Forum Rules - You must read(Updated!)


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.


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.


You agree to NOT hold Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. (makers of the forum software),, sites affiliated with, 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
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.


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.


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.


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.


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

Democrat debates

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by redrover View Post
    I thought Biden and Sanders were flat last night.
    Biden is dumb & done

    Sanders is a creepy socialist

    They're flat for sure

    Originally posted by redrover View Post
    I hope that this is a signal that America may be getting ready for younger more energetic leadership.
    Alexandria Occasionally Coherent is quite energetic

    Kinda cute too

    And she's dumber than hell !!

    PERFECT ; )

    not for president though

    Originally posted by redrover View Post
    Let the Republicans have the geriatric vote
    Preparation H, oatmeal, dentures & Metamucil ... maybe they can start something better ?

    We can hope !

    Originally posted by redrover View Post
    The Demcrats are in trouble if Sanders continues to be the voice of younger voters.
    The few younger voters ignorant enough to believe in the socialist hell sanders is pushing at them WILL grow up and learn

    And there's not enough of them at this time to put a socialist like Sanders into the whitehouse

    Originally posted by redrover View Post
    In the wake of the debates I think we will begin to see Joe and Bernie begin to slide.
    I do think you're right about this

    Originally posted by eohrnberger View Post

    "energetic leadership"

    Yeah, all that's gonna result in . . . .

    It is the foolishness democrats are pushing right now


    • #17
      Originally posted by redrover View Post

      Trump at the G-20 is not quite FDR at Yalta despite what his fans might think. Tonight we get all the B-boys Biden, Bernie and Buttigieg. Right now my top three choices are Klobachar, Castro and Warren. I would be happy with any one of them In the first round Trump wasn't mentioned very often. I would expect Biden to spend more time 3going after Trumpy..
      Yuk. The best one running is tulsi but you like neolib neocons so that rules hear out. Warren is an opportunist and not genuine
      Poor Andrew spoke twice in 2 hours.
      Last edited by Blue Doggy; 3 weeks ago.


      • #18
        Btw, Medicare for most with optional private sector insurance is what most want the last I heard.


        • #19
          The debates . . .

          They displayed their deranged thoughts for the world to see.

          They showed America how hateful & ignorant they are in the worst ways.

          We'll see how that works out for them.


          If there were ever two evenings that exposed the economic idiocy of the Democratic Party, it was both debate nights.

          Every single candidate promises a wish list of free things for all, including a $1,000-a-month income (Yang) courtesy of the government.

          College will be free; health care will be free, even for illegal aliens; abortion will be free on demand; student debt will be erased; etc. Not one of them explains where all this money will come from; perhaps they think they can just print it. They always claim that it will come from the undeserving rich, but it never does.

          The difference between Trump, who loves this country, and all twenty Democrat candidates who seem to hate everything about America could not have been clearer in these two debates.

          Their hatred of Trump has eaten away at their wisdom and conscience. It has poisoned their souls. What we saw those two nights is what is left of them: misery; intolerance; and their disdain for freedom, the Constitution, and the American people.

          Sanders is angry; he rages with furious envy at people who have worked hard and become successful. He loathes such people and wants to destroy them.

          He will never be the candidate; no person with such a vitriolic and aggressive personality has ever been or will ever be elected to the presidency.

          He is hard to listen to because he is so green with envy of successful, happy people. He is a communist of the worst kind. He would love nothing better than to condemn all "rich" people to gulags. All this from a man who owns three homes.

          They all are abjectly committed to the hoax that is climate alarmism, which proves that all of them are a bit dim, ignorant of science, and subject to mass hypnosis. If any one of them knows better, he is too afraid to say so. Only Biden had the guts to say the U.S. is not the problem with regard to CO2 emissions, but he still thinks we should pay for the pollutants of other nations, like China and India!

          Every one of them is as economically illiterate as Ocasio-Cortez, but they are all old enough to know better. It was a pathetic display of ignorance and shameless pandering. They still think the American people are easily manipulated with their bluster.

          And if there was ever an evening that made American citizens double down on protecting their Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms, it was hearing all of them talk about abrogating that right.

          They all clearly believe that law-abiding citizens should not own guns.

          It is perennially lost on them that criminals will always have guns and without them, good people have no means to defend themselves. Given the historical fact that every tyranny on the planet began by confiscating guns -
          Hitler, Mao, Chvez - we should all be very afraid if any one of these people is elected.


          • #20
            Originally posted by Blue Doggy View Post
            Btw, Medicare for most with optional private sector insurance is what most want the last I heard.
            "Medicare for...." loses a tremendous amount of appeal among the electorate when they find out how much it will cost, and the impact it will have on them. And, more importantly, when they are dispelled of the notion that Medicare means you get any medical care you want at anytime, no questions asked (this is how that vapid liar Kamala tried to present it on more than one occasion).

