jcsmith

On 9/28/2016 at 10:26 AM, TooPoopedToPop said:

Discounting the partisan spin, it doesn't seem like either Clinton or Trump decisively won this debate.

 

According to CNN's viewer poll 62% thought Hillary won, 27% felt that Trump won. That's a landslide.

(Waits for someone to mention something about Dubai)

 

Seriously nobody read the charter. It would be about as exciting as reading a dictionary. Nobody other than government sanctioned propaganda agents was even allowed to talk about the charter leading up to the vote. Then after the process people get hit with these surprises. These things should have all been discussed, debated and out in the open before. They obviously were not and I'm sure we all know why that was. 

40 minutes ago, Ulysses G. said:

 

Ever heard the saying two wrongs do not make a right? One LIE every 12 minutes and you are BRAGGING ABOUT IT. 

 

Yeah but it's crooked Hillary telling nothing but lies right? That's why you don't like her? Then why are you intentionally trying to use that number which shows 4x more lies from Trump as a showcase that she is liar? It's deceptive, just like Trump's campaign.

 

CNN fact checked tonights debate. I don't think I can quote the whole thing here due to site policy but here's the headline portions on every fact check in the article ( http://edition.cnn.com/2016/09/26/politics/fact-check-presidential-debate-donald-trump-hillary-clinton/ ) :
 

Note: Some details on that one: Most americans would see no change in taxes in Clinton's policy but the rich would see an increase.
 

 So you tell me who is the liar here?

14 hours ago, Ulysses G. said:

 

She lies every 12 minutes according to the fact checkers and her lies have affected national security. Trump's have not. She is far from a "little liar,".

 

I love how you quote that article but you leave out the other half of that article. Here's the full notes on that section:
 

Politico’s fact checkers tallied up every false public statement that Trump made this week, and the results were striking:

Number of appearances: 6 speeches; 1 town hall, 7 TV interviews; 0 press availabilities; 37 tweets

Combined length of remarks (speeches, interviews): 4 hours and 43 minutes

Raw number of misstatements, exaggerations, falsehoods: 87

Rate: 1 untruth every 3.25 minutes

Here are the same numbers for Hillary Clinton this week:
Number of appearances: 2 speeches; 3 TV interviews; 1 press availability; 114 tweets; 2 op-eds

Combined length of remarks (speeches, interviews): 96 minutes and 10 seconds

Raw number of misstatements, exaggerations, falsehoods: 8

Rate: 1 untruth every 12 minutes

 

1 minute ago, OMGImInPattaya said:

Affirmative action hire.

 

Ladies and gentlemen... Donald Trump supporters in a nutshell.

Just adding to the pile of human rights violations in recent years. I wish him luck.

Throw the book at them.

@Alive: Numbers of those who died as a result of Hitler is anywhere between 11-46 million people depending on what you areas you choose to count the numbers. It also included an attempt to wipe an entire group of people from existence. What the Greeks and Romans did thousands of years ago is no excuse to justify it. Thailand has had quite a few of these Nazi related incidents in the past decade, I'm guessing people don't realize the signifigance of the people they are supposed to be studying. 

10 hours ago, jesimps said:

Can't see what the problem is. You're either for the use of guns for self-defence or against it. I'd say that others in your employ carrying guns in your defence comes under self-defence. Reckon Mr Trump is spot on there.

 

 

 

I have mixed feelings on the gun issue personally. I can see both sides of the argument. But by that logic a country can't arm their military unless guns are legalized? Nor could police, security, etc. Apples and oranges.
 

On 9/17/2016 at 3:20 PM, useronthenet said:

Main problem is that there is no Police force in Thailand adequately enforcing the law, thus drivers will break the law.

