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.

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.

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.

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.

You'd think #3 ("We all have choices in the way we react to the words we hear.") wouldn't be particularly controversial. But take a look at what happened when I dropped something like it into a comment thread on a leftist site a couple of months ago: http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2...

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

There are plenty of libertarians who are not open borders.

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.

Quote 1 is the essence of altruism. I would consider that "bad manners", at best.

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".

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.

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.

That unfortunately may be very true.

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.

I didn't, I just wanted to get other perspectives.

To me, he's still somewhat of an enigma. He gets points in my book for being practical and standing up to President Obama on some things, but I don't know his positions on everything like say Rand Paul or Ted Cruz.

Yes weak at best.