Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by Herb7734 9 years, 9 months ago
    From an objectivist perspective, there is no "perfect" candidate on the horizon. Dr. Carson is so filled with common sense in his pronouncements that he can't help but appeal to a rational thinker. Also, because of who he is, and what he is, he takes away from the libs one of their most effective tools which is character assassination. I think that he certainly is a person who can beat Hillary, and someone who won't be afraid to implement ideas which the lame-stream press will call controversial but we call rational. His greatest virtue? He's not a politician.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by XenokRoy 9 years, 9 months ago
    I have say that the first quote is well, altruistic, and just plain wrong. I mean sure consider the feelings of others, but do so in the context of what is best for you. This guy needs to read the virtues of selfishness.

    Most the rest were not so alarming, but that first one makes me very skeptical of him.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by richrobinson 9 years, 9 months ago
    I don't see him as a Libertarian. Quote 1 sounded a little collectivist to me. He is much better than the thing currently in the Oval Office. I would look for him to be a VP choice.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ jbrenner 9 years, 9 months ago
      Out of the ten quotes, Quote 1 was the one that concerned me most, too.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by $ 9 years, 9 months ago
        Keep in mind that Objectivists have a completely different definition of selfishness than the rest of the world. Use the definition as he is using it - narcissism - and the meaning is more clear. Note that he is not advocating allowing others to tell him what to do, merely that one should show respect and listen to the arguments of all parties. To me, this is a call for rational debate instead of finger-pointing and hyperbole - a welcome change to the political catfights that so frequent the current environment.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by ewv 9 years, 9 months ago
          He has embraced the stock false alternative between "narcissism" and deference to others. The "traditional" definition package deals sacrificing others and rational self interest as a standard as an excuse to reject both. Rational self interest is thereby omitted from consideration by linguistic fiat, as "consideration for others" is elevated to take its place making rational discussion of political controversies impossible. Altruism means living for others as the standard of morality, not others telling you what to do.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by $ 9 years, 9 months ago
            Again, I think you are attempting to thrust your own definition of selfishness into Dr. Carson's words, thus distorting them far past his intent. Consideration does not mean taking orders from, it only means a recognition of other and respect for that other to be self-directed.

            An inconsiderate/narcissistic person attempts to assert control over others as their modus operandi. They belittle consideration because in their own minds, their methods, concerns, values, are all that matters.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by ewv 9 years, 9 months ago
              I doubt he understands the proper concept, and he's no groveling M. Theresa. But this is the problem, that he doesn't know and uses the package deal version blocking out consideration of a rational approach when we need a leader heading in the right philosophical direction. He's a very impressive individual undermined by bad and weak philosophy, if only in the form of bromides undermining his own implicit ethics demonstrated in his life, apparently not understanding what realm he is missing.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by $ 9 years, 9 months ago
                Do any of us have a complete understanding of the universe? I'd give him somewhat of a break.

                Or you could look at it as an opportunity to perhaps educate him!
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
      • Posted by Hiraghm 9 years, 9 months ago
        I disagree thoroughly with #1. The best way to stay cool and calm is to know yourself. D'Anconia, Galt, Rearden, Ragnar.... didn't they all stay pretty cool, even when provoked? Because they knew who they were, and didn't need to worry about what other people thought or felt.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
    • Posted by Robbie53024 9 years, 9 months ago
      That's not collectivist, that's merely good manners. He isn't advocating acquiescence to others, merely to take their perspective into account.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by XenokRoy 9 years, 9 months ago
        I have to say that first point is altruistic. Give up selfishness? What else is that?

