KanchanaburiGuy

If not the will of the people, then whose? Why would it make you uneasy when someone refers to "The Will of the People?" Is there ANYONE ELSE'S will you'd rather be bound to? "The Will of the People" is the very definition of Democracy. Or, as Abraham Lincoln put it, "Government of the people, by the people, for the people." Communism, by contrast, isn't interested in "The Will of the People." Communism instead wants to dictate to people what will be good for them.: "Here is what's good for you. Learn to love it! Love your government because we give you what's good for you." (Or at least what we TELL YOU is good for you!) So, as I said.......... If not The Will of the People, then whose? Who has a greater right to decide what the government should look like and how it should operate......... than The Governed?

"No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.…’ -- Winston Churchill

Gee, this is embarrassing. If this were Venezuela or Iraq or Russia, the leading candidate could easily get 51 of the remaining 44 votes to be cast........

It tells me that you dug up a facetious post from all the way back in MAY, and...... even after all these months........ was unable recognize it for what it was. Is this really how desperate you are to try to make yourself feel superior?

*Ahem* lol

Ah, I wish the USA could just send the women's team, instead........... Given that they've won more World Cups altogether than the men's team has scored goals so far in this tournament, I think the women's team would stand a much better chance against the remaining competition! Prediction: Netherlands 3 - 1

1998 World Cup. Iran vs USA. I was in Derry/Londonderry, Northern Ireland, the only yank in the pub. At that time, Iran was a certifiable enemy of the United States, so a match between the two was a pretty big deal. Being an American, I was not well versed in the intricacies of the game. But for this game, I didnt need to be. You see, you don't have to be a genius to know that when your team is charging down the field, and one guy passes the ball to another....... but puts the ball 15 feet behind him, thereby killing any and all forward momentum........ you're not witnessing high quality play! This happened again and again! The Iranians weren't great, but they didn't need to be. Because the Americans looked like a Pee Wee League team, in comparison! (The defense used by the Americans seemed to be the Bullfighter Defense: Wave a red cape in front of them for a bit, then wave 'em on by! Ole!) Iran won, 2 - 1. It was the first time Iran had EVER won a World Cup match......... in the history of World Cup play. Very humiliating! Especially since everyone in the pub (er, except me) seemed to be THRILLED that America got its collective posteriors kicked! But at least........ 24 years later...... I can say "Congratulations!" to America's team, for their dazzling 1 - 0 World Cup win over Iran! (Of course, the best you could do was a draw against Wales? With WALES? Is Wales even able to field a full team????Jaysus!) 555 Cheers!

Y'know, I've watched at least a couple of dozen episodes of Penn & Teller's "Fool Us" on YouTube. On that show, Magician Contestants perform their best magic tricks before Penn & Teller........ two world renowned Magicians........... a studio audience, and the cameras. If Penn & Teller can figure out how the trick was done, the contestant loses. If they cannot figure out how it was done, the contestant wins. For me, the show is great fun! There have been many, many tricks performed on the show that these acclaimed expert Magicians were unable to figure out. Do I think there was voter fraud in both 2022 and 2020? Of course, there always is. A little bit, anyway. Do I think there was "massive" voter fraud? No, I don't happen to believe there was. But nine seasons of Penn & Teller's "Fool Us" reminds me that sometimes.......... even when experts are watching closely........ the trick may be done so expertly, that no one can figure out how it was done! To all appearances, "magic" is what happened, rather than a Magician simply fooling us with a trick! I think if Penn & Teller can be fooled by some really clever Magicians.......... so-called "Election Experts" can be fooled by some extremely clever fraudsters! No, this doesn't prove that massive election fraud has occurred. But it does convince me that even though we've already looked pretty closely and not found any.......... we still shouldn't take for granted that it absolutely hasn't happened in the past, and it cannot happen in the future! The lesson from Penn & Teller is...... We have to remain diligent and keep looking. And we have to find ways to remain at least as smart or smarter......... than those who'd like to fool us! If you've never seen Penn & Teller's "Fool Us," give it a look-see on YouTube! Some of the tricks are just astoundingly good! Cheers!

Y'know, people laugh at the idea that Donald Trump----DONALD TRUMP!----would ever consider taking the number two role, behind Kanye West. EXCEPT! Vladimir Putin, a man Trump seems to admire and idolize, took the number two job behind Medvedev as a way to get around Russia's term limits. He put his own personal puppet in place until he could get the law changed, thereby opening the door to becoming the dictator he is today! Donald Trump becoming Kanye West's VP seems like a crazy, incredibly unlikely notion........... until you realize there's a real life example of just such a thing happening,........ right there in Russia today! If you think such notions are absurd, just remember.......... Donald Trump got elected President of the United States!