That's it in a nutshell. People routinely double park and block in other cars, while eating up a traffic lane. There virtually zero chance they will ever see any repercussion for this, so they keep doing it. Then everyone else does it because that's the standard. Another one that annoys the heck out of me is people who think they need 2 lanes to make a U-Turn, or people who skip in front of an entire line of people waiting to U-Turn to get in front of them all. Or the simplest of things, taking your turns when at an intersection rather than just forcing your way through no matter what. These are things that are already illegal, but if nobody enforces them then it doesn't really matter.

 

I think part of the problem is that many people never went to any sort of driver education or driving school, and many others bought their licenses without passing the rather easy driving test. They've been giving lip service to improving that for a while.

39 minutes ago, soalbundy said:

strangely enough my missus who was against him is slowly coming round to supporting him. This is better since Prayut, that is better since Prayut,etc. When i say, but he was never voted into power he just took it,she said, so what, what have those voted into power ever done for the common people,nothing, so better this man who is bringing some law and order to the country. I don't argue.

The problem (aside from illegally seizing power in the first place)  is he really answers to nobody with the army behind his back. People speak out they get attitude adjustments. There are no checks and balances, and there is no end in sight. I fail to see how the country has improved at all since he took power, what I see is a loss of basic freedoms with the only improvement being that there are no protesters in Bangkok... Of course the protesters in this case were organized by the man who put him into power and who never faced persecution for it. It just leaves a foul stench in the air, though he would likely try to ensure you that is just the smell of happiness.

1 hour ago, 300sd said:

He also asked social media to stop criticize or pass judgment on pending court cases, saying all legal cases should be left in the hands of the justice system. 

 

Obviously he hasn't been through Thailand's justice system!

 

Considering he is invoking article 44 selectively, it seems that he also isn't leaving things in the hands of the justice system.

10 hours ago, Kabula said:

I remember a time when all persons were, 'not guilty,'  until investigated, charged, and sentenced by a jury.

 

I miss all the freedoms most of the citizens of world once had.

 

It's all about negatives today and very little positive content.

 

 

 

I think that is still the case in most of the free world. However, Julian Assange has sought asylum rather than facing this for many years now. 

14 hours ago, Chris Lawrence said:

what do the yanks on this board think of this fella?

 

He's a madman. If he gets elected I'm never going back home. 

4 hours ago, Chang4u said:

Has Obama been to a good Christian Church lately?   Is it in God We Trust or is it Allah?   Was America founded on aspects of Western Religion or Muslim?

 

lol

 

 

While the majority religion has been various forms of Christianity, it wasn't founded on either. Most likely he is not a devout Christian who feels the need to make a show, or who doesn't fully buy into the idea of an invisible man in the sky any more than he believes in Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny. I'd guess that's pretty common from politicians. They realize that the majority of voters in America are Christian, so they will be sure to to try emphasize it publicly. If you want to consider Obama as not Christian enough for you though, it's a leap to then assume he's a Muslim when he has repeatedly stated otherwise, the more likely answer would be that he would probably an atheist or an agnostic.

22 minutes ago, Ulysses G. said:

 

Already on the thread. It is common knowledge that Hillary's supporters started the rumors about Obama during the 2008 election.

 

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2015/09/23/hillary-clinton-rejects-accusation-of-a-role-in-birther-movement/

 

While some of her supporters may have suggested that, she never went down that road. That was an article grasping at straws. 

4 hours ago, ezzra said:

 

Not before Obama  apologies to the American people for wasting 8 years they will never get back and for ruining the US reputations within and with the wide world with his bad policies.....

 

 

That's a plastic man stretch. After Bush invaded Iraq and world's economy collapsed? It's pretty hard to argue that America isn't better off after 8 years of Obama than they were after 8 years of Bush. Or that the international community would prefer Trump to Clinton.

Utterly ridiculous. Times like this you need street justice.

40 minutes ago, Chang4u said:

 

Simply edit out the quote with my name. 

below the post is the   + Quote Edit   options

simply click on edit then backspace delete over that portion...or highlight and delete.

