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 shouldn’t 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

Progressive Hate

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by redrover View Post
    MSNBC was abuzz about what Sinclair broadcasting did over the weekend demanding that local affiliates read a canned propaganda piece. It was quite humorous hearing all these news hosts spewing the same message word for word. You may say that NBC has a liberal bias which is true but the on air journalists are not just actors reading from a script. State run media seems to be Trump's goal.
    He's going to have to undo the last few administrations state run media constructs to build his own I guess. I don't think he's going to be able to accomplish this.

    I think he'll be very lucky to succeed/even survive his presidency in any way with today's state run media.

    Originally posted by redrover View Post
    He spent Easter reacting to a false Fox story about caravans of illegals coming across the border to take advantage of DACA. Which is riculus unless they can use a time machine that can bring them back to 2007. https://www.google.com/search?source....0.Saxn55KeaIw
    .. these so called "dreamers" ...

    - a word choice to help fools forget that these people are illegal aliens that do not belong here -

    ... ARE coming here, invading our country and we do need a wall to keep them out.

    If we mean to have a country known as America for long.

    מה מכילות החדשות?


    • #47
      Originally posted by Captain Trips View Post

      He's going to have to undo the last few administrations state run media constructs to build his own I guess. I don't think he's going to be able to accomplish this.

      I think he'll be very lucky to succeed/even survive his presidency in any way with today's state run media.



      .. these so called "dreamers" ...

      - a word choice to help fools forget that these people are illegal aliens that do not belong here -

      ... ARE coming here, invading our country and we do need a wall to keep them out.

      If we mean to have a country known as America for long.
      You don't seem to understand DACA any better than Trump does. No illegal entering the country now can qualify for the program. Read a little and learn.https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclope...t-student.html

      מה מכילות החדשות?


      • #48
        Originally posted by redrover View Post
        You don't seem to understand DACA any better than Trump does. No illegal entering the country now can qualify for the program. Read a little and learn.https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclope...t-student.html
        Fanks fer educatin' me. Aye donno whut eyed do widout it !

        Back to what I said earlier - you seem to have missed it...

        .. these so called "dreamers" ...

        - a word choice to help fools forget that these people are illegal aliens that do not belong here -

        ... ARE coming here, invading our country and we do need a wall to keep them out.

        Whether "are" should be "were" is of little importance given the word game - another game of words by liberals - that's also being played with this issue.

        Dreamers daca - nonsense.

        These are illegal immigrants and they have no business in this country.

        None

        מה מכילות החדשות?


        • #49
          Originally posted by Captain Trips View Post

          Fanks fer educatin' me. Aye donno whut eyed do widout it !

          Back to what I said earlier - you seem to have missed it...

          .. these so called "dreamers" ...

          - a word choice to help fools forget that these people are illegal aliens that do not belong here -

          ... ARE coming here, invading our country and we do need a wall to keep them out.

          Whether "are" should be "were" is of little importance given the word game - another game of words by liberals - that's also being played with this issue.

          Dreamers daca - nonsense.

          These are illegal immigrants and they have no business in this country.

          None
          And Mexico is going to build the wall or at least pay for it. I understand why you want something concrete and something you can pee on to protect you because you don't believe that laws are unenforceable. We know you don't believe Trump is bound by the rule of law because you give him a pass on every crime under the sun from violations of the Constitution to violations of election law

          מה מכילות החדשות?


          • #50
            Originally posted by redrover View Post
            And Mexico is going to build the wall or at least pay for it. I understand why you want something concrete and something you can pee on to protect you because you don't believe that laws are unenforceable. We know you don't believe Trump is bound by the rule of law because you give him a pass on every crime under the sun from violations of the Constitution to violations of election law
            Why should we care about "violating law" ?

            We let many thousands of "immigrants" stream into America illegally and ignore it, is "law" .. does "law" even matter ?

            No, apparently not.

            Unless we can dream up laws that the current president supposedly broke, THEN we're worried about "law."

            מה מכילות החדשות?


            • #51
              Originally posted by Captain Trips View Post

              Why should we care about "violating law" ?

              We let many thousands of "immigrants" stream into America illegally and ignore it, is "law" .. does "law" even matter ?

              No, apparently not.

