ChicagoExpat

If you left Harris out of it, and simply stated "A young woman with political ambition sleeps with the decades-older political power broker in her state and subsequently is appointed to positions that further her political career" everyone would reasonably assume this unnamed woman did indeed use sex to promote herself. The fact that he, in his scores of years in politics, appointed other people to positions and presumably didn't sleep with them, is NOT a persuasive argument. On the "Did she sleep her way to the top?" issue, I think any reasonable person would say, of course she did, at least partially.

Unless it wasn't actually his word.

So any criticism of her is misogyny and racism. That's really what you're saying?

I think the undemocratic appointment of Harris (not even bothering with those pesky primaries) delights Republicans. She is a trainwreck of a candidate. There are several others who would have a much better chance of beating Trump -- Shapiro (except the Left hates Jews these days) or Whitmer. They're smart and don't carry Harris' baggage.

True

When an intelligent woman of color runs for President, please let us know.

It's bizarre because it's a lie. A sizeable majority of Thai applicants are given visas. He made up that figure and is presenting it as fact.

I’ll refrain from returning the insult, but your response is so out of touch with reality it’s surprising you’re not embarrassed to post it. He invaded from 3 directions, and you’re claiming he didn’t want to take all of Ukraine… after years of taking pieces of it? What was he trying to do then? Why did someone who is so ready for peace from the beginning… invade in the first place? And continue a war that has costs hundreds of thousands of his countrymen’s lives? Frank, you’re insane if you believe this.

Again, you have it completely backward. The party that doesn't want peace is the party that invaded. That is Russia. It doesn't matter what I and others want. It's what Russia wants. And Russia wants war. And land. And more resources for oligarchs. And a larger empire.

We're not discussing which negotiation skills are great, we're discussing what will actually achieve the peace that pro-Russia Western commenters here claim they want.

In the current Russia scenario, the "peace" crowd always supports the Russian side. And they always deny being pro-Russian. I want peace too, but I also recognize that rewarding Russia now incentivizes Russia to invade Ukraine/other countries (as it repeatedly has under Putin) again. If you really wanted peace and weren't pro-Russian, you would want 1) Russia to lose 2) you would want Russia to pay a MAXIMUM, CRIPPLING price either in a loss or an eventual negotiated settlement if they do get to keep some of their ill-gotten gains and 3) you wouldn't hate Zelensky the way it seems you do.

Agree. There is much I like about Russia, and sometimes I wish I could go back there to live and work, but a big part of the Russian psyche is 1) an absolute and unquestioning obedience to the czar and 2) a willingness to do literally anything asked of a person, if Mother Russia supposedly requires it.

Yes, that pesky habit of Russia thinking it still owns the countries that it used to dominate. He has had NATO on his border for many years, and his invasion added another NATO country on his border that previously refused to join. So you would support his invasion of Finland? The Baltics? The Cuban missile crisis was 60 years ago and an entirely different context. So different it's an irrelevant comparison for the Ukraine invasion. Maybe his neighbors wouldn't want to join NATO if, you know, Russia wasn't such a murderous, domineering Empire? Just a thought...

Yes, actually I do. Drawing conclusions based on a pre-existing bias. Looks like you don't know what it means.

You are correct, I think. Modern Ukraine was made in Russia's/the Soviet Union's image, and its desire for self-determination is what Russia cannot accept. So, definitely not a historical ally at all. But one we should support, and one key to the future of Europe.

Is it? If you can't back that up, you're committing exactly the same error.

It makes sense that a guy who thinks NATO started Russia's war thinks Venezuela is "under attack" by no less than "CANCER USA"! It was Venezuela that moved to reduce ties with the United States, not the other way around; Venezuela that appropriated U.S. property, not the other way around; Venezuela that took U.S. citizens as political prisoners, not the other way around. Weird how hundreds of thousands of Venezuelans have moved to "CANCER USA" rather than stay in noble Venezuela. Supporting both Putin AND Maduro? You're a winner, Frank! Never change.

It's incredible how dishonest people can be about this topic. The dishonesty is so blatant, so Kremlin-serving, so obvious, it's incredible that such claims are made -- and by people who would never actually choose to live in the country they promote. Russia and Russia alone started this war. Not NATO. Not the EU. Putin had many options in his continued pursuit of more land and a larger Russian Empire, and he chose violence -- as he has done in Georgia, previously in Ukraine, in Moldova, everywhere he has deployed Wagner.

The wonderful thing is, @thaibeachlovers FREQUENTLY cries about other people insulting him, yes does it himself all the time. And then uses that really cool coffee drinking emoji.

That's an amazing statement to make. Whatever U.S. involvement may or may not have been, Russia's is incomparably worse because it's, you know, murdering hundreds of thousands, stealing land, and destroying what it can't steal. Yet not a word from you of condemnation of this type of involvement. What a puzzle.

Either ASEAN Now declines to publish stories on the bad deeds of other nationalities, or an extremely high percentage of Russians are really bad people, relative to everyone else.

Your crying about this is a daily occurrence, coinciding with getting your @ss kicked, rhetorically speaking. The actions of the Russian government ARE what we're talking about, Bob. What they do to exterminate political opponents is directly relevant to the conflict and the dictatorship doing the mass slaughter. The dictatorship you support. Bob -- you PROMISED, a mere 15 hours ago, that you would not reply any more. You broke your promise, just like you broke my heart.

Now they're going after Navalny's widow. It's not enough that they killed her husband. Just disgusting. 1930s all overr again. I can't believe you support this sh!t, @thaibeachlovers, @BobBKK https://www.nytimes.com/2024/07/09/world/europe/russia-yulia-navalnaya-arrest-order.html

Man this free speech/internet thing is hard to control. If only we could live in a country where free expression wasn't allowed. We're not talking about your favorite beach in Thailand, we're talking about the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people. You can't open a thread on a subject that people feel very strongly and fight about and then be shocked, SHOCKED when people feel strongly about it and fight about it. Either shut down the thread or find a fainting couch.

I AM pro-war, in the sense that I 100% support Ukraine's right to defend itself, and that it's in the interests of the free world to assist Ukraine. I would have thought that was clear all along. Proxy war? We've already covered this, Bob. Russia invaded; it's not a U.S. proxy war or an EU proxy war, it's simply friends helping a friend. You however, support a dictatorship, and the dictator's brutal invasion.