[Joe Biden Is Now Beating Donald Trump With Republican Pollsters As Well]

On 4/18/2024 at 1:58 PM, Excogitator said:

Trumps appeal is mainly with angry white male racists, hicks and incels, and there just aren't enough of them... 

 

There's far far far too many, including on these pages. However, fortunately, there's far far far too few to win an election.

[A Weary Trump Appears to Doze Off in Courtroom Ahead of Criminal Trial]

11 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

No, I'm fine with people that actually serve the public in some way, but that's most everyone that has a job. 

 

I don't know who Gym Jordan or Hal Rogers are, but Mitch McConnell is a self-serving POC the same way Biden is. 

 

The way I see it, virtually every non-defense bill that comes through congress makes things worse. 

 

 

Wow! Yellowtail certainly has some scoops! I had no idea that either Mitch McConnell or Joe Biden were Persons of Color! Must admit, they do hide it very well.

[A Weary Trump Appears to Doze Off in Courtroom Ahead of Criminal Trial]

On 4/16/2024 at 11:30 AM, Roo Island said:

Oops. Meant Grifter...

 

Drifter, Grifter, Skirt-lifter. All applicable.

[Belgian tourist brutally attacked in Hua Hin, friend seeks justice]

18 minutes ago, Bangkok Barry said:

 

Another bad day for you. Revoke whose visas? It seems the German has a history - read the link. Yet you blame the victim and want him deported

 

He's a Far Right nutter - par for the course to blame the victim. Only surprise is that he wants the German aggressor deported - he's generally a fan of German aggressors, at least those from the past.

[Belgian tourist brutally attacked in Hua Hin, friend seeks justice]

3 hours ago, Skipalongcassidy said:

Revoke both of their visas and send the trash back to whence they came... unproked? right!... hey I have some land in Florida that I would like to sell you.

 

What a nice person you are. Unless you have some insider knowledge, and that would of course require that you have a friend, something you likely have never had, there is nothing whatsoever in that report that indicates the Belgian guy did the slightest thing wrong. In the land of Karma, let's hope some comes your way soon!

[Trump says abortion law should be determined by states]

On 4/13/2024 at 5:23 PM, Yellowtail said:

And that most people are all for "gender affirming care", but when it comes to mutilating children's genitals or providing puberty blockers that often result in serialization and or never having any sexual function, they are not.

 

Perhaps not a majority, but a significant minority have no issues with it. Seems to be a stark political split between Left and Right on this issue. As it's been adopted more recently by the Right as one of their key issues to get their base out to vote and try to paint the Left as being weird, suddenly this is now a topic where everyone has an opinion. Yet I wonder how many people who have  have actually met or experienced people who suffer from gender dysmorphia are among all these people with such strong opinions? It's what we call a "wedge issue" in politics. It's actually of minor importance given how few of the population it affects.

 

So I am not really sure what you're on about. I never claimed full term abortion was the "norm". I assume most women that kill it as soon as they know they're pregnant. 

 

No, but you raise it as a hyperbolic example when it is hardly an issue at all. This is a tiresome rhetorical device used when you have no real interest in substantive debate but just want to shock readers.

 

What I said was that the article you linked to says things like "evidence shows" but really showed no hard data at all. I notices the link to another "viewpoint", but not surprising, no actual study was provided.

 

I also asked you where they would they get any data to do a long-term study about kids that have been transitioned, but of course you dodged that question, because of course you don't know. 

 

Disingenuous. It clearly links to a scientific study, but you have to register to download it.

 

In any event, it does not surprise me that only 1% of kids would admit to being sorry the had their penis cut off, particularly because when they are put on puberty blockers early, they don't even know what it is, and how great sex would have been had they never done it. 

 

Is it really that difficult for you to understand that people who have gender dysmorphia would not actually enjoy sex as a CIS male? Do you really think it is so easy to get puberty blockers and surgery? None of those things are true.

 

Now you are implying that kids should be "...allowed to do what the <deleted> they want so long as they're not harming others.", which I assume includes smoke cigarettes, get tattoos, shoot heroin, have their penis cut off, have their ears cut off, whatever, right? 

 

And here we go again, hyperbolic nonsense rather than honest debate.

