How Is Ayn Rand Still A Thing?

[LogikAndReazon]

Kerouac, Salinger and Marx....now THOSE are reads......lmfao

 

[Synthaholic]

Anyway, what exactly is it that you find creepy about the notion of personal responsibility and the promise to not accept charity that is forced from strangers?

Never really expected a straight forward answer. Typical of the leftists...just stick to emotional arguments and name calling. Avoid logic, reason and specificity at all costs.

Way to keep it in line comrade.

Calling yourself a comrade?

I guess when you reply to your own posts you'll never be wrong.

 

[Synthaholic]

Brilliant! Take a good look at your role model, Libertarians and misguided conservatives. Pro-choice, anti-Reagan, anti-religion, anti-native Americans, pro-selfishness...you all picked a winner to emulate.

Why is she still a thing?
My guess us that in the left's never ending quest to distract Americans from the failure that is Barack Hussein Obama, you guys keep bringing her up.

At least two of your upcoming Republican candidates for president are slavish devotees to her weird views.

So how is she not relevant?

IF they are fans, do they bring her up as much as you do?

Who said she wasn't relevant? You asked a question, I answered it.

I didn't ask a question. Try to pay attention between spews.

Of course they won't bring her up. While she is their guiding ideological light, they know that the rest of the country thinks she's batshit crazy. They don't want to highlight that while pushing her agenda of selfishness.

 

[Synthaholic]

Civil servants to the Rescue !!!!!!!!!!!! Lol

When your house catches fire, who do you call?

Now run along.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

Brilliant! Take a good look at your role model, Libertarians and misguided conservatives. Pro-choice, anti-Reagan, anti-religion, anti-native Americans, pro-selfishness...you all picked a winner to emulate.

What a dangerously nazi-style crock of left wing, un-American, democrat socialist propaganda. And it isn't even clever. Just chopped up, out of context propaganda. You lefties must be feeling mighty threatened by the all American concept of individualism and intellectual property as opposed to your sheeple collective socialistic herd think.
Creepy idiocy of the left. Only the mindless vote democrat these days.

 

[Synthaholic]

Brilliant! Take a good look at your role model, Libertarians and misguided conservatives. Pro-choice, anti-Reagan, anti-religion, anti-native Americans, pro-selfishness...you all picked a winner to emulate.

What a dangerously nazi-style crock of left wing, un-American, democrat socialist propaganda. And it isn't even clever. Just chopped up, out of context propaganda. You lefties must be feeling mighty threatened by the all American concept of individualism and intellectual property as opposed to your sheeple collective socialistic herd think.
Creepy idiocy of the left. Only the mindless vote democrat these days.

Her comment about Reagan was out of context? What's the correct context where she didn't belittle him?

What about her comment about God and reason?

What about her comment about abortion?

Clarify this for us.

 

[PredFan]

Brilliant! Take a good look at your role model, Libertarians and misguided conservatives. Pro-choice, anti-Reagan, anti-religion, anti-native Americans, pro-selfishness...you all picked a winner to emulate.

Why is she still a thing?
My guess us that in the left's never ending quest to distract Americans from the failure that is Barack Hussein Obama, you guys keep bringing her up.

At least two of your upcoming Republican candidates for president are slavish devotees to her weird views.

So how is she not relevant?

IF they are fans, do they bring her up as much as you do?

Who said she wasn't relevant? You asked a question, I answered it.

I didn't ask a question. Try to pay attention between spews.

Of course they won't bring her up. While she is their guiding ideological light, they know that the rest of the country thinks she's batshit crazy. They don't want to highlight that while pushing her agenda of selfishness.

Yes you did ask a question. Look at your thread title dummy.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

Brilliant! Take a good look at your role model, Libertarians and misguided conservatives. Pro-choice, anti-Reagan, anti-religion, anti-native Americans, pro-selfishness...you all picked a winner to emulate.

What a dangerously nazi-style crock of left wing, un-American, democrat socialist propaganda. And it isn't even clever. Just chopped up, out of context propaganda. You lefties must be feeling mighty threatened by the all American concept of individualism and intellectual property as opposed to your sheeple collective socialistic herd think.
Creepy idiocy of the left. Only the mindless vote democrat these days.

Her comment about Reagan was out of context? What's the correct context where she didn't belittle him?

What about her comment about God and reason?

What about her comment about abortion?

Clarify this for us.

Atheism and objectivism are not incompatible. Railing against Reagan early in his presidency is very out of context thirty years later and abortion is a very complex issue.
But let's have you clarify. You're the one referencing them. Meanwhile, no reasonable person would ever completely agree with another person. Only left wingers do that out of sheer groupthink.

 

[Synthaholic]

Brilliant! Take a good look at your role model, Libertarians and misguided conservatives. Pro-choice, anti-Reagan, anti-religion, anti-native Americans, pro-selfishness...you all picked a winner to emulate.

Why is she still a thing?
My guess us that in the left's never ending quest to distract Americans from the failure that is Barack Hussein Obama, you guys keep bringing her up.

At least two of your upcoming Republican candidates for president are slavish devotees to her weird views.

So how is she not relevant?

IF they are fans, do they bring her up as much as you do?

