|
"KMAN" wrote in message ... in article et, rick at wrote on 3/2/05 10:19 PM: "KMAN" wrote in message ... in article et, rick at wrote on 3/2/05 6:03 PM: snip.. You've captured it perfectly. I got so frustrated with rick's spew that I tried to pin him down and make him focus more on his wild claims about Canadian health care, and all that happened instead is he took the dishonest tactic of picking on the wording of my attempts to make him focus. ===================== No, there was no misleading by me of your lies, er wording, liarman. You made direct declarative statements that you cannot back up. I focused entirely on your lies that no 1) no one is waiting for treatment in Canada, Scumbag. You know very well what I declared was that the people in Newfoundland were not waiting for 2 1/2 years for treatment - the lie YOU were telling. But you are too big of a coward to admit it. ====================== Nope. that's not what you said Yes it is. I responded to your allegation that the people featured in the story were waiting for treatment. They aren't. And you are a scumbag for taking my statement out of that context and trying to say that I was referring to all persons in Canada. ======================== Nope. you claimed no one was waiting for treatment No. I said that the people in Newfoundland were not waiting for treatment as you had falsely claimed. Your refusal to apolgize for your dishonesty is further cementing your reputation as a coward and scumbag. ============================ Nope. That's what you are trying to explain away now because you must continue to blather on about this to deivert the discussion from your original lie, no one is dying while on wait lists, liarman. You have been proven to be a liar, and willfully ignorant. |
"KMAN" wrote in message ... in article et, rick at wrote on 3/2/05 10:21 PM: "KMAN" wrote in message ... in article et, rick at wrote on 3/2/05 5:46 PM: "KMAN" wrote in message . .. snip... === So, coward, why are you being a scumbag and refusing to name those valid and valuable purposes of assault weapons? ====================== Because, liarman, unlike you, I don't purport to be the arbiter of what is useful, valuable, or necessary. That is the perogative of eack person, liarman. Why did you say weapons also have valid and valuable purposes if you were not prepared to name them? What a coward! ================== Nope. Because, unlike you, I don't pretend to be the arbiter of what is and is not a valuable use for 'any' product. You said that assault weapons have value. That's just an empty assertion unless you are prepared to state the value. Grow up. =========================== You've claimed alot of things here in this group, and have yet to back any of those assertion up with anything but your lies. Talk about emptiness, that's the whole of your writings. Why now must everyone else bend to your ignorance, liarman? Again, what is of 'value' is different to different people. Why should I presume to speak for everyine just because you feel you can, liarman? What a weasel! =============== No weasel about it, liarman. I don't claim to be the arbiter of everyone elses ideas like you do. You said assault weapons have value. ======================= They do. Just like cars. If you can't say what that value is, then your point is lost, your argument is once again defeated, and you can go home and clean your guns. ============================= Why does my value make any difference to you, liarman. You have lost again. Again, unlike you, I don't claim to make the call for everyone else. You can play at being the god you claim you don't belive in all you want. I'm not delusional like you are, and don't even care to pretend to be god. |
Michael Daly wrote: On 1-Mar-2005, Scott Weiser wrote: Well, given that there are many examples of the various manifestations of God in the Bible, Hey dickhead - you still insist on ignoring what I wrote in favour of your bizarre interpretations. I said "no manifestations of God _as_God_" If you can't cope with that, it's your problem. Michael, if you can cope with me and humor me a little, I would like to ask you a few questions. You have addressed most of your post directly to Scott, and if you do not wish to engage me, I will understand, and respect yours and Scotts conversation. I have been watching this particular thread with interest, as I spent the last couple days frittering away my time with KMAN and rick. I saw they are at it again tonight, and I decided to deal with something that sounds much more interesting. You have been conversing with Scott since 2/21 and seem to be trying to get to some point that I am curious about, but have not been able to acertain exactly what that point is. It seems that you are saying something that is going over Scotts head or experience. I believe that he has admitted that he is not a particularly religious person, so his arguement is primarily academic. You seem to be saying something more. You have said, "no manifestations of God _as_God_", which I find to be a very intrigueing statement. Are you arguing as well from an academic position, or do you have something more in mind. I am not sure that Scott can go beyond the academics on this subject. Are you really interested, curious, or just playing head games with Scott? I have included the link to the word "theophanies", and which gives a brief study of the word. http://www.carm.org/misc/plurality.htm You say the theophanies are not really God_as_God appearing in this world, time and space. Do you have some other particular incident in mind, either past, present or future, that would accomplish the desirable and acceptable level of verifiable proof to be considered not only evidence, but God_as God revelation? Have you experienced any such incident that is inspiring this line of discussion, so as to be able to describe in a meaningful way for us? Or are you saying that it is in fact impossible, based on the separation of the spiritual realm, and the world where we now dwell, and that we are just blowing smoke if we claim such an event has ever, or will ever occur? If you could answer these questions, I would be interested in continuing with your discussion later. TnT |