 

Wrong, the guy committed thousands of late term abortions, and was only convicted because he got carried away and killed at least three of them after they were born and both breathing and crying. 

 

If it does not happen, why was partial birth abortion was banned in 2003, and why did the pro abortion activists sue to have the ban struck down by the court? There are currently no term restrictions in six states and Washington, D.C..

 

Yes, I support abortion at any point is the mother's physical life is at significant risk, how does that go against what I have said?

 

Now that these three statements are listed one after the other, do you observe the sophistry, contradiction and hypocrisy? The continued use of hyperbolic examples that have nothing to do with the actual issue, then your own actual opinion that SUPPORTS PARTIAL BIRTH ABORTION!

 

I would also support cutting off a boy's penis for gangrene it was going to save the boy's life, what of it? 

 

Non sequitur.

 

You're a schoolteacher, yes? 

 

No, never have been. Engineer.

 

[Trump says abortion law should be determined by states]

On 4/11/2024 at 9:13 AM, Yellowtail said:

 

I think we all understand there is more to reproductive health services than abortion, and that there is more to gender care than mutilating children's genitals, but the left uses phrases like "reproductive health services" and "gender affirming care" to hide what is that they are actually promoting.

 

Most people are all for "reproductive health services", but when it comes to free late-term or partial-birth abortions, they are not. 

 

Most people are all for "gender affirming care", but when it comes to mutilating children's genitals or providing puberty blockers that often result in serialization and or never having any sexual function, they are not. 

 

You post a link to article that says things like "evidence shows" but really seems to show no hard data at all. And where would they get any data to do a long-term study about kids that have been transitioned?

 

In any event, it does not surprise me that only 1% of kids would admit to being sorry the had their penis cut off, particularly because when they are put on puberty blockers early, they don't even know what it is, and how great sex would have been had they never done it. 

 

 

Partial birth abortion was banned in 2003, and the ban was later struck down by the court. There are currently no term restrictions in six states and Washington, D.C.

 

 

This guy was doing it for a long time until he got carried away. Kermit Gosnell - Wikipedia

 

I support twelve weeks unconditional and unlimited if the mother's physical life is at significant risk. 

 

 

So having been called out for your gross mischaracterizations and making up straw men, your followup is...more gross mischaracterizations and strawmen! You finally admit your wording about reproductive health services and gender affirming care is incorrect. But instead of walking back your mischaracterization you double down and once again put up something nobody has been talking about - free late-term or partial-birth abortions. This is not a norm. This is the far radical position, and nothing whatsoever about what we've been discussing. I noted in the far more nuanced discussion with Hanaguma that I would support 26 weeks as that being the point of viability, but that there are numerous exceptions that are possible and they only need to be determined by the woman and her physician.

 

Then of course you rabbit on about how the article doesn't show any hard data - instead it links to the article that has the hard data and summarizes the findings. Another mischaracterization, but that's par for the course with sophists like yourself.

 

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamasurgery/article-abstract/2813212

 

Your imagination about how kids would think is revealing, but completely irrelevant. Here's a clue - freedom means individuals being able to do what the <deleted> they want so long as they're not harming others. Get it? Now stop projecting YOUR morals, YOUR ideas and YOUR views onto other people. You hate it when people do it to you, so leave everyone else alone and they'll leave you to your little world. I don't care that you're a bigot, and you can scream at the monitor to your heart's content. If you write your bigotry out so we can comment, then you're going to get the approbation you richly deserve.

Then of course you find an example so absurd and atypical it is utterly meaningless and disproves the very point you're making. An actual serial killer who was a doctor! Yep, happens all the time! Guess what? The existing laws were perfectly sufficient to stop that guy and put him in prison. That's why we have laws and why those who break them go to jail. You support that, right?

 

Finally, having splattered your nonsense all over the screen you pluck 12 weeks out of the air without any justification or discussion and then completely eviscerate your own argument by saying you support unlimited abortions if the mother's physical life is at significant risk. WHICH MEANS INCLUDING PARTIAL BIRTH AND LATE-TERM ABORTIONS! My goodness, the cognitive dissonance must be debilitating. No wonder you can't make any logical arguments.

