JCauto

32 minutes ago, Nilats said:

I still see him as a person with relatively high integrity working under extremely hard conditions.

So let's just examine this sentence. First, let's start with "integrity". Seems you don't understand its meaning.

Integrity - 

the quality of being honest and having strong moral principles; moral uprightness.

"he is known to be a man of integrity"

synonyms:honesty, probity, rectitude, honor, good character, principle(s), ethics, morals, righteousness, morality, virtue, decency, fairness, scrupulousness, sincerity, truthfulness, trustworthiness

"I never doubted his integrity"

So...honesty? There's the 6,000 lies that have been documented and which are increasing by around 20 per day. Do you believe what he says? Then there's ethics and morals - he cheated on his three wives numerous times, he's notoriously corrupt in his business dealings...actually, let's save time. Can you give me one of these words in the definition that describes him? 

You seem to recognize though that governing the USA is a difficult thing, mainly because you have this opposition to whatever it is you wish to do. Do you recognize that the same conditions are in place for Democrats as well? Hence when they had control over the Congress they too couldn't just do whatever they wanted, there was this process called "rule of law" that makes things go slowly and carefully and require people who are opposed to be informed about what's happening and to have the right to try to get it changed. That's why the health care issue hasn't been resolved. Even when the Democrats have control of the Presidency and Congress, just as Trump has had for the last 2 years, they are not able to just do whatever they want, it has to be done according to rules and laws. 

If it makes you feel better, I believe that this slowness in getting things to change was deliberately cooked in at the start to prevent radicals from being able to shift things too quickly and easily. 

1 minute ago, lannarebirth said:

 

The Onion Field, True Believer, Salvador, Once Upon A Time In America...  Good stuff.

1977, 1989, 1986, 1984...I think we've established that his career more or less ended a looooooooooonnnnnnnnnggggggg time ago.

19 minutes ago, lannarebirth said:

 

I would have liked to see more James Woods movies, nut job though he is.

Interesting choice. I thought he was a good character actor, but don't recall a single movie he was in. Looking at his list of movies, seems he's been out of rotation for quite a long time, not just recently. The last movie of his I'd even HEARD of was "Stuart Little 2", which was in 2002. Not an A-lister, or even close to it. And yes, a definite nutjob.

4 hours ago, Nyezhov said:

Exactly. You will have the media darlings like Alexandria pushing their anti ICE, anti Israel, anti Defense and Socialist agenda, they will be arguing about Ladyboys in the bathrooms, burning flags, you will have Crazy Maxine messing with everyones bank accounts, its going to be a circus that is going to endanger moderate democrats, who are going to either push back or go with the flow, meanwhile the Senate is in Republican hands and some Supreme Court Justices are getting old....

 

Its going to be so much fun to watch.....

Wouldn't you say that past performance is the best predictor of future outcomes? Based on that, your predictions should probably be flipped upside-down to understand what's most likely. I thought they were going to retain Congress?

I do agree though that it's going to be so much fun to watch - once the House demands and starts slow-leaking Trump's tax returns.

7 hours ago, mikebike said:

Chillax dude!! The Dems are just as incompetent as 45... little chance they'll accomplish much more than issuing  subpoenas!!

 

45's election promise report card:

Sigh. Okay my Right-Wing friends, it's great to see you trying to emulate your Libtard brothers and start using data to support your arguments and I'd hate to be seen as crapping on that. I think it's admirable. 

However, you're doing it wrong. When you have a numbered set of promises and a pie chart relating to them, you need to connect the numbers and the colours so that we can understand what colour refers to what number. Also, when we use pie charts, the size of the slice relates to the quantities of the thing being charted. So there's not really much benefit to this, and pie charts probably aren't the best way to portray that data.

But as I said, I'm encouraged to see you attempting to use data to justify your opinions, so don't let this constructive criticism deter you from doing so in future posts. I look forward to eventually having a fact-based discussion with you.