Who said she wasn't relevant? You asked a question, I answered it.

I didn't ask a question. Try to pay attention between spews.

Of course they won't bring her up. While she is their guiding ideological light, they know that the rest of the country thinks she's batshit crazy. They don't want to highlight that while pushing her agenda of selfishness.

Yes you did ask a question. Look at your thread title dummy.

OK.

She's not a thing.

Is that because she's been discredited?

 

[Synthaholic]

Brilliant! Take a good look at your role model, Libertarians and misguided conservatives. Pro-choice, anti-Reagan, anti-religion, anti-native Americans, pro-selfishness...you all picked a winner to emulate.

What a dangerously nazi-style crock of left wing, un-American, democrat socialist propaganda. And it isn't even clever. Just chopped up, out of context propaganda. You lefties must be feeling mighty threatened by the all American concept of individualism and intellectual property as opposed to your sheeple collective socialistic herd think.
Creepy idiocy of the left. Only the mindless vote democrat these days.

Her comment about Reagan was out of context? What's the correct context where she didn't belittle him?

What about her comment about God and reason?

What about her comment about abortion?

Clarify this for us.

Atheism and objectivism are not incompatible. Railing against Reagan early in his presidency is very out of context thirty years later and abortion is a very complex issue.
But let's have you clarify. You're the one referencing them. Meanwhile, no reasonable person would ever completely agree with another person. Only left wingers do that out of sheer groupthink.

I still rail against Reagan early, middle, and late in his presidency. Most objective people do.

Abortion isn't complex at all. Especially if you believe in freedom.

And I hope you realize that you just called a whole lot of your fellow Righties 'unreasonable'. Because they never disagree with Poor Sarah, or Rafael "Ted" Cruz.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Marxism comrades, is the answer....

Is that you John Galt?

Who is Karl Marx, shitflinger?

 

[Uncensored2008]

OK.

She's not a thing.

Is that because she's been discredited?

Discredited by whom? Intellectually stunted children who get their news from a comedian and their philosophy from hate sites funded by George Soros?

ROFL...

 

[Uncensored2008]

I think you have to be pretty simple minded to take her seriously.

I think she is literally light years beyond your intellectual capacity.

In fact, I know she is.

You can't debate her ideas, you can only fling shit.

 

[konradv]

You two never read the book did ya'?

"Atlas Shrugged".

Struggled through it. It was the nail in her coffin as far as I was concerned, an unrealistic fairy tale populated by caricatures. As literature it failed miserably. As political philosophy, it could only influence the easily led or already convinced.

 

[konradv]

OK.

She's not a thing.

Is that because she's been discredited?

Discredited by whom? Intellectually stunted children who get their news from a comedian and their philosophy from hate sites funded by George Soros?

The ones who give her the time of day are the "intellectually stunted children", IMO.

 

[eflatminor]

Anyway, what exactly is it that you find creepy about the notion of personal responsibility and the promise to not accept charity that is forced from strangers?

Never really expected a straight forward answer. Typical of the leftists...just stick to emotional arguments and name calling. Avoid logic, reason and specificity at all costs.

Way to keep it in line comrade.

How to answer someone who believes government helping those in need is theft?

By looking at the actual RESULTS of that "help" objectively. For instance, since we began spending other people's money on the so called 'great society', whose idea was to end poverty, the rate of poverty has actually increased. In the decades before spending began, the rate of poverty was dropping precipitously. You caused it to go in the opposite direction! But hey, what's tens of trillions of dollars among friends, right? And who cares if you meddlers made the situation worse, it's the intention that counts, right?

And sorry, you don't get to determine what is and what is not "civilized".

So, I ask again, what exactly is it that you find creepy about the notion of personal responsibility and the promise to not accept charity that is forced from strangers? Be specific now...

 

[konradv]

Like many famous figures, Rand isn't a complete waste of time to read:

The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws.
Ayn Rand

Potentially, a government is the most dangerous threat to man's rights: it holds a legal monopoly on the use of physical force against legally disarmed victims.
Ayn Rand

Individual rights are not subject to a public vote; a majority has no right to vote away the rights of a minority; the political function of rights is precisely to protect minorities from oppression by majorities (and the smallest minority on earth is the individual).
Ayn Rand

others I didn't agree with so much and these from,
Ayn Rand Quotes- BrainyQuote

It's the stopped clock theory, IMO. Anyone can latch on to a few catch phrases, but on the whole, her philosophy would lead to anarchy since just about any action by government can be perceived as a loss of freedom by someone.

 

[HenryBHough]

What's not to like about anarchy?

 

[LogikAndReazon]

There would be no firemen or fires without socialism..... Case closed indeed. For 10 year olds....

Roads neither kiddies.... Lol

 

[eflatminor]

...but on the whole, her philosophy would lead to anarchy since just about any action by government can be perceived as a loss of freedom by someone.

Wrong. Objectivism, just like it's political cousin libertarianism, does not see all government action as wrong. In fact, quite the opposite. We all understand that someone infringing on the rights of another should be punished by government. You steal, you murder, you should go to jail. That's HARDLY anarchy.

Sorry, you don't get to make shit up.