Comments by dallas702 (page 5)

Though I occasionally get a dance from a stripper who is entirely focused of doing the job, most of the time the dancer will attempt to show some interest in me (most do realize that they are selling something!) Acting like they care for me is just a small step beyond acting like they are interested enough in me to enjoy dancing for me. And yes, I know comments on how big my tool is, is stripper shit, but it doesn't hurt my feelings to be lied to in that case!

Fanatics and politicians endorsing the theory of man made catastrophic global warming really like the way a specific set of researchers manipulate the original data to indicate that "runaway" warming is occurring. These specific researchers, and ONLY these researchers, are called climate scientists. All other researchers are called "climate deniers" and alternative research seems to be discredited and those researchers are generally denied funding. The acceptable researchers are the people who create computer climate models and choose the "right" data to input. I am not claiming that the researchers are liars, or co-conspirators in a vast scheme, or even that they are wrong. But I am saying that the process used by these "studies" is less science, and more politics - or as rockstar calls it "religion." (Yes, rockstar I know you were calling the "other guy" a religionist) The evidence for "man made" in the climate argument (since Al Gore and Obama declared the debate ended, the only option left is argument) is not as clear cut as some want to believe. The basic "science" used by AGW research involves two positions. First, researchers work to establish an increase - globally - in specific trace gasses (originally it was only one gas - CO2, but that didn't work so they added more gasses to the "warming gas" list) and worked to tie that increase to warmer climate. And second, researchers create computer models of the atmosphere and plug in changes related to the "warming gasses" to attempt to get the models to show what happens as the "warming gasses" increase. The only problem with this approach is the bias built into both ends of the process. The funded researchers "model" the climate with some very sophisticated computer programs. These models are supposed to accept a tremendous amount of data on atmospheric composition, heating and cooling factors (like amount and reflective ability of polar ice, solar input, ocean temps, energy transfer between gasses, etc.), and the assumed ability of various atmospheric gasses to retain energy (heat). The problem is every model ever created has significantly overstated the change in temperatures actually occurring - even after the "adjustments" described below. That is a big problem - man made catastrophic global warming is "proven" to be a threat only by climate models - and the climate models don't work. Over 35 year of climate models have universally failed. (This issue is discussed in detail in the UN-IPCC 5th Assessment Report, October 2013) The IPCC answer to failed models is "new" models (that are also showing the same trends, and also overstating projected temps) The current temp research uses data points (weather stations) around the globe, satellite data (from Eurosats, NOAA and NASA), and interpolated values for areas without coverage to establish base point data for a global mean. The problems (and there are many problems) happen when researchers "adjust" existing, and prior, reported temps, interpolate with "target" temps previously established and modify satellite data to account for implied variables. There are justifications for each change, and except for a batch of NOAA adjustments between 2013 and 2016 that were not explained, the math behind each change is valid (though a number of climate experts do question the original justifications for many of the adjustments) . But when all the detail work is done and a composite of temperatures is presented, over 93% of the data is adjusted or imputed. Less than 4% of the temperatures used in the "actual" daily, monthly, and annual global temperature are real reported temperatures. And when the various climate reporting sources (NOAA, NASA, UN-IPCC) look back at historic data, they also see a need to adjust (always down) previously reported temperatures, in order to "correct" for "errors" created by using mercury instruments (although, for some reason, mercury thermometers currently in use must be adjusted up to produce the "correct" current temperatures). Then comes the "hottest year," "hottest May," and "hottest day" described in breathless, terrifying, press releases. Even after all the guesswork in figuring historic global average temps, and all the adjustments to calculate the current global average temps, the differences reported between historic and current temps are in tiny percentages of a degree, and in EVERY case to date - the difference is within the reported margin of error of the global temp study. In other words - they really don't know whether it really is warmer or not. Climate change shouldn't be treated as a religion. It should be looked upon as a study of global climate and all theories should be tested carefully and debated often. When a theory fails repeatedly it should be reevaluated - But in the modern politicized environment, political science and the power of government money trumps real science! Again, I am not saying that the AGW faithful are wrong. I am saying that the theory is NOT proven (perhaps "not yet"). And I am saying that politics has overwhelmed research to create a situation where honest research and honest review of the data is difficult - if not impossible. The climate does change, and it is changing, but how much of that current change is due to human activity is still an unanswered question.