Nisarel wrote:
Wilko wrote: It's called trolling... Scott has been doing that for many years, He's not very good. Nope, he isn't, but he does seem to catch unaware newbies to this group every once in a while... :-( -- Wilko van den Bergh wilko(a t)dse(d o t)nl Eindhoven The Netherlands Europe ---Look at the possibilities, don't worry about the limitations.--- http://wilko.webzone.ru/ |
BCITORGB wrote: Tink says: ============== FOCUS! He only said that some have died while waiting for a Medical Test or Procedure. ============== Tink, thanks for what you've done here; you've provided a conciliatory tone. Look, I don't know KMAN, but from his posts, I can well imagine where he was coming from (insofar as I felt the same way but was disinclined to carry on a discussion with one as one-tracked as rick). Over here, in the Great White North, inundated as we are with American media, we constantly hear the ignorant bleatings of the American right-wing. And this nonsense about people "dying while on a waiting list" is one of those bits of nonsense. So let's step back a bit. Do people die on waiting lists? Of course they do. We're talking about illnesses and medicine. How could people NOT die on waiting lists. And that applies to waiting lists in Canada, Sweden, Germany, and the United States. People die on waiting lists PERIOD. OK, we've gotten that out of the way. I'll not speak for KMAN, but from where I'm looking at the discussion, I suspect KMAN is smart enough to realise this as well. I react (I suppose KMAN does) to the nonsense we hear from south of the 49th -- it is exactly as the one article you recommended says; exceedingly long waiting lists are very rare and talk about them is just media hype. For us (and for citizens of all nations) the public debate about medicine is part economic, part ethical, and part philosophical. As you pointed out, after doing extensive reading about our system, you've learned that our system is quite good at early intervention (nobody has to ask whether or not they can afford it), it is good at providing for the poor and the indigent. And, as you so eloquently put it, good at raising the general level of health care in the populace. On principle, we believe that need, not money, should determine where you are in the waiting list. As with most systems, there is an economic component. Emphasis on one element of healthcare generally means that another aspect gets fewer resources. So, given the emphasis and benefits listed above, there are likely to be waiting lists in some other parts of the system. The question that we, as a society, have to answer is, "Are we willing to tolerate a 3 month waiting time for joint replacement surgery if it means that we'll have generally higher health standards or greater accessability for the entire populace?" We've answered "Yes". Americans continue to answer "No". To sum up: I think KMAN's responses are less "jingoistic chest thumping" as rick likes to call it, and more frustrated responses to right-wing nonsense fed by a media machine. Tink, I hope you brought this ping-ponging to and end. Thanks. frtzw906 Very good summary, and I appreciate your time and understanding. Though it appears tha K&R are still at it! Sigh! I will look forward to further dialog, and when time permits plan to research the question Doctors working for the Gov. I am also interested in cont. the discussion about MBPI. Till then, TnT |
BCITORGB wrote: Tink says: ================== No, you have alot right, I in fact have a truck full of tools, and jumper cables, and tow ropes. I have been known to stop in the middle of the central valley highway, now known as TREX, and pull astranded mororist out of the traffic during rush hour. Having done so whn they offer to pay me, I say know, but let me tell you about God's Love. ============= Now that would freak me out, Tink, but I'd be ever-so grateful for your help anyway. But this leads me to another question having to do with religion. I'm assuming, when you talk of religion, you're talking about Christianity, right? OK, I know this was kinda faddish, trendy, and perhaps corny a year or two ago, but what about that "What would Jesus do?" query? Look, here's where I'm going with this. Those of us in the center, politically (that would be left to those in the red states), always kinda liked that question. Even though we tended not to be the religious types, the "What would Jesus do?" question appealed to many of us because, well, the answer generally came out as "Whatever the socialists would do, that's what Jesus would do." Pick a social topic, Tink. Any topic. Let's say, healthcare plans. You've now read about quite a few different public policy options. "Which would Jesus choose?" Capital punishment (or not)? What would Jesus choose? And we could go on, and on, through a long laundry list of social and public policy issues. My bet is, 90% of the time (at a minimum), Jesus would come down on the side of the left-wing liberals. Whadda think, Tink? WINK The lefties love you! frtzw906 This is another great post, and I would love to go into depth, but that will have to wait till later. Briefly, capital punishment, Jesus said, "Let him that is without transgression of the law, throw the first Stone" the sick and hugry, he healed them and fed them. Now I would like to ask you a question, Jesus told us not to proselytize, but we are to witness. What does each mean, and what is the difference? Would this have any bering on my statements about God's love on RBP? TnT |
