THE POLITICAL ARENA!!! Political Gladiators Inside!!

[Hawk]

Did anyone watch Obama's speech tonight? I know you fans of his did, you were probably there on the edge of your seats as he spoke and clapped after every word.

It was the same crap he said before. Nothing more than a raw raw for unions and illegal aliens. The man can talk, but he has no sense of action.

Why do you even post shit? You have the record for "most unnecessary posts" on rockpage. Good God you're pathetic.

He is an ass of the highest degree. Uses space to say nothing. He is consistent at that. No substance, just a parrot. In fact, I know parrots with a greater vocabulary... He thinks I call him stupid because I disagree with him. If he actually provided something of substance I would / could respect that. But just negative whining / crying insulting commenting shit. TYPICAL UNIMFORMED REPUBLICAN VOTER.

[Hawk]

Why would anyone read something from a left wing wacko blog? Only for the kool-aid drinkers.

Never mind the truth, I already know everythingjoe.

Take off the damn blinders. It was written by a Republican who is still a Republican and does not like Obama policies...

That's how you right wingers are fooled so damn easily. Sad...very sad indeed...

[Hawk]

Yep Bill, that pretty much sums it up. Of course, you should be able to find a democrat staffer who could write an equally compelling expose on the equally sinister democrat tactics.

And so it continues and the government is now so big that it has taken a life of its own and is completely unmanageable by either party. It fails completely in many of its most basic constitutional duties and also fails miserably at many that aren't so constitutional. The Great Society has gone bust!

One thing about this guy, though. If he thinks that we aren't in for a financial meltdown at the present rate of government borrowing, he's tripping. The fed can only hold rates so low for so long. When the government borrows all that people are willing to lend them at 0-4% and rates snap back up, its depression time.

The problem is not the government. The problem is the people who bought them. The people who bought congress are running / ruining the country.

Term Limits and no lobby money and no super packs...problem solved.

[lonewolf]

Yep Bill, that pretty much sums it up. Of course, you should be able to find a democrat staffer who could write an equally compelling expose on the equally sinister democrat tactics.

And so it continues and the government is now so big that it has taken a life of its own and is completely unmanageable by either party. It fails completely in many of its most basic constitutional duties and also fails miserably at many that aren't so constitutional. The Great Society has gone bust!

One thing about this guy, though. If he thinks that we aren't in for a financial meltdown at the present rate of government borrowing, he's tripping. The fed can only hold rates so low for so long. When the government borrows all that people are willing to lend them at 0-4% and rates snap back up, its depression time.

The problem is not the government. The problem is the people who bought them. The people who bought congress are running / ruining the country.

Term Limits and no lobby money and no super packs...problem solved.

Those solutions are unconstitutional. Good luck with an amendment.

I like the idea of forcing legislators to put their money in a blind trust like the President has to do. Many influence peddlers will think twice about running for office.

[f.sciarrillo]

Did anyone watch Obama's speech tonight? I know you fans of his did, you were probably there on the edge of your seats as he spoke and clapped after every word.

It was the same crap he said before. Nothing more than a raw raw for unions and illegal aliens. The man can talk, but he has no sense of action.

Why do you even post shit? You have the record for "most unnecessary posts" on rockpage. Good God you're pathetic.

Because I know it gets people like Bill going And thank you for the compliment, all you do is make bitching posts, so I guess we are even

[f.sciarrillo]

He is an ass of the highest degree. Uses space to say nothing. He is consistent at that. No substance, just a parrot. In fact, I know parrots with a greater vocabulary... He thinks I call him stupid because I disagree with him. If he actually provided something of substance I would / could respect that. But just negative whining / crying insulting commenting shit. TYPICAL UNIMFORMED REPUBLICAN VOTER.

Wow, more civility. Good job, Bill. You impress me more every day. You show more and more just how the left has no civility. Keep up the good work. You are doing a fantastic job.

[Hawk]

Did anyone watch Obama's speech tonight? I know you fans of his did, you were probably there on the edge of your seats as he spoke and clapped after every word.

It was the same crap he said before. Nothing more than a raw raw for unions and illegal aliens. The man can talk, but he has no sense of action.

Why do you even post shit? You have the record for "most unnecessary posts" on rockpage. Good God you're pathetic.

Because I know it gets people like Bill going And thank you for the compliment, all you do is make bitching posts, so I guess we are even

Translation:
Frank: "I'm a f'n troll !"

