of Mexico and the United States.

              Obviously, caravans, ever better organized and more frequent, are becoming 'a thing.'

              There are a lot of reasons to favor a wall - with friendly door for legal immigrants alongside it. But probably the biggest one which will support President Trump's case for a border wall on the grounds of national security, is the new reality here - that another caravan is headed our way with thousands of people who don't want to take a number to enter - and as each successive caravan succeeds in its mission, more will be coming.

              With this going on, a very large part of the population of Honduras is going to be in the states before long, which is hardly a good thing for Honduras itself, which is already in a demographic death spiral.

              The fact that caravans, of murky financing, are being organized and turned into an ongoing and ever more polished organized operation suggests that the funding and organization of leftist open border groups is there, and the lack of a wall makes it attractive. Two years ago, we heard about a smaller caravan that headed north to Tijuana, and then things went dormant. Then late last year, a larger caravan showed up, getting lots of bad P.R., but obviously some kind of success for at least some of them, all premised on illegal crossing. Now, there's this vast new caravan preparing to set sail on Jan. 15 at 5:00 p.m., and far fewer of them are going to take a number as many of these past caravan migrants, still waiting at the gates, are. They're just going to march right through because that's where the instant rewards are.

              Obviously, the attractive nuisance of the unwalled U.S. still stands, at least for now. Combine that with the legal incentives to come illegally, and it's no surprise that the caravans -- many, many, caravans -- are coming.

              If that's not a case for President Trump's wall, what is? How is the prospect of 15,000 people, or 80,000 people, or 500,000 people, (with criminals salted in), storming our border, not a crisis, as Trump has argued.


              https://www.americanthinker.com/blog...o_roll_in.html






              ?


              • #8
                "Walls don't work." - said the fool,... who has walls around his living area ...

                "We were for it, before we were against it."

                "Demediacrats" are fools & losers.

                ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                No sooner had the Democrats taken back the majority in the House of Representatives than they proved their harshest critics correct the party no longer concerns itself with the interests of the American people. And by refusing to provide a dime for a physical barrier on our border, they did it in the starkest terms possible.

                Led by far-left Nancy Pelosi, who held off a challenge to her leadership from the even farther left, the House Democrats promptly put themselves in the position of being seen taking the side of foreigners entering the country illegally over the security and economic prosperity of American citizens. They reduced themselves to the absurd position that "walls don't work."

                What's important now is that Trump plays his winning hand and resists the growing calls from the opposition media and cheap-labor Republicans to compromise with Nancy and Chuck. Doing so would just throw them a lifeline. Instead, Trump should use the power granted presidents by Congress, declare a national emergency, and begin construction of the wall.

                Democrats and open-border zealots will run to the thoroughly discredited 9th Circuit and get an activist Obama judge to stand the law on its head and issue a bogus restraining order. But the president will be on solid legal footing, and that ruling will be overturned by the Supreme Court on the expedited basis that an emergency declaration demands.

                ..even liberal legal scholars now grudgingly recognize that the National Emergencies Act of 1976 grants the president the authority to reprogram military construction funds for emergency projects. And sorry, CNN, but it's the president and the president alone who decides what's an emergency. The Secure Fence Act passed by Congress in 2006 further strengthens Trump's case for declaring an emergency.

                This will put the Dems in the awkward position of arguing that wasteful Army Corps of Engineer projects in Iraq and Afghanistan are more important than one protecting America's border. While many of those projects were of dubious value to begin with, many more have already been built, have been destroyed, and are waiting to be rebuilt to be destroyed again.

                While all this plays out, the Democrats will be all over the opposition media, declaring Trump a tyrant for having the audacity to secure the nation's borders. It will be Trump Derangement Syndrome on parade as one wild-eyed leftist after another vehemently argues against what Americans can plainly see is common sense.

                Trump's greatest value is as a disruptor, and all this disruption is just too delicious, as it forces the Dems to play their losing hand.

                ...

                This would also be a good time for the administration to get its communications act together and correct several fallacies the opposition media have ingrained into the public's consciousness fallacies like that the wall is an exorbitant expense, when in reality it will save far more through reduced costs associated with illegal immigration, which currently costs the nation well over $150B each and every year. Heck, it will save money on the reduced need for border patrol personnel alone. Then there is the fallacy that a 2,000-mile border barrier is some major engineering challenge, when the U.S. has built over 46,000 miles of interstate highways, each mile of which required more complex engineering than setting a steel-bollard wall. And there is the self-obvious fallacy that agenda-driven politicians, open-borders advocates, and opposition media pundits know more about how to secure the border than border patrol agents who overwhelmingly are calling for a physical barrier.

                Having regained one house of Congress, the Democrats immediately boxed themselves into a losing position. That position is in opposition to the main issue that elected Trump to the presidency: securing the border. Their fellow travelers in the media can deceive the uninformed portion of the electorate for only so long before it becomes painfully clear that voting for Democrats imperils the nation.


                https://www.americanthinker.com/arti..._cornered.html





                ?


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Captain Trips View Post
                  "Walls don't work." - said the fool,... who has walls around his living area ...

                  "We were for it, before we were against it."

