discussion comment
6 years ago
FWIW, earlier I rejected 2 reviews. They were by TheAdvisor, (although at the time they were anonymous). One was for HiLiter and the other for Christies. They sounded like ads to me. It appears he reviews clubs throughout his travels and appears legit. Anonymously they sound like an ad. Not everyone interprets reviews the same way.
discussion comment
6 years ago
I think he means they expected him to look like them from the rear, bent over.
discussion comment
6 years ago
Why does current society feel the need to apply todays mores to judge past behaviors/culture?
discussion comment
6 years ago
![]()
Papi_ChuloMiami, FL (or the nearest big-booty club)
^Papi, If you take your head out of your ass, you can see the sky.
discussion comment
6 years ago
![]()
Papi_ChuloMiami, FL (or the nearest big-booty club)
In Arizona, you have xx days to respond to the ticket. If you do not respond, they have I believe 20 days to serve you by process server. All you need to do is take measures not to get served. If you are not served, the ticket is dismissed.
discussion comment
6 years ago
![]()
rickduganVerified and Certifiable Super-Reviewer
I had a girl leave her virginity in my car once.
discussion comment
6 years ago
![]()
flagoonerEverything written by this member is a fact.
After hearing her speak, I understand why she was only a bartender, in a booming economy after graduating with a major in economics.
discussion comment
6 years ago
![]()
flagoonerEverything written by this member is a fact.
Consider the facts on an issue-by-issue basis.
Immigration
President Trump succinctly summed up the immigration stalemate: “No issue better illustrates the divide between America’s working class and America’s political class than illegal immigration. Wealthy politicians and donors push for open borders while living their lives behind walls and gates and guards.”
Just five years ago, all 54 Senate Democrats voted for “no fewer than 700 miles” of border fencing and voted to end chain migration, end the visa lottery, and spend $46 billion on border security – more than nine times what the president is asking for now.
If the elements of this 2013 plan sound familiar, they should. President Trump has asked for these very components in an immigration deal – yet not a single Senate Democrat supports the measure.
What changed in five years? The person sitting in the Oval Office. Once content to work with President Obama on securing our border, radical Democrats now sit on the sidelines, determined to deprive the American people of safety and Trump of a political win.
Infrastructure
President Trump rightfully noted the bipartisan consensus on infrastructure. “Both parties should be able to unite for a great rebuilding of America’s crumbling infrastructure,” he said.
In the first year of the Obama presidency, every single Senate Democrat and all but seven House Democrats voted for a $787 billion infrastructure “stimulus” package that failed to stimulate our economy and also failed to rebuild our infrastructure.
In the years that followed, “more infrastructure spending” became the rallying cry of Democrats.
President Trump, immediately upon taking office, offered an infrastructure plan that was widely rejected by Democrats.
For two years, President Trump repeatedly made infrastructure overtures, only to be rejected by the left. Democrats still pay lip service to infrastructure, with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California listing it as a point of commonality. But they nevertheless continue to play political games.
Most recently, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said that climate change must be tied to any infrastructure deal – a surefire way to raise the bar and complicate any bipartisan effort at change.
Trade
“To build on our incredible economic success, one priority is paramount: reversing decades of calamitous trade policies,” President Trump said Tuesday night.
Like President Trump, Democratic leaders have often criticized President Bill Clinton’s job-hemorrhaging North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).
As far back as the 2008 Democratic primary, then-presidential candidates Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama threatened to withdraw from the agreement – a call that many Democrats echoed in the decade to follow.
It wasn’t until President Trump that words finally became action. The president successfully exited NAFTA and negotiated the far superior United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA).
Despite unprecedented labor protections, fairer agricultural provisions, and incentivizing auto production within our borders, House Democrats have indicated they may not support the new agreement.
Why? Perhaps the answer is found in an article authored by Edward Alden, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, headlined: “In the NAFTA Deal, Trump Got What Democrats Couldn’t.”
Therein lies the sad truth of Nancy Pelosi’s divided government: so consumed with disdain for the Trump presidency, Democrats have chosen to forgo the needs of the American people.
Now Democrats have a choice, described quite clearly by President Trump in his State of the Union address: “Together, we can break decades of political stalemate. We can bridge old divisions, heal old wounds, build new coalitions, forge new solutions, and unlock the extraordinary promise of America’s future. The decision is ours to make.”
discussion comment
6 years ago
![]()
flagoonerEverything written by this member is a fact.
The next 10 days should be interesting.
discussion comment
6 years ago
The problem is spending, not tax cuts. The outrage should be over govt spending and waste. Enough taxes are already paid.
discussion comment
6 years ago
If you want to whine about not getting a benefit from the tax cut, remember the stock buybacks inflate the value of stocks. Any of you that own stocks or funds have received a benefit. If you don't own stocks, then that is your fault for not having any investments. I would rather have tax cuts so the public can choose what to do with the funds, rather than tax increases where the govt chooses for me.