Mr. Civility, I suppose trolling is a civil way to discuss politics. Do you ever get tired of proving what an _________you are ?

[Hawk]

He is an ass of the highest degree. Uses space to say nothing. He is consistent at that. No substance, just a parrot. In fact, I know parrots with a greater vocabulary... He thinks I call him stupid because I disagree with him. If he actually provided something of substance I would / could respect that. But just negative whining / crying insulting commenting shit. TYPICAL UNIMFORMED REPUBLICAN VOTER.

Wow, more civility. Good job, Bill. You impress me more every day. You show more and more just how the left has no civility. Keep up the good work. You are doing a fantastic job.

I didn't say anything there that's not true...

BTW I'm waiting. Can I talk to the people you know from Canada ?

[f.sciarrillo]

He is an ass of the highest degree. Uses space to say nothing. He is consistent at that. No substance, just a parrot. In fact, I know parrots with a greater vocabulary... He thinks I call him stupid because I disagree with him. If he actually provided something of substance I would / could respect that. But just negative whining / crying insulting commenting shit. TYPICAL UNIMFORMED REPUBLICAN VOTER.

Wow, more civility. Good job, Bill. You impress me more every day. You show more and more just how the left has no civility. Keep up the good work. You are doing a fantastic job.

I didn't say anything there that's not true...

BTW I'm waiting. Can I talk to the people you know from Canada ?

You are the most uncivil person on this forum. The people I know from Canada wouldn't want to talk to you. Besides, you wouldn't be able to convince them that their socialized health plan, the one you love so much, is good anyhow. Especially since they know so much more about it than you ever will.

I tell you what, why don't you move to Canada and get on it, then you can let us know what you think. Then since you love socialism so much, you would probably rave about it.

By the way, it takes an ass to know an ass. You can go back to your normal MSNBC programming now.

[Hawk]

Wow, more civility. Good job, Bill. You impress me more every day. You show more and more just how the left has no civility. Keep up the good work. You are doing a fantastic job.

I didn't say anything there that's not true...

BTW I'm waiting. Can I talk to the people you know from Canada ?

You are the most uncivil person on this forum. The people I know from Canada wouldn't want to talk to you. Besides, you wouldn't be able to convince them that their socialized health plan, the one you love so much, is good anyhow. Especially since they know so much more about it than you ever will.

I tell you what, why don't you move to Canada and get on it, then you can let us know what you think. Then since you love socialism so much, you would probably rave about it.

By the way, it takes an ass to know an ass. You can go back to your normal MSNBC programming now.

Really, I would only like to ask them about it to educate myself, not to attack it in any way. Please put me in touch with them. Does Randy know them ?

[Hawk]

Frank, have you read the Michael Lofton article ?

[Hawk]

BTW, I never claimed to be civil. So if you attack it, where is the civility in trolling Frank ?

[f.sciarrillo]

I am glad that you admit that you are uncivil. And no my brother does not know them. If you want to educate yourself, then read up on it and then look at the mixed views. From there you will make your own conclusion (I already know which one you will take). I am sure you can find something on it, even something that says how great it is, as well as something that says how terrible it is. Remember that Google is your friend.

[Hawk]

What do we pay for, anyway?As a Canadian living in the United States for the past 17 years, I am frequently asked by Americans and Canadians alike to declare one health care system as the better one.

Often I'll avoid answering, regardless of the questioner's nationality. To choose one or the other system usually translates into a heated discussion of each one's merits, pitfalls, and an intense recitation of commonly cited statistical comparisons of the two systems.

Because if the only way we compared the two systems was with statistics, there is a clear victor. It is becoming increasingly more difficult to dispute the fact that Canada spends less money on health care to get better outcomes.

Yet, the debate rages on. Indeed, it has reached a fever pitch since President Barack Obama took office, with Americans either dreading or hoping for the dawn of a single-payer health care system. Opponents of such a system cite Canada as the best example of what not to do, while proponents laud that very same Canadian system as the answer to all of America's health care problems. Frankly, both sides often get things wrong when trotting out Canada to further their respective arguments.

As America comes to grips with the reality that changes are desperately needed within its health care infrastructure, it might prove useful to first debunk some myths about the Canadian system.

Myth: Taxes in Canada are extremely high, mostly because of national health care.

