discussion comment
16 years ago
Hi David120,
"So, it seems in her mind that prostitution was wrong but stealing is OK."
Well, stealing can be considered a morally superior position. Robin hood stealing from the tax collector to give to the poor. Jesse James? and perhaps other criminals stole from the railroads who were seen as using government muscle and privilege to steal from citizenry and a fair number of citizens cheered them on.
So, strippers stealing from those who "exploit" and "abuse" and "rape" women for their own sick reasons could be seen as justified payback. The stripper with the "chip on her shoulder" probably felt that if the people support a nasty criminal government, then why shouldn't she be as nasty and criminal as she can get away with. It's good for the big shots . . .
discussion comment
16 years ago
Yeah, the economy is just booming although I think shadowcat got cheated a tad. Over here in Miami the local bag boy at Publix gets company shares worth $12,000 every April 1.
Republicans actually didn't do to awful in the last election all things considered. If only more people who detest the U.S. had voted, then perhaps the Republicans would have gained seats and even elected McCain. If President Bush was on the ballot, then shoot I don't think I could resist casting a vote for him. I mean the economy is going BOOM and the world is going KABOOM and Bin Laden is singing God is Great.
discussion comment
16 years ago
Not a problem as long as she does a good job.
discussion comment
16 years ago
Hi Dudester,
I thought the weird part was sending $1,000 just to get them to fax a contract.
The other stuff was like you say "the scenario that led to the entire mortgage meltdown." I don't see how these companies are lending her money unless they were pretty sure the government was going to come to their rescue.
discussion comment
16 years ago
Drinking was a morality issue for her? She might have been more concerned about your health.
Yes, I've had strippers lecture me about what is right or wrong. Doesn't seem odd in the least. It is like strippers who look down on or feel morality superior to strippers who also do prostitution. For those who think this is silly here is an analogy that might make it clearer:
The government reduces the speed limit to 55 mph down from 70 mph. Some drivers continue on with their old ways of driving 65 to 70 mph and have turned into law breakers and speeders. These speeders may see themselves in a positive light for all manner of reasons. This new "criminal class" may start to feel negatively toward police officers who enforce the law against them or other speeders like them. Talking with these speeders, you can agree right down the line and then just throw out that there is nothing like the thrill of blasting down I-95 at 150 mph. :) Wow, the moral judgment is usually instantaneous: You need to be arrested! Or, at the very least pay a hefty fine. It is immoral to go to 150 mph on I-95. Feeling under attacker you realize that hey you criminals also speed! If I should be arrested or at least pay a hefty fine, then then that goes double for you hypocrites!!!
Yes, the clean stripper is breaking some speed limits. But, she isn't a Charles Manson like the strippers who do prostitution. It is like how you can't compare slapping a baby's hand for punishment with chainsawing off a baby's hand for punishment. Everything in moderation even moderation.
discussion comment
16 years ago
Shadowcat,
You have this "voting mania" or belief in voting and yet when I asked you a rather straight forward question you chose again not to answer it.
I've met other people with your same view on voting; a view I find revolting. In old age I've mellowed a lot, however, when my lady friend blurted with smugness that if you don't vote you can't complain, I wasn't so calm, cool, or collected. She is intelligent and educated and this is a view that, imo, doesn't make a cents worth of sense. She didn't seem to have an answer for me other than it is a civic duty to vote. Coming from her that is a piss poor answer. Normally, she is very capable of supporting her beliefs.
Even as a youngster, the mantra was vote even if you don't care or don't know. The important thing is voting. I assumed the reason the vote was important even if you didn't care or didn't know is because it shows support for the system. BTW, dictatorship may provide much more freedom than a democracy, imo: Bork's love of having democratically elected representatives decide all issues is, imo, a vile form of government that I wouldn't support one iota by voting or otherwise.
discussion comment
16 years ago
"jablake: If you detest this country so fucking much, why don't you just leave?"
I've answer that question a few times. I note that you didn't answer the question I asked you.
I did make the painful decision to leave friends and family and relocate to Haiti. Yes, I wouldn't normally associate Haiti with a place to move to and yet over the years I've heard from both whites and blacks that Haiti was their choice and that it is an especially good choice for whites. One gentleman after living in the U.S. for 5 years was actually leaving a wife he loved to move back to Haiti. He detested almost everything about the U.S. except the dollar. :) His wife unfortunately for him loved the U.S. and had refused to leave with him. He claimed she was all about the shopping malls.