8 hours ago, PhonThong said:

With the Democrats proclaiming they will defeat the Presidents part 2 of the tax bill and raising taxes to the previous level, I won't need them. You watch. The transportation industry as a whole will start cutting back to pre-2016 levels. Orders for new equipment will start to be canceled. I know my company will cut back. I think it is only fair that those that opted for this should go first. At least I am laying them off and not firing them. This way, they can at least collect unemployment. 

"The Presidents part 2 of the tax bill" - LOL! You mean the imaginary, pulled-it-right-out-of-my-arse tax cut for the Middle Class? 55555555555555! Yeah, I'm sure he meant it, I mean, they spent 1.6 Trillion on the rich and didn't find any money there for them but you know, NEXT TIME WE WILL!  5555555555555555!

And for your imaginary company, will you be providing a political survey so you can carefully cull your libtard workers? I'm sure you will! And when you call your company meeting to let them know they're being fired, everyone in the company will applaud and carry you around the shop floor on their shoulders!  I guess the only question for you Right-Wing fantasists is "does this ruin your no-nut November"?

8 hours ago, PhonThong said:

Your right, they should be glad. After all who wants to work for a "toxic Trump supporter"?

I am not doing anything that the left didn't do after the 2016 elections.

Sort of like Hollywood blacklisting conservative actors.

I am giving them the opportunity to come out of the shadows and proclaim their freedom as unemployed Lefties.

It is not a punishment. It is emancipation.  

My Money, My Company.

So...got any evidence whatsoever that Democrat business owners started firing employees immediately after the election due to their political leanings? Didn't think so. Got any evidence that conservative actors have been blacklisted? Didn't think so. No, Stephen Baldwin's lack of success is not because he's conservative - it's because he's a really bad actor. Who is it you were thinking of? I just googled a list of conservative actors and actresses. Not a lot of quality there. Do you think there's a link between being Conservative and not being able to act because it requires a person to have empathy and put themselves in another's shoes?

11 hours ago, PhonThong said:

Going to be a sad Christmas for some. I will be going through my layoff list next week. Let them find a job elsewhere. Maybe the Dems will support them.

Riiiiggggghhhhhttttt. So you're just an oligarch sunning away the Autumn in Thailand, while pushing buttons on your enterprise in the USA. And because of this election, which substantively does absolutely nothing in terms of your business, you're already rubbing your hands in glee at the opportunity to make life difficult for your workers. Fair enough, they didn't kowtow to their master, punish them!

Except of course you have no enterprise, no workers, and no ability to do anything other than pontificate on the internet.

15 hours ago, bluesofa said:

There seems to be an irony that a group trying to stop bestiality is an animal rights activists "watchdog"

 

Well, if that's the case, they're actually voyeurs. I think they should refer to themselves as Animal Consent Activists.

1 hour ago, Patriot1066 said:

Economy, rising wages, low unemployment ...................Many more I could go on!

 

I'm not an expert on I Phones but they are quiet secure, were not allowed android at work as it's not. How do you know both Russia and China have hacked his are there any facts that prove it? Clinto admitted her server than destroyed the evidence does that not make you angry.

 

Trumps not killed a journalist nor I suspect you can prove he had any influence on it that's incredulous. People get murdered by the state all over the world including both our own governments I am sure, this was some second rate journalist linked to ISIS working with an American newspaper. That's why there's a fuss anyone else no one would care, in fact I don't care at all, it was on foreign soil, within a foreign embassy to a foreign national.

 

On the climate, in the 1970s the scientists told us we were heading for an ice age, now we're warming up? I have no doubt man affects the climate, we must by the sheer numbers on the planet. But I also don't trust the scientists as they've created a whole well industry paying their wages, they do not take into account all the options such as sun activity. We're wrecking the world without doubt, but it's mainly due to over population. But when China restricted theirs the world was in outcry particularly the left.

