Maybe it's just your ability to communicate which is awful. Though your inability to discern clear points questions your capacity for logic as well. Your lack of interest in discussion (completely ignoring points, equivocating over insignificant nonsense), while whining about how it's "seemingly impossible to get a constructive conversation going" suggests a rather juvenile personality. You never made any remote attempt to have a legitimate discussion. Whining that you're a victim because nobody is having a constructive conversation with you is just stupid.

You made it very clear you have absolutely no understanding of free market principles and how they increase production, increase quality, and lower prices--resulting in a higher standard of living for all members of a society. How can anyone with a complete lack of this economic/political/historical education talk about something like healthcare? You can't. You've admitted as much. And, on top of that, you haven't tried.

With gems like this: (which I've already responded to)
"I don't know exactly how it works but health care insurance providers must also have to make the same judgment when deciding which treatments they will fund and which they won't. I highlighted a system for making or guiding this decision, which you have dogmatically criticised but you have not backed any alternative."

How is one to respond to someone so ridiculously ignorant in a "constructive" way? You obviously have no interest in learning anything about what you're talking about (healthcare, free market vs socialism) or you would have started to learn _any_thing before now. If you need an explanation of how free markets make better decisions and provide for people better than socialist systems, just give me a break and stop pretending you're remotely capable of/want a "constructive" conversation.

I've called you out on specific blunders repeatedly. I made no appeal to authority, only what I was directly quoting and responding to.

Try harder. You bore me.

I disagree. Your subjective judgement of "bad" language insults us, the readers of the forum.

Einstein,

If you're a candidate, you're a public figure. There's no reason to withhold that information except that you're not a real candidate nor a capable forum-poster.

If you can't stand up for yourself on a forum, maybe politics isn't for you.

*****

dpenguins,

A political candidate's official website is not personal contact information. Any forum banning the posting of a candidate's official page is just babysitting them because they're childish and not a real candidate.

I'm confused. You seem to think Romney is very different than Obama.

Both parties agree that the fed should rape the Amerikan people annually.

Both parties agree that tax law should be atrociously complex so that loopholes can be purchased and placed in without much attention.

Both parties agree that the federal government should either be outlawing or providing various bedroom and pregnancy services--For or against, they all want the federal government involved.

Both parties agree that you should be monitored and even held prisoner for an indefinite amount of time without a warrant. Both parties agree that bailouts are good for getting bribes and campaign cash, so they're desirable.

Both parties agree that you, Amerikan citizens, are stupid and should be talked to like dumb children.

Both parties agree that Amerika should send its young men and women to die to meddle in foreign affairs, though the Amerikan politicians running such efforts have historically and consistently proven they're far too inept to achieve any desirable results anywhere--ever.

Both parties agree that social welfare programs are best designed to buy votes, not to help people.

Both parties agree that social welfare programs are best designed to buy votes, even when it comes to encouraging negative and unhealthy behaviors.

Both parties agree that you should be taxed heavily, with only slight equivocation on the exact rates by a few % debated.

I'm not seeing the drastic differences which result in Romney being this awesome president who fights corruption and fixes our tax laws. I agree he'll be considerably less bad than Obama, but he's hardly a desirable candidate. Even on issues like the bedroom police where you want him to to protect you from your closet homosexual behavior, he's just paying your views lip service to con you out of your vote; he just changes his position to whatever polls well at the moment. He's not going to take actions on issues which the country is relatively evenly split over. That'd lose votes.

I'm just saying it's a no-brainer for him to up cubersecurity/hacking. In the worst event, he'll just deny it. In the best event, it'll get something done. Considering that he's too much of an amateur to get anything done by any other means, it's pure win for him to support it and up it.

That said, Israel probably did it. But he's still a dirty piece of shit.

The Yell,

It's the fed printing and just GIVING AWAY money to European banks I object to [Edit: the most]. This is more inflation coming down the pipe which we don't deserve and are getting nothing for.

JP Morgan is a very profitable company overall--They're not in the red, even with that loss; the big stink made over their relatively small loses was just a red herring that socialists wanted to whine about to deflect from the state of the economy. I do agree, however, that in general bailouts encourage stupid behavior and are very bad for the economy.

I love how the justice department is questioning the legitimacy of the lists because of a few supposed errors, while the department of homeland security refuses to assist them in verifying their lists.

You're just mad that they can afford food.

Yeah, I'm not sure what we're getting for the trillions the fed has given to European banks. I think it might be because we're not actually getting anything for it; our corrupt overlords and babysitters are enriching themselves with the kickbacks.

I don't entirely agree with Paul on abortion; but he's consistent in his less-government position, and it has nothing to do with "pork" or spending.

Buy 2 16oz bottles for 32 instead of 24!

Not only is he trying to be a babysitter, he's a shitty one.

But Einstein can't edit it! He'll just do what he always does and ignore it.