              Unless we can dream up laws that the current president supposedly broke, THEN we're worried about "law."
              I won't bother listing all the laws Trump has violated because I know you don't care.You can build your stupid wall if you must waste tax payer money but the little brown men will just drive their pickups across the border to do the farm work that American land owners can't get done without them. And your pathetic wall can't get them to go home if they decide to stay.Here is a little article that might help snap you into reality. https://www.marketwatch.com/story/th...ver-2017-03-09

              מה מכילות החדשות?


              • #52
                Originally posted by redrover View Post
                I won't bother listing all the laws Trump has violated because I know you don't care.
                Maybe you missed it, I'm sorry. . . I'll put it here a second time. Read carefully now, call a friend, neighbor or relative to have them explain it if you aren't picking up the deep concept here;

                "Why should we care about "violating law" ?

                We let many thousands of "immigrants" stream into America illegally and ignore it, is "law" .. does "law" even matter ?


                No, apparently not.

                Unless we can dream up laws that the current president supposedly broke, THEN we're worried about "law.""

                Originally posted by redrover View Post
                You can build your stupid wall if you must waste tax payer money but the little brown men will just drive their pickups across the border to do the farm work that American land owners can't get done without them. And your pathetic wall can't get them to go home if they decide to stay.Here is a little article that might help snap you into reality. https://www.marketwatch.com/story/th...ver-2017-03-09
                . . . and you can rant and squeek about how cool it is to allow America to be invaded by people that don't belong here.

                You can justify it in so many ways, even say "it's good for us." !

                And there are a few numb-skulls out there who will listen, nod their heads and agree with you even !

                In the meantime, you're going to complain about laws the president supposedly broke while ignoring that in America LAW DOESN'T MATTER !

                Why do you complain ??

                So trump broke the most important law in rovers universe; Rover says Trump sucks - Therefore Trump belongs in prison.

                Sorry rover, when you give a darn about law, maybe we'll consider things.

                Until then, WE DON'T CARE THAT TRUMP IS A CRIMINAL - OR THAT HILARY IS A CRIMINAL OR THAT ANY OF THE CRIMINALS IN dc ARE CRIMINALS.

                And we certainly don't care about 10 million little brown nobodies invading America... even though that's against "the law" LMAO

                מה מכילות החדשות?


                • #53
                  Originally posted by Captain Trips View Post

                  Maybe you missed it, I'm sorry. . . I'll put it here a second time. Read carefully now, call a friend, neighbor or relative to have them explain it if you aren't picking up the deep concept here;

                  "Why should we care about "violating law" ?

                  We let many thousands of "immigrants" stream into America illegally and ignore it, is "law" .. does "law" even matter ?


                  No, apparently not.

                  Unless we can dream up laws that the current president supposedly broke, THEN we're worried about "law.""
                  First, let me take you to task for "Unless we can dream up..." Didn't you get the memo that dream(ers) is now a term that belongs morally and ethically to those in DACA, and your use of it is offensive cultural appropriation!

                  Second, generally when people say they won't bother to do something, it is really because they CAN'T do it.

                  Originally posted by Captain Trips View Post
                  . . . and you can rant and squeek about how cool it is to allow America to be invaded by people that don't belong here.

                  You can justify it in so many ways, even say "it's good for us." !

                  And there are a few numb-skulls out there who will listen, nod their heads and agree with you even !

                  In the meantime, you're going to complain about laws the president supposedly broke while ignoring that in America LAW DOESN'T MATTER !

                  Why do you complain ??

                  So trump broke the most important law in rovers universe; Rover says Trump sucks - Therefore Trump belongs in prison.

                  Sorry rover, when you give a darn about law, maybe we'll consider things.

                  Until then, WE DON'T CARE THAT TRUMP IS A CRIMINAL - OR THAT HILARY IS A CRIMINAL OR THAT ANY OF THE CRIMINALS IN dc ARE CRIMINALS.

                  And we certainly don't care about 10 million little brown nobodies invading America... even though that's against "the law" LMAO
                  This is why I generally favored PRINCIPLE-based approaches to issues, and not thoughtless, reactionary, logically inconsistent views on various issues, agree or disagree with me on my policy views, but rarely will I look like an unprincipled, hypocritical hack (when valid seeming inconsistencies in my positions are pointed out to me, I give thought to whether or not I can articulate a principled distinguishing feature of the two, or failing that will reevaluate and likely change my position in some way.

                  For example, I have a general aversion to tariffs. To some extent I distinguish between narrowly tailored, corrective or punitive tariffs designed to create a bargaining position against bad actors, and those which are designed as protectionist measures.