        The man needs to understand that selfishness is not evil or bad, but that it is very good when coupled with reason and looking at the big picture. If he gives it up, he will be a louse leader tossed to and fro with the winds.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
        • Posted by Robbie53024 9 years, 9 months ago
          I think you folks put too much emphasis on the specific words instead of the intent. He probably could have been more articulate in putting more in the vein of - To remain cool and calm it helps to put yourself in the position of the other person and try to understand the situation from their point of view. Which seems to be sage advice.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by khalling 9 years, 9 months ago
            I think we're pointing out that he is missing some logical foundations for a few concepts and that is a warning sign. To me it means, I'm not sure where you'll come down on certain issues. I think he is a very smart guy, who has alot to say. I'm not sure I want him running the country.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by $ 9 years, 9 months ago
          To an Objectivist, your point is well taken. The thing most on this forum tend to forget is that Objectivists are using the Rand definition of selfishness that isn't known or accepted to the vast majority of the world. I would strongly caution against judging someone by definitions he himself has not acknowledged.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by $ sjatkins 9 years, 9 months ago
        Yeah, it was expressed as how to stay cool and calm. Yes you conclude what you conclude including at gut level (if your head level philosophy is well integrated at the emotional level). But to maximize achieving your values in the situation you must see clearly enough the feelings, needs of those you are dealing with in order to get to the best outcome that concerns/needs them if not on board then at least not so actively fighting against.

        I wish he hadn't expressed it as putting aside selfishness.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by ewv 9 years, 9 months ago
          Yes, but it's worse than that because he is missing so much philosophically. Staying "cool" is not nearly enough and not the solution to the fundamental threats facing this country.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by shivas 9 years, 9 months ago
    Ben Carson seems like a decent guy, but I don't get Libertarian out of that article. To me a Libertarian is a fiscal conservative and a social liberal. He talks as though the Constitution means more to him than several recent Presidents, which to me is very meaningful. However, he also speaks of a willingness to compromise like it isn't how we got here to begin with.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ DriveTrain 9 years, 9 months ago
    I'm not as enthused about Carson as a lot of people among Tea Party, libertarian, conservative and (some) objectivist friends. He talks like a libertarian, and while I think he's a rational, benevolent and level-headed individual, I do not think he's anything close to being Presidential material. He strikes me as a half-conservative, half-libertarian populist with a "nice guy" streak that translates into a serious tendency to acquiesce to yet more altruism-based statist advancement.

    This collection of quotes isn't what I'd call a great compilation for changing that perception either. Looking at them critically, there's a mixture of a few sound attitudes on freedom and self-reliance with a whole lot of truisms and bromides of the "stay informed and get involved" variety that you hear from any random ad blurb.

    I don't even like him as a potential VP pick. Fully as important as getting a genuine Constitutional Republican as our 2016 Presidential nominee is getting a genuine Constitutional Republican as our 2016 VP candidate. The next election is not just for 2016, but for 2024 as well. The next VP candidate needs to be as strong Presidential material as the Presidential candidate himself, because we cannot afford another cipher like GHWB, Quayle or Cheney throwing the 2024 GOP campaign into a game of RINO 52-pickup by default.

    Carson's popularity reminds me a little of the Colin Powell popularity back when Powell was being bandied about as GOP Presidential material: enthusiasm based on superficial elements and a couple of good public statements, but no investigation of the whole ideological picture of the man - with seriously disappointing consequences when that ideological picture became clear.

    He also reminds me of Sarah Palin - a bit of a dilettante who enjoys the attention but doesn't come across as someone with a grasp of the seriousness of the situation we're in, much less a commitment to the kind of radical, principles-based agenda that will be needed to mop up this mess and turn the tables on the gargantuan, slobbering leviathan pig looming before us and its dangerous collectivist death-throes.

    It would be great if we could fuse Rand Paul's (apparent) commitment to a complete overhaul of the government-vs.-individual equation from top to bottom, with Allen West's no-BS understanding of the national defense minefield we're traversing. Oh wait, we can: Paul - West 2016, or West - Paul 2016. Each has his own set of drawbacks, but both have rock-solid commitment to first principles, and charisma (translates as: electability) to burn. And I think Ted Cruz is interchangeable with either, for the same reasons. Carson might make a good cabinet pick, or better yet, a Congressman. But Presidency or Vice-Presidency? No.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by ewv 9 years, 9 months ago
      Carson is an impressive and accomplished individual in many ways (more than Powell and Palin), and has some common sense views where they are sadly lacking in some areas (especially in comparison to Obama), but he has no philosophy to back up the good in him, instead embracing platitudes that are hopelessly inadequate for the fundamental task at hand, and/or have led to or excused the worst, with him having no clue how or why. Look at some of his interviews prior to the "Prayer Fest" where Obama made him famous, and you find thoroughly conventional political ideas dominating some common sense observations.