[Trump says abortion law should be determined by states]

14 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

I find the left's language hilarious.  "Reproductive health services" is abortion and "gender health care" is surgery to ruin kids lives. 

 

So, the mother's life is at risk, and she can abort a full-term baby is she can find a leftist doctor that says she's over-stressed. 

 

 

There's some classic Right-wing tactics. Let's invent something out of thin air, then pretend that what we invented is true, then draw conclusions from the invention that we made up out of thin air.

Reproductive health services cover a range of different things from birth control to various aspects of women's health relating to the uterus, ovaries, etc. Gender health care includes counseling and other support services. Did you know that less than 1% of people who underwent transgender surgery regret that choice afterwards? For similar surgeries that are NOT for trans people, the regret ranges from 5-14%.

https://theconversation.com/transgender-regret-research-challenges-narratives-about-gender-affirming-surgeries-220642

 

Nobody has postulated that a woman who is over-stressed can use that as an excuse for aborting a full-term baby. In fact, nobody is talking about aborting full-term babies except people like Trump who say this without the slightest bit of evidence of it happening. I don't suppose you have any examples of this? Of course you don't.

 

[Trump says abortion law should be determined by states]

8 hours ago, Hanaguma said:

Very clear, thanks. So we really aren't that far apart then, wonder why you were spewing all the vitriol.   

 

Just curious, would you change your stance if medical technology advances and the age of viability becomes shorter? 

 

No. We're already there. IVF has just been ruled to be exactly that in Alabama I think? I expect human cloning to already have occurred somewhere. There's a need to draw a reasonable line and then leave it exclusively between the woman and her physician. The government should have no interest in the matter and no access to any of the information unless there is a criminal investigation. Doctors are trained and licensed and can handle the matter as well as recognize when something is not right and report it to the authorities if necessary.

 

The vitriol is because this debate isn't and never was about reasonable abortion laws. Let's not pretend if we're being all clear and honest here. Not saying this about you particularly, saying this about the reason this has become such an important topic in the USA.

[Trump says abortion law should be determined by states]

2 hours ago, Hanaguma said:

Not at all. I think free and widely available birth control is a great idea. I never said a total ban on abortion was the way to go. But you seemed to ignore that most industrialized nations do put time based restriction on abortion, which generally match what Trump said was his policy. Generally 10 to 14 weeks across western Europe (with exceptions, but generally). 

 

No need for the hysteria and hyperbole though. What happens in developing countries has zero to do with policy in the US. Let them make up their own minds.  As to the value of the baby vs the mother, that has been covered. I think abortion should be permitted if the life of the mother is in danger. Period. 

 

Now, time to lay YOUR cards on the table. What restrictions, if any, should there be? Please try to be specific without using euphemisms or dodges. 

 

Viability. Which apparently is 24 weeks. If it's past 24 weeks and threatens the mother's life and she and her physician agree that the abortion is necessary, then allowed. If it is before 24 weeks, then no restrictions, completely up to the mother. Clear?

[Trump says abortion law should be determined by states]

On 4/9/2024 at 9:27 AM, Hanaguma said:

A 16 week ban is reasonable though, is it not? It brings the US in line with most other first world countries AFAIK.  

 

And once again, as usual, you'd be completely wrong.

https://www.cfr.org/article/abortion-law-global-comparisons

 

"The past fifty years have been characterized by an unmistakable trend toward the liberalization of abortion laws, particularly in the industrialized world. Each year, around seventy-three million abortions take place worldwide, according to the World Health Organization (WHO). This translates to about thirty-nine abortions per one thousand women globally, a rate that has stayed roughly the same since 1990. Notably, rates have diverged between countries with fewer restrictions and those with more: Between 1990–94 and 2015–19, the average abortion rate in countries with generally legal abortion (excluding China and India) declined by 43 percent. By contrast, in countries with severe restrictions on abortion, the average abortion rate increased by around 12 percent."

 

So if you are actually interested in reducing the rates of abortion, the answer is clear and always has been - provide open access because by having choice and easy access to birth control and reproductive health services, the number of abortions goes DOWN! But you don't actually care about that anyway, so moot point, right?