Let's not forget the Comic Relief that came from so many Trump Supporters proudly declaring late in the 2016 campaign, "I'm a Deplorable!" You know, the "Deplorables" that Hillary herself specifically defined as "racists, sexists, homophobics, xenophobics and Islamophobics.” Man, what fun it was to ask people wearing their "I'm a Deplorable" t-shirt or hat......... "Here are the people that Hillary described as 'Deplorables.' Racists Sexists Homophobes Xenophobes Islamophobes......... You there, in the hat, which one are you?" --------------- Personally, I wouldn't want to be identified as member of one of these groups. But in 2016, we saw Trump Supporters volunteering to be identified as such, with the t-shirts and hats they wore.......... and the signs they carried at rallies!!! Man, it was funny, funny stuff! Maybe the 2024 Trump Campaign can recreate that magic by throwing a few "Picnic with Nick!" rallies. I have no doubt there'd be a large number of Supporters who would clamour to get tickets! (Maybe they'd even show up wearing their "I'm a Deplorable" t-shirts! You know, for Old Time's sake........! lol) Cheers!

Is this real? Did Donald Trump actually quote Patrick Henry? [Well, misquote,actually] "Give me freedom or give me death?" Well, I dunno, Donald. If you're gonna give me a choice......... *wink*

Words have Connotations and Denotations. Denotations are what words actually mean, while Connotations are what we understand words to mean, even when that understanding is quite different from their definition. Thus........ When a man or woman is described as "hot"........... the Denotation of "hot" refers to their temperature......... while the Connotation says that someone thinks they are sexy or attractive. When Michael Jackson sang about being "Bad," he wasn't singing about the Denotation of the word "Bad": "Bad" = bad. He was singing about the Connotation: "Bad" = Very Good! Donald Trump was Impeached. Twice. So Donald Trump has a vested interest in using that same word to describe how someone else should be removed from their office or position No, it doesn't work Denotatively: Senators cannot be "Impeached." But since we still know exactly what he means when he says "So-and-so should be Impeached"........ we need to recognize there's a perfectly valid Connotative value to the word......... even as it fails Denotatively. William Shakespeare partly addressed this 500 years ago when he said......... "A Rose by any other name would smell as sweet." As a poet, he understood that as long as someone understands the meaning, strict adherence to definitions.........is not so important! ------------- ------------- ------------- (Feel free to wallop me severely, now, for having the temerity to equate Trump's words with William Shakespeare's! ???? Go on, now, I deserve it!) Cheers!

LOL Well, if having Medicare could prevent a car from ever hitting me.......... I would grab that coverage without a moment's hesitation! But it doesn't work like that, does it. So instead, it becomes a question of likelihoods; of risk assessment; of cost vs benefit. For example: I paid auto insurance in the United States for about 40 years. During that time, I drove roughly the equivalent of 30 times around the planet ........750,000 miles. In those 40 years of being insured, I was in exactly ONE accident. And in that one accident, they hit me. So, it was THEIR insurance company that had to pay, not me! And on the health side of things, yeah, I had a trip to the emergency room on 2014. And yeah, I saw a doctor to address a significant health issue in 1995. But again, the health insurance I had at the time didn't prevent these things. It just gave me a little payback against the tens of thousands of dollars I had already paid into insurance--------Tens of thousands of dollars that ultimately bought me exactly nothing.......... except a small bit of peace of mind! LOL So nah........ I'm not going to pay over $2,000 per year for insurance that I can only use when I'm in the States......... on the off-chance that one of those days........those days!......... will be the day when catastrophe strikes! Now, get me insurance that prevents catastrophe? That literally prevents catastrophes from happening?........... Well that........ THAT!......... I'm all in for! --------------- Personally, I've lived roughly 23,500 days, so far. I can say with absolute certaintly that at least 23,450 of those days........... were days when having insurance did me absolutely zero good! So......... as I weigh my odds......... as I assess the risk of having only Medicare part A [hospitalization] and not having Medicare Part B for the relatively few days I spend in the United States each year.......... well, um, I've just gotta say........ I like my odds! LOL Cheers!