      Nowhere do we see a straightforward, principled emphasis on the rights and freedom of the individual. To the extent being VP matters at all, which is primarily 2nd in line in case of loss of the President, then his lack of principled qualifications to be President also disqualifies him for VP (and Congress). We would wind up with a more articulate and intelligent version of Bush.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ stargeezer 9 years, 9 months ago
    As much as I like Dr. Carson, if he runs as a 3rd party the only thing it will do is split the vote on the right, he would not be elected and neither would be whoever the Republicans put up and Hillary Clinton WILL be elected - Just exactly like happened in 93 when the little general, Ross Parole split the vote on the right and gave the election to Bill Clinton.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by khalling 9 years, 9 months ago
    he is not a libertarian. 1. stance on the war on drugs for starters
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ jbrenner 9 years, 9 months ago
      The war on drugs is an area where Ben Carson and I do differ. The war on drugs is a waste. Let the drug addicts and pushers see the full effects of their self-destructive behavior.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by LetsShrug 9 years, 9 months ago
        What about gun control..he has yet to voice his opinion much. He's a likeable guy, but I think we deserve better for president. I read his book America the Beautiful and watch the movie based on his life, Gifted Hands. Interesting story he has.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by edweaver 9 years, 9 months ago
          I saw an interview where he walked back a position that he took on gun control. I believe at the time he was against, so called assault weapons but had changed his mind. I would give him credit for changing his opinion but due to his first position on gun control he would not be my first choice. There is one other thing that concerns me in some of the things he has said. I got the feeling that he would be willing to funnel money into the medical field which logically he cares about. For me to fully support someone, they need not be too eager to funnel money into any field, especially not their own.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ jlc 9 years, 9 months ago
    I think my opinion is that if he knew my beliefs and he wanted to stand under my umbrella, he would be welcome. If he considered himself opposed to me, he would be an alternative that would not present a logical disaster...the 'honorable opponent' concept.

    If people like him were the worst that we had to concern ourselves about...

    Jan
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by RobertFl 9 years, 9 months ago
    Conservatives are having to redefine themselves as they leave the GOP and Republican party. There is much I agree with, with the Libertarians. but there are something I cannot be on board with (Open borders).
    The question isn't whether he is, or isn't a Libertarian it's how much can he turn away from the GOP
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ jbrenner 9 years, 9 months ago
      There are plenty of libertarians who are not open borders.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
      • Posted by Robbie53024 9 years, 9 months ago
        Small l not L. The Libertarian party, I believe, does in fact espouse open borders. Thus, one can have libertarian beliefs and not be a Libertarian. Which is where I think Ben is at.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by RobertFl 9 years, 9 months ago
        They need to express that concern to the LIbertarian party. I recently spoke on the phone to a party rep in DC about just that. He told me that they do get a lot of push back on that issue and are evaluating their position.
        The problem seems to be that there are lot of people saying they're libertarian but that doesn't reflect in their registered membership roles. A lot of people talking but not to where it matters where the party platform is drafted.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by CircuitGuy 9 years, 9 months ago
          My idea on why libertarians don't hold more office is the vocal ones are extreme and uncompromising. To win in office, we need one with very modest goals, say to have tax revenue and expenses both grow slower than the CPI or nominal GDP, whichever is less. They need to push for giving tax credits to replace things currently provided by gov't agencies. Maybe all of this is boring, but I always feel like libertarians screaming for upending everything, for taking us back instantly to the level of Welfare spending, military, monetary policy, and drug laws of 150 years ago.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by RobertFl 9 years, 9 months ago
            Which is why a Libertarian leaning conservative is what's needed. From what I've seen BenC sounds like that
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by CircuitGuy 9 years, 9 months ago
              "Which is why a Libertarian leaning conservative is what's needed."
              I guess it depends on what "conservative" means. If it means conserving stuff or not taking any radical action, that's great. If it means buying into the left/right yelling match, it won't work unless the libertarian conservative gets almost all people who are on the right side of the left/right children's quarrel and most of the people who are not into politics. I'm thinking of a toned-down Ron Paul. A toned-down Ron Paul could win.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by RobertFl 9 years, 9 months ago
                You think Ron Paul needs toning down? What about Rand?
                Conservative in this regard means US first which means respecting our borders
                The social policies I don't see a problem with
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                • Posted by CircuitGuy 9 years, 9 months ago
                  I just think Ron Paul came off as radical. Even though I disagreed with him on monetary policy, I probably would have voted for him and gone to his fundraisers if he had gotten the nomination. I certainly would have if Clinton had won. I wanted Paul over most of the Democrats, probably even over Obama.