                  I heard someone suggest that the trade "war" (really more of skirmish at this point) that Trump has started with China will (by circumstance if not design) become bargaining chips both with China on trade, intellectual property theft, and currency manipulation, or even in backing us on putting pressure on North Korea in the upcoming talks. I agree that these potential considerations are likely be the outcome (due to opportunity and circumstances, rather than any deeply thoughtful strategic plan on Trump's part).

                  מה מכילות החדשות?


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by Marcus1124 View Post

                    First, let me take you to task for "Unless we can dream up..." Didn't you get the memo that dream(ers) is now a term that belongs morally and ethically to those in DACA, and your use of it is offensive cultural appropriation!

                    Second, generally when people say they won't bother to do something, it is really because they CAN'T do it.



                    This is why I generally favored PRINCIPLE-based approaches to issues, and not thoughtless, reactionary, logically inconsistent views on various issues, agree or disagree with me on my policy views, but rarely will I look like an unprincipled, hypocritical hack (when valid seeming inconsistencies in my positions are pointed out to me, I give thought to whether or not I can articulate a principled distinguishing feature of the two, or failing that will reevaluate and likely change my position in some way.

                    For example, I have a general aversion to tariffs. To some extent I distinguish between narrowly tailored, corrective or punitive tariffs designed to create a bargaining position against bad actors, and those which are designed as protectionist measures.

                    I heard someone suggest that the trade "war" (really more of skirmish at this point) that Trump has started with China will (by circumstance if not design) become bargaining chips both with China on trade, intellectual property theft, and currency manipulation, or even in backing us on putting pressure on North Korea in the upcoming talks. I agree that these potential considerations are likely be the outcome (due to opportunity and circumstances, rather than any deeply thoughtful strategic plan on Trump's part).
                    deeply thoughtful strategic plan on Trump's part? When did Trump ever plan anything? As to his criminality. Let's see we are working on conspiracy and obstruction of justice and violations of campaign laws not to mention this little issue with the constitution. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...e-constitution

                    מה מכילות החדשות?


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by Marcus1124 View Post
                      First, let me take you to task for "Unless we can dream up..." Didn't you get the memo that dream(ers) is now a term that belongs morally and ethically to those in DACA, and your use of it is offensive cultural appropriation!
                      No, it's not "a term that belongs morally and ethically to those in DACA" - that's what dim-bulb liberals want us to think.

                      Illegal immigrants are illegal immigrants. They aren't dreamers, they aren't great workers, they aren't doing us a service.. they are illegal immigrants. They are people that have no business in this country.

                      None.

                      Originally posted by Marcus1124 View Post
                      Second, generally when people say they won't bother to do something, it is really because they CAN'T do it.
                      As I pointed out, the president HAS broken 'rovers law.' This is an all encompassing law that is generally covered by the simple statement;

                      "If Rover thinks you suck, you belong in prison."

                      This law is agreed on by most individuals of the hard left.

                      It all reminds me of a statement written long ago, that's still a danger for us today... as we're seeing;

                      In what manner does tyranny arise ? - That it has a democratic origin is evident. - Plato, The Republic, Book VIII

                      Originally posted by Marcus1124 View Post
                      This is why I generally favored PRINCIPLE-based approaches to issues, and not thoughtless, reactionary, logically inconsistent views on various issues, agree or disagree with me on my policy views, but rarely will I look like an unprincipled, hypocritical hack (when valid seeming inconsistencies in my positions are pointed out to me, I give thought to whether or not I can articulate a principled distinguishing feature of the two, or failing that will reevaluate and likely change my position in some way.

                      For example, I have a general aversion to tariffs. To some extent I distinguish between narrowly tailored, corrective or punitive tariffs designed to create a bargaining position against bad actors, and those which are designed as protectionist measures.

                      I heard someone suggest that the trade "war" (really more of skirmish at this point) that Trump has started with China will (by circumstance if not design) become bargaining chips both with China on trade, intellectual property theft, and currency manipulation, or even in backing us on putting pressure on North Korea in the upcoming talks. I agree that these potential considerations are likely be the outcome (due to opportunity and circumstances, rather than any deeply thoughtful strategic plan on Trump's part).
                      It may be that he's just tired of America being ripped off by opportunists. Trade and economic policies that are advantageous to both parties instead of one, seem like they have been needed for quite awhile.

                      I think it's about time we had someone willing to challenge what has become a habit of letting America get bad deals. Likely because there's some kind of "pay-off" for those who used to arrange these things. The creatures in D.C. are there for one thing - to make money.