Ironically, I just went through all this! Turned 65 in September, 2022. For 90 days before your "eligible" date for medicare, and 90 days after, you are in a "Special Enrollment Period" where you can clarify exactly which of Medicare's coverages you want, if any. (Otherwise, you have to do it during their normal Annual Enrollment Period, and perhaps face penalties for delaying.) In my case, this basically meant I had from the sometime in June until sometime in December, 2022, to tell them my preferences. BUT! When September rolled around and I became eligible to actually USE Medicare, I was automatically enrolled in both Part A & Part B, and $170 was deducted in both September and October from my Social Security payments. But what I actually wanted was Part A only [hospitalization], and not Part B. Partly this is because Part A is free, anyway, so why not? (There are a few fairly rare exceptions where people have to pay for Part A, but they don't apply to me.) I didn't want Part B because it represents too big a chunk of my monthly Social Security payment........ and living in Thailand, I'm already nearly fully covered through my wife, and couldn't use it, anyway! So, on November 8th, 2022, as they opened the doors, there I was, standing in the Scottsdale, AZ, Social Security office! (Started with Manila, and a nightmare scenario ensued, which is why I had to make the trip back home, instead!) After positively identifying myself, I did a change of address to a new Scottdale address, then filled out the form DECLINING Medicare Part B. It all took less than 10 minutes (after d-cking around with Manila for 8 weeks, and making zero progress!) The big surprise? On Nov 10th, I got back a direct deposit of the money that had already been deducted in September and October......... $340 worth! The returned money arrived even sooner than I did! I was shocked! 555 And no Medicare money was taken for November, even though my office visit was only 1 week before the payment was due! A surprisingly good experience, overall! Cheers!

Seven seconds. I figure it takes seven seconds to determine whether Double Jeopardy applies. You open the previous indictments and look at the top to see what he was charged with. "Nope, not the same crimes, so not Double Jeopardy." Yep, I figure Seven Seconds. I think it'll take the judge longer to quit laughing......... than it'll take him to render his judgment.

Lol Well, if you define "reasonable people" as people who actually practice-what-they-preach, then you might be right. But in MY experience, the number of people who would qualify as "reasonable people" by that standard......... is very, very small! Lol For example, I've heard far, far, FAR more people say "Jeez, I was only doing 5 mph over the speed limit!"........... (which, if you'll note, is a clear admission of GUILT!)....... than I've ever heard say, "Yeah, I was speeding and I deserved the ticket!" Because, much of the time, people really DON'T want "unbiased" law enforcement! When it comes to themselves........ or their friends........ or their family.......... they'll take whatever BIASED law enforcement they can get! [Feel free to insert Joe Biden and his son, here!] Y'see, if you're going to use whether people want biased or unbiased law enforcement as a basis for defining who is and who is not a "reasonable person".......... it doesn't work. It doesn't work because their interest in being "reasonable" depends way too much on their own personal involvement & family connections, their religion & personal philosophy, their ideology & political persuasion, and so forth. So no, I don't think "most reasonable people have issues with biased law enforcement." In fact, I think it is empirically provable that most people are perfectly fine with "biased" law enforcement........ depending on how personally connected they feel to the situation! --------------- So that brings us back to THIS discussion.......... No, I don't think most "reasonable people" care a whit about the Hunter Biden situation. I think they believe the situation has already been sufficiently looked into, and either nothing was found........ or too little was found to pursue it further. I think that's what MOST "reasonable people" think. But......... of course........ if you define "reasonable people" as only those who are upset that Hunter Biden hasn't been arrested, charged, tried, and jailed already........... (because they already KNOW....... even without a trial or seeing a shred of evidence........ that Hunter Biden is guilty of something! Lol).......... then you will almost certainly see things very, very differently! ---------------- Personally, here's what I think most "reasonable people" ACTUALLY think.... "Why are you bringing up Hunter Biden in a conversation about Donald Trump? The two situations have nothing to do with each other. Nothing whatsoever! "If both did wrong, both should be prosecuted. But even if one isn't prosecuted, the other still should be, right?" I dunno, sounds perfectly reasonable to me! ???? Cheers!