"more" = money One day I might even learn to edit my posts.

I owned a number of "nice" cars over the years, a beautiful Truimph TR3, then a Spitfire, a TR6 and a TR7, had slick black Porsche 914 (yes, that is the VW-Porsche), a 911, and a couple of BMWs (2002 and a 320i), and once - for just a few months - a Rolls. I've owned Fiats and even a hot domestic or two. I got over all of that. Sometime ago I just got tired of changing oil, tuning carbs (the oil flow from the Stromberg carburetor on that TR3 had to be exact!), switching cars if it was going to rain, parking way out there away from any idiot who might ding the paint, polishing - or hiring it done - often, and driving around with my butt 5" off the ground jarred about by stiff springs and road hugging tires. I still enjoy driving, but cars are just transportation to me now. Comfort and safety are much more important than the looks of a car, and the impression a car makes on others is nearly meaningless to me. In fact, I just bought a new "daily driver" last month - a Ford Focus. For just $20,000, I got reasonable comfort, good mileage, all the "bells and whistles" I wanted, and a few I didn't (I don't do Sirius and have no need for Sync). I'll spend the more I didn't spend on a car somewhere! So the car is not an appeal. I guess I'll have to take the one night of strippers and hoes.

"No, I said RETIRED, not retard!"

About $100 (US) in the original "bitcoin" is worth about $80,000,000.00 (US) today. The stuff may be shady, or difficult to understand, or even an excellent way to support criminal activities, but it certainly has a "value."

I think there are two reasons for all the screaming, ranting and angst. First, Trump is outrageous. He talks in over the top metaphors and exaggeration. He pushes a lot of emotional buttons, seemingly with intent. He often opens his mouth (or his Twitter connection) before engaging his brain. All of that provides ample fodder for a desperate collection of elected Democrats, an enormous crowd of un-elected federal government workers, the even larger crowd of people who have benefited from the largess of the last 8 years, and the corporate liberal media who gleefully attacks Trump at every turn for ratings and their own self interest. The second reason is that President Donald Trump is successfully undoing a lot of the socialist "big government" framework put in place by Obama. Whether you think him an idiot or a good guy doesn't matter, he has rescinded most of Obama's 2016 executive orders and is working to eliminate much of the rest. Most of the "anti-Trump" crowd seem to fear Trump as much as they hate Trump. If Trump is able to outlast the screaming rants, absurd demands to impeach, fact free claims, bombshells without merit, and stage whispered innuendo, he may - in 4 or 8 years - actually reduce government, stop the unsustainable deficits and, most damaging to the left, limit the scope and power of the federal government. He was elected because he promised to undo the Obama changes that a majority of Americans did not agree to, and because the "Hillary" alternative was just too repulsive to many voters. As long as he keeps enough of his promises, he will continue to have enough support among voters to stay put. The rest of it is just noise.

"I was so disappointed when my wife cut me off from strip club visits, until she brought her three former college roommates home with her." (I think that was from a Playboy forum letter somewhere in late 1975) Not that it can't happen, but with me now in my 60s, it takes some financial incentive to generate that enthusiasm from dates!

Papi is an expert in this matter, and I don't dispute his judgement. But I would suggest that you consider taking I-4 to either end and try the clubs in either Tampa or Daytona. There are several viable choices on either the west (Tampa is probably better option) or east coast (either Cocoa Beach or Daytona).