Sanders et all, are just upset they can't spend the funds.
And besides, it's not the tax rate that matters. It's the exemptions allowed.
discussion comment
6 years ago
The main purpose of a public corporation is to maximize the wealth of it's shareholders.
discussion comment
6 years ago
![]()
flagoonerEverything written by this member is a fact.
There are many ways to react to this.
This was over thirty years ago, times were different. Blackface was a part of comedy routines. When I was in college in the late 70's, my fraternity had Aunt Jemima parties that had large turnouts off all races. He has had a public career that does not appear to be racist. Based upon that, I do not feel he should resign.
However, due to current PC extremes brought on by liberals and their fake outrage, to be consistent he should resign. Otherwise the liberals will just show once again how hypocritical they are.
As a side note, I read that this was only uncovered because he did something to piss off the DNC and they are retaliating. It is interesting that his replacement is AA.
discussion comment
6 years ago
Out here in Phoenix, we have our "Bandaids", a club that gets good comments but has completely undesirable dancers IMO. There appears to be a lot of people more comfortable with unattractive dancers.
discussion comment
6 years ago
![]()
flagoonerEverything written by this member is a fact.
As I understand the investigation. They are looking for evidence of Trump conspiring with Russia, and are interested in his knowledge of hacked emails and their dissemination. They arrest long time friend/associate Stone for lying about his involvement with the hacked emails and their source (WikiLeaks).
So, if Trump did have anything to do with Russia and the emails, why would Stone need to be associating with WikiLeaks?
discussion comment
6 years ago
![]()
rickduganVerified and Certifiable Super-Reviewer
I still can't believe there is animosity over a review that pretty much was in line with other reviews, and had very little impact on over all scoring. I tend to agree with the Dr., when I walk into a shit hole, it doesn't take long to realize it.
discussion comment
6 years ago
I like to give my fave a brownie, and have her come back and dance for me in an hour.
discussion comment
6 years ago
![]()
flagoonerEverything written by this member is a fact.
These millennials are more than likely the children of your generation.
discussion comment
6 years ago
![]()
founderslip a dollar in her g-string for me
I don't read the front room. I log in to see reviews and VIP comments. You need to do what makes this easiest for you to administer. I don't think losing the front room would have any material impact on your growth. TUSCL seemed to be doing well before the excessive trolling.
With regard to DC9428. I think he/she needs to realize he/she is participating in a forum with a lot of people with similar viewpoints on SC life, discussing their opinions and viewpoints. He/she walks in with his/her beliefs which are contrary to the general consensus, and doesn't realize that he/she is being the loud obnoxious person in the room. It doesn't mean that he/she is wrong, it just means he/she is being the loud obnoxious person in the room.
discussion comment
6 years ago
![]()
founderslip a dollar in her g-string for me
Closing the front room would either cause the trolls to leave TUSCL, or just infiltrate the VIP. The only viable option IMO is to develop a method where you become aware of the trolls and extinguish them as you did Icey Loo.
discussion comment
6 years ago
![]()
IceyI put your ATF on a winning team
Depends on my mood, I always have a variety on hand.
discussion comment
6 years ago
![]()
rickduganVerified and Certifiable Super-Reviewer
What I meant to state is that Dr Evil is one of 84 reviews. His unweighted impact is around 1.2%. It would take significant weighting to make any impact on the total to move by more than .20 considering past reviewer totals.
discussion comment
6 years ago
![]()
rickduganVerified and Certifiable Super-Reviewer
I seem to have a little free time today, so here goes.
reviews ave
15 6.00
51 7.66
33 7.00
5 6.30
36 7.00
114 3.67
55 5.30
14 6.30
14 4.67
36 8.30
total 373 62.2 "= 6.22 avg rating unweighted
The above table is from the 10 prior reviews to the review in question, listing # of reviews by reviewer and their average rating.
Average reviews per reviewer is 37.3. Reviews by Dr Evil=84. Again, this is a stupid argument, and the impact by Dr Evil is minimal.
discussion comment
6 years ago
![]()
rickduganVerified and Certifiable Super-Reviewer
This has got to be one of the stupidest arguments I have seen in a long time. You are arguing over subjective interpretations/opinions, not facts.
I have been in many clubs that have sucked at certain times of the week, only to have them excel at others. The review is a snapshot of that point in time based upon the reviewers observations/expectations.
In the grand scheme of things, the 3 ratings across the board by my calculations probably affected the total cumulative rating by less than .20.
This is hardly enough impact on the rating to get anyone's panties in a bunch
discussion comment
6 years ago
There are thousands of so called professionals mostly privy to the same information, although not always at the same time. It comes down to who's quickest, and the amount of subjective interpretation of the data. The example presented by FTS is one of thousands of analysis of longer term cycles of interest rates and the market.