If we start with the basic principle Two-Wrongs-Don't-Make-A-Right......... I wonder what the point of bringing up Hunter Biden is......... in a discussion about Donald Trump? Are you suggesting that because they haven't pursued Hunter Biden sufficiently.......... they therefore also shouldn't pursue Donald Trump? But that's classic Two-Wrongs-DO- Make-A-Right thinking: "If you're not going to pursue THAT accused criminal......... then you shouldn't pursue THIS accused criminal!:" Or....... Are you saying that if they DO go after Hunter Biden the way you think they should........... then it's also perfectly okay to go after Donald Trump, too, with, as they say, "Both guns blazing?" Because as far as I can see, the only way it makes sense to connect these two situations is to either say........ "It's okay to go after Trump, as long as you go after Biden too."......... or.......... "You shouldn't go after Trump, if you're not also going to pursue Biden!" (Which then becomes, Two-Wrongs-DO-Make-A-Right! Lol) --------------- Honestly, trying to connect the two seems very bizarre, to me. They are extremely different situations with extraordinarily different ramifications!

Lol Child Psychology says that if you want to teach a child something, you have to tell them three times. Not trying to insinuate anything, nor offer up any kind of cheap-shot insult. But I do wonder, if you got banned three times for "misinformation" ......... did you learn anything? Did it ever occur to you that if someone went to the trouble of banning you on three separate occasions for "misinformation"......... that maybe it IS misinformation? Three times seems to be the magic number for teaching kids. What magic number does it take for YOU to learn? [*hee hee*]

I agree, the truth will come out eventually. In this case, "eventually" occurred between Nov 1st and Dec 31st, 2020. It was then repeatedly verified by later, deeper investigations in several Republican-controlled States, every one of which verified the previously published outcomes.

Baffling. You're criticizing the Democrats for not passing legislation that was made completely unnecessary by the Supreme Court, in Roe v Wade? Anaolgy: 1 -- "You should eat something!" 2 -- "I'm full already." 1 -- "You should eat something anyway!" 2 -- "Why would I eat something when I'm full already?" 1 -- "So you can show the world that you are serious about eating!" Why would the Democrats....... even in 40 years' time....... make a law making abortion "legal"....... when the Supreme Court had already prohibited any law that would make it illegal? (The rule-of-thumb is......... and always has been........ "Everything is legal unless or until there is a law saying it is not legal." Cocaine and Heroin were legal until there were laws saying they werent. More recently, Ecstasy was legal for a time, until new laws were passed saying it wasn't. If there are no Speed Limit laws, there are no Speed Limits, and so forth.) Roe v Wade made laws prohibiting abortion unconstitutional. Therefore, abortion automatically became legal, nationwide. If the Supreme Court had already made abortion legal nationwide.......... by what logic would you criticize the Democrats for...... "for 40 years"........ "failing" to make laws that say the exact same thing? If you cant have laws prohibiting it.......... it's automatically legal, anyway! That's how it works! ------------- ------------- As for the idea that they should have anticipated Roe v Wade being overturned, that's silly. Even the newer right-leaning judges on the Supreme Court declared that Roe v Wade was "settled law," when asked about it in their confirmation hearings. NO ONE could have adequately predicted that this unassailable, untouchable decision would get overturned! NO ONE! Bah!

LLCs, not Subchapter-S Corps. Do some homework for a change. ------------------ ------------------ LLCs can have an unlimited number of members; S corps can have no more than 100 shareholders (owners). Non-U.S. citizens/residents can be members of LLCs; S corps may not have non-U.S. citizens/residents as shareholders. S corporations cannot be owned by corporations, LLCs, partnerships or many trusts. https://www.wolterskluwer.com › s-... S Corp vs. LLC - Differences and Benefits | Wolters Kluwer

Donald Trump, Jim Jones, and Bernie Madoff may be/have been big-time conmen........ and "Nigerian Princes," Alex Jones, "male-enhancement" sellers, and Herschel Walker may be comparatively small-time conmen.......... so no, they aren't "the same." But at the heart of things, "frequency and magnitute" are really only important for determining what kind of legal........ (or extra-legal?)......... actions should be taken against them. But that's almost beside the point. Regardless of the comparative "frequency and magnitude" of their cons......... the only thing that REALLY matters........ is knowing that they are conmen! If you know they are conmen, thats all you really need to know! Same goes for both Republican and Democratic Politicians, these days. They may not be up to the level of "conmen," per se, but that doesn't mean that concepts like honesty and integrity........ and an actual and sincere interest in pursuing and governing based on truth......... actual truth!............ have much of a place in their makeup! No, in today's political landscape, being believed........ is exponentially more important.......... than being honest! So in today's political landscape........ time and time again.......... easy, believable lies......... keep proving their worth ........... over honest truths! So that, naturally, then becomes the modus operandi of the modern politician! Saying something believable........ is more important........ than saying something truthful! And honestly, do you really need to know the "frequency and magnitude" of a person's lies........ before you decide not to trust them? Isn't knowing they are a liar........ good enough?