I guess I am "out of touch" with the "new" humor, because I don't think this woman is funny or attractive. Her humor reminds me of a Don Rickles imitator without the talent or the timing - and I never liked Rickles humor! Her appearance is "the chubby girl at the mall food court," and that doesn't get my motor running. Then her politics is simply ignorant blathering lacking perspective of rational. I actually enjoy talking to intelligent, informed people who disagree with me, but screaming political idiots - not so much!

GoVikings, I don't dispute your "numbers game" assertion. In my opinion, you are correct about clubs - most of the time. Even in ATL's Follies there are likely dancers who don't offer extras and in some "prim and proper" clubs it might be hard to find the few "extras" girls. But difference is in what clubs you choose to visit, when you visit, and whether you are looking to just watch, enjoy a lapper, ITC or OTC. If you hit ATL's Follies on a Friday night do not expect to score OTC, the same club on an early afternoon will likely get you $152 VIP FS ITC and OTC with only slightly more difficulty. Other places ITC FS is almost impossible but take out is almost certainly available. When I have asked the "wrong" girl (that happens a lot) usually the response is not an upset dancer, but a "referral" to another dancer on shift who does OTC. There is a new generation of dancers in the clubs these days. Dancers who have a very casual attitude about sex and "hook ups." They are willing, available, and sometimes eager (if the money or the vibe is right). Even if they don't "do it" themselves, they don't seem to judge coworkers who do, and are likely to help you.

During my first strip club visit, in the early 1970's, I got an offer for very reasonable P4P and that night enjoyed the company of a very willing young woman for several hours. That - it turned out (much to my disappointment) - was NOT the usual. The next time I successfully snagged a P4P out of a strip club was in the 1990s. Admittedly, that first visit got me hooked on strip clubs in spite of the "no touch, no lapper" 70s and 80s and the very rare successes in the 90s. I was successful in dating horny civi women, and strip clubs were not my only outlet (for years they were not an "outlet" at all) but they were a place (in the 70s and 80s) where my imagination got fuel, and in the 90s where "hands on" fun was beginning to be found and hope for more was reignited. Now, in SCs it is no longer maybe. In just about every strip club I have been in for the past 5 years, there are women who WILL meet you OTC. I suggest you go ahead and hit it!

Personally, I would prefer to see Hillary in an orange jumpsuit with numbers on it (just once, to know it's real - I wouldn't want to permanently damage my vision). In spite of the fevered headlines from the left - there is still no real high crime or even misdemeanor to hang on Trump. Until then, I will just enjoy the drama and the dismantling of Obama's big government socialism.

I know big butts are "a thing" these days, but I seriously do NOT get the attraction. This woman looks deformed!

The Eastern European Jewish population had (before Hitler and Stalin murdered 90% of them) several distinctive physical characteristics. Notably a large straight nose, ruddy complection and dark straight hair combined were, in Eupore, considered Jewish traits. Many of the descendants of ethnic European Jews who made it to the US still have these physical characteristics. Some consider it attractive in women - note the popularity of the "Kardashian" women - and they can be found in strip clubs. Whether these young women are practicing Jews - or even know their heritage - is another matter. I have encountered several strippers who knew about their Jewish ancestry and one who claimed to be "Jewish." Other than conversational tidbits offered by the woman, I really don't know that it matters to very many guys these days. It certainly doesn't matter to me.