 

"As nations around the globe have expanded the grounds on which people can access reproductive health services, the quality and safety of abortion care has improved, as has maternal survival. However, the safety of abortion procedures diverges widely between countries where abortion is generally legal and countries with high restrictions on abortion. Almost 90 percent of abortions in countries with liberal abortion laws are considered safe, compared with just 25 percent of abortions [PDF] in countries where abortion is banned. According to the WHO, approximately 5–13 percent of maternal deaths worldwide are due to complications from unsafe abortions, the vast majority of which occur in developing countries."

 

And of course you're cool with 5-13% of maternal deaths being because of unsafe abortions, right? Sanctity of life blah blah blah. I do hope you're going full nutter on us and value the life of the unborn more than the mother, after all, why value what already exists more than an abstract possibility for which you need not provide any support or tax dollars to? At least until it's born, at which point "not my problem", amirite?

[Trump says abortion law should be determined by states]

14 hours ago, Hanaguma said:

If you really think this issue is about 'subjugating women' then you haven't been listening. It is about a very basic thing- when does life begin and when does life deserve protection? And what steps should be taken to deliver that protection.  

 

On a purely constitutional level it seems obvious that this is a power that should belong to the separate states.  What is so bad about letting them decide for themselves? 

 

Oh, I've been listening. And to pretend that this is about when life begins and when life deserves protection is just disingenuous. Almost as disingenuous as pretending that you think this is a "State's rights" issue, similar to the pretend way the Right likes to push any issue they don't like as being somehow having to be decided at lower levels due to "the Constitution". Of course, once they stack the courts and succeed in getting their way with "State's Rights" arguments, it's immediately onto the ultimate objective, federal statutes that enshrine it as the law throughout the USA. At that point, you won't hear a peep about "State's Rights".

 

So you'd be totally cool with the male in the relationship having to support their partner from the moment of conception? And if they engage in domestic assault, that puts the life of the foetus in danger, so that's attempted murder, correct? And they have to support that baby once born throughout their childhood, no? Of course, that means supporting the mother too if she doesn't have sufficient income, so you're down with that, right? And if they don't, then because they've already demonstrated that they won't take responsibility for what's theirs, then you're cool with State-sponsored mandatory vasectomies or SSRIs to suppress the man's uncontrollable desires?

 

I don't know why I bother, it's obvious to me that none of our Far Right interlocutors have any religious conviction or moral ground for their arguments, they simply enjoy trolling and want to get their people in power so they can enjoy the cruelty they inflict on women and minorities.

 

[Trump says abortion law should be determined by states]

8 hours ago, retarius said:

What a great idea......make abortion decisions based state level or even county/city level decisions. Just GITF out of politics. I am sick to death of hearing about it.  

 

So you think that state-level, county-level and city-level decisions about abortion are not political? How did they end up getting elected and making profoundly important decisions about other people's bodily autonomy?

I take it you're male, since it clearly annoys you so much that you must consider it to be something that's got nothing to do with you so why do you keep hearing about it all the time? And you know what? You're right! It is something that absolutely should NOT be anything to do with politics, just like nobody should be telling me I can't take viagra or have a vasectomy. Leave individual people alone to make their own decisions with their own bodies. Pretty simple. Yet the party that supposedly advocates for "freedom" continuously tries to subjugate women to their own personal beliefs and whims. The cognitive dissonance is mind-boggling.

[Explicit surfboard sex video off Karon beach sparks heated debate]

Seems everyone missed the interesting part - what's all this about plus-sized women sex parties? Quite a throw-in there at the end.

 

Perhaps like this story, the writer was just chewing the fat.

[Chiang Mai declares more districts as disaster zones amid wildfires]

9 hours ago, hotchilli said:

The biggest obstacal is the governor and headmens inability to control the locals from starting the fires.

 

You mean the residents? The ones who were here LOOOOOOOOONNNNNNNGGGGGGGGG before Chiang Mai had even seen the first longnose? The ones whose land it is? The ones who rely on their traditional agriculture as they have for centuries and for which there is no viable alternative?

 

Or perhaps you mean the CP Group and other large local agro-business concerns who are actually funding the production of cash crops such as corn and cassava? These are the reason why you now have such problems with air quality, as this wasn't an issue until people went from subsistence agriculture to the market, something heavily promoted by the governor, the ministries, the Prime Minister, the village headman, in fact by everyone as the best way forward for the economy and people.

