I agree, for the most part, but unfortunately there are some flaws in the Constitution that can't be easily fixed. Among them is the need for the separation of economy and state.

Seems, then, that you would agree that perhaps the only alternative to our assured slide into the Union of Soviet Republiks of Amerika, which was steadily progressing under Obama and was about to be completed under Hillary, without the resort to a civil war, is Trump?

What makes you think that Trump is "incoherent" (not to mention the rest of your description of him)? I, for one, find him very coherent, very businesslike and very logical. As to Rubio, he represents the establishment as much as Bush, Romney and the rest of the corrupt, ineffective "elite." He had no chance of beating the well established, totally corrupt and brutal "Democratic" establishment. Carson has integrity, but also ineffectiveness and very wako religious deviations. And Hillary was not a "weak candidate" - she, as an individual, was irrelevant, the issue was the continuation of the socialist agenda, with a well oiled and funded machine behind it. Her faults and crimes were (and are) totally irrelevant to half of the country; they would rally behind Stalin, given a chance.
I was not a Trump supporter, but I do believe that if there is a way to drain the swamp without a civil war, Trump is the only option.

I opted to join a Mennonite health share ministry. It is MUCH cheaper than O'Bozocare plans and qualifies under ACA as an alternative to the O'Bozocare plans. You have to agree with some Mennonite beliefs, some of which are VERY libertarian in nature, some of which are religious. But I had no problem with what they said. Take a look at Liberty Healthshare.

Smithsonian funds Goddard -- wouldn't that be the beginning of what has become the "State Science Institute"?

I found his speech to be inspirational. For years Presidents have talked about re building the power grid and addressing infra structure. The money is there but has been wasted and squandered. FDR did it with the Socialist belief that it would stimulate the economy. Trump realizes that it just needs to be done. Not sure how you can call Roosevelt Conservative . His failed policies and agenda were clearly Progressive.

It seems to me that your fears are driving you more than the facts do.

I don't know about you, but I lost my healthcare plan, and my government is now trying to force me, with the threat of huge financial penalty/wealth confiscation, to acquire a worse policy through the bureaucracy so that what used to be health insurance can be transformed into a massive welfare program. I'd put that little item right smack at the top of the list of what has transformed this country into a semblance of its once great self.
America stopped being as great as it originally was conceived the day the first redistributionist gained a foothold in Congress and convinced enough gullible senators and representatives that government has the right to enforce equality of outcome, not just equality of opportunity.

A/S parts 1-3, but not the publication of the novel in 1957-really? No thanks; I'm waiting for the mini-series when (hopefully) they can get it right!

Thank you, ZMT.
I know I'm not alone here,
I know there are many of us.

But it lifts a weary spirit to see it.
I'll take a lesson from that.

This is exactly why I have sat silently watching, observing the chatter on these boards. You're not alone in that sentiment that this has been taken over by those so gullible that they will get behind a man who regularly speaks of controlling others. Protectionism and objectivism are far opposites, yet it seems the trend leading up to the elections in these boards focused only on one freedom - freedom to carry. That is a surefire sign the rednecks have taken over this site, if people are clinging to their gun rights and allowing that to dictate the rest of their decisions. No one candidate will protect all freedom's, but Trump sure is far from our agenda (and I say our as in those others who haven't lost their minds). Goodbye free trade and freedom to innovate in whatever way we choose, instead we are looking more and more like North Korea.

The City of Detroit and other area municipalities gave the manufacturers tremendous privileges to take private property, Poletown in Hamtramck being the final instance before total collapse.

Moreover, other people, seeking other futures, through other means found escape. The Catholic schools served the French, the Irish, the Germans, and the Poles who left for outlying cities that became suburbs. In the final episodes, Detroit's African-American parents sought out Catholic education for their children as a gateway out of poverty. Statistically, it seems that the urban Whites ("hillbillies") never did.

Non-union shops in the South still followed union-like work rules. They were not low-paying sweatshops.

This meant as a reply to Zero's "comment blood will flow" It already is but not from Trumps supporters.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/four-custo...

I'm not really trying to keep this going, CB.
Despite my harsh words I'm not really the guy to just blast away at people.
It's obvious I'm not going to sway your mind and at this point I doubt if anyone else is keeping up with this thread.

But I can't help but bemoan.
Imagine if we had put forward a Latino or a black man. Or a popular union buster.
A man with principles more closely aligned with our agenda.

Imagine if we hadn't played straight into their hands, validating their age-old accusations, by electing the most racially antagonistic candidate in, well, ever.

Obama left this country a powder keg and Trump is a blasting cap.

I remember the 60's when universities were war zones with real fatalities and assassination stopped being unthinkable.
Blood will flow from this.