 

Additionally, why do you call anyone wanting to reduce immigration a White supremacist? On that line Is there a demsupremacist who wants open borders? Or an immigrant supremacist who wants to enter the country illegally?

Regarding the economy, congratulations, after two years Trump has managed to equal the economy of 2015. Real wages are stagnant (slight decrease of 0.2% on average) due to inflation on the rise as a result of tariffs and the long-term outlook is clouded by the massive increase in the deficit due to the tax giveaway to the wealthy. This by the way is from that left-wing site Forbes.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/chuckjones/2018/08/11/trumps-economic-scorecard-higher-inflation-flat-wages-and-a-ballooning-federal-deficit/#75c0439322fa

Not sure the Canadian government is engaging in murder, although it's possible I suppose. And what would constitute "proof" of influence? Would it be having Trump stickers plastered all over your van including targets over pictures of people explicitly identified as evil influences by Trump? Would it be suggesting people go after any media outlets who he doesn't like and then people who are Trump supporters mailing pipe bombs to those people? Probably not in your view. How about statistical analysis of the number of journalists killed worldwide or incidents of authoritarianism or democracies that went down or other data? Probably not in your view. So what would you accept as "proof"?

That you don't care about murder in other countries or other people, that demonstrates a lack of empathy and respect for human rights and the human condition. That's probably not healthy from a personal point of view, causes a lot of internal stress and repels the kind of people who would otherwise be supportive and positive.

Ah yes, the ol' "how can we trust scientists who get paid for their work?" question. Uh, you're aware that any scientist who could disprove climate change would be incredibly wealthy right? Oil companies would buy him his own tropical island. And using that logic, you should only trust scientists who don't get paid - you mean unemployed scientists? Who is it that would know about the science of climate change other than people who study it? How do you study it if you don't get paid? It's absurd.

You at least have the logic to recognize that human activity is wrecking the planet, so why would you question the hard science of thousands of people that's been peer reviewed and has found similar things in numerous different fields is a bit bizarre. Perhaps it's the terrible consequences that you don't want to think about? Anyway, you're already there in seeing what's happening, would be interested to hear what your proposed solution is as I suspect you don't think much of carbon taxes.

I don't call people who want to reduce immigration "White Supremacists" automatically. That was in reference to his "big achievements". If the government wishes to reduce immigration, there's a number of perfectly legal things they can do and which they are doing. None of them require armed soldiers or demonizing different religious or ethnic groups. 

42 minutes ago, Srinivas said:

democrats in four states got whiplashed by PV this week.

if you think the videos are fake you should be concerned.

Nah, everyone knows this guy's a fraud. Only ones to be "convinced" are the ones who believed the BS in the first place. Trump's gambling that the Base is as big as he believes, i.e., that it's a majority of Americans. It's not even close. Anyway, look forward to your prevarications on Monday.

8 minutes ago, Patriot1066 said:

There is no proof over Trumps phone is there it's just something appearing to be made up! Plus how did they hack an iPhone the FBI can't seem to do it?

 

However, plenty of proof over Clintons emails, the disappearing server, and their Peodo friend, then there's Bills confirmed lying and his abuse of an intern?

 

People should fairly judge President Trump on his many big achievements!

https://www.businessinsider.com/president-trump-continues-to-take-calls-from-his-iphone-2018-10

Incorrect, it appears to be both true and something that the NSA and others are very concerned about. So, getting back to your point, you're quite concerned about this, right? When we speak of "hacking iPhones" there's a range of different issues, one is whether you can access a phone without a password which is what the FBI apparently has trouble with. There's being able to access calls on an insecure phone, which would presumably be different than accessing a phone without a password. Anyway, as a person concerned with security as you are, you're obviously not in favour of this, right?

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/25/us/politics/private-email-trump-kushner-bannon.html

So again, these senior White House officials and Trump family members using insecure and private e-mail servers is something you'd be very worried about and would like an investigation into, correct? 