                  "Demediacrats" are fools & losers.

                  ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                  No sooner had the Democrats taken back the majority in the House of Representatives than they proved their harshest critics correct the party no longer concerns itself with the interests of the American people. And by refusing to provide a dime for a physical barrier on our border, they did it in the starkest terms possible.

                  Led by far-left Nancy Pelosi, who held off a challenge to her leadership from the even farther left, the House Democrats promptly put themselves in the position of being seen taking the side of foreigners entering the country illegally over the security and economic prosperity of American citizens. They reduced themselves to the absurd position that "walls don't work."

                  What's important now is that Trump plays his winning hand and resists the growing calls from the opposition media and cheap-labor Republicans to compromise with Nancy and Chuck. Doing so would just throw them a lifeline. Instead, Trump should use the power granted presidents by Congress, declare a national emergency, and begin construction of the wall.

                  Democrats and open-border zealots will run to the thoroughly discredited 9th Circuit and get an activist Obama judge to stand the law on its head and issue a bogus restraining order. But the president will be on solid legal footing, and that ruling will be overturned by the Supreme Court on the expedited basis that an emergency declaration demands.

                  ..even liberal legal scholars now grudgingly recognize that the National Emergencies Act of 1976 grants the president the authority to reprogram military construction funds for emergency projects. And sorry, CNN, but it's the president and the president alone who decides what's an emergency. The Secure Fence Act passed by Congress in 2006 further strengthens Trump's case for declaring an emergency.

                  This will put the Dems in the awkward position of arguing that wasteful Army Corps of Engineer projects in Iraq and Afghanistan are more important than one protecting America's border. While many of those projects were of dubious value to begin with, many more have already been built, have been destroyed, and are waiting to be rebuilt to be destroyed again.

                  While all this plays out, the Democrats will be all over the opposition media, declaring Trump a tyrant for having the audacity to secure the nation's borders. It will be Trump Derangement Syndrome on parade as one wild-eyed leftist after another vehemently argues against what Americans can plainly see is common sense.

                  Trump's greatest value is as a disruptor, and all this disruption is just too delicious, as it forces the Dems to play their losing hand.

                  ...

                  This would also be a good time for the administration to get its communications act together and correct several fallacies the opposition media have ingrained into the public's consciousness fallacies like that the wall is an exorbitant expense, when in reality it will save far more through reduced costs associated with illegal immigration, which currently costs the nation well over $150B each and every year. Heck, it will save money on the reduced need for border patrol personnel alone. Then there is the fallacy that a 2,000-mile border barrier is some major engineering challenge, when the U.S. has built over 46,000 miles of interstate highways, each mile of which required more complex engineering than setting a steel-bollard wall. And there is the self-obvious fallacy that agenda-driven politicians, open-borders advocates, and opposition media pundits know more about how to secure the border than border patrol agents who overwhelmingly are calling for a physical barrier.

                  Having regained one house of Congress, the Democrats immediately boxed themselves into a losing position. That position is in opposition to the main issue that elected Trump to the presidency: securing the border. Their fellow travelers in the media can deceive the uninformed portion of the electorate for only so long before it becomes painfully clear that voting for Democrats imperils the nation.


                  https://www.americanthinker.com/arti..._cornered.html




                  Sadly the shutdown will have to go on until Vladimir takes his foot off Don's throat. Actually Ann Coulter should give the state of the union. She seems to be the one holding the strings of Donald the pathetic puppet.

                  ?


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by redrover View Post
                    Sadly the shutdown will have to go on until Vladimir takes his foot off Don's throat. Actually Ann Coulter should give the state of the union. She seems to be the one holding the strings of Donald the pathetic puppet.
                    Strange fantasies you do have. Who gets you thinking such oddball things ?

                    I know I know, hate makes you stupid and you can't admit that, .. it's Ok, carry-on...

                    ?


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by redrover View Post

                      LOL If Donnie was smart he'd leave Nancy alone because she is a lot smarter and tougher than he is.
                      Oh no... shes not at all smart. She was about to head over to visit with the U.S. Military.

                      Trump saved her life. Frankly, I would have been happier if hed let her get over there then cancelled her return flight.

                      ?


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by DavidSF View Post

                        Oh no... shes not at all smart. She was about to head over to visit with the U.S. Military.

                        Trump saved her life. Frankly, I would have been happier if hed let her get over there then cancelled her return flight.
                        You probably don't know this but she is next in the of succession after Pence, so when Trump and Pence and Trump are impeached and convicted by the senate guess who becomes president?

                        ?


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by redrover View Post
                          You probably don't know this but she is next in the of succession after Pence, so when Trump and Pence and Trump are impeached and convicted by the senate guess who becomes president?
                          Im not at all concerned.

                          first, even my High School Son can recite the line of succession to the President. Most of us are well versed in politics and political processes, unlike democraps and other liberals... for example, my guess is, you probably had that thought but had to go look it up before you fptried to taunt me with it.

                          Second, they cant wven charge him, never mind convict him (Mueller who?)

                          but, finally, if an evil like Pelosi becomes president, Im old enough and I have enough money to move to Costa Rica or Belize.

                          ?

                          Working...
                          X