In actuality, taxes are nearly equal on both sides of the border. Overall, Canada's taxes are slightly higher than those in the U.S. However, Canadians are afforded many benefits for their tax dollars, even beyond health care (e.g., tax credits, family allowance, cheaper higher education), so the end result is a wash. At the end of the day, the average after-tax income of Canadian workers is equal to about 82 percent of their gross pay. In the U.S., that average is 81.9 percent.

Myth: Canada's health care system is a cumbersome bureaucracy.

The U.S. has the most bureaucratic health care system in the world. More than 31 percent of every dollar spent on health care in the U.S. goes to paperwork, overhead, CEO salaries, profits, etc. The provincial single-payer system in Canada operates with just a 1 percent overhead. Think about it. It is not necessary to spend a huge amount of money to decide who gets care and who doesn't when everybody is covered.

Myth: The Canadian system is significantly more expensive than that of the U.S.Ten percent of Canada's GDP is spent on health care for 100 percent of the population. The U.S. spends 17 percent of its GDP but 15 percent of its population has no coverage whatsoever and millions of others have inadequate coverage. In essence, the U.S. system is considerably more expensive than Canada's. Part of the reason for this is uninsured and underinsured people in the U.S. still get sick and eventually seek care. People who cannot afford care wait until advanced stages of an illness to see a doctor and then do so through emergency rooms, which cost considerably more than primary care services.

What the American taxpayer may not realize is that such care costs about $45 billion per year, and someone has to pay it. This is why insurance premiums increase every year for insured patients while co-pays and deductibles also rise rapidly.

Myth: Canada's government decides who gets health care and when they get it.While HMOs and other private medical insurers in the U.S. do indeed make such decisions, the only people in Canada to do so are physicians. In Canada, the government has absolutely no say in who gets care or how they get it. Medical decisions are left entirely up to doctors, as they should be.

There are no requirements for pre-authorization whatsoever. If your family doctor says you need an MRI, you get one. In the U.S., if an insurance administrator says you are not getting an MRI, you don't get one no matter what your doctor thinks — unless, of course, you have the money to cover the cost.

Myth: There are long waits for care, which compromise access to care.There are no waits for urgent or primary care in Canada. There are reasonable waits for most specialists' care, and much longer waits for elective surgery. Yes, there are those instances where a patient can wait up to a month for radiation therapy for breast cancer or prostate cancer, for example. However, the wait has nothing to do with money per se, but everything to do with the lack of radiation therapists. Despite such waits, however, it is noteworthy that Canada boasts lower incident and mortality rates than the U.S. for all cancers combined, according to the U.S. Cancer Statistics Working Group and the Canadian Cancer Society. Moreover, fewer Canadians (11.3 percent) than Americans (14.4 percent) admit unmet health care needs.

Myth: Canadians are paying out of pocket to come to the U.S. for medical care.Most patients who come from Canada to the U.S. for health care are those whose costs are covered by the Canadian governments. If a Canadian goes outside of the country to get services that are deemed medically necessary, not experimental, and are not available at home for whatever reason (e.g., shortage or absence of high tech medical equipment; a longer wait for service than is medically prudent; or lack of physician expertise), the provincial government where you live fully funds your care. Those patients who do come to the U.S. for care and pay out of pocket are those who perceive their care to be more urgent than it likely is.

Myth: Canada is a socialized health care system in which the government runs hospitals and where doctors work for the government.Princeton University health economist Uwe Reinhardt​ says single-payer systems are not "socialized medicine" but "social insurance" systems because doctors work in the private sector while their pay comes from a public source. Most physicians in Canada are self-employed. They are not employees of the government nor are they accountable to the government. Doctors are accountable to their patients only. More than 90 percent of physicians in Canada are paid on a fee-for-service basis. Claims are submitted to a single provincial health care plan for reimbursement, whereas in the U.S., claims are submitted to a multitude of insurance providers. Moreover, Canadian hospitals are controlled by private boards and/or regional health authorities rather than being part of or run by the government.

Myth: There aren't enough doctors in Canada.

From a purely statistical standpoint, there are enough physicians in Canada to meet the health care needs of its people. But most doctors practice in large urban areas, leaving rural areas with bona fide shortages. This situation is no different than that being experienced in the U.S. Simply training and employing more doctors is not likely to have any significant impact on this specific problem. Whatever issues there are with having an adequate number of doctors in any one geographical area, they have nothing to do with the single-payer system.