            The former Representative from MD was the only one that wasn't putting a gun to his party's head during that discussion when he pointed out that the overwhelming majority of those with private health insurance were perfectly happy with it, and it is politically foolish to be the party that promises to take it away.

            Now, if it were not for the fact that every single person posing questions to those 20 candidates are as, if not more, liberal than most of the candidates, they would have gotten a question about how if Medicare is so fantastic, why don't they immediately put themselves and all federal employees on it immediately? Or how about instead of passing the bill to extend the medical care for 9/11 responders, they just pass a Medicare rider putting them all on it.


            • #21
              Originally posted by Marcus1124 View Post

              "Medicare for...." loses a tremendous amount of appeal among the electorate when they find out how much it will cost, and the impact it will have on them. And, more importantly, when they are dispelled of the notion that Medicare means you get any medical care you want at anytime, no questions asked (this is how that vapid liar Kamala tried to present it on more than one occasion).

              The former Representative from MD was the only one that wasn't putting a gun to his party's head during that discussion when he pointed out that the overwhelming majority of those with private health insurance were perfectly happy with it, and it is politically foolish to be the party that promises to take it away.

              Now, if it were not for the fact that every single person posing questions to those 20 candidates are as, if not more, liberal than most of the candidates, they would have gotten a question about how if Medicare is so fantastic, why don't they immediately put themselves and all federal employees on it immediately? Or how about instead of passing the bill to extend the medical care for 9/11 responders, they just pass a Medicare rider putting them all on it.
              I support it as long as we keep private sector insurance as an option for it would help small expbusiness by taking that cost off of them.
              But my fear is the incompetence of govt in an expansion of this program. It might wreck my Medicare and add a ton of red tape and impose more idiots into our lives. The govt is incapable of simplifying and using iintelligence.
              Last edited by Blue Doggy; 3 weeks ago.


              • #22
                It almost seems like democrats WANT to make sure Donald Trump gets a second term !

                They all say nutty things, many even openly claiming to want to make America into a socialist hell-hole...

                Wacky climate jokers like Jay Inslee

                Then there's joe biden - who is going nowhere fast obvioulsy... where he arrives won't be the Whitehouse

                "He's on fire someone put him out !"


                [A source close to Bidens campaign told me that his staff is] freaking out about his poor performance tonight, New York Magazines Washington correspondent Olivia Nuzzi tweeted Thursday night after the debate. The source said that internally, field staff says the campaign-organized debate watch parties in early voting states have been awkward and that Biden isnt playing well to those who attended.

                It appears Biden is a loose cannon as the debate season just gets underway, as he reportedly plowed forward with his own debate strategy without paying heed to plans devised by his campaign team to his own demise.

                According to Bidens staff, he isnt listening to his debate prep and hes set in his ways, the source close to the campaign tells me, Nuzzis tweet continued. The source said that internally, field staff says the campaign-organized debate watch parties in early voting states have been awkward and that Biden isnt playing well to those who attended.

                The head of Bidens campaign denied there is any pandemonium within the Democratic frontrunners team, which now claims he is tearing up the field and mentions nothing about the common consensus that believes he is in a downward spiral, with fans on social media being curiously optimistic.

                Biden's deputy campaign manager and communications director Kate Bedingfield denied Nuzzi's claims, responding to the Twitter feed with a one-word answer: Nope," TheBlaze announced. The campaign sent out a text to supporters during the debate, claiming he was on fire. One Twitter user agreed, saying, Oh God he's on fire. Someone put him out."

                However, most of the media agrees that Bidens campaign is in a tailspin especially after what many believe was a subpar showing in the second wave of the Democratic Partys debates this week.

                Biden struggled in the debate, taking fire from rivals, including Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.), in the night's most notable moment, The Hill reported. Harris pressed Biden on his recent seemingly warm words for two Southern segregationists senators he served with in the 1970s and '80s. She also brought up Bidens past opposition to school busing.

                Racism a familiar and choice topic with the Democratic Party over the past decade was the tool Harris used to try and pry away Biden voters into her camp.




                • #23
                  I have faith that the people of America will reject these little dictators who want to ruin America

                  Americans like their freedoms

                  Freedom, for EVERYONE

                  Freedom from big Government

                  Freedom from radicals who want to push their beliefs, 'lifestyles' or personal problems at us

                  I won't be silenced or fear those who call me an "extremist" a "bigot" a "racist" or "hateful," because I don't think like they think.

                  Liars have used these emotional manipulations and word games on people forever. It's time for the truth.

                  You don't get to sell your hate as love by calling me a hater

                  You don't get to bully me then claim you're against bullying

                  You don't get to say you're for free speech, then tell me to shut up

                  You don't get to say I can't have firearms, but you can

                  You don't get to call me a criminal while you're robbing me

                  You don't get to call me a racist because of my skin color, or because I have a country with borders and laws

                  You don't get to redefine the meanings of words to suit your moods

                  You don't get to take me to court and sue me because I don't believe what you believe

                  If you claim a right is "inalienable" or "fundamental" or a "human right," but it requires restrictions of the freedoms and rights of others, you're wrong.

