Just my oinion

[Oddball]

She was only "forced" into paying for her side of the social contract by choosing to become a citizen of a nation that abided by these rules and conventions. She chose, both to enter that social compact and to reap the rewards of that social compact, the hypocrisy comes in trying to claim that given such choices "a Libertarian could never do," what most always have done.

Uh, Rand became a US citizen in 1931. Social security was enacted in 1935. Medicare in 1965. She had no choice in the matter.

You should really stop trying.

This does not alter the fact that she had the choice to remain in a nation where the laws were as they are, or she could leave the nation she had only chosen to become a citizen of 4 years prior, if she found the conditions so morally abject. Instead she chose to stay and pay into that system she despised for 30+ more years and then reap the rewards of doing so despite preaching to generations that such was wrong and improper. You should really face up to reality, its not always pretty, but it is a sign of maturity.

Doesn't change the fact that compulsion isn't a contract and "if you don't like it, GTFO" doesn't change that fact either.

 

[eflatminor]

She was only "forced" into paying for her side of the social contract by choosing to become a citizen of a nation that abided by these rules and conventions. She chose, both to enter that social compact and to reap the rewards of that social compact, the hypocrisy comes in trying to claim that given such choices "a Libertarian could never do," what most always have done.

Uh, Rand became a US citizen in 1931. Social security was enacted in 1935. Medicare in 1965. She had no choice in the matter.

You should really stop trying.

This does not alter the fact that she had the choice to remain in a nation where the laws were as they are, or she could leave the nation she had only chosen to become a citizen of 4 years prior, if she found the conditions so morally abject. Instead she chose to stay and pay into that system she despised for 30+ more years and then reap the rewards of doing so despite preaching to generations that such was wrong and improper. You should really face up to reality, its not always pretty, but it is a sign of maturity.

Anyone that stands against our welfare state should just leave the country. Got it.

Stupid, stupid, stupid.

 

[Trakar]

Uh, Rand became a US citizen in 1931. Social security was enacted in 1935. Medicare in 1965. She had no choice in the matter.

You should really stop trying.

This does not alter the fact that she had the choice to remain in a nation where the laws were as they are, or she could leave the nation she had only chosen to become a citizen of 4 years prior, if she found the conditions so morally abject. Instead she chose to stay and pay into that system she despised for 30+ more years and then reap the rewards of doing so despite preaching to generations that such was wrong and improper. You should really face up to reality, its not always pretty, but it is a sign of maturity.

Anyone that stands against our welfare state should just leave the country. Got it.
Stupid, stupid, stupid.

I agree, why would anyone equate what I said with this crap? Stupid, stupid stupid!

Anyone who believes that we live in a "welfare state" or any major party or candidate is a "socialist," are either ignorant of basic economics, history and politics or banging the rhetoric drum of arrogant ignorances to persuade the ignorant. Which are you?

 

[eflatminor]

This does not alter the fact that she had the choice to remain in a nation where the laws were as they are, or she could leave the nation she had only chosen to become a citizen of 4 years prior, if she found the conditions so morally abject. Instead she chose to stay and pay into that system she despised for 30+ more years and then reap the rewards of doing so despite preaching to generations that such was wrong and improper. You should really face up to reality, its not always pretty, but it is a sign of maturity.

Anyone that stands against our welfare state should just leave the country. Got it.
Stupid, stupid, stupid.

I agree, why would anyone equate what I said with this crap? Stupid, stupid stupid!

Anyone who believes that we live in a "welfare state" or any major party or candidate is a "socialist," are either ignorant of basic economics, history and politics or banging the rhetoric drum of arrogant ignorances to persuade the ignorant. Which are you?

I reject your false choice analogy. Quit now comrade, you lost.

 

[Dot Com]

She was only "forced" into paying for her side of the social contract by choosing to become a citizen of a nation that abided by these rules and conventions. She chose, both to enter that social compact and to reap the rewards of that social compact, the hypocrisy comes in trying to claim that given such choices "a Libertarian could never do," what most always have done.