                      ... for themselves

                      מה מכילות החדשות?


                      • #56
                        Somebodies favorite website american thinker... can we guess why some of us hate it so much ?

                        Probably because it exposes their belief system for the fanatic foolishness that it is.

                        Some ideas just can't be supported when they're exposed to the light of day.

                        Call us names, call the website some names, that's the typical defense offered by leftists.

                        Because rational logic and order are foreign to them.

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

                        ....leftism perverts America's justice system, corrupting weak elected officials and brainwashing tens of thousands of young adults, all in an effort to decimate the freedoms of the Republic.

                        Even with its distorted knowledge of human nature, a defective version of history, and a prolific case of massive immaturity, leftism continues to thrive and push ahead, with its suicidal progressive agenda relying on ignorance and gullibility.

                        A mob of foreigners planning to march across the United States border knowing in advance that numerous sanctuary cities will break federal law and welcome them in. Unidentified individuals being allowed to vote in U.S. elections, riots at universities with the intention of preventing any discussion that does not agree with theirs. These realities are all happening now and are all symptoms of a political plague that has been visited upon America and most of Europe.

                        ...the left has managed to distort the Bill of Rights into its own bastardized version in an attempt to eliminate liberty, limit free speech, and end the right of the individual to defend against oppression. The left survives within a self-made mirage that uses well written speeches containing caring and poetic language and emotional appeals that appear to be on the side of good, protecting the weak and needy in society. But in fact, the left exploits and manipulates both weak and poor to continue to remain in power. Consider the infected American cities of Detroit, Baltimore, and Chicago, where the left has total control and can implement whatever programs it wants, and look at the result: perpetual devastation, crime, and misery. California, a once wealthy and successful state, is now an insolvent laughingstock of the world.

                        Once infected with leftist ideas, an individual's perception of reality becomes similar to that of a five-year-old. His worldview is filtered through projection and hypocrisy. The left preaches free speech, inclusiveness, and tolerance but omits the part about those qualities applying to those who agree with the leftist agenda. The left calls conservatives violent when it is leftists themselves who are seen throwing stones, breaking windows, and setting cars on fire. And the left says it cares about those wanting to leave a lawless country by crossing into a law-abiding America, but they conveniently forget the fact that such action ignores American laws, is unfair to immigrants who followed the rules, and lays the foundation of participation in American society with the crime of illegal entry.

                        ...


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

                        מה מכילות החדשות?


                        • #57
                          Progressive hatred and lawlessness is destroying America in many ways.

                          Illegal "immigration" - invasion really - is just one of the ways.

                          And from being a keeper of the law, he is converted into a breaker of it. - Plato, The Republic, Book VII

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

                          So what if wages have flatlined -- or declined! -- for several decades? The smart set aren't wage-slaves.

                          Mexican drug cartels aren't swarming through their towns. They live in fancy neighborhoods.

                          Somali refugees aren't beating up their kids -- who are safely ensconced in expensive private schools, anyway.


                          Members of our governing class seem to have decided the country is doomed, so they may as well make their pile. Sure, they'll have to face the wrath of voters and may be voted out of office, like Eric Cantor. But they'll end up on corporate boards or win lucrative lobbying contracts. Plus, being "progressive" on immigration will look great on their kid's Princeton application.

                          Everybody's looking out for No. 1.

                          One doesn't have to go back to the Garfield administration to find a time when everyone wanted to protect the nation from dysfunctional immigration -- the crime, the drugs, the poverty, the wage-depressing effect, the burden on our social services. Positions that are today considered hateful used to be called "common sense."

                          Far-left Democrats used to openly proclaim ideas that would get them banned from Twitter today:

                          "When push comes to shove, there is only one realistic way that you can stop illegal immigration into this country, and that is by making it illegal and being tough enough that illegal immigrants cannot work in this country." -- Democratic Sen. Howard Metzenbaum, 1985

                          "No sane country would (reward illegal immigrants), right? Guess again. If you break our laws by entering this country without permission, and give birth to a child, we reward that child with U.S. citizenship and guarantee full access to all public and social services this society provides -- and that's a lot of services. Is it any wonder that two-thirds of the babies born at taxpayer expense in county-run hospitals in Los Angeles are born to illegal alien mothers?" -- Democratic Sen. Harry Reid, 1993

                          Very recently, a presidential candidate who seemed to actually care about America's working class denounced illegal immigration as "a Koch brothers" idea. That was Bernie Sanders.

