RuamRudy

There was nothing dishonest about my posts, just as there is no empathy shown towards the alleged murderer in that statement that you are so desperately clinging onto. She is merely stating a fact that people have known since stone age times - if you poke a sleeping bear enough, don't be surprised if it attacks. Do you genuinely think that this isn't a fact of life? Of course, the right wing NY Post is going to push the line that all corporations are benevolent and it's owners are national treasures who only have our best interests at heart. It's just a pity that there are so many pliant dupes willing to repeat their lines. That's why nothing ever changes for the better.

I made no edit or censor. I posted the sentence in its entirety, and previously linked to her entire statement. Why not show your hand and make clear what you find offensive in her words. Where did she express sympathy for the alleged murderer?

What is, according to you, the "offending line"?

I know that's what she said, but nowhere has she expressed sympathy for the alleged murderer. She has suggested that vigilantism can be the result of predatory practices by unscrupulous businesses but that's not any suggestion of empathy.

What part of "violence is never the answer" are you struggling with?

Rather than just post a screenshot, why don't you do something less disingenuous and link to it so that people can see what she actually said? If one was to take your post at face value, they might come away thinking it was truthful.

I didn't see anyone suggest that healthcare doesn't require funding, however it would seem that, with the highest costs and almost 3rd world life expectancy, Americans are being short changed. https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/life-expectancy-vs-health-expenditure

He headed up an organisation that actively sought, time and time and time again, to absolve itself of responsibility for paying for treatment for its customers when they were at their most desperate. He may have been acting within the law but that doesn't mean that it was right, moral or ethical. I don't think you need me to dig up examples of just how callous and cruel his company was, do you? News reports of denials are manifest.

It's this constant tilting at windmills that keeps the hate filled right constantly frothing with rage.

That is certainly an interpretation but not necessarily one I would agree with. You should read Elizabeth Warren's comments, above. They might help you.

My post wasn't sourced in any legal framework I know of. Interpret it as you will.

Why do you feel the need to lie about Warren? It's not as if others can't use Google. "Violence is never the answer, but people can be pushed only so far," she added. "This is a warning that if you push people hard enough, they lose faith in the ability of their government to make change, lose faith in the ability of the people who are providing the health care to make change, and start to take matters into their own hands in ways that will ultimately be a threat to everyone." https://www.foxnews.com/media/elizabeth-warren-says-killing-unitedhealthcare-ceo-warning-you-can-only-push-people-so-far

'Eat the rich' is a bit of an over simplification, but when the levers of power have been seized by immoral people, the avenues avaliable for bringing fairness to a system can be hard to find. Desperate times might, in some people's eyes, call for desperate measures.

Ironic, isn't it, that someone who was born into wealth and privilege should care about the struggles of those less fortunate than himself, whereas someone who actually grew up in a much more regular, working class environment would help perpetuate, and actually glorify the inequality and unfairness of the system that pays him millions of dollars whilst killing thousands and putting thousands more into poverty.

You made a statement without substantiating it. Forum rules require you to provide evidence to back up your statements. North Korea is officially known as the Democratic People's Republic of Korea. Do you consider it to be a bastion of democracy? So not a socialist /Marxist then. It would have been much quicker for you just to write that you are unable to back up you claim. But you have a good day nonetheless.

Then please provide evidence that the current PM is a socialist / Marxist.

You should stop reading the Mail on Sunday. It's not good for the soul. Keir Starmer, Trotskyism and Pabloism "By the time, Starmer got involved with Socialist Alternatives, despite Pablo’s past, the IRMT had dumped Trotskyism and developed a form of Red/Green politics"

If you think that Starmer is either a socialist or a Marxist than I can say, with confidence, that you don't know what either term means.

Possibly an unpopular opinion, but I think we should pay our politicians significantly more. If we want to be led by the best, most qualified people, we need to offer competitive salaries. Otherwise you get people like Jonathan Gullis or Jared O'Mara in positions of power, and nobody could surely want that.

I know, and that's the infuriating aspect of it. Johnson deserves nothing but scorn and opprobrium for the rest of his days, so for Starmer to hand him an opportunity to play the victim is such a schoolboy error.

I am no fan of labour, but have you forgotten the seemingly endless run of appallingly poor, weak and incompetent PMs we had after Cameron, not that he was any more than a dull witted toff? Starmer's government is simply another clown show in a long running series of clown shows, and there is no prospective source of statesmanship waiting in the wings either.

There are so many valid reasons to despise a man so utterly amoral and selfish as Johnson; it is beyond belief that someone seemingly as smart as Starmer could allow the charlatan to play the victim.

Then it's got nothing to do with politics but states clearly that the sitting president has no confidence in the impartiality of his judiciary. That's a hell of a message to send to the country and the world.

The event hasn't happened because common sense led to the decision to do the opposite to what you seen to be wishing for. How does economic theory become out of date?

If people, quite rightly, object to Trump evading justice, the same outrage should be expressed towards Biden Jr. Biden has lost any moral high ground he may have held and cheapened his legacy.