JCauto

29 minutes ago, mogandave said:

 

When your buddy gets drunk does he fondle your butt?

I think there is a big difference between an affectionate hug, squeeze on the arm or shoulder, and a squeeze on the butt.

In any event, the ladyboy is not touching him to show affection, he is doing it for no other reason than to antagonize him.

 

 

First of all, the OP talked numerous times about how it's the arm grabbing that riles him, he only mentioned being touched on the butt once, and that was possibly incidental. So no, it's pretty much the same thing.

I can understand that some people are very uncomfortable about physical contact with others, even those of the opposite sex. My experience with people like this is that this is quite deep-seated. So I can sympathize in that respect. My question was more to the point of whether this was a general aversion to physical contact or whether it is connected to the sexuality of the person touching them as it narrows the issue.

In any case, I see this as more of a culture clash than anything else. I don't think he specifically intends to antagonize you, that's just his nature and I've seen it often in the way Ladyboys tend to behave. Whether this is a societal norm or one that people of that gender tend towards I don't know. But certainly his wife ought to be a bit more sensitive and should intervene if she understands how much this annoys him by taking the brother aside and letting him know how to better behave around her hubby. Perhaps there is some lack of communication in that regard such that she doesn't realize how much this is bothering him.

As to the neanderthals suggesting that he ought to play Billy Big Balls and bash the brother, I wonder how often these internet warriors act on these juvenile impulses? Getting into a physical confrontation with Thais of any stripe tends to lead one to becoming the subject of a Thai Visa thread of your own, with accompanying blood and video. And as to the mighty "my way or the highway" Alpha Males ruling their castles with an iron fist, just remember that this is merely one of the steps of a long-trodden and well-worn paths that ends with a sob story about divorce, betrayal and loss of your assets.

2 minutes ago, colinneil said:

Tut tut, are you saying Kiwis and Taffies are all sheep SH+++ers?

No of course not. Probably half the population are women.

17 hours ago, CanuckThai said:

Not a bad run, if he was on the lamb since 2013.  It's good to know, who to slide the envelopes to....  Not good if you forget.

On the lamb? Was he a Kiwi or Welsh?

15 hours ago, robblok said:

I agree popular policies should be checked. Something as damaging to the country as the rice program would have been stopped. Those tablets that broke down all the time would probably be stopped too.

 

I think this is a good step will make it harder for parties to bribe the populace. They will have to have clear normal policies to benefit the country.

 

Its also good that fiscal discipline is now law, the debt from the rice program is huge 2x times the health budget in a year. So yea its good they cap popular policies.

 

So now the bad part, the junta as usual has copied the PTP with popular policies and are as guilty as the Shins so the should have led by example they did not.

Also of course who is going to determine what is popular policy and what is not.. that is bad too.

 

But I 100% agree with that they are trying to prevent this as they are bad and it is damaging to the country. 

You haven't learned a thing. You said essentially the same thing about the Junta. "Yes, it's too bad they have to do this, but the Shins were so bad that it was necessary." You then see the results, that it was just replacing one evil with another except that the new one doesn't allow any dissent whatsoever nor did it have any basis for popular support and is just hanging on for power for as long as possible. You agree that this is bad, but offer no solution other than hope that it somehow gets better.

Here we go again. Yes, it's bad that populist policies damage the country. Oh look, the new mob does it too. Oh, and now they've installed a way for THEM to determine what is good and what is bad. That's bad too. But I agree that populist policy is bad so that's life.

The definition of insanity is repeating the same actions and expecting a different result.

7 hours ago, Boon Mee said:

Believe Comey has it exactly backwards. If anyone is unfit it's him after blatant political bias of the FBI under his 'leadership ". 

You are of course referring to his inappropriate and incorrect decision to announce that they were going to investigate Hilary's e-mails two weeks before the election, the thing that swung the election to Trump, right? Or are you referring to the recent trend whereby pretty much every FBI Director including Comey and Mueller are registered lifelong Republicans?

I personally don't think that the political affiliation of civil servants and law enforcement is an issue. There have always been approximately equal numbers of Republicans/Democrats within any government agency because that's the approximate political split between Americans. If you have to change the entire civil service every time there's an election so that the civil service reflects the election results, that would be unwieldy and grossly inefficient. 