There really wasn't anything to address. The points you made are generally true. But the fact that you criticized from only one side of a two-sided spectrum, while effectively pretending that the other side doesn't exist.......... kind of proves my point about "half-empty/half-full" thinking. Those of us who are sometimes labeled with the shallow cheapshot "both-sideism"............. recognise that "critical thinking" is a tool one uses to understand a topic from a variety of directions. "Critical thinking" is NOT the tool one uses just for dispensing criticism, regardless of similarity in spelling! Cheers!

Apology both accepted and appreciated. (It did send my twisted sense-of-humour into a higher gear, though. "Joking/choking?" It may not be GOOD humour........ but there's no doubt it's twisted humour! ????) (Old-time Saturday Night Live fans might look to Gilda Radner's "Rosanne Rosannadana" to mutter "nevermind " right about now! ????)

Well, since this is an elections thread, let's just start with....... * The whole modern era of claiming widespread election fraud and manipulation STARTED with the Democrats, with the Bush's victories in 2000 & 2004. There were myriad accusations......... of Republicans....... disenfranchising voters, "fixing" elections, and rigging voting machines. The fact that the Republicans picked up on this and became more vociferous and strident about it......... doesn't change the fact that it was the Democrats who started it! * In the two years since the "contested" 2020 election, Republicans in many States have tried to craft laws designed to minimize the possibility of election fraud. These efforts almost universally require that everyone operate by the same rules. Dems, in response......... loudly and frequently...... have been shouting "Racist! Racist! Racist!" because these efforts have the audacity to require "minorities" follow the same standards that apply to the majority! (To a large number of Democrats, treating everyone equally......... is apparently "Racist!") * The second Impeachment of Donald Trump only 2 weeks before he was to leave office anyway, qualifies, I think. This was pure vindictiveness, not ethical governance. (The Jan 6th Committee and its investigation was the CORRECT thing to do, although it should have started a year earlier. The 2nd Impeachment was nothing but vindictive theater!) * As much as I loathe Donald Trump, I cannot disagree with him when he says he was persecuted mercilessly throughout his Presidency, starting even before he took office. Except the majority of the things he was criticized for or accused of......... had almost no substantiated facts to back them up. For example, successes by the TRUMP ORGANIZATION that turned out to be profitable........ like the Washington DC Hotel.........were "blamed" on Trump personally! How many times did we see Trump get blamed personally......... get accused of enriching himself personally......... because people stayed at his properties in Florida and Washington, New Jersey and Scotland? Except these "rewards" would have gone to THE BUSINESS, not to Trump personally. As an owner/stockholder, he would have actually seen very little of it, overall! (Interestingly, almost everyone agrees a President should not use his position and influence to enrich himself personally. Heck, it essentially says that in the Constitution! But no one seems able to explain why, if the government is going to spend that money anyway with someone........ why the President and his business enterprises should be denied that business opportunity......... just because he happens to be the President! If the companies can win the contract fair and square, why shouldn't the President's companies be allowed to do just that?) [Flash back now to conspiracy-minded Dems screaming loudly about Cheney, Halliburton, and No-bid Contracts! So they canceled the No-bid Contracts and put it out to bid. Halliburton won! Turns out there was almost no one in the world who could do what Halliburton could do, anyway!] And on and on....... ----------------- I dunno, ozimoron. You even asking the question makes it seem like you don't think the Dems get their hands dirty. But the fact is, the Dems may not get their hands dirty by wallowing in the SAME muck the Republicans do. But that doesn't mean they don't get their hands just as dirty........ in their own special brand of mucK! ------------ ------------ So, there the Dems are, really, REALLY tweaked about Bill Clinton getting Impeached. So they want....... oh, they want so badly........ to get payback! But dammit! Y'can't impeach Bush while we've got troops in the field! He sent them there. That would be a morale crusher! ("Whaddya mean? We got sent here by a guy who got IMPEACHED????") And then there was eight years of Obama. So, then a Republican gets elected once again. And it's TRUMP! The conman! The shyster! The bigot! The sexist! The Islamophobe! [Please see Hillary's list of "deplorable" categories!] The Xenophobe! The buffoon! The LIAR!.......... "Hey, not only can we probably IMPEACH this guy........... maybe we can impeach him TWICE!!!" You want "Conspiracy Theories?" How about THAT ONE! LOL