Uh, Rand became a US citizen in 1931. Social security was enacted in 1935. Medicare in 1965. She had no choice in the matter.

You should really stop trying.

This does not alter the fact that she had the choice to remain in a nation where the laws were as they are, or she could leave the nation she had only chosen to become a citizen of 4 years prior, if she found the conditions so morally abject. Instead she chose to stay and pay into that system she despised for 30+ more years and then reap the rewards of doing so despite preaching to generations that such was wrong and improper. You should really face up to reality, its not always pretty, but it is a sign of maturity.

No wonder Ryan (R) threw her under the bus a few weeks ago.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9LGiJfMVhs"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9LGiJfMVhs[/ame]

 

[Dot Com]

"There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs. ”

—John Rogers

 

[ConzHateUSA]

"There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs. ”

—John Rogers

the randian obsession by these bigot lying fascists is just one of many examples of what total lying hypcrite pieces of filth they really are...

 

[skookerasbil]

"There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs. ”

—John Rogers

Was there ever a truer quote in the history of the world??


Im fascinated.........for over 30 years, at how those on the far left can perpetually cling to this world of pure fantasy. More compelling is..........one would think that walking around navigating life like this, with feet not firmly planted on the ground, would make them giddy and gay. Instead...........the are ALL miserable. Im telling you........its is fcuking fascinating!!!

 

[onecut39]

Compulsion ain't a contract, comrade.

Are you not free to leave?

But for someone as wealthy as Rand it sure goes to show that the bucks, however few and unneeded, trump principle

 

[Oddball]

You don't own me, Gomer.

Now, quit hijacking the thread.

 

[onecut39]

Just a small addition to my original post. Later this summer you may see a drop in beef prices as ranchers and feedlots sell off their herds due to worsening drought and high grain prices. There are those who will say this disproves the warming and climate change. Just wait a few months as scarcity sets in and beef climbs to record prices.

Where I live we are in moderate drought conditions and this is after having received almost 10 inches of rain in May. Kind of odd, is it not? Across the country we are in the worst drought since the fifties. Keep an eye on what happens across the globe. Those wild fires in Colorado? Drought again.

So keep an eye on these things, as well as the superstorms and floods, in places they should not be.

I will try not to tell you I told you so.

 

[Old Rocks]

That "survey" was rigged.

I guess you didn't get the memo.

Lawrence Solomon: 97% cooked stats | FP Comment | Financial Post

Really? So why don't you show us where there are some prominent scientists publishing in the field in peer reviewed journals that are stating that AGW is not a fact?

Peer review is rigged too, and you know it.

Why sure, anything that deals with real science and disagrees with the way that you think the world oughta be is rigged.

 

[Old Rocks]

Uh, Rand became a US citizen in 1931. Social security was enacted in 1935. Medicare in 1965. She had no choice in the matter.

You should really stop trying.

This does not alter the fact that she had the choice to remain in a nation where the laws were as they are, or she could leave the nation she had only chosen to become a citizen of 4 years prior, if she found the conditions so morally abject. Instead she chose to stay and pay into that system she despised for 30+ more years and then reap the rewards of doing so despite preaching to generations that such was wrong and improper. You should really face up to reality, its not always pretty, but it is a sign of maturity.

No wonder Ryan (R) threw her under the bus a few weeks ago.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9LGiJfMVhs]The Last Word With Lawrence ODonnell Paul Ryan denounces Ayn Rand Rewrite - YouTube[/ame]

When you really look at her philosophy, and the fact that her 'ideal' man was a child murderer, one wonders at the moral compass of those that preach her idealogy. Plus Ryan is just being hyporcritical to avoid the issue of Rand's atheism. I have not heard that he has ceased giving his aides copies of her idiocies.

 

[Trakar]

Compulsion ain't a contract, comrade.

Are you not free to leave?

You first.