Anyway, I'm sure you've heard about the real estate mess here in Florida and you may have read on this board that my health continues to deteriorate.
It is sort of surprising the number of Americans that I've met here in Miami who detest the U.S. even more than I do. Of course, the obvious question that I always ask after telling them that I agree with them is why are they still here!? Sometimes they've already left and have briefly returned to visit loved ones. Sometimes they're financially trapped. One non-American who had fought against Castro says that he would love to return to homeland even if he was required to apologize publicly to Castro and the Cuban people. Anyway, he takes small pleasure in that he costs the taxpayers money; yep taxpayers need to be raped. As I've said in the past, I meet people from all over the world that are visiting or live in Miami and some love America, some hate America, and some don't care. One man who didn't care told me government the world over is crap so he didn't care about the U.S. one way or the other.
I remember this Argentinian dancer at The Trap. She told me Americans and America are the world's best. I couldn't believe it, but she started telling me about different countries she'd visited and she claimed she found Americans to be much nicer. I said in Miami??? She said yes even in Miami. I asked about the government and she said governments in other countries are even worse! Worse??? OK, I can believe other governments are worse. :) BTW, I met another Argentinian woman about the same age who wasn't a stripper who liked her country much better.
discussion comment
16 years ago
"I've found that Christian, esp. black, strippers are more honest."
I don't know about more honest, but more giving and nicer people. :)
discussion comment
16 years ago
Hating religion is very separate from believing in God. A person could think of themselves as a good Christian and believe the church is really all about the dollar or power.
Normally, I'm interested in whether they're a believer first. A believer meaning a believer in a God or Gods. It isn't that unusual to hear God is the greatest and then ask about their religion to learn that they don't believe in the Church. It shouldn't come as a surprise that people can love the Bible or God and yet take a very dim view of the Church; chained to government, and or power. It is the old maxim that power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
discussion comment
16 years ago
"More than GWB?? Please..."
Excellent point.
discussion comment
16 years ago
Smart dancers can definitely be fun. And, generally I would think the atheist is smarter. However, I don't discriminate based on brain power when choosing a dancer. The most intelligent dancers are assuming I liked them more memorable in general.
discussion comment
16 years ago
Well, according to the Slate article U.S. atheists are in general slimeballs compared to U.S. theists. Thus, if same holds true for strippers it might be time to quiz her on her national origin and religion! ;)
Sadly, it didn't surprise me that U.S. atheists could be viewed as slimeballs compared the U.S. theists.
Now, agnostics regardless of national origin on the other hand are generally top tier! ;) It is just difficult to find them-----dang atheists and theists get all the attention.
ARMED with the new information from the Slate article I will now query these strippers a little more closely if only for educational purposes.
discussion comment
16 years ago
American God Believing (Theist) Dancers in U.S.?
"The sorry state of American atheists, then, may have nothing to do with their lack of religious belief. It may instead be the result of their outsider status within a highly religious country where many of their fellow citizens, including very vocal ones like Schlessinger, find them immoral and unpatriotic. Religion may not poison everything, but it deserves part of the blame for this one." http://www.slate.com/id/2203614/pagenum/2
Seems like almost all the dancer that I know are Christians . . . but, at the more elite expensive clubs the very few dancers who were atheist seemed to have lower morals (yes, one man's freedom fighter is another's terrorist) than the Christians.
Maybe the question should be reframed. Do you want your dancer to believe in God?
I hate to say it, but yes I'd rather they believe in God even though I think the whole religion thing is horrible. The reason, I think, is that generally the dancer will have a greater innocence or stupid hopefulness. Doesn't mean those qualities aren't available in the atheist model, but I just haven't seen it.
discussion comment
16 years ago
Oops, how could I forget. Rights like freedom of speech, trial by jury, the right to bear arms, etc. according to judge Bork take away as much freedom as they grant in a democratic society. Thus, in his view my voting is the only important freedom because that allows my democratically elected "representative" to make the decisions.
And, Bork is Supreme Court material? He is an intellectual? By reading different opinions from justices of the Supreme Court, he wouldn't have been much if any downgrade. And, this type of freedom has any value? It may to you and that is wonderful. To me that freedom is as meaningful as the supposed right to bear arms; nonexistent.
discussion comment
16 years ago
Hi shadowcat,
What pisses me off are people think voting is a positive civic activity! My lady friend has a view similar to yours and almost by reflex, I verbally snapped her head off. She was surprised anyone could view voting as negative.