                  When it's possible - under duress of law - to lose reputation, job, and liberty for speaking the truth, we have taken a very wrong turn.

                  It's time to reject actions, witnessed or contemplated that devalue human life, denigrate fatherhood and motherhood, or make speaking the truth "hate speech," and replaces common sense and morality with political correctness.

                  Credits to they whose writings were added into the above statement



                  The Democrats' clown shows last week serve as the perfect illustration of just how nuts they have become.

                  Free everything for everyone -- whether criminally invading the country or simply living beyond one's means -- is now the policy of the Party. Enforcing our laws is pass and viewed as bigoted while these self-righteous, dishonest ignoramuses fight each other for power.

                  Unfortunately, these progressive candidates get away with this nonsense because enough Democrats support their intolerant and totalitarian views.

                  They also get away with this by silencing opposing views.

                  When I spoke out against my town's Sanctuary City law, I was shouted down as a fear-monger and bigot by 100 crazy leftists who ignored the logic of my arguments to scream that Trump was destroying the country.

                  When I spoke to a room of 200 women one month before Obama won his second term, they yelled at me that Mitt Romney would take away their daughters, and granddaughters, right to an abortion.

                  For years conservatives have been silenced on college campuses, often requiring security guards when they attempt to speak.

                  The speakers at the Women's March and even Bernie Sanders revel in shouting at the rest of us lest we fail to fall in line. Intolerance is the new normal.

                  Our way or the highway is the law of the Party.

                  So are lies and distortions.

                  Democrats attack not just individuals with whom they disagree, not just ideas they find offensive, but the truth as they make up facts conveniently perpetuated through mainstream media, social media, progressive events, and the infamous Echo Chamber.

                  Viewpoint discrimination is the new normal as a result of this totalitarian intolerance.

                  And when one points this out, he is labeled a bigot, racist, homophobe, misogynist, or Islamophobe. Name-calling has proven effective.

                  The hypocrisy of these people is astonishing. They scream that Trump is a liar and yet constantly make up their own facts in their quest for power.

                  They yell about free speech and yet constantly seek to shut down ideas with which they disagree.

                  They cry bigotry and racism when the government attempts to enforce the laws and yet are the discriminators who determine who and what will be permitted in their vision of civil society.

                  We can only hope that the majority of Americans watching this disaster unfold wake up and realize that intolerance for thee ultimately leads to intolerance for me. Democrats do not care about Americans rights they seek totalitarian power. They need to be stopped.




                  • #24
                    What they're selling & why they'll lose


                    What conclusions should ordinary people draw about what Democrats stand for, other than a thunderous repudiation of Donald Trump, and how they see America, other than as a land of unscrupulous profiteers and hapless victims?

                    Here's what: a party that makes too many Americans feel like strangers in their own country. A party that puts more of its faith, and invests most of its efforts, in them instead of us.

                    They speak Spanish. We don't.

                    They are not U.S. citizens or legal residents. We are.

                    They broke the rules to get into this country. We didn't.

                    They pay few or no taxes. We already pay most of those taxes.

                    They willingly got themselves into debt. We're asked to write it off.

                    They don't pay the premiums for private health insurance. We're supposed to give up ours in exchange for some V.A.-type nightmare.

                    They didn't start enterprises that create employment and drive innovation.

                    We're expected to join the candidates in demonizing the job-creators, breaking up their businesses and taxing them to the hilt.

                    Why, for example, was there no one on the stage for either event who had a history of actual accomplishment? Or a single fresh idea? Not one candidate who didn't join in the pandering pandering so obvious that even longtime Democrats were turned off and left embarrassed?

                    Why were the actual concerns of the American people not under discussion and left totally unaddressed?

                    In truth, each of those questions answers the others, and thus, in a real sense, those "debates" (if you insist on calling them such) were quite revealing.

                    Our nation's actual needs are in truth lessening. Our economy is again strong and growing. Opportunities abound. The threats from abroad are lessening day by day.

                    For all the talk of "hate," the American people have never been less hateful and never been more open to allowing one another to steer their own lives without social stricture.

                    We the people's real fears and concerns for such are never truly absent among humankind are being addressed outside government, or else the needed "fixes" are being resisted by government bureaucrats or their "bosses" our supposedly representative Congress.

                    There we find the roots of the endless nonsense: everything being put forth on the stage of those "debates" was being put forth to advance or protect a dying status quo. And to snooker the easily snookered.

                    The N.Y. Times was right on this occasion. It was "wretched," indeed. But it should not be just "a wretched start."

                    It should be the Democrats' wretched finish.