                          He explained: "Open borders? No, that's a Koch brothers' proposal. ... That's a right-wing proposal, which says essentially there is no United States. ... It would make everybody in America poorer -- you're doing away with the concept of a nation-state. ... You have an obligation in my view to do everything we can to help poor people.

                          "What right-wing people in this country would love is an open-border policy. Bring in all kinds of people, work for $2 or $3 an hour -- that would be great for them. I don't believe in that. I think we have to raise wages in this country; I think we have to do everything we can to create millions of jobs." -- Bernie Sanders in interview with Ezra Klein of Vox on July 28, 2015

                          Forget hypocrisy -- I don't care about that right now. It's the cruelty that interests me.

                          Have well-heeled Americans really decided to abandon their fellow citizens? These merchants of compassion have none to spare for our own people?
                          I'm not a steelworker, a waitress or a black teenager looking for an entry-level job, either. But I still care about other Americans.


                          http://www.anncoulter.com/

                          מה מכילות החדשות?


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by Captain Trips View Post

                            No, it's not "a term that belongs morally and ethically to those in DACA" - that's what dim-bulb liberals want us to think.

                            Illegal immigrants are illegal immigrants. They aren't dreamers, they aren't great workers, they aren't doing us a service.. they are illegal immigrants. They are people that have no business in this country.

                            None.
                            How dare you, you racist, nativist, authoritarian fascist...and even worse insensitive hyper-masculine thug! Did I leave any of those thoughtful, intellectually unassailable arguments of the left out? *grin*


                            Originally posted by Captain Trips View Post
                            As I pointed out, the president HAS broken 'rovers law.' This is an all encompassing law that is generally covered by the simple statement;

                            "If Rover thinks you suck, you belong in prison."

                            This law is agreed on by most individuals of the hard left.

                            It all reminds me of a statement written long ago, that's still a danger for us today... as we're seeing;

                            In what manner does tyranny arise ? - That it has a democratic origin is evident. - Plato, The Republic, Book VIII
                            You mean the Rover law that was on display when liberals were screaming for Karl Rove to be perp-walked for the "treasonous" leaking of Valerie Plame's name? And never uttered a peep about the REAL leaker, Colin Powell's crony Dick Armitage (because that would have required the left turning on their favorite RINO, Powell)



                            Originally posted by Captain Trips View Post
                            It may be that he's just tired of America being ripped off by opportunists. Trade and economic policies that are advantageous to both parties instead of one, seem like they have been needed for quite awhile.

                            I think it's about time we had someone willing to challenge what has become a habit of letting America get bad deals. Likely because there's some kind of "pay-off" for those who used to arrange these things. The creatures in D.C. are there for one thing - to make money.

                            ... for themselves
                            Here's the thing, and it is at the core of Trump's simply bad overall views on trade policy. Trump has this tendency to view things as either zero sum (every transaction has a winner and a loser) or is relativistic (where if one party benefits more than the other, even though they both benefit, the one which benefits less "loses"). The failure to understand that trade is a win-win in almost every situation is what leads to "protectionist" measures, the purpose of which is to shield or lessen competition for domestic producers (always reducing an otherwise net positive for the nation as a whole). As I previously stated, the imposition of various trade measures, provided they are narrowly targeted to be either corrective or punitive (and generally intended as a bargaining chip rather than an end in and of themselves) against bad actors can be beneficial, provided they meet certain criteria:
                            • They must hurt the other party more than they hurt you
                            • The concessions extracted to end or reduce the measures must be less costly to the other party than the measures themselves
                            • Both parties still walk away as net beneficiaries of the overall resulting trade framework
                            Most of the time, when people (and all of the time when Trump) refers to "bad" deals with regard to trade, people are led to believe that the deal makes us worse off than we would otherwise be without the deal. This is simply and demonstrably false. That is very different from arguing that we could have struck a deal where a greater portion of the overall collective benefit could have gone to us, but often becomes the policy equivalent throwing away a winning lottery ticket, because the other side want 60% of the winnings and you want it 50/50 (or 60/40 in your favor). Not as good as it COULD be is thus equated with "bad" (suggesting you would be better off without it at all). It is irrational to turn down something that provides you with a net benefit merely because it would benefit someone else more.

                            מה מכילות החדשות?


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by Captain Trips View Post
                              Progressive hatred and lawlessness is destroying America in many ways.

                              Illegal "immigration" - invasion really - is just one of the ways.