And these are just some of the myths about the Canadian health care system. While emulating the Canadian system will likely not fix U.S. health care, it probably isn't the big bad "socialist" bogeyman it has been made out to be.

It is not a perfect system, but it has its merits. For people like my 55-year-old Aunt Betty, who has been waiting for 14 months for knee-replacement surgery due to a long history of arthritis, it is the superior system. Her $35,000-plus surgery is finally scheduled for next month. She has been in pain, and her quality of life has been compromised. However, there is a light at the end of the tunnel. Aunt Betty — who lives on a fixed income and could never afford private health insurance, much less the cost of the surgery and requisite follow-up care — will soon sport a new, high-tech knee. Waiting 14 months for the procedure is easy when the alternative is living in pain for the rest of your life.

Rhonda Hackett of Castle Rock is a clinical psychologist.



Read more: Debunking Canadian health care myths - The Denver Post http://www.denverpost.com/opinion/ci_12 ... z1XSKdSBT6
Read The Denver Post's Terms of Use of its content: http://www.denverpost.com/termsofuse

[Hawk]

Frank, have you read the Michael Lofgren article ?

Would you read the Canadian health article and tell me what your Canadian friends say ?

Does your step dad or your sister know the Canadians ?

If you troll while seeking civility, doesn't that make you a hypocrite ?

What is your opinion on the Republican who doesn't want to continue the payroll tax cuts because we can't borrow money to pay for it, yet doesn't want to let the Bush tax cuts to the rich rescind ? And doesn't worry about borrowing to placate the rich ? A hypocrite ?

[Banned]

Why would anyone read something from a left wing wacko blog? Only for the kool-aid drinkers.

Never mind the truth, I already know everythingjoe.

Take off the damn blinders. It was written by a Republican who is still a Republican and does not like Obama policies...

That's how you right wingers are fooled so damn easily. Sad...very sad indeed...

Bill, your buddy johnny criticizes any source he feels is from a right wing blog. I was using the same criteria on your left wing source. Blame johnny.

Oh, and one more time (this is probably the 30th time I've told you) I am not a right winger, I am a libertarian. I want the wars in the Middle East ended, and that is not a right wing position as you know.

[Hawk]

Why would anyone read something from a left wing wacko blog? Only for the kool-aid drinkers.

Never mind the truth, I already know everythingjoe.

Take off the damn blinders. It was written by a Republican who is still a Republican and does not like Obama policies...

That's how you right wingers are fooled so damn easily. Sad...very sad indeed...

Bill, your buddy johnny criticizes any source he feels is from a right wing blog. I was using the same criteria on your left wing source. Blame johnny.

Oh, and one more time (this is probably the 30th time I've told you) I am not a right winger, I am a libertarian. I want the wars in the Middle East ended, and that is not a right wing position as you know.

Libertarian isn't right wing ?

[Banned]

What part of this sentence did you not understand?...


"I want the wars in the Middle East ended, and that is not a right wing position as you know."

[Hawk]

What part of this sentence did you not understand?...


"I want the wars in the Middle East ended, and that is not a right wing position as you know."

Why is Ron Paul a Republican. Perhaps the right wing has MANY things in common with Libertarianism ?

Let's make a list of things Liberterians support that is uncommon among right wingers. Oh, you already have... Thanks.

[songsmith]

Bill, your buddy johnny criticizes any source he feels is from a right wing blog. I was using the same criteria on your left wing source. Blame johnny.
.

Incorrect-a-mundo. I do not criticize any source I FEEL is from a right-wing blog.

I discredit any source that IS a right-wing blog.

But if it's okay for everyone to post stuff from HuffPo, MoJo, or Daily Kos, and you won't discredit that, I will stop poking holes in your balloons.
Is that okay, Joe, can people have your permission to quote left-wing opinion as source? I know it's your personal website, can they do that?

There is no way joe read the entire article. Even if anyone did (I did), nobody has any definite response to it, because it's so airtight. Every possible angle of attack has been covered, and when criticizing the right, all angles must be covered, or else the joes of the world will pound some minor detail. (I know this firsthand, it's why they criticize my wordiness. I have to be, or they run with whatever tiny omission they can) This guy knows the inner workings of the highest echelons of the Right, and he had to cross all the T's and dot all the I's, which he did in spades.
I like that as a conservative, he recognizes what conservatism has become. That's so refreshing, from the normal laziness and self-importance.