                  Regarding our borders, the very concept of nation states with borders is in the process of disappearing. Borders aren't that big an issue for me. I think it's horrible to look the other way when people cross the border illegally, but a sensible policy would reflect that goods, data, and people cross the borders so easily that they're not as important as they used to be.
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                  • Posted by RobertFl 9 years, 9 months ago
                    While we have welfare, and SS, we need borders. Further, we are not a sovereign nation without borders. We cannot be the first nation without borders else the entire world will come here. I'm a software developer and it would be one of the first tech industries that would get diluted. software development would quickly turn into a minimum wage job. which is another reason why a nation has to control it's immigration. had we done that 20 years ago, McD's might be paying a higher wage now.
                    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by $ jbrenner 9 years, 9 months ago
          Libertarians are notorious for their disagreements, so this doesn't surprise me.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by $ stargeezer 9 years, 9 months ago
            Libertarians are as wide on their ideals as pointing to a center left lib and a center right repub - that space between is where the Libertarians live and that's why it's so hard to get behind them.

            One that comes to mind who likes to be called a libertarian holds every belief that most libtards do, EXCEPT he likes and owns guns. Well as much as I HATED mcCain, I wouldn't have voted for this guy because one very small move and he was BO.

            Likewise There are super conservative libertarians who are for gun control. "Reasonable" gun control, what ever THAT means.

            I know the same can be said for conservatives, but pretty much you do know where a Republican conservative stands on the issues.

            Last election I raised money for Rand even though I knew he would not be selected, I even had his signs in my yard, but after the convention, they came down and Romney signs went up. I think Rand would have made a better running mate, but that's just my opinion.

            I couldn't put for his wacko father for anything. Looney toon.

            I do have my limits, zero tolerance for gun control and I'm pro life, I'm very fiscally conservative, but those are just the three big ones.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by khalling 9 years, 9 months ago
    on snowden: note he equivocates. He knows full-well there was no "proper" way Snowden could have given the people this much information. He would have been buried, prosecuted at the very least. Other NSA whistleblowers concur. this is law and order stuff.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hDzpTKUM...
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ jbrenner 9 years, 9 months ago
      I agree completely with you, Khalling, about Ben Carson on Snowden, but I would expect a lot of us have mixed feelings about Snowden. I know I do. I would have put him in a witness protection program after a brief jail time.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by LetsShrug 9 years, 9 months ago
        Snowden is my hero.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by edweaver 9 years, 9 months ago
          Mine too! To me he is an American hero. What he did took a great deal of courage and I suspect he put his life on the line.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by LetsShrug 9 years, 9 months ago
            Yes... going through the "proper channels" would have had him silenced and buried under the WH. He risked EVERYTHING to tell the rest of us the truth. 'Whistle blowing" wouldn't have accomplished a reveal. Look at the other whistle blowers who went through the proper channels... they have been ignored for the most part and pretty much silenced and have lost everything anyway. It begs the questions...'is this America?'
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by edweaver 9 years, 9 months ago
              Not the kind of America I want it to be for sure.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by ewv 9 years, 9 months ago
                The recent Frontlines documentary United States of Secrets showed what happened to the people before him who tried to protest in terms acceptable to the government, and how Snowden realized that the only strategy that could work required massive documentation that couldn't be covered over or ignored.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
      • Posted by Robbie53024 9 years, 9 months ago
        When the Snowden thing first came up I was telling folks to hold their condemnation. I think as things have continued to unfold, it appears that he has been more patriot than traitor. Whatever his original motives (which also seem increasingly to be more patriotic than not), the actual result has been disclosure of unconstitutional invasions of privacy.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by ewv 9 years, 9 months ago
        jbrenner: "I would have put him in a witness protection program after a brief jail time."