Confirmed lying? You're really bringing that up? Seriously? How many lies did Bill tell? Is it over 6,000 like the current President? 

And, for the record, we do judge President Trump fairly on his big achievements. His gutting of environmental regulations and rejection of climate change and science - we judged them as incorrect and setting back efforts to save the planet to the point where millions are now already doomed. His blowing up the deficit to give away money to wealthy people and then claiming the need to eliminate health care and social security - we judged this as hypocrisy at its finest given the years of railing against the Democrats for deficit spending. His abrogating international agreements to free up dictators and autocrats to do whatever they wanted including torture and murder of journalists - judged it as setting back human rights and democracy by decades. How about setting the people of the USA against each other to the point where White Supremacists are engaging in regular terrorism and feeling bold enough to be openly racist - well, we don't think that's positive or fair and will continue to work towards a just society for everyone regardless of their background, race, gender, religion, etc.

Sorry, have I missed any of his "big achievements"? 

10 minutes ago, Patriot1066 said:

Well the Clintons do appear to have been close to a number of sex offenders and Peado kinds.

 

Yes she didn’t breach national security by using GMail yes right no way she did! Like Billy boy never has sexual relations with Monika no Sir!

 

So Judge Roy Moore doesn't bother you? Should be pretty apparent that politics attracts the worst sort of folk, and that this is a bipartisan characteristic. But sure, try to paint the Democrats as the party of paedophiles, I'm sure that won't backfire.

Oh, and national security breaches are another issue you're concerned about? What's your opinion of Trump using an unsecured iPhone that the Chinese and Russians have apparently had access to? I know, you're completely outraged. Fair enough, it's important to be consistent, otherwise you know, you'd be seen as a partisan troll...

22 hours ago, Credo said:

I have no idea what you are on about.   Why would they try to charge the border?   Have you been to any major border crossings lately?  Most of them are very well protected and fortified.    Then remember that the President may send up to 15,000 troops to protect the border.   

 

 

That's actually my point. There is no "threat". The people in the caravan are poor and desperate, no doubt comprising a mix of economic migrants and actual refugees with a genuine case for asylum. There are rules in place to deal with them legally. There's more than enough security without any additional troops to prevent these people from going illegally through the border. 

The entire reason for the brouhaha is political scare-mongering. If they were honest and wanted to have a dialogue about immigration, labour needs, minimum wage, 14th Amendment etc., then have it. Put it forth as your policy and engage in honest debate. Instead we have BS statements about unilateral abolishment of the 14th amendment with full knowledge that such a thing could not possibly be done.

There is no serious attempt to discuss these issues or their consequences, only dog-whistling to White Nationalists and the Base.

26 minutes ago, 55Jay said:

Sure.  The last caravan earlier this year had a high degree of success. 

1,500 set out for the border. 

122 arrested for illegal entry.

401 requested asylum.

374 of them passed the initial screening, eligible to file formally.

DOJ stats so far this FY indicate 85% of eligibles don't file.

22% of the ones who do file, are approved.

According to PSF, so far 3 from the last caravan have been approved.  1 disapproved.

The Immigration system is already backlogged.

 

I also wouldn't object to abolishing the 14th Amendment.

 

The 2nd could use some updating. 

So what's your point? Like the last caravan, there was no threat, and the people can expect to be processed similar to the previous one?

Whether you approve of abolishing amendments or not, there's a very clear process to do so, just a very long and complicated one. You know that, no doubt, as does the President. So why is he pretending he can just abolish the 14th Amendment when he knows he can't? Why is he not campaigning on the abolishment of the 14th Amendment if this is so important?

The answer, as you know, is fear-mongering and to continue to try to divide the nation while inflaming his (not so bright) base with non-existent issues that are based on lies.

2 hours ago, 55Jay said:

He was asking how many  illegals YOU would take in.  Is your wife an illegal Latina, or was she?   If she's a Thai (seeing how this is a Thai forum), what does she, or your spawning habits, have to do with this topic? 