"rick" wrote in message link.net... "KMAN" wrote in message ... in article et, rick at wrote on 3/2/05 10:18 PM: "KMAN" wrote in message ... in article et, rick at wrote on 3/2/05 5:59 PM: snip... You're telling me there aren't poor people in the US in isolated or slum areas where they have a hard time getting a scan at their convenience? Get real. ==================== Another strawman, I see. We aren't talking about their 'convenience', we're talking about the convenience of the medical systam. When that 'poor' person arrives at a medical facility in need, then yes, I'm saying that they will not wait 2 1/2 years for treatment. No one is waiting for treatment. ====================== Yes, they are. Weeks months and years. Even you have agreed to that, now. Nono. Stop being dishonest. I never said no one in Canada is waiting for treatment. ================ Yes, you did. No, I didn't. I respond to your goofy claim that the people in your example were waiting 2 1/2 years for treatment when in fact they were all in current receipt of care. Stop being such a scumbag. You owe me an apology but your are too weak and too much of coward to do it. ====================== Nope. Where's yours, liarman? I responded to your allegation that the people featured in the story were waiting for treatment. They aren't. And you are a scumbag for taking my statement out of that context and trying to say that I was referring to all persons in Canada. ===================== No, you replied that no one is waiting for treatment. liarman. You owe me an apology, but you are too weak and too big of a coward to do it. +================= No, I don't. But it seems you have forgotten about your, eh liarman. Proof that people are dying in waiting lines in Canada have been presented to you, yet you are still spewing about a lie you have already taken back. Why is that, liarman? Don't want to discuss your continued willful ignorance? What happened is you blathered on about the people in Newfoundland waiting 2 1/2 years for treatment, and I responded that they are not waiting for treatment. And they aren't. So stop being a scumbag, stop being a coward, suck it up and apologize. Or are you just too weak? ======================== ROTFLMAO You really are this desperate now, aren't you, liarman? I'm not the one that was blathering about it. Yeah, you were. You were rambling on about how people were waiting 2 1/2 years for treatment in the story about people in Newfoundland. They aren't waiting 2 1/2 years for treatment, and I told you so. Then you tried to say that I was stating that no one in Canada waits for anything, which is not what I said at all. You are a scumbag. |
"rick" wrote in message link.net... "KMAN" wrote in message ... in article et, rick at wrote on 3/2/05 10:19 PM: "KMAN" wrote in message ... in article et, rick at wrote on 3/2/05 6:01 PM: "KMAN" wrote in message ... "rick" wrote in message ink.net... "BCITORGB" wrote in message ps.com... KMAN, I was pleased with the effort Tink took to get a handle on this situation. And, from my own perspective, I've done some reading about various systems and have at least a passing acquaintance with a variety of European models (I now know the difference between the Beveridge and the Bismark approaches to healthcare funding). In that sense, all of this has been useful for me. It's too bad rick could never see the value in such discourse. ==================== LOL I tried, fool. All I got was a bunch of jingoistic chest-thumping lies. Perhaps you should stop telling them, then. ===================== I didn't lie, liarman. People are on long waiting lists in Canada, and some of those people die while waiting for that treatment. Sites have been presented to you that prove this, yet you insist on your chest-thumping lies. Why is that liarman? Haven't quite gotten your refutaions together yet? I'm not lying about anything. ===================== Yes, you are, liarman. People are on long waiting lists in Canada, and some of those people die while waiting for that treatment. Sites have been presented to you that prove this, yet you insist on your chest-thumping lies. Why is that liarman? Haven't quite gotten your refutaions together yet? I don't think you've been paying attention and you are making a fool of yourself. You might want to ask Tinkerntom to point you to the post (long ago) where I conceded that the way I framed the question allowed you to meet the burden of proof I requested. ============================== Yet the proof was presented, and it proves you are a liar regardless of how you make your claim. All it proves is that I told you the people in Newfoundland were not waiting 2 1/2 years for treatment and I was right. You are a scumbag, and a coward for not admitting your dishonesty. |
"rick" wrote in message link.net... "KMAN" wrote in message ... in article et, rick at wrote on 3/2/05 10:19 PM: "KMAN" wrote in message ... in article et, rick at wrote on 3/2/05 6:03 PM: snip.. You've captured it perfectly. I got so frustrated with rick's spew that I tried to pin him down and make him focus more on his wild claims about Canadian health care, and all that happened instead is he took the dishonest tactic of picking on the wording of my attempts to make him focus. ===================== No, there was no misleading by me of your lies, er wording, liarman. You made direct declarative statements that you cannot back up. I focused entirely on your lies that no 1) no one is waiting for treatment in Canada, Scumbag. You know very well what I declared was that the people in Newfoundland were not waiting for 2 1/2 years for treatment - the lie YOU were telling. But you are too big of a coward to admit it. ====================== Nope. that's not what you said Yes it is. I responded to your allegation that the people featured in the story were waiting for treatment. They aren't. And you are a scumbag for taking my statement out of that context and trying to say that I was referring to all persons in Canada. ======================== Nope. you claimed no one was waiting for treatment No. I said that the people in Newfoundland were not waiting for treatment as you had falsely claimed. Your refusal to apolgize for your dishonesty is further cementing your reputation as a coward and scumbag. ============================ Nope. That's what you are trying to explain away now I told you the people in Newfoundland were not waiting 2 1/2 years for treatment and I was right. You are a scumbag, and a coward for not admitting your dishonesty. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:16 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com