There may be a lot things happening that I dislike or disagree with, but nothing that I find intolerable or beyond the pale. If things ever got to that point, however, I would leave before I compromised any principles that I firmly believed in. As long as you are free to stay or leave, why are you here but always whining and complaining about how horrible everything is here?

 

[Trakar]

This is a forum for climate hobbyists. The only true question is, who is winning?

Wind and solar are still fringe energy markets.............so 97% means dick in the bigger picture. Its been that way for over ten years and wind and sloar are still laughable.

The whale oil legend was skeptically shredded decades ago surely you have a better reasoned argument than this?

 

[Trakar]

Uh, Rand became a US citizen in 1931. Social security was enacted in 1935. Medicare in 1965. She had no choice in the matter.

You should really stop trying.

This does not alter the fact that she had the choice to remain in a nation where the laws were as they are, or she could leave the nation she had only chosen to become a citizen of 4 years prior, if she found the conditions so morally abject. Instead she chose to stay and pay into that system she despised for 30+ more years and then reap the rewards of doing so despite preaching to generations that such was wrong and improper. You should really face up to reality, its not always pretty, but it is a sign of maturity.

Doesn't change the fact that compulsion isn't a contract and "if you don't like it, GTFO" doesn't change that fact either.

I never said anything at all about whether or not you like anything, nor did I tell you to "GTFO." The statement was that there were some things a Libertarian would never do, I simply demonstrated an instance where even the prototypical Libertarian not only did it, but she took money for doing it, which means she wasn't just a barely literate philosophical slut, she was an ideological whore.

 

[Trakar]

Anyone that stands against our welfare state should just leave the country. Got it.
Stupid, stupid, stupid.

I agree, why would anyone equate what I said with this crap? Stupid, stupid stupid!

Anyone who believes that we live in a "welfare state" or any major party or candidate is a "socialist," are either ignorant of basic economics, history and politics or banging the rhetoric drum of arrogant ignorances to persuade the ignorant. Which are you?

I reject your false choice analogy. Quit now comrade, you lost.

Wipe your nose and quit your blubbering the adults are trying to talk now.

 

[onecut39]

When you start out of the gate with an outright lie, why would anyone wade through the rest of it?

Care to show where that is a lie?

Is there a scientific consensus on global warming?

In the scientific field of climate studies – which is informed by many different disciplines – the consensus is demonstrated by the number of scientists who have stopped arguing about what is causing climate change – and that’s nearly all of them. A survey of all peer-reviewed abstracts on the subject 'global climate change' published between 1993 and 2003 shows that not a single paper rejected the consensus position that global warming is man caused. 75% of the papers agreed with the consensus position while 25% made no comment either way, focusing on methods or paleoclimate analysis (Oreskes 2004).

Several subsequent studies confirm that “...the debate on the authenticity of global warming and the role played by human activity is largely nonexistent among those who understand the nuances and scientific basis of long-term climate processes”. (Doran 2009). In other words, more than 95% of scientists working in the disciplines contributing to studies of our climate, accept that climate change is almost certainly being caused by human activities.

We should also consider official scientific bodies and what they think about climate change. There are no national or major scientific institutions anywhere in the world that dispute the theory of anthropogenic climate change. Not one.

In the field of climate science, the consensus is unequivocal: human activities are causing climate change.

"Consensus" ain't science, and you know that, too.

Of course, science true science is always based on that which the majority disbelieve.

 

[Oddball]

This does not alter the fact that she had the choice to remain in a nation where the laws were as they are, or she could leave the nation she had only chosen to become a citizen of 4 years prior, if she found the conditions so morally abject. Instead she chose to stay and pay into that system she despised for 30+ more years and then reap the rewards of doing so despite preaching to generations that such was wrong and improper. You should really face up to reality, its not always pretty, but it is a sign of maturity.

Doesn't change the fact that compulsion isn't a contract and "if you don't like it, GTFO" doesn't change that fact either.