I do not like being misquoted....and I never do this to anyone else...as it is a distinct violation of forum rules and grounds for restricting your posting capabilities.

 

 

It doesn't allow me to. Nor to delete the post so I could have requoted, which is why I noted it when I originally edited the quote after realizing originally I quoted the wrong post before you posted this in. It allowed me to edit the post but not the quoter name. So please stop with the melodrama. 

On 9/13/2016 at 9:32 AM, phantomfiddler said:

I do believe it is a common occurrence in muslim countries to set fire to Christian churches, often with the worshippers trapped inside !!  How can the muslims possibly complain ?

What kind of twisted insane argument is that? You can justify just about anything with that kind of logic.

3 hours ago, Chang4u said:

You are off topic. The topic is Powell and the e mails, not about Trump supporters or your opinion of Trump. There are plenty of other threads to convey such.

 

NOTE: This quote was meant for thaibeachlovers not at Chang4U but I misquoted originally (clicked on wrong post) and then when I edited it it didn't allow me to edit the name.

 

My post was about why Powell was spot on in his criticism of Trump. Considering that is the reason he is critical of him it is very much on topic. And there is a reason why none of the guys in here supporting Trump will respond to it. They will just pretend it doesn't exist, or they will make a post like yours attempting trying to make it go away without actually addressing anything. 

I love how not one of the Trump supporters touches any of the bullet points I made about why he would be such a disaster and instead take the Donald Trump tactic of attacking Hillary instead. 

 

Trump is dangerous, not only to America but to the world. A lose cannon would be in the most powerful political position in the world. By electing him, America would send the message that bigotry is acceptable. Hillary is unlikely to be a great president, but she isn't any more dangerous than previous politicians. Trump is a ticking time bomb.

No surprise here. We know what this government is, we just can't speak the words without facing attitude adjustment.

Can't say I disagree with Powell on any of this. I'm not a big fan of the Clinton's, but to me it's, "anyone but Trump". He intentionally avoids revealing policies (instead shifting conversation into general statements and attacking others), and when he does lay something out its a huge step backwards or completely ridiculous. This includes:

 

- The ridiculous notion of building a wall around Mexico and forcing the Mexican government to pay for it. They will never pay for it. Then his assertation that there is some conspiracy by the Mexican government to send rapists and murderers to America. 

- He suggests that children born to illegal immigrant parents are not Americans. This is something protected in the constitution, as is Freedom of Religion. When I was a kid they taught us the American Dream and how we welcomed immigrants from all over the world. Donald Trump wants to beat a nationalist drum but at the same time he wants to throw away basic freedoms which America has always stood for. Something doesn't line up there.

- The notion of denying muslims access to the country is ridiculous, as is the whole idea of making them identify themselves. America was founded on Freedom of religion. Yes, there are muslim extremists. This is such a small percentage of muslims though, just like extremists from other groups, including Christians. There is no way to dance around this one, it is bigotry at its most obvious. If the USA were to integrate those policies it would serve as a recruiting tool for the extremist groups, it's exactly what they want.
- His policy on ISIS is basically bringing in generals and asking them how they can destroy ISIS in 30 days. That's it, he says he won't reveal more than that. You can't destroy ISIS in 30 days, that's completely impossible. Even if you dropped a nuke on all of their strongholds (which of course should never be done, but with a guy like Trump he may be insane enough to do something like that), that would just make make martyrs out of them and encourage others to join their cause. 

- Trump wants to make NATO partners kick in more for US involvement. So what happens then? It will either strain long-term relationships, or they will find new partnerships elsewhere. 

 

Then you add to that the fact that he insults anyone who doesn't agree with him, that he has insulted dead American soldiers, that he has spouted off rhetoric that will either scare or infuriate other world leaders, attempted to divide the American people, overall he's the most unpresidential candidate imaginable. If the American people elect Donald Trump I'd be ashamed to call myself an American. 

We can probably look forward to those words a lot in the next 20 years of the master plan.