Well, I do view voting as negative. And, not just when uninformed people are encouraged to vote. I've never understood how that is supposed to improve democracy when the person votes and yet doesn't know the issues or even if they know the issues vote "bad." What is voting "bad"? Well, voting for President Obama could be seen as bad if he is really going to destroy the country and destroying the country is negative.
Although I've gone thru a litany of reasons explaining why I stopped voting and don't believe in voting, probably the biggest reason is that almost always I'm given a choice between the lesser of 2 evils. McCain has some good points, but he wishes to go full steam ahead with the government's War on Terror. Obama wants bigger government and that is normally something that I detest, but even if I figured America is now at the point (I am at that point now, btw) where bigger government is the solution, he will just redirect the government's War on Terror (assuming he is telling the truth). I guess you could argue well vote for a third party candidate----that wouldn't be so bad if I didn't believe voting under the current rules is bad activity.
Besides when a person really doesn't care whether tweedle dee or tweedle dumb is elected, then why not let someone cares, someone like shadowcat, make the decision?
I didn't give a flying fuck if Clinton or Bush was elected. At the time, I did follow the campain and the issues and etc. Bottom line I found Bush to be a lying piece of shit---remember read my lips? Remember the arrogance when it was stated who cares if conservatives are upset his tax fraud, because who are they going to vote for?
Again, I detest this country shadowcat----mainly because I don't have any important rights like freedom of speech or a jury trial of my peers or the right to bear arms or etc. (Yes, you may disagree with me on every point, but that isn't the point.) The point is where I do NOT care about candidate A or candidate B, then why shouldn't I allow voters who do care, shadowcat for example, make the determination?
Can you answer that one question?
Really, if McCain had won then it would be ok hopefully he'll be as incompetent as Bush. If obama won, then it would be ok well hopefully he socializes the country because that is better than a "free market" in a country dedicated to endless war. Whoever won didn't make any real difference to me. I did want to see Republicans at the lower lever get slaughtered. I don't even think there are Republicans in my district, but they don't have a chance in hell anyway.
discussion comment
16 years ago
"Current Issues
The War in Iraq
Like most Americans, Libertarians are appalled by the actions of the terrorists on 9/11. However, it is important that we ask ourselves whether Osama bin Laden or the Iraqi people are our enemy.
There has been a great deal of controversy about so-called facts presented by the White House about the initial cause for military action in Iraq; it is time we look at some real facts. We are indeed nation building. We are playing policeman in a civil war. We have attacked and killed thousands of people in Iraq because of the actions of a terrorist from Saudi Arabia. We have chased non-existent weapons of mass destruction instead of the terrorists who killed nearly three thousand Americans on 9/11. We are creating more terrorists on a daily basis because of our intervention in Iraq. In short, we went after the wrong bad guys and are now stuck in the middle of someone else’s civil war.
While American public opinion has radically changed about our continued occupation in Iraq, the President wants to send a "surge" of troops to Iraq, while adding nearly 100,000 new members of our armed forces to the ranks. The Democrats don’t seem poised to do anything which will substantially change our presence in Iraq. It is time for U.S. forces to withdraw from Iraq as quickly as possible in a manner consistent with the safety of our troops." http://www.lp.org/issues/current-issues
"Dudester,
Wouldn't it great if some parties that get nearly 0% of the vote could become mainstream?"
You mean like The Constitutional Party and or the Libertarian Party? As long as they're in favor of terminating the government's War on Terror lock stock and barrel any party including the communist party or the old small government Republican party becoming mainstream would be good news! :)
discussion comment
16 years ago
Yep, The Constitutional Party seems like a winner in regards to this bullshit government's War on Terror and financing foreign governments [gee, I wonder which foreign government(s) the U.S. is funding and arming??? Would you know clubber? LOL!]. There is no such thing as a small government with endless government wars like the War on Terror. Excerpted from The Consitution Party website:
"America is engaged in an undeclared war with an ill-defined enemy (terrorism), a war which threatens to be never ending, and which is being used to vastly expand government power, particularly that of the executive branch, at the expense of the individual liberties of the American people.
The "war on terrorism" is serving as an excuse for the government to spend beyond its income, expand the Federal bureaucracy, and socialize the nation through taxpayer bailouts of the airlines, subsidies to the giant insurance corporations, and other Federal programs.