I never said anything at all about whether or not you like anything, nor did I tell you to "GTFO." The statement was that there were some things a Libertarian would never do, I simply demonstrated an instance where even the prototypical Libertarian not only did it, but she took money for doing it, which means she wasn't just a barely literate philosophical slut, she was an ideological whore.

You don't get to tell other people, whom you don't know, what they "would never do".

Fact reaming that Rand, along with millions of other Americans, was forced -by threat of arrest and incarceration- to pay into a Ponzi scheme...There is absolutely nothing illegal, immoral or fattening about recouping that which was taken from you at the point of a gun.

Oh, and Rand was an anarchist, not a libertarian.

 

[Trakar]

Doesn't change the fact that compulsion isn't a contract and "if you don't like it, GTFO" doesn't change that fact either.

I never said anything at all about whether or not you like anything, nor did I tell you to "GTFO." The statement was that there were some things a Libertarian would never do, I simply demonstrated an instance where even the prototypical Libertarian not only did it, but she took money for doing it, which means she wasn't just a barely literate philosophical slut, she was an ideological whore.

You don't get to tell other people, whom you don't know, what they "would never do".

You need to talk to your buddy eflatminor, I didn't say anything about who would or wouldn't do anything, he is the one who said:

When things go bad don't come here looking for a handout.

That's one thing a Libertarian could never do.

Fact reaming that Rand, along with millions of other Americans, was forced -by threat of arrest and incarceration- to pay into a Ponzi scheme...There is absolutely nothing illegal, immoral or fattening about recouping that which was taken from you at the point of a gun.

Oh, and Rand was an anarchist, not a libertarian.

Actually she preferred the term she made up "Objectivist," which you'd know if you had ever done more than "fact ream" her name on wiki. And while you are right that she did not at all care for libertarianism, it is impossible for Libertarians to assert a mutual position. The libertarian movement has not only embraced Rand they have elevated her to their demigod status.

Rand on her opinion of Libertarianism:

..Q: Do you think Libertarians communicate the ideas of freedom and capitalism effectively? [Q&A following LP’s “Objective Communication,” Lecture 1, 1980]

AR: I don’t think plagiarists are effective. I’ve read nothing by a Libertarian (when I read them, in the early years) that wasn’t my ideas badly mishandled—i.e., had the teeth pulled out of them—with no credit given. I didn’t know whether I should be glad that no credit was given, or disgusted. I felt both. They are perhaps the worst political group today, because they can do the most harm to capitalism, by making it disreputable.

Q: Why don’t you approve of the Libertarians, thousands of whom are loyal readers of your works? [FHF: “The Age of Mediocrity,” 1981]

AR: Because Libertarians are a monstrous, disgusting bunch of people: they plagiarize my ideas when that fits their purpose, and they denounce me in a more vicious manner than any communist publication, when that fits their purpose. They are lower than any pragmatists, and what they hold against Objectivism is morality. They’d like to have an amoral political program.

Q: The Libertarians are providing intermediate steps toward your goals. Why don’t you support them? [Ibid., 1981]

AR: Please don’t tell me they’re pursuing my goals. I have not asked for, nor do I accept, the help of intellectual cranks. I want philosophically educated people: those who understand ideas, care about ideas, and spread the right ideas. That’s how my philosophy will spread, just as philosophy has throughout all history: by means of people who understand and teach it to others. Further, it should be clear that I do not endorse the filthy slogan, “The end justifies the means.” That was originated by the Jesuits, and accepted enthusiastically by Communists and Nazis. The end does not justify the means; you cannot achieve anything good by evil means. Finally, the Libertarians aren’t worthy of being the means to any end, let alone the end of spreading Objectivism.

The Ayn Rand Institute: Ayn Rand's Q & A on Libertarianism

And when you contrast this with the Libertarian side of the story it looks like a tragic futile affair, where fantasy and delusion struggle with self-loathing. http://www.libertarianism.org/people/ayn-rand