Sicko the Mmoore movie

[jch159]

each peson is responsible to pay out of their OWN pockets like you do for your groceries ( unless your on welfare) your auto etc

The people who cannot legitimatley pay get taken care of by the SELF-APPOINTED CHARITES
the ones who have tax-free status so they can take care of the sick the weak etc

Only the weak/ the bullies look to force others to pay for them

[kwithers2000]

jch. Enough already, heavens. Although I do not agree with you, I very much believe that you have a right to your opinion and that everyone's opinion is of equal value. But good heavens you bring me to the limit of own tolerance even.

Bold, italic, underlined, back-to-back postings, emotionally charged rebuttals, incomplete thoughts, run-on sentences, dangling participles ... your emotions keep you from even forming coherent sentences half the time. Your posts are like reading a strange combination of ADD and bi-polar disorder.

Perhaps maybe possibly potentially give-it-a-try-you-might-like-it ... you could just relax, take a breather, lets others talk? Maybe if that goes well you could even give others a chance to be interested in the topic and post their opinions without immediately criticizing them?

[Boss Man]

Nope, didn't think you'd have anything to say about your own damning insights.

I didn't want to see anymore iron fisted rhetoric Jch. Imposing a view isn't Democracy, it's akin to Nazi'ism, Communism, and Apartheid.

A viewpoint only can retain validity, when it's not consistantly made, to try and be the over-riding factor.

You can't convert people to a viewpoint they don't share, the more you make it, or reword it, or re jig it, or highlight what you believe are specific salient extracts in bold.

You haven't even had the cahonies to come on here, and do what I suggested. Which was to profer forward your own ideas about conteraction of your damnation.

If you're going to continuously labour a point with no opposing response, I.E. how to deal with the problem, then your beefing looks weak.

A viewpoint in discussion can be be made, other viewpoints questioned, but repetition of the same point, eventually, (as I did), begs the question "okay what would YOU do about it", so in that instance you have to put up, or lose face.

So I'll say it again. Give me your take, on how your viewpoint should be dealt with, by the authority figures. What should they do or combat what you see as a huge social ill / menace?

Otherwise this discussion is closed, and if you want to accuse me of being Stalinistic, or acting with similar methods to those listed earlier, fine, but you'll be wrong.

Only you can return it to a discussion, and not prevent it becoming a one way tirade.

[jch159]

Your need to be popular ........ another sign of weakness.

I dont expect weak people to see the light.
Its great if they do but I dont expect the commonman to get it

If you or others dont agree I dont have a problemn with it but those that dont agree with me have a problem with it.

Like I said I love the freedom to disagree

You and your minions dont.
Have a good life

[Boss Man]

Your need to be popular ........ another sign of weakness

I dont expect weak people to see the light.
Its great if they do but I dont expect the commonman to get it

If you or others dont agree I dont have a problemn with it but those that dont agree with me have a problem with it.

Like I said I love the freedom to disagree

You and your minions dont.
Have a good life

Sorry I don't need to be popular. I can garner respect from whomsoever chooses to show it to me. I just need to do the right things, to achieve that, same as others on here do.

That's what most people on here, myself included do, do. You it would seem don't.

The only weakness here, is your inability to accept other viewpoints, or accept that having another viewpoint, DOESN'T weaken a persons social standing, just because your viewpoint is obviously so right, any other viewpoint can't have validity, in the face of such overwhelming validity from yours.

So you're critiquing yourself, by saying weak people don't see the light. The light being the ability to discuss, not impose viewpoints, and believe that no one viewpoint, can have overwhelming, and overriding presedence in any one discussion. Even if there is a hierarchy sometimes with different views, no view can be vastly superior to another.

Also by not saying, (when asked twice), how you'd tackle the things you continuously groused about, you invalidated your constant labouring of the point. You didn't back yourself up, so you've now lost face, and garnered little respect for it, almost as sure as Eggs is Eggs.

Your weaknesses relating to deliberation of a point therefore, prove that you're in denial, though you wouldn't be able to accept that, as it's a viewpoint not made by you, but may well carry more validity, than your attempts to mass convert people, to an unpopular poorly subscribed viewpoint.

You had something worth saying initially, but now you don't. You killed your own debate, and no doubt learnt nothing from it, thereby bringing into question whether you should have started it in the first, place as then you wouldn't have looked so intolerant, and largely unable to understand others, who differ expressively to you, had you not started a debate that showed that.

Touch luck dude.

P.S. calling others the Commonman, implies you are elevated above others, with your fantastically conceived uber views. A delusion of grandeur for which seeing the light is the only cure.

Though as you're clearly blind to said light, you'll be as damned for the rest of your life, as this discussion was to fail.

Oh well.