                              And from being a keeper of the law, he is converted into a breaker of it. - Plato, The Republic, Book VII

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

                              So what if wages have flatlined -- or declined! -- for several decades? The smart set aren't wage-slaves.

                              Mexican drug cartels aren't swarming through their towns. They live in fancy neighborhoods.

                              Somali refugees aren't beating up their kids -- who are safely ensconced in expensive private schools, anyway.


                              Members of our governing class seem to have decided the country is doomed, so they may as well make their pile. Sure, they'll have to face the wrath of voters and may be voted out of office, like Eric Cantor. But they'll end up on corporate boards or win lucrative lobbying contracts. Plus, being "progressive" on immigration will look great on their kid's Princeton application.

                              Everybody's looking out for No. 1.

                              One doesn't have to go back to the Garfield administration to find a time when everyone wanted to protect the nation from dysfunctional immigration -- the crime, the drugs, the poverty, the wage-depressing effect, the burden on our social services. Positions that are today considered hateful used to be called "common sense."

                              Far-left Democrats used to openly proclaim ideas that would get them banned from Twitter today:

                              "When push comes to shove, there is only one realistic way that you can stop illegal immigration into this country, and that is by making it illegal and being tough enough that illegal immigrants cannot work in this country." -- Democratic Sen. Howard Metzenbaum, 1985

                              "No sane country would (reward illegal immigrants), right? Guess again. If you break our laws by entering this country without permission, and give birth to a child, we reward that child with U.S. citizenship and guarantee full access to all public and social services this society provides -- and that's a lot of services. Is it any wonder that two-thirds of the babies born at taxpayer expense in county-run hospitals in Los Angeles are born to illegal alien mothers?" -- Democratic Sen. Harry Reid, 1993

                              Very recently, a presidential candidate who seemed to actually care about America's working class denounced illegal immigration as "a Koch brothers" idea. That was Bernie Sanders.

                              He explained: "Open borders? No, that's a Koch brothers' proposal. ... That's a right-wing proposal, which says essentially there is no United States. ... It would make everybody in America poorer -- you're doing away with the concept of a nation-state. ... You have an obligation in my view to do everything we can to help poor people.

                              "What right-wing people in this country would love is an open-border policy. Bring in all kinds of people, work for $2 or $3 an hour -- that would be great for them. I don't believe in that. I think we have to raise wages in this country; I think we have to do everything we can to create millions of jobs." -- Bernie Sanders in interview with Ezra Klein of Vox on July 28, 2015

                              Forget hypocrisy -- I don't care about that right now. It's the cruelty that interests me.

                              Have well-heeled Americans really decided to abandon their fellow citizens? These merchants of compassion have none to spare for our own people?
                              I'm not a steelworker, a waitress or a black teenager looking for an entry-level job, either. But I still care about other Americans.


                              http://www.anncoulter.com/
                              Thanks for the news from fantasyland, but in the real world you should not that in Wisconson a liberal just won a seat on the court running against the NRA. In the fall republicans will run on Hillary is going to take away our guns and the democrats will run on Hillary is going to take away their guns. Let's see who wins. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018...ourt-seat.html

                              מה מכילות החדשות?


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by redrover View Post

                                Thanks for the news from fantasyland, but in the real world you should not that in Wisconson a liberal just won a seat on the court running against the NRA. In the fall republicans will run on Hillary is going to take away our guns and the democrats will run on Hillary is going to take away their guns. Let's see who wins. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018...ourt-seat.html
                                .... which one did rover decide to address with something unrelated today ?

                                ... Ah ! The the lawlessness that lawless democrats favor and support... one of the instances of it at least LOL

                                https://www.uspoliticsonline.com/for...459#post552459

                                Illegal immigration ! ... but they call them "dreamers" and say so many wonderful things about these people that don't belong here. The most interesting thing is these 'dreamers' who are so wonderful ... they never live with, or even near the lawless hypocrites who want them to keep coming here... illegally !

                                No.

                                They get to live with the rest of us !

                                The rest of us are finding that these "dreamers" aren't so wonderful !

                                But our lawless hypocrites ... they don't care. It doesn't affect THEM.

                                We have to live with the stupidity of our lawless "officials."


                                You're sure about a democrat takeover in the fall I see.

                                It MIGHT be that a lot of Americans don't want their country to be overtaken by a "legalized" invasion.

                                We're going to find out.

                                מה מכילות החדשות?

                                Working...
                                X