Only morbid curiosity. The French (as a nation) have never truly been friends of this nation. The Loius' (14 and 16) were interested in helping colonists in North America, just to frustrate the English. The "Reveloution" was exclusively internally focused. Napoleon and the subsequent Empires wanted trade, but were otherwise hostile to the new USA. Troops from WW1 reported that Parisians were either indifferent or hostile to Doughboys and only prostitutes showed any interest. WW2 US troops were joyfully welcomed as they liberated French towns, but just days later were shunned by most French. After WW2, the new French government (led by DeGaulle - who we supplied and even set up to be first to "liberate" Paris) did everything possible to frustrate US interests. To this day, the people of Paris (the only super giant metro area of France) are generally unfriendly to American tourists (unless it is their job to be friendly). Individual French people have often been friends of America and Americans. From Lafayette to Frédéric Auguste Bartholdi and Gustave Eiffel (designer and builder of La Liberté éclairant le monde - the Statue of Liberty) several French individuals have contributed to US history and culture. But as a nation, and a people as a whole the French are not our friends. One exception among modern French leaders may be Marine Le Pen, a "not liberal, not socialist" candidate in the current French elections for President. Liberals, progressives, and socialists - worldwide - are aghast at her popularity and even the possibility that she will be in the runoff elections has the French Socialist Party pulling out every dirty trick they ever knew to destroy her. One of the reasons they hate her is she publicly supports better relations with the US and has said she likes what Trump says (the two have never met). Even though Le Pen campaigns on French exit from the EU, a "Frexit" is still unlikely - BUT her influence (if elected) might convince the EU to tighten borders and stop importing Muslim terror. "MIGHT" Even a good showing in the elections might make a little difference - but I doubt that the EU is recoverable. Western Europe is important to the USA, and to the stability of the world, but they seem to be attempting to commit suicide - led by the French. The UK, and maybe even Germany, could slow the decline but I don't know. Bottom line, I am morbidly curious, but I don't hold out hope for France..

Every once in a while I grab a beer in a club that attracts couples and women as customers. Occasionally I see women customers pay attention to one stripper and ignore others. When I commented on it happening right in front of me, a stripper sitting with me laughed at my lack of "gaydar" and said, "everyone knows "X" (actual stripper name) is only into girls."

I know this won't "end" the claims, but this IBT propaganda piece depends entirely upon the assertions of one man, Theodore Postol, for the claim that Assad was not responsible. (All of IBT's "reporting" is tilted far to the left and IBT seldom reports on International Business, so the slant is not surprising.) It is also not the first time Postol defended Assad, not the first time he claimed the US government got it wrong. I am not - here - defending the US attack, or trying to claim that Assad was responsible. I do know a little about the "expert." My only purpose in this post is to expose the "expert." Postol was trained in nuclear physics and did serve, briefly, as a science advisor to the Secretary of the Navy. The man is over 70 years old, retired - by MIT preference, and not currently involved in any active research - of any kind. He has spent the past 20 years arguing against anything ANY US government outlet says about missile attack or defense results (apparently the reason MIT "retired" him). He has argued that Patriot Anti-Missile defense rockets have NEVER stopped a missile attack (also claiming Israeli video of Patriot missiles hitting Scuds were fake). He argued that Assad's government didn't use gas in 2013 (directly opposing Obama's public position). He argued Patriots did not stop a single Scud in the Gulf War. He argues against just about anything the US government says about national defense, but especially missiles. His positions are not supported by any work Postol has published on missile technology. In fact, Postol has no training or experience on missile guidance systems or proximity fusing. That has never stopped him from spouting his opinion, nor has it stopped him from claiming expertise he doesn't have. About the recent chemical attack, Postol insists that the photos, "prove" the attack was staged. Postol has never worked as a photo analyst, has no experience in how metal deforms on impact, and has no training whatsoever in air delivered chemical weapons. It is simply NOT possible for this bigoted old blowhard (or anyone else) to determine who is responsible for a chemical attack by looking at a picture of a crater in a Syrian street.

Smart is good. But I have noticed in the real world that education and intelligence are not always related! Some of the stupidest people I have ever encountered have received a Master's or PHD - and overwhelmingly those degreed idiots are women. Fortunately, (in my experience) the idiot women with advanced degrees are also (almost always) fugly and self righteous. So I very seldom encounter educated idiots in strip clubs. I have encountered strippers who claimed college degrees and they always seemed capable of intelligent conversations and were aware of current events. More often, the intelligent strippers I encounter have learned "on the job" and in the world. They have less college than other jobs, but - perhaps - more real world experience. And I do enjoy conversations with those women. I also encounter dancers who claim to be going to college but many are either future idiot PHDs or are lying.= (I know - who could believe that a stripper would lie?)

Hey, Greenballs - - - Did Shadowcat give you permission to post 2AMer news on this site? Only the Shadowcat him-very-self has the rights to post closing time shoot-em-ups and knife fight news here! If he didn't deputize you dude - you are WAY outta' bounds. Look out!!!!! ;<}

Wackos, Jacksonville is having a run of bad luck - or stupid management - just a few weeks ago they were raided supposedly for "fire code violations," but at the same time sheriff's officers also made drug and prostitution arrests. http://www.news4jax.com/news/local/jacksonville/undercover-agents-swarm-wackos-gentlemens-club

The real problem is that it will not be "North Korea v. South Korea" If Dumb Fuck Fu (Kim Jong-un), the demented grandson of the Russian puppet leader of the "Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea" decides to start a war, the first act will be about 10,000 (literally 10,000) artillery pieces firing into Seoul, Korea (South Korea's capital city is only about 30 miles from mountains in DPRK where almost all of the arty is located) Much of Seoul will be destroyed and thousands will die (perhaps even millions if the asshole uses chemical weapons) in the 4 to 8 hours before South Korean forces can destroy all of the North Korean artillery. Unlike gammanu, I do not think the DPRK is currently capable of getting a nuclear weapon to the battlefield, so I doubt any "A-bombs" will be used, but a dirty bomb - spreading deadly radiation - is a possibility. After the artillery attack, it will be an ugly - and brief - slaughter of North Korean conventional forces. I honestly doubt that South Korean (ROK), US, Japanese, and other UN ground forces will have to even move into North Korea before air power, advanced US artillery, pinpoint rocket and cruise missile assaults, combine to destroy DPRK army cohesion, organization and their will to fight. The North Korean military leaders will probably kill the kid and surrender within 48 hours of the beginning of hostilities. Then the political fight begins. China will want complete control over whatever government is installed. South Korea (ROK) will want "reunification," other powers will want a truly independent North Korean government and the North Korean people will want food and blankets. Look for an unstable and hostile world for years after Kim Jong-un is killed by his generals.

When "dressed up" I carry a Ruger 380 (6 + 1) in either a pocket carrier or an inside the waistband holster. Otherwise I carry either a Ruger .45 (8 + 1) or my fav S&W 9mm (13 + 1) in an inside the waistband holster at the small of my back along with an extra mag. All of my personal defense ammo is Hornady (hollow points) but other defense ammo can be just as good. The 380 really doesn't have the capacity, stopping power or accuracy of the other handguns, but it IS discrete and easily carried just about anywhere.

Strip clubs actually get too much attention from popo to effectively launder mob money. The mob, in the 21st century, is into drugs, pyranids, stocks and internet scams, plus the older business ventures like unions and protection. They need much more discrete businesses to launder their money than titty bars. That doesn't mean organized crime is NOT involved in strip joints - criminal organizations do own or in some way control several - but usually they are disrete about the involvement. Mob control of "sex businesses" is mostly about small time drug and prostitution schemes that any big plans. Most of the time you read stories of Mob related strip joints it is exageration or fantasy created by exuberant, but ignorant, reporters.

@666, I didn't claim that no one believed the assertion Russia hacked the DNC, nor did I claim it wasn't true. My point is: the entire argument is not (or perhaps - not yet) supported by any facts available in the public domain and many other claims by the MSM have been demonstrated to be, "less than entirely credible." And again - not a wacky conspiracy theory - much of the hyperbola and attacks on Trump are clearly identified as originating from entities affiliated with George Soros, an individual who does not hide his desire to topple individual national governments in favor of a global economic control system (presumably with him and his friends as the controllers - but that is just my guess). Soros has worked to undermine several European and central Asian governments as well as influence elections in eastern Europe. It is not far right, or even a conspiracy theory, Soros is real and he is involved in US politics.