Do you think the electorate would have “swooned” to the likes of Rubio, Walker, Carson or Ryan? Do you think they would have swept Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania and North Carolina? They would have run conventional campaigns and lost to the superior Democrat ground game, just as Romney did in 2012. And in the unlikely event that one of them had won, he would have continued playing the corrupt “business as usual” two-party game. No thanks!

Finally...a bit of non democratic sense from you...good job....
Objectivism is valuable, yes...but not the end to end all. Neither is my favored "Prime Law" or my hard worked concept of "wide scope accountability"; but I think I see a bright pin hole at the end of the progressive tunnel.
All we can really do is march on, improving ourselves and others, (by example) as we go.

That corrupt two party system would have given us Rubio, or Walker, or Carson, or Ryan.
Any of which I would have enthusiastically supported regardless of their flaws.
And they would have supported those same issues without being an incoherent, ill-reasoned, bumbling ass.

And they were not unelectable. Hillary was a weak candidate riding an unpopular platform.

But Trump was the spoiler. The made for TV candidate. Just as Kennedy's election turned on a television appearance, so too did this electorate swoon to the practiced manner of a TV celebrity.

And I would not have defended Mike if his point wasn't valid.
And well supported by the Objectivist community.

If you hold each president to a fully Objectivist standard, then none of them meets the test, and that includes George Washington. I'm mainly concerned with the direction of change compared to present-day conditions, and on the above issues Trump is mostly in favor of more freedom.

Now That's funny...and true to boot!

Fascism is a slower death than Marxism or National Socialism. While Italy's alliance with Germany destroyed them in World War II, Spain and Portugal remained neutral and suffered only their own internal inefficiencies. Of course, Spain and Portugal remained poorer than Switzerland, even worse off than socialist (and militarily neutral) Sweden. So, as long as President Trump can avoid a devastating war, we will suffer less than we would with a Clinton presidency and Democrat majorities in the House and Senate.

The Second Amendment does not appear in Atlas Shrugged. Neither does School Choice. The only reference to health care is in the statement of Dr. Hendricks in the Valley. ("The Forgotten Man of Socialized Medicine"), but Trump continues to promise healthcare for everyone, just not Obamacare. Similarly, while promising to "roll back" regulations and to "lower" taxes, those are first of all not his work as President, but Congress's responsibility; and more to the point, they are marginal arguments about how much and how many, not about the objective immorality of such regulations and taxes.

Oh please! Trump supporters have hardly “taken over” this site. I voted for Gary Johnson and there are many of Trump’s positions that I do not endorse. But he deserves credit for the incredible feat of challenging and defeating a corrupt two-party establishment that has abused its power for decades. And he is promoting many policies that, if enacted, will be much more to our liking than the current ones. These include energy deregulation, an end to “climate change” hysteria, school choice, lower taxes (including abolition of the death tax), defense of Second Amendment rights, appointment of Constitutionalists to the Supreme Court, and rollback of Obamacare. The anti-Trumpites on this site are refusing to give him any credit for these positions he has staked out, treating him as if his overall program is as bad as Hillary’s. It is not.

I rarely down-vote on this site, but my up-votes are based on the quality of a poster’s arguments, not on whether he or she is a “bona fide OBJ!”

I've given up here, Mike.
I still look in every day but this site has strayed so far it causes me almost physical distress.

It's worse than sad - it is disgusting.
People come here looking for Objectivism and instead find this.

Objectivism is based squarely on explicit, unbreakable principles - of which Trump has shown none - a fact his followers seem incapable of admitting.

And even that's not the worst of it.
He seems to oppose the very things we believe in (free trade, free markets) and it certainly looks like he supports many of the things we abhor. (Kelo anyone?)

But who knows? He is just as duplicitous as the politicians he vilifies.
Within hours of being elected he began nonchalantly reversing positions boldly proclaimed - even chanted - a day before.

He has proven he will say whatever is expedient in the moment at hand -with no thought to its future.

But these people simply do not care.
So long as he pays lip service to their cause they are mesmerized.
Too entranced at the sound of his words to see he is the same as that which they despise.

The same power-mad would-be-king. The same LIAR - albeit from the private sector.

And they have taken over this site. THIS site.
"Galt's Gulch" rallies to such a man and down-votes a bona fide OBJ!

If Ayn Rand could she would have already disavowed this place.
Vehemently.
As only she could.

Great list..add Political Correctness, transgender restrooms, and global warming insanity

Detroit's downfall was due to municipal mismanagement and a union-friendly political climate that drove auto manufacturing to the American South and overseas. High wages in the mid-20th Century were a symptom of Detroit's impending downfall, not the cause.