So perhaps you can clarify for me here about the "blatant political bias of the FBI under his leadership"? Are you referring to the way he basically swung an election to Trump? I fail to see how this Republican and his Republican successor have implemented something in a politically biased way. Are you saying the Republicans are against Trump?

57 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Somewhat difficult to give an update when he probably has nothing to implicate Trump in a "high crime", regardless of the overwhelming desire of all anti Trumpers that there is something.

I say that because if there were something "there" it would have been leaked by now. As it hasn't, I have to assume there is nothing to leak.

Unfortunately for yourself and, more importantly, the Donald, you're not dealing with an amateur here. You're dealing with a former FBI Director and one who made his rep pursuing the Mafia and other organized crime. These are hardened, cold-blooded law enforcement professionals who document all their conversations as a matter of course and who understand all the different aspects of pursuing high profile criminals. They have been compiling evidence for almost two years now, and you can be sure that it's bulletproof.

And they're not dumb with respect to the Press. They understand that things are building to a crescendo and the mob is baying for them to present their evidence. And look what happened this morning! James Comey's book comes out. You must be very proud of your support for this human bag of slime. It will be such a pleasure watching these clowns go down.

1 hour ago, canuckamuck said:

Tempest in a tea cup though really, everyone knows what kind of lifestyle Trump had, Not as rapey as Bill Clinton though, more like Kennedy and Johnson.

Not as rapey? You have got to be kidding me. The guy who brags about grabbing girls crotches and who numerous women claim he forced himself on them or stuck his tongue down their throat unbidden? That guy?

17 minutes ago, lannarebirth said:

 

I agree with all that but to ensure the understanding of the American people, all of them, it is time for Mueller to give an update, even a vague one, on the nature and scope of his investigation. He need not divulge anything that would be harmful to his further investigations but he should give the public something to promote their civil forbearance.

 

 

 

These guys are professionals and are playing the long game with their cards close to their chests. They also know that they have a subject who has the largest microphone in the world and they don't want to get into fighting the case in the court of public opinion or show their hand. On top of that, their subject continues to shoot his mouth off and provide more evidence for their case as he squirms nervously while the investigation gets closer and closer and more people turn. This is going just the way they want it. 

When they are ready, it's going to go down hard and there will be a lot of people in jail. Trump is either complicit or a dupe. Given his track record in terms of business, ethics and telling the truth, I'm betting he's involved.

2 hours ago, FreddieRoyle said:

Pure desperation by the deep state after the Russia-collusion fantasy collapsed. The deep state is trawling hitherto unseen depths in their panic. IMO Trump having possibly had a sexual relationship with a consenting adult many years ago is slightly less scandalous than him having colluded with Russia to swing a US presidential election. All IMO of course, and happy to be proved wrong.

Looking through the Reddit discussion threads on this one is quite interesting. The most salient point, by an attorney of 35 years, was that the protection of a lawyer-client relationship does not exist when it involves a criminal action. And that there's no way they would attempt to go after a lawyer and raid their offices unless they had proof of criminality AND an expectation or possibility that the persons involved would otherwise attempt to destroy evidence. 

So yes, enjoy your Deep State fantasy, but I'm afraid it's coming to an end soon. The net is closing, and it's already wrapped around several members of Don's inner circle. As noted by others, when the noose closes, the canaries start singing. Won't be much longer now. Feel sorry for whichever people are about to be bombed while Don tries to distract people from his misdeeds. 

By the way, I'm intrigued by your calculation that colluding with a foreign power to swing a US election is only slightly worse than extramarital affairs with consenting adults. Are you that much of a prude or do you really see nothing much wrong with breaking the law and exposing the President to blackmail and undue influence by said nation?

9 hours ago, Boon Mee said:

Yes, he was correctly  targeted all right for covering up Clinton email details and telling falsehoods before Congress. 

Good to see that you agree that anyone who covers up crimes and lies before Congress should be brought up before the courts and punished for their crimes. Just remember that standard in a couple of months when it is applied to those whom you like.

3 hours ago, Boon Mee said:

It was already decided under arbitration several years ago so it's a dead issue. 

So why was Trump's lawyer paying a porn star $130,000 and then going to arbitration to get a gag order? 

If Obama had done this, would you have been taking the same position? What a fine leader and exemplar for the world is your man Donald.