We deplore and vigorously oppose legislation and executive action that deprive the people of their rights secured under the Fourth and Fifth Amendments under the guise of "combating terrorism" or "protecting national security." Examples of such legislation are the National Security Act, the USA PATRIOT Act, and the proposed Domestic Securities Enhancement Act (colloquially known as "Patriot II"), and the Military Commissions Act.
The National Security Act is used by the federal government as a shroud to prevent the American people and our elected officials from knowing how much and where our tax dollars are spent from covert operations around the world. The National Security Act prevents the release of Executive Orders and Presidential Decision Directives, e.g., PDD 25, to the American people and our elected representatives. Not only are many of these used to thwart justice in the name of national security, but some of the operations under this act may threaten our very national sovereignty.
The USA PATRIOT Act permits arrests without warrants and secret detention without counsel, wiretaps without court supervision, searches and seizures without notification to the individual whose property is invaded, and a host of other violations of the legal safeguards our nation has historically developed according to principles descending from the Fourth and Fifth Amendments.
Since we will no longer have a free nation while the federal government (or the governments of the several states, as the federal government may authorize) can violate our historic rights under such laws, we call for the rejection of all such laws and the ceasing of any such further proposals including the aforementioned Domestic Securities Enhancement Act.
The Constitution Party is unalterably opposed to the criminal acts of terrorists, and their organizations, as well as the governments which condone them. Individuals responsible for acts of terrorism must be punished for their crimes, including the infliction of capital punishment where appropriate. In responding to terrorism, however, these United States must avoid acts of retaliation abroad which destroy innocent human lives, creating enmity toward these United States and its people; and
In accord with the views of our Founding Fathers, we must disengage this nation from the international entanglements which generate foreign hatred of these United States, and are used as the excuse for terrorist attacks on America and its people. The 'war on terrorism" is not a proper excuse for perpetual U.S. occupation of foreign lands, military assaults on countries which have not injured us, or perpetual commitment of taxpayer dollars to finance foreign governments." http://www.constitutionparty.com/party_platform.php#Terrorism%20and%20Personal%20Liberty
Anyway, if the government is to be one of endless wars, then small isn't even desirable; the bigger the better especially in support of the poor and middle class! :)
discussion comment
16 years ago
Hopefully, the huge losers will be those who fell hook line and sinker for the government's phoney War on Terror. Unfortunately, I think President Obama will keep those people very happy continuing the government's policy of endless war.
On the bright side funding and arming (part of the "surge" strategy) those who were just a few months earlier were killing and maiming American soldiers may be the means of declaring "victory" and then running away fast and furiously. Of course, the government will have to keep funding and arming these "former" enemies, but the mess that was created by the government's invasion and occupation has to be paid for somehow. Declaring "victory" and then fleeing is a small price to pay.
Another set of losers, unfortunately, were those countries that wished to see Iran's power constrained assuming President Obama keeps his promise and withdraws U.S. forces from Iraq. Toppling Saddam was already like a gift from Heaven for Iran especially moreso when the replacement leaders are essentially the same people as the Iranians and had very close ties in the past. A withdrawal of U.S. forces cements the gift.
Pakistan's people who just wish to be left in peace will be big losers if President Obama keeps his promise to increase the war efforts in that region of the world. President Obama may also go after the opium farmers as part of this all out effort.
Does all this improve America's security? Well, considering the security problem was negligible to begin with the answer is definitely no, imo. Withdrawing from both wars would probably greatly saddened Bin Laden forcing him to try and strike America again. His strategy appears to be what he claimed. Let America destroy itself while creating millions of people who hate America.
discussion comment
15 years ago
A frequent bone of contention at the book store would be my price versus the prices of price guides. My respect for the price guides was pretty much near zero. They had some books listed at prices I would kill to buy at the absurdly low prices and other priced thru the roof that I might as well put in the dumpster.
I have this Barbie doll book listed at $28----it is a total steal at that price and should actually be listed for about $100. This lady comes in and wants it for the price guide price of $3. I say go somewhere else and buy it for $3. She says she has looked everywhere and that book doesn't exist. I say wait till you find it at a thrift store or maybe a yard sale. She says she wants it now, but at the "fair" price of $3. I say the fair price is actually $100. She says that is impossible because it is listed at $28. I said, yep and been a hell of a lot new dollars (inflation) created since that price----and it is one of these deals where it is almost as easy or perhaps easier to sell it for a $100 than sell it for $28. Basic economics. The cattle too often believe the price equals value.