        Why a brief jail time? Rather, a witness protection program prior to a lengthy jail term for the NSA director.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by $ jbrenner 9 years, 9 months ago
          1) The NSA director was definitely following orders.
          2) The brief jail time is because what Snowden did was treasonous to the United States of America (albeit far less than Obama or the NSA director).
          3) The witness protection program should be obvious. Are you arguing for no jail time or a long jail time? No jail time would be difficult to stomach for anyone who likes the rule of law. Death is standard for treason; this is a reasonable place to make an exception to the death penalty for treason.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by ewv 9 years, 9 months ago
            1) So was Eichman following orders, but the NSA director has been worse, deliberately giving orders hidden from Congress and the President, while urging the President(s) to make policy and Congress to pass laws,both of which slip in an NSA private agenda along with it. The NSA director lied to Congress when asked what it was doing. Watch the Frontlines documentary. That isn't the only source, but it condenses the history and the evidence available in one place without having to dig through a lot of articles and videos.

            2) The penalty for treason is execution, not a brief jail time. You can't have it both ways because you want to make an exception. If there is an "exception" because the laws are in fact ensnaring him in a false treason, then the exception is from the accusation, not a compromised punishment that makes no sense for either side.

            3) Long jail time means long for NSA and zero for Snowden. The "rule of law" is a principle for a free society with objective law, not a catch-all excuse for any law. Respect for the law does not mean respect for statism. The witness protection program is a method, within the law, to protect the innocent -- Snowden, not NSA.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by $ jbrenner 9 years, 9 months ago
              No disagreements on 1). I said that the penalty for treason was death. Snowden isn't totally innocent. While what he did can be called meritorious, it can't be called "right". This is a very hard judgment to make precisely because we no longer live in a free society with objective law. I really don't think I can come to a clear, objective stance on Snowden. The Snowden situation is very challenging. Regarding the NSA and their leader, they ought to be taken down, but ... who will do it?
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ jbrenner 9 years, 9 months ago
    Ben Carson would be a fine president.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
    • Posted by Robbie53024 9 years, 9 months ago
      Not so sure. Has he managed a complex organization? If not, I'm not throwing my lot in with another amateur. Give me a good governor - and you can't have mine for awhile.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by $ 9 years, 9 months ago
        Uh, yes - Director of Johns Hopkins Pediatric Neurosurgery.

        http://www.biography.com/people/ben-cars...

        That's far more than our current President can claim.

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ben_Carson

        Oh, and the radical hemispherectomy? It worked on my niece. He wasn't the surgeon, but he revived it.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by $ jbrenner 9 years, 9 months ago
          Managing a bunch of MD's and PhD's is lot like trying to manage the Gulch. You quickly learn that people are quite capable of managing themselves far better than you could manage them.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by $ 9 years, 9 months ago
            It's the best way to govern period. Make sure they are educated and follow good principles, then let them carry on. You save micromanagement for the unskilled and unmotivated.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
        • Posted by Robbie53024 9 years, 9 months ago
          Well, that's getting closer, but not really the same as a decent sized state. But as you say, far more than the current occupant.

          And I'm happy to hear that the extraction was successful.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by $ 9 years, 9 months ago
            Oh, I agree that it isn't like running a state, but I think of it this way: Would I rather have a politician running the show, or a businessman?

            A businessman is going to come in and say "this isn't efficient" and look for ways to make things run better. A politician is just going to come in and say "how can expand my scope of power".
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
            • Posted by Robbie53024 9 years, 9 months ago
              Correct. The biggest problem with gov't efficiency is that the "real" objectives aren't spoken - as you identify one of the keys is the scope of power that is derived by the politician (and the sycophants in gov't that run the agencies). You won't find that on any published mission statement or list of priorities, but it ranks up there at the top.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo