Mike comments to Scott:
=============
You're making this up as you go along.
==================

It's amazing isn't it. There's plenty wrong with our healthcare system
(and as we've also observed, all other healthcare systems), but Scott
has yet to identify the real issues.

Every time he's confronted by real, everyday, practical questions about
how he thinks the system works, he starts making stuff up. TOO FUNNY!

frtzw906

A Usenet persona calling itself BCITORGB wrote:

Mike comments to Scott:
=============
You're making this up as you go along.
==================

It's amazing isn't it. There's plenty wrong with our healthcare system
(and as we've also observed, all other healthcare systems), but Scott
has yet to identify the real issues.

Every time he's confronted by real, everyday, practical questions about
how he thinks the system works, he starts making stuff up. TOO FUNNY!

And yet you can't refute them. Interesting.

--
Regards,
Scott Weiser

"I love the Internet, I no longer have to depend on
friends, family and co-workers, I can annoy people WORLDWIDE!" TM

© 2005 Scott Weiser

Scott asserts:
==============
Every time he's confronted by real, everyday, practical questions
about
how he thinks the system works, he starts making stuff up. TOO FUNNY!

And yet you can't refute them. Interesting.
=================

Have done so every time. And every one gets batted right out of the
ballpark.

But that's OK. At least you're getting an education about the Cnadian
system. Good on USENET.

frtzw906

A Usenet persona calling itself BCITORGB wrote:

Scott asserts:
==============
Every time he's confronted by real, everyday, practical questions
about
how he thinks the system works, he starts making stuff up. TOO FUNNY!

And yet you can't refute them. Interesting.
=================

Have done so every time. And every one gets batted right out of the
ballpark.

Nah. You just evade the issues with pettifoggery.


But that's OK. At least you're getting an education about the Cnadian
system. Good on USENET.

Well, somebody's getting an education anyway.

--
Regards,
Scott Weiser

"I love the Internet, I no longer have to depend on
friends, family and co-workers, I can annoy people WORLDWIDE!" TM

© 2005 Scott Weiser

Scott:
================
Well, somebody's getting an education anyway.
==================

No thanks required. Think nothing of it.

frtzw906

A Usenet persona calling itself BCITORGB wrote:

Scott:
================
Well, somebody's getting an education anyway.
==================

No thanks required. Think nothing of it.

You're quite welcome anyway.

Don't forget what my purpose here is. It's to stimulate debate, and by doing
so, cause people to think. I don¹t much care *what* they think, so long as
they exercise some mentation. That's why I'm very, very hard to insult and I
don't really mind being wrong (though I seldom am). I never take it
personally because I know that sometimes it necessary to pierce the Usenet
persona to get to the real truths involved, and sometimes that takes
vigorous and even contumacious debate to get beyond the sneering veneer and
to sort out the Netwits (of whom there are many) from those with some
modicum of wit and intelligence (who can be quite hard to find).

And most of my intended audience are the lurkers, of whom there are also
many, if my private email is any indicator, who enjoy the give and take.

--
Regards,
Scott Weiser

"I love the Internet, I no longer have to depend on
friends, family and co-workers, I can annoy people WORLDWIDE!" TM

© 2005 Scott Weiser

Scott says:
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3 D
Don't forget what my purpose here is. It's to stimulate debate, and by
doing
so, cause people to think. I don=B9t much care *what* they think, so
long as
they exercise some mentation. That's why I'm very, very hard to insult
and I
don't really mind being wrong (though I seldom am). I never take it
personally because I know that sometimes it necessary to pierce the
Usenet
persona to get to the real truths involved, and sometimes that takes
vigorous and even contumacious debate to get beyond the sneering veneer
and
to sort out the Netwits (of whom there are many) from those with some
modicum of wit and intelligence (who can be quite hard to find).

And most of my intended audience are the lurkers, of whom there are
also
many, if my private email is any indicator, who enjoy the give and
take.
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3 D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D

I think that's Scott's way of saying, "Whoops! I was wrong on that
issue. frtzw906 was right."

Thanks, Scott.

frtzw906

On 31-Mar-2005, Scott Weiser wrote:

Don't forget what my purpose here is. It's to stimulate debate, and by doing
so, cause people to think.

Maybe you should consider lying less and telling the truth more.

I don't really mind being wrong (though I seldom am)

You're never willing to admit you're wrong. That's not the same
thing.

And most of my intended audience are the lurkers, of whom there are also
many

Which is why we continue to point out your lies and bull****.

Mike

On 31-Mar-2005, Scott Weiser wrote:

Nah. You just evade the issues with pettifoggery

And you have evaded every demand that you actually prove
your claims. You lie and make things up and then try
to accuse others of the same thing. You're the one
living in a dream world.

Mike

Mike! Mike!

According to my news client, you posted responses to SW at 1:51, 1:56,
1:59, 2:03, and 2:08. And that's just so far this afternoon. After the
dozens (hundreds?) of these exchanges, do you see any change at all in
SW? It's said that one of the hallmarks of insanity is to keep repeating
the same behavior in the belief that the results will change. Odds are
against you, man. Give it up while you still have some sanity to cling to.

Of course, since SW, wilf, and TnT are already in my bit bucket, if you
stop there won't be any r.b.p coming into my computer at all.

--
Steve Cramer
Athens, GA