I've been going back in the Rockpage General Discussion archives the last few days... I'm in mid-2004 right now, pre-ucjoe. The discussion was spirited, with the occasional troll cheerleading for GW Bush and Iraq War, but there's none of the sustained, joe-style control-freak hatred. People still loved their country. Retrospect shows us that the liberals were mostly correct, about Bush AND Iraq, but there's been very little I-told-you-so since... in fact, I think there should be far more of that. It wasn't always civil back then, but nobody fell to sabotaging relationships, or internet stalking, etc. People WANTED to be in a discussion. FatVin, ImGrimm, Lonewolf, RTD, myself... we all disagreed with one another, but had no problem shaking a guy's hand at a gig the next day.
Really, who (on either side) wants to attempt a give & take conversation now? It's mostly just joe oozing venom, and reaction to it. I'm sure that is his final objective, to make sure nobody "gets away with" posting something he doesn't agree with. To me, that's what talkshow conservatives are all about.[/b][/u]

[bassist_25]

I've been going back in the Rockpage General Discussion archives the last few days... I'm in mid-2004 right now, pre-ucjoe. The discussion was spirited, with the occasional troll cheerleading for GW Bush and Iraq War, but there's none of the sustained, joe-style control-freak hatred. People still loved their country. Retrospect shows us that the liberals were mostly correct, about Bush AND Iraq, but there's been very little I-told-you-so since... in fact, I think there should be far more of that. It wasn't always civil back then, but nobody fell to sabotaging relationships, or internet stalking, etc. People WANTED to be in a discussion. FatVin, ImGrimm, Lonewolf, RTD, myself... we all disagreed with one another, but had no problem shaking a guy's hand at a gig the next day.
Really, who (on either side) wants to attempt a give & take conversation now? It's mostly just joe oozing venom, and reaction to it. I'm sure that is his final objective, to make sure nobody "gets away with" posting something he doesn't agree with. To me, that's what talkshow conservatives are all about.

That's why I don't take part in these conversations anymore. I do read them and will occasionally post if something is said that is so wrong I can't let the ignorance exist here in cyberspace without being unrebutted (like all of the rectal discourse in the EEOC thread, which I had to call out because it's relevant to my daygig career).

I do lament the days of Rockpage when there were a lot more working musicians on the site, talking about music stuff. But the political stuff was actually interesting back then.

[Banned]

What part of this sentence did you not understand?...


"I want the wars in the Middle East ended, and that is not a right wing position as you know."

Why is Ron Paul a Republican. Perhaps the right wing has MANY things in common with Libertarianism ?

Let's make a list of things Liberterians support that is uncommon among right wingers. Oh, you already have... Thanks.

Lets follow your logic. Ron Paul wants the wars in the Middle East ended, now. As a matter of fact, he wants all of our troops around the world brought home, saving maybe a Trillion dollars a year. If he is a republican, than the republican party stands for endind all wars, according to your logic.

Obama has started 2 more wars in the Middle East and now there are 5 countries where US activities are involved. He is a democrat. So according to your logic, Republicans are the party of peace and democrats are the war mongers. Your logic is pretty twisted Bill.

[Banned]

Bill, your buddy johnny criticizes any source he feels is from a right wing blog. I was using the same criteria on your left wing source. Blame johnny.
.

Incorrect-a-mundo. I do not criticize any source I FEEL is from a right-wing blog.

I discredit any source that IS a right-wing blog.

But if it's okay for everyone to post stuff from HuffPo, MoJo, or Daily Kos, and you won't discredit that, I will stop poking holes in your balloons.
Is that okay, Joe, can people have your permission to quote left-wing opinion as source? I know it's your personal website, can they do that?

There is no way joe read the entire article. Even if anyone did (I did), nobody has any definite response to it, because it's so airtight. Every possible angle of attack has been covered, and when criticizing the right, all angles must be covered, or else the joes of the world will pound some minor detail. (I know this firsthand, it's why they criticize my wordiness. I have to be, or they run with whatever tiny omission they can) This guy knows the inner workings of the highest echelons of the Right, and he had to cross all the T's and dot all the I's, which he did in spades.
I like that as a conservative, he recognizes what conservatism has become. That's so refreshing, from the normal laziness and self-importance.