 

So what's your proposed solution? It seems "locals fulfill market needs then go to jail" is the one you're advocating for. I'd say the ones who ought to be at the forefront of this discussion are those from whom we've heard precisely nothing, nada, zip, zilch, silence. That would be the large local agro-industry who are funding this burning and benefiting directly from it. Why don't they say anything? Probably because they don't have to, they've got the lazy foreign retirees whining about their poor air quality and denigrating the villagers without identifying the real problem so they're best to keep mum.

[Allegedly Intoxicated British Man on Motorbike Crashes Into Pattaya Taxi Injures Two Girls]

9 hours ago, Sigmund said:

These issues involving foreigners are increacing ever since cannabis became legal. Not to mention the other harsher drugs available in the black market!! (no puns). Allowing the free sale of cannabis has attracted all the junkies from the west to Thailand.

 

So where in the article was it mentioned that this guy had been smoking cannabis? Nowhere to be precise, entirely made up from your own keyboard and bias. Then you for some reason believe that people attracted by cannabis are junkies? Weird, junkies refer to heroin addicts, they're not pot smokers.

 

As you're aware, Thailand was the land of the well-behaved Westerner prior to the legalization of cannabis and opening of the shops. At least in your mind it seems. Those of us who are in the real world however recall things differently.

[Republicans slam Biden for proclaiming Transgender Day of Visibility on Easter]

20 hours ago, impulse said:

 

Every year on August 13, he neglects the 10% of voters that are lefties on Left Hander's Day.  Not a peep from the WH.  Despite the fact that honoring us on our day probably wouldn't lose him a single righty vote.

 

He could have done the same to the 0.6-1.5% of voters who identify as Trans.  Instead, he panders to the 1%, alienating some portion of the other 99%.

 

Just on the numbers, he was a political idiot for that Proclamation, especially with the coincidence of Easter.  It was an unforced error.  And the Repubs picked up on it and ran.

 

 

Yeah, because everyone after all these years still picks on Lefties. Despite the education and advancement of human knowledge, Lefties are stigmatized, beaten up in the bathrooms, banned from expressing their preferences, have legislation written specifically against them...

 

It's pretty sad that this passes for rhetoric on the Right. The sorts of arguments I thought had been left behind once we reached Junior High School seem to still have persuasive value to some.

[Northern Thailand grapples with severe global air contamination]

Holy crap - they know the air pollution levels in two days time!

Quick, give us the lottery numbers!

[Republicans slam Biden for proclaiming Transgender Day of Visibility on Easter]

30 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

No problem.

 

Let's have national bacon day at the start of Ramadan. 

 

Actually, we're better than that. Let's not join "Oirish" Joe in the gutter. He has more experience down there. 

So Jonny, care to enlighten us about how he set all this up in 2009 just so he could desecrate your holy day? Keep thinking about it, perhaps one day you'll understand.

[Republicans slam Biden for proclaiming Transgender Day of Visibility on Easter]

4 hours ago, impulse said:

 

Another unforced error by a guy with over 40 years in politics.

 

 

So he went back in time to 2009 to declare the International Transgender Day of Visibility as 31 March every year? How did he do that when he wasn't the President? Is he actually a Trans woman named Rachel Crandall Crocker from Michigan?

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Transgender_Day_of_Visibility

 

The Stoopid from the Right just finds a new level with every manufactured outrage...why wasn't this an issue last year (HINT: Easter Sunday changes from year to year, don't believe me just go look at a calendar, maybe take a day off from work so you can contemplate how EASTER SUNDAY is NOT THE SAME DAY EVERY YEAR)?

[Jail time to return for Cannabis players as PM describes the trade as a threat to Thailand]

6 hours ago, Andre0720 said:

I see recreational drugs, tobacco, now cannabis, as having young Thai men, some that are still kids, as main users.

They start early morning to come get their bottle of cannabis, hemp products, cigarette in the mouth, as these immature men need something like that to make them feel part of a crowds, and feel like men. And a lot of money is spent on these products. Just one seller close by here, bought a new Honda car, and a new motorbike as well.

 

Men that are already immature, not wanting to take responsibility for their actions, even responsibility for children that they father along.