 

Many of "our" (?) ancestors came in here (see below).   They queued up for Customs and Immigration.  It was far from perfect.  Still is.  But there was a process, and there still is. 

 

That is the point here, after all.  Illegal Immigration.  Not bathrooms, transgenders, guns, or your regurgitated insults.

I would allow them to follow the law, which as I understand it includes having the people who are claiming asylum apply for entry outside of the USA, be vetted and processed and then either admitted or rejected. That is what the people in this caravan are intending to do as I understand it. The idea that they'd somehow be able to stroll across the border and walk into the local welfare office is amusing, but only in the sense that it demonstrates how facile the viewpoint of the Right is on this issue. 

So illegal immigration is way down, the defenseless families in the caravan don't have any way of getting across the border and are expected to apply for asylum in the usual legal way, and you are freaking out about it all and sending in the troops. Oh, and are all for the one promising to abrogate the sacred Constitution that you've apparently got a life-or-death attachment to with the stroke of a pen. I actually hope he does somehow abolish the 14th Amendment without Congress or the States, that will enable the next President to dispose of the 2nd Amendment too.

10 minutes ago, Srinivas said:

 

There you go! See? You CAN provide evidence of your own assertions rather than make it a job of your readers. Well done!

And it's a fence. Covering around a third of the length of the border area. Not a gigantic 30-foot high wall closing the border off. And that a significant number of senior Democrats voted for it seems to contradict your assertion that Democrats are for open borders, no?

9 minutes ago, Patriot1066 said:

How many are you going to take in and look after?

Proud to say I've taken one in (my wife) and produced two offspring with her, so that's 3 that wouldn't otherwise be back in my home country. The wife is likely going to open a business here eventually, the kids are getting through university and will be productive citizens. 

So how many generations does your line go back, Mr. Patriot1066? All the way to the Magna Carta? I'm betting your ancestors were not at all unlike the folks in this caravan, and like them, your ancestors came with little and produced much, becoming a net benefit for their new country and forming the backbone of the nation. 

Regardless, I'm not afraid of a bunch of desperate refugees unlike the manly gun-totin' Right, whose delicate sensibilities can't even handle someone who's transgender going to the toilet nearby. 

38 minutes ago, Srinivas said:

im using your own terms. wall/ fence 

personally I dont care. call it whatever you want. a,safespace!

Oh, look at the Right-Wing snowflakes! They need a safe space from all those dirty dirty immigrants. Help! There's a caravan of desperate people coming to seek asylum, send in the army to protect me! 

4 hours ago, Srinivas said:

bill and hillary proposed a border wall when it was election time.

As did Fienstien, Schumer all said same as Trump.

want videos, easy to find yourself though. In their own words.

 

LOL. Here's a completely unfounded assertion I made up out of thin air. It's now your responsibility to research this and point out that it's not true.

Should be easy enough to catch the other participants. Just look for guys with styes in both eyes.

3 hours ago, tomta said:

The trouble is, Robblok, in the long term we are all dead. You want paradise and would condemn us all to hell until it arrives

That's a good summary. 

Robblok has no practical advice, only principles that are impossible to be applied and which couldn't exist within the Thai context. To me this is a null position. 

2 minutes ago, zzaa09 said:

Playing sort of a moderate devil's advocate - 

 

Perhaps, it should be agreed upon by Junta and Thaksin apologists/defenders alike, that there is no middle ground here and comparative [less superlatives] don't apply regarding these situations.

 

A closer and fair examination might suggest that they're all cut from the same cloth, yes? 

Not much difference, if any...

Sure, I've said that all along.

Only difference is that one was elected by the majority of the population, and given another election with no restriction would overwhelmingly win again. The other has soldiers, guns, tanks, military aircraft and ships. And a compliant urban middle class willing to forgo the rights of the majority for their own convenience and benefit while denigrating them as buffalo.