She is battling me for over an hour and I say look, I feel like just taking it home and putting it in the trash. Oh don't put it in the trash give it to me. Then she says it is for her daughter. I say your daughter isn't worth spending a little money on? She says it is about what is "right" and "fair." She says if the price guide said $500 or even a $1,000, then she'd gladly pay those prices. She just wants what is "fair." I said I have total contempt for the price guides. She says you think you know more than them? I say, yep a whole lot more. Of course, you can ask those clowns where to order it for $3. LOL! :) She leaves in a huff. I put the book in the trash can under the desk.
She comes back with her daughter! To cut to the chase she trades a $100 worth of new books which she claimed had no value for my "$3 book." We were both happy campers and especially her daughter. :) After the sale, she said I know this is a sore point but why don't you believe in the price guides? I said because I can't buy the books that I like at those absurd prices and if I could, then I'd be buying like mad.
discussion comment
16 years ago
Cute pussy from what I can see. :)
discussion comment
16 years ago
Yes.
discussion comment
16 years ago
![]()
Book GuyI write it like I mean it, but mostly they just want my money.
A hard worker? Or a crook like a lawyer or judge? Or someone who charges thru the nose primarily because they got a government license or government monopoly? Sorry this is a corrupt country and the solution unfortunately is income and property fairness as well as liberal government benefits.
If it destroys the U.S., then that is hardly much of a loss, imo.
discussion comment
16 years ago
![]()
Book GuyI write it like I mean it, but mostly they just want my money.
Hi how,
Well, if there isn't a small limited government, then my preference is for a very large left wing government that puts the people first. Bascially, one of the highest priorities needs to be wealth equality. Not a brilliant idea as far as wealth creation, but social justice can be much more important.
It is like the example of the stripper over at Angels with a bad chip on her shoulder. It seemed liked she'd been screwed by the government and felt that society owed her. Yes, society did owe her and big time. The problem is collecting. Do you collect from the little old lady who supports the government, but doesn't have a clue as to its rip-offs or oppression? Do you collect from the lawyer who just rationalizes it is a dog eat dog world? How about the clueless flag waver? The man she was ripping off turned out to be just a very nice guy who chose the wrong dancer. For whatever reason he could not read her body language even a little.
The problem besides her ripping off the customer is that she creates problems for other dancers. Anyway, he felt a lot better once the situation was explained. The manager even offered him a full refund for all dances from her plus a refund of the rip off amount. The nice guy didn't want a refund and was just happy for the explanation and club response.
Problem still existed in that that dancer is a threat to society . . . not a large threat most likely. But, she was aggressive (and potentially very violent, imo) and not everyone would be capable of standing up to her especially outside the club environment.
Wouldn't surprise me if she was rotting in prison or dead right now, but who if anyone did she hurt on her way there.
discussion comment
15 years ago
Hi lopaw,
If you're my type, then I'd gladly hit on you for a few paid dances. :) Heck, it might be fun for you to be a dancer for a few songs. Besides your new honorary guy status just adds to your value. ;)
I don't recall any lesbians getting pissed at me for being aggressive. Scared once, but that was just a miscommunication---the customer was smoking hot and she looked like a dancer. The dancers pointed out she wasn't wearing a "uniform," which at Angels means zippo because the dancers do that when they're not working. Hit on the dancers when they're not working and the response is either a little fun or they tell you when they're working. :)
Why hit on a stripper in street clothes? I prefer that "uniform" especially if it is relaxed. Why hit on a lesbian? Some don't mind and besides it seems normal for a woman to be attracted to other women---what seems odd is women being attracted to men. My old girlfriend strongly preferred women---the joke being only because I was her boyfriend. :)
discussion comment
16 years ago
![]()
Book GuyI write it like I mean it, but mostly they just want my money.
Well, I wish President Obama success. I hope to see an extreme left wing agenda that's initially candy coated. Universal health care, higher taxes for the rich, peace with the Islamic nations on terms that make them consider the U.S. a long lost brother, full diplomatic and political relations with Cuba and perhaps reparations to pay for past U.S. crimes, modication of "predator loans" and debt forgiveness on a massive scale, a nationalization of banks and other financial institutions, massive cuts in defense spending including veterans benefits, mandatory liability and personal injury insurance for all gun owners including picture IDs and fingerprints; yes, a lot of good deeds for President Obama to get busy on. With any luck the Republicans won't find their backbone or brains.