I've been going back in the Rockpage General Discussion archives the last few days... I'm in mid-2004 right now, pre-ucjoe. The discussion was spirited, with the occasional troll cheerleading for GW Bush and Iraq War, but there's none of the sustained, joe-style control-freak hatred. People still loved their country. Retrospect shows us that the liberals were mostly correct, about Bush AND Iraq, but there's been very little I-told-you-so since... in fact, I think there should be far more of that. It wasn't always civil back then, but nobody fell to sabotaging relationships, or internet stalking, etc. People WANTED to be in a discussion. FatVin, ImGrimm, Lonewolf, RTD, myself... we all disagreed with one another, but had no problem shaking a guy's hand at a gig the next day.
Really, who (on either side) wants to attempt a give & take conversation now? It's mostly just joe oozing venom, and reaction to it. I'm sure that is his final objective, to make sure nobody "gets away with" posting something he doesn't agree with. To me, that's what talkshow conservatives are all about.[/b][/u]

So why do you criticize and insult everyone that disagrees with you? You never defend a liberal position, you go to destroy anyone who does not drink your kool aid. Before Lonewolf would show you the errors of your ways, it was mostly a liberal love orgy going on here, all of you agreeing on how terrible anyone not a commie was. You guys bashed Bush day and night. Now when we criticize the Kenyan, you babies can't take it. Bah bah bah.

[Hawk]

What part of this sentence did you not understand?...


"I want the wars in the Middle East ended, and that is not a right wing position as you know."

Why is Ron Paul a Republican. Perhaps the right wing has MANY things in common with Libertarianism ?

Let's make a list of things Liberterians support that is uncommon among right wingers. Oh, you already have... Thanks.

Lets follow your logic. Ron Paul wants the wars in the Middle East ended, now. As a matter of fact, he wants all of our troops around the world brought home, saving maybe a Trillion dollars a year. If he is a republican, than the republican party stands for endind all wars, according to your logic.

Obama has started 2 more wars in the Middle East and now there are 5 countries where US activities are involved. He is a democrat. So according to your logic, Republicans are the party of peace and democrats are the war mongers. Your logic is pretty twisted Bill.

You never read my post even though you quoted it...That's how you guys get fooled so damn easily.

Let's try again. Key word - UNCOMMON Do you know what "uncommon with" means ? It means to list items NOT COMMON between Libertarianism and right wingers. And you DID ! You listed all of them. I actually congratulated you when I said, "Oh, you did list them".


Why is Ron Paul a Republican. Perhaps the right wing has MANY things in common with Libertarianism ?

Let's make a list of things Liberterians support that is uncommon among right wingers. Oh, you already have... Thanks

I know it was too difficult for you three word sound bite guys. I was making fun of the fact that that is the only thing you wrote, ONE thing not in common with the right. I didn't disagree at all with your one line list.

Why is Ron Paul a Republican if they have very little in common ? Couldn't get elected as a Libertarian ? Same common enemy as the right wing ? Yes that's it. He sided with the devil to get into office...

[songsmith]

So why do you criticize and insult everyone that disagrees with you? You never defend a liberal position, you go to destroy anyone who does not drink your kool aid. You guys bashed Bush day and night. Now when we criticize the Kenyan, you babies can't take it. Bah bah bah.

I don't criticize and insult everyone who disagrees with me. Mostly just you. When the Braintrust takes a shot at me personally, or vomits the same old socialist/commie/liberal/Marxist bullshit. I'm only showing that I have no reason to be intimidated by them (or you) for any reason, intellectually, musically, physically, or otherwise.
Everything else, and I mean everything, is something you manufactured. I seldom say anything positive about Big Bad O, only that you hate and fear him. Everything else, like calling him the Messiah... that's you.
You have to be the 800-lb gorilla in every room you're in. Perhaps it's attention thing, all of the musicians here are familiar with people who don't like you simply because everyone's watching you play and not them. Maybe it's just bully mentality, or maybe you're just very open to suggestion from media figures, I don't know. I've tried to be cool with you, I've tried to sit out, I've tried to write everything according to your rules, I've tried to make it funny, I've tried to find common ground, posting facts, and I've gotten right down in the pit on your level. Still, you insist on enforcing your values on everyone and everything.
People really need to start telling you "no." You need to learn humility. I'm peacock-proud of the music I create, but I'm humbled by people's reaction to it. I'll go toe-to-toe with anyone on any subject, but I learn more than I teach. I've held a thousand people in the palm of my hand, but I learned how to do that playing to empty chairs a LOT.
You need to play to some empty chairs.