Now the number of cannabis shops are on a course to surpass the number of 7-11 shops.

 

I do not see anything good coming out of that in Thailand.

 

Perhaps the government had good intentions at the onset of the liberalization of cannabis, and what they see makes them question their first decision...

 

Right, so before cannabis was legalized here, what you described simply didn't occur? Or since legalization, things have gone on a downhill slide?

Or the only major real change was that they made sure for the nth consecutive election that those receiving the most votes and clear mandate from the population were disqualified on spurious reasons?  Would that be a bigger impact that legalization of a plant?

[Trump wins last-minute reprieve as judge cuts fraud bond to $175m]

7 hours ago, JonnyF said:

Correct decision.

 

Just as I said last week, $464 million was a ridiculous amount solely designed to stop him appealing. Good to see sense prevail, although I still think $175 million is essentially a Trump tax. If it was Joe Bloggs it would have been a fraction of that amount.

 

Hopefully these silly games stop now and we can let the voters decide who leads the US, not judges.

 

Joe Bloggs is a multi-millionaire now? Inflation really is getting out of control.

[National police chief refutes claim of foul play in Surachate Hakparn case]

Just a reminder...ACAB! In case there were any doubt.

[Srettha will not declare Chiang Mai a disaster zone to protect tourism]

4 hours ago, worgeordie said:

"You want to change the climate via rain-seeding airplanes? Might as well invest in Aboriginal raindancers to come and have a jump about for all the good that will do"    read what i wrote I never said use rain seeding planes , That's what the Government said.

 

'Drones, police and rangers to observe the fires that any idiot could simply go to a website showing the latest satellite imagery to observe? Why? What's the point? They know where they are, I could list the ones for yesterday if you like." , i don't want them to use drones to see fires , BUT catch those going into the

forests to set fires ...

 

It seems to you we are doomed , nothing will change anything , I would hope one day something will

be done , and I am not giving up on that .

 

regards worgeordie

 

 

Sorry, didn't catch that was the Government's idea.

 

It doesn't have any easy solutions, since the conglomerates are responding to the market by producing a lot of cattle and commodities to feed them and other cash crops. They don't have to deal with the issues caused by the burning because they're one step or more removed and the government won't hold them accountable in Thailand while the government doesn't have much control over what happens in the rural areas in Laos. Not that there's a huge amount they can do about it if they require those commodities to serve their large markets which are mostly in Thailand.

 

The EU and other developed countries are implementing new rules that govern the origin of the major commodity crops that are imported into EU countries. These are aimed at preventing conversion of forests to cash cropping or plantations. However, the vast majority of these areas that are currently burning aren't good quality forest, they're swidden agriculture fields that are in various stages of fallow, so that regulation won't apply. Eventually one would expect that with the large number of sensors that are available and AI to handle a lot of the analysis load they're going to eventually drill down to source on everything and assign carbon and biodiversity costs to it all. But that's going to take quite some time. I don't see how you can get widespread permaculture in the sloped lands unless they're just really crowded and everyone is only into farming. But that's not really the issue in Thailand, there's lots of migration for employment in the cities and other economic alternatives.

 

As to the "mushrooms" and swidden agriculture, that has been going on for hundreds of years including the entire time when things were tolerable in the dry season. The rate of swidden hasn't really increased significantly since it's subsistence agriculture and there's low population growth in the poor rural areas and there's a lot of out-migration and availability of food from elsewhere.

 

This is just business.

[Srettha will not declare Chiang Mai a disaster zone to protect tourism]

1 hour ago, helloagain said:

Total cop out, fix it. Send up your jets with GPS.  Then army choppers with a few guns and land office to find out who owns the land then drag them into court with jail time. Next make contact with neighboring countries who also still burn that blows over Thailand. 

 

You think the current jets don't have GPS? Wow. And you think that the number of land owners is so small you could chase after them with choppers and coppers and haul them all off to the land office? LOL. And what's the plan once you "make contact with neighboring countries"? Hold onto the phone while they try to stop laughing and answer your ridiculous questions?

 

Here's a hint about why this ain't changing. Those people you wish to conduct air raids upon and throw into jail are also known as the majority of the voting population in the North of Thailand. Capisce?